Thoughts about current economic paradigm PART 1.

[Mr.Jeffery]

For a while now I have been having a growing concern about the current economic situation in the world. I believe it is impossible to simply look at one nations economic situation, but instead to look at it from a macro point of view with many nations. The world is not so narrow.

As the world becomes more and more globalized, we have seen new economies develop, namely that of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) nations; which by IMF predictions will surpass western economies in the next 50 years. In retrospect this should not be a shock. But what is concerning is HOW it will unfold, and when.

Radical changes in the geopolitical world have been taking place for a while. To name one: the effect of middle eastern upheaval on the petrol-dollar (the official reason the USA dollar is the world reserve currency). Without the USA dollar status as the world reserve currency, Ben Bernanke's(the Federal Reserve) monetary policy of buying 85billion bonds a month (Q&E)would be causing crushing inflation.
However this is a none issue until the world reserve currency changes. The USA is able to continue to print as long as it keeps that status, and retains a favorable rating from the Fitch, Moody and S&P.
One major factor to consider is how the BRICS nations are reacting in recent years. We have seen these nations in particular pulling away politically from the western rating agency's and pooling vast resources in securing tangible assets; namely land, gold and allies. (If you follow the news, you will have heard of the massive moments of civilian Chinese buying gold on every dip.) The reason gold buying fascinates me is because current economic models in the western nations are no longer attached to a asset. The global economy is in a fiat state, with trillions of dollars in derivatives. [this current fiat economic paradigm has lasted the longest in history. the last one to last this long was in Rome before the collapse of the roman empire] So to me, the idea of a asset backed currency seems due. What concerns me, is how this will occur and when. Typically such a change happens in war.

While there are many worrying avenues of thought to the USA economic situation, I would like to discuss one at a time.
As I am no professor in macro or micro economics, I can only look at give logical guesses. But my questions for readers is do you believe these events are coming in the near future? and if not please explain in a through response.

-Jeffery

 

[Friends]

As the world becomes more and more globalized, we have seen new economies develop, namely that of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) nations; which by IMF predictions will surpass western economies in the next 50 years.

-Jeffery

I see potential in Russia and China, but not in Brazil, India, and South Africa. Brazil, India, and South Africa are racially diverse. Contrary to liberal dogma diversity is not a national asset. Racially homogeneous countries respond better to national traumas when the population is nearly all white or all Oriental.

Russia is rich in natural resources. China is too, but suffers from over population. The Chinese one child only policy is well intended. Unfortunately, it leads to a youth population with many more males than females. That is socially dangerous. Other countries like Russia, Japan, and Taiwan have been able to reduce their populations without government coercion, and without creating a sexual imbalance.

If the Chinese can find a better way to reduce their population, and if they adopt a democratic government I expect China to dominate the world by the end of this century.

In China the average IQ is 100. In Russia it is 96. In Brazil, India, and South Africa it is much lower. That is an additional reason I expect little from those countries in the future.

Average IQ in US and 80 other nations

India has a lower murder rate than the United States, but in Brazil and South Africa the murder rate is much higher. That is why I expect Brazil and South Africa to remain what they are now: poverty and crime ridden countries to avoid traveling to if at all possible. As the populations of both countries increase I expect conditions in both to get worse.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As the world becomes more and more globalized, we have seen new economies develop, namely that of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) nations; which by IMF predictions will surpass western economies in the next 50 years.

-Jeffery

I see potential in Russia and China, but not in Brazil, India, and South Africa. Brazil, India, and South Africa are racially diverse. Contrary to liberal dogma diversity is not a national asset. Racially homogeneous countries respond better to national traumas when the population is nearly all white or all Oriental.

Russia is rich in natural resources. China is too, but suffers from over population. The Chinese one child only policy is well intended. Unfortunately, it leads to a youth population with many more males than females. That is socially dangerous. Other countries like Russia, Japan, and Taiwan have been able to reduce their populations without government coercion, and without creating a sexual imbalance.

If the Chinese can find a better way to reduce their population, and if they adopt a democratic government I expect China to dominate the world by the end of this century.

In China the average IQ is 100. In Russia it is 96. In Brazil, India, and South Africa it is much lower. That is an additional reason I expect little from those countries in the future.

Average IQ in US and 80 other nations

India has a lower murder rate than the United States, but in Brazil and South Africa the murder rate is much higher. That is why I expect Brazil and South Africa to remain what they are now: poverty and crime ridden countries to avoid traveling to if at all possible. As the populations of both countries increase I expect conditions in both to get worse.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

dear, are you brain dead? Do you have any thoughts at all about how we should vote. Do you know that Democrats and Republicans are the major parties. Which do you think is better and why. This is not trivial pursuit.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I think currently the greatest danger for the US economy is the health care system.

Although the US healthcare system is roughly at the same quality level as the top 10 OCDE countries. It's a lot more expensive.

This year the government expense in healthcare will be greater than the military spending.
Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2013 - Charts

Healthcare is becoming very expensive without this translating into greater benefitts for the average american citizen.

The only state that has put a halt to this madness is Maryland.

Maryland Reins In Hospital Costs by Setting Rates - WSJ.com

 

[Whereisup]

We have exported most of our computer programming job to India, plus many customer service calls jobs, etc. and India is growing quite well. Brazil and South Africa are doing well, and energy exports are helping Russia. No doubt China plans to dominate those nations in the end, but I don't know what China's exact strategies will be.

The economic conflicts going on are costing the world much growth. Of course, economic growth would only be safe if it were done with wind, solar, and perhaps wave power. But that could be done.

A nation's economy, if business leaders mainly, but also government, are skilled enough, can grow at about 10% per year. Therefore, if we did it right, the world economy could grow at about 10% per year. The Gross World Product is now about 60 trillion dollars per year. If it were to grow at 10% per year, then in about 7.5 years, the Gross World would be about 120 trillion dollars per year. In about 15 years, the GWP would be about 240 trillion dollars per year. In about 30 years, the Gross World Product would be about 960 trillion dollars per year. If the world population were to be about 9 billion people at that time, then the per capita Gross World Produce would be about $100,000 per year.

Therefore, the poorest people in the world could have a standard of living equal to a current above-average-middle class American, and there would still be enough money left over for some people to be quite wealthy. Opportunities for skilled companies would also be tremendous in the 960 trillion dollar economy.

This could be done by a world government and if the world government were to be democratic, that would be good for everyone.

However, this could be done without a world government also. I suggested the method a little over 10 years ago to various people and groups. The Indian government economic development think in Mumbai replied that what I was proposing would work, but would not be accepted politically by the governments of the world.

The method is to use supercomputers working in parallel and design a very good economic model of the world economy, complete down to individual companies.

Then, the computer program would be designed to test various proposals for better coordinating the world economy in such a way that all nations would grow simultaneously. Anything which would lead to some nations growing at the expense of others would therefore be rejected.

The computer would not make the actual decisions however. That would still be left to humans. The computer would merely forward successful new plans for arrangements to the world governments, with the reasons that the solutions would increase economic growth for all nations simultaneously. Then, the governments could decide which suggested plans to implement.

It would be hard to turn down a plan that would benefit all nations simultaneously.

The development economists at the think tank did say my proposed method would work.

Jim