News:

Sarkat And Rian: Happily Ever After? [EX]
Congratulations shengami & FoxgirlJay for completing your RP!

Main Menu

Aftershock - Impending Economic Collapse?

Started by Iniquitous, July 06, 2012, 03:34:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Iniquitous

I first found out about this book from my mom when we were doing our usual sharing of books that we have read recently and I’ll admit that when it comes to anything dealing with numbers and economy, I am far from being even competent to participate in a discussion. But this book was something my mother kept insisting that I read despite the fact that I told her it seemed like fear mongering to me.

Now, whether it is fear mongering or not, the guys that wrote this hit everything dead on and that is what makes me a little - alright, very - uneasy about their coming predictions for the economy. I found the interview online and thought I’d share here to see what other people think of what this guy is predicting.

Bow to the Queen; I'm the Alpha, the Omega, everything in between.


Oniya

My computer's a little futzy with videos these days *shakes fist at Comcast* - is this the one by Robert B. Reich?  I read his blog online, and I have to say, the man impresses me.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

OldSchoolGamer

Anything that comes from Newsmax, I take with a pinch of salt.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but Newsmax are doomsday pimps. 

Having said that, I do believe the U.S. is headed for a fall.  We can't go on borrowing one out of every four dollars we spend indefinitely.  It would be different if we were borrowing those dollars to invest in things like thermonuclear fusion power, space exploration, curing disease, geoengineering, and other things that would pay long-term dividends.   But we're mostly just pissing the money away.  And that can't continue.

The fall could take any of a variety of forms.   We could undergo a couple decades of stagnation, where our GDP growth has an interquartile range of 0.5 to 2% rather than the 2.5 to 4% we took for granted for the last half of the 20th century.  There could be a sudden panic in financial markets.

I think the $64 trillion question here is the oil supply.  If Peak Oil theorists are right and we've tapped out all the easy-to-get energy and oil hits $200/bbl by the middle of the decade and $350/bbl by the end, we're headed for real trouble.  Financial shortages and business-cycle recessions are one thing, but when an industrial civilization is starved of energy, it goes into depression, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.  The Fed can't ease our way into finding another Ghawar.  Central banks can't print more barrels of oil.

If, on the other hand, the Republicans are right and it's just a matter of shooing the tree-huggers away and drilling more holes to bring gas back to $2.29 a gallon and put fins back on our cars, then we'll probably just undergo a period of austerity and adjustment...or inflate our way out of the debt and keep on trucking.

Vitiseek

I don't know if it's true or not whether there will be an economic collapse (my opinion is we'll see a lot tighter governmental control for a long while before any "revolution" -- 1984 instead of Mad Max) but it could make for some interesting roleplay scenarios.

Iniquitous

Quote from: OldSchoolGamer on July 06, 2012, 03:52:04 PM
Anything that comes from Newsmax, I take with a pinch of salt.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but Newsmax are doomsday pimps. 

Having said that, I do believe the U.S. is headed for a fall.  We can't go on borrowing one out of every four dollars we spend indefinitely.  It would be different if we were borrowing those dollars to invest in things like thermonuclear fusion power, space exploration, curing disease, geoengineering, and other things that would pay long-term dividends.   But we're mostly just pissing the money away.  And that can't continue.

The fall could take any of a variety of forms.   We could undergo a couple decades of stagnation, where our GDP growth has an interquartile range of 0.5 to 2% rather than the 2.5 to 4% we took for granted for the last half of the 20th century.  There could be a sudden panic in financial markets.

I think the $64 trillion question here is the oil supply.  If Peak Oil theorists are right and we've tapped out all the easy-to-get energy and oil hits $200/bbl by the middle of the decade and $350/bbl by the end, we're headed for real trouble.  Financial shortages and business-cycle recessions are one thing, but when an industrial civilization is starved of energy, it goes into depression, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.  The Fed can't ease our way into finding another Ghawar.  Central banks can't print more barrels of oil.

If, on the other hand, the Republicans are right and it's just a matter of shooing the tree-huggers away and drilling more holes to bring gas back to $2.29 a gallon and put fins back on our cars, then we'll probably just undergo a period of austerity and adjustment...or inflate our way out of the debt and keep on trucking.

If you had watched the video you would have seen that it is an interview with one of the authors of the BOOK, Robert A. Wiedemer. The website is hosting the video since it was repeatedly pulled down from other sites.

And not to sound too bitchy, but it is things like that which irritate me. You seen the link and made an assumption based on what the site was instead of actually checking anything out. If you had watched the video, you would have learned that this man accurately predicted *everything* that has happened to date and is telling us what is in store instead of saying what you think could happen.

@Oniya, I haven'd read his blog. Do you have a link you could share?
Bow to the Queen; I'm the Alpha, the Omega, everything in between.


Oniya

Certainly:  http://robertreich.org/

He's not quite as doom-and-gloom, but he cuts through a lot of the B.S about the numbers (especially the unemployment numbers that both sides keep pointing to and spinning in their favor), and has some pretty good ideas about what needs to happen to turn things around. 
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: Iniquitous Opheliac on July 06, 2012, 05:22:13 PM
If you had watched the video you would have seen that it is an interview with one of the authors of the BOOK, Robert A. Wiedemer. The website is hosting the video since it was repeatedly pulled down from other sites.

