Everyone should read this interview.

[leishi85]

here is an interview i found in "The Atlantic". The man interviewed is responsible for overseeing the 200 billion in 2+ trillion dollars holding.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200812/fallows-chinese-banker

What i want to say is, we in the U.S have got to abandon the notion we are always going to be the top dog by default. We need to look past the old political labels, and begin to view the world in terms of economics.

[primesuspect]

Full of very valid points. Americans need to remember that what we DO have are vast agricultural and natural resources, a brilliantly educated workforce, and a fiercely independent entrepreneurial streak. The problem is we made trillions of dollars selling essentially nothing. Of COURSE that's coming back to bite us in the ass now, it is a system doomed to fail. We need to MAKE things, and SELL them to other nations. Otherwise, we'll be left standing here scratching our heads when China, India, and Russia become the superpowers of the 21st century, saying "What happened? We were on top!"

[Snarkasm]

America's been moving to service industries for a while now. Let's face it, very few people WANT to work in factories making stuff, especially when the move is towards maximizing profit rather than employee satisfaction...

[primesuspect]

I think we should place more stock in returning to agrarian culture. We have something to offer the world - some of the most fertile land on earth. What's our other major export? Culture (McDonalds, Pepsi, etc.) and entertainment (hollywood, music, video games). Those are what we've got. We're not an industrial superpower anymore. We have military might (which scares the world and makes them hate and fear us), and coolness (Rock n Roll yankee blue jeans usa usa!)

What else do we have? Huge, massive natural resources (water and arable land). An educated populace. Elite investment bankers and oligarchs can't really keep america valid. They'll remain rich and secluded, while the world passes their country by.

[NiGHTS]

Much of the wealth made in the market is reinvested in the same market, which supports everyone from your entrepreneurs to your factory worker

While I'll admit some of the things you can do in the market are a bit odd, completely ignoring it and saying we need to start farming again isn't quite the solution that I'm looking for.

[Snarkasm]

Not to mention we already create more food than we can do anything with. Government subsidies aren't in place for no reason, remember. We already overproduce. It's just a function of the difficulty of preserving and shipping food.

[mas0n]

I think we need more exports of high-tech and intellectual property. We will never beat China at their game of mass exportation of simple goods. We need to sell cutting edge science to the rest of the world. Agrarian societies will not be exploring the cosmos.

[Winfrey]

"She's got HUGE...tracts of land!" :)

[Nomad]

I think we should place more stock in returning to agrarian culture. We have something to offer the world - some of the most fertile land on earth.

This concept is almost entirely without merit, and to be blunt—snotty.

We make extremely good use of our fertile land. Industrial agriculture, one of the great 'successes' of American history, has made certain of that. Less than 1% of our adult population produces enough food to feed the nation to excess.

Our large cities are built on soil that is largely depleted. The dirt, or rather sand, in the metro-Detroit area is unsuitable for growing crops. The large amount of pesticides and fertilizer needed to grow people's simple gardens year-to-year ends up as runoff in our water table, destroying water culture for decades. This is aside from the fact that, with everyone farming, we'd suffer from severe soil erosion and permanently lose arable land.

Under what sensible circumstances should we heed Jefferson's advice and return to the agrarian society? Already, produce goes rotten and meat spoils on the grocer's shelf. Further production of such goods would deplete prices to the point when no one would even bother farming.

This is not to say locality is not important, nor farming practices couldn't be improved. By all means, buy local meat, dairy, and eggs which are free of hormones, force molting procedures and significantly reduce environmental impact by decreasing transportation cost, whilst simultaneously stimulating local economy.

However, this is not the answer to our global economic woes. Simply put, these are solutions of self-legislation to end inhumane practices by industrial agriculture and react—through the pocketbook—to the adverse consequences of the Farm Bill's massive subsidy of corn, a commodity that yields improperly fed cattle and high fructose corn syrup.

The concept of commodity mercantilism is just silly.

