- This topic has 158 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 17 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
If it wasn’t here, it would be on something. That’s the way I look at it.
CherylKaufman wrote:mimitrek wrote:I agree with a lot of what you said, but globalism does have its good points too. For one, look at how fast technology is advancing, because everyone is sharing ideas — and the developments from that increase the quality of life for a lot of people.
Yes but in essence what globalism is doing is taking higher quality standards of living, like the US, and lowering it to match a middle ground- so while China is doing GREAT for themselves and their standards of living are increasing we, in essence, are stooping to THEIR level which is several levels lower than what we are at now. Say they are a 1 and we are a 10- globalism is going to help them to make level 5 (good for them) and decrease us to level 5 (bad for us who are used to living at a 10). The previous good economies aare going to suffer intensely all in teh name of cheaper labor and higher profit- so 10% of the execs of the world are going to be BANKING while the middle class becomes poverty stricken.
A negative effect on the standard of living is definitely one of the drawbacks — but its also inevitable that that’ll happen as technology flattens the world. But there will always be goods and services that will be relatively unaffected, such as restaurants and doctors, which will always be needed locally. I think that the negative effects of globalism can’t be eliminated, but the effect can be greatly reduced if people here are able to do things better than people in other countries — such as being leaders in technology and innovation, so that we have something that no other country has. This essentially means increasing the number of people in the workforce who are highly skilled professionals like scientists, engineers, etc. who can do jobs which would be very difficult or not cost effective to outsource.
But from articles that I’ve read, it seems like the reverse is happening. People in other countries are working much harder at becoming highly skilled than people in the US, as evidenced by the number of college/graduate degrees earned per year, in proportion to the population. Other countries are working hard to catch up to us, but people in the US aren’t working nearly as hard to stay ahead of them. The reality is that globalism is here, and the ones who don’t try to improve themselves will be the ones who are affected the most. So I don’t think the middle class necessary has to become poverty stricken — but they will be if they don’t do something about it.
But then again, the fact that the population is constantly increasing within the country is already producing a negative effect which is very similar to that of outsourcing. A person today has to be much more highly skilled than someone 30 years ago if they want to have the same standard of living, because we have more people competing for the same amount of land, and its driven the house prices way up. This is especially evident in high cost of living area like mine. For example, I have an elderly neighbor who used to be a postman, but there’s no way that someone who’s working as a postman today could buy that house. So essentially, people’s standard of living has been going down over the years. I don’t think the outsourcing is really producing any effect that wasn’t already there, but it is accelerating the rate at which the standard of living is dropping, and its affecting certain segments of the population a lot more than others.
The thing that I think is really problematic is that there will always be people who don’t have the ability to do anything except low skill jobs, such as the manufacturing jobs which have gotten outsourced. The standard of living for those people is dropping much faster than for everyone else, and there’s no question at all that those people will become poverty stricken unless the government steps in, by imposing regulations, subsidizing employment, etc.
well I hate to say it but most Americans seem to have become very lazy. It may have something to do with the fact tha a number of us, Not me, but a number have had everything handed to them, like Paris Hilton who is rich beyond anything we can every imagine but has no real talent, skills or smarts in my opinion
Greater Basilisk wrote:And Mimi, you’re not the first one to call me radical. 😉 But some folks have really gotten uptight with my views, so now I’m rather more careful about stating them without knowing my counterpart better.
I know what you mean…but I think discussions like this are fun! Its really interesting to see what different people think on various issues.
mimitrek wrote:The thing that I think is really problematic is that there will always be people who don’t have the ability to do anything except low skill jobs, such as the manufacturing jobs which have gotten outsourced. The standard of living for those people is dropping much faster than for everyone else, and there’s no question at all that those people will become poverty stricken unless the government steps in, by imposing regulations, subsidizing employment, etc.
But how will the government be able to afford that when so much of the work force=taxpayers aren’t at or can’t work because Indians and Chinese have their jobs – either in the States or their own countries? Personally I think tariffs and taxes on foreign goods are a wonderful idea, and again, I believe that if nations would look at themselves as the market, and only import what they can’t make, everybody would be better off. There’s no reason to import crappy Chinese cars when U.S. automakers still exist. If the government would slap China with huge tariffs, nobody would buy Chinese trash anymore, and they’d start making things themselves again, high quality Made in USA. Technology hin oder her, we can have a connected world without ruining our country’s base of income by giving foreigners the jobs. Advanced tech really doesn’t have much as an argument for outsourcing. Americans are the world’s biggest consumers; they should have their products made at home and save the environment the stress of shipping and themselves the worry of losing their job to a far easterner. And talking about having higher quality is very nice, but as you said, Mimi, what happens when the far easterners are just as skilled as Americans? Of course it’s no excuse for Americans to kick back and rest on their laurels, but I do think it’s wrong to say, “Well, that’s the economy, those who don’t find a way to survive go under.” I don’t usually propagate government interference, but here there’s a serious lack of it. Instead of supporting illegals with welfare and medicare, instead of fighting in places nobody could place on a map before Bush decided it needed to be democratized, instead of trying to boss the world, Washington D.C. should pay attention to internal problems and protect the American market.
