Worried about the economy?

[Max E.]

You are posting these numbers, as if it is a counterpoint to my argument. For the record, i will gladly say that i agree, exports are good, and we should continue trying to bolster our manufacturing base, and continue trying to export goods.

However i feel like i have more than proven the fact that when you create exports through the destruction of the dollar, you ruin far more peoples lives, then what it is worth to create a few new jobs via exports.

I wish we were far more focused on innovation, as opposed to creating jobs sheerly through the destruction of currency, and inflation. Sadly this is not the case. What is happening right now is exports going up, solely based on the destruction of the U.S.D, which is unsustainable, and destructive to anyone who doesnt own assets.

Quote from Ricter:

Good points, Max, I'll try to get to them. In the meantime:


"Exports generated 9.2 million U.S. jobs in '10
The following is from the 6 July 2011 edition of the “American Shipper”.

The U.S. Commerce Department’s International Trade Administration reported Tuesday that exports supported an estimated 9.2 million jobs in 2010, up from 8.7 million in 2009.

Also, for every $1 billion of exports, more than 5,000 jobs are supported, the agency said.

New data from the ITA shows employment supported by manufactured exports plays a significant role in many states. Twenty-one states each counted more than 100,000 jobs supported by manufactured exports in 2009, with two states registering more than a half-million -- California at 616,500 jobs, and Texas at 538,500 jobs.

“As we continue to make progress in reaching the goals of the President’s National Export Initiative, we are confident that the number of jobs supported by exports will continue to rise,” said Francisco Sánchez, undersecretary of commerce for international trade, in a statement. “More businesses are reaching customers in foreign markets and seeing their sales rise which leads to more good-paying jobs in the United States.”

The report updates ITA’s April 2010 report, Exports Support American Jobs, and points out that more than ever, exports are central to a strong U.S. economy. The value of exports that support one job was $181,000 in 2010, an increase of $17,000, or 10 percent from the 2009 figure, as export prices and productivity have strengthened.

“The International Trade Administration is committed to helping U.S. firms find lucrative exporting opportunities around the globe, and ensuring access to these markets,” Sánchez said. “Our efforts improve the global business environment and help U.S. companies compete abroad, creating jobs at home.”


Clearly it's the right course correction to make, the NEI, but it also takes time and a pound of flesh.

 

[Illum]

Yes we would be in great shape if we stop giving all of our money to the animals. Housing, food, cash. And they continue to rob us. Causing police, jail, government services all too much of a tax burden. Good article, just missing a huge chunk that is dragging this nation down.

 

[soldsoldsold]

History repeats itself. Looks like the USA is not the place to be for the next 10 years. 4 to 7 year slump before job creation gets back on track? Fu that shi.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

...I wish we were far more focused on innovation...

I agree. I also came across this today:


"Switzerland Tops Innovation Rankings

(Bridges Weekly)

Switzerland is the world’s most innovative economy, according to a ranking released last week in Geneva by the Paris-based INSEAD business school, in collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Alcatel-Lucent, Booz & Company, and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). The Global Innovation Index (GII), which has been prepared annually since 2007, aims to establish metrics for measuring innovation to better understand its role in driving economic progress.

Soumitra Dutta, co-author of the report with Daniela Benavente, commented: “The index aims at gauging not only the capacity of an economy to innovate but also the extent of its success in doing so.” Both Dutta and Benavente are from INSEAD.

The rankings are based on innovation “inputs” and “outputs.” In the case of the former, the input pillars attempt to capture elements of a national economy that enable innovation; these include institutions, human capital and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, and business sophistication. Output pillars focus on evidence of scientific and creative innovation.

Following Switzerland, the top ten includes Sweden, Singapore, Hong Kong, Finland, Denmark, U.S., Canada, the Netherlands, and the UK. China, at position 29, is the only emerging economy that entered the top 30 (see http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/)

Emerging economies came out ahead when the economies are ranked by innovation efficiency – i.e. the ratio of an economy’s innovation output score to its input score – which included some of the world’s most densely populated countries. Côte d’Ivoire tops the innovation efficiency index, followed by Nigeria, China, Pakistan, Moldova, Sweden, Brazil, Argentina, India, and Bangladesh.

Gary Nugent of Alcatel-Lucent emphasised that this ranking demonstrates that developing countries “are generating a substantial amount of scientific and creative output from an environment which is not the most heavily invested or mature. That implies that if they are able to maintain that degree of productivity that will have a gearing effect.”

The report adopts a broad definition of innovation in line with the most recent developments and standards in this field, such as those of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which is the publisher of the Oslo Manual.

The GII’s input and output pillars encompass approximately 80 individual indicators. These covered areas such as tertiary student mobility, microfinance, trademarks, and creative outputs, along with more traditional indicators such as research and development expenditure, patents, and scientific publications.

