Redstate

someone should independently verify the stats this video relies upon and let us know whether they check out

So you're volunteering then? Thank you!

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

If you use GDP as calculated by purchasing power parity, the US is #1 (hooray!), followed by China, Japan, India, then Germany.
GDP (PPP)

GDP

International Monetary Fund, World Bank and CIA World Factbook.

The tables show the 2006 or 2007 rankings of 166 developed countries and Hong Kong. You can find them here.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

The reason the video is valuable and worth showing is that we are entering yet another period when people are coming out of the woodwork and proclaiming The End Of American Economic Dominance And Power. It seems to me that we ought, in response, to note anew the staying power and endurance of the American economy.

Thus the video. It has a great deal more value than you appear to ascribe to it. And with due respect, please refrain from accusations of "simplism" or of bragging. It ain't bragging if you can do it, as Muhammad Ali said and the lesson of the video is far more nuanced than your accusation of "simplism" appears to recognize.

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid." --Friedrich Nietzsche

I don't agree with your assessment, but I've no interest in going round and round when we don't -- and won't -- agree. The need to tell everyone how great you are usually arises out of insecurity and immaturity.

The simplism "accusation" is what it is. The presentation is one dimensional and ignores many considerations of equal (and perhaps in the long run greater) importance. But that's an opinion based on values we probably don't share.

While there were many great things about Ali, his bragging went hand-in-hand with what was at times a very ugly mean streak. He was cruel when he didn't need to be. I admired Ali's skills, but I've never employed his witticisms as words to live by.

If you can do it, you shouldn't have to brag.

As for nuance, the video is about as nuanced as a sledge hammer.

I've lived my entire life in the age of American economic supremacy, and I'll undoubtedly die before it ends. But I suspect there are young Americans who will outlive it, and I hope if and when that happens they have more to be proud of than how big their economy used to be.

from inside your great country and from without how "bad" you are....you challange it....you yell from the mountain top how wrong they are and how right you are....otherwise you are just a beaten wife who refuses to recognize the problem and fixes it.

Like America much?

I hope my great great grandchildren are able to enjoy the greatest country in the history of the world...just as it is today.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

elmidd, "The need to tell everyone how great you are usually arises out of insecurity and immaturity" may be true in some cases, but not here. My 5th grade daughter's social studies class teaches lots about oppression, but nothing at all about competitiveness. For example, last year she learned that Chinese came to the US to work on the railroads and ended up being discriminated against through various labor laws once the railroads were built and they entered to workforce to compete against whites.

That is a fact, it happened and it was morally wrong. We need to learn about it so it doesn't happen any more.

However, what was not taught was the reason why Chinese came to America for jobs and Americans did not go to China for jobs.

The US education system, as far as I can tell from my kids, does a great job teaching about diversity and oppression, but a horrific one teaching about competitive advantages in economic systems. That's why I love this video, not because I want to beat my chest and yell "Scoreboard, baby!" to people from all other countries.

To redstate: thanks for posting this! I'm going to go put it up at my blog.

Visit The Scratching Post!

Pejman, in a time when I'm worrying constantly about oil-rich nations and their sovereign wealth funds, this little video served as a refreshing reality check. Thank you.

In the U.S. we have standards and principles for measuring greatness. Libs deny all of them. Black is white, up is down, success is failure, the least among us are the greatest.

Wrong.

And so predictable that videos and stats like this drive libs and America-haters (but I repeat myself) nuts.

You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.

America is great. The economy is great. Does that mean the people are great? Does that mean that the huge part of the population that favors obsolete socialist policies is great? Nah. I know the thrust of the video was to be in favor of liberty and free markets and such, but the beginning was just too long and too nationalistic for me.

One other thing is that we inherited the size of the economy from previous generations (including older people still living). It's trends like growth rates, investment rates, etc. that determine "moral" value insofar as moral value is related to the economy. I don't have a problem with our trade deficit and low savings rates and so forth, but what good is our huge economic output if we use it all for sports cars, $400 haircuts, and conspicuous consumption?

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report

Unless they first manage to exceed our economic output, right?
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

Terrorist attacks will continue to occur on US soil until we gain control of our borders (and make sure we do a better job on expired visas). This is a fact independent of whether we have troops in the Middle East or not. However, our presence in the ME does make recuiting easier for our enemies.

I believe that staging attacks in the US take time, training, and funding. As we continue to crack down on sources of funding, we should see reduced attacks. Not having a successful plot in US since 9-11 is a good sign, but we are vulnerable with an open border.

If I was fighting against the US, I'd want to bog their miliary down in a police action, and target them with IEDs and sniper attacks. Hit and run stuff, no? Relatively cheap for me because I can recruit, train, and send lunatics from neighboring ME countries. Relatively expensive for the US because of all the logistical costs. Why continue to play on a slanted field?

