Govt exepcting a pandemic, made 10 million vaccines last month

[Large Sarge]

http://www.gsnmagazine.com/node/26878?c=cbrne_detection

[Large Sarge]

cliff high and his olympic opening scenario.....

[Cebu_4_2]

Ten million H1NI flu vaccines produced in one month, says DARPA Fri, 2012-07-27 10:18 AM By: Mark Rockwell (http://www.gsnmagazine.com/author/21449/mark_rockwell)




http://www.gsnmagazine.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/fullsize/darpaplantsweb.jpg


DARPA's vaccine source



A DARPA-funded vaccine company working on ways to quickly develop immunizations for potential pandemics, has successfully made over 10 million doses of H1N1 flu vaccine in a single month.
The company, Medicago Inc., used a “rapid-fire,” plant-based production method to make them, according to DARPA. The plants used in this case, however, aren’t factories, but the chlorophyll-based kind. Plant-produced vaccine practices hold promise for speedier development of vaccines than traditional egg-grown vaccine techniques. Plants are soaked with a solution that contains a disease’s DNA. The plant responds by producing antibodies almost immediately. Those antibodies can be synthesized into a human vaccine.
DARPA said on July 25, that Medicago Inc. had produced more than 10 million doses of an H1N1 influenza vaccine. The work was part of a test that ran from March 25, 2012, to April 24, 2012, at a facility in Durham, NC, it said, adding that a third-party laboratory tested the production lots to confirm it worked. “Testing confirmed that a single dose of the H1N1 VLP influenza vaccine candidate induced protective levels of hemagglutinin antibodies in an animal model when combined with a standard aluminum adjuvant. The equivalent dose required to protect humans from natural disease can only be determined by future, prospective clinical trials,” said DARPA.
“The results we’ve achieved here with plant-based production of vaccines represent both significant increase in scale and decrease in time-to-production over previous production capabilities in the same time period. The plant-made community is now better positioned to continue development and target FDA approval of candidate vaccines,” Dr. Alan Magill, DARPA program manager said. “Once the FDA has approved a plant-made vaccine candidate, the shorter production times of plant-made pharmaceuticals should allow DoD to be much better prepared to face whatever pandemic next emerges.”
DARPA has been looking to develop speedy methods of producing vaccines for pandemic viruses for the armed forces for some time, through its Blue Angel Program, because production times for traditional vaccines aimed at pandemics can take six to nine months.
The Blue Angel program seeks to demonstrate a flexible and agile capability for the Department of Defense to rapidly react to and neutralize any natural or intentional pandemic disease, said the agency. Building on a previous DARPA program, Accelerated Manufacture of Pharmaceuticals, Blue Angel targets new ways of producing large amounts of high-quality, vaccine-grade protein in less than three months in response to emerging and novel biological threats. One of the research avenues explores plant-made proteins for candidate vaccine production.
“Vaccinating susceptible populations during the initial stage of a pandemic is critical to containment,” said Magill. “We’re looking at plant-based solutions to vaccine production as a more rapid and efficient alternative to the standard egg-based technologies, and the research is very promising.”

[Santa]

Well, if DARPA funded it, it must be kosher.

[Glass]

I am reading that Seal Flu is the next pandemic. Apparently American Harbour seals were found to have a flu virus designated H3N8.


Seal flu 'threat to humans'

Seal flu could pose a new threat to human health, scientists have warned.

A new flu virus identified in American harbour seals has the potential to pass to other mammals, including humans, experts say.
The H3N8 strain was discovered after the death of 162 New England harbour seals last year.

Post-mortem examinations of five of the animals showed they were killed by a flu infection.

The strain is closely related to one that has been circulating in North American birds since 2002.

But unlike the bird strain, it has adapted to living in mammals. It has also evolved mutations known to ease transmission and cause more severe symptoms. Specifically, the virus has the ability to target a protein found in human lungs.

