|
|
|
|
|
|
by wolverine876
1111 days ago
|
|
|
> Taking into account the most economical outcome in the short/medium term also can make your country or community poor in the long term. If you care about the future of where you live, its important to cultivate and support local industry, even when its more expensive. Your solution is the short-term one, maybe not even that. In the long run, your community is much better off producing what it does best and trading with others for what they produce best, rather than everyone trying to do everything at some mediocre level. Your solution is like Microsoft building its own furniture and cars and flying its own planes, rather than making software and buying the furniture, cars, and air travel from those who are expert in it. |
|
|
Let's use your example, Microsoft. Companies have different incentives than communities or countries, but I think we can make this work.
For many years, Microsoft only sold software, and let others who were experts in hardware make the hardware and install microsoft on it. Later, they realised that it was strategically important to manufacture their own consumer hardware, and now you have the Surface lineup. Maybe in the near future, they will decide they need to start manufacturing their own chips. If they do that, it's not going to be cheap, especially in the short term. In fact, Microsoft might never be able to produce chips more cheaply than Intel. But they still could choose to do it in-house (or just buy Intel) if the alternative is to lose their dominant position in the market.