World Economic Equilibrium: Worth looking at again?

[Vanquish]

I know this is going to come off all "workers of the world unite" aka communist/socialist...but really that's not what I'm going for here. Believe me when I say that.

That being said...I really don't think America's financial problems will EVER become manageable again until there's some semblance of economic equilibrium across the entire planet.

No...I'm not saying that everyone should get a hand out. No...I'm not saying that profit is evil and economic opportunities shouldn't be exploited. (Everyone knows a lot of money is made from finding something cheap somewhere and selling it high elsewhere. I get that and believe in it)

But there are always going to be countries and companies in those countries who have less restrictive laws, less consumer and worker protections, and are willing to exploit them.

I'm not saying we have to fix the world or have one world government...but that ignoring the global economic equilibrium shift is killing us.

Thoughts?

 

[uscitizen]

Our standards of living for most of our people will continue to decline until our main competitors in the worlds lving standards come up closer to where we are.

It is inevitable with Global/"free" trade.

 

[Vanquish]

Exactly. But we seem to be sticking our heads in the sand about it.

 

[Toro]

The way you get "economic equilibrium" on the planet is to make everyone as rich as we are. And the way not to make everyone as rich as we are is to impose our standards and laws on everyone else.

There is a growth curve to economic development, whereby poor countries become richer by making cheap things cheaper. Raising those costs, as you imply, will do nothing but keep the poor desperately poor.

 

[loosecannon]

I know this is going to come off all "workers of the world unite" aka communist/socialist...but really that's not what I'm going for here. Believe me when I say that.

That being said...I really don't think America's financial problems will EVER become manageable again until there's some semblance of economic equilibrium across the entire planet.

No...I'm not saying that everyone should get a hand out. No...I'm not saying that profit is evil and economic opportunities shouldn't be exploited. (Everyone knows a lot of money is made from finding something cheap somewhere and selling it high elsewhere. I get that and believe in it)

But there are always going to be countries and companies in those countries who have less restrictive laws, less consumer and worker protections, and are willing to exploit them.

I'm not saying we have to fix the world or have one world government...but that ignoring the global economic equilibrium shift is killing us.

Thoughts?

It is tempting to think those thoughts. I hear you.

But IMO that is naive thinking.

I do not believe that China or the next superpower is gonna honor the same globalization rules that are currently balancing the world's power. I think they will retain a grip on authoritarian government and yuan hegemony and protectionist tactics as long as they possibly can. Which may be until after the population bomb has peaked and receded and resource scarcity has changed everything about our economy.

Nation states always have first and foremost protected their own interests and even if the west might want to share power amongst a coalition in order to secure it there is no guarantee that the next superpower will violate the age old rules for the sake of Kumbaya.

As powerful as tiny Japan managed to become in just 2 decades China has 13 times their population and a better relationship to resources than the island of Japan. They are 1/5th of the world. Even at wage parity China is destined to be the geopolitical leader of the world.

And China has already established a network of ties to the developing world to give them a good shot leading the larger more resource rich coalition in the future. And they are quickly matching and surpassing our technological plateau.

Plus the dollar/yuan relation is triggered to flip and catapult China toward great wealth while the dollar tumbles. That's what happened to the Yen in 85.

China will be as savage a world superpower as they were savage toward their own during their last revolution.

 

[loosecannon]

The way you get "economic equilibrium" on the planet is to make everyone as rich as we are.

well that is impossible because there simply are not enough resources for even half the present population to share our living standards.

So exactly how do you plan to redefine our wealth?

It's a race toward the bottom Toro, not toward the top. Every previous model since the industrial revolution began had the advantage of exploiting massive virgin resources. That won't happen again.

 

[william the wie]

I was with you LC until you got to Japan 85 and didn't continue the analogy. China has played all of its cards to hype growth and Bernancke's trashing of the dollar will crush it.

 

[Vanquish]

Equilibrium will happen whether we want it to or not. The question is how do we get there. Living conditions in China have risen as a direct result of the effect...similarly in India. Mexico seems to be remaining stagnant or even regressing, and predictably, crime is on the rise there.

How do we win, economically, while still increasing our standard of living?

 

[loosecannon]

I was with you LC until you got to Japan 85 and didn't continue the analogy. China has played all of its cards to hype growth and Bernancke's trashing of the dollar will crush it.

Unlike puny Japan who actually was reliant on a trade surplus with the US China is planning to switch polarity and shift toward the developing world as their market, including of course themselves. They won't really need the US as a leading trade partner, and we will be reliant on them for basics like cell phone components and military components.

Japan fell into terminal deflation after 85 because they priced themselves out of the world labor market and there was no developing world to replace the US as their trade partners. Today all of the wealth is migrating toward the developing world. They are the future consumer society of the world, not the developed nations.

 

[JULIO]

I predict with an assured confidence that the only way out is for us to discover some object which is admitted even by the deadheads to be a legitimate excuse for largely increasing the expenditure of someone on something!

