Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Condor who wrote (79857)	3/6/2003 10:51:57 AM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hello Condor, I thought the following to be an interesting SI post FWIW. I guess so! (seeing as how you posted it twice) Oh BTW, that counts as two posts for the day. Sorry... --fl@notreally.com :o)

To: Condor who wrote (79857)	3/6/2003 12:21:03 PM
From: Rascal	Respond to of 281500

Good post COndor, "3)I see the country heading towards a financial crisis due to the current account deficit, which is widening. The deficit is at an unsustainable level and will either cause the dollar to plunge quickly - and create a financial panic in the United States - or will cause economic growth to continue to be sluggish for years on end as it is worked off slowly. I think the odds are that it will fall sharply. As long as these records have been kept every single time a country has built a current account deficit that is as big as our a financial panic was the result. I don't see why things will be different here. If this happens it will probably occur in the second half of this year." So the current account deficit is keyed off imports and exports. When we count the exports we only count what was produced domestically. The GDP. Now we all know about the multinationals and all the stuff we (actually) produce in Mexico, China, etc. Instead of devaluing the dollar, I think we should change the GDP to GAP Or, Gross AMerican Product. Let's look at all the things we can count as American production regardless of where it is produced. I don't suggest we do it right away. The smart guys have to look at how things add up. Get the smartest guys to work on this. (I wouldn't assign it to Treasury Secretary Snow, maybe Sandy Weil.) All this America as empire and world power has to payoff someplace. Investing Multi-billions in a hole in the middle east has a very bad payback. The world foots to our balance sheet as each country closes business each day. Let's change the Accounting system! After all: "You are what you measure." :>) Rascal@ Imadethisallupbutlet'stryit.com

To: Condor who wrote (79857)	3/6/2003 1:44:19 PM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

according to Lenin's "imperialism" theory, #3 here could be the cause for #1 action. If only the US can have all those oils in Iraq for a low price then it will solve a big part of its own economic problem, won't they?

To: Condor who wrote (79857)	3/6/2003 2:03:38 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<America is becoming a nervous nation and people are acting strange and scared.> Yes, we are returning to the 1950s, with McCarthyism and Domino Theories and a demonized foreign enemy. He's got a good handle on the intersection between economic and political sentiment. In the recession of 2001, U.S. consumers did not cut consumption. In 2003 they are, in spite of 50-year lows in mortgage rates and 0% auto financing.

To: Condor who wrote (79857)	3/6/2003 6:57:47 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Even if Bush lost the next election, whoever is the next President will have to continue in Bush's direction after Iraq. While I agree with many of the sentiments Mike expressed in his latest missive, the above statement seems too pessimistic and deterministic even for me. While it is true that it may take years to dig out of the mess created by Bush's hegemonic foreign policy, there is just no way that a strong successor president will simply carry on the status quo of the Bush administration. If the unfortunate social and financial trends seen by Mike should continue, then by late next year it is extremely doubtful that Bush will win a mandate for reelection by the American people, who will have witnessed the greatest decline in American power, prestige, freedom that has occurred since this republic was founded. Four more years? Is your family better off than it was in 2000? Are you kidding? The next President will have a mandate for a complete about-face, not just in economic policy, but foreign policy as well. The extremist rightwing hardliners will be purged in favor of a realistic foreign policy based on cooperation, negotiation and problem-solving via teamwork and dialog. It's mostly about economic development, not regime change through the barrel of a gun. We live in an era of tremendous technological progress. There is no fundamental reason why rich and poor nations must be at war with one another or why ethnic differences must prevail over our common shared humanity. All we need is education (especially cross-cultural training and understanding) and sharing in common struggles to eradicate poverty, hunger, illiteracy and exploitation. The current administration simply doesn't understand that the reason that the poor don't embrace modernity is that modernity has torn their traditional cultures apart without delivering any tangible benefits. Instead modernity has merely widened the gap between the rich and the poor while unrealistically raising peoples expectations. This must change before there can be genuine and lasting world peace. The culture of the world does not want to be reshaped in the mass-consumption consumerist model of America, nor is it in the interest of America for it to be, for such levels of consumption and waste would quickly strain the earth's carrying capacity. It is folly to imagine that we can transform a tribal middle eastern society into a functioning western democracy by bombs and free elections. It is delusional to imagine that this can be the cornerstone of peace in the Middle East, a fantasy even shared by some liberals like Thomas Friedman. Even if we were to succeed in this misguided hundred billion dollar plus adventure, all we would really achieve is the transformation of a country that exports oil into one that imports oil instead. What a bonanza! Does it create genuine indigenous economic development or lift Palestinians out of their misery? Not at all. Instead it will be viewed by historians as a failed graft between very different cultures, an evil experiment in human cloning at the societal level. Unlike Friedman, who suggests that if it weren't actually happening, he would pay good money to be entertained by this "thriller", I'm not much of a fan of these violent Rambo-style Hollowwood adventure fantasies. JMHO, Sam