On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:



The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world.

and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions.
a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with
strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right
destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing

On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:26:27 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:43:35 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:32:41 -0400, wrote:



Certainly it can. All it would take is for China to stop buying our
debt and dump their dollars on the world money markets.

john maynard keynes once said, if you owe the bank $1000 you have a
problem. if you owe it $1M, they have a problem

china's not going to dump anything. you think they want to lose money?

what planet you right wingers live on?

That is the same kind of logic that said Japan would never attack
Pearl Harbor.

Actually, there's some dispute about us knowing or not knowing about the
impending attack.

Ah the old "FDR caused the attack to get us in the war" theory.
That usually comes from right wingers. I'm surprised.

Short term money loss is not the only thing some countries think
about, even if that is such a strange concept to us.

We've had a very stable, long-term monetary policy in the US up until
recently... about the time of Reagan. Between the Depression and then, we
had recessions but nothing severe. Then, the regs got removed and/or gutted.
We see the result. We need to learn from our mistakes and reinstitute the
policies that stabilized our economy.


The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world. These days most of our exports
to China are raw materials. We sell them scrap iron and they sell us
consumer goods. The real profit is in the manufacturing, not
collecting and shipping scrap iron.

China is in better shape to come out of a global depression than we
are and they will own the world when they do.

No they aren't. They're a much more rigid society. Millions would die if
their economy went bust.

They have 1.3 billion, they can afford to lose a few million but it is
unlikely it would be that bad. A global depression and fionancial
collapse could set us back over 100 years. For most of China it would
just set them back a decade or so and they are better equipped to
recover.

The rich people here will be fine, they already operate quite well in
the global economy. It will be your middle class that becomes serfs in
a neo-colonial America growing food, cutting wood and mining
materials for China.
To some extent we already are.

The rich people are usually fine. So what. The middle class would be hurt
but would recover.

Recover doing what? This isn't 1929. Our problem is not excess
capacity with no place to sell it. We don't have the ability to
produce much. We sold our factories to Mexico and China.
In the 90s.we thought we would dominate the world in the internet
business but we found out there is really not much employment there.
One guy sitting at a PC arranging drop shipments from Asia is not as
much of an employer as a whole brick and mortar store chain, then they
figured out the guy on the PC could be overseas too. (Clinton's
recession)
In the 2000s we filled that gap building houses, until the market was
so flooded that we may not work through the inventory for years to
come. (the current recession)
Now we are just staring into the hole that used to be American
industry and wondering what is next?

This is yet again a case of Chicken Little (no offense intended).

OK everything is fine, thanks, now I know my kids will be OK.


Another case of a well presented, logical argument being shrugged off with a
liberal cliche because depoop couldn't think of a counter.

Nice job. Wasted though.
--
John H

All decisions are the result of binary thinking.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...


Greg:
The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world. These days most of our exports
to China are raw materials. We sell them scrap iron and they sell us
consumer goods. The real profit is in the manufacturing, not
collecting and shipping scrap iron.

Greg:
Recover doing what? This isn't 1929. Our problem is not excess
capacity with no place to sell it. We don't have the ability to
produce much. We sold our factories to Mexico and China.

Plume:
The facts just don't support this statement.

Economies was and wane. There are plenty of things we export.

http://www.suite101.com/content/top-...s-2009-a204269




Earth to Plume! Which planet is teleporting your "facts" to you?


--
Harry
"The 'C' students run the world."

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:55:44 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

So is the US The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?

Perhaps. They are issuing lots of new fiat money to the US and other
governments as no one is lending them money any more. Keep crating
money
until it breaks and then declare bankruptcy on a world wide scale.

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time....dump-u-s-debt/

Which is the real reason behind government rant on currency, they want
the
Chinese to eat the depreciation of US debt.

Suckers play by democrat debtors in denial.

Boats are only going to get cheaper.

--
Is government working for you, or are you working for the government?

Nuckles, nuckles... the Fed can't go bankrupt. Learn to use google. Google
is your friend.


Certainly it can. All it would take is for China to stop buying our
debt and dump their dollars on the world money markets.

As I said, it can't go bankrupt.

It would certainly hurt them bad but it would kill us. The Chinese
expect tanks in the street to kick them back into the fold but we
would not survive as a country if it happens here.

No, actually, the reverse is true. It would hurt us and wipe them out.



What logic supports your theory?

--
Harry
"The 'C' students run the world."

On Oct 1, 3:59*am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:

The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world.

and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions.
a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with
strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right
destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing

You're using backward logic. Actually, more manufacturing brings more
unions. Less manufacturing = less unions. Unions priced themselves
out of the market, and people like you killed manufacturing by buying
cheap chinese-made battery chargers at walmart. You killed the unions
with your purchasing decisions.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 23:16:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message

The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world. These days most of our exports
to China are raw materials. We sell them scrap iron and they sell us
consumer goods. The real profit is in the manufacturing, not
collecting and shipping scrap iron.

Actually, the situation with China is improving...

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/...5700.html#1990

Which isn't something I really considered. Look at the timeline...


Yeah I looked. In 1895 we exported 99% of what we imported from China
Through most of the 2000s the range was 16-20%.
In 2009 it was 26% and it was 25% this year so far with the
traditional largest quarter yet to be reported.
Is that the trend you were talking about?

The difference between the imports and exports changed significantly in 2001
and beyond. This year it will be slightly worse. The sky isn't falling, at
least not very quickly, and given that we've pretty much always had a trade
imbalance, I think that's a fair assessment.


China is in better shape to come out of a global depression than we
are and they will own the world when they do.

No they aren't. They're a much more rigid society. Millions would die if
their economy went bust.

They have 1.3 billion, they can afford to lose a few million but it is
unlikely it would be that bad. A global depression and fionancial
collapse could set us back over 100 years. For most of China it would
just set them back a decade or so and they are better equipped to
recover.

Wow... you're a great humanitarian! A few million here and there... after
a
while it becomes a bad thing I guess... with apologies to Everett Dirksen.


War is hell. We have seen the Chinese fight before. Losing people is
not a big deal to them.

But, it's ok with you, apparently. So, we have a few (regrettable) suicides,
more people are unemployed for a time, more people lose their homes, perhaps
even bread lines, and in contrast millions die in China, so that means,
according to your logic the Chinese fair better????

The rich people here will be fine, they already operate quite well in
the global economy. It will be your middle class that becomes serfs in
a neo-colonial America growing food, cutting wood and mining
materials for China.
To some extent we already are.

The rich people are usually fine. So what. The middle class would be
hurt
but would recover.

Recover doing what? This isn't 1929. Our problem is not excess
capacity with no place to sell it. We don't have the ability to
produce much. We sold our factories to Mexico and China.

The facts just don't support this statement.


Go to any store, pick up just about anything and see where it came
from.

So, you want us to compete to make plastic toys? Well, actually, what gets
produced here doesn't usually have a lead problem.

In the 90s.we thought we would dominate the world in the internet
business but we found out there is really not much employment there.
One guy sitting at a PC arranging drop shipments from Asia is not as
much of an employer as a whole brick and mortar store chain, then they
figured out the guy on the PC could be overseas too. (Clinton's
recession)
In the 2000s we filled that gap building houses, until the market was
so flooded that we may not work through the inventory for years to
come. (the current recession)
Now we are just staring into the hole that used to be American
industry and wondering what is next?

This is yet again a case of Chicken Little (no offense intended).

OK everything is fine, thanks, now I know my kids will be OK.

Economies was and wane. There are plenty of things we export.

http://www.suite101.com/content/top-...s-2009-a204269


This seems like a good list to me...


# Civilian aircraft including parts . US$74.7 billion, up 1% from 2008
(7.1% of total US exports)
# Medicinal, dental and pharmaceutical preparations . $46.1 billion,
up 14.1% (4.4%)
# Semiconductors . $37.5 billion, down 26% (3.5%)
# Other industrial machines . $30.9 billion, down 19.1% (2.9%)
# Automotive parts and accessories . $30 billion, down 24.6% (2.8%)
# Telecommunications equipment . $28.7 billion, down 12.6% (2.7%)
# Passenger cars . $27.5 billion, down 44.5% (2.6%)
# Medicinal equipment . $26.9 billion, down 0.5% (2.5%)
# Electric apparatus . $26.1 billion, down 15.5% (2.5%)
# Plastic materials . $25.5 billion, down 19.3% (2.4%).