I know about the free trade market. Free trade is good – in the sense that the government should protect its borders and leave the inside alone. But in order to have true freedom, boundaries need to be set.Greater Basilisk wrote:mimitrek wrote:The thing that I think is really problematic is that there will always be people who don’t have the ability to do anything except low skill jobs, such as the manufacturing jobs which have gotten outsourced. The standard of living for those people is dropping much faster than for everyone else, and there’s no question at all that those people will become poverty stricken unless the government steps in, by imposing regulations, subsidizing employment, etc.
But how will the government be able to afford that when so much of the work force=taxpayers aren’t at or can’t work because Indians and Chinese have their jobs – either in the States or their own countries. Personally I think tariffs and taxes on foreign goods are a wonderful idea,
Well, limiting outsourcing or imposing tariffs would fall under what I meant by “imposing regulations.”
Greater Basilisk wrote:and again, I believe that if nations would look at themselves as the market, and only import what they can’t make, everybody would be better off.
Given how the world’s economies are currently interrelated, I don’t see how that would be possible. And the countries which are poor in resources but rich in labor wouldn’t be better off — they’d have to import everything at high cost and be unable to outsource any of that labor. I think what you proposed would be beneficial only to countries like the US, which is blessed with both a huge amount of arable land and extraordinary natural resources.
Greater Basilisk wrote:There’s no reason to import crappy Chinese cars when U.S. automakers still exist. If the government would slap China with huge tariffs, nobody would buy Chinese trash anymore, and they’d start making things themselves again, high quality Made in USA.
But looking at this another way, those crappy cars would not be imported if there was no demand for them. So apparently there are people in the U.S who only care about price and not quality. Who’s to say that those people shouldn’t be able to buy what they want? And the problem is that American cars are not the best when it comes to quality and reliability — which is why I have a Japanese car. If American cars were as good, I wouldn’t have bought a Japanese car. My first car was a Chevrolet (bought brand new) which had constant problems, while my current car has had 0 problems in 10 years.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Technology hin oder her, we can have a connected world without ruining our country’s base of income by giving foreigners the jobs. Advanced tech really doesn’t have much as an argument for outsourcing. Americans are the world’s biggest consumers; they should have their products made at home and save the environment the stress of shipping and themselves the worry of losing their job to a far easterner.
That would only work if all countries agreed to do the same thing, otherwise the companies of the one country that did would be at a severe competitive disadvantage. The only way to prevent that would be not allow imports, which I don’t think is practical given the current way the world’s economies are interrelated.
Greater Basilisk wrote:And talking about having higher quality is very nice, but as you said, Mimi, what happens when the far easterners are just as skilled as Americans? Of course it’s no excuse for Americans to kick back and rest on their laurels, but I do think it’s wrong to say, “Well, that’s the economy, those who don’t find a way to survive go under.”
I think that’s reality though. And I think we see that every day in all aspects of life. For example, I think my company would fire me in 2 seconds if they could easily replace me with someone of equivalent capabilities who was willing to work for significantly less. But they can’t, because I have a skill set which isn’t easy to replace, and I worked hard to get that skill set. People who didn’t are the ones who have “gone under” (namely, those that got selected in the many layoffs that my company’s had over the years). I really don’t see this as any different than the “survival of the fittest” in the wild that’s gone on for millions of years.
Greater Basilisk wrote:I don’t usually propagate government interference, but here there’s a serious lack of it. Instead of supporting illegals with welfare and medicare, instead of fighting in places nobody could place on a map before Bush decided it needed to be democratized, instead of trying to boss the world, Washington D.C. should pay attention to internal problems and protect the American market
I also think that more can be done to protect the American market (though obviously our opinions differ as to the degree), and I totally agree with all of the other things that you mentioned. The amount of money being wasted on Iraq boggles the mind — if only that money could’ve been applied to fixing internal problems we’d be much better off.
Greater Basilisk wrote:I know about the free trade market. Free trade is good – in the sense that the government should protect its borders and leave the inside alone. But in order to have true freedom, boundaries need to be set.
