|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stupified
Joined: 10 Jan 2010
|
Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes, the US does have a future but a diminished one. Folks there are just going to have to live poorer. After the Fed finishes its money printing looks like inflation will engulf the economy. How much...who knows. Speculations abound. It'll take about ten years for the economy to return to any semblance of what it was before. This will have some harsh effects on people who never realized that much of our illusive prosperity in the recent past was due to cheap credit. I always thought are economic house of cards would tumble but, boy howdy, it seems to be happening very fast. On the upside, we still have lots of resources and an innovative spirit. Small interlinked communities will have to be rebuilt and cling together for the transfer of goods if purchasing power of the dollar is smashed. Many parts will survive, thrive and some parts will further desend into wild west chaos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stupified wrote: |
| Small interlinked communities will have to be rebuilt and cling together for the transfer of goods if purchasing power of the dollar is smashed. Many parts will survive, thrive and some parts will further desend into wild west chaos. |
I thought Mad Max was set in Australia... Anyway, our economy has a strong foundation. The fact that such a large system is interlinked provides a LOT of stability, even in downturns. Unlike most countries that rely on the U.S. buying things (I'm looking at you, China), our economy is highly diverse and exports should increase if the value of the dollar plummets. It'll be very painful for this generation, but it'll set the stage for greater investment and expansion for the most productive workforce in the world. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either very shortsighted, ignorant of the basis of the U.S. economy, or completely unaware of cyclical inflation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Louis VI
Joined: 05 Jul 2010 Location: In my Kingdom
|
Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
USA is so gigantic in terms of economy that any prediction of its demise is laughable. And I say that as a non-American who simply looks at the stats.
California qua California will do just fine (GDP same as France).
Texas qua Texas will do just fine (GDP of Canada).
New York will do fine (GDP of Brazil).
New Jersey will do fine (GDP of Russia).
Florida will do fine (GDP of South Korea).
If each U.S. state were independent nations then 10 of the world's top-20 economies would be those U.S. states!
All the states of the U.S. of A. have a combined GDP over THREE TIMES greater than the economies of China, Japan and Germany combined. The economic problems ought to be put into context. Even if - heaven forbid - they get two quarters of negative growth and thus have a recession, it'd have to go on for half a century before any other country would match its gross domestic product. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
I know a guy who imports erasers from China. He could buy them in the US from a domestic manufacturer but they're slightly more expensive (after compensating for shipping). The spread is not caused by labour because the process is almost fully automated. Instead, the costs are from environmental regulations and other state created costs of business. So he buys them from China. So, do people like Reich care about the environment or not? Or do they only care about maintaining the system of globalization that has enriched the elite at the expense - obvious expense - of the middle class in the US, Canada and elsewhere. A tariff to compensate for the cost of regulation would shift huge amounts of capacity back to the United States. RR opposes this. He was "labor secretary". Ha.
|
[Bold is mine]
It sounds like you agree with Reich on at least one point: its not the low cost of labor driving the disparity.
I've heard the same about automation in China. Quality control is such a problem, that for more sensitive (or potentially dangerous) parts, they'd rather invest in machines.
Look, globalization to me is something much bigger, much broader, than merely who labors on what product. I think its on balance a positive force, but its unstoppable in any case.
Specifically, I believe Reich is right. Productivity from computers and automation is killing our jobs, not outsourcing. To what extent is your description true, that American companies are moving to China to escape onerous American environmental regulations? I don't know.
I do know that in 2007, China passed a landmark labor protection law. These regulations provide for restrictions on dismissing workers, and provide for pensions after they are released. These laws are a major headache for foreign companies (all companies!) in China, and America, as an employment at will jurisdiction (actually, as fifty of them) lacks any sort of comparable regime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hindsight
Joined: 02 Feb 2009
|
Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| To get a sense of how deeply entrenched the problems are, consider what passes for good news these days. The economy added 151,000 jobs last month, which was more than most economists had expected. But even at that rate of job growth, it would take 15 to 20 years to get the employment rate back to where it was when the Great Recession began in December 2007. |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/09/opinion/09herbert.html?ref=opinion
And that's just talking about the percentage of people with jobs, ie, employment rate. How about the level of income? After every Republican recession* of the past 40 years the level of income of most Americans never returned to what it was before the recession.
