| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Get Out Of America!; while you still can... | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Dec 8 2008, 02:09 PM (689 Views) | |
| Ulgania | Dec 8 2008, 10:53 PM Post #51 |
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse
|
The general propagation of free trade (with a load of strings attached) screwed over the automobile industry, and unions did screw over steel and made the cost of doing business that much worse. Sadly, it seems as though we're going to need a massive source of cheep labor to do the dirty work for the economy. Lots of output for little pay! If it wasn't for the fact that all the exploitable workers are often thrown into the service industry good things would happen. Who cares about silly things like wages when the backbone of an economy is being held up! And this thinking still occurs 0_o |
 |
 
|
| Sedulius | Dec 8 2008, 11:35 PM Post #52 |
Field Marshal
|
Ha. With the dumbing down of the people in general, I'm sure cheap labor will be easy to find... |
|
|
|
| East Anarx | Dec 8 2008, 11:39 PM Post #53 |
Anarchitect
|
It might very well come down to just that. I, on the other hand, couldn't give a shit about the Republic. As far as I'm concerned, we tried the constitutional republic thing, and this is what it got us. The founding fathers should have known that a monopoly on force would inevitably lead to tyranny. Amass that much power in one place and how can you expect it to attract anything other than the most despicable, power-hungry, Machiavellian kind of people? A piece of paper isn't capable of restraining the government any more than an infant is capable of standing up to a steamroller. I will not fight for the Republic, not because its a lost cause, (just because I may have already lost I'll never stop fighting for something I know is right,) but because if I'm going to fight for a lost cause, it must be nothing more nor less than absolute liberty. When it comes to that, I refuse to compromise. If there is at all hope for any kind of lasting peace, any kind of lasting freedom, it will come only when enough people realize that no one has the right to control anyone else. The closer we come to that, the better. And that's all there is to it. As for whatever my chances of success may be, I am fairly certain they will be higher if I manage to stay out of a death camp. BTW, it's great to see you again, Scy. I was beginning to think you'd left us forever. :sad: |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Dec 8 2008, 11:47 PM Post #54 |
|
Field Marshal
|
What's wrong with power-hungry Machiavellians? :lol: |
|
|
|
| Porcu | Dec 9 2008, 01:15 AM Post #55 |
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."
|
Damnit! Away studying for finals for a couple of days and stubble back onto the type of thread that keeps me up reading and thinking about it...Missed out on pretty much the entire discussion. Frankly I have no idea what the hell is going to happen and don't expect myself to make it through any apocalyptic scenarios with ease (if it ever gets to that point) but I must say that it is very entertaining just to read what everyone else is thinking. If anything it gets my head churning :P For me the auto industry needs to fail, for that is not what the American and World financial markets depend on. Sure it may be bad timing that the first black president was elected in what will probably be another depression but all in all I seriously doubt that the very fabrics why which the United States is held together are going to seize and shatter. If anything (and it is certainly stretching it for me), I follow Tristan's logic of a hyper-regulated, fascist state. All in all I agree with NH and Flumes... Edited by Porcu, Dec 9 2008, 01:18 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Draxis | Dec 9 2008, 03:30 AM Post #56 |
Captain
|
Yeah E! Why must you hate us? :P |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Dec 9 2008, 10:01 AM Post #57 |
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
OK, a couple of points and corrections for you children: 1. If there was no economic crisis, John McCain would be the President Elect. Think about it. Why was there an economic crisis? Couldn't earlier action have forstalled it? Who and what prevented earlier action? Might I suggest the Democratic Congress ignored, no, encouraged behavior that would throw the country into economic chaos for the sole purpose of assuring the election of Democrats everywhere. Proof? If this crisis was in anyway the fault of George Bush or the Republicans, Congress would be calling for hearings and investigations like crazy. Wait. What's that? They're not calling for hearings and investigations? Why not? - because such investigations would point directly at Barney Franks, Harry Ried, Chris Dodd and Nancy Palosi. Now, if anything good happens after 1/21/09, Obama and the Democrats will take all the credit. 