We need Chinese-style autocracy

[DarrinS]

Possibly the dumbest op-ed I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=2




Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today.

One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today :wow, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power. China’s leaders understand that in a world of exploding populations and rising emerging-market middle classes, demand for clean power and energy efficiency is going to soar. Beijing wants to make sure that it owns that industry and is ordering the policies to do that, including boosting gasoline prices, from the top down.

(I love how he cites China as some kind of "green" role model)

Our one-party democracy is worse. The fact is, on both the energy/climate legislation and health care legislation, only the Democrats are really playing. With a few notable exceptions, the Republican Party is standing, arms folded and saying “no.” Many of them just want President Obama to fail. Such a waste. Mr. Obama is not a socialist; he’s a centrist :lmao . But if he’s forced to depend entirely on his own party to pass legislation, he will be whipsawed by its different factions.

Look at the climate/energy bill that came out of the House. Its sponsors had to work twice as hard to produce this breakthrough cap-and-trade legislation. Why? Because with basically no G.O.P. representatives willing to vote for any price on carbon that would stimulate investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, the sponsors had to rely entirely on Democrats — and that meant paying off coal-state and agriculture Democrats with pork. Thank goodness, it is still a bill worth passing. But it could have been much better — and can be in the Senate. Just give me 8 to 10 Republicans ready to impose some price on carbon, and they can be leveraged against Democrats who want to water down the bill.

“China is going to eat our lunch and take our jobs on clean energy — an industry that we largely invented — and they are going to do it with a managed economy we don’t have and don’t want,” said Joe Romm, who writes the blog, climateprogress.org.

The only way for us to match them is by legislating a rising carbon price along with efficiency and renewable standards that will stimulate massive private investment in clean-tech. Hard to do with a one-party democracy.

The same is true on health care. “The central mechanism through which Obama seeks to extend coverage and restrain costs is via new ‘exchanges,’ insurance clearinghouses, modeled on the plan Mitt Romney enacted when he was governor of Massachusetts,” noted Matt Miller, a former Clinton budget official and author of “The Tyranny of Dead Ideas.” “The idea is to let individuals access group coverage from private insurers, with subsidies for low earners.”

And it is possible the president will seek to fund those subsidies, at least in part, with the idea John McCain ran on — by reducing the tax exemption for employer-provided health care. Can the Republicans even say yes to their own ideas, if they are absorbed by Obama? Without Obama being able to leverage some Republican votes, it is going to be very hard to get a good plan to cover all Americans with health care.

“Just because Obama is on a path to give America the Romney health plan with McCain-style financing, does not mean the Republicans will embrace it — if it seems politically more attractive to scream ‘socialist,’ ” said Miller.

The G.O.P. used to be the party of business. Well, to compete and win in a globalized world, no one needs the burden of health insurance shifted from business to government more than American business. No one needs immigration reform — so the world’s best brainpower can come here without restrictions — more than American business. No one needs a push for clean-tech — the world’s next great global manufacturing industry — more than American business. Yet the G.O.P. today resists national health care, immigration reform and wants to just drill, baby, drill.

“Globalization has neutered the Republican Party, leaving it to represent not the have-nots of the recession but the have-nots of globalized America, the people who have been left behind either in reality or in their fears,” said Edward Goldberg, a global trade consultant who teaches at Baruch College. “The need to compete in a globalized world has forced the meritocracy, the multinational corporate manager, the eastern financier and the technology entrepreneur to reconsider what the Republican Party has to offer. In principle, they have left the party, leaving behind not a pragmatic coalition but a group of ideological naysayers.”

[nuclearfm]

Possibly the dumbest op-ed I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=2

We should just ban all trade with China. That would solve things pretty quick...for most of us that is. It's completely ridiculous.

[Extra Stout]

That reads like the kind of op-ed that could have been written in Italy or Germany in the 1920's.

Unless this is some elaborate kind of satire, that has to be one of the scariest op-eds in recent memory.

It is exactly the kind of argument both the fascists and the socialists used 100 years ago.

My doomsday prediction for America is so freaking correct. War is coming.

[Extra Stout]

double post

[nuclearfm]

double post

Rather than waste all that white space, you could post some interesting facts.

Something like this works well.

Klingons (Klingon: tlhIngan, pronounced [ˈt͡ɬɪŋɑn]) are a warrior race in the fictional Star Trek universe. They are recurring villains in the 1960s television show Star Trek: The Original Series, and have appeared in all five spin-off series and seven feature films. Initially intended to be swarthy antagonists for the crew of the USS Enterprise, the Klingons ended up a close ally of humanity and the United Federation of Planets in later television series.

As originally developed by screenwriter Gene L. Coon, Klingons were darkly colored humanoids with little honor, intended as an allegory to the then-current Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. With a greatly expanded budget for makeup and effects, the Klingons were completely redesigned in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979), gaining ridged foreheads that created a continuity error not explained by canon until 2005. In later films and the spin-off series Star Trek: The Next Generation, the militaristic traits of the Klingons were bolstered by an increased sense of honor and strict warrior code.

[doobs]

ES, don't be concerned. Friedman is merely a well-meaning boob. Nothing sinister here.

[Winehole23]

We've already had one party rule, as recently as 2001-2006. I agree it leads to bad things.

Friedman's choice of China as an example for us shows a tin ear, but the sentiment he expresses is hardly new. Bush used all the power at his disposal to "get things done", even invented some brand new powers, and steamrollered his opposition in Congress. Obama will probably do much the same.

[101A]

We've already had one party rule, as recently as 2001-2006. I agree it leads to bad things.

Friedman's choice of China as an example for us shows a tin ear, but the sentiment he expresses is hardly new. Bush used all the power at his disposal to "get things done", even invented some brand new powers, and steamrollered his opposition in Congress. Obama will probably do much the same.

And Friedman makes it abundantly clear that that, in his opinion; is not enough. More steamrolling is needed, not less.

[Winehole23]

Shoe's on the other foot now, so right-wingers cry fascism. They are no less right than the left-wingers who used to say it IMO.

The democratic majority is no more permanent than the GOP's was. Or will be. Unfortunately for us all, the nexus of money and power transcends party lines. Corporatism flourishes no matter who's in office.

[Winehole23]

And Friedman makes it abundantly clear that that, in his opinion; is not enough. More steamrolling is needed, not less.It's becoming SOP and it sucks. I agree.

[Winehole23]

Instead of consensus, raw power.

[101A]

Instead of consensus, raw power.

Well, duh.

It's working so well in China - and has for like nearly 20 years now, how much evidence do we NEEEEEEEED?!

- kneejerk

[Winehole23]

Expedience is king. No evidence is needed for that.

[BadMoodBob]

Government works best when one controls the Presidency and the other Congress.

I love how these piece of shieeeeet Progressives repeat the mantra, "The majority of Americans want health care reform."

Of course they do. However they are using this term to project onto the listener that "Health Care reform" is synonymous with "Obama's current Health care reform plan." It is not.


Also, China does what China do. They don't care about the rest of the World. They are freaking China. ah ching chong chi China.