Sure, the rate of hiring could increase. Then it might take 10 to 15 years? Five to 10 years?
Or the rate of hiring could slow. It could go into reverse. We could have increasing rates of unemployment.
If people don't have money to spend, and if the federal government isn't increasing spending, and if state and local governments are laying off employees, then where is the spending going to come from to lead to hiring more employees by businesses?
It's funny, but in the old days, Mexicans would come to America to get jobs and send their earnings back to Mexico to support their families. Now Americans are having to go to other countries to earn money to help save the family house, etc. Sound like anyone you know? We are the new Mexicans.
------
* Recessions by President in office:
| Quote: |
Republicans:
Dwight Eisenhower: 2 recessions
Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford: 2 recessions
Ronald Reagan: 1 recession
George H.W. Bush: 1 recession
George W. Bush: 2 recessions
Here are the Democrats:
John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson: no recessions
Jimmy Carter: one recession, the briefest of the era
Bill Clinton: no recessions |
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-madrick/the-republican-presidenti_b_147518.html
And then there's the Great Depression, resulting from the Republican administrations of Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hindsight wrote: |
* Recessions by President in office:
| Quote: |
Republicans:
Dwight Eisenhower: 2 recessions
Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford: 2 recessions
Ronald Reagan: 1 recession
George H.W. Bush: 1 recession
George W. Bush: 2 recessions
Here are the Democrats:
John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson: no recessions
Jimmy Carter: one recession, the briefest of the era
Bill Clinton: no recessions |
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-madrick/the-republican-presidenti_b_147518.html
And then there's the Great Depression, resulting from the Republican administrations of Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover. |
Superficial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Suwon4AGT
Joined: 26 Apr 2009
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't it great being an American Economic Refugee Slave in the ROK? Gotta love it.
And it keeps getting better. Obama on his recent Asian tour, trying to sell the ROK on the idea that the U.S. isn't printing money or trying to weaken the U.S. dollar (yeah, whatever!!) while pointing fingers at China. What a joke.
Nevertheless, I have a secret wish for the Fed Reserve to succeed at its goal. All that phony money and the Asian creditors fleeing from the dollar would bring on hyperinflation and I could pay off my student loans with a week's salary. Don't tell me that thought hasn't crossed your mind.
I used to think dudes like Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente were out of their minds (and full of agendas to pimp commodities). But I just don't see how the U.S. government can pull off propping up this phony economy without bankrupting the country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Suwon4AGT wrote: |
| All that phony money and the Asian creditors fleeing from the dollar would bring on hyperinflation and I could pay off my student loans with a week's salary. Don't tell me that thought hasn't crossed your mind. |
This would actually work in the ROK. Not so much in the States, where wages are stagnant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
It sounds like you agree with Reich on at least one point: its not the low cost of labor driving the disparity.
I've heard the same about automation in China. Quality control is such a problem, that for more sensitive (or potentially dangerous) parts, they'd rather invest in machines.
Look, globalization to me is something much bigger, much broader, than merely who labors on what product. I think its on balance a positive force, but its unstoppable in any case.
Specifically, I believe Reich is right. Productivity from computers and automation is killing our jobs, not outsourcing. To what extent is your description true, that American companies are moving to China to escape onerous American environmental regulations? I don't know.
I do know that in 2007, China passed a landmark labor protection law. These regulations provide for restrictions on dismissing workers, and provide for pensions after they are released. These laws are a major headache for foreign companies (all companies!) in China, and America, as an employment at will jurisdiction (actually, as fifty of them) lacks any sort of comparable regime. |
Colbert had a decent interview with a manufacturer.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/365265/november-10-2010/america-s-job-loss---beri-fox
Tariffs should be applied. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
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
|
|