I can’t give the exact reference from memory, but as I recall about a week after Nixon left China and all the mega media coverage of his dinners, parties and walk on the Great Wall that were covered day and night; a small note deep in the Wall Street Journal reported “David Rockefeller president of Chase Manhattan Bank flew to China in his private Jet.” I laughed. That said it all about what Nixon’s trip was really about – the China market.
But, I was not quite correct. I thought it was about opening up China’s market for American goods. It never occurred to me that it was the other way around. At that time Sam Walton owned a couple of dime stores in the South.
Nixon's secret trip in Feb of 1972 to China to forge relations with that previously quite isolated communist country. I posit that the opening of relations was the kick off for converting that huge labor pool from mostly farmers to today's "world's manufacturing source".
May I suggest contemplating the PPP ratio between the U.S. and China, which was the point of my sarcasm? Yes, I also am aware China offers free wooden bunk beds in Factories and even meals....so does Prison! (ah, probably won't get that one either). Anyone else, the point was the wage ratios between the U.S. vs. China and to note...those wonderful middle class wood slant bunk beds and they even wake you up to eat over there!
Your sarcasm is surely misplaced. While the minimum wage might only be US$140 a month, it is a living wage in China. You need to read up about purchasing power parity. Then too, food and lodging are typically included free or at low cost.
The notion that we should get back to a Bretton Woods style system is all good and well, but the problem is that the ruling class that benefits from the current system will never let that happen. In order for such reforms to have a snowball's chance in hell, Joe Six Pack is going to have to understand all this stuff. (Hell, the average person has a pretty good idea of what's wrong with the healthcare system and prefers a rational solution, and we can't even get that.) A massive grassroots educational movement would be required to get average citizens to understand half as much about monetary and financial policy as they do about the intricacies and strategery of college and professional sports or tabloid court cases.
To further the goal of educating the dumb masses, can someone here enlighten a simple caveman like myself: What is the mechanism by which we get from ending Bretton Woods to the decoupling of wages from productivity and our current race to the bottom for workers? Is it just the currency speculation? If we still had substantial tariffs, wouldn't that keep jobs here and keep wages from falling? Excuse my ignorance, but I really would like to understand this stuff. There are just a few pieces that I'm missing.
They will not tackle insourcing and outsourcing. Just yesterday John "Benedict Arnold" Kerry introduced yet another guest worker Visa and this time they are trying to claim that foreigners create startups and innovate. This is pure statistical bullshit frankly and it's just another thing to labor arbitrage U.S. STEM. It's more like bringing in more foreigners so they can set up some sort of offshore outsourcing deal.
No requirement to hire Americans, keep funds in the U.S. and most importantly, the fact Americans cannot get funding to do their own startups!
They will not cancel federal and state offshore outsourcing contracts, they will not stop bringing in 1.5 million guest workers, which has been proved over and over to be a labor arbitrage mechanism and then...
on any sort of direct jobs program, they won't do a damn thing. The AAM has the best detailed analysis I have seen, it clearly would work, the focus is on investment, long term valued added to the national economy, I mean it's really well done and that study is being completely ignored in D.C.
They are handing out contracts via no-bid deals to our usual suspects and also it's clearly political too.
They won't tackle China on currency manipulation and they will not put together a national industrial policy, a national trade policy.....nada to strengthen the U.S. middle class.
I mean there is spending and there is spending and another thing they should be doing is keeping capital investments in the U.S.
Ugh, I could go on and on but it's just so stuck on stupid here.
Yesterday, Huffpost asked the question - why doesn't the government just hire people? I have been thinking the same thing for quite some time now.
Did you know? Back in Nov-December 2008, Christina Romer advised then president-elect Obama that he would need $1.2 trillion stimulus in order to be effective. He proposed a lot less and compromised further by including tax cuts (least bang for buck) at the expense of infrastructure spending - just to get 1 or 2 republican votes.
And now, several hundred thousands job less, he is proposing another stimulus but is calling it a "jobs bill".
but one must notice that the bottleneck is the Senate in almost everything that needs to happen here.
Or do I for one minute believe the Obama administration will push for the right policies. They won't go against the for profit health sector anymore than the corrupt Senate will. Derivatives reform is the most obvious, the financial sector, but at least the House is passing legislation and it's for the most part a strong step in the right direction.
Yeah, I mean Good God, those Republicans are just useless, all they want to do is limit trial attorneys which has very little effect on costs.
It's like watching how is bought off more, which is the most bought off....
But this one simple bill (I think they should pass more of these, short sweet bills focused on one thing) would go a long way in stopping the gouging.
The states could do something if their legislative branches were not so FUBAR and they just sit there and let health insurance companies run amok.
I reading all this talk from Democrats about how Obama is doing so well at this thing they are calling a health care summit. Give me a break: he is well-trained highly skilled attorney - he should be schooling this republican imbeciles.
Obama's problem is substance and delivering on policies.
Hell yeah, that was the start on the attack of the middle class. How many times does it have to be shown that labor costs so often are not the main costs of corporations, esp. in advanced manufacturing. But no problem squeezing the middle class to control inflation by these guys. How about squeezing demand or squeezing corporate profits or squeezing raw commodities and so on?