The United States, led by self loathing un-Americans, does not have the country's interest at the top of the list as China does of themselves. Our der leaders are more concerned with curbing traditional American prosperity if it means "progressing" the America they want us all to live under.

[LnGrrrR]

Friedman is an idiot.

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

He has negative credibility.

[Extra Stout]

ES, don't be concerned. Friedman is merely a well-meaning boob. Nothing sinister here.
Nobody gets it. It has nothing to do with whether anybody is being "sinister."

The people residing in the United States of America, both left and right, are increasingly a people comfortable with intrusive, authoritarian government as long as it provides comprehensive services to their liking. These people increasingly see the role of the state as providing positive rights as opposed to protecting negative ones.

But at the same time, these people are increasingly are splintered to the point where separate factions, often regional in nature but not entirely so, hold little to nothing in common and cannot be called part of the same country in anything beyond a nominal sense. These people no longer believe that others are operating in good faith with them or that they much in the way of common interests. There is no trust even in so much as the basic decency of the other side. The other side is called dangerous and evil and must be eliminated [sic].

Democracies are always poor at coming up with sweeping government programs, because while a majority of people may agree something needs to be reformed, there is never more than a sliver that agrees with a particular detailed solution. Much of the majority that wanted reform might actually prefer no reform to whatever specific plan is under consideration.

So what happened in the past was that people would get frustrated with the inability to get anything done in a democracy. If only changes could be passed by fiat it would work better! Forget having dilettante politicians evaluate legislation; let panels of experts develop and implement reform! Germany and Italy didn't go from some Jeffersonian liberal paradises in 1925 to totalitarianism all of a sudden; the seeds were sown years, decades in advance in the culture of each nation to where the people accepted, nay, demanded dictatorial, er, umm, "unitary executive" leadership to solve their problems and purge their enemies.

The world has been down this road before. We know what happens, but I guess because the U.S.A. for all its hegemony is still isolated by the two oceans from really "getting it," we're doomed to go down the road ourselves and bleed and die. So be it. I may get to transfer out of the country in a few years, and if offered I will jump at the chance to get out.

And of course everyone will laugh and say that I am just being ridiculous because of course it can never happen here. Not only can it happen, it will happen, because that is who the people of the United States of America are, not because they're going to be duped by some sinister charismatic leader. New York will have its Lenin, and Georgia its Hitler.

[BadMoodBob]

Government is wisely turning the majority into those receiving benefits while the minority is expected to pay for it all.

It's going to be fun when this class warfare flips and it is the poor receiving the hate from the REAL Middle Class.

Not the "middle class" government refers to because they want to whisper sweet nothings into the ears of those whom they are afraid to offend with reality.

[Winehole23]

But at the same time, these people are increasingly are splintered to the point where separate factions, often regional in nature but not entirely so, hold little to nothing in common and cannot be called part of the same country in anything beyond a nominal sense. These people no longer believe that others are operating in good faith with them or that they much in the way of common interests. There is no trust even in so much as the basic decency of the other side. The other side is called dangerous and evil and must be eliminated [sic].This is the nub of it. Most of what gets posted in this forum reinforces and extends it.

[DarrinS]

Isn't the US constitution all about limiting the power of government and establishing checks and balanced to prevent any single branch from becoming too powerful?

[LnGrrrR]

Meet me back here in 50 years ES, and whoever is the winner of our "Will the US exist as it does now, more or less" bet will owe the other a coke. :lol

[LnGrrrR]

Isn't the US constitution all about limiting the power of government and establishing checks and balanced to prevent any single branch from becoming too powerful?

Yes.

It's also about reducing the overall power of the government.

[101A]

Isn't the US constitution all about limiting the power of government and establishing checks and balanced to prevent any single branch from becoming too powerful?

It was.

However, the "Interstate Commerce" clause let the camels nose under the tent; and there is NOTHING that Congress can not pass in terms of taxation/property rights - up to and including nationalization of industries and 100% tax rates; with that level of power over $$$$ - nothing else really matters.

[101A]

Meet me back here in 50 years ES, and whoever is the winner of our "Will the US exist as it does now, more or less" bet will owe the other a coke. :lol

I will join you........



Comrades.

[Winehole23]

Your solicitude for the US Constitution is touching, Darrin.

[Winehole23]

When did you acquire it? It was hardly in evidence last year.

[doobs]

Nobody gets it. It has nothing to do with whether anybody is being "sinister."

The people residing in the United States of America, both left and right, are increasingly a people comfortable with intrusive, authoritarian government as long as it provides comprehensive services to their liking. These people increasingly see the role of the state as providing positive rights as opposed to protecting negative ones.

But at the same time, these people are increasingly are splintered to the point where separate factions, often regional in nature but not entirely so, hold little to nothing in common and cannot be called part of the same country in anything beyond a nominal sense. These people no longer believe that others are operating in good faith with them or that they much in the way of common interests. There is no trust even in so much as the basic decency of the other side. The other side is called dangerous and evil and must be eliminated [sic].

Democracies are always poor at coming up with sweeping government programs, because while a majority of people may agree something needs to be reformed, there is never more than a sliver that agrees with a particular detailed solution. Much of the majority that wanted reform might actually prefer no reform to whatever specific plan is under consideration.

So what happened in the past was that people would get frustrated with the inability to get anything done in a democracy. If only changes could be passed by fiat it would work better! Forget having dilettante politicians evaluate legislation; let panels of experts develop and implement reform! Germany and Italy didn't go from some Jeffersonian liberal paradises in 1925 to totalitarianism all of a sudden; the seeds were sown years, decades in advance in the culture of each nation to where the people accepted, nay, demanded dictatorial, er, umm, "unitary executive" leadership to solve their problems and purge their enemies.

The world has been down this road before. We know what happens, but I guess because the U.S.A. for all its hegemony is still isolated by the two oceans from really "getting it," we're doomed to go down the road ourselves and bleed and die. So be it. I may get to transfer out of the country in a few years, and if offered I will jump at the chance to get out.

And of course everyone will laugh and say that I am just being ridiculous because of course it can never happen here. Not only can it happen, it will happen, because that is who the people of the United States of America are, not because they're going to be duped by some sinister charismatic leader. New York will have its Lenin, and Georgia its Hitler.

My point is that Friedman mainly writes silly, weightless, airy nonsense that feels good to those with liberal sensibilities. This is nothing new.

I think the "I'm leaving this country" argument is pretty shitty, by the way. Despite the statist inclinations of both parties, we still enjoy a fairly solid foundation of liberalism in this country. (I use the term in its classic sense.)

I think some big changes would have to occur before I would even consider this country falling apart or succumbing to a new Hitler or Lenin. I guess I have more faith in our constitutional system.

[DarrinS]

Your solicitude for the US Constitution is touching, Darrin.

:toast

[101A]

My point is that Friedman mainly writes silly, weightless, airy nonsense that feels good to those with liberal sensibilities. This is nothing new.

I think the "I'm leaving this country" argument is pretty shitty, by the way. Despite the statist inclinations of both parties, we still enjoy a fairly solid foundation of liberalism in this country. (I use the term in its classic sense.)

