A hole in the theory of the global economy.

A hole in the theory of the global economy. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

popeye1250 -> A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:04:59 AM)
We're told that people must be better educated to "compete" in this "global economy." But then, we don't "compete" against foreign countries. We actually "help" foreign countries with favored trade deals and "foreign aid!" How is doing those things "competing" against foreign countries in a "global economy?" I mean if we were really serious about competing "against" foreign countries shouldn't we be locking them out of our markets and putting them out of business? That's competition! In capitalism you try to knock your "competition" out of business not help them! Then, we are told that "we should develope foreign markets to buy our goods and services." Oh? And why is that? Are they saying that we should start opening Lincoln-Mercury dealorships in Port O Prince, Haiti? All the while our salaries are going down and our jobs are going overseas. I make a real concious effort now to "not" buy anything made in foreign countries. This really doesn't sound like capitalism to me! I don't know what it is but I do know that I don't want my Tax Dollars involved in this! What say you?

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:07:20 AM)
well- maybe it works- since cheap junk is abundant. ?? ????

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:09:25 AM)
...it is a sceem for the rich to get richer. it is ok for a corporation to buy meds over there- but if the peon tries to do- the rx might be" taken". ild suppose it wouldnt go over too well if the consumer cut out the middleman, on all its products!!

Politesub53 -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:14:10 AM)
Just as here in the UK. You will struggle to find anything thats totally made here. I got a Timberland top direct online...Made in China... All major companies outsource work, car manufactures buy complonents abroad. It is in effect capitalism at its finest, making stuff as cheap as possible and maximising profits. If they made everything in the UK or the USA the costs would increase, would we be prepared to pay them or not. Or would we be happy to get cheap " named brands" from overseas ? As for overseas aid, i am cynical enough to think no governments do this without seeing whats in it for them, in the way of trade or cheap labour ect.

KenDckey -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:35:50 AM)
I think it is a real difficult chore trying to decide which company uses only american parts in the completion of their product. Even Ford, GM, and all use foreign parts and assemble their equipment here. To buy American purely is about gone. Even our groceries come fromother countries. at different tiimes of the year. We use international standards (even tho many of them are created in this country and adopted overseas) to determine quality. If we invest in an American company that has interests overseas, we are supporting their economy. Are we really ready to give up everything to buy American products only. Nice dream not realistic. I do think that to much is paid in Foreign Aid. Why not send business in there instead and take over those economies, produce American Good, To American Standards, for sale worldwide, bringing the profits back to our economy and giving us world dominance.

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:35:53 AM)
-do you have the link pls??

farglebargle -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:49:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Just as here in the UK. You will struggle to find anything thats totally made here. I got a Timberland top direct online...Made in China... All major companies outsource work, car manufactures buy complonents abroad. It is in effect capitalism at its finest, making stuff as cheap as possible and maximising profits. If they made everything in the UK or the USA the costs would increase, would we be prepared to pay them or not. Or would we be happy to get cheap " named brands" from overseas ? As for overseas aid, i am cynical enough to think no governments do this without seeing whats in it for them, in the way of trade or cheap labour ect. I recall a day when the manufacturers of a Nation poisoning America's children and pets would be considered an Act of War.

popeye1250 -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 11:51:19 AM)
You guys are missing the point. How is it "competition" if we're "helping" someone? They tell us that we have to "compete" against these foreign countries. To me that means driving those countries right back into the stone age, not doing anything to "help" them. That's Capitalism.