Dr Anne Moscona, from Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City, who led the researchers, said: “There is a concern that we have a new mammalian-transmissible virus to which humans haven't been exposed yet. It's a combination we haven't seen in disease before.”

The warning is published in the online journal of the American Society for Microbiology, mBio.
One cause for concern was the fact that few scientists had considered the possibility of a bird flu virus infecting seals, said the researchers. It highlighted the fact that pandemic influenza can appear in unexpected ways.

“Flu could emerge from anywhere and our readiness has to be much better than we previously realised,” said Dr Moscona.
"We need to be very nimble in our ability to identify and understand the potential risks posed by new viruses emerging from unexpected sources.
"It's important to realise that viruses can emerge through routes that we haven't considered. We need to be alert to those risks and ready to act on them.”


Link to article (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/14425142/seal-flu-threat-to-humans/)

So yes, this is a real story, based on who knows what but it is not an onion piece.

All I can say is "spare me from the madness".

[Uncle Salty]

I am reading that Seal Flu is the next pandemic. Apparently American Harbour seals were found to have a flu virus designated H3N8.

So yes, this is a real story, based on who knows what but it is not an onion piece.

All I can say is "spare me from the madness".

So, who fucked the seals to get this thing started?

[Glass]

hmmmm you know I've never heard of a seal but I have heard of dolphins...... yes dolphins. yes.

[General of Darkness]

When I hear stuff like this is when I feel most alone. Regardless of what people might think of me on this forum and my opinions I do personally treat people in the real world like I'd like to be treated.

So that being said, I'm an advocate of people taking responsibility for their lives and actions, which these cock blowers have designed a system that negates ALL OF IT. So in this system that we all live in, the dumb fucks are given everything, they breed like rabbits and they produce more dumb fucks. It's a system designed to promote failure and slavery.

So we get to the story. If true, it's genocide and it's indiscriminate. And that's where it just gets crazy. I'm not even 50 and I've paid more than my fair share into the system that intentionally works against my interests.

It's absolutely disgusting and I can't comprehend how people have sold their souls to the "devil" so to speak. What's interesting to me is that I do get it, but then again I don't, because at the end of the day, how is this in their interest.

[Cebu_4_2]

^ huh?

[Skirnir_]

Ten million sounds like many, but in a country with a population over 300m, it is sufficient for just over 3%. Whoop de doo.

[Cebu_4_2]

So are they going to vaccinate all the seals? Progress to give the virus to all that eat the seals? WTF?

[General of Darkness]

^ huh?


Yeah, that's what I said.

[Glass]

Just mulling over GoD's comments. I had some thinking along those lines a couple nights ago.

It occured to me that Global Competition is quite purely a race to the bottom. International competition/competitiveness is simply a process of who can deliver the least product/service for the money.

A lot of people will mistakenly believe that competition on a global scale actually does the opposite of delivering the most for the least. It is my opinion that it is the other way, the goal is to deliver the least for the cheapest price.

Most everything we have is a former shadow of what it was decades, 30, 40, 50 years ago. We might think because it's bigger or has more bling it is better, but scatch beneath the surface and you find there is no substance there.

so a few examples:
motor vehicles: less metal, thinner, cheaper rust protection, cheaper materials made from less and less natural materials
food substances like milk, orange juice, peanut butter, butter/spreads, meat, all full of substitute/filler materials and ingredients that were not used many years ago
houses which are mere facades not much better than the old west stage and set at the back of the warner bros studio lot
education which doesn't include the basics such as mathematics and literacy.
furniture, it's almost impossible to buy solid timber furniture. All you can get these days is wood crushed into chips or powder which is then held together by glue
clothes.... how thick is the material today compared to yester year

so I see globalisation / international competition as a race to the bottom. Thats about as simply as I can put it. Its everyone cutting their prices and quality, constantly so they can be competitive but basically all you get is crap for crap.

[General of Darkness]

Glass I haven't trusted you since day one, but for the life of me, after that post I like ya, in a I'd have to kill a family member type of a way.

