If this is in fact China's century, how do we play it?

[mdmc]

I know how it will most likely go down; international corporations will continue to make deals that benefit the investor class, improve opportunities to earn income in the third world, and chip away at the prosperity of the first world.

The trick, it would seem, for the American working class, would be to fight like hell to keep our first world status and not allow our working and working poor to fall to the levels found in second world countries. Perhaps we can also do something about the third world like conditions that you can find in most states of our Union.

I think we need to partner up with India, Korea, and Japan and hope for the best.
Protect our economy under national security exemptions to trade deals.
And start building a new old economy while competing in the new economy. And soon to be new, new economy.
Of course universal health care and the absence of a corrupt corporate government would also help, but I guess this really aint gonna be our century.

[Jamastiene]

1. Learn Chinese.

They already own our asses, lock, stock and barrel.

[grahamhgreen]

2. Baby, it is they who will be playing us. Tarrifs, trade barriers, protectionism, end wars.

[galileoreloaded]

3. On our knees????? n/t

[HeresyLives]

4. Globalize.

Like everyone else is doing.

I know that's hard for most Americans to accept, but it's also the only option.

[grahamhgreen]

6. Translation: bend over

Soon they will be siezing assets of transnationals until they crush them.

[HeresyLives]

7. No, globalize.

Only an American would see that as a problem.

[grahamhgreen]

8. We already did that, that's why we have no jobs.

[HeresyLives]

9. You aren't even CLOSE to globalizing.

And you have the same problem with jobs the rest of the world does. The Industrial Age is over...move on.

[grahamhgreen]

10. Oh right, all of our daughters are not prostituting themselves to support the family yet.

[HeresyLives]

11. Which has what to do with this discussion??

[grahamhgreen]

24. The result of globalization. No jobs.

[HeresyLives]

27. The result of globalization is a massive amount of new jobs.

Kindly don't let yourself fall into the Luddite trap. They thot industrialization would be the end of jobs, but instead it produced more jobs than the world had ever seen before.

[bob4460]

38. Ok who wants the shit service sector and fast food jobs???

We are the world's economic engine and until we STOP buying all the foreign msde garbage, we will continue to compete with third world salaries and benifits!!!

[HeresyLives]

40. Nobody, so why do you think we would have that?

Doctors are in the service economy, and lawyers...and a whole host of other people. How did MacDonalds get into this?

And you've never heard of robots and space and holography and biomeds and thousands of other things??

[FreakinDJ]

93. Great - another FREE TRADE Liar

Since you wish to pretend to be an expert here on the subject of Globalization / Free Trade, do us 1 favor

Name 1 country that has a TRADE DEFICIT Higher then the USA in terms of % of GDP or $Dollar amount

Thanks for playing - I'm sure you already know the answer to that question.

Were as Globalization "Looks" good in theory, the application of those UnFair Trade Policies on the behest of a select few MultiNational Corporations, over the wellbeing of the Citizenry of the USA, has reaped a devastation the likes of which Osama Bin Luadin couldn't have fathomed in his wildest dreams.

[Hannah Bell]

100. uh, no. everyone had jobs prior to industrialization, unless you're suggesting

people lived in paradise, without working, prior to the industrial revolution.

the IR just produced different *kinds* of jobs under *different economic arrangements.*

it also produced the phenomenon of mass unemployment as well. something new.

[FreakinDJ]

101. Hannah - he is not from the United States

he is from Canada where they are not yet finished selling off their natural resources

That is why he is here espousing the "Wonders of Free Trade / Globalization"

And you will probably be one of them.

Canada will do just fine, we are moving to the Knowledge Economy.

Apparently you aren't interested.

Hey, if you want to play Rome...be my guest.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7382522&mesg_id=7383125

[Hannah Bell]

104. thanks for the heads up. but canada is on the same road as we are.

he's just a winger.

[Jamastiene]

18. At this point, that might be the better option.

Geez, I can't believe they have free health care in England. I never knew that before. :wow:

[HeresyLives]

19. All 'advanced western nations' have free health care.

The US is the only hold-out. No one knows why.

[HughBeaumont]

118. No one knows why?

Because with universal health care, you wouldn't be a tethered slave to a low-paying job, and in turn, the Corptocracy.