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:05:05 PM)
at the moment i dont care what they do- as the lies, and double speak.... the best attn may be NO attn

lapresence -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:13:14 PM)
Actually, shutting companies and/or similar products out of a market is called a monopoly. It isn't illegal to have a monopoly. What is illegal is to take advantage of it. Which is what you are talking about. A perfectly competitive market is the goal. This is characterized by small firms (boy, those days are gone in the US), a homogenous product, and free entry and exit into said market, and perfect knowledge for the consumer about all competition (we're getting somewhere in this arena with the internet - I can see if Best Buy, Amazon, or Circuit City has it cheapest). A purely competitive firm is a price taker, meaning profit is at near zero. Meaning consumers get the best product for the best price. Because of the agreements we are in, for many things it is actually illegal for us to set trade barriers. On the other hand, our biggest coming competitor, China, has a few advantages on us which give us no control over them, unlike other markets. We can't force them to reset their currency value, which is tied to our own exchange rate. They have devalued their currency because it is to their advantage to do so; they have a trade surplus. Meaning they export way more than they import. This allows them to flood markets with cheap products (below market prices). The other kicker, that would generally allow us (or the International Monetary Fund) to go in and force them to play fair doesn't work here. We like countries to be in debt to us, because then we can (in an international body sort of way) force them to adopt certain measure and standards that benefit us. China, unfortunately, has liquid enough funds to cover all their debt to other nations. This is what makes them particularly daunting and scary. They save and we spend. Making us much more dependent. They can isolate themselves much easier than we can. Sorry, had to chime in. I love economics.

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:17:37 PM)
jumping in here. the Euro is $1.42. EU is telling China- to redo its currency.

lapresence -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:22:42 PM)
BTW, the money is rarely free. Usually it gives US companies access to natural resources, or some other advantage to some company that has petitioned the government to give aid. Money = Power. Sadly, it's special interests you need to fight if you don't want money sent overseas. Unless you can motivate a significant portion of tax payers, your opinion will fall on deaf ears I'm afraid.

lapresence -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:25:17 PM)
Bush has been telling them to for years. Unless they can put enough pressure on China, it ain't happening. No one holds their debt, which gives China power; not to mention, it's in their best interest not to change. It will take monumental political pressure to move China towards playing fair.

pahunkboy -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:40:23 PM)
-yes- it falls under choose your fights carefully. Net Neutrality had MANY supporters- and it still did not pass.

Politesub53 -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 12:43:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy -do you have the link pls?? www.timberland.com The stuff i got was made in Vietnam, but i know they have shoes which are produced in China. Popeye i see what you are getting it, at the end of the day its all about keeping costs down.

kdsub -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 1:20:11 PM)
I don’t believe at any time in world history there have been so many free enterprise societies and the ability to transport goods around the world cheaply. This would not be too much of a problem if it weren’t for the greed of big business. Profit and efficiency are all the count. It would be great if the business owners would share their profits with their employees but that on average is not the case… They are perfectly happy to increase profit by moving company production to other countries with cheap labor. They have no intention of raising the living standards of those employees but just reap the profit in reduced labor cost and ruin their environments. BUT eventually it will backfire on them… as affluent countries loose income because of lost jobs… who will be able to afford their products? Not the cheap labor employees. Finally the people will get tired of the concentration of wealth and as always in history that will force change… either by the elective process or by force. Butch

LadyEllen -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 1:23:40 PM)
The reason we must all become educated, is so that we are fit to work in insurance, banking and call centres, or to spout the line we're fed, so that we can be at the cutting edge of innovation and invention - whilst the manufacturing for what we innovate and invent is done overseas where its cheap - this is then fed back to us to buy, supposedly using the "wealth" created by insurance, banking and call centre employment but more often using the money supplied by the "financial services industry" on credit. The problems with this are plain to see; 1) it doesnt matter how much education is provided - many are not predisposed to benefitting from it; thus we end up with a sizeable proportion of the population unemployed for want of the manufacturing jobs exported overseas 2) whatever we invent and innovate, it gets quickly copied and our income from it is lost - and this strategy also assumes that all these overseas countries are full of fools, when in fact theyre turning out graduates in sciences and other subjects useful to invention and innovation in enormous numbers, whilst our lot are turning out graduates in "media studies" - whatever that might be. Right now, we are being outcompeted in invention and innovation - the source of our supposed future wealth. 3) insurance, banking and call centres are service industries - by their nature they make money, but they do not create wealth, which is an entirely different thing. One creates wealth by taking one thing and making it into something more valuable - manufacturing in other words. 4) the purchase of foreign made goods, in the absence of the weath required to purchase them is a sure fire way to bankruptcy. Yes, we have the money to buy this stuff, but not the weath to afford it. Meanwhile, we are watching our wealth disappear out the door even quicker by our recourse to credit to buy the foreign made goods. At the macro level, our wealth is being transferred to other countries - they will improve their standard of living whilst ours will fall. Eventually, there may be a balance - or it may swing about and we will be the low wage labourers in the sweat shops of overseas countries. At the micro level, it means that the misery and poverty of other countries will be exchanged for our comparative well being. How this is in any way protecting the interests of the people, I do not understand. E