"There is basically a fixed amount of X in the world, we need to be producing some of it or else."

Certainly, a portion of any economy must be based in industry or agriculture. Yet, service and stock based economies are basically what all developed countries have. Even China, leaping between developing and developed, is much more involved in service and loan with just 11% of its economy made up by farming compared to our 1.2%.

We don't do work as well, as quickly, or as voluntarily as developing countries do. Those jobs, those products, are never coming back. Find a solution that works in a post-agrarian world, not just glib remarks and sanctimony.

[Khaos]

I think we need more exports of high-tech and intellectual property. We will never beat China at their game of mass exportation of simple goods. We need to sell cutting edge science to the rest of the world. Agrarian societies will not be exploring the cosmos.
+1

Our strength is in our minds. Not just the minds of our people and our native citizens, but the minds who are attracted to this nation because we are so forward thinking. Or at least we used to be.

We need to seriously reinvest in the basic sciences. We're falling behind many European countries as the epicenter of physics research and mathematics, and many Asian countries as the epicenter of electronic research and development. World War II was a great intellectual boon for the nation when great minds came here from Eastern Europe. If we haven't already, we're in danger of squandering our intellectual capital.

We will never be a great industrial power again. That time has come and gone. We should not strive to be a great agrarian power, either, as we already manage that without it being our greatest focus.

What we need to strive for is to be the country that is bleeding new technology from all our borders; a beacon of the technological future of mankind just as we serve as a beacon for the human spirit. Those combined factors will ensure our longevity.

China will be forever making crap and copying other people's ideas. It's okay -- they're good at it. We just need to make sure that it's our ideas that they're building and copying. Realistically, most of their population is still living in the pre-industrial age and the untenable burden of their communist model is inevitably going to fail to support the rural people. They'll go through some sort of upheaval in the next twenty years, probably a social revolution or the succession of a vast portion of the country.

Russia, quite frankly, is going nowhere fast. Their entire economic model is driven by oil. We need to be investing as much money in alternative energies as we have been in enriching OPEC, Canada, Venezuela and Mexico with our oil imports.

The European Union, when they can get their collective head out of their asses, is a force to be reckoned with. You can already see the centralization of power... They have a president of the EU who has actual authority over member nations. They're going to become much more like states than individual nations over the coming decades. They don't handle crisis well, but in the good times their economic cooperation makes them a true competitor on the scale of China. The United States of America wasn't born overnight. The United States of Europe (LOL) won't be either -- but increased cooperation is their only path to economic viability whether they make it official or not, so at least in some sense it is an inevitable outcome.

The good news in all this is that the EU is on good terms with us. After all, we're like the kid brother who grew up to be six inches taller than them and 50 lbs heavier.

China is invested heavily in us, so it will be at least thirty years or so before they start a war... Assuming our economy doesn't completely tank.

All of this gives us plenty of time to get our nation back on track.

Sorry for the extreme nationalism, oh foreign (to me) Icrontians. :)

/end

[Nomad]

China will be forever making crap and copying other people's ideas. It's okay -- they're good at it. We just need to make sure that it's our ideas that they're building and copying. Realistically, most of their population is still living in the pre-industrial age and the untenable burden of their communist model is inevitably going to fail to support the rural people. They'll go through some sort of upheaval in the next twenty years, probably a social revolution or the succession of a vast portion of the country.

You make it fairly clear you know almost nothing about Chinese pseudo-socialism and their role in Asian market development since the '90s. China is nothing like you describe, except in extremely isolated areas. It's not nearly as backwater as you suggest.

Russia, quite frankly, is going nowhere fast. Their entire economic model is driven by oil.

Not really, because they are investing their oil revenues in non-oil enterprise. They are also the natural gas supplier to all of eastern Europe, and they make sure the Ukraine does not forget that by shutting it off periodically. Since their market failure in the late '90s, they've posted straight surpluses and solid investments. They are very much on the rise.