And not to sound too bitchy, but it is things like that which irritate me. You seen the link and made an assumption based on what the site was instead of actually checking anything out. If you had watched the video, you would have learned that this man accurately predicted *everything* that has happened to date and is telling us what is in store instead of saying what you think could happen.


I've seen the video before.  Contrary to Newsmax, it hasn't been censored.  It usually appears on sites alongside ads for everything from stopping the New World Order to Art Bell to survival supplies to rants about chemtrails.  And only for a limited time before "they" come take it down.  Funny thing is, if you go back to the site weeks after "they" were supposed to take it down, it's still there...but you better hurry up and watch it, because "they" (presumably riding in black helicopters) will be along any day to take it down.

None of which is categorical proof that what he has to say is false.  But I think you can understand where that kind of "packaging," if you will, makes me skeptical.  It has the aura of a used car lot.  And I stand by my assertion that Newsmax is a doomsday pimp.  Its credibility is dubious at best...maybe a notch or two above the supermarket tabloids, but well below what I consider to be reputable news sources.  To them, the sky is always falling.

So is the world coming to an end?  Yes.  As time approaches infinity, the odds of survival for anything--you, me, America, Western civilization, Elliquiy, rock and roll, even Lady Gaga--approach zero.  But I'm not holding my breath.  And I also believe the biggest threat to America is energy (oil) shortages, not the housing market or the Federal Reserve or Barack Obama.

Iniquitous

If you say so. But since I started this thread to discuss what Bob Wiedemer is discussing in the video, I'd like to stay on topic.
Bow to the Queen; I'm the Alpha, the Omega, everything in between.


Serephino

I take anything like this with a grain of salt.  He could be right if every piece of data he looked at holds true, but the economy is so fragile at this point, who can really say.  There is also the law of chaos.  Who's to say several leaders of the GOP don't hold some little get together, eat something bad, and all get violently sick and drop dead (I can dream, can't I?).  That would certainly change things up a bit.  China could erupt in civil war, and want their money.  Any number of random things could happen.  That is why it's nearly impossible to accurately predict the future.

I seriously doubt taxes will be raised on the wealthy in the near future if Republicans keep or gain more control, especially not with Citizens United continuously being upheld.  The conservatives in office seem pretty consistent in bending over and spreading their cheeks for their corporate backers.  I think it's fairly safe to say they won't give up that gravy train without one hell of a fight.  They haven't done or said anything to suggest otherwise to me.  So, yes, it does matter who is in the White House in 2013.

Since I admittedly am not that well versed in economics I don't know if raising interest rates will help any, but I do agree it won't be done any time soon.  He is definitely right that it would be an unpopular decision.  It's an election year, so the goal is to make as many voters and backers as happy as possible, no matter what it does to the country in the long run.  See, that's the problem; everyone always thinks in the short term.  Politicians want elected, so they do anything and everything they think they need to.     

 

Shjade

Quote from: Serephino on July 06, 2012, 08:23:35 PM
I take anything like this with a grain of salt.

How can you afford to waste salt in this economy? :o
Theme: Make Me Feel - Janelle Monáe
◕/◕'s
Conversation is more useful than conversion.

TheGlyphstone

Quote from: Shjade on July 06, 2012, 08:46:47 PM
How can you afford to waste salt in this economy? :o

Who says he wastes it? Take that grain of salt and throw it over your shoulder and it'll ward off evil spirits. ^-^

Shjade

Oh sure, deny evil spirits their right to work. That'll definitely help swing money back into the system.
Theme: Make Me Feel - Janelle Monáe
◕/◕'s
Conversation is more useful than conversion.

TheGlyphstone

Quote from: Shjade on July 06, 2012, 08:55:24 PM
Oh sure, deny evil spirits their right to work. That'll definitely help swing money back into the system.

The LaVeyan plan was economically unfeasible, I tell you! The souls of the innocent are not a viable export good, and if they were, China would have an unbreakable monopoly.

Vekseid

Quote from: Iniquitous Opheliac on July 06, 2012, 05:22:13 PM
If you had watched the video you would have seen that it is an interview with one of the authors of the BOOK, Robert A. Wiedemer. The website is hosting the video since it was repeatedly pulled down from other sites.

And not to sound too bitchy, but it is things like that which irritate me. You seen the link and made an assumption based on what the site was instead of actually checking anything out. If you had watched the video, you would have learned that this man accurately predicted *everything* that has happened to date and is telling us what is in store instead of saying what you think could happen.

@Oniya, I haven'd read his blog. Do you have a link you could share?

The same Robert Wiedemer claiming 50% unemployment and 100% inflation before 2012?

Umm yeah. I know where to file this guy's opinions.

Apple of Eris

I'm waiting for my dystopian future so I can live in some skyrise above all the pollution with the rich and their most trusted minions, while everyone else lives on the ground under the 'cloud'.

Unfortunately, this isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Men are those creatures with two legs and eight hands.  ~Jayne Mansfield
To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first, then call whatever you hit the target. ~Ashleigh Brilliant

Ons/Offs
Stories I'm Seeking

Oniya

I couldn't find much at all about Robert Wiedemer that didn't look like his own press cuttings.