2. There should never have been bailouts. There was a moment, right after Palosi, Reid and Bush got together, and Bush asked first for the $700,000,000,000, where this could have been prevented. The unforseen delay caused by bucking Dems and Republicans in the Senate let that moment slip by, and the money couldn't be delivered in time to forstall the calapse of credit. That first flush of money was meant to bail out the polititian's folly, and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which would have prevented the fall of the credit markets. Any attempts after that to bail out individual companies is foolish. We already have a bailout mechanism in place, called the Bankruptcy courts, which is where they should be. 3. Flumes is partially right. The American spirit will be strong - among Americans. Unfortunately, many of our citizens and residents now are first generation or second generation imigrants who come from countries with cultures that do not allow decent, or that rely on the government to solve problems, not create them. I would not want to live in: California, Southeast New York, Northern New Jersey, Northeast Illinois, Northwest Indiana, Florida, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Western Washington, Southeastern Pennsylvania and a few other choice spots. I'll do just fine in Central and Northern Michigan (I'm not worried about Detroit, it's almost a ghost town now). 4. In case you missed it, The President has called for deployment of troops in the United States to be trained as a rapid deployment force for use in the United States in time of National crisis. This is what E is referring to. It is unconstitutional, illegal, and frightening as hell and could be the precursor to the fall of the Republic as we know it. Will those troops follow orders? Considering that the media is all but ignoring this deployment, I'd say "yes". We Americans should be protesting this like hell. There were other things I wanted to say, but, hell, I forgot them. Oh, yeah. I can camp, cook, build shelters, plant crops, scavange for food, identify good and bad plants, know some medicine, know some chemistry, can handle a rifle, pistol and bow. I'll be just fine. P.S. Tomorrow is "A day without a Gay" day. Don't call in sick, call in "gay". Don't spend money tomorrow if you support gay rights. This is an attempt to show the economic impact gay people have on the country. |
|
|
|
| Telosan | Dec 9 2008, 03:07 PM Post #58 |
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
I can cook, scavenge, fish, and build shelter. Make a fire if I have what I normaly use, which is lightweight and and only a very little amount is needed. These are all things a hunter needs to know. I'm not good at making a fire with all natural things so I cheat and bring powdered potassium nitrate. Makes a decent fire if you have dry wood. Using it to light wet wood will take a bit but it's no more effort than dry. Fixing a car, that I can't do. Besides, I said the hunters in my area would gather. Rely on each other's skills. This thread wasn't for talking about how I can do this stuff. |
|
|
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Dec 9 2008, 03:30 PM Post #59 |
Science and Industry
|
Survivalism is not romantic. Away from technology there are "natural" levels of disease, death, and suffering. You have to mentally prepared for living in a primitive situation. |
|
|
|
| Al Araam | Dec 9 2008, 03:33 PM Post #60 |
Demigod of Death & Inactivity
|
The American auto industry is atrocious and has been pridefully atrocious for decades. Although it is painful in the short term due to the loss of a massive amount of jobs, most people in the know about the economy agree that it would be beneficial to redistribute labor and capital to sectors where America has a comparative advantage, which is very clearly not the auto industry. (Or that has been what I've been told is the prevailing view of the academic community by members of that same academic community.) The meritocratic underpinnings of American society dictate that innovation and proficiency should be rewarded with success. The American auto industry has demonstrated neither innovation nor proficiency and so they deserve the alternative, which is obviously failure. In layman's terms: at its best the American auto industry is not as profitable per man hour and per dollar invested as, say, the Japanese auto industry, so we should reallocate those dollars and those man hours to something which provides us with a better return on our investment. The deployment of US troops within the borders of the United States is indeed very worrisome. There's a part of me that wonders how many American soldiers would follow orders to fire upon their fellow Americans? If they did so, would the American public actually rise up? I think the latter is a possibility, although it would require incident after incident after incident. See the shitstorm that ensued from the Kent State "Massacre" for an example, then consider multiply that to account for very significant loss of civilian, American life, where relatively few lost their lives at Kent State. |
|
|
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Dec 9 2008, 03:44 PM Post #61 |
|
Science and Industry
|
That's not correct, and no credible economist would agree with that. The American auto industry isn't lacking in innovation and proficiency. It's lacking in money. American car companies are forced to spend vast sums of money to fulfill union requirements. This is something the Japanese do not have to contend with. To truly provide a better return on investment, dollars have to be reallocated away from the union agenda, and to the actual business of car manufacturing. The short term bankruptcy of the US auto industry would not at all redistribute labor and capital to other sectors. Quite the opposite, it would attract skilled labor and capital to a leaner, reorganized, more efficient American auto industry free from UAW bondage. |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Dec 9 2008, 04:15 PM Post #62 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
