| Revision as of 09:48, 10 October 2018 edit98.4.124.117 (talk) →Bias← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:12, 4 November 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,372,461 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Race to the bottom/Archives/2021. (BOT) |
| (11 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{findsourcesnotice}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Business|class=Start|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Business|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Economics|class=Start|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Economics|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Globalization|class=Start|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Globalization|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Philosophy|ethics=yes|class=Start|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Philosophy|ethics=yes|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Trade|class=Start|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Trade|importance=Mid}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Race to the bottom/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}} |
|
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Race to the bottom/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
== Major POV problem == |
|
|
|
|
|
This article needs to be rewritten so that it isn't obviously railing against the so-called "race to the bottom". ] 09:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:: But I think the phrase inherently refers to the negative aspects of deregulation, and the perverse nature of certain incentives to deregulate. Insofar as deregulation is good, it really wouldn't be called a "race to the bottom." ] (]) 17:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Isn't "race to the bottom" a far more general term? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't the term cover '''any competition that produces emergent negative beaviour'''?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e.g. 1 |
|
|
the tendancy to for people to buy bigger and bigger cars (to compete on safety and to compete on style) is called a "race to the bottom" in the book the Rebel Sell. |
|
|
|
|
|
e.g. 2 |
|
|
The same book describes more and more graphic body-piercings by each successive generation of teens similarly. Yesterdays rebellion is nothing today so, to compete, you have to go to the next level. |
|
|
|
|
|
e.g. 3 |
|
|
Arms races are an example of a race to the bottom (and arms treaties are used to check this natural tendancy). |
|
|
|
|
|
e.g. 4 |
|
|
Even tree heights in a forest are an example. If the trees could only agree to all grow less tall they'd all get the same amount of sunlight. Sadly wasted tree-trunk-growing effort is the order of the day. This emergent wasteful behaviour is also a race to the bottom. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely. Saying that it refers just to competition between governments is way too limiting. The entire article needs a serious rewrite for this. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, this article claims a narrowness of definition which is not reflective of wider use. When people speak of a race to the bottom they mean a dive towards the worst that mankind is capable of rather than climbing to the best. ] (]) 11:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I was really confused about this too. This article explains what is a classic ''example'' of a race to the bottom, but is not the definition. That said, I think the definition is a game, very close to, but not identical to, the prisoner's dilemma. ] (]) 17:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Major POV Problem == |
|
|
|
|
|
This article does not even come close to NPOV. It should probably be entirely re-written, but a "criticism" section seems absolutely necessary to even feign NPOV. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:10, 5 October 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:{{reply to|Aquishix}} I don't perceive any bias in this article. Which problems do you notice here? ] (]) 20:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
{{reply to|Aquishix}} Since you added the POV tag, can you describe any specific problems in this article that need to be fixed? ] (]) 23:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
How about "The incentive to deregulate comes from the consumer who wishes to pay a competitive rate for items or services, rather than one set by the government often at the behest of businesses or unions."? |
|
|
I really thought this part was the result of vandalism (or bad internet trolling). Anyway, I'd love to see some backup for the (implicit) claim that businesses do not ask for less regulation.] (]) 11:07, 11 November 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:The article presumes that this is a real phenomenon and that outcomes are as claimed. For example right in the lede it states in Misplaced Pages voice that "deregulation" leads to "lower wages". This is an empirical question and obviously a non-neutral way of stating things.<span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span> 14:46, 11 November 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::The lede is supposed to summarize the body of the article. Within the body of the article there should be a statement that states that deregulation leads to lower wages, supported by a ]. If this is not true, the lede phrase should be removed. ] (]) 20:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== External links modified == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|
|
|
|
|
I have just added archive links to {{plural:2|one external link|2 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: |
|
|
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140222045753/http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2949 to http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2949 |
|
|
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160104230529/http://www.zcommunications.org/race-to-bottom-for-garment-workers-by-sheila-mcclear to http://www.zcommunications.org/race-to-bottom-for-garment-workers-by-sheila-mcclear |
|
|
|
|
|
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tl|Sourcecheck}}). |
|
|
|
|
|
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 01:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This article is packed full of untruths == |
|
|
|
|
|
A race to the bottom is simply a race to the worst possible situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
This article make huge assumptions as to what makes a worst possible situation. ] (]) 06:40, 18 May 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Bias == |
|
|
|
|
|
This article reads from a very leftist perspective, thanks in large part to relying upon left-wing sources. There are important game theory applications of this term and nowhere does this discuss the "Delaware Effect" (opposite of the "California Effect" which has been called "race to the top" before Obama lifted the term). I imagine one could make a ] argument to have this deleted. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">] (])</span> 19:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Probably from your perspective, the very thing, the concept of a race to the bottom is left biased. Certainly the notion that wages are low is a left perspective, by rightist perspective they can't be too low, the lower the better for "entrepreneurship". Contrary to what you say, the main space text and much of the back matter make clear the opposite is the case (the immediately prior comment is an (accurate if inarticulate) exception). I have corrected this by at least making clear what the metaphor is about. The ubiquity of right wing perspectives, while in rapid decay from the pile up of its effects, allows such obvious glaring mistakes of fact. ] (]) 06:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::The clarification I've added to the lede was stimulated by the tagging which is justified by the right wing obfuscation of the meaning of the term just referred to. I would remove the tag but the body of the article still so solidly reflects that obfuscation that it is still justified. ] (]) 09:48, 10 October 2018 (UTC) |
|