Because with universal health care, a person with nothing would have more than a vaguely impossible chance of getting somewhere in life.

Because with universal health care, entrepreneurship would flourish.

Because with universal health care, billions of dollars wouldn't be flowing into the pockets of Big Insurance/Big Pharma, both of whom thrive on forced speculation and leave you holding the bag when you actually need help.

Because with universal health care, people would actually have a slight semblance of something called "peace of mind".

And in the U.S., all of the reasons listed above is why Universal Health Care will never pass in this country: because the Corptocracy doesn't and never will WANT it that way.

[Odin2005]

5. I for one welcome our new Chinese overlords!

:sarcasm:

[keep_it_real]

12. The GDP of China is 4 trillion and change the U.S. is 21 trillion give or take

China is just catching up to beat the GDP of Japan. China is doing a lot and fast but China has a ways to go before the century is theirs. Beware the hype and the hype is to give peeps the perception that China is all that but the GDP speaks.

[HeresyLives]

14. Again, that's irrelevant.

[Juche]

21. The US is 14 trillion

China's economy is 4 trillion in USD, but in PPP it is close to 8 trillion.

The Chinese economy doubles every 7-9 years. The US economy doubles every 25 years. They will overtake us in USD around 2025.

By 2050 the economy of China will be bigger than the US & Western Europe combined (70 trillion vs about 60 trillion). Plus places like Indonesia and Mexico will have bigger economies than Germany or France. Vietnam's economy will be bigger than Canada's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRIC#BRIC_in_future

That'll be an interesting world. Hopefully those nations undergo human rights and civil rights reforms by then, because a world where places like Vietnam or China are in charge could suck.

[dysfunctional press]

25. the numbers will be very different in another 15-20 years...

and the trends aren't good for us.

[HeresyLives]

28. Yes, China has shot ahead in just 20 short years.

The numbers will change very rapidly from here on out.

[JI7]

13. accept it

[HeresyLives]

15. Agreed. The world moves on.

[mdmc]

16. How could America globalize more?

I was definetly thinking along some lines of a planned and protected economy, which may be part of the over concept you call "globalize".

So how can we in America globalize more?

[HeresyLives]

17. Free trade, globally.

With the EU, with ASEAN....with BRIC generally. Global free trade.

'Planned and protected' economies don't exist anymore.

Well....unless you are N Korea, and we all know how well they are doing.

[JI7]

20. yes, and rights of workers would need to be organized globally also

just like environmental laws and many other issues.

[HeresyLives]

22. Yes, everything has to become global.

Most of our problems are global already. Our solutions should be as well.

[Cogito ergo doleo]

31. And what happens when all of a sudden the owner of a company

in China or India suddenly gets this idea that if he paid his workers a higher salary, they might be able to afford the products or services his company sells. If that idea caught on, it could really throw things back in the rudder, huh! So we'll need some good wage regulations, too-- and none of this prosperity or flourishing shining society on a golden hill crap-- it's just so 20th Century.

[HeresyLives]

32. Is that likely to happen? No.

The employees of one company are not the only people in the marketplace.

There are in fact 6 billion possible consumers of any given product.

[Cogito ergo doleo]

116. You never know-- anything can happen unexpectedly. It happened

here, and it caught on so well that we had a healthy middle class for a few decades. Being forced to a standard of mediocrity will not benefit humanity in the least.

An unemployed person is not a consumer, and countries with low wage earners cannot afford to drive economies. When China and India produce T.V.s, the workers are not paid enough to buy them. If China and India are to be groomed to pick up the slack of the born and raised and well-indoctrinated U.S. middle class consumer, who can no longer afford to drive the world economy, they need to make the kind of money that Americans were making when they did drive it(not so long ago).

Free trade is not fair trade, and it's impossible to compete under these conditions. There may be more jobs than anyone can possibly imagine down the road, but a $2. a day wage just isn't going to cut it when you have a monthly $1,000 house payment-- and that's the people's bottom line.

[Juche]

23. How is China a free market

They manipulate their currency to undervalue it. They violate WTO standards. They suppress labor (less so recently). I believe their government subsidizes various industries.

Now they have cornered the market on rare earth elements. They are planning to restrict exports to force manufacturers of alternative energy and consumer electronics to set up shop in China.

