[berntb]

>>Race to the bottom.

Probably, but you seem to imply that is bad?!

What happens when all the world's areas of dirt poor people has been "used up" by outsourcing, so they lack dirt poor people? [Edit: That is, what will happen after the race to the bottom?]

I really don't have an idea about the answer. But the world will be better, with much fewer poor people.

[jacoblyles]

It's going to be strange to live in a world where there is no longer a double-digit percentage of poor people. There may still be pockets of poor in areas at war or under very dysfunctional regimes. But poor continents or regions will be things of the past. It's so incredibly different from anything that has happened before in all of recorded history.

[yesno]

Will the world become a better place?

That depends on whom you asked. From my perspective the world was a better place in the past but that's my personal opinions.

Has India become a better country because of all the offshoring? Their GDP might increase, but what about their quality of life? What about those overwork IT workers?

There are 2 things I learned in life so far:

1) There's this thing called "balance".

One gives, the other receives. One gets something, the other lose something. Addition, subtraction.

2) Money is the root of all evil.

I've never perceived that money can make the world a better place. In 1998, money nearly destroys Asia. In 2008, money hurts western countries.

US residents probably have more money than the other countries. But at the same time, check out the obesity level of US residents. Check out how many trash US produces. Why do you think people are buzzing over "green" thing.

If you have more money, you will want more of everything. The end result of this cycle hasn't been good so far.

As of today, the world has more problems than it was. Eliminate one, then two or more problems will arise.

[jacoblyles]

>"Has India become a better country because of all the offshoring? "

Yes, yes, a million times yes. How is it even a question?

http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=sp_dyn_le...

[yesno]

[Edit]

Obviously I'm ignorant. Excuse me.

[berntb]

Obviously you neither know every area, nor have you thought about every type of problem. I haven't done that either. Or anyone else. The important thing is to love learning.

If you haven't thought at least a bit about a problem area, you don't know enough to realize that you don't understand it. That has happened to me many times.

I'm sorry if I was rough in the last comment.

[berntb]

I don't know if you're a kid or really trolling on Xmas? I'll bite shortly, to be polite.

≈>>One gives, the other receives. One gets something, the other lose something. Addition, subtraction.

Please look up the definition of "zero sum game". Then realize that modern economy really isn't one. Most people are winning, in the present world.

Exceptions are people in countries with conflict or with corrupt/dictatorial regimes.

>>There are 2 things I learned in life so far:

>>2) Money is the root of all evil.

How about learning something from history?

Start by reading some books about poor people's lives and how it feels to bury your kids.

People die today, because of lack of food. Children still get organ damage (including brain) from too little food.

The point is, below a certain level of money/resources, life gets bad. Everyone should be happy that an increasing part of humanity can go away from that.

Please go look at Hans Rosling on TED:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/speakers/hans_rosling.html

>>As of today, the world has more problems than it was. Eliminate one, then two or more problems will arise.

For my information, how would you describe someone that has a total lack of sense of size of problems?! Someone that confuses losing money on a stock market crash -- with seeing your loved ones die young from treatable diseases?

(And I'm not arguing everything is better than it used to be.)