TJ,
I think you pointed out a key issue. This equalization must occur smoothly. I am not sure if Dr Rich is right about China's banking systems, but if it is we have two sides of a very important equation based on some rather unsound assumptions.
I do think Bush, in a strange way, 'gets' one thing. The Heritage Foundation, the Repub think tank, wants to minimize govt's role. Americans are in disbelief (what else is new) when they hear the gov't would like to do away with Soc Sec (humorous, really, as many who voted for Bush saw no downside, but now he wants to stop my Mum and Grandma's pension payment??)and other gov't programs.
The Republicans want little else to do with anything beside military. This would be acceptable if there were a commensurate decrease in the size of gov't, to make the US truly competitive as a low tax state (for this will be a key corporate success point in the future-as you pointed out-the location of an enterprise). The US will have to be a low tax state merely to survive, but the largesse of gov't has to go. It is interesting to see the outcome in N.O. Originally local industry, like Walmart, was only going to provide a few days pay, but after seeing the gov't 'response', they realized they had an obligation to do more, and paid salaries to displaced staff to the end of Sept, in addition to making charitable contributions.
The real issue, as far as a society is concerned, is that corporations will act in their best interests and will never be as efficient at distributing charity. Starbucks may give a barista medical insurance after working 20htrs/wk but they won't give same to poor and ill in the same community. So as corporations lobby gov't for a better deal, and while corporations are cash rich, they are reaping benefits where the avg American has seen their salary grow from $40,000 to $45,000 in 20 yrs.
As these companies globalize they might not be so willing to help at home, and the US will become more polarized. Thugs shooting at nurses and MDs in N.O. (as well as the Medevac 'copter) might be a light occurrence in a few years time. I rather think US society is at risk, and I don't think the Republicans will change their way.
China has much to gain and the US much to lose, I have a hard time seeing the win-win here. Maybe there will be win-win in 20-40 yrs but the present is and will be increasingly painful.
Cheers,
D |
