American traitor and coward writes communist book

[darkbeaver]

RE: American traitor and

We're not only outsourceing manufacturing to China and services to India , but we,ve managed to outsource our financing to Asia.

Stephen Roach, chief economist, Morgan Stanley, 2004

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Unreliable source ITN.

You're the first beaver I know of that acts like an ostrich, with its head in the sand. Keep believing what you believe, I'll be drinking pina coladas while you are screaming the same thing 20 years from now.

I can I come with you?

 

[Sassylassie]

Move over Jay, ITN take me also they are driving me to drink. A drunk Sassy isn't a good thing.

 

[sanch]

Re: RE: American traitor and

We're not only outsourceing manufacturing to China and services to India , but we,ve managed to outsource our financing to Asia.

Stephen Roach, chief economist, Morgan Stanley, 2004

Why is this bad?

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Even Britian, as it happens has avoided the reckless deindustrialization allowed in the United States. Although British manufacturing exports lack the comparative heft they registered in 1870 or 1890, economic historians underscore that in 1990 merchandise exports represented 21 persent of British GDP, whereas in the United States they amounted to only 8 percent. Between 2000 and 2003
, the share of US GDP represented by manufactured exports dropped from 7 percent to 6 percent and it is chilling to contemplate what the ratios might be in 2010 or 2020.

from American Theocracy

Cite the source since you have the book.

Goldman Sachs Global Investment Reserch for it's 1974-2004 data on the growth of the US financial sector.

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: American traitor and

We're not only outsourceing manufacturing to China and services to India , but we,ve managed to outsource our financing to Asia.

Stephen Roach, chief economist, Morgan Stanley, 2004

Why is this bad?

It leaves nothing for America to do but consume.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Goldman Sachs Global Investment Reserch for it's 1974-2004 data on the growth of the US financial sector.

Interesting Beav, you cite an evil corporation worth billions of dollars when it suits your bias and you call the US department of labor data, unrealiable. :roll:

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and coward writes communist book

What say you Toro ?

A lot of Americans agree with that statement of
Darkbeaver's: No healthy manufacturing base= no country.

Why would it be?

There's nothing magical about manufacturing.

Manufactured goods are merely physical embodiements of utility. But simply because its manufactured doesn't mean there is utility. If the United States produced 1 billion iron bars when the demand is only 10 million iron bars, the fact that 1 billion bars are created does not create utility in and of itself. There must be demand, ie utility, for it.

Utility can be created through services, which is what most of the economy is today.

Finally, capital is capital is capital.

Its no coincidence that in economic terminology capital can mean

capital = physical plant

and

capital = money, stocks, bonds, etc.

If you have a $1 billion plant or you have $1 billion in cash, there is no difference in the fixed stock of wealth. Otherwise, financial centers - Switzerland, New York, Luxembourg, etc. - would not become wealthy.

100 year ago, agriculture was a large slice of the economy, both in terms of employment and output. Today, its a small part of output and an even smaller part of employment. Yet we produce way more food than we did 100 years ago.

And the exact same arguments made then about agriculture are being made today about manufacturing.

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

How are you today Toro, did you burn any oil toady.

Ok. That was funny.


I'm sorry Toro. :wink:

Lots of it.

But I finally got a new car.

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

corporate profits in the US
Part of the Empire disease.
manufacturing sector 10% and falling
financial services 44% and rising

Financial services cannot sustain an empire, Rome tried it,Holland tried it, Spain tried it, England tried it and the USA is into it heavier than any of them ever where.No healty manufacturing base= no country.

Historically, the financialization of society has always been a symbol that a nation,s economic position has entered a phase of deterioration.

William Wolman and Anne Colamosca, The Judas Economy, 1997

To say that the fall of Rome, Holland, Spain and England can be traced to the lack of manufacturing and a reliance on financing is beyond ridiculous.

See, I always thought the Industrial Revolution happened, oh, 1500 years or so after the fall of Rome.

Guess I was wrong!

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Unreliable source ITN.

Its from the frickin' St. Louis Fed!

Oh, but we'll listen to Kevin Phillips.

<takes another toke>

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

We're not only outsourceing manufacturing to China and services to India , but we,ve managed to outsource our financing to Asia.

Stephen Roach, chief economist, Morgan Stanley, 2004

Why is this bad?

He's talking about the capital surplus America runs with the rest of the world, and that China is the largest holder of US government bonds.

See,

capital surplus = trade deficit (more or less).

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Even Britian, as it happens has avoided the reckless deindustrialization allowed in the United States. Although British manufacturing exports lack the comparative heft they registered in 1870 or 1890, economic historians underscore that in 1990 merchandise exports represented 21 persent of British GDP, whereas in the United States they amounted to only 8 percent. Between 2000 and 2003
, the share of US GDP represented by manufactured exports dropped from 7 percent to 6 percent and it is chilling to contemplate what the ratios might be in 2010 or 2020.

from American Theocracy

Cite the source since you have the book.

Its also disingenuous since he's talking about exports.

America has a much larger internal market and relies much less on exports than every other industrialized economy. So, of course its going to be lower.

Well done, Kevin Phillips. Real rocket science there.

And the fact that share might go lower is, of course, no surprise, if everything else grows faster.

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and

youd have to campare that to other nations
even during the decline of spain holland britain etc--- there was
absolute growth-- but relative decrease to the rising powers of the time---

im not sure that beavers argument regarding manufacturing base comes uniquely from the left---- itsnt this a broad spectrum concern......

You're right, cortez, it doesn't come just from the Left. There are even some credible economists who make the argument. But they are in the minority.

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: American traitor and

Goldman Sachs Global Investment Reserch for it's 1974-2004 data on the growth of the US financial sector.

Interesting Beav, you cite an evil corporation worth billions of dollars when it suits your bias and you call the US department of labor data, unrealiable. :roll:

The one is relatively reliable the other is nowadays skewed with smoke and mirrors, or so I'm told. The real state of the US economy is dismal, to much debt to much borrowing to much credit, way to little manufacturing, big problems very hard to juggle for long, lots of bets going down on when the bubble will burst and what will cause it. A costly war with negative returns historically acts as a big pin.

 

[Toro]

RE: American traitor and

The US economy is not dismal.

The housing bubble could cause problems, but nothing the US hasn't handled before.

The costly Iraq war is bad for the economy.

 

[jimmoyer]

jimmoyer wrote:
What say you Toro ?

A lot of Americans agree with that statement of
Darkbeaver's: No healthy manufacturing base= no country.
----------------------------------jimmoyer------------------

Why would it be?

There's nothing magical about manufacturing.

Manufactured goods are merely physical embodiements of utility. But simply because its manufactured doesn't mean there is utility. If the United States produced 1 billion iron bars when the demand is only 10 million iron bars, the fact that 1 billion bars are created does not create utility in and of itself. There must be demand, ie utility, for it.

Utility can be created through services, which is what most of the economy is today.

Finally, capital is capital is capital.

Its no coincidence that in economic terminology capital can mean

capital = physical plant

and

capital = money, stocks, bonds, etc.

If you have a $1 billion plant or you have $1 billion in cash, there is no difference in the fixed stock of wealth. Otherwise, financial centers - Switzerland, New York, Luxembourg, etc. - would not become wealthy.

100 year ago, agriculture was a large slice of the economy, both in terms of employment and output. Today, its a small part of output and an even smaller part of employment. Yet we produce way more food than we did 100 years ago.

And the exact same arguments made then about agriculture are being made today about manufacturing.

----------------------------------Toro --------------------------


Toro, be sure to take the argument from me the
right way. I intuitively feel you're quite a step beyond
me on economics.


But your parallel of the agrarian economics of yesteryear with manufacturing economics of today doesn't sit well
with me for a number of non-economic reasons, and
therein you'll have a good argument against me on
economic principles.

I'm not sure when a country loses out to others
on manufacturing or even farming technology
that this loss of knowledge and this loss of knowledge
as a handoff to the next generation is good for any
individual nation.

I'm not sure we should completely take a bean-counter's
view of economics over those who love knowledge, over
those who love the toys, over those who emphasize
the short-term profit over the long term gain.

Ultimately Toro, I instinctively feel that you are right
about the power of free market economics, but this
way of life is not without pain, not without abuse,
not without unneccessary waste.

May I remind you that mankind cannot live on bread
the metaphor of market economics alone.

Don't center on that last above statement, but
consider, please the other points above in this post.

 

[darkbeaver]

RE: American traitor and

Never before has a US political coalition been so dominated by an array of outsider religious denominations caught up in biblical morality, distrust of science, and a global imperative of political and religious evangelism. These groups may represent only a quarter to a thrid of the US population, but they are mobilized, as the turnout in 2004 showed.
They also have important allies. As we have seen, the financial sector-and a large majority of the richest Americans-understandably finds the alliance convienient. Many of the fundamentalist, evangelical, and Pentecostal faithful are to caught up in religion, theology, and personal salvation to pay much attention to economics, and they are easily rallied for self-help, free enterprise, and disbelief in government. With much of the GOPs low- and middle-income electorate listening to conservative preachers, the corporate and financial agenda not only prevails but often runs riot.

from American Theocracy

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: American traitor and coward writes communist book

Jimmy

Toro, be sure to take the argument from me the
right way. I intuitively feel you're quite a step beyond
me on economics.


But your parallel of the agrarian economics of yesteryear with manufacturing economics of today doesn't sit well
with me for a number of non-economic reasons, and
therein you'll have a good argument against me on
economic principles.

I'm not sure when a country loses out to others
on manufacturing or even farming technology
that this loss of knowledge and this loss of knowledge
as a handoff to the next generation is good for any
individual nation.

I'm not sure we should completely take a bean-counter's
view of economics over those who love knowledge, over
those who love the toys, over those who emphasize
the short-term profit over the long term gain.

Ultimately Toro, I instinctively feel that you are right
about the power of free market economics, but this
way of life is not without pain, not without abuse,
not without unneccessary waste.

May I remind you that mankind cannot live on bread
the metaphor of market economics alone.

Don't center on that last above statement, but
consider, please the other points above in this post.

I highlighted your above statement because it bears mentioning. It is critical that in the post-industrial economy, to be productive and to grow, America and the West MUST remain on the edge of technological advancement.

Economic growth is a function of technological progress. But you can create the technology and manufacture it elsewhere. This is already being done. For example, manufacturers of analog semiconductors and programable logic devices - such as Maxim, Altera, Analog Devices, Xilinx, Linear Technology, etc. - design semiconductors in the United States but farm out the production of their chips overseas to companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Such semiconductors are used in a wide variety of items, from cell phones to computers to servers to routers.

Now, the value-added is not in the manufacturing. It is in the design. If the likes of Altera ceased to exist, the TSMCs of the world would collapse. But if the TSMCs of the world ceased to exist, then the designers could, after some delay, start manufacturing themselves again, or find someone else to do so. The value added is in the technology, not the production. It is technology that is the driver.

Its important to understand that there are few, if any, industries that have survived long-term under protection. There is a valid, albeit tenuous argument, for protecting infant industries in emerging markets. However, there is virtually no valid economic argument for protecting industries under pressure in mature economies.

 

[Jo Canadian]