I think some big changes would have to occur before I would even consider this country falling apart or succumbing to a new Hitler or Lenin. I guess I have more faith in our constitutional system.

Not sure if ES is serious with his posts here; although it does fit his tone of late.

He is right about proponents on each side no trusting even the motives/desires of anyone that doesn't agree with them. "Yay team!" is such a cliche these days it's ridiculous.

Also, as whack as Friedman's article is today; 10 years ago there's no way it gets published. Things have changed - relatively quickly.

If the economic crisis continues to worsen, and doesn't rebound, it is plausible that more and more Americans will turn to the govt. to do whatever is necessary to "fix" everything. It has been shown, also, that post-9/11 Americans on both sides of the political spectrum are willing to forego there own rights for an end they agree with.

[LnGrrrR]

I will join you........



Comrades.

I see you're on ES's side then... that's two cokes for me! :lol

[clambake]

ES...the only thing missing from your scenario is an outside oppressive military action.

[DarrinS]

Jonah Goldberg has a great response to Friedman's op-ed

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDcxZDkzN2EyNDQwYTQzNWNjNjdiZWNiZTIzYTcwOTA=





So there you have it. If only America could drop its inefficient and antiquated system, designed in the age before globalization and modernity and, most damning of all, before the lantern of Thomas Friedman's intellect illuminated the land. If only enlightened experts could do the hard and necessary things that the new age requires, if only we could rely on these planners to set the ship of state right. Now, of course, there are "drawbacks" to such a system: crushing of dissidents with tanks, state control of reproduction, government control of the press and the internet. Omelets and broken eggs, as they say. More to the point, Friedman insists, these "drawbacks" pale in comparison to the system we have today here in America.

I cannot begin to tell you how this is exactly the argument that was made by American fans of Mussolini in the 1920s. It is exactly the argument that was made in defense of Stalin and Lenin before him (it's the argument that idiotic, dictator-envying leftists make in defense of Castro and Chavez today). It was the argument made by George Bernard Shaw who yearned for a strong progressive autocracy under a Mussolini, a Hitler or a Stalin (he wasn't picky in this regard). This is the argument for an "economic dictatorship" pushed by Stuart Chase and the New Dealers. It's the dream of Herbert Croly and a great many of the Progressives.

I have no idea why I still have the capacity to be shocked by such things. A few years ago, during the worst part of the Iraq war, I wrote a column saying that Iraq needed a Pinochet type to bring order to Iraq and help develop democratic and liberal institutions. To this day, I get vicious hate mail from liberal and leftist readers for my "pro-dictator" stance. Meanwhile, Thomas Friedman, golden boy of the NYT op-ed page, is writing love-letters to dictatorships because they have the foresight to invest in electric batteries and waterless toilets or something. It looks like there's reason to hope I was wrong about Iraq (I certainly hope I was). But at least I favored a dictatorship of sorts — for another country! — because I thought it would lead to a liberal democracy. Here, Friedman lives in a liberal democracy but has his nose pressed up against the candy store window of a cruel, undemocratic, regime and all he can do is drool over the prospect of having the same power here. It's disgusting.

[Winehole23]

ES's suggestion seems to be that the USA will disintegrate from within. Foreign aggression might not be needed to accomplish this, clambake.

[101A]

Hey, WH,

Where's that burger from in your Avatar?

Making me hungry (and realizing this food-cesspool I live in in Western PA means if I want something like that tonight; I'm doing in myself.)

[Winehole23]

Wunsche's in Ft. Worth, Texas.

[Winehole23]

http://blogs.chron.com/cookstour/archives/max%27s%20year.jpg

[clambake]

ES's suggestion seems to be that the USA will disintegrate from within. Foreign aggression might not be needed to accomplish this, clambake.

just reminiscent of my time at home. one could hardly call that foreign.

[101A]

http://blogs.chron.com/cookstour/archives/max%27s%20year.jpg


Fuck you.


Seriously.


'goin to the store, y'all take it easy.

[DarrinS]

http://blogs.chron.com/cookstour/archives/max%27s%20year.jpg


nom nom nom

[Extra Stout]

I think the "I'm leaving this country" argument is pretty shitty, by the way. Despite the statist inclinations of both parties, we still enjoy a fairly solid foundation of liberalism in this country. (I use the term in its classic sense.)

I think some big changes would have to occur before I would even consider this country falling apart or succumbing to a new Hitler or Lenin. I guess I have more faith in our constitutional system.
Would the fallout from our pending national insolvency qualify as "big changes" to you?

[Marcus Bryant]

My God. I thought this was a parody.

Though we aren't that far off from taking orders from the great Chinese whose nuts Friedman has on his chin.

[doobs]

Would the fallout from our pending national insolvency qualify as "big changes" to you?

Yes, that's a big deal. But I think I need you to connect the dots for me.

The amount of debt we were carrying before Obama was disgusting and needed to be remedied, but it hardly unsustainable by historical standards. Things are much, much worse now. But I still don't understand how that translates into fascism or the dissolution of the United States.

So how does it all play out? Keep in mind: We have congressional elections every two years. We have presidential elections every four years. We have an independent and respected judiciary. We have never had a military coup in our history.

[Extra Stout]

But I still don't understand how that translates into fascism or the dissolution of the United States.

So how does it all play out? Keep in mind: We have congressional elections every two years. We have presidential elections every four years. We have an independent and respected judiciary. We have never had a military coup in our history.
The insolvency plays out when the dollar abruptly undergoes hyperinflation. This destroys the economy; high unemployment, crime, chaos, etc. Because the government is insolvent, it cannot provide its normal array of social services. Many, many people are hungry and out in the streets. Shantytowns emerge around major cities.

The government cannot fund the military. Maintaining whatever civil order is possible falls to the werewithal of whatever provisional authorities local areas can set up. There is functional anarchy for a time.

Once these provisional authorities have reestablished some semblance of order, the questions start. Why did this happen? Who did this to us? The answers and the repercussions are predictable.

[Marcus Bryant]

Wal-Mart will save us all. Better yet, we'll make shit here for the green Chinese. That should make Friedman's cock hard.

[Extra Stout]

I don't think there's much doubt what the answers would be in a place like Texas. There would be a Kristallnacht going after blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, and anybody who looks or acts like an urban intellectual type. People will go through the rolls to see who donated money to a Democrat recently, and pay visits to those people's houses to deliver bullets.

Some of those targeted groups will fight back and it will get bloody.

The converse will happen in liberal areas.

[Marcus Bryant]

Damn, this small batch bourbon is tasty.

[Wild Cobra]

We should just ban all trade with China. That would solve things pretty quick...for most of us that is. It's completely ridiculous.
No, we should stop taxing production. Then we can compete. Then if cases are found where products are dumped below cost, we tariff the shit out of them.

[101A]

I don't think there's much doubt what the answers would be in a place like Texas. There would be a Kristallnacht going after blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, and anybody who looks or acts like an urban intellectual type. People will go through the rolls to see who donated money to a Democrat recently, and pay visits to those people's houses to deliver bullets.

Some of those targeted groups will fight back and it will get bloody.

The converse will happen in liberal areas.