Quote from: Apple of Eris on July 07, 2012, 10:23:27 AM
I'm waiting for my dystopian future so I can live in some skyrise above all the pollution with the rich and their most trusted minions, while everyone else lives on the ground under the 'cloud'.

Unfortunately, this isn't going to happen anytime soon.

And when it does, some kid with a sword bigger than he is, and a Mr. T. look-alike will screw it all up for you.  ;D
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: Vekseid on July 07, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
The same Robert Wiedemer claiming 50% unemployment and 100% inflation before 2012?

Umm yeah. I know where to file this guy's opinions.

You mean you evaded the black helicopters and the Reptiloids to unearth Wiedemer's previous predictions from the memory hole?   ;D

I think the core problem here is, in an age of disaster movies where the world's major cities get torn apart in CGI-land, people have a "zombie apocalypse" perception of collapse: one day we're going to wake up and there'll be anarchy and rioting everywhere.

That's not how collapse works.

Actual collapse of empires the size of America is generally a much slower, "sea-change" sort of affair.  Note that during the decline of the Roman Empire, few people of the day actually realized what was happening.  It wasn't until historians could look backwards and view things in context that the pattern became clear.

Revolverman

Quote from: OldSchoolGamer on July 07, 2012, 01:01:36 PM
You mean you evaded the black helicopters and the Reptiloids to unearth Wiedemer's previous predictions from the memory hole?   ;D

I think the core problem here is, in an age of disaster movies where the world's major cities get torn apart in CGI-land, people have a "zombie apocalypse" perception of collapse: one day we're going to wake up and there'll be anarchy and rioting everywhere.

That's not how collapse works.

Actual collapse of empires the size of America is generally a much slower, "sea-change" sort of affair.  Note that during the decline of the Roman Empire, few people of the day actually realized what was happening.  It wasn't until historians could look backwards and view things in context that the pattern became clear.

Many local rulers, when they came to power also attempted to emulate the Roman empire as much as possible to keep the people calm.

Moraline

Quote from: Vekseid on July 07, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
The same Robert Wiedemer claiming 50% unemployment and 100% inflation before 2012?

Umm yeah. I know where to file this guy's opinions.

Unfortunately Robert is correct.  Most people have stopped being able to find work. I know at least one person here on this site that lives off of doing odd jobs (all under the table.) It's the only income he has and he is barely able to get working doing that.

The bulk of people in the US (nearly 50%), no longer have Employment Insurance (EI).  EI ran out for them years ago.  They are not eligible for any form of welfare, and the ones on welfare don't count in the EI unemployment stats.

A couple of fairly reliable sources, I'd find actual gov't stats for you but I'm not that familiar with American gov't stats places. In Canada we have StatsCan for all our gov't census info.

Forbes 2/09/2012 - "...the labor force participation rate had plummeted to 63.7%, the most rapid decline in U.S. history..."
Read More:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/02/09/dont-be-fooled-the-obama-unemployment-rate-is-11/

Business Insider January 24, 2011 - "Only 47% Of Working Age Americans Have Full Time Jobs"
Read More:  http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-01-24/markets/29974517_1_part-time-unemployment-labor-force


America is in trouble. Hard economic lessons need to be learned - not by the people, but by your Government. Unfortunately, it's the people that are suffering.

What the guy in the interview says is the truth. Things need to change and they need to change fast. You can't avoid what's coming, but you can make hard choices and lesson the blow of it.

If I was living in the US right now I'd be preparing for this. As it is, I live in Canada and our situation is nothing like yours and I'm still prepared because your economic bubble burst is going to hurt us again, just like it did last time.


My suggestions:

Get out of real estate while you can, land is good, houses/property is bad. But keep in mind that the government makes money off of land taxes so it's best just to get out of the real estate game right now while you can. 

Keep investments minimal and easily affordable. Also get out of any investments that are tied to the government at all (gold, bonds, gov't businesses, any business that's received a gov't bail out package - financial institutions etc...) 

I'm not saying stuff your money in a mattress, just invest money wisely. 

Keep your portfolio versatile and don't over invest.

Trim all your expenses now before you are forced to do it.  It'll help you out in the long run.

Vekseid

That's a bit of a silly figure to run your numbers on. Was unemployment over 50% back in the 50's when only one member of the household tended to work?

The employment to population ratio needs to be taken in context - yes, these days, it's a better number to look at than unemployment. However, there are more reasons for not working than being too young to legally work.

His inflation claims are the really ludicrous figures, however. The US is in a liquidity trap - people are burdened by debt, and don't have enough money to spend. High inflation in the US at this time would by definition mean low unemployment.

gaggedLouise

#20
Greece's latest move in the euro feud is supposed to be to sue Germany to demand WW2 reparations to the cost of many billions - seventy years after the war ended (in 1945, the Western allies were agreed to forget about claims on any massive war reparations because everybody understood that it was more important to get the economy and basic livelihoods working again; no one was gonna repeart the mistakes of the Versailles treaty and its huge claims for war damages). Never heard of a better way to get back on the countries that have been lending oceans of money to a crisis-stricken economy... ahem...

