decentralization and the energy crisis

[Kamala Trump]

The real key to the GREEN ISSUE, is massive decentralization of production of all goods, to save shipping costs, but of course the fascists might lose control in this scenario, so it will never happen. They will continue to promote NEW GREEN TECHNOLOGY (that you can buy stock in) as the ACTUAL solution.

 

[Cancel3]

The real key to the GREEN ISSUE, is massive decentralization of production of all goods, to save shipping costs, but of course the fascists might lose control in this scenario, so it will never happen. They will continue to promote NEW GREEN TECHNOLOGY (that you can buy stock in) as the ACTUAL solution.

Decentralization of production of goods would mean an increase in the cost of those goods. So even fewer people would be able to afford the goods.

But if we can stick it to those fascists, then by all means lets make shit cost more!

 

[Kamala Trump]

Decentralization of production of goods would mean an increase in the cost of those goods. So even fewer people would be able to afford the goods.

Not necessarily.

But if we can stick it to those fascists, then by all means lets make shit cost more!

Considering your premise was destroyed, this statement was even dumber.

With imported mexican slaves and high fuel costs, local production all around the country may be the key to america's future.

 

[Cancel3]

Not necessarily.


Considering your premise was destroyed, this statement was even dumber.

With imported mexican slaves and high fuel costs, local production all around the country may be the key to america's future.

By manufacturing in larger quantities, you almost always cut costs.

Many areas have such high property values and high tax bases that manufacturing plants are unable to produce anythiung with making it cost far more.

Shipping costs could be slashed if items were shipped by rail instead of by truck.




The idea that dozens of smaller manufacturing plants would provide products as cheaply as a single centralized one makes no sense. Its cheaper to build one big plant than to build a dozen smaller ones.

And the infrastructure that is used for one plant would have to be multiplied for the dozen smaller ones. The mgmt needed for a larger plant is not significantly more than for smaller plants, so having more smaller plants means far more mgmt cost.

I hardly think "Not necessarily" destroyed my premise. It simply showed that you haven't a clue about the topic.

 

[Kamala Trump]

By manufacturing in larger quantities, you almost always cut costs.

But not always. Of course, other factors come to bear.

Many areas have such high property values and high tax bases that manufacturing plants are unable to produce anythiung with making it cost far more.

Shipping costs could be slashed if items were shipped by rail instead of by truck.

This may not always be the case with house values taking. And you cannot get a better shipping rate that local production and little shipping required.

The idea that dozens of smaller manufacturing plants would provide products as cheaply as a single centralized one makes no sense. Its cheaper to build one big plant than to build a dozen smaller ones.

It does makes sense if transportation costs are too onerous. You're not looking at the full picture.

And the infrastructure that is used for one plant would have to be multiplied for the dozen smaller ones. The mgmt needed for a larger plant is not significantly more than for smaller plants, so having more smaller plants means far more mgmt cost.

I hardly think "Not necessarily" destroyed my premise. It simply showed that you haven't a clue about the topic.

It is simply a falsehood that centralized production is always cheaper in all ways.

Plus it leaves out nearly all security concerns one way have about being independant of foreign control.

Plus, local production keeps locals employed. but of course, this populist concern is of little value to a mr. big shot corporatist whip cracker like yourself.

 

[Cancel3]

What other factors would that be?

When you order the raw materials in bulk you get better prices in almost all cases.

If you are manufacturing for a greater area you have a more even call for your products, as the ups and downs in the economy will not be as great over a wider area.

Fuel costs to heat and cool will be less. The maint staff will not be as large as with multiple plants.

You will not need mutilple mgmt, payroll, human resources, safety and security staffs and offices.



What you save on shipping costs will be eaten by the costs of shipping raw materials in. The more bulk you buy the better bargaining power you have to get the shipping reduced or eliminated. After all, the provider of the raw materials is far better off making one large shipment and eating the cost than making dozens of small shipments. So the savings in the cost of fuel balances out.

But the ability to get discounts for buying in bulk means central manufacturing is cheaper.



You keep saying its not cheaper. But the fuel costs will be paid for shipping materials in OR shipping materials out. With smaller plants you have no bargaining power. With larger plants you do. Not to mention that a larger plant could make better use of the railways, which are ALWAYS cheaper for bulk shipping.



But tell me again where the dozen smaller plants would save money?