If they come here, they will find we are neither complacent or asleep this time. This approach saves money, reduces international tension, and allows us to use special forces on overseas covert missions instead of sending Jonny Reservist for his third/fourth tour in the sandbox from hell.

If you want to see how effective we can be at defeating terrorism without having to be in Iraq, read "Shadow War" by Rickard Miniter.

Hell, if Iraq deteriorates into a "haven for terrorists" then we can park our battleships offshore and bomb them anywhere they gather. Why not admit that the post Vietnam new age goal of winning the "hearts and minds" has failed. We rule Iraq by force, and threat of force, just like Saddam did.

Do you deny that we have reached a Military stalemate, and now are simply awaiting political progress? Our boys have done a terrific job, and they deserve to be able to come home with their heads held high. There is no dishonor in how they have executed the mission. I just think we keep sending them on the wrong mission.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

being in Iraq is doing more harm than good, no. How about you?

before you learn of the Florida media monitored recounts and the fact that Earth still revolves around the Sun, despite Gore's Earth in the Balance predictions...

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

1. Use a mildly humorous (but out of date) punchline.
2. Avoid any substantive debate.
3. Retort with a call back to original joke (in a vain effort to improve it)
4. End discussion when things don't go your way.

When you're ready to ditch the script, let me know. We can have a DISCUSSION. Who knows, you might even learn something?

in defeat that you ignore the facts on the ground now. You still live in 2006. When you catch up with Murtha, who woke up this week for 5 seconds, let me know.

night, night

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

Let me see if I understand you. You think that because I say we are at a Military stalemate and are waiting for a political solution, that I am "invested in defeat."

I'm afraid that off the rack slight just doesn't fit me.

As for my verbosity (is that a word?), it helps to convey one's meaning in a medium (text) that doesn't allow one's voice inflection and facial expression to be read.

But, perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe concise barbs that lack substance are a more effective means of persuading people?

I'm here (at Redstate) because I think it's a good place to discuss the nuaces of Republican ideals, and to get exposure to other points of view. That means that if you disagree with me (and I encourage that), all I ask is that you actually reference what it is that you disagree with, and why?

I don't think that's too much to ask in debate forum such as this, do you?

The way you are using the word does not seem consistent with the definition I am familiar with.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

was to achieve enough security to allow the political process to move forward because a purely military victory was not possible. The surge has dramatically reduced violence across Iraq, so we are not losing. And if we cannot "win" with the military alone, that is where I am getting the term "stalemate."

My own view is that right now we are beating AQ like a pińata.

So at the very least we are accomplishing a very nice objective.

With low levels of violence, Oil money up for the bribing and the MEF all in Iraq, I am sure they will work out some sort of political settlement.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

We have been very effective against AQ.

"Shadow War," the book I referenced goes into detail about that exact topic.

Where do we go from here seems to be the point of contention.

I'm here (at Redstate) because I think it's a good place to discuss the nuaces of Republican ideals

You're here to shill for RonPaul™. We recognized that fact from the first day you registered. Unlike most of your friends you appeared potty trained.

But you are still a shill. Your posts are intended to disrupt -- rather than discuss. But, thanks for playing.

========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?

at my original post to see what your contribution was, because I couldn't remember (no offense). You seemed to have a suspicion about a date range I used, when in fact I used the only one provided by the Department of Labor's FAQ. I like to make sure that when I quoting stats that I have a reliable source. The 1967 number wasn't chosen by me to mislead anyone.

If I hadn't lost my temper at what I felt were unwarranted attacks, I probably could have explained that back then.

I sincerely apologize for those rude and arrogant comments, I should never have over-reacted like that.

Redstate has seen fit to give me another chance. I will respect your decision not to, if that is what you decide.

to make political progress.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

Being new here, my tactic is this: it is their house and I want to be heard and to learn. That makes the terms completely up to them.

Think of the treatment an avowed Republican gets at some liberal sites. I don't mean trolls, but someone expressing legitimate dissent from liberal views. I've seen some get hammered beyond rescue and all that does is harden any negative view.

Thick skin is to be expected. The way I see it is I either have to have patience and expect a little violence, or why bother? If I demand an answer, I couldn't possibly expect the results I want.

Have patience and ask your question again at a different time.

Also, some people are so wrong they may as well be on a different planet. :)

I've read some posts here that I wouldn't know where to begin to have a dialog - yet. You're not going to change anyone, and I expect they won't change you. But by gaining perspective you at least have a chance to disagree without having to go away.

I was expecting to call the whole experiment off but so far I have been pleasantly surprised.