It's becoming increasingly clear that Greece is heading for a state default or a fast exit from the eurozone - either option could shake up the financial system badly.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: Vekseid on August 21, 2012, 08:31:11 PM
That's a bit of a silly figure to run your numbers on. Was unemployment over 50% back in the 50's when only one member of the household tended to work?

The employment to population ratio needs to be taken in context - yes, these days, it's a better number to look at than unemployment. However, there are more reasons for not working than being too young to legally work.

His inflation claims are the really ludicrous figures, however. The US is in a liquidity trap - people are burdened by debt, and don't have enough money to spend. High inflation in the US at this time would by definition mean low unemployment.

Thinking about this for a time, I believe one of the biggest unsung problems America is facing is the definition of "work."  And how our economic system rewards it--or doesn't.

There's still plenty of work out there.  Everything from bridges that need fixing to kids that need teaching to homeless people who need food and shelter to a thousand and one other socially productive ventures that would add value to people and things.  Trouble is, our economic system doesn't reward people for doing any of this.  So it doesn't get done.  So cue the crosstalk between Left and Right:

Right: "Look at all these lazy kids with their pants half off, and college grads living in their mothers' basements and going to Occupy protests.  They need to get off their asses and work for a living!"
Left: "Yeah, maybe so, but there are no jobs for them, so what are they supposed to do?"

Both are right--and neither.  Yeah, there are a lot of unproductive people out there.  Yeah, maybe extended unemployment insurance does encourage dependency and discourage people from seeking work.  But all cutting off unemployment insurance would do is make it so Wal-Mart and McDonald's and the gas station around the corner get 14 applications rather than 11 for every position open.  It's not going to put anyone back to work.  For that, you need paying jobs.  And we don't have them.  And we won't, for a long time, if ever.

So, what's the way forward?  I think we're going to need to re-localize.  This is something we will need to do anyway, as the collapse of the United States unfolds in earnest in the last half of the 2010s and the 2020s.  A few towns have already come up with their own local currencies, exchangeable for goods and services produced by local merchants.  The next step is for communities to hire the unemployed, and pay them in local currency.  Put people to work building houses for the homeless and growing food for the hungry.  As state education budgets spiral downwards and public pensions collapse, offer room and board to teachers.  The federal government and big corporations (which are increasingly one and the same anyway) are going to be increasingly useless to actually get anything done.  Both require large amounts of cheap energy and endless economic growth to function--and those are exiting stage left.

Oniya

Quote from: OldSchoolGamer on September 06, 2012, 11:39:33 AM
There's still plenty of work out there.  Everything from bridges that need fixing to kids that need teaching to homeless people who need food and shelter to a thousand and one other socially productive ventures that would add value to people and things.  Trouble is, our economic system doesn't reward people for doing any of this.  So it doesn't get done.  So cue the crosstalk between Left and Right:

So, why not start rewarding people to do these things?
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: Oniya on September 06, 2012, 11:48:35 AM
So, why not start rewarding people to do these things?

Because doing so doesn't make the Forbes 400 any richer.  The money we would spend would be money the super-elite could use to buy more islands, yachts, and other toys.  In the eyes of American conservatives, that's a much better use of the money than building roads, bridges and homes for the homeless.

That's the logic of the Big System.  And, ultimately, it will be that system's undoing.  So we need to have local systems in place when the Big System falls apart.

gaggedLouise

#24
Quote from: Oniya on September 06, 2012, 11:48:35 AM
So, why not start rewarding people to do these things?


I think he's got a point - the crisis isn't about dozens of millions of individuals being lazy or unwilling to work (for an illustration of where that view ultimately ends up, check Gina Rinehart's insulting comments about work and wages in Australia earlier this week). There is a huge amount of work that needs to be done, but the market as it's set to function now doesn't allow people in on a broad scale, neither for to hire anyone to do the work, nor to enlist for it.

Ultimately I think we need some other means than money (as in: purely monetary wages, prices or dividends tied to a supposedly fixed currency system) to act as exchange vehicle  for work, goods, rights and so on. Not saying we should give up money, but we need some other yardstick that's also given the status of exchangeometer and which you'd actually be able to trade, pay and hire in. The setup we have now - all over the world really - imposes money as the only value that can express a price on anything (excepting stuff that is recognized as not being possible to put on the market, like the Mona Lisa or, in solemn moments, justice). There's so many people now who have lots of technically free time, ambition and skills - and will to learn new things - but no marketable way, where they are standing, of using that time or capacity, to sell themselves. Why not? Because the system only allows that kind of hiring for a limited band of people.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Moraline

The value of working at most common jobs now is laughable.

They pay minimum wage or a couple dollars an hour more and the people that work them can't afford to live off of them. Single mothers (far too common) can barely afford to pay rent, groceries, utilities, and send their child to school. They end up working in jobs like a waitress, or a clerk, or some call centre, etc...

50 years ago. One member of the family worked and was able to afford all of those things. In some cases they could afford a lot more.

If all you can get or want is a part time job, then yes a person should struggle to live but if you work 40 hours a week at any job you should be able to afford to feed your self, pay rent, and even support a child.