Authors point out that the ranking was submitted to a thorough statistical audit by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

Nevertheless, questions have been raised about the relevance and quality of some of the selected indicators and the resulting rankings. For instance, some have pointed to the limitations of patents as a measure of innovation. Speaking on a panel at the GII’s Geneva launch, Naushad Forbes, Chairman of the CII Innovation Council and Director of Forbes Marshall, noted that patent counts do not capture sufficiently the full range of new services, products, and business methods brought to the market. Forbes commented that these are key outputs of innovation.

Rolf-Dieter Heuer, Director General of CERN – the European Organization for Nuclear Research – was also at the Geneva launch, and questioned the index’s excessive reliance on patents in promoting innovation. Heuer noted that, had CERN patented the World Wide Web, then the world might be a very different place.

WIPO Director General Francis Gurry responded that, had the internet been patented with fair and flexible licensing terms, it might have prompted major investments into future research. He stressed that, overall, intellectual property rights are not rigid and actually enable knowledge sharing, which fosters innovation.

In conclusion, Gurry noted at the report launch that the journey toward understanding innovation remains incomplete. Bruno Lanvin of INSEAD reaffirmed this sentiment, stating that the GII as it stands is not “ultimate,” and can be improved through collaboration and further evidence-based research."

Goddamn commies. ; )

 

[Max E.]

What point are you trying to make as it pertains to the u.s. based on this article? What point have i argued with?

Im all for "innovation" im not in faviour of the destruction of the dollar in order to create false exports, i have said this repeatedly.

There wasnt a single comment in this article that alluded to the destruction of a nations currency in order to bump their exports.

Quote from Ricter:

I agree. I also came across this today:


"Switzerland Tops Innovation Rankings

(Bridges Weekly)

Switzerland is the world’s most innovative economy, according to a ranking released last week in Geneva by the Paris-based INSEAD business school, in collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Alcatel-Lucent, Booz & Company, and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). The Global Innovation Index (GII), which has been prepared annually since 2007, aims to establish metrics for measuring innovation to better understand its role in driving economic progress.

Soumitra Dutta, co-author of the report with Daniela Benavente, commented: “The index aims at gauging not only the capacity of an economy to innovate but also the extent of its success in doing so.” Both Dutta and Benavente are from INSEAD.

The rankings are based on innovation “inputs” and “outputs.” In the case of the former, the input pillars attempt to capture elements of a national economy that enable innovation; these include institutions, human capital and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, and business sophistication. Output pillars focus on evidence of scientific and creative innovation.

Following Switzerland, the top ten includes Sweden, Singapore, Hong Kong, Finland, Denmark, U.S., Canada, the Netherlands, and the UK. China, at position 29, is the only emerging economy that entered the top 30 (see http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/)

Emerging economies came out ahead when the economies are ranked by innovation efficiency – i.e. the ratio of an economy’s innovation output score to its input score – which included some of the world’s most densely populated countries. Côte d’Ivoire tops the innovation efficiency index, followed by Nigeria, China, Pakistan, Moldova, Sweden, Brazil, Argentina, India, and Bangladesh.

Gary Nugent of Alcatel-Lucent emphasised that this ranking demonstrates that developing countries “are generating a substantial amount of scientific and creative output from an environment which is not the most heavily invested or mature. That implies that if they are able to maintain that degree of productivity that will have a gearing effect.”

The report adopts a broad definition of innovation in line with the most recent developments and standards in this field, such as those of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which is the publisher of the Oslo Manual.

The GII’s input and output pillars encompass approximately 80 individual indicators. These covered areas such as tertiary student mobility, microfinance, trademarks, and creative outputs, along with more traditional indicators such as research and development expenditure, patents, and scientific publications.

Authors point out that the ranking was submitted to a thorough statistical audit by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

Nevertheless, questions have been raised about the relevance and quality of some of the selected indicators and the resulting rankings. For instance, some have pointed to the limitations of patents as a measure of innovation. Speaking on a panel at the GII’s Geneva launch, Naushad Forbes, Chairman of the CII Innovation Council and Director of Forbes Marshall, noted that patent counts do not capture sufficiently the full range of new services, products, and business methods brought to the market. Forbes commented that these are key outputs of innovation.

Rolf-Dieter Heuer, Director General of CERN – the European Organization for Nuclear Research – was also at the Geneva launch, and questioned the index’s excessive reliance on patents in promoting innovation. Heuer noted that, had CERN patented the World Wide Web, then the world might be a very different place.

WIPO Director General Francis Gurry responded that, had the internet been patented with fair and flexible licensing terms, it might have prompted major investments into future research. He stressed that, overall, intellectual property rights are not rigid and actually enable knowledge sharing, which fosters innovation.