Love,
Dad

I really blew up after I recieved several comments to my first post here. Not good. And, you can't take it back, so word to the wise, learn from my painful mistakes and avoid them yourself.

It sounds like you are here for the good. Getting insulted here means nothing. It's their house and people vent. If it gets nasty, you can say you gave it an honest effort and that's more than many.

So far, it's actually spun my head around here. I wouldn't go telling others that RedState can be quite civil; people will think you are nuts and they will want to take the star off your belly. ;-)

It is true that America should not be complacent. But if one is going to maintain a successful track record, one must first be aware that one actually is doing reasonably well.

If most Americans believed that France, Germany and Canada are more economicially dynamic nations than the US, we might be tempted to adopt their economic policies of more government regulation over the labor market and nationalized health care.

If the Boston Red Sox believed, incorrectly, that they lost the World Series a few weeks ago, they might be tempted to radically change their lineup and their pitching staff, rather than resign those who had a role in their victory.

Perhaps there should be a "part 2" to this video, which would compare the economic performance of advanced nations of the world excluding the United States. For example, over the past 5 or 10 or 15 years, which nations have enjoyed the most rapid economic growth? Japan? France? Great Britain? Ireland? Spain? The Netherlands?

I don't have the answer to these questions. But I have read that Ireland has enacted many aspects of "Reaganomics" and have seen their economy prosper. Anyone care to investigate this proposition?

Not having any children I can't speak to what they're being taught in school.

If many Americans literally believe that France, Germany and Canada have more dynamic economies than the US, they're simply being fed misinformation. And free markets are ruthless about making sure that people with bad information get very limited opportunities to destroy value.

So I'm not terribly worried about economic ignorance.

What does worry me is the belief that countries like France, Germany and Canada have more fair societies than we do, and that we should emulate them. The only way to achieve economic fairness in the known universe is at the expense of aggregate prosperity. And a great many young people seem perfectly willing to be a less prosperous society if we can be a more fair one.

Now it's certain that some intelligent people, like our own flyerhawk, accept this tradeoff with their eyes open. But it's possible that many of our college-educated youth who speak in similar terms have simply been drinking Kool-aid and they'll wake up when they start making their own money.

I have young people working for me now who literally believe that society will be more economically prosperous (not just more tasteful) as soon as we kill all the CEOs. They'll learn.

Now here's the thing about social utopianism: it's all well and good as long as you can afford it. As the US starts to lose its economic pre-eminence little by little to other countries, Americans will wake up and recognize that we need to take the gloves off of business, and to hell with all the high taxes and the social-welfare garbage. That moment may come too late, however.

And that's because of the other major problem: we're aging and graying. More and more Americans are entering their less-productive years, and they will vote for government policies that transfer resources to them and away from productive uses. This is a powerful and unavoidable headwind that the American economy will suffer from, for at least two or three decades.

Ireland eliminated progressive taxation and most business regulation in and around 1995. That touched off an instantaneous boom to continues to this day. It also reversed, overnight, a massive diaspora of young Irish people around the world. Unlike America, Ireland is a young nation, and prosperity is still seen there as an unambiguously good thing.

You said: The only way to achieve economic fairness in the known universe is at the expense of aggregate prosperity.

This is why I got hooked on Redstate. Bravo.

One of the main themes that defines liberals vs us, is that they seek equality and we seek liberty.

What was a base cause for my conversion was the observative that liberty
produces more affluence at the bottom, while equality makes everyone poorer.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

Thanks for the interesting response. It is true that many people, young and not so young, often say, "Money isn't everything." What they are really saying is "Wealth and income aren't everything."

And this is true. But in the next breath they will then say, "We need better health care, education and housing," all of which a nation can have if they have more wealth and income.

That's why I think you have people, incorrectly, believing that a more socialized economy would be superior to one we have. They don't see the contradiction in wanting more of the things that money can buy (health care, education, housing, nice vacations, early retirement) and denouncing "materialism" or the study of economics.

I get this in online debates over free trade all the time. I will tell an anti-free trade person that free trade creates conditions for more economic growth and prosperity. The anti-free trader accuses me of being overly "materialistic" (concerned with money, income and wealth) and then says, "We just can't allow our living standards to decline as we see our jobs shipped overseas."

He doesn't realize that he is being just as materialistic as I am, but, by being unwilling to confront his desire for more money, wealth and income, he will end up proscribing economic policies that creates less of these.

It's better to be up front and open about one's materialism. Admit that you want your country to be wealthy and prosperous up front. Then you can focus on how to effectively get there. The best way to get there is through policies of free enterprise, free trade and freedom of association.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

I could argue for days about free-trade with you but you are 100% correct about materialism.