The European Union, when they can get their collective head out of their asses, is a force to be reckoned with. You can already see the centralization of power... They have a president of the EU who has actual authority over member nations. They're going to become much more like states than individual nations over the coming decades. They don't handle crisis well, but in the good times their economic cooperation makes them a true competitor on the scale of China. The United States of America wasn't born overnight. The United States of Europe (LOL) won't be either -- but increased cooperation is their only path to economic viability whether they make it official or not, so at least in some sense it is an inevitable outcome.

The EU is a long way from being a supranational entity. More likely, it has simply taken the long route to the Articles of Confederation with a great deal more organizational and economic skill. The disparity of per capita income between member nations poses many problems in unifying an economy—and currency.

The good news in all this is that the EU is on good terms with us. After all, we're like the kid brother who grew up to be six inches taller than them and 50 lbs heavier.

And then got in a car accident because he was drinking and driving while gloating about how much better his country was, while being entirely ignorant to the complexities of solid global relations to economic standing.

[Khaos]

China: I don't know what to say to this. You seem to have made a lot of assumptions about my view of China, but the bottom line is that what I said is predominantly true. If I am wholly ignorant of rural China, then I must be blind, because I've been there and spent years working for a company that manufactures there.

The facts are that a huge portion of China's population -- incomprehensibly huge -- subsists without basic services. No running water, no utilities, in freakin' huts working on government farms or in government factories.

Some of those same people leave their huts to go live in massive, company-owned tenement houses and subsist in a different environment manufacturing crap for Americans. Their standard of living is marginally better, but still awful. We're talking on the order of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. More than twice the population of the United States, essentially living in an Orwellian society where they are denied access to information and kept ignorant so that they will continue to function as worker-bees in someone else's hive.

Now, China's economy is wholly dependent on this class of worker and this class of citizen in general. You can say whatever the hell you want about China's role in the Asian market -- and you wouldn't be wrong -- but none of that can change the fact that they are sitting on a time bomb. As soon as their government loses control of information, which I view as an inevitability, their whole system of subsistence for hundreds of millions of factory workers is going to implode.

In my humble opinion.

Not really, because they are investing their oil revenues in non-oil enterprise. They are also the natural gas supplier to all of eastern Europe, and they make sure the Ukraine does not forget that by shutting it off periodically. Since their market failure in the late '90s, they've posted straight surpluses and solid investments. They are very much on the rise.
Russia faces too much territorial competition from their neighbors, being China and the E.U. Granted, they have a good relationship right now with China, but Russia is trending towards authoritarian oligarchy and China is trending toward some odd flavor of pseudo-socialist-capitalist-democracy. If there is a social revolution in China and Russia continues on its current political path, the two could well find themselves at odds. That's a lot of pressure for a superpower to endure -- meaning Russia. One of the reasons the U.S. is successful is because we're the biggest asshole on the island. Russia doesn't have that claim anymore, and likely never will again unless there's nuclear war. In which case, they're the biggest asshole in the world.

And then got in a car accident because he was drinking and driving while gloating about how much better his country was, while being entirely ignorant to the complexities of solid global relations to economic standing.
lol... I don't disagree.

The tone of my post must have come off wrong. I'm not a patriot by any means. I live with my eyes open, mostly.

The disparity of per capita income between member nations poses many problems in unifying an economy—and currency.
They have a currency, and thanks to the current fiscal crisis they've done away with a few of those pesky national currencies that are lingering.

I don't see how the economic diversity, or disparity if you prefer to view it that way, presents a problem. If anything, a nation must be diverse in order to survive economically. One of the great downfalls with the U.S. economy is that we have been homogenizing into two economic superclasses: the ultra-rich, and the debtors.

[Nomad]

China: I don't know what to say to this. You seem to have made a lot of assumptions about my view of China, but the bottom line is that what I said is predominantly true. If I am wholly ignorant of rural China, then I must be blind, because I've been there and spent years working for a company that manufactures there.

The facts are that a huge portion of China's population -- incomprehensibly huge -- subsists without basic services. No running water, no utilities, in freakin' huts working on government farms or in government factories.

Some of those same people leave their huts to go live in massive, company-owned tenement houses and subsist in a different environment manufacturing crap for Americans. Their standard of living is marginally better, but still awful. We're talking on the order of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. More than twice the population of the United States, essentially living in an Orwellian society where they are denied access to information and kept ignorant so that they will continue to function as worker-bees in someone else's hive.

Now, China's economy is wholly dependent on this class of worker and this class of citizen in general. You can say whatever the hell you want about China's role in the Asian market -- and you wouldn't be wrong -- but none of that can change the fact that they are sitting on a time bomb. As soon as their government loses control of information, which I view as an inevitability, their whole system of subsistence for hundreds of millions of factory workers is going to implode.

I made assumptions based of what you posted, which seems to be more opinion than fact, but I take your word as someone who has been there.

Chinese nationals I know will be quick to tell you that the cities are vastly superior to what they were in the '80s and the increase in income per capita has greatly helped the individual's standing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying China doesn't treat its citizens like malarkey (visit one of their recycling factories to see some of the haphazard conditions children work in tearing apart heavy metals in computers), but things must be viewed with scale. While millions live in bad conditions, it must be kept relative to the fact the nation has 1.6 billion people.

With the relaxation of economic socialism, individuals are less likely to 'rise against' so to speak, given that they are beginning to profit. Basic principle, as seen in Russia accepting Putin despite his curtail of freedom, that people prefer security and prosperity over their individual right.

I don't see how the economic diversity, or disparity if you prefer to view it that way, presents a problem. If anything, a nation must be diverse in order to survive economically. One of the great downfalls with the U.S. economy is that we have been homogenizing into two economic superclasses: the ultra-rich, and the debtors.

You have countries that make $6,800 a head, and others that make close to $70,000 a head, but a common currency between them. The U.S. doesn't have this large a gap between states (Roughly $25,000 to $45,000 if you exclude the outlier of D.C.), and this wide gap creates increase in the price of living.

For example, Chuck Taylor Converse in Europe down the street from me right now cost roughly €90. In Switzerland it's the same, as is in France, Sweden, etc. These European countries—note Switzerland is not in the EU—have comparable standards of living. Yet, in places like Bulgaria and Roumania, these shoes still cost the same amount, but no one makes nearly as much.

[Khaos]

Chinese nationals I know will be quick to tell you that the cities are vastly superior to what they were in the '80s and the increase in income per capita has greatly helped the individual's standing.
True, but the percentage of the population that actually lives with basic services or better in these cities is extraordinarily small. Even in the cities, most of the people are dirt poor. Of course, as Westerners our exposure to Chinese nationals is greatly skewed by the fact that most Chinese nationals never use a phone or a computer, let alone travel outside the borders of China or have any contact whatsoever with Westerners. I really don't care to substantiate these opinions with unbiased data, but if you feel strongly enough about this subject you could dig up plenty with Google.

While millions live in bad conditions, it must be kept relative to the fact the nation has 1.6 billion people.
It almost sounds like you're arguing with yourself, here. The majority of the Chinese, whether in the cities or not, live in downright terrible conditions with no path to a better life and no hope.

So yes, you're absolutely right... All things must be taken in perspective. In this case, the examples of Chinese living a good quality of life with good social services and individual wealth, essentially living in a capitalist system, must be taken in the perspective of their minority position within the greater Chinese population.

This notion you have of the Olympic China, as I like to call it, is the exception -- not the rule.