And you started this thread about the green movement, and I have corrected you.

As for the fascists having control, YOUR plan would offer them a greater control. In your plan the items are made, sold, and purchased locally. This means the consumer will have FAR less choice. Which means the manufacturer will have even more control.

 

[Kamala Trump]

What other factors would that be?

Transportation costs, for one.

When you order the raw materials in bulk you get better prices in almost all cases.

But there are other factors.

If you are manufacturing for a greater area you have a more even call for your products, as the ups and downs in the economy will not be as great over a wider area.

you still refuse to consider transportation costs.

Fuel costs to heat and cool will be less. The maint staff will not be as large as with multiple plants.

You're still not considering all factors.

You will not need mutilple mgmt, payroll, human resources, safety and security staffs and offices.

These represent more opportunites for an unforeseen value add idea that central planners, being detached and shit headed, may miss.

What you save on shipping costs will be eaten by the costs of shipping raw materials in.

Not necessarily. Business could focus on what's found locally. This is maximum diversity.

The more bulk you buy the better bargaining power you have to get the shipping reduced or eliminated. After all, the provider of the raw materials is far better off making one large shipment and eating the cost than making dozens of small shipments. So the savings in the cost of fuel balances out.

Not necessarily. You're just pulling shit out of your ass.

But the ability to get discounts for buying in bulk means central manufacturing is cheaper.

But manufacturing is only one part of the overall business process. You're still leaving out distribution costs, because you want to.

You keep saying its not cheaper. But the fuel costs will be paid for shipping materials in OR shipping materials out. With smaller plants you have no bargaining power. With larger plants you do. Not to mention that a larger plant could make better use of the railways, which are ALWAYS cheaper for bulk shipping.

At least one hop can be cut out manufactuing locally.

But tell me again where the dozen smaller plants would save money?

And you started this thread about the green movement, and I have corrected you.

As for the fascists having control, YOUR plan would offer them a greater control. In your plan the items are made, sold, and purchased locally. This means the consumer will have FAR less choice. Which means the manufacturer will have even more control.

You can move to the next town. In your plan, there is no escape.

 

[Cancel3]

I am not ignoring the fuel costs. If you ship materials in, or if you ship product out, you are still using fuel.

Railways are FAR cheaper than trucks for shipping bulk. But the savings are far less if there is less bulk.

So you are cherrypicking what facts you want.


What facts am I pulling out of my ass? That you can get excellent discounts for buying in larger bulk? That you can get shipping costs dropped or reduced if you buy in bulk? That a company is going to be better off making one bulk shipment instead of dozens of smaller scattered shipments? That the costs of shipping bulk materials in can equal the costs of shipping goods out?




Also, this thread started out about the green movement. Now which do you think is better, environmentally speaking? To have one large landfill or to have dozens scattered all over the country? To have one location for manufacturing (with the inherent risks of spills) or dozens of them?

No, this idea of your is simply wrong. Its cheaper to manufacture in larger quantities, and the transportation costs can be negated by use of the railway system. And its better for the environment to have fewer mantufacturing plants.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Additionally decentralized production means redudancy and failover protection, in case of some unforeseen calamity. These are the same strengths the internet architecture possesses.

 

[uscitizen]

Decentralization means more jobs. Just a thought.

Prices will always rise, the real trick is to get as much benefit to our society as possible from those price increases.

As energy costs rise some level of decentralization is inevitable.

 

[Cancel3]

Decentralization means more jobs. Just a thought.

Prices will always rise, the real trick is to get as much benefit to our society as possible from those price increases.

As energy costs rise some level of decentralization is inevitable.

But are they good jobs? In the areae I lived in a few years ago there were two cabinet making plants. I worked in one for a few weeks when I was laid off back in '03. There are people who have been there 10 years and only make $9 an hour.

I think I'd rather be shot.




But yes, I will concede that there would be more jobs. I will add that there is more likelihood for layoffs in all of those jobs.

But decentralization would not help the green movement.

 

[Kamala Trump]

But are they good jobs? In the areae I lived in a few years ago there were two cabinet making plants. I worked in one for a few weeks when I was laid off back in '03. There are people who have been there 10 years and only make $9 an hour.

I think I'd rather be shot.




But yes, I will concede that there would be more jobs. I will add that there is more likelihood for layoffs in all of those jobs.

But decentralization would not help the green movement.