I sat down and thought about where I stand in the world and was pleasantly surprised at my luck.

No, I am not asset rich, but I have 3 acres of land on a pristine river in Oregon. I have a little hobby farm with a few horses, some chickens, etc.

If "Something Bad" happened, I have all the eggs and chicken and fish and wood I need. I grow vegetables in the summer. This all keeps the grandkids busy, but it actually could be of practical value.

Two of my horses are worthy to pull a cart long distances. If it ever hit the fan, I would build a nice cart or carriage and equip it with a fuel cell so I could listen to music and have heat while I deliver eggs and chicken one way, and fuel cells and solar panels the other way.

I would put a racing stripe down the side so my grandkids could slowly pick up babes in the chariot and cruise around and rock out.

Then when people started to ask about the cool chariot, I would take their order for a custom-built chariot of their own.

I really need nothing, and can occupy my time quite well. In the mean time, I will keep reading and improving my engineering skills and I will keep practicing farming with the grandkids.

A few I would wager are addicts of advanced medical treatments, a varied diet, and technologies such as the one that allows us to communicate.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I never even set it as a goal. I grew up with Subways and grime in Boston, not horses in Oregon. My girlfriend got me into it.

If I was still in Boston I would still look at my game plan to make sure I could stay happy.

If "things" are what you need, then so be it. I'm a software engineer by trade and work with many people who are material "freaks" and are happy and great people.

My door is open to them if they ever need a meal. They can learn how to pluck a chicken in the bargain and would probably get a certain amount of satisfaction in doing it. ;)

But they define it differently. Rather than the freedom to pursue individual enterprise, they're interested in freedom from desire.

Left-wingers believe that "consumerism" and "brand slavery" are the great evils of our day. They want to be free from the need to work at a job that (theoretically) makes some CEO rich as Mammon, solely in order to scratch out the necessities of life for themselves.

I won't bother to rehearse the well-known ignorance of economic specialization implicit in this position, to say nothing of its assumption that money grows on trees.

I do think, however, that a society as wealthy and prosperous as the United States has become, is vulnerable to such idiocy, because we're wealthy and prosperous enough to mask the effort it took to get where we are.

As other nations increase in economic dynamism while the US goes in the other direction, my hope is that more and more young people will start to re-learn the age-old lesson that society's prosperity starts with the effort of individuals.

The greatest achivement and triumph of mankind has been the establishment of the rule of law.

The rule of law ultimately exists to make gain a zero-sum endeavour. Unchecked gain is the bane of humanity and is balanced by the rule of law. We would be savages without it.

Most liberals understand this. They simply want to peg the best value for the individual as opposed to the company.

Many companies work toward creating an unfair advantage for themselves. Why should big oil be entitled to $16 billion in tax breaks on top of record profits? I pay taxes, why can't they? They argue costs of exploration but that's called the cost of doing business. Don't let them fool you.

And by the way be thankful of those oil companies.
Your gas costs you $3.00 gallon
If you were in europe it would $3.00/ liter
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

And gas prices were even worst than Europe (I think).

If our gas is cheaper because of tax breaks to big oil, then that means we are subsidizing oil. I would rather pay the two cents.

(I'm against subsidies and unions, but I call myself a liberal. Go figure!)

He has a whole series of blogs that could be entitled "The Oil business for people who can't take a lifetime to get up to speed"
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Thanks for the tip. I'm learning my way around here.

Oil companies do not get tax breaks out of the normal for any sort of manufacturing/mining/drilling interest. They do get some exemptions on costs of exploration which are accepted accounting principles.

Oil Companies pay a really HUGE amount of taxes.

I find it interesting that in the late 80's, early 90's when the oil industry was suffering, and all the service companies were going out of business, I did not see any articles on the poor folks in the oil field, or any legislation giving breaks and subsidies to oil companies (not that I think it should have happened) But now that prices are up, we are the big villains again.

Please try to rise above the doublespeak that comes out of the media. Yes oil companies have made some big profits recently, but oil always has been a commodity which is characterized by extreme ups and downs.

Right now those highs have allowed my retirement fund to grow pretty nice. And every other retirement fund or person who invested in energy stocks. It is supply and demand.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

For most of human history, people have worked in order to secure the means of survival: food, shelter and clothing. By your admission, you have returned to this mode of life with no regrets. I applaud you for living your life in accordance with your principles.

But for the vast majority of people, industrial capitalism has provided the means to rise far above the struggle for basic survival, by making the wherewithal for survival so inexpensive that developed nations can and do give it away for free to their disadvantaged people.

But man still needs to justify his existence. He also has a hunger to learn new things, and to extend his own capabilities in new and different ways.