I was on the University of Illinois campus when Kent State occurred. The day before, we were in the intersection of Green St. and Wright St. facing a line of armed guardsmen who looked as scared as some of us were, tho we knew in our hearts they wouldn't shoot. When the shootings took place at Kent State the following day, we were NOT in the intersection of Green and Wright facing down guardsmen. Our illusion was shattered. I think if it had happened at Michigan, and Wisconsin and Berkeley all in the same week, then we would have burned the state capital down in Springfield, and most of the University (except the Morrow Corn Plots which were guarded by armed regular army 24/7), but Kent State was more than enough to give us pause. If the Weather Underground, Yippies, etc. all backed down because of one campus shooting incident, I doubt if one, or even two, would gather much radical support here. Many would mobilize some of the survivalists, but I think it would take actual concentration camps to motivate the general populous. Think of Tiemiman Square and what happened once they found troops ignorant enough to open fire. |
|
|
|
| Quaon | Dec 9 2008, 04:39 PM Post #63 |
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
|
The economic crisis is not the fault of the Democrats, nor is it the fault of the Republicans. It is the fault of the system for propagating a system that will only lead to a boom or bust cycle. Your ignorance of the culture of certain parts of this country is astounding. Southeastern PA isn't any less "American" then Michigan. |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Dec 9 2008, 06:18 PM Post #64 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Grumble grumble grumble grumble! I am not a crook! lol No Mr. Nixon, but you did set Reagan up for his Reaganomics. Bad trickle down theory! Bad! I agree with NH on the Dems part in all this economic BS, but I cannot ignore the policies that got us here. Rich people having money does NOT help the poor, and cutting taxes just makes things worse these days. If taxes were higher, like 50% income tax, then a tax cut would help. But tax cuts now, especially for the rich, are just plain stupid. And then there's globalization... ugh. The failure of our society as we know it. Let's take away jobs from our own citizens and give them to cheap labor in China so we can make a higher profit margin! NO! BAD GREEDY RICH PERSON! Don't you see that this takes away your consumer base! I we don't have the jobs, we can't buy your products because we'll have no money! The reason the economy is failing is because current economic theory is bogus. It doesn't work. It ignores basic economic principles. Reps and Dems are equally to blame here, it's just that the Dems did the more recent and direct screw up. |
|
|
|
| East Anarx | Dec 9 2008, 06:46 PM Post #65 |
|
Anarchitect
|
The only long-term solution to all of our economic woes is a truly freed market. Government intervention is doomed from the start, simply because forcible government is incapable of economic calculation. As Mises said, "Economic calculation makes it possible for business to adjust production to the demands of the consumers." Government, and by extension government-subsidized businesses, shielded from the negative effects of their policies by the use of force to inhibit or outlaw competition, or to gain an unfair advantage, will perpetually decrease in quality relative to firms that can react to consumer desires. |
|
|
|
| Union | Dec 9 2008, 06:52 PM Post #66 |
Pyrenees Republic
|
A free market, unless enforced by force, will always devolve into a regulated one. |
|
|
|
| A.Q. | Dec 9 2008, 06:56 PM Post #67 |
Beautiful Snowflake
|
Back when I was y'alls age, the Defense Deprtment's job was defense. No one seems to remember Bush's BRAC comitees a couple of years back, where he closed a whole chain of domestic military bases, presumably to cut down on the upkeep, cash that we were spending to build new bases overseas. Ever since WWII, I have seen the US take an Imperial-style military policy, not officially, but we do have bases all across the world. The Pentagon reports 702 overseas military bases, and it routinely leaves out dozens if not hundreds of bases. Okinawa, for instance, is listed as having only one US military facility, when in fact it has ten. We officially have no military presence in Kosovo, when in fact we operate the massive Camp Bondsteel, run by the good boys over at KBR since 1999. The Pentagon also regularly ignores US military facilities in "Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan." in the Middle East alone in its reports. My point is this. It's about damn time that the US returns our troops to American soil, to protect the American people, rather then our commercial and political interests in a thousand obscure places across the planet. Trust me, I'm basically the only kid in my school who isn't a Navy brat, there's a routine circuit of the Navy from base to base. Norfolk, Rota, the Gulf, Japan, San Fransisco, then back to Norfolk. I WANT US troops on US soil. It's their job to protect us. EDIT: I'm reaaalllly hoping that Obama does the unexpected and actually pulls completely out of Iraq. Everyone expects the US to keep Balad Air Base, at least. Edited by A.Q., Dec 9 2008, 07:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Dec 9 2008, 07:37 PM Post #68 |
|
Science and Industry
|
Sidebar... E, do you think people have a right to use force to defend themselves against aggressors who initiated force against them? I've been curious about that.