It's better than no job. and IM not talking about the "green movement" in all it's totalitarian glory. They're all for centralization, like you. Im talking about actually cutting shipping costs and having jobs for americans, in one stroke of genius.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Globalization is a bunch of assholes brutalizing one population into slavery to undercut workers in richer economies, so they can keep the difference for themselves. It's a bunch of sick shit. For real.

 

[Cancel3]

It's better than no job. and IM not talking about the "green movement" in all it's totalitarian glory. They're all for centralization, like you. Im talking about actually cutting shipping costs and having jobs for americans, in one stroke of genius.

Look retread, perhaps you should go back and read what YOU wrote at the beginning of this thread?


You are not talking about the "green movement"??

Well then please tell us who typed the first post of this thread?? The one that started out "The real key to the GREEN ISSUE, is massive decentralization of production of all goods, to save shipping costs, but of course the fascists might lose control in this scenario, so it will never happen."????

YOU started out talking about the green movement. You digressed into your typical "fascist global" bullshit conspiracy theorist rhetoric.

But don't lie when the proof is at the top of the page.

 

[Cancel3]

It's better than no job. and IM not talking about the "green movement" in all it's totalitarian glory. They're all for centralization, like you. Im talking about actually cutting shipping costs and having jobs for americans, in one stroke of genius.

Besides, wouldn't this decentraslized scenario make it easier to utilize illegal immigrant labor? Since the plants would be smaller the labor would effect a smaller area of the country. So it would not get the news coverage that would shake things up?

So would it provide jobs for americans? or provide jobs for whoever was willing to work for less?

Look back at the old company towns, mining towns, and such. When the smaller plants and mines were the only choice they could rule the town.

 

[TRGLDTE]

AH's point has merit. There is a trend toward mass customization. The ability to design and manufacture custom designed goods is greater than ever before. The most economic way to manufacture commodity goods is economy of scale, but as the scale gets smaller, decentralized factories become a better way to approach the problem. Economic lot sizes of one are feasible. An example is Align Technologies InVisalign dental aligners (the clear ones for adults). Each aligner is a custom product.

 

[uscitizen]

But are they good jobs? In the areae I lived in a few years ago there were two cabinet making plants. I worked in one for a few weeks when I was laid off back in '03. There are people who have been there 10 years and only make $9 an hour.

I think I'd rather be shot.




But yes, I will concede that there would be more jobs. I will add that there is more likelihood for layoffs in all of those jobs.

But decentralization would not help the green movement.

No I am not saying it would help the green movement, just that some degree of decentralization is inevitable and can provide some benefits.

Lower wages on the average are also inevitable as a result of global competition. Or at best less increases. As the average workers have seen for several years now.

Of couse with higher transportation costs from other countries, more domestic production for domestic consumption will happen. the level this will haoppen at varies according to the product, wage increases in the countries and the increases in energy/transportation costs.

How much of our product costs do we want to be for transportation ?

 

[Topspin]

assmoron, do you really think increased shipping cost have risen enough to offset Chineese labor at about $1 hr????

 

[Kamala Trump]

Besides, wouldn't this decentraslized scenario make it easier to utilize illegal immigrant labor?

Not if borders are enforced, and immigration policy respected.

Since the plants would be smaller the labor would effect a smaller area of the country. So it would not get the news coverage that would shake things up?

News coverage can occur anyplace there's a camera. Crawford texas seems more significant when the news goes there.

So would it provide jobs for americans? or provide jobs for whoever was willing to work for less?

Whoever happens to be around. Who that is depends on other factors.

Look back at the old company towns, mining towns, and such. When the smaller plants and mines were the only choice they could rule the town.

So foreign rulers care more? Is that your contention? Local leadership is much more responsive to the needs of the community, cuz they and their children and grandchildren might live there too.

 

[Cancel3]

AH's point has merit. There is a trend toward mass customization. The ability to design and manufacture custom designed goods is greater than ever before. The most economic way to manufacture commodity goods is economy of scale, but as the scale gets smaller, decentralized factories become a better way to approach the problem. Economic lot sizes of one are feasible. An example is Align Technologies InVisalign dental aligners (the clear ones for adults). Each aligner is a custom product.

On some products I would agree. But this is due to the aim to create a more customized or individually designed product. There is no way to do that on a large scale.

But that does not effect the green movement.