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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (172137)	9/16/2011 4:43:06 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542169

<<<Until we figure out a way to keep jobs here and stop stimulating in a way that benefits China more than us - we have failed.>>> The rise of China is inevitable. It has nothing to do with us. They have almost as many people in the middle class as we do but they also have three times that many people living on a few dollars a day. It is inevitable that China's economy will transform from low level manufacturing. They understand better than we do that is not the way to prosperity. An Apple product that sells for $200 gets at most $40 in parts and labor. Apple is the most successful company in the world because they understand this. They get $160 for marketing, sales, distribution, money for R&D, and profits. That is why China is investing heavily in education. They want their companies to become more like Apple. IMO that is not likely to happen soon. By soon, I mean in the next 100 years or so. But who can predict what happens after 100 years. Instead of fighting with China for cheap jobs in manufacturing, we sell them Starbucks Coffee, KFC, Caterpillar, Boeing, and advanced products. Germany is doing well in China. We should view this as a once in a lifetime opportunity. In a few short years Coca Cola in China will be bigger and more profitable than Coca Cola in the United States. But getting back to Keynsian economics. We will always disagree. Keynsian economics is not failing. It is in the execution. You go into debt because you spend more than you take in. You waste trillions of dollars on wars that you don' t have to fight. You take in less when people are laid off and lose their job. It has a ripple effect. People have less money to spend for necessities. Stores close. People lose jobs. Meanwhile the top one percent of people in our society has greater income and assets than 90 percent of our total population. They pay almost nothing in payroll taxes. Their tax rate is lower than everyone who works for a living.

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (172137)	9/16/2011 8:55:51 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542169

>><<<<<<Keynsian economics is the best theory we have. >>>>>> Then why isn't it working? We've been in this loss of jobs position for a very long time and it isn't getting better. We keep stimulating over and over and over again and so far all we have done is saddled the country with a huge debt - and given the Tea Party a platform to become popular with. You can wish all you want that we should have done more or this or that - but the fact is that is sending pragmatism down the toilet since it is silly to propose anything that is politically impossible. Until we figure out a way to keep jobs here and stop stimulating in a way that benefits China more than us - we have failed. topics.nytimes.com Somewhere in the above, Krugman says we never had a serious stimulus ala Keynes. 40% were tax cuts and then another chunk was help to states. He also said it was too small from day one. Shouted it at the top of his lungs. Many economists said so. No one listened, and the right wing was having none of it anyway. Same ol same ol. Bottom line, true Keyensian economics was never tried.