f***ing low wages low hours... f*ck capitalism

Post Reply New Topic

I don’t believe that outsourcing and free trade could have been avoided unless the US wanted to give up its position as leader of the free world. The consequence (for its citizens) is that the world is becoming ultra competitive. I personally believe the government needs to do more, in terms of helping its citizens succeed in this global competitive marketplace. I also believe that the US will have significant issues if the divergence between the 1% and everyone else continues along its current course.

I think the evidence quite clearly shows that the US is losing its preeminent position, and free trade is to blame. Please consider:

I'm 51, and I was in junior high the last time this country ran a positive balance of trade, meaning we exported more than we imported. Because the US dollar is the world's reserve currency, we've been able to get away with this; no other country would have. But as the world fills up with a glut of dollars, our reserve currency status will be lost to this irresponsibility. I would further add that every single free trade deal, without exception, has made this trade deficit worse.

An economy, any economy, consists of three basic factors: producers, consumers, and entrepreneurs. And no economy can be stronger than the weakest of these factors--like a chain. Since WWII, the US public has been a large part of the consuming factor--the world's biggest market. But as all the wealth-generating capacity has been offshored over the years, American consumers have been on a debt binge to maintain their high consumption levels. It is unsustainable.

Creating wealth is being able to take things out of the ground and make them into things people want to buy. Today, this country's biggest exports concentrate around the raw materials needed to make the things people want to buy. This role of being impoverished resource provider to the industrialized countries was the biggest grievance the colonial states had against their European imperial masters. It is more than a little bit ironic that the tables have turned 180 degrees, and needlessly so. It is because of free trade.

I could go on, but suffice it to say that until this country starts making things again, and at above-subsistence wages--that things not only here, but all over the world, will only get worse. The world will have lost its great market over excessive greed and narcissism that led to free trade.

"I am not prepared to discuss the merits or deficits of sailor's statements, all I can say is that they are politically incorrect in the blunt manner that he chose to couch them. it shows tone-deafness at least. if one wants to persuade a large audience, it makes no sense to deliberately piss off a part of said audience when it could easily have been prevented with nicer language. if he intended his comments to be read only by the conservative elect in-group [IOW "us versus THEM"], that also is problematic for me, as it smacks of di-social personality traits that are very unsavory."

Actually, Sailer comes across in his writings as very amiable, though not without a cutting sense of humor.

Sailer also has a very large audience considering the level on which he writes. In particular, he is read by the major opinion makers because of his brilliance, even though they hate what he has to say. The establishment defines itself in part by opposition to his ideas.

does anyone have the LAT/LON for those greenhouses? I'd like to look at them with Google Earth.

"And you my friend explained perfectly why we are in the shape we are in. We need an international gold standard, devoid of a name, replace dollar, Yen, Eruo with just the word gold. Murray Rothbard mentioned that this is how the world operated prior to the 1500's . This will ultimately, with silver, will be a poor man's assets. I think if we actually abolished money, and replaced it with gold, we could legitimately claim savings as an asset, and as a result empower the middle and lower classes. But at this rate, we will send many to the poor house."

Much of Europe actually had a common gold currency in the 18C: The .1867 coins, which are still commonly sold today. See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Monetary_Union

Question: If it worked so well, why was it stopped?

Answer: Because while gold does solve certain problems, such as inflation, it creates others, such as very serious deflation. Gold's strongest advantage is also its biggest disadvantage, which is that the supply is relatively fixed, and it is scarce, thereby inhibiting economic growth because the money supply cannot grow along with the economy. As such, the gold standard works to the advantage of those who already have money (the rich), and against those who do not have it (everybody else).

It's the reason for one of the most famous speeches in American history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_of_gold_speech

As far as one coin being the standard for the world, what about those countries that don't care to participate? How are you going to force them into this new world order? No, I say if the Swiss want to be on a gold standard, the more power to them; and if the Greeks want fiat money, that is their business too.

Though I'm hardly an expert on the Austrian economists, I seriously doubt Rothbard said the world had a gold standard prior to 1500. It was only after 1500, when the Spaniards raided New World gold stores that gold became common. Prior to that time, silver was the standard unit of exchange simply because gold was so rare. Actually, the US had the same problem prior to the discovery of gold in California in the late 1840's.