You are asking the US to unilaterally disarm in a global economy.

[HeresyLives]

30. The US is already disarmed in a global economy.

China has advanced hugely in just 20 short years. They will continue to do so.

Progress is not exclusively American.

[Juche]

33. I'm not sure what you mean

My point was that you are asking the US to embrace free trade. However I'm saying that is not what China has done. China is violating WTO policies, it is manipulating its currency, it is cornering the market on raw materials, it is suppressing labor, it is subsidizing its industries.

Asking us to have a 'free market' while China is doing all that means we will keep losing jobs.

Your statement that progress is not 'exclusively American' was kindof insulting though. I know it isn't exclusively American. I pointed out earlier how China's economy will be bigger than the US & western europe combined by 2050. However they do not engage in 'free trade'.

[HeresyLives]

35. I'm not asking the US to do anything.

The US has no choice, it either globalizes or it dies.

We are going thru a change-over period, and we'll have chaotic conditions for awhile as a result.

The US also violates WTO policies...and all other policies and treaties. It all gets worked out by the bodies responsible for various things.

If you can't outsmart China by coming up with new ideas and jobs, is that China's fault?

[JVS]

49. Thomas Friedman, is that you?

Juche raises the point that the China does not follow globalist policies, they practice protectionism.

[HeresyLives]

51. Definitely not.

Friedman is fine when he talks about tech. He's lost in space when it comes to politics.

[malletgirl02]

115. You are right

Also, according to the Paul Krugman article I read yesterday, China also practices mercantilism.

[Juche]

55. Define globalize

The point is, expecting us to globalize (which is usually synonymous with free trade) in a world where countries like China engage in endless manipulations and subsidies is not going to work. We are giving up our own ability to manipulate the market but letting China do it freely. If China wants to manipulate its currency or corner the rare earth metal market, then you shouldn't expect the US to engage in 'free trade' since we will be at a disadvantage.

The US actually has a very productive workforce. Our tertiary educational system is the best on earth.

[HeresyLives]

60. One world, one race...human. No borders.

And stop fussing about current local stuff.

Earth is a planet. Learn to live with it.

And no, you aren't the 'best on earth'.

Get over 'American Exceptionalism'.

[Juche]

85. Do you even read what I say?

It feels like you don't, its like you just put your own interpretations on what you want to believe I'm saying, then respond to them. So you are basically debating a strawman you have created in a mirror rather than me. I'm wasting my time trying to have a rational discussion.

The US does have the best tertiary educational system on earth. Not forever, but right now we have a great tertiary educational system. As a result we can hold our own when it comes to a globalized workforce since our workforce is well trained and skilled. You said the US has to keep up with China to compete. I said we have a great educational system, and our workforce is decent. I don't know how you got American exceptionalism out of that.

However all this stuff about globalization and meritocracy is nice and dandy until you consider that a China with a manipulated currency and a monopoly on raw materials that go into manufacturing is not going to create opportunities for free trade.

[JVS]

86. Nope, just spout globalist dogma.

[mdmc]

50. I thought all European countries had protected economies

in the sense that a certain amount of manufacturing a vital security related goods needed to be produced in country.

And how would global free trade be better then an interconnection of regional economies? same thing?

[HeresyLives]

52. Ever heard of the EU???

Or the Schengen Visa???

We currently have the EU, NAFTA, ASEAN and so on. Eventually they'll all connect and become one, and we'll have global free trade.

Patience, Grasshopper.

[FreakinDJ]

94. Yes we know only too well UK is being destroyed under Free Trade

[JVS]

53. I've seen people here claim that the EU is all about free trade, but they're mistaken.

The EU is all about free trade within the borders of its member states . Which means that it's essentially a customs union. If they truly practiced global free trade, neighboring countries would not be as eager to join.

[HeresyLives]

57. The EU moved past a customs union long time ago.

NAFTA isn't a global free trade unit either, but obviously it exists.

Here's a thot...link NAFTA to the EU...and then to ASEAN...and a few other things, and THEN you'll have global free trade.

[JVS]

59. Why do you assume that the function of these unions is to join with others?

That's like assuming that Nato and the Warsaw Pact were intended to join each other. It is possible that these unions exist in order to provide the different blocs with enough clout to impose trade policies on other blocs to their own favor.