These more spiritual needs are those well suited to modern post-industrial capitalism.

I employ people in my several businesses. I set as my daily goal the creation of work environments in which people can go home from work saying not "another day, another dollar." But rather: "I learned new things today, I interacted with exciting people, and I achieved things I didn't know I was capable of."

I actually found myself in this situation. It was never the plan but life is strange. I am still quite industrious and write prolific amounts of software for money. It holds less and less meaning for me these days but the company I'm contracting for has a good thing going and a great customer base. My leaving would just burn their customers and I can't have that on my head. I will slowly detach from there and my comment was just about my self-inventory and the conclusion that I can make it if I have to.

I have to tell you, though; it's not always fun breaking up ice from the watering trough in the morning darkness - especially with a horse riffling through your pockets. It's tough to do math like that and I'll never stop being the engineer. I also glossed over small facts like the pharmacy I keep in the large refrigerator out in the barn. My animals may end up being on their own. :)

I'm sure you want to strangle some of your employees, but that you care for them and remain successful is testament that it can work and must be personally satisfying. Not everyone has what it takes to do that.

I address your points here.

And Rightly So!

Remember Scrooge McDuck? He was a character in the old Donald Duck comics. He used to have a "money bin" (I believe it has since been acquired by George Soros, BTW.)

Anyway, I have previously remarked in these pages that oil company profits don't go into some big money bin somewhere; those profits get reinvested in new wells, new platforms and in exploring for new fields. An oil company that fails to reinvest its profits is bleeding a slow death.

In other words, profits are what guarantee future supplies. We are in the pickle we're in now because oil was too cheap for 20 years; oil company profits suffered, and inventories could not be replenished for the price it was selling for back then.

Since kind poster Joliphant has referred you to some of my prior musings, let me suggest a good place to start: Crude Oil hits $90 per barrel! ... Congratulations!

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life. - Frank Zappa

I thought it was $16 billion, but it's only $14.5 billion that I don't really think they are entitled to. They can explore on their own dime and then hit us at the pumps if they wish. I don't use as much gas as, say, a trucking company so I really don't think I should have to help subsidize their exploration at the same rate.

(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a1eDReAgtETw&refer=n...)

If they sign oil contracts in Iraq, will we get reimbursed for part of the war cost? Those contracts wouldn't have been possible without the war, and that would make their business once again tax-payer subsidized.

It's a great way to make money, having the tax payers do the the heavy lifting, I just don't agree with it.

Its amazing the differences I see when I look at my fathers generation he was born in 1895 and compare it to mine. The America he knew as a child was entirely different than the one I knew. He knew the country as a struggling up and comer where even the concepts behind the new deal were hated. I have only known this country as the colossus of the west. The greatest nation in the world, that when challenged went from rockets exploding on launch pads to the moon in less than ten years. I have always looked back on a history of a nation so filled with success that it would seem to have been inevitable.

Then I am brought down to earth. I never understood 3/4 of what my father tried to tell me until I started my own business. Success isn't guaranteed and even the greatest of victories are temporary phenomena. All that it needs is a few small things to turn an industrial empire into a junkyard of rotting tools. What worries me so much about the liberal ascendancy is that they seem to see our success as inevitable and our place in this world as granted.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

your father was born in 1895? If you don't mind my asking, how old are you? I am nearly 50 and my father is 80, HIS father was born in 1901.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

Be thankful your Father is still around, I came along late in my dad's life and he passed away when I was very young. There is so much I can only infer from the fact that he wouldn't talk about things and I only found out posthumously.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I still call my Dad up every week and talk about football and politics. The really amazing thing to me is how, as I grow older, I become more and more like him. But he was nothing like his father. My grandpa was an artist and inventor and rather liberal. My dad and I both were conservative by nature, and like to work with our hands. Although in retrospect, we both also produce armature art.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

him as much now as I did when he passed 8 years ago.

Spend all the time you can with him.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

I'd quibble with you a bit blackhedd. If you want to characterize dKos liberals in a slogal you're better off with "freedom from need" or "freedom from fear". Recognizing that people need food, a roof over their heads, and medical care when they're sick seems simple enough. Fear of the lack of any of those things, the loss of privacy, and economic ruin for whatever else they have managed to acquire are the other options. People may desire a new car, a bigger house, etc, but I don't believe anybody argues they shouldn't have to work hard to achieve those things.

Edward's two America speech captures the essence better than your consumerism/brand slavery idea. How exactly is that individual who puts in 40-50hr weeks of manual labor at a job that earns cost of living adjustments supposed to feel about a CEO that jets around, seems to have it easy, and makes huge bonuses because he fired people, cut benefits, or did something that drove up profits for the company but hurt the employees? Especially when it turns out that CEO hurt the company in the long term, but he got out with huge stock option gains plus a buyout!

