Socialism or Globalization?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by loosecannon, Jan 2, 2011.

  1. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    2010 seems to be the year that Socialism, or rather social democracy's entitlement programs proved economically untenable.

    So obvious is that point that it needs little explanation. Google "PIIGS" and "liabilities shortfall" if you aren't up to speed yet.

    But is this common wisdom and apparent intuitive point of fact actually a half truth? Or something less?

    The dominant economic model that developed nations with robust social programs rely on says that the costs of tomorrow's social programs will be born by a continually expanding economy and more specifically a continually expanding workforce.

    What that model ignores is that the dominant economic paradigm of our time is Globalization, a force that will forcefully promote the migration of industry to the location of whatever workforce is least burdened by overhead like existing pension plans and esp the burden of existing social entitlement programs.

    In fact the failure of state economies that feature robust entitlements is occurring exactly while industry is migrating en masse toward the workforces of the undeveloped world.

    These are two tectonic economic forces squarely at odds with one another. And the failure of socialism does indeed appear to be the success of globalization.

    The success of globalization is in fact the force destroying social entitlements along with the economies of developed nations across the globe.

    It isn't, and can't be determined to be, one event without the other because they are both intertwined and occurring in unison. In fact they are two sides of the same event.

    Capiche?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2011
  2. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,447
    Thanks Received:
    450
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +630
    Makes sense to me.
    When Wall Street buys-off the DC whores to get tax breaks to move 14,000 factories overseas, and then unemployment hits 10% and that shortfall causes the deficit and Debt to explode creating the necessity to reduce entitlements, QED.
     
  3. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Don't forget the $13 trillion in bail-outs and guarantees provided to Wall Street from many of globalization's victims (and their children's children).
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    "And remember, when the financial markets are done with Europe, they will come to test our fiscal resolve. All the indications so far are that our politicians will also struggle to get ahead of financial market pressure...

    "Our leading bankers looted the state, plunged the world into deep recession, and cost us 8 million jobs. And now many of them stand by with sharpened knives and enhanced bonuses – also most willing to suggest how the salaries and jobs of others can be further cut.

    "Think about the morality of that one.

    "Will no one think hard about what this means for our budget and our political system until it is too late?"

    Why Can’t Europe Avoid Another Crisis? Why Can’t the U.S.? The Baseline Scenario
     
  5. Bill O'Olberman
    Offline

    Bill O'Olberman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +124
    In the U.S. we will have to rely on things like innovation, education, hard work, etc in order to grow and maintain a position of prominence. Developing countries are much more attractive for some industries since they have cheap, unskilled labor and a relatively large pool of undereducated workers to do those jobs. I will agree that our entitlement programs are unsustainable no matter how innovative we are in the US.

    As a consumer, globalization isnt a bad thing. If I can get the same quality product for a lesser price since it was made somewhere else, why wouldnt I?
     
  6. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    possibly because in so doing you finance the development of more offshoring and undermine our economy directly via the increased trade deficit.

    The sales price isn't the actual net price you pay for any given product. The net price is realized over the life of the product on the one hand and the life of the nation on the other.
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2011
  7. hortysir
    Offline

    hortysir In Memorial of 47

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    20,459
    Thanks Received:
    4,027
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Lakeland, FL
    Ratings:
    +6,296
    Seems to me that these robust social programs merely beget generations of entitlement-minded people.
    The number of recipients grows exponentially.
    The funding can never keep up without taking from one group in order to give to another.
    Forced charity.

    How can any economy enjoy a continually expanding workforce with that large of an albatross around it's neck?
     
  8. Bill O'Olberman
    Offline

    Bill O'Olberman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +124
    But if we cannot make the same quality product for the same price is that an industry that we should invest our resources in? Why not invest our resources in industries that we can compete in?
     
  9. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    I concur. I could accept pay as you go entitlements based upon democratic support. But people who feel entitled give me the creeps.
     
  10. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    name one! More on point: there are not enough of them.

    The job of balancing an economy is not the job of simply supporting industries over which you can kick ass it is the job of making sure that there are enough industries in your nation to secure full employment, that your trade deficits are as low as possible, that your exports are robust.....

    And most importantly that you can afford to produce the products that promote defense.

    Off shoring to the cheapest bidder undermines all of that. And weakens America by the day.

    We are NOT just an economy, we are a NATION!

    The needs of the economy and the economic players are not at all the same as the needs of the nation.

    So who do you serve? The USA or the bottom line of corporations that have no loyalty to the USA?
     

Share This Page