Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Is There Any Future For The United States?

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Is There Any Future For The United States?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:04 pm Post subject:

Dev wrote:

Another thing I heard about the U.S. is that it has almost no manufacturing sector. That's all gone to China except for planes and other military ware some high end machinery.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/28/robert-reich-manufacturing-business-economy.html

Robert Reich wrote:

Economists at Alliance Capital Management took a look at employment trends in twenty large economies and found that between 1995 and 2002--before the asset bubble and subsequent bust--twenty-two million manufacturing jobs disappeared. The United States wasn't even the biggest loser. We lost about 11% of our manufacturing jobs in that period, but the Japanese lost 16% of theirs. Even developing nations lost factory jobs: Brazil suffered a 20% decline, and China had a 15% drop.

What happened to manufacturing? In two words, higher productivity.

bucheon bum

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:16 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

Dev wrote:

Another thing I heard about the U.S. is that it has almost no manufacturing sector. That's all gone to China except for planes and other military ware some high end machinery.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/28/robert-reich-manufacturing-business-economy.html

Robert Reich wrote:

I really like Reich. I agree with most of his writings. A shame he isn't part of the current administration.

Koveras

Joined: 09 Oct 2008

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:17 pm Post subject:

pkang0202 wrote:

Corporations are good.

Average Joe Blow small business owner can not compete with Siemens, Haier, Toshiba, Nestle, or any other internationally based company.

Why do you think US companies are getting bigger and stronger? Its to compete with OTHER global companies from Europe, Japan, China, etc...

Does the fact that corporations are big and strong and can outcompete small business owners really make them *good*?

Panda

Joined: 25 Oct 2008

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

Dev wrote:

Another thing I heard about the U.S. is that it has almost no manufacturing sector. That's all gone to China except for planes and other military ware some high end machinery.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/28/robert-reich-manufacturing-business-economy.html

Robert Reich wrote:

Thanks for sharing this, I just read this article on Chinese WSJ

It mentioned how America is losing jobs because of China thus should take them back.

A free market has always been preached by capitalism countries like the US. According to my very limited economy knowledge, it's widely accepted within a free market "the survival of the fittest" " the elimination of the inferior" ..China has been trying to survive the free market by making cheap products since 10 years ago it officially opened its market to the world... with China becoming a big part of the global trading, it's unlikely the world economy remains unchanged.....

But isnt it what America always wanted to prove to our communism countries that "free market rules" ?

Wink

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:18 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

Let's talk about extremism.

Wickard v. Filburn

Short version. In the dark night of WWII, the government tried to enforce the AAA to prevent a farmer from growing surplus wheat on his own farm and then using it on his own farm. It did so because wheat, grown and used on one person's farm, was held to constitute interstate commerce.

Extremism is when Supreme Court justices hollow out a Clause in the Constitution, and thus revolutionize the Federal-to-States relationship.

I agree that's an extremist interpretation of the Constitutional clause in question.

patongpanda

Joined: 06 Feb 2007

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:36 pm Post subject:

Sergio Stefanuto wrote:

The only way to get the US, or any, economy back on its feet is to implement Sergio's Six Point Prosperity Plan Mr. Green

certain!

Are you familiar with the Landless Peasant Party?
http://landlesspeasants.org/?p=85

Dev

Joined: 18 Apr 2006

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 4:52 pm Post subject:

Koveras wrote:

pkang0202 wrote:

Does the fact that corporations are big and strong and can outcompete small business owners really make them *good*?

No. The independent businesses provide employment to tradesmen and sometimes specialize in manufacturing small parts for the corporations. They co-exist together and benefit from each other. You see this in Korea - tradesmen working out of their own small work spaces. They co-exist with huge corporations like Samsung, Hyundai and LG.

My point is that because the U.S. has shipped its manufacturing jobs to China, hoards of tradesmen have no jobs.

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 4:59 pm Post subject:

Dev wrote:

Seems like everything in the U.S. is designed to make profits for corporations. Like the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. This may be the case because many prisons are privately owned.

It's certainly the case that the Arizona immigration bill can be traced back to private business concerns who planned to profit off of it.

Sergio Stefanuto

Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject:

patongpanda wrote:

Sergio Stefanuto wrote:

The only way to get the US, or any, economy back on its feet is to implement Sergio's Six Point Prosperity Plan Mr. Green

certain!

Are you familiar with the Landless Peasant Party?
http://landlesspeasants.org/?p=85

Awesome

comm

Joined: 22 Jun 2010

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 8:18 pm Post subject:

patongpanda wrote:

Are you familiar with the Landless Peasant Party?
http://landlesspeasants.org/?p=85

I wish that site provided more details on their plan. Perhaps Sergio can expand on the topic...

1. Would all land be taxed equally, or would the tax be based on the market value of the land?
2. If based on the land's market value, would it be re-evaluated (thus increasing the tax) periodically?

The only problem I'd see with that would be people getting kicked off of their land because they can't afford its appreciated price (due to outside factors).

Sergio Stefanuto

Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 8:28 pm Post subject:

comm wrote:

1. Would all land be taxed equally, or would the tax be based on the market value of the land?

the latter

comm wrote:

2. If based on the land's market value, would it be re-evaluated (thus increasing the tax) periodically?

yes

comm wrote:

The only problem I'd see with that would be people getting kicked off of their land because they can't afford its appreciated price (due to outside factors).