I think we can agree to disagree on this one. 🙂
Okay, postponing exercise outside to answer this step by step 😀 –
You’re right, I was only thinking of the U.S., simply because trying to think for the world is impossible. But it’s not a matter of trying to bring everybody up to the standard of living we consider adequate. If everybody consumed as much as Americans, we would require three Planet Earths to fill the demand. Frankly, we don’t want the rest of the world to acquire the same demand as the States, and I think the States wouldn’t do badly to cut back on their consumption either.
But take India as the prime example of third-world countries “benefiting” from American exported jobs. India is actually not benefiting. India is suffering from the huge influx of wealth, because there is suddenly a wealthy middle class, hugely wealthy compared the very poor people of the country. And because of the predominate Hindu religion, there’s no such thing as sharing. India is in huge internal turmoil because of this sudden rise of a “capitalistic class”, the government doesn’t know how to handle it, the culture calls for violence, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re headed for out and out internal conflict between those rich on U.S. dollars and the poor untouchables.
As for the demand for lousy Chinese cars – yes, there are people who just want what’s cheapest. And if there were tariffs on Chinese junk American cars would be cheaper by far and would provide better quality.
I do agree that American cars don’t have the same reputation for No Problems as Japanese ones. But I think that Japanese cars could fall in the same category as Swiss chocolate – a specialty from a certain country that knows exactly how to make a certain product just right. I know the legalities of differentiating between the unique poor quality of Chinese trash and the unique good quality of Japanese cars would be horribly complex. On the other hand I also think it wouldn’t be any worse than what they already churn out in regard to detailed regulations on everything else.
As for survival of the fittest – it is reality. I never argued that. I just think that reality changes occasionally (Martin Luther’s Reformation, the American War for Independence), and in preparation for such changes there should be goals and ideals for the better. Considering the U.S.’s national debt, the fact that the Euro is now the preferred currency in the world, the fact that China dumped a trillion U.S. dollars as unreliable currency in December, there is no doubt that something is going to change in the economy, both American and worldwide, sooner or later, but not too much later. In view of that it is simply not wise to have all our industry and factories in the Far East, to have to import basic everyday things we used to make ourselves. The biggest employer in the States is the government – which has been factually bankrupt since FDR signed the Emergency Banking Act in 1933. As soon as any business has a debt so large it can’t pay it off, it’s bankrupt. A government is no different. And the U.S. government will never be able to pay off its trillions of debt. Where does this take us? I don’t know, except that it’ll be a new system.
I know I really backed up to present the big picture here, but the details of outsourcing and tariffs are really only symptoms of a rotten economy. Just as an example: It used to be that college kids worked at McDonald’s for the minimum pay. Now you have grownups working there to get their families by – because their jobs are overseas. Of course restaurants and gas stations are always needed – but they can’t be the biggest source of income. Most of the “new jobs generated” last year came from restaurants and suchlike. A nation’s economy can’t run forever in the tertiary economic sector. It needs the golden middle. It needs farmers and industry. America needs to be America’s best employer of Americans and Americans need to be America’s best customers.
And finally – I hope you’re not thoroughly bored of this yet, because I quite enjoy it 🙂 – it is very good people to have an incentive to work hard, to gain experience like yours and be able to rely on a good steady job for their efforts. But it’s impossible for everyone to do that. White-collars have high paying jobs for a reason: they’re few. Most people are simply not capable of putting in the effort it takes to get hired by a pharm company or Lockheed. Equality before the law is nice, but people weren’t created equal in abilities. That’s just the way it is. But even they shouldn’t have to work at McDonald’s to get by. Again: A nation can only run for so long in the tertiary sector. Relying on the tertiary is just as dangerous as an African country relying on the export of coffee. A country to needs to stand on as many economic legs as it can, so when one gives out, the rest will still support it.Your turn again. Really, Mimi, I’m having fun. I appreciate being able to have a good discussion on a serious topic again. 😀
Wow. Well.. I was not invited but I do have an opinion on a little of this. I think our economy is crap but can be fixed if we stop spending money on this war (We just commited 20,000 more troops) and if we pay more attention to our own country. I do beleive in outsourcing. While it takes some jobs, it creates more and makes products cheaper. When products are cheaper, people can buy more. Rich and poor alike. I think we should pay more attention to who is on Welfare. Germany has it right. They will find you a job. If you dont take it… you dont get welfare. The governments current policy changes should help. It sets limits on how long you can be on welfare and even wont pay for new kids if you are already collecting welfare. This is a start, but they also need to work on illigal immigration. Where was Immigration the day all the illigals took to the streets?? Hello? if they were arrested and sent back home that would open up quite a few new jobs dontcha think? Also, the jail system needs to be revamped. Why do we have people on death row or spending a lifetime in prison? If they killed people… kill them back. Less money spent on people who are not contributing to society. TAXES! Hello!! How are big companies getting out of paying taxes?? Multi-billion dollar corporations have fancy lawyers to find every loophole to get their employer out of paying proper taxes. They also “Donate” money that suspicioulsly turns up somewhere else and they dont pay taxes on it. Why are everyday citizens who get $3000 refunds getting audited?? Go after the big guys who are skipping out. Just my opinion on some problems in society.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Okay, postponing exercise outside to answer this step by step 😀 –
Postponing sleep to continue our very interesting discussion… 😆
Greater Basilisk wrote:You’re right, I was only thinking of the U.S., simply because trying to think for the world is impossible. But it’s not a matter of trying to bring everybody up to the standard of living we consider adequate.