[Glass]

Glass I haven't trusted you since day one, but for the life of me, after that post I like ya, in a I'd have to kill a family member type of a way.

Well thats good. Trust no one by their words. Words cost nothing and clearly they suffer from Global Competition these days too.

[DMac]

Just mulling over GoD's comments. I had some thinking along those lines a couple nights ago.

It occured to me that Global Competition is quite purely a race to the bottom. International competition/competitiveness is simply a process of who can deliver the least product/service for the money.

A lot of people will mistakenly believe that competition on a global scale actually does the opposite of delivering the most for the least. It is my opinion that it is the other way, the goal is to deliver the least for the cheapest price.

Most everything we have is a former shadow of what it was decades, 30, 40, 50 years ago. We might think because it's bigger or has more bling it is better, but scatch beneath the surface and you find there is no substance there.

so a few examples:
motor vehicles: less metal, thinner, cheaper rust protection, cheaper materials made from less and less natural materials
food substances like milk, orange juice, peanut butter, butter/spreads, meat, all full of substitute/filler materials and ingredients that were not used many years ago
houses which are mere facades not much better than the old west stage and set at the back of the warner bros studio lot
education which doesn't include the basics such as mathematics and literacy.
furniture, it's almost impossible to buy solid timber furniture. All you can get these days is wood crushed into chips or powder which is then held together by glue
clothes.... how thick is the material today compared to yester year

so I see globalisation / international competition as a race to the bottom. Thats about as simply as I can put it. Its everyone cutting their prices and quality, constantly so they can be competitive but basically all you get is crap for crap.

You've hit the nail on the head Glass. "The goal is to deliver the least for the cheapest price.

About a year ago I was on a kick of reading thriller/horror books; fictional stories of zombies, vampires, nuclear war etc. There is a common underlying theme in these books. One that not every author purposely hits us over the head with and I find it to be a damning critique of (western) society when they do. One of these books I read, I think it was The Passage made this point explicitly. After the SHTF, 90-100 years passes and people rebuild. Generating power 100 years after the global collapse is a tough nut to crack. Windmills and spare solar are piped into batteries so the people can have light. Most generators and almost all commercially available batteries have died. The head engineer makes comments to the group of how we had the wrong mindset in these golden years. People threw away what no longer worked and replaced it with something new. This created, as you wrote Glass, a race to the bottom as every major company today strives to provide the lowest quality possible at the highest price possible, and the big corps work together to establish baseline prices but not basic quality.

As each year passes in this 'global downturn' my perspective gets closer and closer to that of hypertiger. The global society that has been forced down our throats was set up to fail, purposely. Collapse only further empowers the strong. It's not even simply consumerism, as shown in the beginning stages of the 20th century boom. Consumption can be supported if materials are built to last (real wood, metal parts etc).

The education system has purposely broken the peoples' minds.
Media has corrupted the peoples' spirit.
Finance has bankrupted the peoples' prosperity.
Government has outlawed liberty.

These things are only possible within the framework of a top down control system.

We are all riding a screaming freight train and it may look like no one is driving, but as the aware know, there most certainly is and they want nothing more than to see our train obliterated as we scream over the edge of the world.

[JDRock]

hmmm.....homsland insecurity buys millions of rounds...detention camps go public.....are they going to start a FF pandemic, and in the chaos demand mandatory vaccinations door to door?
JD's house has drawn a line in the, sand-NO one will put anything in my body without my approval. I mean, i will rather go down in a lead sh!t storm than take their poison OR their mark.

[mick silver]

so will we be able to sue the company that make this crap if one was to die from it ? i will bet no you cant ...

[PatColo]

^ I seem to recall during the '09 bird flu hoax, the big pharma vax corps had some sort of impunity from liability for damages caused. I had a couple threads at GIM1 during that time, gone now, :P

[mick silver]

pat i recall that at gim about not being able to sue . i will bet the gov done made it were you cant sue a company over the drugs there making . well it being funded by the gov so i would say you will not be able to sue

[Old Herb Lady]

The company, Medicago Inc., used a “rapid-fire,” plant-based production method to make them, according to DARPA. The plants used in this case, however, aren’t factories, but the chlorophyll-based kind. Plant-produced vaccine practices hold promise for speedier development of vaccines than traditional egg-grown vaccine techniques.
Plants are soaked with a solution that contains a disease’s DNA.