I've already formed a tribe. When the Sh!t hits the fan; everyone cowboys up at my house; we couquer from there. No ideological similarities amongst the tribal members; they are mostly useful, armed, or both. Two honest-to-god Navy Seals, A doctor, dentist, several scientists, a historian, and three lawyers (in case we run low on food).

[Marcus Bryant]

How about we don't have a race to the bottom to feed our consumer appetites? I guess that is what happens when Wal-Mart is considered to have 1st Amendment rights just like every Jim Bob and Sally May.

[Wild Cobra]

How about we don't have a race to the bottom to feed our consumer appetites? I guess that is what happens when Wal-Mart is considered to have 1st Amendment rights just like every Jim Bob and Sally May.
Walmart not the problem. Granted, I would like to see corporation never get that big, but they are just doing good business practices playing by the rules and regulations our government makes.

Government is the problem.

[Marcus Bryant]

Good business practices mean doing bidness with totalitarian communist regimes in pursuit of profit growth just because it's legal.

[Bartleby]

I guess that is what happens when Wal-Mart is considered to have 1st Amendment rights just like every Jim Bob and Sally May.

You think it's bad now, just wait until the SC rules against the FEC in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

[Marcus Bryant]

Oh shit, I'm turning into a "socialist" because I think the almighty American corporation should know its role.

Exit question: does Wal-Mart even consider itself "American"?

[doobs]

Oh shit, I'm turning into a "socialist" because I think the almighty American corporation should know its role.

Exit question: does Wal-Mart even consider itself "American"?

Who cares if Wal-Mart considers itself American?

[Marcus Bryant]

Who cares if Wal-Mart considers itself American?

I don't know. Perhaps "Americans" should? Crazy thought, I know.

But if it enjoys Bill of Rights protections then it's surely capable of telling us, no?

[Wild Cobra]

Oh shit, I'm turning into a "socialist" because I think the almighty American corporation should know its role.

Exit question: does Wal-Mart even consider itself "American"?
Walmart is actually a good community player. They return money to the areas the preside in. Go ahead and believe the hype because unions and other businesses want to knock the top dog down. When someone comes up with valid complaints about them, I night change my mind. All the BS floating around about them is pathetic though.

Have any valid complaints?

[Marcus Bryant]

LOL. Oh, I don't know, how about enriching a dictatorial communist regime? That's right, that's not valid.

Further, let's not knock the "top dog down" while he's disrupting American communities and propping up commie governments around the world. While he's leading the pack of corporate hounds in a race in which the average American loses, unless they have any money left to spend in this consumerist fantasyland.

[Wild Cobra]

LOL. Oh, I don't know, how about enriching a dictatorial communist regime? That's right, that's not valid.

Further, let's not knock the "top dog down" while he's disrupting American communities and propping up commie governments around the world. While he's leading the pack of corporate hounds in a race in which the average American loses, unless they have any money left to spend in this consumerist fantasyland.
That's not a valid argument because all the other retail stores buy from China, asia, etc. too.

What's funny is I think I've seen more "made in USA" products in Walmart, than other retail stores.

[doobs]

I don't know. Perhaps "Americans" should? Crazy thought, I know.

But if it enjoys Bill of Rights protections then it's surely capable of telling us, no?

Ah, economic nationalism.

[Marcus Bryant]

That's not a valid argument because all the other retail stores buy from China, asia, etc. too.

What's funny is I think I've seen more "made in USA" products in China, than other retail stores.

Is that a defense?

[Marcus Bryant]

Ah, economic nationalism.

Not necessarily. Just not a race to the absolute bottom to squeeze out every last penny at the expense of life here in these United States. Taking your argument to its extreme, we end up with a tool like Friedman.

[Wild Cobra]

Is that a defense?
Against a stupid attack? No. Just pointing out you have no valid complaints, that your dislike of Walmart is based on the ignorance of a lemming.

[Marcus Bryant]

Sure, life is good here if you are a member of the professional class as I am and don't have to worry about your job being shipped overseas and your best option being to work for a retail chain store hawking Chinese slave made goods. Otherwise, Wal-Mart and the rest are leading us to oblivion in the mold of some South American 3rd world hell.

[Marcus Bryant]

Against a stupid attack? No. Just pointing out you have no valid complaints, that your dislike of Walmart is based on the ignorance of a lemming.

So what jobs are left? Waiting tables? Ringing up customers at the local Wal-Mart? What's left? Tell me. As for "ignorance", I know all your free trade Friedmanesque (the other) arguments. That shit's great until you figure out that the rest of the world is dirt poor and can make shit for 1/100th the cost of it here in these United States. Sure, they do the routine manufacturing shit and we end up with all the high end engineering jobs here, no? Problem is, there's only so many engineers...

[Wild Cobra]

So what jobs are left? Waiting tables? Ringing up customers at the local Wal-Mart? What's left? Tell me. As for "ignorance", I know all your free trade Friedmanesque (the other) arguments. That shit's great until you figure out that the rest of the world is dirt poor and can make shit for 1/100th the cost of it here in these United States. Sure, they do the routine manufacturing shit and we end up with all the high end engineering jobs here, no? Problem is, there's only so many engineers...
Why is it Walmarts fault?

Stop and think for a moment. Walmart is doing the same thing other retail stores do. Your complaint is not against Walmart, but against the way we trade. Singling out Walmart paints you as a liberal lemming.

[doobs]

Not necessarily. Just not a race to the absolute bottom to squeeze out every last penny at the expense of life here in these United States. Taking your argument to its extreme, we end up with a tool like Friedman.

My argument?

[Wild Cobra]

Sure, life is good here if you are a member of the professional class as I am and don't have to worry about your job being shipped overseas and your best option being to work for a retail chain store hawking Chinese slave made goods. Otherwise, Wal-Mart and the rest are leading us to oblivion in the mold of some South American 3rd world hell.
Are you high, or speaking out your ass again? The best paying job I ever had is now in Malaysia. I only make about 85% as much of a salary as I did in 2002, in dollars. Not COLA adjusted. In my current job, I don't have a stock purchase program or quarterly profit sharing which used to take me past $110 k. My job went away when the tech bubble burst.

Funny thing is, corporations try to stay here. They know that the USA is their biggest market, and for them to survive, it need consumers. The Gresham facility I used to work at could have survived the tech bubble, but the local government decided to raise property taxes. That was the straw that broke the camels back, and manufacturing went overseas.

My previous job is one that would have stayed here if it wasn't taxed out of existence.

[Marcus Bryant]

LOL. So I should pledge blind loyalty to the "American" corporations who are selling out my country because I'm an American and they're an American corporation who enjoys 1st Amendment rights even though we shouldn't even care if they acknowledge that they are American because they inherently good because to disagree would make you a socialist, or worse, a commie.

[Marcus Bryant]

"Economic nationalism." Would that not consist of using taxpayer money to subsidize the losses of large businesses just because they were American businesses? I'm sure doobie was opposed to that. Or printing money and thereby undermining the value of currency held by the people?

[doobs]

"Economic nationalism." Would that not consist of using taxpayer money to subsidize the losses of large businesses just because they were American businesses? I'm sure doobie was opposed to that. Or printing money and thereby undermining the value of currency held by the people?

