Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Apr 2007 19:07 UTC, submitted by alcibiades
Hardware, Embedded Systems Having Michael Dell back at the helm of his namesake company hasn't paid any quick dividends when it comes to market share. According to Gartner Research, Dell continued its slide both in the US and worldwide during the first quarter of 2007, while HP opened up an even-wider lead. Interesting in these results is that you can clearly see that Apple's strongest market is still the United States.
Permalink for comment 232857
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
OT -- Protectionism
by llanitedave on Sun 22nd Apr 2007 09:05 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Dell"
Member since:

I understand the egalitarian motive behind your condemnation of protectionism, unfortunately you forget one part of the equation: the american worker. If *he* doesn't have a job (because service jobs are off-shored, while virtually all manufacturing jobs have long ago gone to China), then *he* won't be able to spend as much to buy the products made - you guessed it - in the third world.

Yes, equality is desirable, but you can just turn economies upside-down by removing all regulations and allowing for such savage off-shoring.

It is foolish to abandon protectionism as an economic tool. That's a one-way ticket to economic ruin. The passage to a free global market must happen *very* gradually, and must also allow for freer movement of workers.

You can't just say "it's the third world's turn, too bad for the first world workers, they can just go on welfare!" In any case, protectionism can also help local economies in third-world nations (which have been for decades inundated with american products, killing off local businesses).

Quite off-topic, but I just thought it needed to be said, especially since we share the same utopian dream of a better, more egalitarian world.

I agree with both of you -- protectionism has its place, but it needs to be focused, and a stepping stone to a more equitable global economy.

The way to do that is to apply protectionist measures against "sweatshop" exporters -- those that deny their workers benefits, decent wages, and a reasonably safe workplace. Those manufacturers who can show that their workers are fairly paid, have decent working conditions, protections against abuse and fair benefits, should receive the benefits of free trade.

And no others.

Reply Parent Score: 2