On 10/1/10 1:34 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

"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.




Manufacturers left the USA not because they weren't making profit...they
simply did not think they were making enough profit. Greed took over,
big time.

Prices for most consumer items are far higher than they ever were when
they were made in the USA by unionized workforces and labor charges in
the Pacific Rim are not much better than slave labor rates.

You figure out the rest.


--
Republicans are the Party of No:
No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:57:38 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 01:13:19 -0400, wrote:

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.

so your argument is that china will take a trillion dollar loss? has
that ever happened? all you have to do is point out an event in
history and you'll have an argument


They are already braced to take that loss. China is smart enough to
see our current system is unsustainable. The only question is whether
they want to get out while the dollar is still strong or ride it down.
They may take the tough love decision to squeeze us, just to force us
into fiscal responsibility and insure a longer term market for their
goods.

Not true. They're in it for the money. They intend to keep playing. They're
certainly going to squeeze us (continue to actually) to get our house in
order. What's wrong with that? Everyone wins.

Short term money loss is not the only thing some countries think
about, even if that is such a strange concept to us.
China is in better shape to come out of a global depression than we
are and they will own the world when they do.

we're in such a depression now, remember. they aren't dumping
anything. so your experiment doesnt work

Lots of things we are seeing now have never happened before. Why would
you think other things we have not seen before can't happen in the
future? There has never been a time when other countries held this
much of our debt.

There's a difference between the unknown and the unknowable. One works to
explore the unknown. The unknowable is best left to God.

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.

they already are becoming serfs. they just dont realize it. a recent
study shows that americans have NO idea how skewed income and wealth
are in this country. and the right is certainly helping to keep this a
secret

Yet when I try to point it out you say I am wrong. Again you are
standing to the right of me.

"Secular Humoresque" wrote in message
...
On 10/1/10 1:34 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

"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.




Manufacturers left the USA not because they weren't making profit...they
simply did not think they were making enough profit. Greed took over, big
time.

Prices for most consumer items are far higher than they ever were when
they were made in the USA by unionized workforces and labor charges in the
Pacific Rim are not much better than slave labor rates.

You figure out the rest.


--
Republicans are the Party of No:
No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals

I guess that would mean it was ~good~ management lol

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

"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
m...
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!



Wow! Small tits, big mouth, no brains. This newsgroup is about boats. Please take a moment to think about why you are disliked and suffer ridicule from those of us that would like to read about boating.

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

"Secular Humoresque" wrote in message
...
On 10/1/10 1:34 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

"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.




Manufacturers left the USA not because they weren't making profit...they
simply did not think they were making enough profit. Greed took over, big
time.

Prices for most consumer items are far higher than they ever were when
they were made in the USA by unionized workforces and labor charges in the
Pacific Rim are not much better than slave labor rates.

You figure out the rest.


Yup.. it's the importers... buying cheap & selling high.

In article ,
says...

"Secular Humoresque" wrote in message
...
On 10/1/10 1:34 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

"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.




Manufacturers left the USA not because they weren't making profit...they
simply did not think they were making enough profit. Greed took over, big
time.

Prices for most consumer items are far higher than they ever were when
they were made in the USA by unionized workforces and labor charges in the
Pacific Rim are not much better than slave labor rates.

You figure out the rest.


Yup.. it's the importers... buying cheap & selling high.

Yeah, who do those assholes think they are, actually wanting to make a
PROFIT?

"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.


One way or another unions had to go. They became too powerful and greedy to allow on shore manufacturing to compete in the world market.

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

On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:02:17 -0400, wrote:

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

wrong. provably wrong. right now, the countries with the strongest
unions have the best manufacturing bases.

you are simply WRONG

and not being willing to budge.
The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the
non-union states.

also wrong.

On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 09:22:48 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

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.

nope. not if you can intimidate workers. and america has given carte
blanche to companies to do exactly this. there is no penalty for
harassment, intimidation, or even firing union organizers

Less manufacturing = less unions. Unions priced themselves
out of the market,

wrong. germany, sweden and france all have good manufacturing bases
and have strong unions

right wingers WANT people to think unions are bad, but the EVIDENCE
shows othewise

and people like you killed manufacturing by buying
cheap chinese-made battery chargers at walmart. You killed the unions
with your purchasing decisions.

nope. you killed them when you allowed the right to pass legislation
destroying unions

On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:59:42 -0400, wrote:

nt


They are already braced to take that loss.

actually so are we. they only hold 10% of US public debt.


China is smart enough to
see our current system is unsustainable.

and where they gonna put the money? oh. nowhere.


they already are becoming serfs. they just dont realize it. a recent
study shows that americans have NO idea how skewed income and wealth
are in this country. and the right is certainly helping to keep this a
secret

Yet when I try to point it out you say I am wrong. Again you are
standing to the right of me.

we are becoming serfs because people like you want companies to have
MORE power, not LESS