That's the idea.

patongpanda

Joined: 06 Feb 2007

Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject:

comm wrote:

2. If based on the land's market value, would it be re-evaluated (thus increasing the tax) periodically?

The only problem I'd see with that would be people getting kicked off of their land because they can't afford its appreciated price (due to outside factors).

Sergio:

Would there be a minimum land value threshold before tax kicks in?

I'd hope small plots of land for an individual's own home wouldn't even pay tax.

Sergio Stefanuto

Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK

Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:13 am Post subject:

Patongpanda wrote:

Would there be a minimum land value threshold before tax kicks in?

I'd hope small plots of land for an individual's own home wouldn't even pay tax.

I prefer a single flat tax levied at 50%, but if we were to have progressive taxes and/or tax exemption, I would prefer that they be levied on the basis of size in terms of area (height restrictions are an abomination, but discouraging wastes of land area defensible). So a party occupying 100sq/m might pay the top rate of 50% of its market value and a party occupying 20sq/m 10% and so on. A combination of market value and land area seems just, but I couldn't possibly justify the occupation of space for free, for this would constitute arbitrary special treatment.

In all likelihood, a shared & high rise system would come to dominate, with only a single party (the land lessee) paying tax at all. In consequence, many people would indeed pay nothing in direct taxes

patongpanda

Joined: 06 Feb 2007

Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:35 am Post subject:

Immediately after I posted I realised that land area made more sense, glad you picked up on it.

Anyway, land values would drop so much, and the area needed for a single home is small enough, I think you might be right - it would be unnecessary

Also, to allay comm's fears: Land values are far less volatile than real estate values, and can be valued much more objectively.

Wonder why this book never got mentioned at college?

http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm

Sergio Stefanuto wrote:

Patongpanda wrote:

Would there be a minimum land value threshold before tax kicks in?

I'd hope small plots of land for an individual's own home wouldn't even pay tax.

I prefer a single flat tax levied at 50%, but if we were to have progressive taxes and/or tax exemption, I would prefer that they be levied on the basis of size in terms of area

asylum seeker

Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Location: On your computer screen.

Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:04 am Post subject:

Sergio Stefanuto wrote:

The only way to get the US, or any, economy back on its feet is to implement Sergio's Six Point Prosperity Plan Mr. Green

* abolish the benefits for the idle poor

* make all land the property of the state, thereby abolishing rent for the idle rich. An owner of capital collecting rent - for example, the owner of a house collecting rent from a lodger - is one thing, but a landowner collecting rent from what is rightfully the state's - land - is an abomination.

* abolish all spending on the military

* legalize all drugs

* abolish all taxes and instead charge people for occupying land. Given the paramount importance of space and how the unproductive occupation of it is such a formidable obstacle to production & prosperity, taxing land, and abolishing the obscene taxes on production & consumption (which makes us prosperous and is the meaning of life) is crucial. The three most heinous things known to man are the unproductive occupation of space, the idle rich stealing from the state and thereby the population, and taxes on production & consumption. This unholy trinity should be smashed without delay!

* restrict government activity to law & order and the collection of land tax thereto and one or two other things that I approve of, such as investment in nuclear (and other green) energy

It's a tall order, I know, that's what's required. If we were to do this, hitherto unthinkable prosperity would emerge. Of this, I am certain!

I semi-agree with some of these points.
Here's my slightly different prescription to fix the US:

1. A modest tax on gasoline that will not be used for general government purposes but will be channeled directly into improving public transportation networks and green energy technology (alright nuclear too). The US funnels billions of dollars to the Middle East because of it's oil addiction and it has to be weened off it. It will be hard and slow but it has to start now. I say a modest tax because the US economy is too fragile for anything more than that but if the economy improves the tax could be increased.

2. Legalization of marijuana and taxation of it. Good for saving police time and as a form of revenue etc. I'm not sure about legalizing harder drugs but certainly the 'war on drugs' should be drastically scaled back.

3. Get rid of mid-term elections. two years is much too frequent for national elections. it encourages short-term pandering instead of looking at more long-term solutions.

4. Introduce an MMP-style electoral system. This would give smaller parties a chance to have a voice and representation.

6. Put a cap on corporate and individual contributions to political campaigns. Maybe about a $100,000 cap for senate/house candidates and a million for presidential campaigns. This would force candidates to actually come up with good policy instead of spamming attack ads at each other. Not to mention preventing large financial institutes and corporations from dictating public policy.

7. Make a labor standard of safety practices/minimum wages/conditions that any country that wants to export products to the US must adhere to. Of course, the Chinese would balk at this but Europe and Japan would probably back it and China could hardly have a trade war with all three. This would give the US a chance to rebuild it's manufacturing base somewhat.

8. A public health insurer should be created to compete against the private health insurers. This insurer would be run as a for-profit corporation to ensure that it is not a burden to the government but it's profit goal should be set at 1% so it can provide cheaper insurance than the private insurers and this force them to drop their prices to compete.

9. Military spending should be cut as much as possible. To prevent job losses at the big arms companies incentives should be provided to allow them to transition towards producing green technology.

10. I'm not sure what policy the US already has on this but child welfare payments should be capped at two children if such payments exist to discourage people who can't support their own children from breeding.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 3 of 5

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe