Everything must start again anew,
Everything just goes that way my friend,
Every king knows it to be true,
That every kingdom must one day come to an end,
- Ben Howard, EverythingMIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
131–140 of 279 posts
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#132Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? The first version of something is rarely the best version, and while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness…
Don't forget the racism. Some of the weird structural elements date from the "three-fifths compromise", like the electoral college.
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? Almost certainly. The US was doing fine for most of the 20th century. Globalism is what has brought wages down. Globalism combines the economies of the richest countries with the economies of the poorest in an attempt to "help" poor countries. As rich countries and poor countries combine economies, they mo…
Globalism isn't an "attempt" to do anything. It's just markets naturally tending towards efficiency. > but if you're part of rural America you're getting hit very hard by globalism. i.e. if you're part of rural America, you're being out-competed by superior market participants located in poorer countries. It's not that unfair. It would be much more unfair to apply protectionist policies to subsidise the rural America…
completely disagree. Why is china expanding faster than most "democratic" countries. India is focused on technology which should be easier to outsource yet, Knowledge workers are doing fine in the US. It's because china is coordinates its activity like a giant company, in my opinion, to exploit markets. investing heavily in infrastructure, stealing trade secrets, destroying the environment, exploiting children and criminals, manipulating currency for decades. I could go on but you get the point
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait what? So because there are even poorer people on the other sides of the ponds, some of which might actually benefit in some tangential way from globalism, it's OK for the 0.01 % to rob their closest neighbours blind?
> to rob That's a pretty strong claim you have here. Can you back it up? As far as I see, the 'closest neighbours' are in the ditch because they now compete with workers from other continents, and turns out that these workers are ready to do the same work for less. If I used to pay you money for your work, but then found someone else that would do that for half a price, I'm not robbing you. If anything, it's you who'…
Call me old-fashioned but I think it's wrong when the powers that be deceive, manipulate and strong-arm the local worker to give what they owned, personally or collectively.
Why is the elite's right to ownership less sacred than the common citizen's? "You", in your example, can only buy these services because you could influence the State to wield its power in your best interest. Wagging the dog and all that...
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#135Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? The first version of something is rarely the best version, and while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness…
There's nothing in the Constitution about political parties, two or otherwise. In fact, the initial idea at the time was that the US wasn't going to have political parties and that voters would focus on individuals instead.
[deleted]
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to rob That's a pretty strong claim you have here. Can you back it up? As far as I see, the 'closest neighbours' are in the ditch because they now compete with workers from other continents, and turns out that these workers are ready to do the same work for less. If I used to pay you money for your work, but then found someone else that would do that for half a price, I'm not robbing you. If anything, it's you who'…
Call me old-fashioned but I think it's wrong when the powers that be deceive, manipulate and strong-arm the local worker to give what they owned, personally or collectively. Why is the elite's right to ownership less sacred than the common citizen's? "You", in your example, can only buy these services because you could influence the State to wield its power in your best interest. Wagging the dog and all that...
> deceive, manipulate and strong-arm the local worker
Can you back this claim up, please?
> to give what they owned, personally or collectively
Who is "they" here? Also, what are you talking about?
> Why is the elite's right to ownership less sacred than the common citizen's?
I have no idea, because I never made such a claim.
> "You", in your example, can only buy these services because you could influence the State to wield its power in your best interest.
I don't understand. Why wouldn't I be able to buy these services otherwise?
> Call me old-fashioned
I don't want to call you old-fashioned. More like incoherent.
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to rob That's a pretty strong claim you have here. Can you back it up? As far as I see, the 'closest neighbours' are in the ditch because they now compete with workers from other continents, and turns out that these workers are ready to do the same work for less. If I used to pay you money for your work, but then found someone else that would do that for half a price, I'm not robbing you. If anything, it's you who'…
You make it sound like most people that make those decisions have a choice with outsourcing. If you don't lead the project to outsource they'll find someone that will. And if leadership won't make the decision the company you supply will find a competitor. and if you're a fortune 500 company then the bad quarterly results will get you replaced.
> You make it sound like most people that make those decisions have a choice with outsourcing.
Depends on your definition of "choice" and what "free will" is. In the definitions that I'm using, you always have a choice to stand on "high moral ground" (as you perceive it), lose money and in the end destroy your company.
> And if leadership won't make the decision the company you supply will find a competitor. and if you're a fortune 500 company then the bad quarterly results will get you replaced.
And if you follow the chain of cause and effect to the logical conclusion, you will see the same middle american, shopping in Walmart, searching for cheaper goods without any concern over whether they were produced in China or America.
Companies and other large organizations like that cannot be moral or immoral, because they just serve as proxy for collective decisions and desires of other people - their shareholders and customers. And their shareholders and customers are usually the same usual american people, who want their pension savings to grow and buy things for cheap.
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Notice how things start to get worse and worse as globalism progresses? Not for the actual third world countries. I completely agree with your description of the facts on the ground, just completely disagree with what you consider 'bad' or 'good'. Everybody's talking about US' inequality problem like US is a closed system. It's insane. US elites are _world_ elites, and inequality should be considered in the world s…
Wait what? So because there are even poorer people on the other sides of the ponds, some of which might actually benefit in some tangential way from globalism, it's OK for the 0.01 % to rob their closest neighbours blind?
Global average wage is ~200$ per month, or about $1800 PPP dollars. I believe that answers your question.
There is no alternative.
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#139Am I wrong in attributing/connecting most of Americas problems with its flawed constitution/democratic system? The first version of something is rarely the best version, and while the US constitution contained a lot of fantastic elements and freedoms that every educated American knows about, it also contained a democratic system (first past the post/two party system) that is mathematically bound to breed divisiveness…
The problem is not the constitution or the existing system. The problem is there is a privileged class that don't follow the rules of the law. And privilege is one of most inefficient thing in a system!
Re: MIT economist believes U.S. is shifting to be more similar to developing nations
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Globalism isn't an "attempt" to do anything. It's just markets naturally tending towards efficiency. > but if you're part of rural America you're getting hit very hard by globalism. i.e. if you're part of rural America, you're being out-competed by superior market participants located in poorer countries. It's not that unfair. It would be much more unfair to apply protectionist policies to subsidise the rural America…
completely disagree. Why is china expanding faster than most "democratic" countries. India is focused on technology which should be easier to outsource yet, Knowledge workers are doing fine in the US. It's because china is coordinates its activity like a giant company, in my opinion, to exploit markets. investing heavily in infrastructure, stealing trade secrets, destroying the environment, exploiting children and cr…
> It's because china is coordinates its activity like a giant company, in my opinion, to exploit markets.
Same thing Japan did after WWII. Works great if you can pull it off.