That's not really the issue though, it's the perceived disparity between those who made it and those who haven't yet. Back when we had the robber barrens and companies ruthlessly treated employees I'm sure our economy was doing wonderful but I wouldn't have wanted to live then. Using only GDP, etc it probably looked like America was a great country and everyone should be happy it was doing so well right? Heck, using the average per-capita-income you mentioned elsewhere it probably still looked good but perhaps if you looked at the median real income it might not...

Right now the income at the top of every company is rising faster than the bottom and that's OK as long as the ratio isn't out of whack. Executive pay to employee pay in the 1950s used to be a much smaller ratio than it does today. What is happening?

As an aside, people joke that the rich don't pay taxes and in some cases it's true. Seems lots of "rich" folk own their own small corporations who somehow manage to provide company cars, pay their mortgage, employ their children for $20/hr to do nothing, go on fancy "business" trips to exotic locations, etc. Since the company doesn't make a profit after paying for all that stuff tax income is kinda low... Heck, for the really wealthy those tax-free bonds I hear are good, but why exactly do they exist if the only people who can really benefit from them are already wealthy?

Anyway, the idea that liberals want to remove desire is just silly. I'm thinking communism is a better name for that. Liberals want to guarantee, and thus remove the fear of needing, essential items for living. And no, that doesn't include big-screen TVs.

exactly for people like yourself who would appear to be quite jealous of what they "want" and cannot or will not work as hard to have.

It is not the business of the government to take away your or any liberals "fears"....it is your personal job....get to it.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

I agree with the majority of what you wrote except that I don't begrudge the rich for jetting around if (always, if) they treated people fairly to get it.

I think it's great that Bill Gates does charity but that's not why I admire him. He made a fortune for himself while kicking down to the people who helped him make it. Nobody worked harder than him, but many worked just as hard.

I mean, it can't be all about money, can it? Is there room for the human condition? I have a blind cousin who can't participate in most earning opportunities but there's room for her, right? She took our casual Catholic upbringing a bit more serious and it worked out great for her. She also knows not to cram it down our throats because she knows humility. She's a great gal and has an amazing son that I should write about someday (he will be rich.) (also, her husband died while engaging in an extra-marital affair, so fill in a religious joke here. She does.)

Anyone should be entitled to achieve absurd riches, but doing so by pushing aside humanity receives nothing but contempt from me. It was probably my complaining about a surging stock due to massive layoffs that gave liberals a bad rap on their business philosophy.

Even with politicians: I don't actually have a problem with one dipping into the well, just don't use my money to do it. If they can build a new wing on their house by sliding some business a certain way, fine; just don't make us pay more for it. I'd rather have a mildly corrupt and happy politician than a zealot with a chip on his shoulder. (That goes for special prosecutors too, Mr. Starr!)

I really liked what you wrote because it is a realist view of liberals (at least the one's I know). Yes, there are some idealists and some far left kooks, but they make more noise than the numbers of them deserve. Go over to a liberal blog and you will see that the vast majority of conservatives are ____ and ____. Pick your favorite perjoratives.

That's why I'm here. I'm sick of validating the same tripe. I started to find myself spouting the talking points that have somehow, unfortunately, started applying to the people and not the politicians. Both parties have big problems with their politicians.

productivity gains of the 90s and thru the 00s was technology. Tell me how a candidate's porposed policies would help increase productivity other than supply side tax rate cuts and less regulation. How does education affect same?

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

We've had two major bursts of productivity increases affecting the US economy in the last two decades. The one in the mid-Nineties was most probably driven by information technology. The one that appears to have ended in 2005 or '06 was probably driven by globalization.

You ask how a politician's policies can increase productivity. They can't.

I'm a businessman. There's not a blessed thing that any President of the United States can say to me, that will encourage me to take more risk, hire more people, or work harder.

On the other hand, there are millions of things she can say that will discourage me from doing those things.

The best thing a President can do to encourage productivity growth is to announce that the business of America is business, and get the d*mned government out of the way. We need less regulation, an elimination of the business income tax and capital-gains tax, and an end to taxes on exports. That's for starters.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

I agree, I was glad when I read that Reagan had put his picture up. Do you know of any good Coolidge books?

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

Well, didn't he translate some major work on his honeymoon?

HTML Help for Red Staters

Unless your into ancient mining tech not of great interest.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Of course it wasn't until I was older than I found out they were all from Silent Cal.

Whatever happened to the economic theory that stated that too much concentration of personal wealth leads to recession or depression?

