Steve Rymer Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: So when in doubt, just throw out a bunch of subterfuge, or maybe go off on autopilot? The question again is. You expressed twice your concern globalization.What would Steve do about globalization? Give me a chance! You actually had more than one point in your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Rymer Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: So when in doubt, just throw out a bunch of subterfuge, or maybe go off on autopilot? The question again is. You expressed twice yours concerns about globalization.What would Steve do about globalization? Globalization is a race to the bottom for most and a race to the top for a few. It can never work for all because it replies on trade/resource/capital and labor deficits for profit. It allows transnational corporations to avoid paying taxes, paying decent wages or complying with regulations and a whole host of other crappy things. Off the top of my head: Countries service their own domestic markets - where possible. Where not possible - $-for-$ trade/exchange between countries. No outsourcing where demand can be met internally. Pay taxes on profits in the country where it was earned. Stock markets trade within each country. Dunno. It's all pie in the sky. Do you have any ideas? Steve Edited May 19, 2017 by Steve Rymer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted May 19, 2017 Author Share Posted May 19, 2017 (edited) . 52 minutes ago, Steve Rymer said: Globalization is a race to the bottom for most and a race to the top for a few. It can never work for all because it replies on trade/resource/capital and labor deficits for profit. It allows transnational corporations to avoid paying taxes, paying decent wages or complying with regulations and a whole host of other crappy things. Off the top of my head: Countries service their own domestic markets - where possible. Where not possible - $-for-$ trade/exchange between countries. No outsourcing where demand can be met internally. Pay taxes on profits in the country where it was earned. Stock markets trade within each country. Dunno. It's all pie in the sky. Do you have any ideas? Steve Before I even address the truth and the fallacies of what you've just said. Let's talk specifically about causes of job loss you're referring to in our country. From 2000-2009, we lost 5 million manufacturing jobs. The crescendo of that loss was due to the world economic meltdown, which we'd probably agree was due to American banks.The result is that a lot of our people lost their jobs, and were forced to take jobs at about half the wage, which wasn't going to cut it. Lots of workers over 40 simply never recovered, and never rejoined the work force, and some companies folded and went to foreign countries.. The idea that we've continued to lose manufacturing jobs is false. The Obama administration has gained about a million back, and the industrial sector has continued to grow.Just as great a factor in job loss has been due to automation, and a number of the new manufacturing jobs require more advanced skills. So the truth is Steve, a lot of them won't come back on their own. You seem to have a distrust of government.Maybe you think government is inherently evil? You obviously don't think it can help protect our environment. As a taxpayer, if you are one or not, do you think it would be worthwhile to have a government retooling program to retrain misplaced workers? If you don't then all of your cries for the misplaced workers are really just jive.And if that program is to have a ghost of a chance, Do you honestly think the Republicans will behind that? They've opposed almost any programs like that since the 60's.Or maybe you think the free market system will cure all? Just like the people who think of the free market system with the sanctity of the "constitution" or the Bible?.What is it Steve? Edited May 19, 2017 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 9 hours ago, Steve Rymer said: Not impolite at all Michael, I actually don't think it's relevant (not my opinion), but Trump's suitability. He was elected and that should be enough. But, I will answer. Is he smarter than Nancy Pelosi, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Maxine Waters? Yes, I would say so. He has a different kind of intelligence and yes, his lack of political and geopolitical knowledge worries me. It makes for an easily led president. He did run a business empire and that must count for something. As for maturity. I don't see a lack of it. I see a non-politician and non-media savvy president. He's prepared to say it like he sees it - one of the reasons his supporters voted for him. They are sick of the lying, obfuscating and deceptive practices of the current batch of politicians. He's not a procrastinating, teleprompter reading, think-tank consulting autobot. Does he have access to those? Yes. Does he use them all the time to create a false public persona. No, I don't think so. I do know he represents a big threat to a lot of people (the Media, incumbent politicians etc). He puts his foot in his mouth. He says the wrong thing. Voters looking for real change (not an advertising slogan) - like that. Fitness to lead his country. Presidents rarely lead the country. Perhaps this explains some of the animosity the establishment have towards him. Maybe he became president stupidly believing he would run the show. Well, he's learning the hard way. There is no real democracy. I don't want you to think I'm pro-Trump, I'm not. I'm actually a political atheist (new term invented by me). I think the whole process is a PR exercise. I'm actually pro-principal: Can any old Joe Bloggs get elected? Is the process simply about money and friendly media coverage(paid for)? Can an outsider really make a difference or will we be trapped in this pro-war, pro-globalization, pro-neo liberal economics, pro-open border game forever? I would argue just the same for a left-wing outsider. Steve Steve - allow me to challenge you on your last sentence. You say in a response to my post on this thread that the various government agencies like the EPA aren't doing their job anyway. I agree. So do most progressives. (Political labels are