In conclusion, Gurry noted at the report launch that the journey toward understanding innovation remains incomplete. Bruno Lanvin of INSEAD reaffirmed this sentiment, stating that the GII as it stands is not “ultimate,” and can be improved through collaboration and further evidence-based research."

Goddamn commies. ; )

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

What point are you trying to make as it pertains to the u.s. based on this article?

In your case, my point is that you should be more careful about your tossing around denigrations of "liberal", and then elsewhere naming attributes you admire but which more liberal countries than our own are beating us in.

This will save me some time. Much of what you've described as problems of the US is in fact why there are liberals. "The minimum wage will hurt business!" So the minimum wage hasn't budged, relative to inflation, for decades, as you say (I haven't checked that), and indeed business is doing great, (well, not so much the SMEs)... but not the working man.

Republican values are, at best, of no use whatsoever to the nation at this time. To the degree that Obama is entertaining them, we continue to suffer. I'll grant that the GOP has possibly gone nuts, in pandering to the nuts of the Tea Party, and that sanity may return some day. Without the Tea Party, maybe they could look at the data that's right in front of us all.

 

[Eight]

Quote from Ricter:

Keep this on the down-low, but *whisper*, "buy American". Pass it on.

The quality just isn't there. I used to "buy local" then I got treated insanely badly by locals, and "buy american" but those cars were garbage compared to the German and Japanese stuff so why be political about what we buy? If Americans make a lot of low quality stuff why should I reward them with my business?

I love that scene in "Outlaw Josey Wales" where the Indian asks the snake oil salesman what's in the elixer. The sales guy says "I don't know, I just sell it" and the Indian says "Then you drink it"...

 

[Max E.]

I will be back right away, got to go to supper for my moms b-day.

Quote from Ricter:

In your case, my point is that you should be more careful about your tossing around denigrations of "liberal", and then elsewhere naming attributes you admire but which more liberal countries than our own are beating us in.

This will save me some time. Much of what you've described as problems of the US is in fact why there are liberals. "The minimum wage will hurt business!" So the minimum wage hasn't budged, relative to inflation, for decades, as you say (I haven't checked that), and indeed business is doing great, (well, not so much the SMEs)... but not the working man.

Republican values are, at best, of no use whatsoever to the nation at this time. To the degree that Obama is entertaining them, we continue to suffer. I'll grant that the GOP has possibly gone nuts, in pandering to the nuts of the Tea Party, and that sanity may return some day. Without the Tea Party, maybe they could look at the data that's right in front of us all.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Eight:

The quality just isn't there. I used to "buy local" then I got treated insanely badly by locals, and "buy american" but those cars were garbage compared to the German and Japanese stuff ...

I remember that time. We weren't quite yet aware at the national level what fierce competition globalism was going to expose us to. The good news is that American auto manufacturers have improved their product and kept costs down quite well. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I believe the free-market never works.

 

[Max E.]

Minimum wage will never keep up with inflation, thats the point, inflation crushes the little guy, and the middle guy. There is no way that minimum wage will ever keep up with the cost of a barrel of oil for example. In 1998 a barrell of oil was 12 dollars, and minimum wage was about 6 dollars.

Do you really think that when oil goes from 12 to 100, (an 8 multiplier) that minimum wage is going to follow and go from 6 to 48 dollars an hour?

Wages never keep up with inflation, because businesses dont even keep up with inflation, inflation crushs everyone.

There is a GIGANTIC ANCHOR hanging on workers, in the U.S. called china, and we have a long damn way to go before we can match the wages which they have in China, So minimum wage will never go up, until we have matched the 1 dollar per day wages in china.

Thats the reason why we should not be trying to compete based on a weakened dollar.... because we are playing their game. We would absolutely have to decimate our labourers to compete on that level, so we are better off living an isolationist policy.

That is just unrealistic.

Quote from Ricter:

In your case, my point is that you should be more careful about your tossing around denigrations of "liberal", and then elsewhere naming attributes you admire but which more liberal countries than our own are beating us in.

This will save me some time. Much of what you've described as problems of the US is in fact why there are liberals. "The minimum wage will hurt business!" So the minimum wage hasn't budged, relative to inflation, for decades, as you say (I haven't checked that), and indeed business is doing great, (well, not so much the SMEs)... but not the working man.

Republican values are, at best, of no use whatsoever to the nation at this time. To the degree that Obama is entertaining them, we continue to suffer. I'll grant that the GOP has possibly gone nuts, in pandering to the nuts of the Tea Party, and that sanity may return some day. Without the Tea Party, maybe they could look at the data that's right in front of us all.