8 of the top 10 are going down. Not an encouraging trend.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:42:14 -0400, wrote:

Yeah I looked. In 1895 we exported 99% of what we imported from China


Where are the typo police when you need them ... 1985

lol

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:59:32 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:



The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world.

and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions.
a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with
strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right
destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing

The unions caused it to some degree by making our workers too
expensive to compete in a world market and not being willing to budge.
The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the
non-union states.

You really can't blame the unions for screwed up, exploitive management
practices that caused the unions to be formed in the first place.

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Oct 1, 3:59 am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:

The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world.

and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions.
a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with
strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right
destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing

You're using backward logic. Actually, more manufacturing brings more
unions. Less manufacturing = less unions. Unions priced themselves
out of the market, and people like you killed manufacturing by buying
cheap chinese-made battery chargers at walmart. You killed the unions
with your purchasing decisions.

Sure.. you're right, except for the root cause of union creation... BAD
MANAGEMENT.

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:26:27 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:43:35 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:32:41 -0400, wrote:



Certainly it can. All it would take is for China to stop buying our
debt and dump their dollars on the world money markets.

john maynard keynes once said, if you owe the bank $1000 you have a
problem. if you owe it $1M, they have a problem

china's not going to dump anything. you think they want to lose money?

what planet you right wingers live on?

That is the same kind of logic that said Japan would never attack
Pearl Harbor.

Actually, there's some dispute about us knowing or not knowing about the
impending attack.

Ah the old "FDR caused the attack to get us in the war" theory.
That usually comes from right wingers. I'm surprised.

Short term money loss is not the only thing some countries think
about, even if that is such a strange concept to us.

We've had a very stable, long-term monetary policy in the US up until
recently... about the time of Reagan. Between the Depression and then, we
had recessions but nothing severe. Then, the regs got removed and/or
gutted.
We see the result. We need to learn from our mistakes and reinstitute the
policies that stabilized our economy.


The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to
produce things we can sell the world. These days most of our exports
to China are raw materials. We sell them scrap iron and they sell us
consumer goods. The real profit is in the manufacturing, not
collecting and shipping scrap iron.

China is in better shape to come out of a global depression than we
are and they will own the world when they do.

No they aren't. They're a much more rigid society. Millions would die if
their economy went bust.

They have 1.3 billion, they can afford to lose a few million but it is
unlikely it would be that bad. A global depression and fionancial
collapse could set us back over 100 years. For most of China it would
just set them back a decade or so and they are better equipped to
recover.

The rich people here will be fine, they already operate quite well in
the global economy. It will be your middle class that becomes serfs in
a neo-colonial America growing food, cutting wood and mining
materials for China.
To some extent we already are.

The rich people are usually fine. So what. The middle class would be hurt
but would recover.

Recover doing what? This isn't 1929. Our problem is not excess
capacity with no place to sell it. We don't have the ability to
produce much. We sold our factories to Mexico and China.
In the 90s.we thought we would dominate the world in the internet
business but we found out there is really not much employment there.
One guy sitting at a PC arranging drop shipments from Asia is not as
much of an employer as a whole brick and mortar store chain, then they
figured out the guy on the PC could be overseas too. (Clinton's
recession)
In the 2000s we filled that gap building houses, until the market was
so flooded that we may not work through the inventory for years to
come. (the current recession)
Now we are just staring into the hole that used to be American
industry and wondering what is next?

This is yet again a case of Chicken Little (no offense intended).

OK everything is fine, thanks, now I know my kids will be OK.


Another case of a well presented, logical argument being shrugged off with
a
liberal cliche because depoop couldn't think of a counter.

Nice job. Wasted though.
--
John H

All decisions are the result of binary thinking.

Wow... you sure contributed NOTHING to this thread! Keep up the great work
representing your viewpoint!