Please Get Off Your High Horse, World

[Yum]

@ Bearcat:

Actually, it's rather stupid of us to be isolationists. Last time we tried it there were these little things called the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Holocaust. Ever heard of them?

LOL, I was just literally rolling on the floor laughing after I read that. Oh and this one too...

You're assuming that a) the economy is a zero sum game and b) we don't have enough resources in the US. German, Swedish, and Belgian workers are some of the most productive in the world because they have high taxes, and thus health care and free (or nearly free) higher education. And the US has a GDP of $43,000 per capita, more than any other country; if they can afford health care, we can too.

The oversimplification hurts my eyes T_T

I wish angst ridden youth from developed countries would do something better than go to rallies and rant in forums... I mean sure that's fun (for a while I guess) but wouldn't something more productive be better? Like joining a youth political party or doing an internship for a successful corporation?

Walk the walk ffs -_-

And what's up with this...

One last thing I'd like to mention is the differences between the US and Japan/Sweden/Germany. First of all, we are one of the few developed countries in the world that does not guarantee higher education, which hurts our economic growth and further destroys class mobility. Second, we have policies, unlike the three others, that allow capital to move across borders without hampering, but not labor (a gross violation of not only simple justice, but Adam Smith's theories). Finally, we are the only country that is actively resisting the reduction of externalities (that is, economic costs, like polution, that are not payed by either the producer or consumer of a product), creating a grossly distorted economy.

You're talking about Japan and Germany pre-1970s right? Like, not right now right? What do you mean about labor "crossing borders" being hampered by policies? And write down Negative* Externalities. Even then, such externalities are a pre-requisite for any development - I'd argue, and so would other Unbalanced (and Balanced... kinda) Growth Economists. As for what kind of development this entails, well your views on that are however you view history.

As for me, the US has literally and technically done more good for the world than any other country has from the Marshall Plan to Akamatsu's Geese. Yeah so what if it was to fuck over the USSR. You read Adam Smith right? Good can come out of being a bitch.

I guess what I'm getting at is, there really is no point flaming/ talking about what the US is and should be doing if you're not a policymaker and have no intention of becoming one... It feels like one of those What If ideas... like what if Germany won World War II? Omfg that'd be so interesting, yeah, pointless too? You betcha.

It'd only be cool if you had a time machine right? And becoming a policy maker's easy than that. And when you do get to that point go work a bit, and show us what you were able to achieve... So go and be one then and PM us 20 years from now or something. You think you can do better right? Most of the people I know who've got ideas like yours end up, well... less than what they expected to be. All Little dogs with loud barks and weak bites. I.E. Left-wing European college kids ;3 j/k guys.

 

[Venetia]

It's nice to see I'm not the only one on the forum posting with a slant against socialism ... I was beginning to become disheartened a little :P. Ha.

 

[Roman Candle]

Please try to talk without being obnoxious. It's really not neccessary.

 

[Yum]

@ Venetia: I think it's because of the age demographic, I'm assuming you're relatively old Venetia as you do have a husband and all that.

I'm guessing more mature people like you have a better "feel" of how the world really works.

Then again, there are really bad right-wing white-trash Americans who don't know anything at all... the opposite side of the spectrum

Time to patent a Maturity / Political ^ Economic Inclination spectrum! (Just for Fun)


Person's Maturity
<------------------- | | ----------------->

Politcal Left / Political Right / Yum

Poor me I'm not even there T_T

EDIT: @ Candle, you're right, that was rude of me. I apologize bearcat. I can't control me sometimes. I'm stupid that way.

 

[Jeff the Green]

In Europe, you are constantly exposed to different languages - partially because of tourism, but moreso because the countries with those spoken languages are just a stone throw away.

I'm not sure that's the only reason (though it's part of it). In Europe, the people who speak different languages are the same color skin (usually) as you and politicians in France are generally not railing against the threat of the Swiss coming and taking jobs from the French. In the US, however, there is a long history of racism, both against Asians and Hispanics (the two largest non-English speaking minorities). There's also the issue of an overgrown nationalism. Back in the late 1700s and 1800s, almost no Frenchman learned anything but French (nobles generally learned Latin, but they never spoke it) because they were the dominant power and had an enormous national ego. Japan had similar issues until the end of WWII.

I wish angst ridden youth from developed countries would do something better than go to rallies and rant in forums... I mean sure that's fun (for a while I guess) but wouldn't something more productive be better? Like joining a youth political party or doing an internship for a successful corporation?