Edited by Tristan da Cunha, Dec 9 2008, 07:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Nag Ehgoeg | Dec 9 2008, 07:38 PM Post #69 |
The Devil's Advocate
|
This thread does not interest me. But in my modderly duties I was screening it for anything inappropriate when I saw this post... and I feel I have to reply to it. I joined the Scouting Association when I was five (that's a year early for those of you who didn't know), that's also when I started learning self defence (though, you know, I suck at self defence: every fight I've won, I've won by either fighting dirty or just not quitting until the other person backed down - always resulting in me coming off a lot worse than them). I can cook. I know what wild plants are edible, where and when to find them. I can fish. I have fished (with reasonable success) using two miters of line, a sowing needle and a fish hook (part of a survival kit I always carried with me). I can build shelters of varying complexity based on the terrain. If I'm in the British woodland, I can build a knock out job without any tools. Give me tools and people willing to follow instructions and I can build a quasi-permanent log cabin. I can build a fire. I can use a flint and blade to start a fire. With dry kindling (something that's (admitted) a rare commodity in England) I can start a camp fire on a single match. I can't rebuild an engine block (though one of my best friends works in a garage) but I can do simple things like changing a tire. More than that: I know first aid and basic life support. I can make bandages. I can triage. I have a good grasp of human anatomy and knowledge of a range of surgical procedures. I know how to collect water. I know how to build effective filters and solar collectors. With household materials, I can build a purifier. I can brew alcohol and make bread from scratch. I'm not a bad shot with an air-rifle. I'm good with a bow. I can make an effective bow and arrows (for hunting small animals) from house-hold materials and easy to come by wood. What I don't have, however, is the following: The will to survive more than six weeks without modern luxuries. A life without the internet? :sad: Any feasible way of generating electricity. Any feasible way of obtaining parts for keeping machinery running. Any feasible way of making medicines. Any feasible way of maintaining clothing. Any feasible way of storing food through the winter. Any feasible way of stopping army snipers armed with Light Fifty. Any feasible way of stopping a tank. Any feasible way of avoiding satellite detection. Any feasible way of escaping the densely populated areas where I live without alerting the officials (should they be looking for me). Etc, etc, etc. I'd last a year. At best. The government guards all the doors and holds all the keys. Just like a zombie plague, there's no way that a few individuals will be able to survive against an implacable foe. The only force capable of stopping a government (or a zombie plague, or an antediluvian) is a force of equal strength. Sure if every person who loved freedom rallied together, then you'd have a force capable of standing off against a government. You'd also have a civil war. And if this freedom faction was the size of a government, as well organised as a government and as representative of the people as a government - then by George, you've got yourself another government. (I'm using the term government to represent the defacto leaders of a nation and the resources at their command rather than the term for "elected" "officials".) |
|
|
|
| Al Araam | Dec 9 2008, 08:42 PM Post #70 |
|
Demigod of Death & Inactivity
|
I pulled information on the US unemployment rate since 1969, and it seems to have remained relatively stable, which is not what you'd expect if American jobs were being shifted overseas, leaving the poor Americans jobless forever. On the contrary, I'd say that it fits the basic assumptions of free trade. We lose jobs in areas which we do not have a comparative advantage and the investments and labor that would otherwise be devoted to that sector of the economy are freed up for use in another sector in which we have a comparative advantage over other countries.
