|
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 |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 7:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| mises wrote: |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMdbS1VU5do&feature=player_embedded
Very unsustainable. |
What has happened is this:
The socialist government spent and spent, taxed and taxed, borrowed and borrowed. They encouraged consumption and discouraged savings and investment.
But, it's savings and investment that creates jobs, more investment creates better jobs. The distortion caused by all the socialism has caused a huge increase in the relative scarcity of capital vs. labor. So, the value of labor declines relative to the value of capital.
We have to end the distortion and create a balanced neutral economy. We have to end all government borrowing and unbalanced budgets. We have to end all government subsidies and abolish nearly all laws and regulation. We have to cap total government expenditures at 10% of GDP.
Then, the trend will reverse. People will save and invest. The relative value of labor will begin to increase and income and wealth will gradually become more evenly distributed.
Socialism is the cause of all of our social problems.
Liberty is the answer.
Last edited by ontheway on Sun Dec 12, 2010 7:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| caniff wrote: |
| Quote: |
| majored in humanities or social sciences. |
I did, and as far as I can tell whatever marketable skills I now possess were attained off-campus. |
Yeah, I was a history major. I suppose I'm a better writer because of that, but beyond that skill? Can't say my history classes have contributed to my skill set. On the other hand, I wasn't expecting to woo employers with it anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madigan
Joined: 15 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Video on "malemployment". Profiles college grads doing crap jobs. Rather depressing although all of those profiled majored in humanities or social sciences. |
It isn't just BAs though. I posted a news report on another thread about a guy who got an MBA at Notre Dame. He had a very good advertising job paying a little more than $80,000 per year before starting. After finishing his MBA at ND, with at least $160,000 of debt, all he could find was cashier job at Super Target paying no more than $22,000 per year. What was that guy thinking? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Video on "malemployment". Profiles college grads doing crap jobs. Rather depressing although all of those profiled majored in humanities or social sciences. |
Not to me. I studied philosophy for personal reasons, not career-related ones. And I'll continue to study it for personal reasons. My interested in shaping myself into the ideal worker is zero.
Now, borrowing money to get a humanities or social sciences degree on the other hand is perhaps something of a mistake. If you want to study such things, the wise course is to procure sufficient funds and then study, ensuring you avoid the debt trap and minimizing how much you actually pay for the education. Borrowing only even hypothetically makes sense if the field you're entering has such high earnings that getting into it as soon as possible makes financial sense, even if doing so requires loans. The number of fields that possess that quality are fairly small though.
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Yeah, I was a history major. I suppose I'm a better writer because of that, but beyond that skill? Can't say my history classes have contributed to my skill set. On the other hand, I wasn't expecting to woo employers with it anyway. |
You do, however, seem to be a fairly aware, ethical person with a good head on your shoulders and a fair amount of insight into the world. You can consider matters both social and ethical, develop and defend a position, have the strength of character to admit when you're wrong, and the intellectual conviction to stand your ground when you're right. I suspect your education played a part in that. This is the real purpose of education. The Chinese realized this thousands of years ago. I don't think it's too much to ask modern Americans to begin realizing it today.
Work experience is what should make us better workers. Education should make us better people. The capitalist ethic is inherently dehumanizing, trying to twist us into little more than implements of production and consumption. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Video on "malemployment". Profiles college grads doing crap jobs. Rather depressing although all of those profiled majored in humanities or social sciences. |
Not to me. I studied philosophy for personal reasons, not career-related ones. And I'll continue to study it for personal reasons. My interested in shaping myself into the ideal worker is zero.
Now, borrowing money to get a humanities or social sciences degree on the other hand is perhaps something of a mistake. If you want to study such things, the wise course is to procure sufficient funds and then study, ensuring you avoid the debt trap and minimizing how much you actually pay for the education. Borrowing only even hypothetically makes sense if the field you're entering has such high earnings that getting into it as soon as possible makes financial sense, even if doing so requires loans. The number of fields that possess that quality are fairly small though. |
Yes, I agree with the 2nd paragraph. I didn't mean to bash the humanities or social sciences, I just think it is a bad idea to study those fields while borrowing money to pay for those degrees. I also think it is naive and/or ignorant for someone to expect to make more than $35K after graduating from ANY university with a degree in those two areas.
I also have no regrets being a history major and definitely appreciate the education I received, but I also did not take on any debt doing so.
One thing I like about the college system in the USA is nearly every university requires undergrads to take a wide range of classes. While I admit I was not a fan while I was in school, I do think it essential that business majors are required to take humanities classes and us history and philosophy majors have to take at least a couple science courses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Krugman's analysis of the tax cut extension
While I know many of you disagree on his economic philosophy, I have to say I think he's right about this much:
| Quote: |
As I understand it, the administration believes that all it needs is a little more time and money, that any day now the economic engine will catch and we�ll be on the road back to prosperity. I hope it�s right, but I don�t think it is.
What I expect, instead, is that we�ll be having this same conversation all over again in 2012, with unemployment still high and the economy suffering as the good parts of the current deal go away. The White House may think it has struck a good bargain, but I believe it�s in for a rude shock. |
That is a big problem in the Obama administration: overly optimistic. They were that way for 2009 and 2010 and continue to be that way. You'd think they would have learned to dampen their enthusiasm by now. It is better to project low expectations than high ones. Underestimate things, people will be pleasantly surprised you're wrong. Overestimate and they begin to doubt your forecasts.