Also, what's with you attitude?

[HeresyLives]

61. I don't. It's their choice. Do or die.

My 'attitude' is global. Sorry it doesn't mesh with your local concerns.

Kinda the point of this whole thread, ya know?

[grahamhgreen]

26. Accept it = no jobs.

[HeresyLives]

29. More jobs than you ever dreamed possible.

[Hardrada]

34. This strikes me as naive

or very cynical.

[HeresyLives]

36. Ned Ludd thot so too.

Ned Ludd was very short-sighted tho.

[Hannah Bell]

102. you don't know much about the luddites, or about "jobs".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7382522&mesg_id=7383544

[FreakinDJ]

95. Actually the BIGGEST LIE we ever dreamed possible

You still think Reaganomics were a "Good Thing" for the country

Funny how the "Trade Imbalance" is in direct corrilation to to declining middle class buying power

[leftstreet]

37. International Labor organizing?

:shrug:

[HeresyLives]

41. Well it was once only local. And then they got past that.

and became state wide, and then nation wide. Soon it will have to be planet wide.

[Goldstein1984]

39. The problem is the unlimited growth myth...

The United States has 5% of the world's population, we consume 25% of it petroleum, we produce 25% of its waste.

If the rest of the planet plans to develop and live like the U.S. population, then either we need five more planets worth of resources, or the entire planet, including the U.S. population, has to settle on a standard of living that consumes about 20% of what U.S. residents currently consume.

So, with globalization, as the standard of living in the Third World improves, the standard of living in the developed world will have to deteriorate for the entire human population to live within the limits of available resources. That, or efficiency is going to have to increase by 500%.

The planet can't handle 6.6 billion people living the way we do in the U.S.

The deterioration we're seeing now is a result of free trade policies (NAFTA/CAFTA/GATT) that mixed the U.S. economy, where the Middle Class earns a livable wage, to the economies of developing nations, where there is no Middle Class.

The question is: Will globalization result in a global Middle Class? Or will globalization result in the peasantification of the American Middle Class, which will join the peasant class of the developing world?

[HeresyLives]

42. We have unlimited growth available.

But what makes you think everyone wants to live like Americans??

And what makes you think that for others to get ahead, Americans have to go downhill??

You mean you depend on everyone else being poor so that you can be rich?

Do you see how that idea is unsustainable?

Stop blaming NAFTA and all yer other boogeymen, that's just an excuse.

Every country has a middle class, not just you.

[Goldstein1984]

43. You'll need to do better than that list of platitudes

I gave the reasons: human population and finite resources.

Unlimited growth isn't possible without unlimited resources and space, neither of which is unlimited on a finite planet.

[HeresyLives]

44. Dismissing reality won't actually make it vanish, sorry.

Thomas Malthus was proven wrong long time ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_catastrophe

We don't HAVE limited resources and space...never did in fact.

[Goldstein1984]

45. Sorry. You and I obviously live on different planets

The planet I live on has a relatively stable mass and geometry.

The last word is yours if you want it.

[HeresyLives]

46. True. I live on Earth.

You apparently live on Ideology.

Everyone on Earth could easily fit into Texas, with plenty of room left over...assuming they wanted to.

The planet is a big place, and 70% water at that.

And the human mind is infinite...as long as you stop playing 'victim'.

[wuushew]

63. Are you oblivious to much of human history?

The world is littered with failed or fallen civilizations that were toppled by either resource depletion or some type of ruinous economic entropy. Man's so called material shrewdness didn't seem to stop the extinction of numerous species and environs as we spread across this globe.

I am sorry but efficiency gains face very real constraints in the form of the laws of chemistry and physics. Will we ever run out of oil? If efficiency is never ending then my car should get 1,000 miles per gallon eventually. Western nations are spoiled because for several centuries our energy sources have been ever more useful and energy dense. The industrialized world will soon face its fist era of inferior substitutes.

Maybe the world looks pretty spacious and wet from up there in Canada but you are going to be up shit creek when your energy exports tail off. No miracle of globalization is going to save your standard of living.

[JVS]

66. Now now, if they just put on Thomas Friedman's Golden Straightjacket™ it'll all be good.

They can do that or die. Any attempt to create policy is futile.

[HeresyLives]

67. LOL the world is littered by fallen civilizations, indeed.

And you will probably be one of them.