Yes, I'm opposed to economic nationalism.

[Marcus Bryant]

The best paying job I ever had is now in Malaysia.

Your words.



I only make about 85% as much of a salary as I did in 2002, in dollars. Not COLA adjusted. In my current job, I don't have a stock purchase program or quarterly profit sharing which used to take me past $110 k. My job went away when the tech bubble burst.

Funny thing is, corporations try to stay here. They know that the USA is their biggest market, and for them to survive, it need consumers. The Gresham facility I used to work at could have survived the tech bubble, but the local government decided to raise property taxes. That was the straw that broke the camels back, and manufacturing went overseas.

My previous job is one that would have stayed here if it wasn't taxed out of existence.

Well shit, of course it's going to be 'highly taxed' when the alternative is to head down to some third world shithole and shine the local dictator's pole for less.

[Marcus Bryant]

Yes, I'm opposed to economic nationalism.

Good. Then you should be opposed to this country selling itself to the Chinese economic nationalist program. Duh.

[Marcus Bryant]

Since we're opposed to 'economic nationalism' then I'm sure we can reach a consensus here that no corporation should hold 1st amendment rights.

[doobs]

Good. Then you should be opposed to this country selling itself to the Chinese economic nationalist program. Duh.

I'm opposed to people caring about a company being "American."

I'm opposed to protectionist fearmongering.

I'm opposed to the government trying to force private enterprises to stay in America while at the same time taxing the crap out of them.

[Marcus Bryant]

Yet you support the state being so servile to private enterprises that it treats them as an actual person, while they sell out your countrymen to enhance the economic nationalist regime of a communist state.

Perhaps soon enough we can ignore states and pledge our loyalties directly to multinationals. That would be so cool. Better to be red than a "protectionist," apparently.

[doobs]

Yet you support the state being so servile to private enterprises that it treats them as an actual person, while they sell out your countrymen to enhance the economic nationalist regime of a communist state.

Perhaps soon enough we can ignore states and pledge our loyalties directly to multinationals. That would be so cool. Better to be red than a "protectionist," apparently.

What did I say?

[Marcus Bryant]

I know what you wrote. No government, just slaves to the almighty C corp.

[Marcus Bryant]

Obviously we don't care about states until we care about the protection of the property rights and the free speech rights of multinationals, then we must have servile states which call upon the lower classes to die in the wars which the state conducts which enrich the multinationals. Not to mention that we should expect those lower classes to compete with the slaves of communist states we support through a theory of free trade in which the benefit is further indebtedness for the state and its citizens.

[hope4dopes]

That's not a valid argument because all the other retail stores buy from China, asia, etc. too.

What's funny is I think I've seen more "made in USA" products in Walmart, than other retail stores.


The right needs to learn that it has as much to fear from big bussiness as it does big goverment, and the left has to learn it has as much to fear from big goverment as it does big bussiness.
I think a lot of conservatives really felt Bush was just a little too cozy with internationlist corprate visions.The spp, the NAU, I always got the feeling Bush was a mouthpiece for people who wanted to create something like the EU in the westeren hemisphere. Like Rockefeller.
The Republicans aren't really speaking to the workers, they pat them on the head call them the salt of the earth, couldn't do it without you blah blah Horatio Algers bullshit and out the door you go, meanwhile hiding the level of corruption big bussiness forgien and domestic play in the direction of the state and their end game for the nation, and it's people.
Walmarts been busted several time for hiring illegal aliens to build their stores.

[Yonivore]

The right needs to learn that it has as much to fear from big bussiness as it does big goverment, and the left has to learn it has as much to fear from big goverment as it does big bussiness.
I think a lot of conservatives really felt Bush was just a little too cozy with internationlist corprate visions.The spp, the NAU, I always got the feeling Bush was a mouthpiece for people who wanted to create something like the EU in the westeren hemisphere. Like Rockefeller.
The Republicans aren't really speaking to the workers, they pat them on the head call them the salt of the earth, couldn't do it without you blah blah Horatio Algers bullshit and out the door you go, meanwhile hiding the level of corruption big bussiness forgien and domestic play in the direction of the state and their end game for the nation, and it's people.
Walmarts been busted several time for hiring illegal aliens to build their stores.
The Bush Justice Department had a better record for prosecuting corrupt business than just about any previous administration...

[hope4dopes]

The Bush Justice Department had a better record for prosecuting corrupt business than just about any previous administration...
Get real the level of corruption I'm talking about never sees the light of day and you know it. The ultra rich and powerfull call the tune sometimes the tune is republican sometimes the tune is democrat, but they call the tune.
Bush made it a point to threaten the citizens and the border patrol agents if the interfered with the flow of illegal aliens, he was agressive in pursuing an agenda of an EU like community. The larger the state gets ,the farther away the peoples access to it is ,until one community,then another is sacrificed for the greater good.

[Bartleby]

The Bush Justice Department had a better record for prosecuting corrupt business than just about any previous administration...

:lmao

[Yonivore]

Get real the level of corruption I'm talking about never sees the light of day and you know it. The ultra rich and powerfull call the tune sometimes the tune is republican sometimes the tune is democrat, but they call the tune.
Bush made it a point to threaten the citizens and the border patrol agents if the interfered with the flow of illegal aliens, he was agressive in pursuing an agenda of an EU like community. The larger the state gets ,the farther away the peoples access to it is ,until one community,then another is sacrificed for the greater good.
Put a name on these nebulous puppeteers. Who are they? To whom are our presidents prostrating themselves? Who are these "ultra rich and powerful?"

[LnGrrrR]

Fuck you.


Seriously.


'goin to the store, y'all take it easy.

:rollin:rollin:rollin

Seriously, I just mentioned yesterday how WH23's avatar was making me hungry.

Change your avatar! :lmao

[LnGrrrR]

Why is it Walmarts fault?

Stop and think for a moment. Walmart is doing the same thing other retail stores do. Your complaint is not against Walmart, but against the way we trade. Singling out Walmart paints you as a liberal lemming.

LMAO

WC, you're the first to say you're not a big R Republican because you disagree with some of their tactics.

However, Marcus disagrees with you in one area, and you are quick to paint him as a liberal. If you've read anything else Marcus has posted, you would know he's not a liberal.

[polysylab1k]

The chinese mode is absolutely not something replicable, at least it's not what America needs. Autocracy never works in a country where most people are smarties instead of dumbasses, America reached the world's summit through its old route and I believe it'll once again lead the world in the 21st century. Some changes are truly urgently needed in America, but the changes are more like adjustments but not revolutionary switches that some delusionists want. The North started with difficulties in the civil war but eventually defeated the South and maintained our union. It's stupid to give up our own believe for reloading shitty concepts, or whatsoever.

[Winehole23]

LMAO

WC, you're the first to say you're not a big R Republican because you disagree with some of their tactics.

However, Marcus disagrees with you in one area, and you are quick to paint him as a liberal. If you've read anything else Marcus has posted, you would know he's not a liberal.Whatever WC says and believes is canonically conservative.