FullCircle -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 1:29:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 In capitalism you try to knock your "competition" out of business not help them! If you’d ever played that board game Monopoly you’d realise it’s a bit boring at the end when you own all the hotels and no one wants to play with you anymore. In reality chasms between the rich and the poor only lead to the poor not wanting to play anymore;threatening the rich with terrorism and or not buying all the shit you produce to keep your economy going. It’s all about moving the money around, the money only has value as long as it never stops moving.

NorthernGent -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 1:30:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I mean if we were really serious about competing "against" foreign countries shouldn't we be locking them out of our markets and putting them out of business? No, competition involves being right in the mix: a) There's you. b) There's us c) We think we can outperform you. d) Ok, no restrictions, no protection, us against you, fair and square. e) Protectionism works both ways; you can lock them out of your markets, but they'll do the same to you. The global economy is simply a bigger garden with more fruit; you'd have to be scared of the garden to close yourself off to the fruit.

popeye1250 -> RE: A hole in the theory of the global economy. (10/10/2007 2:10:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I mean if we were really serious about competing "against" foreign countries shouldn't we be locking them out of our markets and putting them out of business? No, competition involves being right in the mix: a) There's you. b) There's us c) We think we can outperform you. d) Ok, no restrictions, no protection, us against you, fair and square. e) Protectionism works both ways; you can lock them out of your markets, but they'll do the same to you. The global economy is simply a bigger garden with more fruit; you'd have to be scared of the garden to close yourself off to the fruit. I just don't think that what we have now is "competition." More likely some type of socialised trade. And I think that the powers that be are handing us a pig in a poke. Like we're "competing" by making stuff in foreign countries that they expect us to buy? And, the big companies should be paying for "foreign aid" in those countries not U.S. Taxpayers! Why should our money be subsidising big businesses in foreign countries? What's theirs is theirs and what's ours is theirs? Also, it's not the government's job to decide what citizens "need" in the way of commerce. Who told them that I need cheaper stuff? The last few years I only buy what I need. I haven't been into a Walmart in more than 5 years now. I go to Costco because I read that they treat their employees very well pay and benefits wise. I've heard Bush say, "what about the American consumer?" What does (he) care, that's really not his job to be worrying whether they have enough plastic junk to buy. He could just as easily have been saying "what about the American businesses who use to produce things in this country." Gee, like I'm going to lose any sleep if Walmart went bankrupt? I need one of those "entertainment centers", the things that hold a tv, stereo, CDs etc. Instead of paying $800-$1,200 in a store for it for a piece of junk that's made in China or another worker's paradise I hired a local guy who has a woodworking shop in his garage to build me one custom made for $350. And it'll be 8 feet wide. He makes furniture and all kinds of things. All it is is simple shelving and stores want $800-$1,200 for them! I told him he should start thinking about making toys too because of all the dangerous stuff comming out of China. What good is "saving" money if you're getting junk and it's dangerous too? Lady Ellen, well said! It's just a vicious circle with a tiny fraction of people getting extremely rich from it.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875