Canada will do just fine, we are moving to the Knowledge Economy.

Apparently you aren't interested.

Hey, if you want to play Rome...be my guest.

[JVS]

69. Why would anyone hire Canadians in a knowledge economy? The Chinese are just as smart and work...

for less pay. Go globalize some more and solve that problem.

[HeresyLives]

70. Gosh, I dunno. Knowledge maybe?

Advanced research? Different fields? Global competition instead of national chest-beating?

Don't lower yourself to personal and nationalist attacks, kay?

Brilliant qualified people exist all over the earth.

[JVS]

84. There are plenty of brilliant and qualified people in China who work for less than you.

[FreakinDJ]

97. WARNING - Non US Citizen Bull Shirt Artist

Try visiting a web forum that dels with Canadian Trade policy.

Your comments would be more welcomed there

[Hannah Bell]

106. canada has no knowledge the chinese don't, nor superior knowledge production

process. & chinese work cheaper, even its researchers & inventors.

knowledge economy doesn't employ most of the workforce anywhere anyway.

its bullshit, guess you're too young to remember the last time that meme blew threw.

lots of unemployed computer guys do, though.

[cornermouse]

111. Let's see, how did this start?

When you start hearing that the Chinese, Indians, or (fill in the blank) are better educated and smarter than Canadians? Watch out because they're coming after you and your job.

When they tell you that Canadians are spoiled, lazy, and too comfortable as compared to the rest of the world? They're planning on moving your job somewhere else.

When they tell you that the products you're producing are inferior to the rest of the world? Say bye-bye to your job because it's leaving you behind.

[FreakinDJ]

96. That explains every thing - YOU are NOT in the United States

Nor are you a U.S. Citisen

Canada will do just fine, we are moving to the Knowledge Economy.

So you don't care how much Free Trade Destroys our country as long as you can import some poorly made cheap junk across our borders.

[Hannah Bell]

107. no, canada's being moved toward the same right wing low-wage regime as us.

check canada's share of world patents, for example. knowledge economy. sure. it's an extractive economy with a couple of finance centers.

but you're apparently buying the bullshit out of the fraser institute & its sisters.

[FreakinDJ]

109. Canada is importing labor with very liberal immigration policies

There are parts of Canada nobody wants to live in and those territories are currently the destination of choice for Asian 3rd World Citizens. My Brother-in-Law from the Philippines and his family moved there just last year. The prospects of them being able to immigrate to the US were hopeless.

It might be cold and desolate but at least they have jobs there.

Quite the cultural shock for them. His wife was pretty high up in the Philippine Government's Dept. of Commerce, and he had a small cattle ranching operation. Upper class by Philippine standards. Now he is setting tile and she is a cashier at a department store. Still they see it as better prospects for the future of their 2 sons

[Hannah Bell]

110. i.e. canada is on the same road we are.

[girl gone mad]

117. China and India will clean Canada's clock in the "knowledge economy".

The combination of billions of people willing to work cheap, heavy investment in education and infrastructure and growing manufacturing sectors makes Chindia a much more attractive region than Canada to large employers.

Canada is not competitive against these emerging markets. Your cost of living is too high, your climate is unappealing and your educational system and infrastructure are mediocre, for the most part. So-called knowledge jobs follow manufacturing. Demand for doctors and lawyers will shift to where the action is. Chindian lawyers and doctors work for a fraction of the salary trained N. Americans demand.

The trend is not your friend. Eventually China will be able cut you out of the commodities picture, too. If they continue accumulating resources at the pace they are on now, it won't be very much longer.

[HughBeaumont]

119. "stop playing victim"?

Someone PLEASE get these Free-trader, "bootstrapper" lapdogs OUT of the big tent.

You sound just like this guy and your sad-ass theories are bullshit. Proof positive that your theories are inaccurate when applied to reality is the fact that http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/86">our wages haven't risen in the face of inflation and productivity in thirty years and there's been http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/94">very little meaningful job creation in the U.S. for a decade, which not by happenstance coincides with the ripple effect of the free-trade agreements that laissez-failures on both sides of the Money Party drew up for us some 15 years ago. What's hilarious is that people like you, with your sucktastic talking points at the ready, don't even see that job offshoring is a very painful and distressing problem for http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/92">degreed individuals who spent thousands upon thousands of dollars to get trained at their professions and find that it wasn't the ticket to the secure future they were told it was. Job offshoring does NOT help the American worker, and you'd do well to think that if this economy were to tumble, so will the rest of the world that's tethered to it.