Due to the "credit card reform" bill, to replace their lost overdraft fees, now banks are getting into payday loans.
Amazing payday loans were not outright banned in legislation.
I've got a great Sunday Morning Comics skit which shows how great loan sharks are by comparison to this.
I have some more "policies" that destroyed America. Around that time bad trade deals started forming as well. The free movement of capital around the globe was starting. And the PR campaign against labor organization also started. Nixon went to China, in party, because the U.S. corporations wanted into that mythical 1.3 billion person consumer market.
the myths of non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU) and natural rate of unemployment, over-emphasis of monetary policy and inflation didn't help.
IMO, controlling inflation through monetary policy leads to unnecessarily high unemployment (jobless recoveries ring a bell).
Offshorers are confusing cause and effect, They say they need to offshore due to labor shortage, but the will NEVER hire a U.S. junior programmer.
U.S. computer science majors can't get jobs so they don't study programming, Thus, the offshorers CREATE a labor shortage.
The damage to our country is extensive, and we may not recover.
real estate market and the mortgage market are broken. The mortgage market, which is essential to real estate market, needs to be reconstructed (there's a proposal for that).
More than 11.3 million homeowners -- nearly one-fourth of all Americans with a mortgage -- owe more on their loan than their home is now worth, according to a report released Tuesday by FirstAmerican CoreLogic.
More than 10% of people with mortgages owe 25% more than their home is worth.
The number of underwater mortgages increased by about 620,000 from the third quarter, the firm said. Another 2.3 million mortgages had less than 5% equity in their home, which could be wiped out if home prices fall further.
And Calculated Risk is pointing out housing is a leading economic indicator....
Their contact phone numbers are right on their website, here and if a corporation isn't offering them, usually someone posted their number on the web somewhere. You just put it into a search engine, such as Google to find it.
Economists use different data and interpret the same data differently to 'prove' their results.
Thats competing. They compete. If that wasn't true they'd all be on the same page or at least they'd all be claiming a series circuit is the same as a parallel one and out of work as an electrician.
Chart depicts data - assuming the data is correct then it's a matter of interpreting the chart. Sure a chart could be dressed-up by exaggerating scale and units but if the underlying data is correct then again its a matter of interpretation.
For instance, charts showing the amount of income inequality in U.S. over time - to me that they are alarming and so we have a problem - to someone who is conservative they would say so what - income inequality is not a problem. It is a matter of interpretation.
Theories are developed by humans and last time I checked humans are not perfect, therefore theories will not be perfect or w/out contradiction.
I can’t give the exact reference from memory, but as I recall about a week after Nixon left China and all the mega media coverage of his dinners, parties and walk on the Great Wall that were covered day and night; a small note deep in the Wall Street Journal reported “David Rockefeller president of Chase Manhattan Bank flew to China in his private Jet.” I laughed. That said it all about what Nixon’s trip was really about – the China market.
But, I was not quite correct. I thought it was about opening up China’s market for American goods. It never occurred to me that it was the other way around. At that time Sam Walton owned a couple of dime stores in the South.
Nixon's secret trip in Feb of 1972 to China to forge relations with that previously quite isolated communist country. I posit that the opening of relations was the kick off for converting that huge labor pool from mostly farmers to today's "world's manufacturing source".
May I suggest contemplating the PPP ratio between the U.S. and China, which was the point of my sarcasm? Yes, I also am aware China offers free wooden bunk beds in Factories and even meals....so does Prison! (ah, probably won't get that one either). Anyone else, the point was the wage ratios between the U.S. vs. China and to note...those wonderful middle class wood slant bunk beds and they even wake you up to eat over there!
Your sarcasm is surely misplaced. While the minimum wage might only be US$140 a month, it is a living wage in China. You need to read up about purchasing power parity. Then too, food and lodging are typically included free or at low cost.
The notion that we should get back to a Bretton Woods style system is all good and well, but the problem is that the ruling class that benefits from the current system will never let that happen. In order for such reforms to have a snowball's chance in hell, Joe Six Pack is going to have to understand all this stuff. (Hell, the average person has a pretty good idea of what's wrong with the healthcare system and prefers a rational solution, and we can't even get that.) A massive grassroots educational movement would be required to get average citizens to understand half as much about monetary and financial policy as they do about the intricacies and strategery of college and professional sports or tabloid court cases.
To further the goal of educating the dumb masses, can someone here enlighten a simple caveman like myself: What is the mechanism by which we get from ending Bretton Woods to the decoupling of wages from productivity and our current race to the bottom for workers? Is it just the currency speculation? If we still had substantial tariffs, wouldn't that keep jobs here and keep wages from falling? Excuse my ignorance, but I really would like to understand this stuff. There are just a few pieces that I'm missing.
miasmo.com
They will not tackle insourcing and outsourcing. Just yesterday John "Benedict Arnold" Kerry introduced yet another guest worker Visa and this time they are trying to claim that foreigners create startups and innovate. This is pure statistical bullshit frankly and it's just another thing to labor arbitrage U.S. STEM. It's more like bringing in more foreigners so they can set up some sort of offshore outsourcing deal.
No requirement to hire Americans, keep funds in the U.S. and most importantly, the fact Americans cannot get funding to do their own startups!
They will not cancel federal and state offshore outsourcing contracts, they will not stop bringing in 1.5 million guest workers, which has been proved over and over to be a labor arbitrage mechanism and then...
on any sort of direct jobs program, they won't do a damn thing. The AAM has the best detailed analysis I have seen, it clearly would work, the focus is on investment, long term valued added to the national economy, I mean it's really well done and that study is being completely ignored in D.C.
They are handing out contracts via no-bid deals to our usual suspects and also it's clearly political too.
They won't tackle China on currency manipulation and they will not put together a national industrial policy, a national trade policy.....nada to strengthen the U.S. middle class.
I mean there is spending and there is spending and another thing they should be doing is keeping capital investments in the U.S.
Ugh, I could go on and on but it's just so stuck on stupid here.
Yesterday, Huffpost asked the question - why doesn't the government just hire people? I have been thinking the same thing for quite some time now.
Did you know? Back in Nov-December 2008, Christina Romer advised then president-elect Obama that he would need $1.2 trillion stimulus in order to be effective. He proposed a lot less and compromised further by including tax cuts (least bang for buck) at the expense of infrastructure spending - just to get 1 or 2 republican votes.
And now, several hundred thousands job less, he is proposing another stimulus but is calling it a "jobs bill".
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
but one must notice that the bottleneck is the Senate in almost everything that needs to happen here.
Or do I for one minute believe the Obama administration will push for the right policies. They won't go against the for profit health sector anymore than the corrupt Senate will. Derivatives reform is the most obvious, the financial sector, but at least the House is passing legislation and it's for the most part a strong step in the right direction.
Yeah, I mean Good God, those Republicans are just useless, all they want to do is limit trial attorneys which has very little effect on costs.
It's like watching how is bought off more, which is the most bought off....
But this one simple bill (I think they should pass more of these, short sweet bills focused on one thing) would go a long way in stopping the gouging.
The states could do something if their legislative branches were not so FUBAR and they just sit there and let health insurance companies run amok.
I reading all this talk from Democrats about how Obama is doing so well at this thing they are calling a health care summit. Give me a break: he is well-trained highly skilled attorney - he should be schooling this republican imbeciles.
Obama's problem is substance and delivering on policies.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Wage growth was seen as too inflationary. So what happens, attacks on unions - unfettered globalization.
We are left with the consequences of these policies - Great Recession and more and more debt.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Hell yeah, that was the start on the attack of the middle class. How many times does it have to be shown that labor costs so often are not the main costs of corporations, esp. in advanced manufacturing. But no problem squeezing the middle class to control inflation by these guys. How about squeezing demand or squeezing corporate profits or squeezing raw commodities and so on?
Due to the "credit card reform" bill, to replace their lost overdraft fees, now banks are getting into payday loans.
Amazing payday loans were not outright banned in legislation.
I've got a great Sunday Morning Comics skit which shows how great loan sharks are by comparison to this.
I have some more "policies" that destroyed America. Around that time bad trade deals started forming as well. The free movement of capital around the globe was starting. And the PR campaign against labor organization also started. Nixon went to China, in party, because the U.S. corporations wanted into that mythical 1.3 billion person consumer market.
the myths of non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU) and natural rate of unemployment, over-emphasis of monetary policy and inflation didn't help.
IMO, controlling inflation through monetary policy leads to unnecessarily high unemployment (jobless recoveries ring a bell).
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Offshorers are confusing cause and effect, They say they need to offshore due to labor shortage, but the will NEVER hire a U.S. junior programmer.
U.S. computer science majors can't get jobs so they don't study programming, Thus, the offshorers CREATE a labor shortage.
The damage to our country is extensive, and we may not recover.
real estate market and the mortgage market are broken. The mortgage market, which is essential to real estate market, needs to be reconstructed (there's a proposal for that).
Jobs would also help.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
11.3 million mortgages larger than home value.
And Calculated Risk is pointing out housing is a leading economic indicator....
that's all folks!
Their contact phone numbers are right on their website, here and if a corporation isn't offering them, usually someone posted their number on the web somewhere. You just put it into a search engine, such as Google to find it.
Does anybody know how to obtain the fannie mae loan number? Im told it is a different number than my mortgage loan number.Thank you ..
Economists use different data and interpret the same data differently to 'prove' their results.
Thats competing. They compete. If that wasn't true they'd all be on the same page or at least they'd all be claiming a series circuit is the same as a parallel one and out of work as an electrician.
Chart depicts data - assuming the data is correct then it's a matter of interpreting the chart. Sure a chart could be dressed-up by exaggerating scale and units but if the underlying data is correct then again its a matter of interpretation.
For instance, charts showing the amount of income inequality in U.S. over time - to me that they are alarming and so we have a problem - to someone who is conservative they would say so what - income inequality is not a problem. It is a matter of interpretation.
Theories are developed by humans and last time I checked humans are not perfect, therefore theories will not be perfect or w/out contradiction.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Pages