Ergo, whoever disagrees is a dirty libtard!

[Winehole23]

It cracked me up, too.

[Marcus Bryant]

The right needs to learn that it has as much to fear from big bussiness as it does big goverment

Yes. The problem on the right is that any critique of large multinationals that regards something other than support of left-wing politicians or leftist causes is automatically seen as evidence of incipient socialism and automatically brands one as a radical. Of course, the amusing thing is that while conservatives leap to the defense of those multinationals as if they are engaged in free enterprise, many of those businesses use governments, including our own, to gain benefits not attainable in a free market.

While it should be clear that the Fortune 500 is generally politically agnostic, and perfectly willing to seek favor with whatever politicians are in charge to receive state support (none dare call it socialism), it's not. Many see any critique of big business as a critique of free enterprise. They are not one in the same. Yes, Wal-Mart doesn't give a shit if it's American, but you can be assured that it does care about what goodies and standing it can receive from the federal government.

What's good for Wal-Mart is not necessarily what's good for this nation. While conservatives freak out about any expansion of state power, many are silent when state power enhances Wal-Mart (or Goldman or ExxonMobil, etc...) Conservatives rightly see a threat to individual liberty from massive federal intervention called for from the left, but fail to see the threat from federal intervention for multinationals.

The individual is truly under attack from all sides today here in the US. The last thing big government and big business want are free individuals, able to think and take care of themselves. Big business wants you to support the politicians they have bought off because you believe that they represent the vanguard of free enterprise. Meanwhile, they seek socialism for themselves while the small and medium sized businesses of this country have to worry about a free market, even though their conservative employees believe that what's good for Wal-Mart is good for their employer, or their family, or their neighborhood.

Rampant materialist consumerism is close to destroying this country, leaving us with a nation of gullible serfs and their upper middle class and upper class masters/caretakers. The dropout thread (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134613) should be referenced for some background on how we got here, and why it's only going to get worse.

Finally, some conservatives and libertarians base their support for the multinationals under some shade of anarcho-capitalism, the desire for the state to wither away and be replaced by a bunch of free individuals making up the rules as they go along. While that may sound great when you have spent a bender hating on Uncle Sam, it's pure fantasy, and the result would likely be the total enslavement of the masses (just like 'leftist revolutions' lead to). Property rights require some form of government to exist. Anyways, the point here is that we are not headed to decentralization in government but rather greater centralization. The state isn't going away. Big business knows this and is spending more time in bed with big government. Neither is your friend.

[101A]

Yes. The problem on the right is that any critique of large multinationals that regards something other than support of left-wing politicians or leftist causes is automatically seen as evidence of incipient socialism and automatically brands one as a radical. Of course, the amusing thing is that while conservatives leap to the defense of those multinationals as if they are engaged in free enterprise, many of those businesses use governments, including our own, to gain benefits not attainable in a free market.

While it should be clear that the Fortune 500 is generally politically agnostic, and perfectly willing to seek favor with whatever politicians are in charge to receive state support (none dare call it socialism), it's not. Many see any critique of big business as a critique of free enterprise. They are not one in the same. Yes, Wal-Mart doesn't give a shit if it's American, but you can be assured that it does care about what goodies and standing it can receive from the federal government.

What's good for Wal-Mart is not necessarily what's good for this nation. While conservatives freak out about any expansion of state power, many are silent when state power enhances Wal-Mart (or Goldman or ExxonMobil, etc...) Conservatives rightly see a threat to individual liberty from massive federal intervention called for from the left, but fail to see the threat from federal intervention for multinationals.

The individual is truly under attack from all sides today here in the US. The last thing big government and big business want are free individuals, able to think and take care of themselves. Big business wants you to support the politicians they have bought off because you believe that they represent the vanguard of free enterprise. Meanwhile, they seek socialism for themselves while the small and medium sized businesses of this country have to worry about a free market, even though their conservative employees believe that what's good for Wal-Mart is good for their employer, or their family, or their neighborhood.

Rampant materialist consumerism is close to destroying this country, leaving us with a nation of gullible serfs and their upper middle class and upper class masters/caretakers. The dropout thread (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134613) should be referenced for some background on how we got here, and why it's only going to get worse.

Finally, some conservatives and libertarians base their support for the multinationals under some shade of anarcho-capitalism, the desire for the state to wither away and be replaced by a bunch of free individuals making up the rules as they go along. While that may sound great when you have spent a bender hating on Uncle Sam, it's pure fantasy, and the result would likely be the total enslavement of the masses (just like 'leftist revolutions' lead to). Property rights require some form of government to exist. Anyways, the point here is that we are not headed to decentralization in government but rather greater centralization. The state isn't going away. Big business knows this and is spending more time in bed with big government. Neither is your friend.

Well said.

[hope4dopes]

Yes. The problem on the right is that any critique of large multinationals that regards something other than support of left-wing politicians or leftist causes is automatically seen as evidence of incipient socialism and automatically brands one as a radical. Of course, the amusing thing is that while conservatives leap to the defense of those multinationals as if they are engaged in free enterprise, many of those businesses use governments, including our own, to gain benefits not attainable in a free market.

While it should be clear that the Fortune 500 is generally politically agnostic, and perfectly willing to seek favor with whatever politicians are in charge to receive state support (none dare call it socialism), it's not. Many see any critique of big business as a critique of free enterprise. They are not one in the same. Yes, Wal-Mart doesn't give a shit if it's American, but you can be assured that it does care about what goodies and standing it can receive from the federal government.

What's good for Wal-Mart is not necessarily what's good for this nation. While conservatives freak out about any expansion of state power, many are silent when state power enhances Wal-Mart (or Goldman or ExxonMobil, etc...) Conservatives rightly see a threat to individual liberty from massive federal intervention called for from the left, but fail to see the threat from federal intervention for multinationals.

The individual is truly under attack from all sides today here in the US. The last thing big government and big business want are free individuals, able to think and take care of themselves. Big business wants you to support the politicians they have bought off because you believe that they represent the vanguard of free enterprise. Meanwhile, they seek socialism for themselves while the small and medium sized businesses of this country have to worry about a free market, even though their conservative employees believe that what's good for Wal-Mart is good for their employer, or their family, or their neighborhood.

Rampant materialist consumerism is close to destroying this country, leaving us with a nation of gullible serfs and their upper middle class and upper class masters/caretakers. The dropout thread (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134613) should be referenced for some background on how we got here, and why it's only going to get worse.

Finally, some conservatives and libertarians base their support for the multinationals under some shade of anarcho-capitalism, the desire for the state to wither away and be replaced by a bunch of free individuals making up the rules as they go along. While that may sound great when you have spent a bender hating on Uncle Sam, it's pure fantasy, and the result would likely be the total enslavement of the masses (just like 'leftist revolutions' lead to). Property rights require some form of government to exist. Anyways, the point here is that we are not headed to decentralization in government but rather greater centralization. The state isn't going away. Big business knows this and is spending more time in bed with big government. Neither is your friend.

