patrick.net

Heraclitusstudent says

You are right. Britain had the first modern government. Now they are encumbered by an obsolete Monarchy, a House of Lords, an astounding level of self importance and quite frankly arrogance.

Every year, France and Italy lose steam. Germany gets on because of their monopolization of much of the goods, particularly high end goods, made in Europe. The EU has done for Germany what the Wehrmacht could not - make a captive goods-absorbing colony out of Europe. Even while trying to absorb East Germany, West German businesses were far more interested in buying up and shutting down Polish and Hungarian businesses lest they compete with lower cost goods, and promulgated lots of "Enviro" and Labor laws to make sure it happened.

Britain is a services powerhouse, it is a massive R&D, financial, marketing, consulting etc. power, but the EU rules are written by Germans and Dutch, who are stronger in manufacturing but want to keep their Telecoms safe from British competition. Like France, many sectors exist simply as make work jobs.

Britain has lost trade with the world ever since it joined the EU, since it can no longer build upon previous relations with the Commonwealth since trade deals are now done in Brussels by the EU, not decided in London by Parliament.

The British were neoliberalized just like the US was neoliberalized. The country was sold out by the Bankers as the party that was supposed to represent the Working classes and Manufacturing, was taken over by Radical Trotskyites.

Patrick says

This would please global capital, which wants to pay far lower wages. The only thing global capital fears is strong national governments that can restrict its power.

Maybe it's less machavalian than you think.

Maybe it's just that our economic systems are based on "economic growth." And that in turn requires population growth.

THe natives aren't growing the population.

Maybe it really is that simple.

By the way I'm not advocating that we have to always grow our economies bigger. But changing that would require some pain, or maybe some fear it would even require a period of collapse, given debt levels.

I don't think the elites, that is the powers that be (not necessarily a conspiracy) are thinking about race, and in fact they probably would have preferred it if the natives had simply reproduced more.

marcus says

Maybe it's just that our economic systems are based on "economic growth." And that in turn requires population growth.

Like Malthus and Marx, you forget a factor.

The impact of Prosperity and Technology.

The ruling classes need cheap labor and expensive rents to maintain their power relative to the populace, but especially against new wealth upstarts.

Paul Ehrlich's starvation bomb not only didn't come true, the opposite happened. There were more people who got FATTER. Even among the poorest countries.



Meanwhile, as populations become wealthier, they have fewer children. India, which is by no means among the wealthiest nations today, has seen a collapse in birth rates to just over the replacement rate. As Indians continue to increase prosperity, the need for investment in fewer children and competing leisure expenditures, will continue. This is seen everywhere in the world, including the poorest countries.



Just wait until Starship Mk 20 returns from Jupiter's Gravity Well, loaded with Ganymede Rice and Platinum, bound for O'Neil Cylinder #23.

Vietnam's birthrate is below 2. Laos and Cambodia's birthrates are still above, but a fraction of what they were during Peak Ehrlich.

Niger birth rate: around 7 kids by woman.
Going down vvvveeeerrrryyyy slowly.

This mass population will be dependent on a resilient civilization just to exist. We will need lots of technology and organization to feed, educate, care for and organize such a population. Any wobbling and the situation might descend into chaos Haiti style, and no one will be there to help them - not on the scale required.
Left on its own such a population might destroy forests, fish stocks, wild life etc..., start wars, create epidemics, finally migrate by the tens of millions exporting the chaos elsewhere.

Heraclitusstudent says

Niger birth rate: around 7 kids by woman.
Going down vvvveeeerrrryyyy slowly.

Ehrlich loved India and SE Asia as examples of birth rates declining too slow, also.

No worries! Same will happen in Africa. It's LESS Densely Populated than Europe by far.

NoCoupForYou says

Every year, France and Italy lose steam. Germany gets on because of their monopolization of much of the goods, particularly high end goods, made in Europe. The EU has done for Germany what the Wehrmacht could not - make a captive goods-absorbing colony out of Europe.