The plant responds by producing antibodies almost immediately. Those antibodies can be synthesized into a human vaccine.


Well lookie loo at this one. WOW. I'm no scientist, but um they're going to take mutated DNA from the probable man-made disease & put the diseased DNA in some chemicals, soak the plant in it, extract the toxic potion and inject it into people's bodies. WOW again.

I know I preach and over-preach about the abuse of nature, but they're getting more creative at destroying nature, aren't they ?

They stir the pot so well that great FDA
http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/puhveli123/witch_stirring_pot_md_clr.gif


I'm DYING to know what plant that they will be abusing to create 10 million "vaccines"......
Would love to know what chemicals they're soaking the poor plants in. (mercury, formaldahyde ??)

Injecting this into your body is going to make your immune system go insane and new/worse diseases will come down the road because of it.

They are going to confuse the masses by telling them about their NEW PLANT BASED VACCINATION. Mark my word.
This can open up the door to now outlaw a plant growing out of the ground as unfit for human consumption unless it has been approved worthy of the
FDA approved/altered/poisoned/abused garbage.


WOW ,this is insane.....now.....wouldn't it make sooo much more sense to INGEST a plant/herb for your immunity without altering/lowering it to a state of the FDA's medicine ?
Nope can't do that, it doesn't cost very much to make that much sense. It has to cost ALOT of money and cost ALOT of damage.



http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r26/oceanapesgirl/defendmothernature.jpg

[gunDriller]

I am reading that Seal Flu is the next pandemic. Apparently American Harbour seals were found to have a flu virus designated H3N8.

the Seal that endangers Americans the most is the pResidential Seal.

[madfranks]

It occured to me that Global Competition is quite purely a race to the bottom. International competition/competitiveness is simply a process of who can deliver the least product/service for the money.

I have to disagree with you on this. It's not a process directed at making cheap shit, it's a process directed at satisfying the demands of the consumer. In most cases in the developing world that invovles producing cheaper products because that's what people can afford. People in developing nations who can't afford high quality living would rather have cheap clothes, cheap sofas, cheap cars and cheap food than remain in poverty. The engine of production creating scores of inexpensive products is what lifts the poor out of poverty. Trust me, if the demand for cheap shit went away, companies would stop making it.


so a few examples:
motor vehicles: less metal, thinner, cheaper rust protection, cheaper materials made from less and less natural materials

You can still buy high quality vehicles, you just have to pay for them. Many people who can't afford high quality cars are very happy to have the option of a cheaper car because otherwise they wouldn't have one at all.


food substances like milk, orange juice, peanut butter, butter/spreads, meat, all full of substitute/filler materials and ingredients that were not used many years ago

I agree with you on this in that I don't like fillers in my food as much as the next guy, but how many people are being fed on this planet right now compared to any other time in history? Would you rather people starve to death or eat filler laced foods? And like the previous example, there is no shortage of high quality food, you just have to pay more for it.


furniture, it's almost impossible to buy solid timber furniture. All you can get these days is wood crushed into chips or powder which is then held together by glue
clothes.... how thick is the material today compared to yester year

You can still go to a quality furniture store and shell out $2500 for a solid wood framed sofa, or you can buy a $300 sofa made of wood chips and glue. For people who can't afford a $2500 solid wood sofa, would you rather them do without furniture than have a cheaper option?


so I see globalisation / international competition as a race to the bottom. Thats about as simply as I can put it. Its everyone cutting their prices and quality, constantly so they can be competitive but basically all you get is crap for crap.