GDP, per capita income, and trade balances are pretty meaningless to the average voter. If they don't feel that they are getting their fair share of the economic pie, the majority will vote to expand the welfare state.

Does anybody believe that U.S. statistics truly reflect the amount of inflation in food, energy, health care, and housing costs. If enough voters think their cost of living raises haven't exceeded these higher basic costs, and, at the same time, a massive redistribution of wealth to the top 1-5 percent of the population has occurred, I doubt that they will be too concerned about economic development or free trade.

A majority of voters have to think that the neocons will get them a fair piece of the economic pie, through their policies. Unless the neocons get a hold of the distribution of income and wealth problem, they will lose power rapidly. Human psychology would indicate that it isn't just how much I get, but how much I get relative to the fat cats.

This is a very cynical political view, but I would like your response.

Also, under what conditions might your answer change, if any?

Over the next few decades, the entire rest of the world (except for Africa, Bangladesh and the oil-states) will indeed join the developed world, with per-capita GDPs in the range that Mexico is at now ($10,000 at current exchange rates).

However, they will not simultaneously become liberal democracies. Rather, they will try to pursue the heavily-managed, policy-driven growth model that China is in the process of validating. (Of course, not everyone will be willing or able to emulate the biggest factor in China's lack of economic stress, which is the degree to which they insulate their finance and banking systems from the rest of the world.)

That's the reason why I keep harping on productivity growth as the key goal for the US. We are, and always will be, unique as a freedom-loving society. I say that even in light of the European nation-states (except Britain) which appear to be liberal democracies but in reality are the same social-compact aristocracies they've been for over a thousand years.

In the global game of Risk, freedom gives us an unbeatable edge in terms of economic flexibility and productivity growth, but not in businesses (like manufacturing or resources) that favor sheer size. If we execute this well, we will win the game. We should not make the mistake of competing on terms that favor the Chinese or anyone else.

Politicians who understand neither history nor economics must not be allowed to take us off course.

what has been fueling our growth lately? It's certainly not our factories.

Who cares? The mass replication of designs is no longer a high-value-added activity. It takes virtually no skill. Heck, machines can do it.

creating wealth through debt is risky in the long run.

There is no such thing as creating wealth without risk. Debt has nothing to do with it. Debt merely changes who is taking the risk.

even cheap stuff become prohibitively expensive without a job.

Hopefully yours is not a plea for those HighPaidManufacturingJobs™ that politicians are always talking about. Those were predicated on a skill level that no longer obtains in most manufacturing. Journeyman welders, machinists, etc. made good money. But that work is all done by machines now. Even China is losing manufacturing jobs... to machines.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

I don't mean risky to the individual, I mean risky as policy.

The treasury auctions seem to be more and more frequent these days. It eventually has to be backed by GDP. Efficiency doesn't grow the GDP by itself, it just makes it cheaper.

...schedule, same as they always have. The amount of new debt being issued is falling along with the Federal budget deficit.

Shifting from the fiscal side to the monetary side, the Federal Reserve hasn't created any permanent new money since April, well before the financial crisis blew up.

And the trade deficit is now about 5.5% of GDP, versus 7% or more a few years back, when the euro rather than the dollar was falling like a rock.

The global economy balances itself automatically. Guys like Hank Paulson understand that, which is why they're so reluctant to use policy tools to "manage" the economy.

Every month. You are correct, though; the amount has fallen recently but that seems to be more of an indicator of expected smaller growth.

I'm not even say it's wrong; I'm just saying that at some point debt has to be backed by something. That something is future growth, and that can entail risk for the nation at the levels we are seeing.

The debt is very manageable.

Where do you see the problem ?

Oh and when you quote making quotes with ginormous numbers. The net privately held wealth of the nation is 72 trillion and that does not include things like the public lands.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

As far as the frequency of auctions is concerned: the Treasury actively manages its exposure to different maturities as they run off, depending on the shape of the yield curve at any particular time.

Formally speaking, US Treasury debt isn't backed up with GDP or any other kind of economic measure. It's backed by the "full faith and credit of the US government," which specifically refers to its power to print legal money.

Since I'm sure you knew that, I'm not quite sure what your point is. If you're simply saying that the day will come when investors will refuse to buy US government paper, welcome to the chorus. People have been saying that for 25 years now.

That scare people into thinking taxes need to be higher.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I'm going to defer to you on this because economics is not my thing. I was originally considering the huge growth in the financial institutions over the years as being in good part fueled by debt but then I dragged in the government and I shouldn't have.

My point is that, in the extreme, let's say all our wealth is growing fantastically through foreign investment. Again, in the extreme, we don't need to make anything as a nation because we collectively benefit from cheap foreign labor, our bank accounts swell, and we spend our money... where?