True words, but I think conservatives are begining to understand this and bush's immigration policy was what tipped his hand to his allegance to corprate internationalisim. I think the bigger problem is the democrats blind following of political internationalist same thing under diffrent name, this administrations main job is to legitamize a political thought ,that while waving the flag of human liberation, is nothing more than barbarisim, responsible for the most brutal and oppresive chapter in human history.Must we have our own gulags our own cultural revolution our own pol pot before we are dissilusioned with bullshit rhetoric.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm opposed to the government trying to force private enterprises to stay in America while at the same time taxing the crap out of them.

Exactly. That's what liberals just don't understand. They tax the rich and corporations right out of America, then blame the rich and corporations rather than looking at themselves.

[Wild Cobra]

The Republicans aren't really speaking to the workers, they pat them on the head call them the salt of the earth, couldn't do it without you blah blah Horatio Algers bullshit and out the door you go, meanwhile hiding the level of corruption big bussiness forgien and domestic play in the direction of the state and their end game for the nation, and it's people.
Corruption exists anywhere. That doesn't mean it is supported. I agree the republicans as a whole aren't doing much better than the demonrats. However, they are the lesser of two evils. As long as the two party system is prominent, I'll vote republican over democrat most the time. However, I'll spoil my vote rather than vote for a RINO.

Walmarts been busted several time for hiring illegal aliens to build their stores.
Really? Never heard of that past one of their contractors being busted for that.

Can you support that contention?

[LnGrrrR]

Exactly. That's what liberals just don't understand. They tax the rich and corporations right out of America, then blame the rich and corporations rather than looking at themselves.

I think you're missing Marcus' point.

You say they "tax the rich out of America", but don't look at the fact that WalMart games the system in America to get favorable treatment. It's a two-way street. Should WalMart make profits here and not get taxed?

In fact, how SHOULD multinational corporations be taxed? What do you think is fair WC?

Marcus, please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Wild Cobra]

Bush made it a point to threaten the citizens and the border patrol agents if the interfered with the flow of illegal aliens, he was agressive in pursuing an agenda of an EU like community.
Yes, and conservatives everywhere chastised president Bush. Because of him and other republicans supporting Amnesty, it is part of why they lost seats in congress. Conservative like me spoiled our votes rather than voting for them. I didn't vote for either the incumbent senator Smith (R) or senator Merkley (D) who won this last election for Oregon. Senator smith supported Amnesty and would not take a strong stand on border control. I'm usually not a single issue voter, but that blew it for me. I'm sure it did for others who voted for him last time, and he lost because of his liberal viewpoints.

[Wild Cobra]

I think you're missing Marcus' point.

You say they "tax the rich out of America", but don't look at the fact that WalMart games the system in America to get favorable treatment. It's a two-way street. Should WalMart make profits here and not get taxed?

In fact, how SHOULD multinational corporations be taxed? What do you think is fair WC?

Marcus, please correct me if I'm wrong.
When you tax something, you discourage it. When we tax production, we discourage production. In a world economy, if we want to balance the trade, we need to be on equal footing. I think you missed my points of how we tax ourselves into the problems we have.

When we tax a retail store, they just pass that cost along to the consumer. We really end up paying the tax anyway.

[Marcus Bryant]

What is the effective income tax rate that Wal-Mart faces in the US?

[Wild Cobra]

What is the effective income tax rate that Wal-Mart faces in the US?
I don't know, and I don't care. I want to see a dramatic change in our tax system. If we tax consumption rather than production, then we tax imports and local made items the same. If we tax production and not consumption, then imports are effectively not taxed, except for on the retail profits. Local products are effectively taxed twice. At production, and at retail profit.

[Marcus Bryant]

You don't know, but you are certain that the multinational to which you pledge your allegiance to is being heavily taxed.

Further, since this is a world economy and the competition which lower and middle class individuals face in the labor market consists of the slaves of communist states and various others in 3rd World nations barely eeking out a subsistence level existence, we need to have the same arrangement here in order to compete for the favor of our almighty multinational masters.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know, and I don't care.Bumper sticker!

[Marcus Bryant]

Motherfucker. Since when did conservatives stop being Americans?

[Winehole23]

Their allegiance is to abstract liberal concepts like free trade, not to the USA per se. If we become a third-world country in the process of fostering so-called free trade so be it.

[DarrinS]

Their allegiance is to abstract liberal concepts like free trade, not to the USA per se. If we become a third-world country in the process of fostering so-called free trade so be it.


How in the hell wil free trade turn us into a third-world country?

[Marcus Bryant]

Their allegiance is to abstract liberal concepts like free trade, not to the USA per se. If we become a third-world country in the process of fostering so-called free trade so be it.

Meanwhile, they're on the hunt for "traitors" among the left, or anywhere for that matter. Disagree with a perpetual war machine and you're a communist.

They worry about the well-being of large multinational organizations, cry about the taxes paid by billionaires, and tag anyone who expresses concern about ordinary Americans as a Bolshevik.

[Winehole23]

How in the hell wil free trade turn us into a third-world country?Go back to sleep, Darrin. You won't miss a thing.

[Winehole23]

How in the hell will free trade turn us into a third-world country?By decimating our productive base and bringing down the cost of American labor. It's already happening.

National insolvency and currency collapse will seal the deal.

[Marcus Bryant]

And they laugh at Friedman, though he's simply a little further along than they are in embracing this new 'flat world.' Soon enough they will also be extolling the virtues of the Chinese communist state and suggesting its adoption here. Shit, soon enough the Chinese will own us.

[Winehole23]

Patriotism consists of sacrificing our standard of living to *global competitiveness*, for the greater good of multinational businesses that export the wealth and productivity of the USA. People who can't see this as a race to the bottom simply haven't got their heads screwed on straight.

[LnGrrrR]

Meanwhile, they're on the hunt for "traitors" among the left, or anywhere for that matter. Disagree with a perpetual war machine and you're a communist.

They worry about the well-being of large multinational organizations, cry about the taxes paid by billionaires, and tag anyone who expresses concern about ordinary Americans as a Bolshevik.

Well said.

It seems that WC thnks that all taxes on corporations are bad. I'd like to see what tax scheme he would prefer instead.

[LnGrrrR]

Patriotism consists of sacrificing our standard of living to *global competitiveness*, for the greater good of multinational businesses that export the wealth and productivity of the USA. People who can't see this as a race to the bottom simply haven't got their heads screwed on straight.

What's wonderful as well is the thinking that America magically benefits from corporations that work here.

The thinking goes, as far as I see it, that we should lower taxes in order to keep corporations here. However, workers overseas, due to a depressed economy, will work for much less than American workers. It's unrealistic to expect the American economy to drop to the levels of poorer countries.

Therefore, conservatives want to lower taxes on corporations, so they will continue to base some of their operation here, even though a large amount of their output will forever be manufactured by poorer countries.

How does this make sense? Do they think that WalMart will reinvest all of its money back into the States?

[Marcus Bryant]

Hell, we used to be against communists until we learned they'd make cheap shit for us and lend us a trillion.

[DarrinS]

By decimating our productive base and bringing down the cost of American labor. It's already happening.

National insolvency and currency collapse will seal the deal.



How much do factory workers make in China?