Quite frankly, I fail to see how interning for a "successful corporation" is a more valuable expenditure of my time than working for a non-profit (which I do), getting other people to vote (which I do), convincing people to do the right thing, which you dismiss as going to rallies and ranting (and which I do), or getting the best education I can so that I can influence policy more directly in the future (which I'm doing). And doesn't joining a youth political party generally involve a lot of ranting and going to rallies?

You're talking about Japan and Germany pre-1970s right? Like, not right now right? What do you mean about labor "crossing borders" being hampered by policies? And write down Negative* Externalities. Even then, such externalities are a pre-requisite for any development - I'd argue, and so would other Unbalanced (and Balanced... kinda) Growth Economists. As for what kind of development this entails, well your views on that are however you view history.

Um, no, Japan and Germany now. Germany has managed to keep a relatively high (nearly 3%) growth per year, despite having absorbed East Germany, which was stripped of resources by the Soviets until 1990, and despite having few natural resources other than coal, production of which the government has been trying to reduce. Japan has a similar lack of natural resources, compounded by lack of arable land, and despite this, has a growth rate higher than the US (3.3% vs. 3.2%). The US has enormous reserves of minerals and large amounts of some of the most fertile land in the world; the fact that our economy is not as healthy as Germany's or Japan's is a sign of serious trouble.

By labor crossing borders I mean immigration. Most free-trade types have an almost pathological obsession with illegal immigration, despite the fact that almost all of the originators of capitalist theory said that in order to have a balanced market, one must allow free movement of capital (goods and money) and labor (people). Otherwise those with capital (employers) can create artificial wage reductions.

Yes, I forgot the word "negative." It doesn't negate my point though. Most non-neo-liberal (flat-earth/free trade) economists are actually of the opinion that externalities in general, but especially negative externalities, create an inefficient economy. In a capitalist society (which we are, sort of) two or more parties make a transaction because both feel they have gained something, thus, with each transaction the economy grows. However, if the transaction negatively affects someone who has no say in the transaction, it may cause the net result of the transaction to be a weakening of the economy.

Case in point, greenhouse gases. Neither the energy plants using coal (and thus causing global warming) nor the consumer (who, for the sake of argument, lives in Colorado, will be affected so negatively by their transaction that they decide it is disadvantageous for them. On the other hand, the people in Bangladesh, Florida, the Netherlands, and other low-lying places who lose their homes to rising sea levels lose much more than the energy plant and the consumer gain. Thus, a net loss to the economy.

It'd only be cool if you had a time machine right? And becoming a policy maker's easy than that. And when you do get to that point go work a bit, and show us what you were able to achieve... So go and be one then and PM us 20 years from now or something. You think you can do better right? Most of the people I know who've got ideas like yours end up, well... less than what they expected to be. All Little dogs with loud barks and weak bites. I.E. Left-wing European college kids

First of all, I'm a Left-wing American college kid. Second, there is a point, which I alluded to earlier. In having this debate, I'm hopefully changing someone's mind, or at least making someone think, which may lead to another evangelist for economic parity, one less vote for corporatists, or even a butterfly effect. And I can think of several people who had ideas like mine and became more than what they expected to be. Huey Long. Pete Seeger. Mother Jones. Martin Luther King, for that matter.

And don't worry about being rude. I've been at least as rude many times before.

 

[Danton Lavergne]

The media, and just spoken words around you have the major role on this. I personally don't speak badly about America, and if I do it's to your bent and corrupt government. And I mean sure, there's going to be a ton of people saying I know shit about politics and that all of this is bullshit, but it's to be expected. The majority of the people on this forum are Americans and evidently don't want their country bashed.

Also, stupid stuff like your flags being everywhere in movies, commercials, and chanting about how great your land is in your own anthem, really encourages people to dislike and comment on how stupid your country really is.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

Not going to disagree with Serenade, and personally I don't care if my country is bashed.

But there has been a lot of bashing in inappropriate spots, and I got tired of reading certain posts from certain people that came in out of the blue. Although I'm really referring to another site more than here.

 

[Danton Lavergne]

It happens.

 

[Venetia]

And I can think of several people who had ideas like mine and became more than what they expected to be. Huey Long. Pete Seeger. Mother Jones. Martin Luther King, for that matter.