As more Chinese slaves are exposed to other cultures, social unrest will grow. Tell me it isn't inevitable... It is. Sure, this is my opinion here, but if you look at the pattern of civilizations, the pattern of humanity, humans inherently desire civil liberty. They will only tolerate so much in exchange for security. Believe me when I say that what the average Chinese worker is currently living with is far outside the bounds of human tolerance; no matter where you live or who you are. That is why the Chinese government puts so much effort into controlling all the information channels, including the Internet. You would not believe how much trouble the CEO of my company had to go through just to bring a camera to the factories we toured. In the end, our handlers censored his pictures and limited them to operations, equipment and sightseeing. Very little was allowed out that depicted the workers' living conditions even remotely. We had government handlers with us at all times. It can't last forever, and it won't.

With the relaxation of economic socialism, individuals are less likely to 'rise against' so to speak, given that they are beginning to profit. Basic principle, as seen in Russia accepting Putin despite his curtail of freedom, that people prefer security and prosperity over their individual right.
Sure, but you seem to be unwilling to recognize the fact that China has a long way to go towards the goal of placating the majority of their population with improved living conditions, let alone individual wealth or freedom of the human spirit. I do have a tendency for hyperbole, but I'm actually being understated here. There is a social arms race right now in China between the authoritarian regime's ability to improve the quality of life for people versus the growth of the population and the economic pressures placed on them by their total dependence on the U.S.

The only reason the population of China is placated right now is because they're ignorant; not because the Chinese government is adequately meeting their obligations.

China just doesn't have jack shit for resources other than slaves and coal, to put it bluntly. China has lots of slaves, and their economy is totally hinged on slave labor and a massive disparity between import and export.

Now, you tell me how China, having almost no valuable resources other than people, is supposed to substantially improve the quality of life for the majority of their population when most of their wealth is derived solely from exploiting that same population? It's completely impossible.

If they stop producing gobs of cheap stuff for export, then they have no economy. At least not an economy to support 1.6 billion people. Then they have no quality of life. If they continue exporting gobs of cheap stuff, then they have an economy, but still no quality of life. The bottom line is no quality of life.

Now, when Joe the Child Slave (He's an unpopular Chinese campaign prop) sees YouTube videos on the Internet of people... Well, people being not slaves, he then thinks to himself, Hey, why couldn't I be a not slave? It's not an unfair thing to think. Joe the Child Slave would probably rather being a plumber.

You have countries that make $6,800 a head, and others that make close to $70,000 a head, but a common currency between them. The U.S. doesn't have this large a gap between states (Roughly $25,000 to $45,000 if you exclude the outlier of D.C.), and this wide gap creates increase in the price of living.

For example, Chuck Taylor Converse in Europe down the street from me right now cost roughly €90. In Switzerland it's the same, as is in France, Sweden, etc. These European countries—note Switzerland is not in the EU—have comparable standards of living. Yet, in places like Bulgaria and Roumania, these shoes still cost the same amount, but no one makes nearly as much.
A unified European Nation does not change the internal economic dynamics of Europe. They already have trade agreements with one another and the economic principals surrounding locally produced vs. imported goods, cost of living, etc. already are in effect in Europe. Your whole example with the Converse shoes is pointless because imports never scale well to cost of living. The reason why the perceived quality of life is similar across Europe is all tied up in the cost of living being reflected in the costs of locally produced goods.

The European Union is all about economic bargaining power, or it's supposed to be. Bargaining power with Russia, with OPEC, with China. This whole tangent about the United States of Europe is really just me being cheeky. The fact of the matter is that Europe is already on the path. Whether they formalize it or not is unimportant; in the end the formation of a true nation would be just that, a formality.

[Winfrey]

Wholly god. I'm not reading that much. But prime's idea of agrarian society makes me laugh. I mean I would say 95% of people today who didn't grow up on a farm or work on a farm would have no freaking clue!

I mean, come on. Imagine Greenspan running a tractor or Jennifer Aniston as a humble farmwife. Not only that but there is no way farming can return to smaller operations. Over the years farms have become huge operations(especially livestock), there just isn't the resources or land to accomplish a massive shift of people to agrarian life. What you're thinking of is a city person's romanticized picture of rural life. Take it from a country boy, prime, leave it as a dream. (not to say I don't dream the same from time to time ;))