 

[sjay]

I predict with an assured confidence that the only way out is for us to discover some object which is admitted even by the deadheads to be a legitimate excuse for largely increasing the expenditure of someone on something!

You wanna give a coherent detailed explanation so it can be understood what your'e trying to say?

 

[rdean]

When the US is physically attacked, the US government steps in to protect this country. Usually. Republicans let Bin Laden go, but they did attack Afghanistan, so it's a mixed bag. But usually the government protects the country.

We have been attacked economically. China has many more than a half billion workers who are willing to work for 51 cents an hour, live in shabby dorms and work 60 to 70 hours a week. We can't fight that.

We expect government to step in and protect the country from such unfair practices. Under Democrats, it will eventually happen. Under Republicans? Republicans have already sent millions of jobs to China. The leadership looks forward to the day they can send millions more.

 

[Revere]

Bush created jobs faster then they moved to China, until Democrats controlled Congress in 2007.

 

[loosecannon]

Bush created jobs faster then they moved to China, until Democrats controlled Congress in 2007.

but not fast enough to keep pace with the swelling labor force, hence "jobless recovery".

 

[asterism]

When the US is physically attacked, the US government steps in to protect this country. Usually. Republicans let Bin Laden go, but they did attack Afghanistan, so it's a mixed bag. But usually the government protects the country.

We have been attacked economically. China has many more than a half billion workers who are willing to work for 51 cents an hour, live in shabby dorms and work 60 to 70 hours a week. We can't fight that.

We expect government to step in and protect the country from such unfair practices. Under Democrats, it will eventually happen. Under Republicans? Republicans have already sent millions of jobs to China. The leadership looks forward to the day they can send millions more.

6% of rational people agree.

 

[cutter]

Force manufacturing to come home. Tax imports until they are more expensive than domestic manufactured items. When manufacturing comes home we will have full employment and sure we will have to pay more for what we want but we will not be sending all out wealth to china. Screw the world and take care of ourselves.

 

[boedicca]

But there are always going to be countries and companies in those countries who have less restrictive laws, less consumer and worker protections, and are willing to exploit them.

I'm not saying we have to fix the world or have one world government...but that ignoring the global economic equilibrium shift is killing us.

Thoughts?

Global Economic Equilibrium is just another way of saying Maintaining The Status Quo.

What a grand concept! Let's keep people in underdeveloped nations impoverished so they can continue to be the cheap near slave labor to enable those at the upper echelons of the Status Quo to maintain their lifestyles without competition and as little effort as possible.

 

[Ragnar]

Property rights. Rule of law. Individual rights. Start exporting our values instead of just cheeseburgers, coca cola and garbage Hollywood movies. (yeah, selling/teaching our values, not "imposing" them)

Why Do the Poor Stay Poor? - Reason Magazine

...

Is de Soto saying that if the developing world had the rule of law they could become as rich as we are?

"Oh, yes. Of course. But let me tell you, bringing in the rule of law is no easy thing."

De Soto started his work in Peru, as an economic adviser to the president, trying to establish property rights there. He was successful enough that leaders of 23 countries, including Russia, Libya, Egypt, Honduras, and the Philippines, now pay him to teach them about property rights. Those leaders at least get that they're doing something wrong.

"They get it easier than a North American," he said, "because the people who brought the rule of law and property rights to the United States (lived) in the 18th and 19th centuries. They were your great-great-great-great-granddaddies."

De Soto says we've forgotten what made us prosperous. "But (leaders in the developing world) see that they're pot-poor relative to your wealth." They are beginning to grasp the importance of private property.

Export capitalism.

 

[Toro]

The way you get "economic equilibrium" on the planet is to make everyone as rich as we are.

well that is impossible because there simply are not enough resources for even half the present population to share our living standards.

So exactly how do you plan to redefine our wealth?

It's a race toward the bottom Toro, not toward the top. Every previous model since the industrial revolution began had the advantage of exploiting massive virgin resources. That won't happen again.

It's a race to the top.

If it were a race to the bottom, incomes would continuously be falling. But globally, incomes have been rising pretty consistently, current recession notwithstanding.

Thomas Malthus said that we didn't have enough resources, and he said that 200 years ago, just before mankind was about to embark on the greatest period of wealth creation the planet has ever seen.

 

[Ragnar]

The way you get "economic equilibrium" on the planet is to make everyone as rich as we are.

well that is impossible because there simply are not enough resources for even half the present population to share our living standards.

So exactly how do you plan to redefine our wealth?

It's a race toward the bottom Toro, not toward the top. Every previous model since the industrial revolution began had the advantage of exploiting massive virgin resources. That won't happen again.

It's a race to the top.

If it were a race to the bottom, incomes would continuously be falling. But globally, incomes have been rising pretty consistently, current recession notwithstanding.

Thomas Malthus said that we didn't have enough resources, and he said that 200 years ago, just before mankind was about to embark on the greatest period of wealth creation the planet has ever seen.

That's right. A lot of people forget (or don't know) that the greatest resource on the planet is the human mind.





Also...