I think its not that we’re trying to bring everybody up to our standard of living, but that people in poorer countries see what we have and want it for themselves. And so they work extremely hard and do everything in their power to improve their situation. I think China is a good example of a country that’s made amazing progress.
Greater Basilisk wrote:If everybody consumed as much as Americans, we would require three Planet Earths to fill the demand. Frankly, we don’t want the rest of the world to acquire the same demand as the States, and I think the States wouldn’t do badly to cut back on their consumption either.
That’s the truth! Cutting back on consumption would solve a lot of problems. If people stopped buying like crazy then we wouldn’t have this enormous trade deficit (the cheap import problem would take care of itself to a large extent), the savings rate would be a lot higher, and most people could retire without having to depend on social security, for starters. The interesting thing is that countries like China still have much less of a conspicuous consumption culture than we do — good savings habits are so ingrained in the culture that their government is concerned about people causing problems for the economy because they’re not spending enough!
Greater Basilisk wrote:But take India as the prime example of third-world countries “benefiting” from American exported jobs. India is actually not benefiting. India is suffering from the huge influx of wealth, because there is suddenly a wealthy middle class, hugely wealthy compared the very poor people of the country.
That’s a good point. But given India’s situation, I don’t know how this problem could’ve been prevented though. For the capable people to capitalize on opportunities and become wealthy is a very natural thing, and is the same thing that’s made the US world dominant. I think these problems will get worked out gradually. And even the poor people are benefitting, because now there are a lot more wealthy people who have the money to hire domestic help and otherwise create jobs for poor people.
Greater Basilisk wrote:And because of the predominate Hindu religion, there’s no such thing as sharing.
That’s not completely true. I read an article a few weeks ago about how some prominent Indian businessmen who had become wealthy were donating a lot of money to schools and other philanthropic efforts. They might be the exception right now, but I think as more and more people absorb Western ideas, they’ll become much more like the US in this respect.
Greater Basilisk wrote:India is in huge internal turmoil because of this sudden rise of a “capitalistic class”, the government doesn’t know how to handle it, the culture calls for violence, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re headed for out and out internal conflict between those rich on U.S. dollars and the poor untouchables.
That’s definitely a possibility. I sometimes wonder if that will happen in the US at some point also, as rich get richer and the poorer get poorer.
Greater Basilisk wrote:As for the demand for lousy Chinese cars – yes, there are people who just want what’s cheapest. And if there were tariffs on Chinese junk American cars would be cheaper by far and would provide better quality.
I do agree that American cars don’t have the same reputation for No Problems as Japanese ones. But I think that Japanese cars could fall in the same category as Swiss chocolate – a specialty from a certain country that knows exactly how to make a certain product just right. I know the legalities of differentiating between the unique poor quality of Chinese trash and the unique good quality of Japanese cars would be horribly complex. On the other hand I also think it wouldn’t be any worse than what they already churn out in regard to detailed regulations on everything else.The main problem, though, is that our economy has become so dependent on Chinese money and Chinese goods that I think it would be impossible to enact protectionist trade policies against China without getting into a very dangerous situation, given the delicate balance of the economy.
Greater Basilisk wrote:As for survival of the fittest – it is reality. I never argued that. I just think that reality changes occasionally (Martin Luther’s Reformation, the American War for Independence), and in preparation for such changes there should be goals and ideals for the better.
I agree, some changes need to be made. Though I think we disagree to what degree…
Greater Basilisk wrote:Considering the U.S.’s national debt, the fact that the Euro is now the preferred currency in the world, the fact that China dumped a trillion U.S. dollars as unreliable currency in December, there is no doubt that something is going to change in the economy, both American and worldwide, sooner or later, but not too much later.