That was incredibly humble of you >_>.



MLK put necessary embers under the fire for the race for equality of all men of color. Mother Jones fought for the rights of common man by defending coal miners. Their contributions to society as a whole are enormous.

Huey Long was a crackpot narcissist who was assassinated. Pete Seeger sang some songs that hippies could agree with. They belong not even in the same paragraph as MLK or Jones.


Nobody gives medals of peace to people who uphold individualism and capital, but they're a necessary part of politics. Perhaps if man were not greedy we would be better off without them, but the fact of the matter is, we are greedy, and folks like me exist, so get used to it, you're not a saint for having a liberal slant.

Individualism, forward-thinking, and the ability to forgive and forget what you may consider to be ires of your fellows, involves the qualities of freedom and free thought.

When the society acts as a whole, the individual is lost. Freedoms are infringed upon because policing "equality" in funds and assets may help some, but will hurt others, and impede your ability to improve your own life.

Radical conservatives impede freedom with their views, too. I think it's the radical part that makes political stances unrealistic for everyone outside their own circles.

Spoiler

@ Yum: Actually I'm 23. Been with my husband for 7 years though. I left home at 16. I've had a little more time to "grow" than most 23 year olds.

 

[holloway]

Time to patent a Maturity / Political ^ Economic Inclination spectrum! (Just for Fun)


Person's Maturity
<------------------- | | ----------------->

Politcal Left / Political Right / Yum

Are you quite mad? Since when has it been immature to have a political ideology. You think Conservatives have the right idea? Fair enough- I might [I don't but hypothetically] support the Lib Dems' much more liberal concepts on representation. I don't then go and call you immature and an idiot for having a different belief. Part of getting mature, which apparently you believe you completely are, is learning that differences of opinion exist.

You just made yourself look a right arse.

 

[Jeff the Green]

MLK put necessary embers under the fire for the race for equality of all men of color. Mother Jones fought for the rights of common man by defending coal miners. Their contributions to society as a whole are enormous.

Huey Long was a crackpot narcissist who was assassinated. Pete Seeger sang some songs that hippies could agree with. They belong not even in the same paragraph as MLK or Jones.

Mother Jones was a hero for the common man and a racist who helped pass the Chinese Exclusion Act. Huey Long was a narcissist/some-time despot who was assassinated because he proposed taxing the rich to guarantee everyone in the US enough money to avoid starvation. Pete Seeger spent most of his early life not singing, but organizing for labor unions. MLK was a plagiarist.

And no, I was not comparing myself to any of them, only pointing out that liberals do get places.

Nobody gives medals of peace to people who uphold individualism and capital, but they're a necessary part of politics. Perhaps if man were not greedy we would be better off without them, but the fact of the matter is, we are greedy, and folks like me exist, so get used to it, you're not a saint for having a liberal slant.

Individualism, forward-thinking, and the ability to forgive and forget what you may consider to be ires of your fellows, involves the qualities of freedom and free thought.

When the society acts as a whole, the individual is lost. Freedoms are infringed upon because policing "equality" in funds and assets may help some, but will hurt others, and impede your ability to improve your own life.

You're operating under two flawed assumptions. First is that an individual cannot cooperate without surrendering oneself to the whole. I have no idea where that idea comes from; I'm perfectly capable of thinking of myself as an American, Oregonian, Democrat, Liberal, and individual all at the same time.

Second is that the self-improvement you're so keen on is solely dependent on the individual. Nearly every part this self-improvement is built on a government superstructure. Several of your teachers probably got their degrees under the G.I. Bill (tax-and-spend, tax-and-spend). The corporation you work for exists because the government has designed laws providing that corporations can be sued rather than their owners (interference in the free market, let the invisible hand do the job), the doctor you go to almost certainly received thousands of dollars in grants from the government (ah! welfare!), and the roads you drive on were built using taxes (private roads would be so much more efficient!). Without this infrastructure you wouldn't have bootstraps to pull yourself up by.

 

[Yum]

For one thing, you get more money in the highest echelons of a successful corporation than an NGO, and I never said you couldnt intern for an NGO, I said doing internships are better than ranting in forums. Whatever you do though, don't become a lawyer, you can't seem to read. Also, I don't quite consider Mother Jones and Martin Luther King as successful people, sure they did stuff but kinda 7 out of a scale to 10. Let's get more serious.

This is pretty funny bearcat.

