Why did the US send so much work overseas?

eusdaiki · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Cache Landing:

1) Stop globalization and everyone is poorer as a result.

That sounds easy. How soon can you unplug the internet?

btw... option 3 sounds best...

Cache Landing · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from eusdaiki:

That sounds easy. How soon can you unplug the internet?

btw... option 3 sounds best...

Well, by stop globalization I really was suggesting tough restrictions. Things like high tariffs, boycotts, etc.

I think the stupidity of that is obvious.

As far as option 3 goes. That is really the debate between the Keynesians and Laize Faire guys.

Is the fact that the poor become richer good enough to simply allow the rich to become uber wealthy? Or do the poor need to get richer at a faster rate than the rich do, so that we can close the wealth gap. And if so, what incentives are there for someone to take the risk necessary to make globalization work?

eusdaiki · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Cache Landing:

Well, by stop globalization I really was suggesting tough restrictions. Things like high tariffs, boycotts, etc.

I think the stupidity of that is obvious.

As far as option 3 goes. That is really the debate between the Keynesians and Laize Faire guys.

Is the fact that the poor become richer good enough to simply allow the rich to become uber wealthy? Or do the poor need to get richer at a faster rate than the rich do, so that we can close the wealth gap. And if so, what incentives are there for someone to take the risk necessary to make globalization work?

I have usually sided with the Laize Faire crowd, but from a while back I've been under the impression that allowing the gaps created by globalization to continue growing as they are today, is not a viable path.
So, now I'm more inclined towards ideas such as using more than the GDP to measure a country's progress. Indicators such as the Ginni coefficient also be factored in to take into account human development when evaluating macro-performance.

So I've come to think that the state might actually serve a purpose...

Cache Landing · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from eusdaiki:

I have usually sided with the Laize Faire crowd, but from a while back I've been under the impression that allowing the gaps created by globalization to continue growing as they are today, is not a viable path.
So, now I'm more inclined towards ideas such as using more than the GDP to measure a country's progress. Indicators such as the Ginni coefficient also be factored in to take into account human development when evaluating macro-performance.

So I've come to think that the state might actually serve a purpose...

I don't have a problem with creating very strong incentives for the wealthy to do their own redistribution. But the poor should be informed that limiting the income of the rich usually results in a lower quality life for the poor.

If they are ok with that (essentially cutting off their nose to spite their face) then I'm fine with that too. Personally, I work hard to be successful and don't ever put myself in a situation where I will join that demographic. But I sympathize with them and donate >10% of my income to help.

I tend to think that people who have should be incentivized to willingly give to those who have not.

eusdaiki · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Cache Landing:

I don't have a problem with creating very strong incentives for the wealthy to do their own redistribution. But the poor should be informed that limiting the income of the rich usually results in a lower quality life for the poor.

If they are ok with that (essentially cutting off their nose to spite their face) then I'm fine with that too. Personally, I work hard to be successful and don't ever put myself in a situation where I will join that demographic. But I sympathize with them and donate >10% of my income to help.

I tend to think that people who have should be incentivized to willingly give to those who have not.

Simply handing money over to the poor does no good. It actually makes things worse.
Help to the poor should come in the form of education and opportunities to earn a decent wage...

Cache Landing · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from eusdaiki:

Simply handing money over to the poor does no good. It actually makes things worse.
Help to the poor should come in the form of education and opportunities to earn a decent wage...

I agree, that is why I don't simply hand over money to them.

Maverickz · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from eusdaiki:

Simply handing money over to the poor does no good. It actually makes things worse.
Help to the poor should come in the form of education and opportunities to earn a decent wage...

QFT

I have been saying for a while now the solution to the "healthcare" issue is to expand medicaid/medicare to all those that cannot physically work and educate the ones that can work so they can get jobs that provide insurance. I would also support day care programs to allow single parents to get jobs as well. I have also always been a STRONG opponent to paying people who are physically/mentally capable of working for being a lazy POS and sitting on the couch all day long.

bwolinsky · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Renegen:

Guess why the chinese have disposable income and the Americans have none.

China is a fucking shithole, with GDP per capita at around our poverty level, have fun moving there if you think it's so much better than the United States.

bwolinsky · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Renegen:

No, I don't disagree with you on that point. I wrote that without checking the numbers. But there's also plenty of graphs going back to the 1980s showing real incomes are flat, and that's what I had in mind.

Go find one, because I guarantee you won't discover anything that even remotely supports that claim.

bwolinsky · Sep 16, 2009

Quote from Misthos:

By 2012 the effects of peak oil will hit and it will be a very different world. Many transnationals will go bankrupt. Jobs will come back home because shipping goods globally will be prohibitively expensive. The government will be the largest purchaser of oil, and the military and agriculture will be the first in line for it.

Capitalism on a grand scale will be dead. However, family owned businesses that serve their local communities will thrive once again. Businesses such as Walmart will be on their last legs.

We will look fondly back at 2006 and explain to incredulous children that many of us used to fly halfway around the world to exotic lands.

Yeah, right. We'll always find more oil. Petrobras will be our supplier from Brazil, and the Canadian Tarsands have far greater oil supplies than even Saudi Arabia. Maybe it will be more expensive, but I don't think we're running out in the next 100 years. If you'd like to find data supporting your claim, please do, because I don't see any charts with credibility saying peak oil is in 2012, more like 2150 when I'm dead.