patrick.net

Just a tiny shade of optimism among the gloom that these kind of discussions tend to provoke:

* The US and global economies are not static, nor are they "zero-sum". Growth in one region really is good for everyone in the long-run. It's the period of adjustment that causes concern.

* The US is very very very far from slipping into lack of self-sufficiency. US agriculture, for example, is many times more productive than most of the world, even modern Europe. The US produces much more agricultural stock than is required for sufficiency. In fact, much of the consternation over global agricultural subsidies centers around other countries wanting the US to open to their imports but be able to protect against our much more efficient and thus cheaper exports.

* The above also applies to manufacturing, despite popular conception. What has occurred in mfg is that we've shed old industrial-area labor intensive mfg, replacing it with small, capital intensive fabrication. Most people don't realize that there has been a net increase in US mfg output in the past 30 years, not the opposite. Just a lot less people are employed to do it (same as ag).

* Even given dramatic growth in engineering and R&D in India and China (although China has far far fewer than 750K *equivalent* engineers graduating every year, they still have a lot), there is a hidden economic pressure that is being masked by the current global system. Inflation.

China, and less so India, are masking enormous inflationary pressures through a complex system of currency manipulation, capital controls and trade barriers. This game creates huge disequilibriums, and cannot go on indefinitely. If China were to loose the RMB, their engineers and R&D would close in to within 15% of the *median* rates in the US in PPP terms, well within the logistical overhead. This doesn't help those losing out today, but it will eventually correct itself; there is *no* alternative. China cannot build national wealth on stacks of USD paper. In fact, we are building more proportionate wealth on their taking our paper. We are restructuring inefficient industries on their dime.

* And don't forget, the US is *by far* the most self-sufficient, large industrialized nation. We produce nearly 80% of our GDP internally. We do not rely upon an export economy, nor currency manipulation. We are militarily strong, and have by far the lowest percentage of GDP debt when compared to Europe or Asia. We can survive entirely without the rest of the world if need be, only at about a 15% reduced consumption level. (Don't get me wrong, this would hurt bad, but not kill us; like it would Europe or Japan)

The sun will surely set on America, but it will be quite a while until that day comes. Those shorting the "end of our empire" would be well advised to be able to hold those positions for more than a few generations. Of course we can do a lot of damage, and hasten the end; something I am inclined to believe the current leadership is unintentionally encouraging. But, things have been much much worse before, and yet those trials have not succeeded in sinking us. I don't think these will either.

Here are questions to ask yourself: what will Korea do when they eventually lose the hyperscale steel mfg base? How hard will the adjustment be for them? Can they survive such restructuring on their own without aid? How about China, with over 1bn in population who's GDP is built upon over 60% export mfg and 25%-50% inflation in a genie bottle? Or "old" Europe with GDP debt approaching 100% and generational entitlements that will push this over 200%, but little immigration to fill the worker gap?

Market captialist democracy is absolutely a terrible socio-political-economic system; it's just better than all the others that have been tried.

nor are they “zero-sum”.

I hear you...

I could present the economic-benefit-of-Wal-mart argument, but it's dry, boring and doesn't appeal to emotions.

Suffices to say that even though Wal-mart uses labor arbitrage and local market power (local monopoly power) to create barriers to entry, they were only able to do so by first creating consumer benefit in the areas they penetrated. You cannot become a local monopoly without first offerring something of value.

Wal-mart faces very serious challenges to future growth today; something well studied in B-Schools. They have had a series of dismal failures in expansion attempts the past years. They're in the "winners-curse" zone now. I look for them to diversify, then later sell off loss-leading divisions over time. Not that different from the lifecycle supermarkets went through 30+ years ago.

[The "Futurist"]

The only people who would oppose it fit into one of the two categories above. There is no other possible reason [...]

Only one type of person subscribes to and produces such rhetoric. A pseudo-intellectual demagauge. (Decrying "there is no debate" does not pass as debate.)

Don't get me wrong, I love Walmart's business model and tactics. I just hate the culture of cheapness.

I move we retitle "The Futurist" to a more appropre "The Reactionary Demagogue". In the spirit of Fox-News style "intellectual" bullying. I can hear echos of Roy Cohn: "Answer the question! Yes or no! Are you still a communist supporter? Yes or no?"

But I’m willing to bet a lot of people don’t bother to do research when they are looking to buy stuff. We’ve all commented on how people jump into RE without any real knowledge, so why should consumer products be a different story. I bet if we asked the average Walmart customer they would say they were getting a good “deal” on what they buy.

Always look at the total cost of ownership. It is the true cost to you.

LOL, Randy is not a liberal. Don't worry.

I do not understand why Fox News is considered right-wing. Perhaps I have not been watching TV for too long.

It is fun to expose ideologues like Randy H.

Randy is not an "ideologue", trust me on this one.

Juku,

I am about as "left" as your logic is sound. You'll have to try harder if you're looking to expose me. The "Futurist" has made a number of categorically false statements which I and others have provided objective, empirical references about.

If actually thinking through issues violates your sensibilities, then by all means continue to consume knee-jerk pablum, whatever the left/right slant.