Do we save it? Not good for the economy. Do we start new companies? OK; but not ones that make "things". They may make wealth but it is concentrating now.

What is the endgame? What happens if there is a hiccup elsewhere?

If China saw major labor problems or some other form of unrest, we literally do not have the chip foundries in this country anymore to produce the electronic gear we are so dependent on. Worse, we are not training new talent in the numbers needed to ramp up fast. Our economy's health is in fact dependent on much of the rest of the world. I'm sure there are historical parallels, but not in the same way as today. What does this all mean? I don't know, but I would feel better if we still made stuff.

Ironically, I hope there is a lot of ignorance in what I'm saying, but by saying it, maybe I'll learn something.

What if all of a sudden everybody else in the world decided to shun us ?

Answer, it would be bad but we would find ways to cope if were allowed to.

Upside we probably could cope and more or less keep on without seeing too big a loss. The nations that shunned us, would likely have a very different experience.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Speaking of which. I have a million things I have to do but thank you for the conversations. I'll be reading you soon.

And it's why politicians want to meddle so bad... they can't imagine they aren't needed.

Bottomline, I don't think our Oregonian understands fully the global economy. And I can, with complete confidence, state I don't fully understand it.

The only reason China is becoming an economic lion is because they treat their people like we treat pens at a bank.

What this country needs is a leader who is also a teacher. It's time that the citizenry understand that unless we are undoing what we've done, the only thing government can do is to hinder economic growth.

Want to see those property values tank by 25% to 30% instead of 5%, let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid get involved. They'll tack on a troop withdrawal date and a SCHIP expansion while completely clusterf**king the real estate and equity markets for decades.

But as a liberal, I run the risk of being trolled here if I make general statement along idological lines.

I don't understand the leaps you make in your last paragraph. They simply sound partisan and I am not here to get into partisan issues.

I respect your freedom to be wrong, and I'm sure you respect mine.

I'm not sure China is strictly a labor issue, and even if it is, it doesn't make the problem go away. As a nation, they are ramping up as though they mean to stay. They are making strategic moves that should worry us. We should be doing the same and I don't mean that militarily. They know full well the risks of war and seem to be doing fine without it.

I sometimes ask myself what would happen if Walmart (generic) just went away. There used to be saying: "Buy US", but that seems to be religated to mail order these days.

I wasn't be sarcastic or rude... rather I was stating an observation that it appeared you didn't grasp how the United States can simply handle it's debt and how the global economy can adjust. You don't need gold in vaults to address the currency, debt, deficit, whatever ills you today problem.

I was born and spent quite a bit of my childhood in Oregon and what I have learned is that Oregon used to be "moderately conservative with an environmental twist" and has been completely ruined by lame-o Californians upset with the prices and taxes they created there and then move and immediately start demanding the exact same things that caused them to move in the first place.

What would happen if WalMart disappeared? There would be a lot more Targets.

China's issue is entirely about labor. They have human capital that they use as if they are cogs and pay them little with very little other things. There is no way China could be a powerhouse if the people had any form of Democracy that would make their leaders/CEOs have accountability.

We cannot ramp up the way they do. As a liberal, you know full well there are about 19,532 programs put in place to prevent this country from using it's resources (the non-labor kind) to ramp up production to compete. And there is no incentive to do so. We'd have to fight a price war and we'd lose that war very quickly.

My last paragraph was partisan in only that Nancy and Harry are in charge and have "talked" about trying to have a government solution to a private property problem. It wasn't to bait you or anything. Quite simply, you know full well that the government isn't about solving problems, it's about getting us to live with the problem so those employees hired to fix it can keep their jobs.

I think china would blow our socks off if it had those things. Look at how well it can do with a strategy thats made to benefit the few in their country.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I guess I look at it that they wouldn't though. Because if you aren't forced to work at a job that could literally kill you without being paid handsomely their economic output wouldn't be anything like it is now.

Further, if they had to pay people for what their labor was actually worth, and those billion people started to demand government programs, I think China would sink fast.

many more women due to selective abortion.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

China has still got a few 100000000 peasants to work with. Until that supply dries up, wages aren't going anywhere

In that the labor supply would better allocate itself.

Heres the scary thing as rapid as china's growth is, its not nearly impressive as it should be. Solely because china's growth is controlled to keep the current oligarchy in power.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I'm just trying to tread carefully. I am quite active on DailyKos and the partisanship is brutal there.

Dissenting views are trolled out of existence and I'm sure it can be quite easy to pick a fight here too.

You are right about the government but it can't be drowned in a bathtub either.

Cheers, and it's Saturday and I have children scowling at me.

Thanks again.

not kookoo bananas partisan like some places. There are a few topics that are exceptions, though.