[LnGrrrR]

How much do factory workers make in China?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A22507-2004Feb7?language=printer



Most of the 2,100 workers here are poor migrants from the countryside who have come to this industrial hub in southern China for jobs that pay about $120 a month.

[Winehole23]

You tell me, Darrin. Then you can go ahead and make your point, if you're not allergic to that.

[LnGrrrR]

Now, granted, that article is from 2004, and there are signs that the wages have been increasing. For instance, in this article in 2008...

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/02/china-labor-costs-markets-econ-cx_jc_0402markets03.html



The mean annual wage for a typical urban Chinese employee grew by a blistering 18.72% in 2007, to 24,932 yuan ($3,556.63), or 99.32 yuan ($14.17) per day, the National Bureau of Statistics said, adding that it was the fastest growth in six years and higher than the 14% on average of the preceding six years.


Wow! A whole $3500 a year!

[Marcus Bryant]

Mean bank in a commie land.

[LnGrrrR]

Mean bank in a commie land.

I'm looking forward to DarrinS's insightful post now.

[Winehole23]

I'm looking forward to DarrinS's insightful post now.I'm not.

Darrin is lazy. He's waiting for us to answer his own question so he can deflect us with another meaningless question he won't answer, and which probably leads nowhere.

It's his famous bizarro-socratic method. He likes to lead conversations from clarity to obscurity. He probably thinks asking so many useless questions makes him look sagely, but in fact it makes him look like a dolt.

[DarrinS]

I'm looking forward to DarrinS's insightful post now.


My point is that capitalism isn't the greatest system -- well, besides all the others.


I still don't know how the free market is turning us into a 3rd world country. Hasn't so far.

[DarrinS]

^ Is my point unclear?


I'm not.

Darrin is lazy. He's waiting for us to answer his own question so he can deflect us with another meaningless question he won't answer, and which probably leads nowhere.

It's his famous bizarro-socratic method. He likes to lead conversations from clarity to obscurity. He probably thinks asking so many useless questions makes him look sagely, but in fact it makes him look like a dolt.

[Winehole23]

Then hit the snooze bar while the rest of us deal with it.

[hope4dopes]

Meanwhile, they're on the hunt for "traitors" among the left, or anywhere for that matter. Disagree with a perpetual war machine and you're a communist.

They worry about the well-being of large multinational organizations, cry about the taxes paid by billionaires, and tag anyone who expresses concern about ordinary Americans as a Bolshevik.

They don't have to hunt very far on the left or in the whitehouse to find communists.The workers don't want their fucking revolution cause we usually end up getting killed while the appartchicks live like lords.
What does the left offer up? socialisim, communisim,or variants, that no choice that's the illusion of choice for the dopes, it's hope4dopes.
What makes the left a particularlly virulent form of oppression is that it offers change like Obama, Chavez,Castro, but it never delivers in fact is far more oppresive to the workers.
I've heard Pete Stark call the union goons brothers? a piece of shit BANKER that's what pete stark was a banker. He has no idea of the life of the workers he throw a few slogans around, and tell the dumbshits if you vote for me I'll give you pie in the sky.
The left is as far in bed with the corporations as the right, the media down play it so the people live with the illusion that the parties have an actual platform.
The left pats the worker on the head calls him salt of the earth, and sheds a few tears, calls them the backbone of America. That is for as long as the worker pulls the party line,but once they stray from leftist dogma they suddenly become toothless,neanderthal rednecks, or swastika carrying mobs.

[DarrinS]

Then hit the snooze bar while the rest of us deal with it.


.

[hope4dopes]

My point is that capitalism isn't the greatest system -- well, besides all the others.


I still don't know how the free market is turning us into a 3rd world country. Hasn't so far.

It is by far and away the best, that's why we need to protects it from those who buy our political class to create monopoly,or legislation that keeps others out of the market alot of the enviormental laws for example are supported by big bussiness , because it helps keep smaller companies with less available capital to survive massive expenditures neede to comply with petty and stupid enviormental hoops.While real enviormental issues are put on the backburner.

[DarrinS]

It is by far and away the best, that's why we need to protects it from those who buy our political class to create monopoly,or legislation that keeps others out of the market alot of the enviormental laws for example are supported by big bussiness , because it helps keep smaller companies with less available capital to survive massive expenditures neede to comply with petty and stupid enviormental hoops.While real enviormental issues are put on the backburner.


Aren't environmental regs doing wonders for California's economy?

[Marcus Bryant]

Isn't trade with China doing wonders for ours?

[Winehole23]

Corporatist government plus bad education, unfunded liabilities and structural fiscal, trade and debt imbalances ensure a declining standard of living for all of us into the foreseeable future, barring some miraculous transformation of our technical base that we discover and own.

Rejoinder?

[Marcus Bryant]

Db1s-eV-Bd0

[DarrinS]

Isn't trade with China doing wonders for ours?


I don't know. I have seen "Made in China" stickers on plastic crap ever since I've been alive.


I know that borrowing but-loads of money from them isn't helping.

[DarrinS]

Corporatist government plus bad education, unfunded liabilities and structural fiscal, trade and debt imbalances ensure a declining standard of living for all of us into the foreseeable future, barring some miraculous transformation of our technical base that we discover and own.

Rejoinder?



You see that thing that you are typing into? You see the website that you are posting to?

Just a couple of examples. More will follow.

[Winehole23]

Oh, we're already saved. What a relief.

[LnGrrrR]

^ Is my point unclear?

Why'd you ask what the wage of a Chinese worker is then, if your point was just that capitalism was better than other economic solutions? Seems a rather specific question for so general an answer.

[Wild Cobra]

Well said.

It seems that WC thnks that all taxes on corporations are bad. I'd like to see what tax scheme he would prefer instead.
HR 25 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h25ih.txt.pdf)

Fair Tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_tax)

[LnGrrrR]

HR 25 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h25ih.txt.pdf)

Fair Tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_tax)

Ok, here's my question with those taxes.

Will they bring in the amount of revenue that the government takes in now?

If not, what programs will be cut?

[Marcus Bryant]

Would you like the list in alphabetical order?

[LnGrrrR]

Would you like the list in alphabetical order?

Ha! I already know what the list is.

"List of programs that politicians are willing to cut:

.....

.....

.....


That is all."

[Winehole23]

You see that thing that you are typing into? You see the website that you are posting to?

Just a couple of examples. More will follow.Still waiting for the examples.

Are you waiting for a lottery jackpot to pull our bacon out of the fire, or did you have already have examples in mind?

As for the example you gave, the tech bubble already burst. PC's and SpursTalk don't fix education, debt, trade deficits, unfunded liabilities, an unnecessary global military empire and a government in bed with multinationals to the common detriment.

Try again.

[Wild Cobra]

Ok, here's my question with those taxes.

Will they bring in the amount of revenue that the government takes in now?

If not, what programs will be cut?
It is hard to really tell for sure, but it should bring in as much, but eliminate most of the cost of the IRS. Eventually, the IRS would disappear.

We need something different. The Fair Tax will never become reality for one reason. It takes control away from the politicians.

[Winehole23]

The gradual withering away of the IRS. I love it.