It also sounds so easy from someone that comes from a country that doesn't have a piss-poor social safety net like the U.S. does.

Incidentally, it's funny how the term "Suck It Up" only applies to the hoi polloi. The rich don't have to deal with such nonsense.

[Hannah Bell]

103. in fact, the middle class, defined as the percent of the population

within a standard deviation of median income, has shrunk since the mid-70s.

& yes, under a capitalist regime, one set of competing workers "getting ahead" typically = another losing ground.

[Goldstein1984]

47. A House of Cards

The U.S. economy is a house of cards built on consumption and businesses that make money without producing anything. The U.S. deficit is financed with the U.S. debt. We've become a debtor nation.

I'm fortunate to be able to spend a lot of time with my grandchildren, and I plan to teach them that the debt they've been handed isn't their moral responsibility to repay.

I'm also fortunate enough to have worked myself into the 90th percentile income bracket, and we've reduced all spending to absolute minimum to maximize the amount we set aside and take with us when we retire.

I don't believe the wealthy are capable of anything more than a pragmatic patriotism. Once they can't squeeze anymore out of this economy, they'll move on like locusts.

[HeresyLives]

48. 'Hate the rich' is a self-defeating belief.

Absolves YOU of all responsibility, but doesn't solve any problems.

[Goldstein1984]

56. I don't have the rich anymore than I hate the locusts

hating the rich is like hating scorpions because they sting, or hating rattlesnakes because they bite, or hating ticks because they suck blood...

I don't hate the rich, I am rich. But I didn't get this way by voodoo economics, I did it by earning two advanced degrees in science and engineering, managing my career, buying a small house when everyone else was buying big houses, and spending money like I make 1/4 what I make. I could retire today if I wanted to pay Uncle Sam the 10% penalty.

It isn't me I'm worried about.

[HeresyLives]

58. Political boogeymen are a waste of time.

Congrats...you're rich. So am I.

Now move on.

[FreakinDJ]

98. Canada is Not the United States

You are from Canada

You stand to gain greatly from the current Trade Imbalance remaining intact

[Greyhound]

73. Sounds nice, but I doubt you are rich.

Could you write a check for $500K that would clear without selling or encumbering assets?

[HeresyLives]

75. Doubt anything you like.

It won't change world history, I'm afraid, for you to concern yourself with me.

Focus on your country and it's future...that's far more important to you than my bank account. :rofl:

[Greyhound]

88. In the first place, I wasn't even talking to you. And secondly, I believe the

discussion related to the topic of the merits of "hate the rich". Now, your obnoxious response to your misinterpretation of what was said might make you a target since your on-line demeanor indicates you may well be pretty obnoxious IRL, but you're still irrelevant.

Oh, and don't get too smug up there, if we go down, we're definitely taking you with us.

[Goldstein1984]

80. I could write more than one, but

I would have to pull most of it form 401(k) and IRA accounts. So, depending on your definition of encumbered, I could not write the checks today. In may of 2011, I can start writing those check anytime. Less that 3% of our assets are tied up in real estate.

I was very fortunate that our Edward Jones agent contacted us in January of 2008 and recommended moving all of our IRA funds out of stocks. While others lost 50% of their retirement in 2008/2009, we gained 2% in safer investments.

We have always been cautious. When we moved from Fairbanks to Anchorage, we were expected to buy an $800,000 home, but we purchased a simple $150K home. We've always kept our mortgage payment at less that 15% of our post-tax income. When I worked in Nebraska, the same scenario.

We didn't participate in either the dotcom or the real estate bubbles. But what really put us over the top was Williams Energy in 2002. Their stock dropped from $25/share to $0.78/share when they were caught doing some creative accounting. I bought in big when it was on its way up at $0.91/share, and two years later I sold it when it was back at $25/share.

We have been fortunate, but we have also been frugal.

We plan to keep a base of resident in Alaska where there is no state income tax and where one of my pensions pays an additional 10%. But we plan to live somewhere to be decided in Latin America, closer to sun and scuba diving.

