Talk:Race to the bottom - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.4.124.117 (talk) at 06:04, 10 October 2018 (→Bias). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:04, 10 October 2018 by 98.4.124.117 (talk) (→Bias)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Template:Findsourcesnotice

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Globalization Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Ethics Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Trade Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Major POV problem

This article needs to be rewritten so that it isn't obviously railing against the so-called "race to the bottom". Salvor Hardin 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." Daniel J. Hakimi (talk) 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.200.11 (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. Saying that it refers just to competition between governments is way too limiting. The entire article needs a serious rewrite for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.99.65.10 (talk) 15:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

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. LeapUK (talk) 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. Daniel J. Hakimi (talk) 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquishix (talk • contribs) 20:10, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Aquishix: I don't perceive any bias in this article. Which problems do you notice here? Jarble (talk) 20:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@Aquishix: Since you added the POV tag, can you describe any specific problems in this article that need to be fixed? Jarble (talk) 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.2001:610:338:1080:0:0:0:48C (talk) 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. Volunteer Marek 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 WP:RS. If this is not true, the lede phrase should be removed. Student7 (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Race to the bottom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 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. LeapUK (talk) 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 WP:TNT argument to have this deleted. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Probably from your perspective, the very thing, the concept of a race to the bottom is biased. Contrary to what you say, the main space text and the back matter make clear the opposite is the case. 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. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 06:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Categories: