Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only thing that globalization is killing is 1st world hegemony.
Apparently you haven't read about the environmental destruction and exploitation of labor in the third world that results from free trade/outsourcing...all it's really accomplishing is turning the people of the third world into near-slave labor, the destruction of the environment in countries lacking environmental protection laws, and the enrichment of large corporations.
the "American Dream" never really was. It was an ideal to aspire to, not the place most people were actually at.
Before 1992, I would have agreed with your interpretation of the American Dream, as portrayed in the mass media.
After 1992, my idea of the "American" dream is individual sovereignty, the real "self government", that was promised to our forebears, by the victorious generation that endowed us the 'republican form of government'.
That American dream has 95% of the nation's people restored to sovereignty. As sovereigns, they would absolutely own themselves, their labor, the fruits of their labor, and their private property (immune from taxation).
When 95% leave "voluntary" participation in FICA, that effectively ends national socialism, and cuts 98% of the revenue stream to the errant "public servants". Only those 5% who are truly civic minded, self sacrificing public servants would wish to remain in public office. They would have to do much with very little.
There would be a recall of all American forces from foreign lands, and a closure of all foreign bases.
All governments would find themselves with very limited tax revenue, and thus little ability to meddle in that which government should not meddle in.
It would also entail the repudiation of the public debt, over 12 trillion dollars. That would trigger a backlash by the usurers.
But I am a realist, and don't expect any significant change. The "fleas" run the dog and wag his tail. So as the OP stated, we are doomed to inevitable decline and collapse.
Apparently you haven't read about the environmental destruction and exploitation of labor in the third world that results from free trade/outsourcing...all it's really accomplishing is turning the people of the third world into near-slave labor, the destruction of the environment in countries lacking environmental protection laws, and the enrichment of large corporations.
I agree..China doesn't have an EPA to worry about:
Part of the problem is that the so-called 'American Dream' was never sustainable and, quite frankly, it was never an accurate depiction of the real American experience.
My issue is not that the American Dream was not sustainable---you're right, it wasn't. But the point is that for some 20 or 30 years we actually WERE living the American Dream and that's what we all got used to. As 20YearsinBranson so plainly stated any nation has a cycle of birth, strength, decline and finally death. We're in the decline phase right now---that's the part of your statement where you say the AD was unsustainable. So true, it wasn't and now we're losing everything we achieved after WW2, analogous to a human body in a state of physical deterioration as it gets to age 70 and 80. The human might live to 100 but their last years will be ones of enfeeblement until the death knell finally tolls. Repeal of NAFTA might add a few years to life, but soooooooo much is wrong with this country economically, morally, financially, socially and a whole bunch of other -allies that we might as well be trying to put back together an egg that went splat on the floor.
The Fourth Turning is a good book to read if you are in agreement with the posts on this thread.
The last decline ended in the Great Depression. The years preceeding that were boom years that went bust. Before that, the Civil War. Before that the American Revolution.
History does repeat itself and economic cycles are boom and bust.
Do you think people in 1928 thought they were on a decline ? How's about in 1929 after the crash ?
No..it wasn't until 1934 that reality hit.
My issue is not that the American Dream was not sustainable---you're right, it wasn't. But the point is that for some 20 or 30 years we actually WERE living the American Dream and that's what we all got used to. As 20YearsinBranson so plainly stated any nation has a cycle of birth, strength, decline and finally death. We're in the decline phase right now---that's the part of your statement where you say the AD was unsustainable. So true, it wasn't and now we're losing everything we achieved after WW2, analogous to a human body in a state of physical deterioration as it gets to age 70 and 80. The human might live to 100 but their last years will be ones of enfeeblement until the death knell finally tolls. Repeal of NAFTA might add a few years to life, but soooooooo much is wrong with this country economically, morally, financially, socially and a whole bunch of other -allies that we might as well be trying to put back together an egg that went splat on the floor.
Yet, we really weren't! We never were living the American Dream. For 20 or 30 years some people were living the 'American Dream' -- hell, some people still are! But during that same period there were plenty of poor people, there was higher levels of sexism and racism, etc. We tend to romanticize this period by thinking of all the good and forgetting all the bad.
And repeal NAFTA? Really? I get frustrated by the level of misunderstanding that people have regarding trade policy. However, it's understandable... Not to be arrogant, but I have a Masters Degree in International Development and am working on a PhD right now where I'm minoring in agricultural economics... I've taken quite a few classes dealing with trade and trade policy and I, myself, don't entirely understand it! However, what I do know is that for aggregate welfare, for the overall general welfare of our entire population, free trade is best. Free trade maximizes efficiency as long as certain conditions are met.
Trade restrictions, such as tariffs, non-tariff barriers, quotas and, yes, even subsidies, by and large favor a small set of particular industries, corporations and workers at the DETRIMENT of the general welfare as they transfer considerable 'consumer surplus' to producers. Such policies, furthermore, necessarily result in what is known as 'Harberger Triangles' which, in laymen terms, are net deadweight losses to overall economic productivity. Yet, they remain popular because the benefits to producers and those who are employed for them are HIGHLY visible while the (substantially larger) losses to the general welfare are HIGHLY diffuse and much less visible. These trade restrictions result in higher prices for all consumers in order to improve incomes of a few workers in industries which we do NOT have a comparative advantage in and which we will inevitably have to lose as they become increasingly unsustainable given the decline in that comparative advantage.
Rather than repeal free trade agreements, which improve overall welfare, for restrictions which improve producer welfare (and their employees welfare) at the detriment of general welfare, we need to let industries that we have lost our comparative advantage in die. This may sound counterintuitive, but in the long run it is the economically rational thing to do. Instead, we need policies to assist in the transition. Better unemployment benefits for those workers who have lost jobs due to the decline of their industry, government-funded job retraining that assists those workers in training for jobs that we do have a comparative advantage in, more grants and general funding for adult education, increased public investment in research and investment to promote high-value added industries where developed countries such as the US maintain a comparative advantage, etc. There's a lot that can be done without sacraficing overall welfare and economic efficiency..
Yet, we really weren't! We never were living the American Dream. For 20 or 30 years some people were living the 'American Dream' -- hell, some people still are! But during that same period there were plenty of poor people, there was higher levels of sexism and racism, etc. We tend to romanticize this period by thinking of all the good and forgetting all the bad.
And repeal NAFTA? Really? I get frustrated by the level of misunderstanding that people have regarding trade policy. However, it's understandable... Not to be arrogant, but I have a Masters Degree in International Development and am working on a PhD right now where I'm minoring in agricultural economics... I've taken quite a few classes dealing with trade and trade policy and I, myself, don't entirely understand it! However, what I do know is that for aggregate welfare, for the overall general welfare of our entire population, free trade is best. Free trade maximizes efficiency as long as certain conditions are met.
Trade restrictions, such as tariffs, non-tariff barriers, quotas and, yes, even subsidies, by and large favor a small set of particular industries, corporations and workers at the DETRIMENT of the general welfare as they transfer considerable 'consumer surplus' to producers. Such policies, furthermore, necessarily result in what is known as 'Harberger Triangles' which, in laymen terms, are net deadweight losses to overall economic productivity. Yet, they remain popular because the benefits to producers and those who are employed for them are HIGHLY visible while the (substantially larger) losses to the general welfare are HIGHLY diffuse and much less visible. These trade restrictions result in higher prices for all consumers in order to improve incomes of a few workers in industries which we do NOT have a comparative advantage in and which we will inevitably have to lose as they become increasingly unsustainable given the decline in that comparative advantage.
Rather than repeal free trade agreements, which improve overall welfare, for restrictions which improve producer welfare (and their employees welfare) at the detriment of general welfare, we need to let industries that we have lost our comparative advantage in die. This may sound counterintuitive, but in the long run it is the economically rational thing to do. Instead, we need policies to assist in the transition. Better unemployment benefits for those workers who have lost jobs due to the decline of their industry, government-funded job retraining that assists those workers in training for jobs that we do have a comparative advantage in, more grants and general funding for adult education, increased public investment in research and investment to promote high-value added industries where developed countries such as the US maintain a comparative advantage, etc. There's a lot that can be done without sacraficing overall welfare and economic efficiency..
We're not talking a few workers here. we're talking a very wide swath of the population. And furthermore, a service economy is a poor economy for the majority. Nope, we shouldn't be destroying ourselves based on some foolish notion of comparative advantage that doesn't work in real life. There is absolutely no industry where we have a "comparative advantage" when greedy corporations can use third world labor cheaper than slaves (after all, slaves cost more money to feed, clothe, and house than many of these people are paid). Free trade benefits the few and harms the majority. Not just the Americans who lost their work and now must work at fast food joints, retail outlets, etc., but also the people being exploited elsewhere for cheap labor while having their environments destroyed. I see no reason to continue down such a stupid path. Even Alexander Hamilton rejected the notion of comparative advantage and encouraged protective tariffs.
I could go further and point out that with the world's growing population and increasing scarcity of resources, our goal shouldn't necessarily be constantly greater production anyways, but rather, meeting the actual needs of people (and not the manufactured, consumerism-based "needs").
The trend will definitely stop as the majority of educated americans take back possesion of OUR COUNTRY! First we will kick Obama and his family out of the White House in 2012, then we'll get to work cleaning up his sewage. I doubt America will ever make the mistake of putting someone like Obama in the position of power again. It will take a decade, but when we're done, people will know their place in our society based on education and income. No more free rides, housing, and sure as hell...No Free Medical Care! This is America! Our people will have to re-learn the meaning and value of freedom and hard work.
Yes, our children will be in debt thanks to our nations first black president, but that is because they had ignorant parents. When their parents are too old to care for themselves, their children will chose to let them languish in state nursing homes because of personal debt. Too bad, so sad. God Bless America!
I am repping you for this! We have too many costly entitlements in this country. People are used to the idea of living off the government, cheating the disability system, cheating welfare. People have children for the sole purpose of increasing a welfare check and not because they actually want to be a parent. We provide our kids with free lunch, free education, free school supplies, and will soon provide everyone with free medical care. We Americans need to learn to stand on our own two feet and not rely on the government. Our founding fathers stood on their own two feet so we can too. Until we learn to do this our country will continue to decline.
I think Bush started us on a path toward socialism, but Obama is accelerating it. What we need in Washington is good leaders who are going to stand up for values and principles. We have not had this since Reagan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