[Greyhound]

87. OK, you're very comfortable, but not rich, at least not in the sense of being

a mover-shaker. Good for you, I was there too, but you are not "the rich".

Edward-Jones is a dead giveaway. Real assets might be a consideration.

[Goldstein1984]

89. I have no desire to be among the ugly rich

I work directly for the corporate president, and I feel more like an insurgent than an employee. I spend most of my time not saying what I'm thinking. Because my wife and I choose to live a modest lifestyle, we are (thankfully) excluded from the social networking. I do what is probably the only job in corporate America that I could do and remain sane--environmental health and safety.

My "I am rich" comment was originally meant as sarcasm because I was trying to remember what political candidate defined rich as anyone making more than something round $85K, which I was making at the time and I hardly felt rich.

The truth is, we have a son who has been hit very hard by the recession, and about a quarter of my take-home pay goes to help him out, which I am happy to be able to do.

In spite of being statistically better off than 90% of Americans, we are, like everyone else, one major illness or job loss away from disaster.

[Greyhound]

90. He's very lucky that you can do that for him, and are willing to do so.

(I've been shocked several times recently by people that have the means to help their kids, but refuse out of some bizarre, Calvinistic(?) notion that they have to suffer for their own good).

I can only say that when I speak of "the rich", I'm speaking of, and usually use the term, the parasites. those that prosper through the looting and misery of others, and for whom there is no such thing as enough. People that produce nothing but extract obscene compensation for nothing other than being in George Carlin's "club".

Is your company public? I only ask because, these days, that seems to be the dividing line. I was taught about business by three old farts that owned their companies outright and would never go public because they would lose control over their operations, a lesson well learned by me even though I finally fell to outright fraud committed by people with enough clout to stop prosecution.

We're living in interesting times, unfortunately, and the "fun" hasn't even begun yet.

[Goldstein1984]

91. I work for one of the more successful Alaska Native Regional

Corporations.

The worst company I ever worked for, which is why I left three months after they bought the refinery were I worked, was Flint Hills Resources, which is a subsidiary of the infamous Koch Enterprises--I privately held company. The second worst company was VeraSun Energy, an publicly traded ethanol manufacturer that was badly managed and filed bankruptcy a week after I left to take a job back in Alaska. I was only with the company for 9 months, and I knew I was leaving after about four months.

The truly rich, in my view, is that top 2% that has as much wealth as the bottom 95%. They are the Dick Cheneys, and Charles Kochs of the nation. I also include the overcompensated CEOs of major corporations--the big bonus crowd. The people to whom our elected representatives prostitute themselves.

We don't mind helping our son. His wife is carrying our fourth grandchild.

I agree with you that the "fun" has barely started. I'm not an economist, and I'm not a political scientist, but the world has a house-of-cards feel to it. I don't believe anything the government or industry say about the economy because they have too many reasons to simply want to boost consumer confidence. I don't believe what I'm told about terrorism and "vital national interest" because the government has too many reasons to want me to be afraid. I think thinks are going to get worse, and it will probably just be that way one morning when the nation wakes up.

[Hannah Bell]

108. two falsehoods in such a short post.

[HeresyLives]

54. Look folks, there are 6 billion people on this planet.

There are only 300,000 Americans.

And obviously all your military hardware can't change that.

Time to learn to play nice in the sandbox, before you get voted out of it.

During the last 8 years, when you were out of the loop...the world has changed immeasurably. Complaining won't help. Catch up.

[Goldstein1984]

62. First of all, there are 300,000,000 Americans

not 300,000.

And second, and unfortunately, all of our military hardware is quite capable of changing that.

Nobody is going to vote the U.S. out of the sandbox. And if they did, the best thing that could happen to the U.S. would be to turn inward, ignore the rest of the world, and focus on our out issues. So, I'd love to see us voted out. Do us a favor. When U.S. consumers stop consuming foreign goods, which I would love to see them do, the world economy collapses.

Finally, for someone saying we've been "out of the loop" for eight years, you and your "don't hate the rich" and "unlimited growth" bullshit sound just like the Right Wing ilk who were out of the loop.

There were plenty of us paying attention.

[HeresyLives]

65. Typos don't change reality either. Sorry.

No, your hardware is irrelevant. Others have the same hardware or better.

