>The world changed. The skill pool was expanded significantly and skills are distributed differently.

For a lot of the jobs described that really isn't the big factor.

>It used to be that no formal education was needed for some things, now everyone expects a PhD.

Again more of a consequence of the "elite overproduction" and policy than anything else. I'm sure that earlier mentioned callcenter job could happen without a social sciences degree as can myriads of jobs i supported in factories.

>You still don't get it do you? You wanted stuff so cheap >Because they have no leverage and you wanted everything dirt cheap.

a) Stop projecting

b) I'm not arguing against what individuals want when spending. Americans such as you wanted cheaper and better cars and electronics and..... Japan provided those but not because japan was a libertarian paradise. America strongarmed them out of that position not because it is some kind of libertarian paradise. Same with the new competition in some fields from China.

> So why are they still paid a pittance and have to pee in bottles while driving? Because they have no leverage and you wanted everything dirt cheap.

PS They have better conditions and pay in my country. It still isn't great. Again due to lack of leverage since a lot of them are migrants. I'm sure you're supportive of that eroded lack of leverage but don't project it onto me. At some point you'll just end up arguing for the relative competitive advantage of places with slavery.

> PS They have better conditions and pay in my country. It still isn't great. Again due to lack of leverage since a lot of them are migrants.

Took a while to guide to horse to water. We circled back to what I said from the first comment [0]: the lowest end jobs have very low salaries because these people have no leverage (multitude of factors, some of which I listed), not because of offshoring. This situation holds true even from jobs that are safe from offshoring.

> a) Stop projecting

> I'm sure you're supportive of that eroded lack of leverage but don't project it onto me.

The old "You don't project onto me! I project onto you!". But somehow you managed to screw up even your diss at me. Supporting the "eroded lack of leverage" means supporting the leverage. Maybe you wanted to say I "support the lack of leverage". I'm a strong supporter of everyone being able to have a good life, whether they do a job locally or from offshore. I won't get into that discussion because I don't think you care that much for anything more complex than grandparent stories.

So I'm sorry Mario but your reasoning skills are in another castle.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48033641

[deleted]