Korean Job Discussion Forums

[lastat06513]

From the beginning of both major wars, the US has tried to stay clear of taking sides (while providing military supplies to Allied Europe via Canada), but inevitably entered the conflicts after being drawn in by hostile means


Example;

Zimmerman Telegraph to Mexico (1917)
Pearl Harbor (1941)

As the world's policeman, after the fiascos in Iraq and eslewhere due to its policies regarding the "war on terror", many in the US are now advocating that the US should take an "isolationist" policy and let the world solve their own problems.

What do you think of this rising attitude?
Do you think the US should stop interfering in international affairs and start concentrating more domestically?

[igotthisguitar]

GM to Ax 30,000 Jobs, Close 12 Facilities
By DEE-ANN DURBIN, AP Auto Writer

DETROIT - General Motors Corp., pounded by declining sales and rising health care costs, said Monday it will cut more than a quarter of its North American manufacturing jobs and close 12 facilities by 2008. The United Auto Workers called the plan "devastating" and warned it will make negotiations more difficult, but some Wall Street analysts said GM's actions may not go far enough.



To get production in line with demand, GM will cut 30,000 jobs and will close nine assembly, stamping and powertrain plants and three parts facilities. The job cuts represent 27 percent of GM's hourly jobs and about 17 percent of its overall North American work force of 173,000.

GM's U.S. market share fell to 26.2 percent in the first 10 months of this year compared with 33 percent a decade ago, the result of increasing competition from Asian rivals. GM lost almost $4 billion in the first nine months of this year

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051122/ap_on_bi_ge/gm

[Wangja]

I don't immediately see how one country could be isolationist and globalist at the same time.

For the US to become isolationist, would they not have to sever trading links with the outside world?

[Ya-ta Boy]

I'm with Wangja. You can't have it both ways and the US is too dependent on trade to even consider real isolationism.

I would take it a step further. I don't think isolationism ever went away, at least among the general population. I think Americans generally dislike the idea of political/military involvement overseas but accept it as an 'evil necessity'.

[bucheon bum]

[Wangja]

[Ya-ta Boy]

I agree with Wangja again. (This is getting to be a bad habit and I will see what I can do about rectifying it immediately after this post.) Japan is a formal ally of the US with its defense guaranteed by the US. So I don't think Japan makes a good example of an isolationist state.

[bucheon bum]

[Wangja]

True, BB, but therein lies the rub. They are inseparable. A country cannot trade with another country "in isolation" of its foreign policy.

For example, US is a great importer (relatively small exporter btw) and one can imagine that under a policy of isolation all commercial sanctions imposed for political reasons would be abandoned. And that Havana cigars would again be on sale in USA.

As for the exports, there would again be no restriction on arms sales to, say, China. Or North Korea.

The point I am making, perhaps too crudely, is that as soon as the foreign policy is isolation, the commercial companies will feel free to go where before they could not. As soon as they are stopped in such trades, the foreign policy is no longer one of isolation.

[Yu_Bum_suk]

I'd hesitate to say 'again'. With the Monroe Doctrine the aim was to have hemispheric, not world, domination, and that was still US policy throughout the supposedly 'isolationist' eras of the 20th century. A minority of right-wing Americans would like to be truly isolationist, but in relative terms I think we're only going to see a slight shift in this direction.

[4 months left]

[Ya-ta Boy]

Even if it were true and the US did become isolationist, it would only last until a crisis erupted and all the Europeans started whining that the Americans were sitting on their butts and not doing anything about it.

[Wangja]

No, that's not the reason.

Even if Korea and Japan opened their markets to US cars, there would be almost no buyers. If they were going to buy an imported car, they would not choose a Chevrolet or Ford form USA they would choose a BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar from Europe or Lexus from Japan.

Seriously, and I not mean to offend, but who in their right mind would buy an American car when they could have something - anything - else?

Where else in the world does petrol cost less than 3 USD a gallon for one thing?

When US manufacturers start making cars that people want they will sell more cars. 75% of Americans do not want a GM car.

Edit: I don't have figures to hand, but I do believe that most Japanese and Korean-badged cars sold in USA are in fact made in USA by US citizens now.

[Wangja]

[Moldy Rutabaga]

After winning a world conflict, the US has invariably turned isolationist-- as it did at the end of WWI and WWII and in Iraq I, booting out presidents that were war-hawks in favor of peacetime presidents. It could happen again, although the Americans aren't exactly 'winning' in Iraq II.

Of course countries can have an isolationist military policy and a globalist economic policy. Most of the smaller countries in the world do it, benefiting (not always) from global trade while not building armies for foreign conflicts.

Korea is a bit of an exception, because it only wants the benefits of outward trade; and Canada, because America defends us while we blame them for it. But in total, I wouldn't be surprised if a possibly Democrat president told the world, "if we're such baaad people, why don't you take care of your own f--ing problems?" and turned the country isolationist. Look at the falling levels of foreign tourism.

Ken:>