And you've been voted out of the sandbox during the last 8 years when you were out of the loop.

By all means, turn inward, ignore the world...be North Korea.

Consider yourselves such rulers of the earth that we can't get along without you.

Write when you get work, okay?

[Goldstein1984]

71. You just like to read your own words, don't you?

Voted us out?

Hardware irrelevant?

As good or better?

You appear to be from other than here. If you haven't noticed, your opinions are irrelevant.

[HeresyLives]

72. Not especially, and personal attacks won't help America.

But you go on believing in American Exceptionalism ya hear? It's what Rome did.

[Goldstein1984]

74. I don't believe in American Exceptionalism

And I get all the tired parallels about empire. I write some of them myself.

Before you presume to lecture me, read my posts. Your criticisms of American foreign policy are amateur, mild and vague compared to mine. You need to do a little more than make vague statements to get me to waste anymore of my time with you.

Now, unless you're getting ready to kick us out of the sandbox anytime soon, I have more interesting threads to tend to.

[HeresyLives]

76. That's good because it doesn't exist.

But if you don't want to discuss globalization and it's ramifications, why are you on this thread to begin with?

[Goldstein1984]

81. Actually, American Exeptionalism does exist...

as our at-will violations of International Law and our predator drones prove. Whether i should exist is the question, and, of course, the answer to that is that it should not.

My original post was quite clearly about the limits of globalization in light of limited resources, and what I believed the impact of globalization and limited resources will be on standard of living.

Since you and I disagree on the limits imposed by environment and energy, that discussion isn't fruitful.

As far as how the U.S. conducts its international business, my concern is that of a citizen, and that of a grandfather of four. I hardly base it on whether or not the U.S. is popular on the playground (in or out of the sandbox) in the eyes of those without a vote in the matter.

[Lasher]

77. There are almost 7 trillion people on this planet, not 6 billion.

There are 300 million Americans, not 300 thousand. There is one tenth as many Canadians. Your nominal GDP is $1.499 trillion. Ours is is $14.441 trillion but we'll try to catch up as you say.

[HeresyLives]

79. Sorry, only 6 billion. No trillions.

But clutch that flag to your chest, and recite the pledge. I'm sure it will help. :rofl:

[Lasher]

83. Sorry, closer to 7 billion

6,794,000,000 rounded off is 7,000,000,000. But like you just said, typos are irrelevant like everything else you don't like. And you broached the subject of relative population size. I suppose such a measure is irrelevant when your own country is included in such a comparison.

:rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. We organize lynch mobs and start beating up Chinese Americans.

Irishland isn't a major world superpower anymore, thanks to Grandpa. And with a little elbow grease and a lot of xenophobia, we can make the 21st safe for Americans once again from the Chinese too.

[HeresyLives]

68. LOL Thanx for the laugh.

I needed it. :)

[HeresyLives]

78. Kay, I'm off to bed. Enjoyed this. Many thanx everybody.

[mdmc]

113. thanks for the info and replies

peace

[Political Heretic]

82. I for one welcome our new Chinese overlords.

[Hannah Bell]

92. I think it's a mistake to believe the conflict is between nations. It's my opinion it's

between groups of international capitalists, who play the citizens & workers of various countries off against each other using nationalism to rev people up. They get us to fight each other for their own purposes.

about half of China's exports aren't chinese; they belong to foreign corps exporting from china into their home markets.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

99. Damn, that post is some food to digest.

too early for me, back to bed, but well done!

[Orsino]

105. Tragically, pretending with our last breath that we still rule the world.

Just like every other empire did.

I would say that had we not willingly put on these blinkers, it wouldn't be China's century For better or worse, it would still be "ours."

[rucky]

112. Renewables is the key global issue to push.

While the rest of the world is putzing around with global wars over limited resources, the push for renewable energy will set us free from much of the current and potential global oppression. The more energy independent nations are, the less dependent they are on other nations.

China has every incentive in the world to push for renewables, even though they're currently one of the biggest environmental offenders. I really don't care at this point which nation will lead in energy technology - it just needs to get done. I just hope they have the foresight to see it's urgent importance.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

114. Elect Judy Chu in 2016, yes Chu can. =))

[Hannah Bell]

120. :>)