On the other hand I doubt the GOP will be able to find a viable candidate in 2012 so it might not make a difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote
Last edited by blade on Tue Dec 14, 2010 8:37 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="blade"]
| ontheway wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMdbS1VU5do&feature=player_embedded
Very unsustainable. |
What has happened is this:
The socialist government spent and spent, taxed and taxed, borrowed and borrowed. They encouraged consumption and discouraged savings and investment.
|
Hold on? How about Germany? Socialist policies, yet high rates of saving and investing, China?, Norway, Finland, etc, have lots of saving and investing in these countries too.
The fact that countries where socialism was strongest in the past also have the highest rates of saving and investment in infrastructure should at least cause you too think before you arbitrarily apply the word Socialist to countries that are now in a great deal of financial trouble.
The terms Crony capitalism, Socialism for the rich, Corporatism are much more descriptive terms and don't tend to force people into one of two camps i.e. Socialist or right wing Libertarian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="blade"]
| blade wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMdbS1VU5do&feature=player_embedded
Very unsustainable. |
What has happened is this:
The socialist government spent and spent, taxed and taxed, borrowed and borrowed. They encouraged consumption and discouraged savings and investment.
|
Hold on? How about Germany? Socialist policies, yet high rates of saving and investing, China?, Norway, Finland, etc, have lots of saving and investing in these countries too.
The fact that countries where socialism was strongest in the past also have the highest rates of saving and investment in infrastructure should at least cause you too think before you arbitrarily apply the word Socialist to countries that are now in a great deal of financial trouble.
The terms Crony capitalism, Socialism for the rich, Corporatism are much more descriptive terms and don't tend to force people into one of two camps i.e. Socialist or right wing Libertarian. |
There are many roads that socialist governments can follow. All forms of socialism are harmful, violate individual liberty and make the people poor. However, they manifest themselves in different ways and cause different problems depending on the factors involved.
It is perfectly possible, for example, to have a socialist economy where the government does little or no borrowing. Such a system would be socialistic than the US in these areas. They could cause less damage in the areas of savings and investment by taxing and spending without borrowing. They can tax comsumption instead of income and property. This will allow the economy to grow at a better rate and be closer to a free market. This is a less destructive form of socialism.
The US has taken a much more socialist road by running huge deficits and running up massive unfunded liabilities. The Social Security and Medicare programs have unfunded liabilities that are responsible for preventing the creation of over 500 million good jobs around the world.
Socialism is the problem. It is always evil. Some socialist systems, like the US, are more evil and cause more damage than others.
Liberty is the answer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/255320
| Quote: |
Two Californias
Abandoned farms, Third World living conditions, pervasive public assistance -- welcome to the once-thriving Central Valley. |
Good read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:29 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| I love the way you just ignore that kind of crap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rogue123
Joined: 23 Aug 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/255320
| Quote: |
Two Californias
Abandoned farms, Third World living conditions, pervasive public assistance -- welcome to the once-thriving Central Valley. |
Good read. |
Found that account to be an anecdotal, insipid narrative, devoid of historical (economic) context.
instead...
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0107vogel.htm
The Maquiladora System
U.S. capitalism invaded Mexico in pursuit of cheap labor the year after the termination of the Bracero Agreement. In 1965, Mexican president Diaz Ortiz signed into law the Border Industrialization Program (BIP) that established the maquiladora system in Mexico. Developed by U.S. business interests and secured through �dollar diplomacy,� the BIP granted U.S. industry access to Mexican labor, initially along the U.S.-Mexico border and later expanded under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) into the interior of Mexico, with virtually no liability for the social or environmental costs of production.
Chart 4 tracks the growth of the maquiladora manufacturing system in Mexico. The system built up slowly�in 1980, fifteen years into the program, slightly more than 500 maquilas employed about 120,000 workers. In the following fifteen years, maquiladora employment increased five-fold to over 600,000. Employment soared in the late 1990s, peaking in the year 2000 with approximately 1.3 million workers employed in over 3,000 plants. The program showed an abrupt decline accompanying the mild economic recession in the United States in 2001 but is currently in a period of strong recovery. Overall, the maquiladora system has been a boon to U.S. capitalism, keeping the costs of production down and profits up in many critical U.S. industries.
The costs of the maquiladora system have fallen on Mexico. Maquila industries have produced a sizable number of jobs, but real wages have declined throughout the history of the program. In addition, Mexico has lost untold revenues and resources, and, therefore, opportunity for national development. The social and environmental costs of the maquiladora system in Mexico have been well documented and continue, exacerbated, under NAFTA.
Especially relevant to the unfolding U.S. labor strategy is the fact that the maquiladora program resulted in substantial resettlement of the working-age Mexican population along the U.S.-Mexico border that was supplemented in the 1990s by many of the over one million Mexican farmers dislocated by NAFTA. High unemployment in Mexican border cities, despite the thriving maquiladora industry, and higher wages to be earned in the booming U.S. economy triggered the flood of immigrant laborers that entered the United States during the 1990s and early 2000s. The exodus was facilitated by the lax enforcement of immigration law in the United States and an unofficial open border policy.
and
"Harder Times: Undocumented Workers and the U.S. Informal Economy "
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0706vogel.htm
and
The NAFTA Corridors: Offshoring U.S. Transportation Jobs to Mexico
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0206vogel.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rogue123 wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/255320
| Quote: |
Two Californias
Abandoned farms, Third World living conditions, pervasive public assistance -- welcome to the once-thriving Central Valley. |
Good read. |
Found that account to be an anecdotal, insipid narrative, devoid of historical (economic) context. |
Maybe, but still interesting. I see why the National Review printed it (duh), but I'm also gullible enough to believe that a random honky living in that area could have those impressions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| I love the way you just ignore that kind of crap. |
Huh? Don't get it. |
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