That’s what I think too. The trade deficit and the national debt are frightening to contemplate, and I’ve often wondered how long the US can keep this delicate balance.
Greater Basilisk wrote:In view of that it is simply not wise to have all our industry and factories in the Far East, to have to import basic everyday things we used to make ourselves.
That’s a good point, and the current policies are basically betting that the status quo will be maintained, in terms of the delicate balance between the world’s economies.
Greater Basilisk wrote:The biggest employer in the States is the government – which has been factually bankrupt since FDR signed the Emergency Banking Act in 1933. As soon as any business has a debt so large it can’t pay it off, it’s bankrupt. A government is no different. And the U.S. government will never be able to pay off its trillions of debt. Where does this take us? I don’t know, except that it’ll be a new system.
This debt situation is very scary, and the possible consequences are pretty frightening.
Greater Basilisk wrote:I know I really backed up to present the big picture here, but the details of outsourcing and tariffs are really only symptoms of a rotten economy. Just as an example: It used to be that college kids worked at McDonald’s for the minimum pay. Now you have grownups working there to get their families by – because their jobs are overseas. Of course restaurants and gas stations are always needed – but they can’t be the biggest source of income. Most of the “new jobs generated” last year came from restaurants and suchlike. A nation’s economy can’t run forever in the tertiary economic sector.
All this is very true, and it has to change.
Greater Basilisk wrote:It needs the golden middle. It needs farmers and industry. America needs to be America’s best employer of Americans and Americans need to be America’s best customers.
Given the current trends, I don’t think that’s going to happen. And I think the only solution is if the US can provide specialists, products, etc. that other countries don’t have. I think this is kind of analogous to how a lot of families in the 1700’s were fairly self sufficient — they baked their own bread and made their own soap — but nowadays everyone is a specialist. I think the trend is moving to countries becoming specialists also.
Greater Basilisk wrote:And finally – I hope you’re not thoroughly bored of this yet, because I quite enjoy it 🙂
Me too! 😀
Greater Basilisk wrote:– it is very good people to have an incentive to work hard, to gain experience like yours and be able to rely on a good steady job for their efforts. But it’s impossible for everyone to do that. White-collars have high paying jobs for a reason: they’re few.
The problem is, right now we have more of those jobs than we can fill, and they’re being filled by foreign talent. White collar jobs are definitely fewer than blue collar jobs, but there are still a lot out there that are waiting to be filled by qualified Americans.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Most people are simply not capable of putting in the effort it takes to get hired by a pharm company or Lockheed.
This is the part I question. Can’t, or won’t? I think its the latter. Take Japan for example. Most of the kids there study furiously and do everything they can to succeed. Here, we have many kids who don’t even want to go to school even though its free, and are perfectly satisfied working at a minimum wage job. How can you expect to compete if the competition is working 3 times harder than you are? Granted, there are definitely some people who aren’t capable of doing highly skilled work, but there are also plenty of people who can but aren’t willing to do what it takes.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Equality before the law is nice, but people weren’t created equal in abilities. That’s just the way it is. But even they shouldn’t have to work at McDonald’s to get by.
That’s true, which is why I think the government needs to make some changes to protect these people.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Again: A nation can only run for so long in the tertiary sector. Relying on the tertiary is just as dangerous as an African country relying on the export of coffee. A country to needs to stand on as many economic legs as it can, so when one gives out, the rest will still support it.
We have different opinions on this point — as I mentioned, I think its a natural trend for countries to specialize.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Your turn again. Really, Mimi, I’m having fun. I appreciate being able to have a good discussion on a serious topic again. 😀
Me too! Like you said…its good to find that we have something in common besides Windstones. 😀
skigod377 wrote:Wow. Well.. I was not invited but I do have an opinion on a little of this. I think our economy is crap but can be fixed if we stop spending money on this war (We just commited 20,000 more troops) and if we pay more attention to our own country. I do beleive in outsourcing. While it takes some jobs, it creates more and makes products cheaper. When products are cheaper, people can buy more. Rich and poor alike. I think we should pay more attention to who is on Welfare. Germany has it right. They will find you a job. If you dont take it… you dont get welfare. The governments current policy changes should help. It sets limits on how long you can be on welfare and even wont pay for new kids if you are already collecting welfare. This is a start, but they also need to work on illigal immigration. Where was Immigration the day all the illigals took to the streets?? Hello? if they were arrested and sent back home that would open up quite a few new jobs dontcha think? Also, the jail system needs to be revamped. Why do we have people on death row or spending a lifetime in prison? If they killed people… kill them back. Less money spent on people who are not contributing to society. TAXES! Hello!! How are big companies getting out of paying taxes?? Multi-billion dollar corporations have fancy lawyers to find every loophole to get their employer out of paying proper taxes. They also “Donate” money that suspicioulsly turns up somewhere else and they dont pay taxes on it. Why are everyday citizens who get $3000 refunds getting audited?? Go after the big guys who are skipping out. Just my opinion on some problems in society.
In principle, I agree with everything you said! Its funny that our viewpoints are so similar. 😀
But there are a lot of issues to consider though. In regards to the death row issue — I’ve read about quite a few cases where the person convicted was innocent. If we execute people without this lengthy process, how can we minimize the chance that we’re executing an innocent person? I think this issue is directly tied into the correctional and educational systems. If we made sure that kids didn’t get into trouble in the first place, and that rehabilitation in the jails actually worked, or was able to identify the true psychos/incorrigibles and got them off the streets early, then there would be a lot fewer potential killers on the streets. As far as illegal immigration goes, I think this has to be solved by preventing people from getting here in the first place, and enforcing strict penalties on companies that hire these people. But there are a lot of difficult issues here…like illegal immigrants who have kids who grew up in the US. The parents may have committed a crime, but why should the kids have to suffer for it? Not to mention that various businesses would be negatively impacted if we didn’t have illegal immigration — California agriculture for one. And I think what you mentioned about the taxes is really part of a bigger issue — if you’re rich enough, the laws don’t apply (or some way can be found to get around them).
skigod377 wrote:Wow. Well.. I was not invited but I do have an opinion on a little of this. I think our economy is crap but can be fixed if we stop spending money on this war (We just commited 20,000 more troops) and if we pay more attention to our own country. I do beleive in outsourcing. While it takes some jobs, it creates more and makes products cheaper. When products are cheaper, people can buy more. Rich and poor alike. I think we should pay more attention to who is on Welfare. Germany has it right. They will find you a job. If you dont take it… you dont get welfare. The governments current policy changes should help. It sets limits on how long you can be on welfare and even wont pay for new kids if you are already collecting welfare. This is a start, but they also need to work on illigal immigration. Where was Immigration the day all the illigals took to the streets?? Hello? if they were arrested and sent back home that would open up quite a few new jobs dontcha think? Also, the jail system needs to be revamped. Why do we have people on death row or spending a lifetime in prison? If they killed people… kill them back. Less money spent on people who are not contributing to society. TAXES! Hello!! How are big companies getting out of paying taxes?? Multi-billion dollar corporations have fancy lawyers to find every loophole to get their employer out of paying proper taxes. They also “Donate” money that suspicioulsly turns up somewhere else and they dont pay taxes on it. Why are everyday citizens who get $3000 refunds getting audited?? Go after the big guys who are skipping out. Just my opinion on some problems in society.
YES! Absolutely yes! Except for the outsourcing, but just to mention – I’m sure there are occasional circumstances that justify it. But I still have a problem with the amount of outsourcing that’s happening. Again – we need the golden mean, no extremes. But other than that, Ski, I’m so with you! Especially the stuff about death row. I have a real problem with European thinking when it comes to death row. They’ve taken away a huge incentive against crime by getting rid of the death penalty. They essentially show they don’t respect life by giving the murderer of a little girl 2.5 years in prison. 👿
Okay, Mimi, here goes again – but I hope I can keep it shorter this time since we mostly agreed. 🙂
China has made very amazing and commendable progress. but notice how they did it: They protected their nation, their inside life. They welcomed American and European money, they gladly take what’s handed them – or steal it if it isn’t offered – but without giving up any national sovereignty. I’m not condoning the narrow-minded Commies here. Far from it! I just think that China is wisely using the foolish Western corporations’ greed to its infinite advantage.
India: I remember reading about that businessman too. It was very nice of him. But he is an exception. Sharing, care for one’s neighbor is, quite frankly, a Western trait proceeding from our Christian heritage. Even if the businesspeople who profit from American outsourcing adapt Western traits of giving for good causes, it will be in conflict with their culture. Here you see the same problem as in Iraq: Bush jabbers about democracy, even though anyone in his right mind should have seen years ago, even before the troops got deployed, that democracy and Islam don’t mix, don’t match, and will never happen. Period. So the never-ending conflict between rich people and poor people in a Hindu culture, which relies strongly on the caste system (I’m a higher caste; I’m better than you; don’t touch me)can only get worse when the rich get richer. Also, it’s never good to hand a person, any person, money without having them work for it first. (Welfare problem.) But this is basically what the U.S. did to India: invest millions and millions to set up the cheap service centers and factories, pouring sudden money into a system that’s not ready and hasn’t worked for it. Bad idea.
I know our economy now could probably not survive without China. It’s too late for anything short of a radical change that would require of people to give up their creature comforts and start back at the equivalent of settler days. The only way to get off dependency from China is to start over from scratch, and I can’t foresee any catastrophes. But there’s no arguing we’re much too reliant on overseas for what we need.
The can’t or won’t question: The way I see it many people can’t afford the education they’d need to specialize in a good job – because their wages are in India. It’s a Teufelskreis – devil’s circle. And I have nothing against specialized workers or even nations – but the nations need to be specialized in several areas, again to secure their basis if one area should suddenly crumbled. There should be a good mix of all three economic sectors. But back to can’t or won’t: Those who won’t have no reason to because money is so readily available. The welfare system is a joke, like Ski said. Here I tie in to your response to Ski: You say illegal immigration is vital for California agriculture. Is it? All the kids in California who spend their summers lying on the beach, driving up CC debts and whatnot. All the people who live off free handouts. What if welfare were suddenly to shut the flow of money? What if people suddenly had to work again for their money? California agriculture would have more American workers than they know what to do with. and the working Mexicans can never make up for what the illegals do in terms of bankrupting hospitals, massive crime, and leeching off the ridiculous socialist system that rewards the lazy. In order to be able to get rid of Mexicans, other parts of the system have to change too. That’s the problem: Everything, and I mean everything, about the socialist system is completely rotten. It’s heading for collapse (bankruptcy) as surely as its big brother communism did.Man this got long again. Your turn. 😀
Greater Basilisk wrote:Okay, Mimi, here goes again – but I hope I can keep it shorter this time since we mostly agreed. 🙂
Ha ha! There are actually a lot of points that we agree on, especially the ones you wrote in his post.
Greater Basilisk wrote:China has made very amazing and commendable progress. but notice how they did it: They protected their nation, their inside life. They welcomed American and European money, they gladly take what’s handed them – or steal it if it isn’t offered – but without giving up any national sovereignty. I’m not condoning the narrow-minded Commies here. Far from it! I just think that China is wisely using the foolish Western corporations’ greed to its infinite advantage.
That’s definitely true. But they’re in the position they are because most of it was handed to them, because their labor is so much cheaper than ours. I think the US definitely should’ve done more though — look at the way China’s currency has been pegged to the dollar for so long, and how little has done about copyright violations.
Greater Basilisk wrote:India: I remember reading about that businessman too. It was very nice of him. But he is an exception. Sharing, care for one’s neighbor is, quite frankly, a Western trait proceeding from our Christian heritage. Even if the businesspeople who profit from American outsourcing adapt Western traits of giving for good causes, it will be in conflict with their culture.
Here I disagree. The Western influence is showing up in a lot of countries, and you can see the cultural changes that are occurring. From talking to my young Japanese colleagues from our Japan site, I can see all kinds of thinking and beliefs that the older generation didn’t have. One of my friends is black, and he’s married to a 26 year old ethnic Japanese woman who had been in Japan her whole life (they met when she happened to be visiting the US for a few months when whe was in her early 20’s). This probably would’ve been unthinkable for the previous generation. My boyfriend’s family is another good example. His parents and relatives are Sri Lankan, but they’re very Westernized and their attitude towards charity is just the same as charitable people in the US. His uncle is actually the bishop of the capital, and his life is dedicated to charity and helping people. And before Western influence was present, the culture there was essentially like India’s since that’s where Sri Lankans came from in the first place. Granted, his family and relatives aren’t typical of the bulk of the population, but I think it shows that as more people absorb Western values the culture will change.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Here you see the same problem as in Iraq: Bush jabbers about democracy, even though anyone in his right mind should have seen years ago, even before the troops got deployed, that democracy and Islam don’t mix, don’t match, and will never happen. Period.
I couldn’t agree more. Its unbelievable to me how poorly thought out this whole endeavor was.
Greater Basilisk wrote:So the never-ending conflict between rich people and poor people in a Hindu culture, which relies strongly on the caste system (I’m a higher caste; I’m better than you; don’t touch me)can only get worse when the rich get richer.
Again, I think this will change…but it’ll probably take a long time.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Also, it’s never good to hand a person, any person, money without having them work for it first. (Welfare problem.) But this is basically what the U.S. did to India: invest millions and millions to set up the cheap service centers and factories, pouring sudden money into a system that’s not ready and hasn’t worked for it. Bad idea.