Um, no, Japan and Germany now. Germany has managed to keep a relatively high (nearly 3%) growth per year, despite having absorbed East Germany, which was stripped of resources by the Soviets until 1990, and despite having few natural resources other than coal, production of which the government has been trying to reduce. Japan has a similar lack of natural resources, compounded by lack of arable land, and despite this, has a growth rate higher than the US (3.3% vs. 3.2%). The US has enormous reserves of minerals and large amounts of some of the most fertile land in the world; the fact that our economy is not as healthy as Germany's or Japan's is a sign of serious trouble.

LOL? You think the US economy absolutely has to optimize its usage of resources for "growth" (Which can intensify your feared negative externalities *o*)? You think the developers and economists working for the U.S. government / Corporate investors who graduated Harvard and Yale haven't thought of better ways than that? You think it's as simple as having enough resources instead of the policy restrictions (and the necessity of them) as well as banks / corporations and their relations with the U.S. government and finally the U.S. in relation to the world that makes it grow? You also think that the U.S. - the most advanced economy in the world (yes ask anybody who knows money) HAS to grow at the same rate as Japan and Germany despite being on a whole higher level than them? You yourself saying East Germany had to be absorbed therefore putting Germany "lower" and giving it a higher potential for growth? Where the fuck do you learn your economics from? Finally, I'd like to ask you to define Growth because quite frankly, I'd like to see you try.

And I was mostly asking you about Japan and Germany because of the compulsory higher education thing and the labor restrictions that you said distinguished them from the U.S., not because they're "richer" as you say. Like I said, don't ever become a lawyer. You don't even read your own text.

by labor crossing borders I mean immigration. Most free-trade types have an almost pathological obsession with illegal immigration, despite the fact that almost all of the originators of capitalist theory said that in order to have a balanced market, one must allow free movement of capital (goods and money) and labor (people). Otherwise those with capital (employers) can create artificial wage reductions.

There are two types of Economists in this world bearcat, those who know that the theories don't work, and those who don't know that the theories don't work. Guess who's stupider?

And wtf, you think US immigration laws are restricting? lol, compared to Japan HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA k that was funny shit.

And holloway I'm assuming you're british, I'm not even gonna start on you.

Quite frankly though, I've got better stuff to do than forum-argue with left-wing white boys in developed countries. So I bid you good day, Venetia, I recommend you do the same. Let time and tide deal with these guys. The ones who are actually good enough to listen to never spend their time debating in gaming forums anyway, they're usually in Harvard or Yale, arguing it there instead in the cafeteria.

Bearcat, I suggest you go to an actual forum for economics and politics instead of duking it out with a bunch of kids who like to play games. Despite being rarely the best of the best, you'll still find more people there actually "Hearing" what you're saying and putting you down in less than two seconds flat.

 

[holloway]

And holloway I'm assuming you're british, I'm not even gonna start on you.

Are you really trying to just act like a cunt?

 

[JakeyZombie]

Are you really trying to just act like a cunt?

Um, try to stay on topic and not be a such a dick in the symposium.

(I've already made my point in here, I just can't stand to read Yum's posts and allow him/her to think they're allowed to post this garbage.)

 

[Yum]

@ Holloway: I'm typing this down while listening to Iron Maiden - Aces High...

Nah, not trying to be a cunt, I just choose to never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.

 

[JakeyZombie]

@ Holloway: I'm typing this down while listening to Iron Maiden - Aces High...

Nah, not trying to be a cunt, I just choose to never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.

It's pretty obvious why you were banned on IRC.

THIS IS THE SYMPOSIUM. IT'S FOR INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION ONLY.

If you think it's too difficult to act like an adult, then get the fuck out, or I'm pretty sure some infractions are going to be handed out to you.

 

[Yum]

@ Jakey: You guys act like adults? Did you even consider reading my reply to bearcat and thinking that bearcat may indeed be oversimplifying things and getting some things totally wrong? No, you're too busy being pissy white hippie.

But yeah, I'm gonna go with Churchill and leave this topic. It's obvious you're all too "mature" and "intelligent". You guys have fun playing in here then. I'm out.

Oh and I'm banned from IRC? T_T No wonder I couldn't get in the other day *_* I'm depressed now. lol.

 

[JakeyZombie]

@ Jakey: You guys act like adults? Good god, did you even consider reading my reply to bearcat and thinking that bearcat may indeed be oversimplifying things and getting some things totally wrong? No, you're too busy being pissy white hippie.

