Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Jan 2012 00:14 UTC, submitted by Elv13
Hardware, Embedded Systems "Raspberry Pis started being made a couple of days ago, but I was forbidden to tell you about it until signed contracts and receipts for payment had arrived - it's been killing me, especially since I've had tens of you asking me when manufacturing would start every day for the last few weeks. I am not good at keeping secrets." No more secrets to keep, Liz! I can't wait to place my order.
Thread beginning with comment 502792
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Subtext
by TechGeek on Wed 11th Jan 2012 05:11 UTC in reply to "Subtext"
TechGeek
Member since:
2006-01-14

Well, this is how the civilized world works. We no longer allow harmful(to the environment) manufacturing so we can take the moral high ground. However, we still want cheap stuff so we push production to 2nd/3rd world countries which don't have tough pollution laws.

Reply Parent Score: 11

RE[2]: Subtext
by -pekr- on Wed 11th Jan 2012 08:23 in reply to "RE: Subtext"
-pekr- Member since:
2006-03-28

It's not necessarily about polution laws. It is about EU countries drilling money from companies to the blood level, via various taxes. You know, you have to feed the EU bureaucracy somehow.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Subtext
by mormon on Wed 11th Jan 2012 13:31 in reply to "RE: Subtext"
mormon Member since:
2005-08-13

I think, he is saying that law is only beneficial for China and other countries. That's why we are so dependent on far east countries. It is very bad for EU economy and EU country citizens.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Subtext
by sbergman27 on Wed 11th Jan 2012 17:04 in reply to "RE: Subtext"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I don't know why people cast about looking for convoluted reasons while missing the obvious one. Open Trade. Money flows downhill. And if workers in one country have less, and are thus willing to work for less money, that's where the contracts are going to go. And it's a *good* thing. Denizens of 1st world countries don't have a $DEITY-given right make lots of money while hard-working 3rd world populations get ignored.

As the world gets smaller, and trade more open, it will become harder and harder for us in the 1st world to maintain our customary arrogance and complacence.

And I, for one, welcome the change.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Subtext
by Neolander on Wed 11th Jan 2012 19:51 in reply to "RE[2]: Subtext"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

This post puzzles me. I have a hard time understanding if you advocate increasing the living standards in poorer countries or decreasing them in richer countries. ;)

Edited 2012-01-11 19:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Subtext
by mormon on Wed 11th Jan 2012 20:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Subtext"
mormon Member since:
2005-08-13

I understood, that UK work has similar price as "Far East" price. The difference is tax for single part and for whole device. You have to pay more for assembling device because tax for getting all parts from abroad is higher than for getting whole device. So I'm asking, where is that "free trade"?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Subtext
by earksiinni on Thu 12th Jan 2012 01:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Subtext"
earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

Ahh...when citizens from rich countries write in favor of free trade thinking that they are doing citizens from poor countries a favor (and with such moral conviction)...now we know that colonialism has come full circle ;-)

You are aware of course that countless millions of people in "third world" countries are against so-called free trade? You do also realize that the money that flows downhill comes from the uphill in the first place, correct? I think most people who are against unfettered free trade are in favor of other nations generating their own wealth rather than letting it roll down a hill into their neighbor's backyard.

At any rate, the way that the blog post described UK law made it clear--if their interpretation and delivery are correct--that UK tax law is decidedly anti-free trade. They are effectively subsidizing importation, which is a totally valid economic policy decision for certain things but certainly not if you're trying to promote free trade or if you're trying to generate manufacturing jobs.

Reply Parent Score: 2