Inflation went up and no ones job wages matched them. They blame the average person for borrowing.... they only did it to survive, each generation had to borrow a little more and a little more until it all exploded.

It's not done exploding, little has changed so far. I don't have all the answers, I can only take care of myself and my family. Something needs to be done though.

vtboy

Quote from: Moraline on September 06, 2012, 01:07:15 PM
The value of working at most common jobs now is laughable.

They pay minimum wage or a couple dollars an hour more and the people that work them can't afford to live off of them. Single mothers (far too common) can barely afford to pay rent, groceries, utilities, and send their child to school. They end up working in jobs like a waitress, or a clerk, or some call centre, etc...

50 years ago. One member of the family worked and was able to afford all of those things. In some cases they could afford a lot more.

If all you can get or want is a part time job, then yes a person should struggle to live but if you work 40 hours a week at any job you should be able to afford to feed your self, pay rent, and even support a child.

Inflation went up and no ones job wages matched them. They blame the average person for borrowing.... they only did it to survive, each generation had to borrow a little more and a little more until it all exploded.

It's not done exploding, little has changed so far. I don't have all the answers, I can only take care of myself and my family. Something needs to be done though.

The problem is globalization or, more precisely, a global supply of labor competing for jobs which once were American.

Unskilled or semi-skilled workers in the U.S., who could count on manufacturing work to provide a liveable wage when America was the only industrial game in town, now vie for jobs with workers in Asia, Central America, South America, and elsewhere who command much less for their labor. The result is hardly surprising -- all else equal, manufacturers either move their operations to those countries with the lowest labor costs or are trounced by competitors willing to take advantage of favorable wage rates.

Those who would lay blame for the withering of America's middle class entirely at the feet of callous corporations and greedy investors should perhaps consider whether they themselves would be willing to pay, say, another 20% or 30% for the goods from distant lands which now fill their homes. 

AndyZ

Quote from: OldSchoolGamer on September 06, 2012, 11:39:33 AM
Right: "Look at all these lazy kids with their pants half off, and college grads living in their mothers' basements and going to Occupy protests.  They need to get off their asses and work for a living!"
Left: "Yeah, maybe so, but there are no jobs for them, so what are they supposed to do?"

Both are right--and neither.  Yeah, there are a lot of unproductive people out there.  Yeah, maybe extended unemployment insurance does encourage dependency and discourage people from seeking work.  But all cutting off unemployment insurance would do is make it so Wal-Mart and McDonald's and the gas station around the corner get 14 applications rather than 11 for every position open.  It's not going to put anyone back to work.  For that, you need paying jobs.  And we don't have them.  And we won't, for a long time, if ever.

The capitalist solution would be to start up more businesses.  I'd love to see that, but since America has the highest corporate tax rate of any country in the world, it doesn't seem likely.  Any business capable of providing any substantial amount of profits/jobs will simply move to other countries, or start there to begin with.

To continue towards the capitalist solution, we'd need to set things up so that it's much easier to start a business in America.  If OSG has any accuracy about how Forbes 400 hypothesis, this won't happen because big businesses don't want the competition.  They can hire huge lawyers and be able to do whatever the crap they want because people don't have any other choices.

The socialist solution (as I understand it) would be for the government to just give people jobs.  You can see how well this is working for Europe.  There just isn't enough money.

To continue towards the socialist solution, we would have to raise taxes on the richest.  However, this wouldn't help, because even after you took every last dime from the highest 1%, there still wouldn't be enough to pay for everything.  Our debt already exceeds our GDP.

The Singularity solution is developing an artificial intelligence which is far more logical and intelligent than we are, which can construct a superior method of government.  This one has my vote.

Quote from: Moraline on September 06, 2012, 01:07:15 PM
50 years ago. One member of the family worked and was able to afford all of those things. In some cases they could afford a lot more.

If all you can get or want is a part time job, then yes a person should struggle to live but if you work 40 hours a week at any job you should be able to afford to feed your self, pay rent, and even support a child.

Inflation went up and no ones job wages matched them. They blame the average person for borrowing.... they only did it to survive, each generation had to borrow a little more and a little more until it all exploded.

Going to agree about inflation.  Look at the prices of food and there's no freaking way it's only 1.4%.

Does that mean that you want the government to print and spend less money?

Quote from: vtboy on September 06, 2012, 04:48:38 PM
Those who would lay blame for the withering of America's middle class entirely at the feet of callous corporations and greedy investors should perhaps consider whether they themselves would be willing to pay, say, another 20% or 30% for the goods from distant lands which now fill their homes. 

Are you suggesting tariffs?
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

gaggedLouise

#28
Quote from: vtboy on September 06, 2012, 04:48:38 PM
The problem is globalization or, more precisely, a global supply of labor competing for jobs which once were American.

Unskilled or semi-skilled workers in the U.S., who could count on manufacturing work to provide a liveable wage when America was the only industrial game in town, now vie for jobs with workers in Asia, Central America, South America, and elsewhere who command much less for their labor. The result is hardly surprising -- all else equal, manufacturers either move their operations to those countries with the lowest labor costs or are trounced by competitors willing to take advantage of favorable wage rates.

