TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Dick Margulis wrote a bunch of interesting stuff centered around the
question:
> What is the mix of economic activity that we need in order to have a
> sustainable economy? For example, if we export 100% of our manufacturing
> jobs to China (not an inconceivable eventuality), what does that leave
> us by way of primary industries--things that can bring money in or
> create money from resources? It leaves us raw material extraction (you
> can't mine American coal in China); agriculture (you can't export our
> soil, water, and climate per se, but only the produce from them); trade
> (import/export, design and marketing); I'm not sure what else.
Great topic, but any minute now Eric or someone is going to ask, "Since when
is Techwr-L a forum for amateur economic and socio-political discussions?"
Besides, I'm running out of background tasks that permit me to while away
time on this stuff. :-)
But the short, flip answer to your question, Geoff, is "If I knew, I'd
become rich." Fifty years ago, people worried about the consequences of
automation, which began wiping out factory jobs. They worried about
questions similar to those you ask today. What will replace those fine,
high-paying, union jobs? Will we have large numbers of people with nothing
to do? Will people's standard of living decline as they have to settle for
lower-paying work?
No, we all became richer and better off because we could buy more and better
goods for less, and the jobs that went away have been replaced -- and then
some -- by even better jobs that no one could foresee in 1956.
By the way, the loss of manufacturing jobs is not unique to us, and they
aren't going to China. In fact, I recently saw some interesting statistics
on econopundit.com: During the past decade (or something like that), China
lost more manufacturing jobs than the US. We (and the Chinese) "lose"
manufacturing jobs by learning to make the same goods more efficiently. That
frees up resources to produce new goods and services.
Like you, many people want to know what those new goods and services will
be, what the replacement jobs will be like, etc. That's an understandable
concern, but the answers aren't really knowable without a crystal ball.
But, like the late Julian Simon, I'm confident that things will keep
"getting better and better." I just don't have time to write 40 or so pages
expounding on why. ;-)
Besides, Simon, Stephen Moore (Club for Growth), and others have already
done so better than I can. Check out Simon's:
_The State of Humanity_
_The Ultimate Resource 2_
_It's Getting Better All the Time_
Richard
------
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Voyant, a division of Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
richardDOTcombs AT voyanttechDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT freeDASHmarketDOTnet
303-777-0436
------
ROBOHELP IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IN HELP AUTHORING
New RoboHelp X5 includes all new features such as,
content management, multi-author support, distributed
workforce support, XML and PDF support, and much more!
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