Again, only because there are masses of consumers who would rather have cheap products than no products at all. This is how the middle class is built, production of inexpensive goods that raise the standard of living for poor people. And alternatively, there is absolutely no shortage of high quality products on the market, they just cost more (duh).

[mick silver]

and this is why i buy at yard sales . nothing but the best . some of the best wood furniture money can buy can still be brought at yard sales if one can sand and stain . the stuff they made in the days gone by are not cheap as the stuff made today

[Skirnir_]

Madfranks - there is also the matter of declining real wages since the mid 70s.

[Glass]

I have to disagree with you on this. It's not a process directed at making cheap shit, it's a process directed at satisfying the demands of the consumer. In most cases in the developing world that invovles producing cheaper products because that's what people can afford. People in developing nations who can't afford high quality living would rather have cheap clothes, cheap sofas, cheap cars and cheap food than remain in poverty. The engine of production creating scores of inexpensive products is what lifts the poor out of poverty. Trust me, if the demand for cheap shit went away, companies would stop making it.


I think this is a view through lenses coloured by global comptetition. It's difficult to see now that global competition is so pervasive. so I'd like to expand on that a bit.

For example: 1 country has to sell their produce, not to themselves but to people in an other country. That is the underlying principle of global competition. That buying country cannot sell their produce to their own people they must sell them to some other country. To enable them to sell to the other country means they must be cheaper than any other country to ensure they get the trade.

People say, its good business to sell your stuff to someone who will pay more for it than your fellow countrymen. My issue is that this may not be good business but because you cannot sell to your own countrymen you will not prove or disprove this.

Imagine instead that there was no global competition. Imagine that the US of A made or grew produce and only sold it to Americans. Would those products and produce be more or less expensive for Americans to buy? If they were making everything themselves and selling only to themselves would it be more expensive than if it were made in the US of A. Do you see the trick there. I did say if americans made their own stuff would they be more expensive or less expensive than american products? They can only buy from america so the price could only be compared to american prices. It's a loop. It doesn't matter what it costs in other countries because US of A stuff is not sold there.

The economy would be based on the price of american products. The wages would be based on the price of american products. The quality would be based on American quality expectations.



You can still buy high quality vehicles, you just have to pay for them. Many people who can't afford high quality cars are very happy to have the option of a cheaper car because otherwise they wouldn't have one at all.


Only if you buy European or some Japanese. Again, the situation only arises from global competition. Global competition has made it so that America does not make european quality cars. But if America was only making cars for Americans and Germany was only making cars for Germans you would have a different situation. Because you would not compare a US car with a German car there would be no quality issues. An american car could be high quality. It may not be german high quality but it doesn't matter.



I agree with you on this in that I don't like fillers in my food as much as the next guy, but how many people are being fed on this planet right now compared to any other time in history? Would you rather people starve to death or eat filler laced foods? And like the previous example, there is no shortage of high quality food, you just have to pay more for it.


Global competition creates the situation where there is good quality and bad quality food. The bad quality food is not made because that is the companies mission statement "We are comitted to making crap food for the greatest profit margin". Poor quality food is made because the companies mission statement might be "We are comitted to provding the most cost effective food at the most globally economical cost possible".

This situation should not even be happening. All of the food should be top quality. Also global competition has blurred to meaning of the word food. Food is not something that occupies volume in the stomach. Food needs to have nutritional value to be actual food.



You can still go to a quality furniture store and shell out $2500 for a solid wood framed sofa, or you can buy a $300 sofa made of wood chips and glue. For people who can't afford a $2500 solid wood sofa, would you rather them do without furniture than have a cheaper option?


Also another situation that does not need to exist and only occurs because of global competition. Global competition not only creates a race to the bottom, it creates a situation where the worlds future population is brought forward to the here and now. False prosperity or more correctly, the futures prosperity brought foward causes more people to be born now. If those people were born into the future when they should have been then the demand would be lower now and probably of londer duration at that lower activity level.

As to the poor. Being poor is relative. By what measure is someone poor. If someone lives in a country where $60 a month is a living income then they are not poor in that place where that living income is possible. They would be poor by US of A standards but not by their own.