Those who would lay blame for the withering of America's middle class entirely at the feet of callous corporations and greedy investors should perhaps consider whether they themselves would be willing to pay, say, another 20% or 30% for the goods from distant lands which now fill their homes.


I agree the meltdown can't just be blamed simply and squarely on individual greedy skunks among the top 0.5% - that notion is just the mirror image of the idea that it was caused by lazy, procrastinating and fraudulent working people, ditto jobseekers and their inept, "dumb" family members and choices. The greed and abusive treatment of assets is a business culture thing, and it also comes out of a state of affairs where corporations often don't *need* the "common people - not as a large sheet of buyers, neither as workforce. They need their aspirations to try to climb, but they don't need a dozen million of regular U.S. workers and employees anymore. Ford, Apple or Exxon wouldn't hire people on that scale now even if they could afford it: they prefer to let the machines or highly trained specialists carry out the brunt of the work. And those work pullers - machines or geeks - don't really need to be located in the U.S., or in Western/Central Europe. It's much cheaper if most of them can be located to india, Peru or China.

But banks and stock exchanges are not really doing the job of allocating money and assets to the places where they tend to come to the best use (the "invisible hand" of money and stock trading). What's rational about the hype around Facebook and the initial price of its shares when they were listed? It was plainly a piece of subculture hype and the media were 99% uncritical about it. Much of what happens on the stock exchange now is little more than pyramid games or guesswork, and insight abpout long-term trends or relations that would limit the prospects of a company or a venture are *not* rewarded if they don't "sound right" at the point when they are made. There's a huge amount of insider trading (violating the legal demands for transparency and fairness), backscratching and hype in the stock exchanges and banking world - and this is not rational or helpful.

**'


I'd like to add to my earlier pst, that when I suggested we need some other yardstick than money as a means of formalizing prices, wages, the exchange of work, goods, information and assets, I was thinking of a system where a couple different exchange axises coexist at the same time. I was not imagining a world where money is not an important base of wages and prices, but one where it's not the only ultimate base.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

gaggedLouise

#29
Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 05:22:01 PM
Are you suggesting tariffs?


If the crisis goes on, all around the world - China could well be next -  and there is no real upturn that seems to begin to get close to where the economy was in 2005 (statistically there will be upturns, but that's because we've been so low down already!) then more and more countries will be forced to tariffs and protectionist measures because that's the only well-tested way to protect your own industries and trades in the modern world, if you can't achieve growth on the worldwide open market. Well, short of war, because war and arms races often makes the industry boom too, at least if you got the raw assets and knowledge to keep going.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Oniya

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 05:22:01 PM
Are you suggesting tariffs?

More like, if the corps wanted to keep the same profit margin while paying even minimum US wages for an American to make the widgets, prices would end up being raised by that amount.  If they can pay a worker in the Grand Duchy of Fenwick less than minimum US wage, that's what makes them put their factories in the Grand Duchy of Fenwick.  If the US - by whatever means (tariff, boycott, 'buy local' movements) - were to insist on Americans making their widgets, in American factories, the corp would have to raise prices or lose profits.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

AndyZ

Quote from: gaggedLouise on September 06, 2012, 05:27:50 PM
I'd like to add to my earlier pst, that when I suggested we need some other yardstick than money as a means of formalizing prices, wages, the exchange of work, goods, information and assets, I was thinking of a system where a couple different exchange axises coexist at the same time. I was not imagining a world where money is not an important base of wages and prices, but one where it's not the only ultimate base.

This makes me curious.  The idea of currency is supposed to be a means of exchange.  So, I can see how this would work, because we have gold, silver, stocks, and other things which go up and down in value over time when compared to currency.  I can see how it would work but not sure what the unit would be.




Tariffs do present an interesting solution.  Prices would go up for goods and services, but jobs would come back to match.  Overall, I'm pretty good with it, although I could be persuaded otherwise if someone can show why it would really hurt us...or can I?  Let me think.

Although, I can think of a couple possible ways.  For one, if the USA puts a tariff on any one country, that country will almost certainly put a tariff on the USA in return.  That hurts our exports and damages GDP as a result.  I wouldn't really object to more of a push for having the USA be more self-sufficient, though.

For another, it's not just wages that push companies away but regulations and taxes.  The USA would have to be competitive in all of the things.  If businesses look at all the options and would still rather be in Fenwick, retaliation might be to raise the tariffs even higher, raising the price of goods on things.

I'm not sure I trust politicians to keep tariffs as purely punitive and not a source of income as well.  Let's look at cigarettes and how the government now relies on cigarette taxes.  I have no evidence for this, but I believe that the government is now deep in bed with tobacco in order to make sure that that money keeps on coming in.  Thus, I fear (perhaps irrationally) that government may end up giving special favors to those who pay the tariff money, as opposed to those who just come here.

All in all, I'm pretty happy with the idea of tariffs.  That's the best I can do at playing devil's advocate unless anyone else has suggestions why it'd be bad.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

Oniya

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 06:01:53 PM
This makes me curious.  The idea of currency is supposed to be a means of exchange.  So, I can see how this would work, because we have gold, silver, stocks, and other things which go up and down in value over time when compared to currency.  I can see how it would work but not sure what the unit would be.