I'm operating on the assumptions of free trade, which enjoys a high degree of support by economists. My statements regarding the auto industry may, and probably are, flawed. We agree that a bailout of the auto industry is a bad idea because the market will solve the problems facing that sector of the economy if things are allowed to run their natural course. What you said is correct. About $1500 per car produced by the Big 4 goes to benefits for union workers. However, I disagree that American automakers are uncompetitive solely for this reason, and that conviction is supported by a number of articles I have read recently. I don't feel my argument can be shot down that easily, but the fact is that we agree where it matters. If American automakers are not "bailed out", they will succeed if they show they have a comparative advantage after they go bankrupt. Shedding the heavy shackles placed on them by the United Auto Workers of America will move them in the right direction, but at this point in time it cannot be said with certainty whether it would be enough. Edited by Al Araam, Dec 9 2008, 08:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
| flumes | Dec 9 2008, 08:49 PM Post #71 |
CLEVELAND ROCKS!
|
:dry: The lack of understanding in economic principle is amazing........ Edited by flumes, Dec 9 2008, 08:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Dec 9 2008, 09:33 PM Post #72 |
|
Science and Industry
|
Asgard, you neglected to consider that the US trade deficit has grown each year for the past several decades. Concurrently US personal and government debt levels have also grown annually. Therefore these seemingly stable employment figures are in fact not based on reallocation of productive capital to sectors where American industry enjoys a comparative advantage. Rather, the stable employment is based on the *dissipation* of capital by taking on ever-increasing debt loads. Simply stated Americans as a whole are borrowing money from foreigners and using that money to pay Americans to do non-productive work, especially in the service sector. Obviously this is an absurd and unsustainable arrangement. The current economic crisis is occurring because Americans can't borrow any more money to pay for these nonproductive service jobs, so even these service jobs are disappearing and people are getting laid off. Finally- which brings us to the most important point - global trade today is not based on the assumptions of free trade. This is because the medium of that trade - the foreign exchange market - is constantly manipulated by central banks for political purposes.
My point was that economists do not predict, as you did, the extinction of the American auto industry if it undergoes a natural bankruptcy. Every economist arguing against the bailout have reasoned that bankruptcy will make the American auto industry competitive, not extinct. Bankruptcy would result in the allocation of new capital into the auto industry, rather than out of the auto industry as you predict. Right now it's impossible for investors to give the American automakers capital because the liabilities in their balance sheets are too huge and opaque. Under bankruptcy the liabilities would be written off and there would be a rush to recapitalize the Big 3. |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Dec 9 2008, 09:52 PM Post #73 |
|
Field Marshal
|
You also have to remember how much the population has increased since then. Maybe the percentage hasn't changed, but the amount of people have risen with the population. But yes, that is surprising that the unemployment rate hasn't risen. |
|
|
|
| East Anarx | Dec 9 2008, 10:32 PM Post #74 |
|
Anarchitect
|
"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics...But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance." ~ Murray Rothbard
Yes. I fully recognize the right of self-defense as fundamental to a free society. Though I think most problems can be solved without resorting to violence, and I'm usually rather pacifistic when it comes to personal relations, I reserve the right to use force, (in defense of myself and others who so request it,) against aggressors. As far as applying this principle to libertarian-anarchist revolutionary theory, I'm against it. Though I would respect an individual's right to fight back against state aggression, I see it as rather futile, (at least in the current stage of the revolution,) and prefer voluntaryist and agorist methods of resistance, (i.e. peacefully withdraw support / utilize the black market and counter-economic activities.) |
|
|
|
| flumes | Dec 9 2008, 11:31 PM Post #75 |
|
CLEVELAND ROCKS!
|
"A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself." -Milton Friedman Edited by flumes, Dec 9 2008, 11:31 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic » |
12:01 PM Jul 13