If countries all had their own industries making stuff for themselves that stuff would be affordable to them. Wages would enable those things to be affordable because it's a closed system. It doesn't need to compete. It can provide for it's own.

I think global trade should be on surpluses not on essentials. When a country sells its essentials before its people have been able to obtain those then I think there is something seriously wrong. This is what global competition does. It forces businesses to sell things essential to it's own people to other countries.

Take Australia for instance. We have no manufacturing left. We used to make our own cars, televisions and other electronics, refridgerators, clothes, steel and food. We also have huge amounts of natural gas and oil.

Today Australia must sell all of it's primary produce off shore. Imagine crayfish in abundance. Delicious apples, oranges so sweet it makes you shiver, Timber so trough and strong you can't hammer a nail into it. Billions of tons of gas that could power the nation, fuel all of the cars for just cents per litre.

All of these things are sold over seas and not to Australians. Unless I can compete with someone from Europe or Japan and pay $40-$50 each for a crayfish I can't have any. Australia sold all of it's natural gas to Chevron, BP and Co. None of it was sequestered for Australians. This means we have to pay marklet prices. For our natural gas and we have to import most of it from Singapore. So instead of paying maybe 10c cents per litre we are paying 60c per litre.

Can you see, global competition actually pushes the price of things up beyond a country's own peoples ability to pay so as a result they have to buy cheaper versions or go without.

I typed a lot of words and I'm still not sure I made my point clearly. I see your point but I think the cause of those situations, poor needing products too. I think it's all caused by this and it wouldn't be if each country produced for it's own and then sold any surplus. Economies would be very different to what they are today.

[madfranks]

Madfranks - there is also the matter of declining real wages since the mid 70s.

Of course. My old boss started working in the 1950's for a starting wage of $1.10/hr. Considering the money was silver back then, one silver dollar and one silver dime being $1.10, that is roughly 26 grams of silver, and based on current spot price today, roughly $23/hr. I started at $12/hr doing the same work in 2005. My real wages were just over half what he was making half a generation ago. This is why in his generation his wages were enough to support a family without the wife working, and today my wife needs to work to make back the other missing half.

[madfranks]

Global competition creates the situation where there is good quality and bad quality food. The bad quality food is not made because that is the companies mission statement "We are comitted to making crap food for the greatest profit margin".

What about those committed to making high quality food for the greatest profit margin?


This situation should not even be happening. All of the food should be top quality.

What about people who prefer cheaper food to save money for other things, like clothes, furniture and transportation? Should they not have the option?


Also another situation that does not need to exist and only occurs because of global competition. Global competition not only creates a race to the bottom, it creates a situation where the worlds future population is brought forward to the here and now.

What's so special about global competition? How is that any different than state competition? Or county competition? Following your logic, we can't stop with American made products, we must go to the state level. I.e. California quality versus Florida quality. And why stop there? Surely competition between states causes a race to the bottom, so naturally the counties within the state should be self sufficient, and the towns in those counties should be self sufficient. And the households should be self sufficient. Forget the division of labor, let everyone provide for themselves, then there will be no quality issues because everyone makes their own quality goods to their own satisfaction. Don't you see how silly this is? The division of labor and specialization is what makes us wealthy. The rules of economics don't magically change at the invisible lines we call borders between countries.


As to the poor. Being poor is relative. By what measure is someone poor. If someone lives in a country where $60 a month is a living income then they are not poor in that place where that living income is possible. They would be poor by US of A standards but not by their own.

Forget the nominal value of money for a minute, let's go back to the furniture example. Let's say you have enough wood to make either one solid wood, high quality sofa you can sell for $2000, or you can put the wood in a chipper and mix it with glue and make ten sofas that will sell for $300 each. Which option makes the world wealthier? One option makes one person happy and profits you $2000, the other option makes ten people happy and profits you $3000. Can't you see that providing inexpensive products according to market demands actually makes the world wealthier?