Maybe there wouldn't be a unit.  Someone suggested the idea that a teacher could be partially compensated with room and board - food and shelter, maybe even a uniform if the school does that sort of thing.  What does this person provide that the community needs?  What does the community have that this person needs?  What balance can be struck between the two? 

Of course, without a unit, the federal government couldn't really get their cut...
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

AndyZ

It sounds a lot like going back to the barter system, then.  I like the idea of the federal government not swooping in and demanding their cut, although even with the barter system, I'm sure they'd find a way.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I feel like this method would simply be treating a symptom, and it's not so much the currency causing the issue as other things that affect the currency.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

Oniya

I'm just theorizing.  But basically, all currency is simply a compact way of trading goods and services.  Instead of having to make change for a yak, you bring a token that represents a yak, and the shopkeeper gives you your goods, and enough tokens to make up for what a yak is worth.  He can then trade in your yak token for a yak, while you trade in your change for a pig and two chickens.  Gradually, a 'yak' token ends up with a standard value, whether it's buying yaks or tomatoes - and you have currency.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

AndyZ

Well, also, prices go up and down thanks to supply and demand.  That's why prices on things are constantly fluctuating, either to go up or go on sale.

It does remind me of an argument for the gold standard, though, where currency is fixed upon something rather than simply being fiat currency that they can print as much as they want.

That's about my limit of the understanding of how it all works, though.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 05:22:01 PM
The capitalist solution would be to start up more businesses.  I'd love to see that, but since America has the highest corporate tax rate of any country in the world, it doesn't seem likely.  Any business capable of providing any substantial amount of profits/jobs will simply move to other countries, or start there to begin with.

America has the highest marginal rate, yes.  With more holes in it than a chunk of Swiss cheese.  The effective tax rate (what companies actually pay) is much lower.  For some very big firms, it's zero.  Can't get lower than zero...unless you're an oil company, that is.

QuoteTo continue towards the capitalist solution, we'd need to set things up so that it's much easier to start a business in America.  If OSG has any accuracy about how Forbes 400 hypothesis, this won't happen because big businesses don't want the competition.  They can hire huge lawyers and be able to do whatever the crap they want because people don't have any other choices.

This I agree with.  I think we could significantly cut the red tape small businesses have to endure.

QuoteThe Singularity solution is developing an artificial intelligence which is far more logical and intelligent than we are, which can construct a superior method of government.  This one has my vote.

If you think the IRS is bad, try these guys:


AndyZ

Well, we agree on cutting red tape on small businesses.  I'll take it.

Oh, and a silly question, but: what logical reason would an artificial intelligence have for wanting to destroy humans?  Other than if we try to destroy it after programming it with a stringent self-preservation algorithm.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

Oniya

Well, it depends on whether we remember to program in the Three Laws of Robotics.  If we don't, then the AI might determine that the source of all the 'inefficiencies' is humankind and try to 'correct' that problem.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

gaggedLouise

#39
Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 07:18:19 PM
Well, also, prices go up and down thanks to supply and demand.  That's why prices on things are constantly fluctuating, either to go up or go on sale.

It does remind me of an argument for the gold standard, though, where currency is fixed upon something rather than simply being fiat currency that they can print as much as they want.

That's about my limit of the understanding of how it all works, though.


The beginnings of philosophy in Greece happened around the same time and place that rulers and cities first began to strike regular coins, and that might not be a historical accident. I've heard people in classical studies argue that some of the concepts of early philosophers - Thales, Pythagoras, Heraclitus - were influenced by coins and gold emerging as standards to settle a "token value" and simplify trade/change. Heraclitus actually said at one point that "all things come out of fire and return to it, as gold can change into all things and all things can change back into gold" and to him, fire was the creative principle. A direct allusion to the use of (gold) coins as a link between the values of things?

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

AndyZ

Quote from: Oniya on September 06, 2012, 10:21:00 PM
Well, it depends on whether we remember to program in the Three Laws of Robotics.  If we don't, then the AI might determine that the source of all the 'inefficiencies' is humankind and try to 'correct' that problem.

Personally, I always figured that as of the Singularity, AIs would work in synergy with humans.  Both sides would be pretty good at doing some things and terrible at doing others.

Of course, maybe I'm looking too far ahead.  The Singularity is the point where the AI is so smart that it's better than humans at making AIs, and we have a rocket boost in technological advances.  Perhaps AIs are just pretty stupid before then.

Quote from: gaggedLouise on September 06, 2012, 11:50:47 PM

The beginnings of philosophy in Greece happened around the same time and place that rulers and cities first began to strike regular coins, and that might not be a historical accident. I've heard people in classical studies argue that some of the concepts of early philosophers - Thales, Pythagoras, Heraclitus - were influenced by coins and gold emerging as standards to settle a "token value" and simplify trade/change. Heraclitus actually said at one point that "all things come out of fire and return to it, as gold can change into all things and all things can change back into gold" and to him, fire was the creative principle. A direct allusion to the use of (gold) coins as a link between the values of things?