But yeah, I'm gonna go with Churchill's quote and leave this topic. It's obvious you're all too "mature" and "intelligent". You guys have fun playing in here then. I'm out.

It doesn't matter if you're right over him, I didn't say anything about you being wrong. I said stop being a dick. I can say that we act like adults because for the most part we practice civil discussion, and we don't enter the symposium with shit spewing from our mouths.

Please, un-find the Symposium. It's obvious you're unable to conduct yourself appropriately.

 

[Jeff the Green]

But yeah, I'm gonna go with Churchill and leave this topic. It's obvious you're all too "mature" and "intelligent". You guys have fun playing in here then. I'm out.

Says the four-year old taking her ball and going home.

Anyway just so nobody thinks I'm conceding the point:

LOL? You think the US economy absolutely has to optimize its usage of resources for "growth" (Which can intensify your feared negative externalities *o*)? You think the developers and economists working for the U.S. government / Corporate investors who graduated Harvard and Yale haven't thought of better ways than that?

Yes, an economy should optimize its usage of resources. Of course, optimize means "to make the best," not "make the biggest." And considering how corporate investors handled Enron, savings and loans, etc. I'm less likely to trust them than my econ profs and my debate partner who's writing his thesis on externalities and optimization of markets.

You also think that the U.S. - the most advanced economy in the world (yes ask anybody who knows money) HAS to grow at the same rate as Japan and Germany despite being on a whole higher level than them? You yourself saying East Germany had to be absorbed therefore putting Germany "lower" and giving it a higher potential for growth? Where the fuck do you learn your economics from? Finally, I'd like to ask you to define Growth because quite frankly, I'd like to see you try.

Annual growth for year "n" = (GDP - GDP(n-1)) / GDP(n-1)

The US doesn't have to grow at any particular rate, but its generally better for it to be high, and Japan and Germany are useful comparisons. I'm having a difficult time parsing "You yourself saying East Germany had to be absorbed therefore putting Germany "lower" and giving it a higher potential for growth?" since I never said absorbing East Germany gave it a higher potential. Actually, I said it stunted growth, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who's cracked a middle-school history text. The fact that a country with an economy that was that badly damaged (imagine the US absorbing Mexico) can rebound (while still having the minimum wage of a developed, rather than developing, country) is a testament to either the people or the infrastructure. Since I somehow doubt Germans are any more industrious or intelligent than those of the US, I assume the infrastructure takes the credit.

There are two types of Economists in this world bearcat, those who know that the theories don't work, and those who don't know that the theories don't work. Guess who's stupider?

And wtf, you think US immigration laws are restricting? lol, compared to Japan HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA k that was funny shit.

My point was not that the theories are right, but that free-trade nuts are hypocritical when they invoke Adam Smith et al. and the invisible hand and all that jazz to support their policies, but then don't accept the corollaries. I personally think most country's immigration laws are too strict, and criticizing the US isn't the same thing as elevating other countries. I'm fairly certain there are lively debates on Japanese blogs about their immigration policies. I simply know the US better and my opinions have more power here than Japan since a) my comments are in English and b) I can't vote in Japan.

Quite frankly though, I've got better stuff to do than forum-argue with left-wing white boys in developed countries.

Oh my. So, because of my gender, race, and country of origin I'm excluded from criticizing my government? Isn't it the obligation of the privileged ("white boys in developed countries") to defend the under-privileged?

Bearcat, I suggest you go to an actual forum for economics and politics instead of duking it out with a bunch of kids who like to play games.

I do. I have a blog, I regularly comment on others' blogs, and I haunt political chat rooms on occasion. Besides, I'm a kid who likes to play games.

 

[Andy6000]

The second half of your post made me respect you a good deal more than I have bearcat, bravo.

But I figured I should step in and say... Clean this topic the fuck up. I like your debating, it's informative, it's generally rather intelligent, and I'd really love to see it continue (whether it be between Yum and Bearcat or Venetia and Bearcat or between Bob Ueker and Jerry Sienfeld). But if you cannot stop putting in 'lol u so stupid' to half your arguments, I'm going to ban you from this thread. So if someone does it to you, report it. I don't CARE if your report is blatantly wrong, but just posting 'TY FOR TROLLING FAGGOT' is basically falling for the troll. So yeah, figure it out, but continue debating.