1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI remember after my first long trip overseas, after living in huts on rice with hot sauce for 8 months, I came back to the USA. I had lost 20 lbs or so.
...as far as reasonably prosperous people in developed countries are concerned, you mean.
Why do you always provide only half the picture? 🙂
It's your one helluva test-tube tested marketing campaign, I suppose.
I ordered a sandwich and a drink -- it looked like a whole turkey, sliced up and placed between two giant loaves with a bucket of lemonade beside it. And later the lady asked me if I wanted more to drink. I could eat about a quarter of it, my stomach had shrunk so much.
I drove by palace after palace after palace with lawns -- endless luxury and wealth. Magnificent personal cars, not beaten up Peugeots that only move when crammed to the gills with people and crates of livestock.
And I thought, 'Christ, we are rich. We have NOTHING to complain about.'
So I thought about why that was -- why even poor people in the US seemed to have 2 color TVs and a DVD player and were fat as pigs. Not because we have a high degree of socialism, certainly.
Do I have a complete explanation? No, not really. Maybe we just exploited our natural resources. Although lots of countries have natural resources. Maybe we were never a colony. Except...we were colonies. Maybe we forced other colonies to fuel our empire...except...we never had an empire. Maybe a lot of "old money" came over from Europe...except...the vast majority of immigrants (my dad included) came over with a couple of suitcases.
No, there is something about the USA.
I can't really explain what it is, except that there is a notion that you don't have to do or think what you are told -- because a lot of what you are told is, frankly, crap. A notion that good things happen when everybody has as much freedom as they can handle, and more. People in that situation have to think. More than that, they get creative. They get busy. And in the process, they get rich.
So that's the story. Nothing about socialism. All about getting "authority" off your back, so you can do the job that needs doing. Yankee ingenuity, they used to call it. Fostered by a group of post-Renaissance, cock-eyed optimists who had the gall to decide to put theory into practice.
Imagine that.
Originally posted by spruce1123581. Visit a ghetto in the USA.
I remember after my first long trip overseas, after living in huts on rice with hot sauce for 8 months, I came back to the USA. I had lost 20 lbs or so.
I ordered a sandwich and a drink -- it looked like a whole turkey, sliced up and placed between two giant loaves with a bucket of lemonade beside it. And later the lady asked me if I wanted more to d ...[text shortened]... eyed optimists who had the gall to decide to put theory into practice.
Imagine that.
2. Visit a "ghetto" here in Finland.
Originally posted by spruce112358What about our ugly history of slave and immigrant labor. Like the Romans all that free/cheep helped our democracy and capitalism system.
I remember after my first long trip overseas, after living in huts on rice with hot sauce for 8 months, I came back to the USA. I had lost 20 lbs or so.
I ordered a sandwich and a drink -- it looked like a whole turkey, sliced up and placed between two giant loaves with a bucket of lemonade beside it. And later the lady asked me if I wanted more to d ...[text shortened]... eyed optimists who had the gall to decide to put theory into practice.
Imagine that.
Originally posted by rwingettMarx=Good for socialism
Back to socialism? You never responded to my last post on socialism.
Lenin=Marx's political theories applied to an actual country
That's why the philosophy is not called "Leninism;" it's called "Marxist-Leninism." Marxism is more an ideology than Marxist-Leninism, which is a school of political thought.
Originally posted by spruce112358Well the 21stC version of "Yankee ingenuity", unfortunately, isn't going to allow what happened to the USA to happen in the developing world.
So that's the story. Nothing about socialism. All about getting "authority" off your back, so you can do the job that needs doing. Yankee ingenuity, they used to call it. Fostered by a group of post-Renaissance, cock-eyed optimists who had the gall to decide to put theory into practice.
Nice anecdote.
But essentially an evasion.
Here was my question: Do you seriously think it is in the nature of capitalism to "allow" all countries to become developed countries in the same sense as the reasonably prosperous people in developed countries would define "developed countries"?
Originally posted by StTitoI think the reverse -- slavery actually retarded economic development in the South -- which contributed hugely to them losing the American Civil War. Forcing a group of people to sell their labor for very little screws up the market fundamentally.
What about our ugly history of slave and immigrant labor. Like the Romans all that free/cheep helped our democracy and capitalism system.
The diffference between a slave and a poorly paid immigrant is huge. Look at the trajectory of Asian immigrants -- from servants to laundries to restaurants to whatever they want now. Mexicans are now in the restaurant phase -- unbelievable that you can get authentic Mexican food in Podunk, Iowa. And they will keep moving up.
One of the problems though, and this gets to KN's point, is the degree of immigration. Countries like Finland historically have had a very strict immigration policy. In France and Britain the policy has been more loose, and you have more ghetto-like areas. In the US, the policy is a shambles because traditionally we didn't have to worry about it.
The last US ghetto I was in, KN, was 'Over the Rhine' in Cinncinnati. One doesn't expect ghettos in the Midwest. I think they still exist because each time bottom-tier wages start to go up, another flood of immigrants arrives, and that drives demand for labor down again. I think capitalism will inevitable create prosperity in any society of a given size. Change the size, and capitalism has to start over again.
Originally posted by spruce112358well stated!
I remember after my first long trip overseas, after living in huts on rice with hot sauce for 8 months, I came back to the USA. I had lost 20 lbs or so.
I ordered a sandwich and a drink -- it looked like a whole turkey, sliced up and placed between two giant loaves with a bucket of lemonade beside it. And later the lady asked me if I wanted more to d ...[text shortened]... eyed optimists who had the gall to decide to put theory into practice.
Imagine that.
Originally posted by FMFYes. The only thing that can screw it up is inapppropriate government fiddling -- which includes distorting the market to try to please the IMF or foreign governments/corporations OR from officials trying to line their own pockets or favor their friends or their own tribal areas.
Well the 21stC version of "Yankee ingenuity", unfortunately, isn't going to allow what happened to the USA to happen in the developing world.
Nice anecdote.
But essentially an evasion.
Here was my question: Do you seriously think it is in the nature of capitalism to "allow" all countries to become developed countries in the same sense as the reasonably prosperous people in developed countries would define "developed countries"?
Appropriate governnment fidding would include things like taxation to provide the infrastructure that allows businesses to operate, and protecting the environment -- they are the only ones in a position to do that.
Originally posted by eljefejesusSlowly the socialism... I mean the fast food... clogs the arteries and slows the free movement of blood to the entire system, eventually it so badly compromises the health of the system that staying alive means radical change to reverse the years of stagnation and deterioration.
Socialism is to the economy as ...
fast food is to a diet.
Like England and Russia in the 1980's... or like a candidate for gastric bypass surgery. Drastic and painful probably, but sometimes you need to resuscitate the system from the effects of junk socialism.
Originally posted by eljefejesusI don't like to plagiarise but with a little tweak to make your observation current,
Slowly the _ism... I mean the fast food... clogs the arteries and slows the free movement of blood to the entire system, eventually it so badly compromises the health of the system that staying alive means radical change to reverse the years of stagnation and deterioration.
like Wall Street and the World's bourses in the 2000's... or like a candidate for gastric bypass surgery. Drastic and painful probably, but sometimes you need to resuscitate the system from the effects of junk _ism.
Originally posted by kmax87[/b]You may get away with quoting my post here, it is quite instructive as to why the insertion of Wall Street does not keep any of the metaphor sensible. How does this credit downturn that affects all open world economies make Wall Street a suitable substitute in this metaphor? Perhaps you can explain it a bit? Thanks.
I don't like to plagiarise but with a little tweak to make your observation current,[b]like Wall Street and the World's bourses in the 2000's... or like a candidate for gastric bypass surgery. Drastic and painful probably, but sometimes you need to resuscitate the system from the effects of junk _ism.