GDP by country in 2019:
United States (GDP: 21.41 trillion)
China (GDP: 15.54 trillion)
Japan (GDP: 5.36 trillion)
Germany (GDP: 4.42 trillion)
India (GDP: 3.16 trillion)
France (GDP: 3.06 trillion)
United Kingdom (GDP: 3.02 trillion)

Hummm Why is UK GDP still around that of France? Even when they consider France such a country of socialist losers. Even after decades of socialist governments in France?
The UK has let its car industry be destroyed because "international trade is good". They rely purely on finance, which guaranties that they run a trade deficit, as they consume and don't produce. Their GDP is in line with France because the pound keeps sliding down.

Being in Europe or not will change nothing, particularly if the other side of that is that they keep trading with countries like China. They are more annoyed by Europe than by China.

marcus says

Maybe it's just that our economic systems are based on "economic growth." And that in turn requires population growth.

THe natives aren't growing the population.

Maybe it really is that simple.

That is most rational explanation I have seen so far. I also think that our "elites" do not care what color the serfs are - if they could find white serfs to import, they would be just as happy to have white, obedient, low-paid servants as now they are happy with Mexicans in USA or Turks/Arabs in Europe. it is not talked much about, but a YUUGE population from former Eastern Block settled in Western Europe in 1990's and early 2000's. Now E. Europe does not provide immigrants, so they have to turn to other parts of world.

marcus says

Maybe it's less machavalian than you think.

But it is quite Machiavellian even in this case.

Heraclitusstudent says

Hummm Why is UK GDP still around that of France? Even when they consider France such a country of socialist losers. Even after decades of socialist governments in France?

France has almost 10% larger population (67M vs. 62M), and more resources than the UK. France does not have to load it's European exports on a boat, Britain does.

France gets huge Eurosubsidies for manufacturing, like ArianeSpace which cannot compete with SpaceX even with $30m/Launch Eurosubsidies. Netherlands and Portugal subsidize their fishermen to go into the Dogger Bank and practice the most environmental distructive fishing in the world; the UK does not subsidize fishermen.

France aggressively subsidizes and insulates from competition their inefficient farmers. The chicken tax began in 1954 long before "Chloronated Chicken", "GMOs" and other EuroExcuses to one-sided Free Trade.

Because German-dominated EU subsidizes manufacturing and agra over services, and the EU is basically the Germans kissing France's ass to keep the EU together.

And German-dominated Euro monetary policy makes sure German goods are favored, while borrowing to modernize/invest in economies of Southern and Eastern Europe is less available.

France's GDP/PPP per capita is about $2000 lower than the UK.

No, UK also has 67 millions: http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/united-kingdom-population/

NoCoupForYou says

France gets huge Eurosubsidies for manufacturing

I keep being told that state subsidies are bad, and ultimately make the country less efficient and hurts its economy.

NoCoupForYou says

France's GDP/PPP per capita is about $2000 lower than the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita
Looks like they are pretty much tied:
19 France 42,878
20 United Kingdom 42,558

I used the World Bank, not IMF.

Any listing that has Ireland at over $70k/year is on crack. They must not be adjusting for corporations (Google, Apple, U2) doing the Dutch-Irish-Bahama sandwich tax dodge.

If Brexit happens, short Ireland. Most of Dublins "Growth" is booking UK sales in Ireland as a tax dodge, like Amazon does.

Marcus, you should like this:
"Trade is good for you based on the cube of your wealth". -Eric W. quoting Brad Delong.
(See 104:52)
www.youtube.com/embed/bkAWAJyX0fM?t=3869

France receives far more than the UK in Eurosubsidies, which makes sense because the Germans must bribe their chief partner without which the EU is impossible.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/22/eu-budget-spending-contributions-european-union

https://x.com/EuropeInvasionn/status/1804918973797949687

@EuropeInvasionn
This Italian girl's name is Desirée Mariottini. Desirée was 16 years old. One night, she missed the bus on her way home. She didn't have money to take a taxi and had to walk.

On the way back, 4 Senegalese immigrants attacked Desirée and took her to a ruined house. They drugged Desirée, sexually assaulted her, and tortured her.

Desirée's respiratory system could not withstand the drugs and torture, Desirée is no longer with us.

https://x.com/EuropeInvasionn/status/1802302925693145412

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazines/pdf/101716_int/indexROW1.html

How Japanese Authorities handle horribly behaved African sentenced to deportation.

https://x.com/Klaus_Arminius/status/1828391540844052885