[Mouse]

Competition and comparative advantage and the "invisible hand" are all great in macro. The problem is corruption of the free market that allows comparative advantage to be siphoned off by the parasite class, to the detriment of producer and consumer. Rent-seeking behavior and unearned income is the tick that sucks our planet dry. It has been written and it is true. Make plans for your trip now; there is only one solution, and it is entirely your choice.

Wasn't this a doomer thread about government cooking up virae to save us from and then making the vacs available for the mind-numbed proles to kill themselves off with?

Another derailment.

[Glass]

Sorry MF but you don't get my point and seem unable to see everything through the lookng glass of global competition. I understand that is the position we are in and it's difficult to see things from other vantage points if they are not something you may have experienced before.

The volume of people on the planet could be related to global competition influences like cheap credit. Cheap credit provides temporary illusion of wealth. Wealth, even if an illusion causes people to make choices they may not other wise make. Such as having more children, much like when there is a bumper crop of something in nature, you have an explosion in the population of animals or insects that feast on those things, you get an explosion in population.

There are a couple of dirty words that humans dare not utter, even in hushed tones.

1 of those is racist, another is protectionism.

If a country was self contained and supplied it's produce only to it's own people it would reach a level of equilibrium. The economy would produce stuffs at a price point that everyone was in a position to afford if they chose to. Wages would likewise be priced according to the local economy ensuring that the stuffs could be purchased by those who chose to.

Now lets correct some assumptions, you seem to be claiming that by my comments I don't think people are entitled to cheaper. My point is, which still stands the test of critical thinking, is that crapier does not equal cheaper. Crapier means some level of substitution is required to achieve the "cheap".

This would not be necessary at all, if there was not global competition. The reason for this is because I would not need to cheat my customers, because I would not be trying to match the <$1 per day wages of my competitors who can compete me into the ground purely on wages, not on materials.

So my only ability for competition is to either cut my labour rates to the same <$1 per day or find some other way and the only other way to poduce a cheaper product is to cheat on the qualtiy of the materials going into the manufacture.

It's very simple, not difficult. If I spend a years wages on something that has a durability factor of 10 years, I have something of wealth for 10 years. If I spend that same years wages on something that performs the same function but has a durability of 5 years I am out 5 years of utility and wealth. So in your example the furniture made from solid timber makes the world wealthier long term because while it's not $2000 for each wood chip sofa. Does each 10 wood chip sofa's have the same durability as the single all timber one? No, not really.

[madfranks]

If a country was self contained and supplied it's produce only to it's own people it would reach a level of equilibrium. The economy would produce stuffs at a price point that everyone was in a position to afford if they chose to. Wages would likewise be priced according to the local economy ensuring that the stuffs could be purchased by those who chose to.

But what's so special about countries, that they must be self contained? Why can't the world be self contained, or individual states, counties, or towns be self contained? What logic stops the division of labor at the end of a country's boundary? Alternately, why is it bad for a town, county or state to be self contained, but good for a country to be self contained?

[mick silver]

i still dont see how making some thing a few thousand of a mile away is cheaper then making what one need closer .

[DMac]

i still dont see how making some thing a few thousand of a mile away is cheaper then making what one need closer .

If you want to make 10 things then you're correct. If you want to make 1,000,000 things, then labor/material costs become much less outside the relatively affluent America (insurance etc).

[vacuum]

If you want to make 10 things then you're correct. If you want to make 1,000,000 things, then labor/material costs become much less outside the relatively affluent America (insurance etc).

There does come a point however where each widget itself requires several widgets which may require their own widgets. Instead of trying to support the global web of dependencies where the permutations and combinations of things required at all points becomes nearly infinite, it starts to make economic sense produce all parts on site, digitally, where and when they are needed. By digitally I mean with a cnc machine, 3d printer, laser cutter, etc.

[DMac]

@vacuum, I agree with you, my post was trying to use 'their' justification.

Who needs a million widgits anyway :)