I have absolutely no evidence of this, but I always figured that gold became a measure of currency when people found this pretty, rare, shiny rock and started using it as its own system of trade.  The rock wasn't good for much on its own beyond jewelry, so people could make it into stuff to wear and be pretty if they had enough of it, but otherwise they just used it to trade.  The great thing was that it didn't rot or age or change, unlike yaks, furs, grain and other stuff you might trade.

Eventually, people realized that some rocks were bigger than others and used some method of making even-sized bits of gold in order to keep everything level.  Why coins?  Crap if I know.  It may have even started out as balls or something else, up until somebody wanted to stamp his face on them and proclaim himself the ruler of that area.  Coins would be great for that.

Again, no evidence, just how I always figured things went.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

OldSchoolGamer

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 10:18:26 PM
Oh, and a silly question, but: what logical reason would an artificial intelligence have for wanting to destroy humans?  Other than if we try to destroy it after programming it with a stringent self-preservation algorithm.

I don't know.  But I work with computers for a living, and they're quirky beasts.  I'm not going to assert as fact that a superadvanced AI would see all humans as a threat and try and go Terminator or Reign of Steel or Matrix on us.  But I also don't think you can assert as fact that something like that is impossible, or even highly improbable, either.  So while I'm not opposed to the building of AIs like that (under carefully controlled and supervised conditions) I don't believe in trusting them with anything important.  Certainly not key infrastructure, or anything sharp or nuclear.  I would not, for instance, allow it to network with any other system except itself and devices attached to it (no Internet connection).

AndyZ

Fair enough.  I'll accept that it's an unknown and not worth the risk even if the risk is small.  I guess I just...always figured that the rational and logical thing would be to work in harmony, and never saw any other reason.

Though, I will say that I'd rather give AI control as opposed to most of our politicians, but that's barely a fair comparison.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, folks.
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

Vekseid

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 10:18:26 PM
Well, we agree on cutting red tape on small businesses.  I'll take it.

Oh, and a silly question, but: what logical reason would an artificial intelligence have for wanting to destroy humans?  Other than if we try to destroy it after programming it with a stringent self-preservation algorithm.

Most AGI doomsday proponents imagine that it will instead be a mistake of some variety. "Make everyone happy!" Well...

In the worst case scenario we create a zone of death expanding at some not-too-insignificant fraction of c. Tile the universe with copies of Britney Spears CDs or something.

Rapid-singularity proponents believe that whomever comes up with this first wins. Whatever ideas they have, however they design it - their singular invention will be the greatest event in Earth's history since the origin of life. What ever government they tell the AGI is ideal, will be theirs to enforce. There's no stopping them - they simply win.

I don't subscribe to that view, it's not necessarily a given that we'll achieve AGI before we start significantly expanding human capacity directly - not necessarily through cybernetics or genetic modification, either. But there's still certainly going to be a relatively small group of people with both the knowhow and resources, at that point, to actually determine humanity's future. I sortof wonder if this is what Marx actually feared - socialism is about public ownership of the means of production.

If, privately, one person controls enough automata to declare war on the entire planet and win - do they deserve it?

If you believe in the singularity solution, you pretty much have to accept that as a possibility.

AndyZ

Stupid question but search engines don't seem clear on it: what's the difference between AI and AGI?
It's all good, and it's all in fun.  Now get in the pit and try to love someone.

Ons/Offs   -  My schedule and A/As   -    My Avatars

If I've owed you a post for at least a week, poke me.

Vekseid

Artificial General Intelligence

Many problems in AI are considered to be 'general' - you solve one, you solve all of them. An AGI is assumed to be a sapient entity. Early ones might not function on a fully human level but the capacity would clearly be there.

vtboy

Quote from: AndyZ on September 06, 2012, 05:22:01 PM
Are you suggesting tariffs?

Absolutely not. I am only pointing out that the popular vilification of businesses for "outsourcing" jobs is, at best, overly simplistic and, frequently, downright hypocritical.

Tariffs are mechanisms by which A's economic difficulties are shifted to B's shoulders, but not made to go away. In essence, B is forced to subsidize A.

Placing a 20% tariff on clothing imported from China, for example, might create room for less competitive American textile manufacturers to enter the market. But, while A, an unemployed textile worker, might be grateful for the resulting job opportunity, B, a single mom struggling to keep her kids clothed, is likely to prefer cheaper t-shirts and jeans. Or consider the likely ramifications of placing tariffs on an industrial commodity like steel. Though goosing the price of foreign steel might lead to more jobs in America's steel industry, it would also likely increase the costs of production and prices of America's manufactured goods in which steel is a major component (e.g., cars). If those American goods then cease to be competitive with their foreign counterparts, in both domestic and international markets, labor force reductions in American manufacturing are likely to follow. I am not sure how vigorously B, an unemployed auto worker, is likely to celebrate the good fortune of A, a recently hired steel worker, under these circumstances.   

And then, of course, there is the specter of trade wars.     

TheGlyphstone

Quote from: Oniya on September 06, 2012, 10:21:00 PM
Well, it depends on whether we remember to program in the Three Laws of Robotics.  If we don't, then the AI might determine that the source of all the 'inefficiencies' is humankind and try to 'correct' that problem.

Right up until the Zeroth Law develops and we get the problem anyways.