Well, I don’t think it was intended as welfare…it was the US companies wanting to maximize their profits, and the Indians had a motivated population that was ready to take advantage of that fact. While I agree that this has introduced some problems, I think they’re greatly outweighed by the benefits and will be resolved over time.
Greater Basilisk wrote:I know our economy now could probably not survive without China. It’s too late for anything short of a radical change that would require of people to give up their creature comforts and start back at the equivalent of settler days. The only way to get off dependency from China is to start over from scratch, and I can’t foresee any catastrophes. But there’s no arguing we’re much too reliant on overseas for what we need.
I totally agree. This is where the US needs a culture change — people need to start saving, as all the financial planners and economists keep saying. Then that would bring about the added benefit of reducing the trade deficit and our reliance on China. More people here need to adopt Japanese/Chinese values on the savings issue.
Greater Basilisk wrote:The can’t or won’t question: The way I see it many people can’t afford the education they’d need to specialize in a good job – because their wages are in India.
That might be true for a few people, but I don’t think that’s true for most. Chinese and Vietnamese immigrants, for one, typically come here with nothing, they don’t even speak the language, have to work at jobs that are even less then minimum wage, and yet some of them manage to get a college education and become successful professionals. And for the ones that don’t — well, they concentrate on their children’s educations and their kids all grow up to be professionals. This was exactly the case with my family. So that makes me think: what’s different between immigrants like my parents and the numerous people who have been in the US for many generations, and are still working at minimum wage jobs? Its a well known fact that, as a group, there is a big disparity between blacks and Asians in terms of wealth and education. Why is that? I think blacks are just as intelligent as Asians, and they have the added advantage of not being immigrants. So I think this is a good example of the fact that with a lot of people, its not “can’t” but “won’t”.
Greater Basilisk wrote:It’s a Teufelskreis – devil’s circle. And I have nothing against specialized workers or even nations – but the nations need to be specialized in several areas, again to secure their basis if one area should suddenly crumbled. There should be a good mix of all three economic sectors.
I agree in general, though our thinking is probably different on the specifics. But I definitely wouldn’t want my country’s economy to be based on coffee! 🙂
Greater Basilisk wrote:But back to can’t or won’t: Those who won’t have no reason to because money is so readily available. The welfare system is a joke, like Ski said.
I totally agree. But you would think that bettering their own lives and that of their children should be reason enough.
Greater Basilisk wrote:Here I tie in to your response to Ski: You say illegal immigration is vital for California agriculture. Is it?
Actually that’s not quite what I said — what I meant is that given the current situation, it would have a significant negative impact if we didn’t have illegal immigration…more in my next comment…
Greater Basilisk wrote:All the kids in California who spend their summers lying on the beach, driving up CC debts and whatnot. All the people who live off free handouts. What if welfare were suddenly to shut the flow of money? What if people suddenly had to work again for their money? California agriculture would have more American workers than they know what to do with.
That’s very true, and I agree. But the problem is, with the current system there’s nothing that will force these people to work in the fields. And realistically, a lot of them might not be able to take it, because its extremely grueling work. I know if I had to do that work I probably wouldn’t last a day.
Greater Basilisk wrote:and the working Mexicans can never make up for what the illegals do in terms of bankrupting hospitals, massive crime, and leeching off the ridiculous socialist system that rewards the lazy. In order to be able to get rid of Mexicans, other parts of the system have to change too. That’s the problem: Everything, and I mean everything, about the socialist system is completely rotten. It’s heading for collapse (bankruptcy) as surely as its big brother communism did.
I couldn’t agree with you more. The thing is, this has been going on for so long that the problem has become entrenched and massive, and change is going to be very difficult. I mean, we’re talking about 10 million people and all of the relevant parts of the economy that would be affected…
Greater Basilisk wrote:Man this got long again. Your turn. 😀
😆 You’re not kidding! But this is so much fun. 😀
I think that you guys have nailed the main problem with almost all the issues and difficulties this country has, and it boils down to change. In order to fix any one of a thousand small things you have to completely redo the system, and fix all of them, because they feed eachother.
And unfortunately before we can put in a new system, we have to get rid of this one, and of course those in power don’t want to, they like things just the way they are.
So it has to get bad enough that the whole thing comes apart before we can really fix it.
Though I think we need to try and do what we can within the system as it is. But there’s no way the current government, or even the new government in two year’s time, is going to fix welfare, tax law, trade law, or anything else that might cut into their fat share of the pie.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