limiting aren't they?) But the difference between Bernie Sander's position on government agencies effectiveness, and the current administration, are night and day. How does this square with your sentence? Are you going to take the position that Sanders is not a left wing outsider? How is weakening government institutions a solution for fighting entrenched monied interests? Don't we need better institutions? Anoher question - are you in favor of single payer health care, which you say Hillary Clinton is against? In my opinion Trump and his team including Robert Mercer are trying to weaken government, skew power further towards big money interest and away from public interest. Can we agree on that? I hope so, because there would be little possibility of establishing common ground otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Rymer Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Paul Brancato said: Steve - allow me to challenge you on your last sentence. You say in a response to my post on this thread that the various government agencies like the EPA aren't doing their job anyway. I agree. So do most progressives. (Political labels are limiting aren't they?) But the difference between Bernie Sander's position on government agencies effectiveness, and the current administration, are night and day. How does this square with your sentence? Are you going to take the position that Sanders is not a left wing outsider? How is weakening government institutions a solution for fighting entrenched monied interests? Don't we need better institutions? Anoher question - are you in favor of single payer health care, which you say Hillary Clinton is against? In my opinion Trump and his team including Robert Mercer are trying to weaken government, skew power further towards big money interest and away from public interest. Can we agree on that? I hope so, because there would be little possibility of establishing common ground otherwise. Hi Paul, I would suggest agencies like the EPA are fronts for corporate interests. In addition to the items I mentioned (fracking/pipelines etc). They allow corps to outsource liability in exchange for a minimal capped fine, provide a focal point for public discourse and anger away from the corps, perform a non-existent oversight role, set lenient targets for polluters and most importantly - they don't protect the environment. I would consider Sanders and left-wing progressive and an outsider - he was actually my pick. "How does this square with your sentence?" - perhaps I was not very clear? "I'm actually pro-principal:....I would argue just the same for a left-wing outsider." "How is weakening government institutions a solution for fighting entrenched monied interests?" - I did not suggest weakening them. I would radically overhaul them. Right now, they are captured lapdogs. I would give them teeth, standards set by academia - not industry, end the revolving door and implement personal penalties for EPA failures. "Don't we need better institutions?" - yes. "Ano[t]her question - are you in favor of single payer health care, which you say Hillary Clinton is against?" Yes, I live in the UK. We have a fantastic NHS, although it's being starved of resources, maligned in the press and privatized in secret in preparation for a US corporate invasion via a free trade agreement (IMHO). "In my opinion Trump and his team including Robert Mercer are trying to weaken government, skew power further towards big money interest and away from public interest" - yes, but big money already own it all anyway. I sense that everyone has pre-decided I'm a free-market republican because I argue against what is happening to Trump. I am defending a principle here. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Rymer Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 7 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: . Before I even address the truth and the fallacies of what you've just said. Let's talk specifically about causes of job loss you're referring to in our country. From 2000-2009, we lost 5 million manufacturing jobs. The crescendo of that loss was due to the world economic meltdown, which we'd probably agree was due to American banks.The result is that a lot of our people lost their jobs, and were forced to take jobs at about half the wage, which wasn't going to cut it. Lots of workers over 40 simply never recovered, and never rejoined the work force, and some companies folded and went to foreign countries.. The idea that we've continued to lose manufacturing jobs is false. The Obama administration has gained about a million back, and the industrial sector has continued to grow.Just as great a factor in job loss has been due to automation, and a number of the new manufacturing jobs require more advanced skills. So the truth is Steve, a lot of them won't come back on their own. You seem to have a distrust of government. You obviously don't think it can help protect our environment. As a taxpayer, if you are one or not, do you think it would be worthwhile to have a government retooling program to retrain misplaced workers? If you don't then all of your cries for the misplaced workers are really just jive.And if that program is to have a ghost of a chance, Do you honestly think the Republicans will behind that? They've opposed almost any programs like that since the 60's.Or maybe you think the free market system will cure all? Just like the people who think of the free market system with the sanctity of the "constitution" or the Bible?.What is it Steve? I did say off the top of my head. So many points and a few insults - I'm not sure where to start. I am not an economist, but I will take a swipe. "Let's talk specifically about causes of job loss you're referring to in our country." - I didn't mention jobs. "labor deficits" refers to imbalances. "From 2000-2009, we lost 5 million manufacturing jobs. The crescendo of that loss was due to the world economic meltdown". The period from the dot.com bubble collapse in 1997 and ending in 2001 until the recent crash of 2007/2008 was a period of US GDP growth. http://blogs.ft.com/gavyndavies/2011/11/22/us-escapes-eurozone-contagion-so-far/ http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG "The crescendo of that loss was due to the world economic meltdown, which we'd probably agree was due to American banks. " - No, that happened in 2007/2008. The GDP increase was fueled by cheap money and fraudulent investment vehicles. Many jobs have been lost to China (2001-2013): https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/12/11/outsourcing-to-china-cost-us-32-million-jobs-since-2001 "The result is that a lot of our people lost their jobs, and were forced to take jobs at about half the wage, which wasn't going to cut it. Lots of workers over 40 simply never recovered, and never rejoined the work force," - agreed. " and some companies folded and went to foreign countries.. " - factories closed and went to China/Mexico. Outsourced. "The idea that we've continued to lose manufacturing jobs is false." - Nope, see above. "The Obama administration has gained about a million back," - maybe but, by exchanging well paid jobs for minimum wage. "and the industrial sector has continued to grow. " - Don't know about manufacturing. One point I would make is that Apple(China)'s GDP is counted in the US and some 70%(I could try and source if you like) of global trade is inter-branch traffic. "Just as great a factor in job loss has been due to automation" - Yes, and much more to come. " You seem to have a distrust of government. " - Yes. Many years of observation, research, revelation and experience. I bet you could think of 5 really big government lies or deceptions without even trying. My default position is disbelief until proven true - I think that is a reasonable position. "You obviously don't think it can help protect our environment. " No. Have they? How's fracking working out for you? Fukushima? Hanford? The Gulf? Corexit? Flint and 200 other water supplies in the US? "As a taxpayer, if you are one or not, " - That sounds like the sort of slur a republican would resort to. And yes, I pay tax. " do you think it would be worthwhile to have a government retooling program to retrain misplaced workers? " No, I don't. Manufacturing in the developed world is sunk (without some of the items in the list in my original response to you). Automation is about to explode. Foxconn has just replaced 60,000 jobs in China - where does that place US workers at 4x the cost? " Do you honestly think the Republicans will [be] behind that? " - Do you honestly think the Democrats will be behind that? As I said, I am a political atheist (you may not have read that post). " They've opposed almost any programs like that since the 60's" This is a biggy - not had a lot of time on this: Here's 3: "May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats " "The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate". "August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) introduces 1965 Voting Rights Act" " Or maybe you think the free market system will cure all? " - No, how can anyone read my 5 point reply and think I'm a free-market-fundamentalist! "...sanctity of the "constitution" or the Bible?.What is it Steve?" Well, the constitution is important, but I live in the UK, so I'm a peasant on the land. Bible? No, I'm an atheist. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 14 hours ago, Steve Rymer said: Steve R. I agree with most of what you are stating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted May 20, 2017 Author Share Posted May 20, 2017 Joe, That because despite his rude introduction, he's one of us. I agreed with many of the things he first said, but then I couldn't see how he'd be for Trump or Hillary, and alas, he's not. He parachutes in and actually has the gall to chide us for being "infantile", and it turns out, he's one of us, but somehow thinks he's different because he's frustrated with the effectiveness (or maybe the takeover) of government..Oh how inspirational you are Steve! You have some curious holes in you economic thinking but now I realize it's because you're a Brit. We thought you were talking specifically about our American experience with globalism, and the loss of manufacturing jobs. But congrats! You do know more about us than the average American. I should have figured, "dodgy stuff", "vultures in the pig trough", so descriptive! But then so dark, OK you took my automation point,and it's pretty clear you have no hope for the future, do you? Hearing you, I feel like I'm in the advanced stages of the Industrial Revolution, or maybe more contemporary, "The 1952, London Pea Soup Fog." . Is everyone around you also such a downer? Why are so fascinated with us yanks? We obviously are all such insulated "dolts" that we don't know or care much about you. Ok, I'm kidding I really do care. But the most interesting thing I thought you just said was about your country. Yes, I live in the UK. We have a fantastic NHS, although it's being starved of resources, maligned in the press and privatized in secret in preparation for a US corporate invasion via a free trade agreement (IMHO). American corporate takeover of British Health Care? Privatized in secret. I almost hesitate to ask, but do tell me more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted May 20, 2017 Author Share Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) Hey Steve, Since you're looking to influence Americans. Maybe I can give you your first introduction to a like minded American with a similar communicative style as you. https://youtu.be/2okLFw9TIEI . Edited May 20, 2017 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Rymer Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said: Hey Steve, Since you're looking to influence Americans. Maybe I can give you your first introduction to a like minded American with a similar communicative style as you. https://youtu.be/2okLFw9TIEI . Oh dear. Is that all you've got? I think I demonstrated you were just plain wrong about many of your assertions on the economy. You've not addressed a single point or supplied a single reference. But, you do seem to enjoy snide comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Rymer Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 9 hours ago, Joe Bauer said: Steve R. I agree with most of what you are stating. Thanks Joe. Most? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now