For the record, I regard all the major television "news" media equally as lowly. Fox gets singled out because of it's "new kid" status, but they're in good company with all the other infotainment circuses.

Anyone who thinks any news service is not biased is not paying attention.

Yes, if I run a news station I will be so biased that vegetarians or animal right activists may bomb me.

There is no value in san Francisco real estate at today’s prices.

But there is more value in SF real estate than SJ real estate.

For the record, I regard all the major television “news” media equally as lowly. Fox gets singled out because of it’s “new kid” status, but they’re in good company with all the other infotainment circuses.

Perhaps we should read FT, The Economist, and Foreign Affairs instead.

Only because Sf is nicer than SJ. I have to take my son to a fencing competition in San Jose in a couple of weeks, where would you take a 10 year old (with a good palate) for lunch?

If he likes steaks, try The Grill in Fairmont. Arcadia in Marriot is sometimes good, but it fluctuates. E&O Trading at First and San Fernando is not bad.

SJ simply does not have many okay restaurants.

Be warned, set your food expectations to San Jose mode.

Would there be a great little Mexican dive or noodle bar? We are very happy with that type of food.

I rarely eat mexican food, but the one in Santana Row across from the theater is pretty good.

What kind of noodle bar do you have in mind? Chinese? Pho? Ramen?

There is an Asian noodle place that let you mix-and-match ingredients near Camera 12 across from the Fairmont. I think that one is pretty okay. I have not been there for a while.

Think ’stinky people are welcome’ restaurant.

That Asian noodle place should do then. There is also a Thai place on Second across from the Rep.

California unemployment the lowest in 5 years! Guess what the biggest job creator in the State is?

http://www.sacbee.com/content/breakingnews/story/14225354p-15049686c.html

The only losers were manufacturing and the information sector.

Enough said. No Bay Area rebirth... yet.

Randy H,

Is Bloomberg's considered part of the "infotainment circus"?

Is Bloomberg’s considered part of the “infotainment circus”?

Anyone here uses a Bloomberg machine regularly?

He also said that 95% of a Realtor(TM)’s time is spent trawling for clients.

The agent who sold my home last year asked me for referrals many times. She even went across the street to my neighbor and tried to get him to list with her. I still get emails from her asking for client leads.

Is Bloomberg’s considered part of the “infotainment circus”?

Financial television news sources have been pretty good, probably because they tend to focus, and there's usually verifiability. But even here there's been a slow creep of sensationalizm. I started seeing this about 5 years ago. But I'd say Bloomberg's talking head/scroller station is reasonable. Just reporting facts or statements purported as such. CNN's Lou Dobbs on the other hand...

I should add that I watch *very little* television, and haven't in the past years since having children. I'd rather read to my little boy than watch someone scream about ideology.

Isn’t the Bloomberg machine that tiny little thing with changing numbers you need to get onto certain computer sites?

It is a system that provides real-time news and very detailed data. It is very expensive (I heard $2000 a month). Many professionals swear by it. I am just curious. :)

Were you thinking about SecurID?

So I take it you don’t watch Kramer?

Isn't CNBC a good contrarian indicator?

My husband often jokes that the stock market in the 70’s went up 3 points, down 2, what was so interesting about that?

You can potentially make 3 + 2 = 5 points! :-D

Of course, it usually does not turn out that way.

Sounds great? The problem is YOU the OWNER of the car become liable for any damages since the robber was unable to control the car!

No, it should be a remote switch from the police. Any damages should be considered an extension of the pursuit. Since the robber started the chain of events, he should be liable.

On the other hand, we should massively expand the scope of capital punishment to deter crimes.

NOT LEGAL ADVICE

I believe the little device my friend has with the changing numbers allows him to access the Bloomberg information.

Yes, my wife has one that allows her to access corporate intranet.

Randy H said : I am about as “left” as your logic is sound. ”

So, what are your reasons for opposing the Patriot Act?

(a) I'm not "to the left". I evaluate issues on their merit. Left and right are useless, broad ideological distinctions. If I assume you are "to the right", then you must be in favor of "market liberalization", which is a fiscally "conservative" ideal. Does that make you left or right?

(b) My quotation was yours. Sorry if that escaped you. Most people remember what they have written.

(c) I've taken the time to write careful criticism of "The Futurist" before. Its is an act in futility because those who read it are rarely interested in debate, only labeling and name calling.

(d) Your question phrased So, what are your reasons for opposing the Patriot Act? is itself loaded. It is possible to question the merits of the act without necessarily opposing it. Isn't this the very point of democratic debate? "The Futurist" says if I dare to ask the questions then I must be a "5th Columnist". As such, the author loses all credibility with me. Once upon a time the same was said about those who dared to question the curvature of the Earth.

(3) My issues vis-a-vis the Patriot Act are mainly in the oversight arena. I don't like to see the creation of runaway beaucracies, no matter their political intent. Seems to me "The Futurist" isn't very conservative in that it is advocating big government without the minimum mechanisms to ensure beaucratic growth can be checked by future administrations.

Many of my own views are heavily influenced by Libertarian ideals: pro-free trade, pro-tranparency, pro-individualism, pro-gun, pro-free speech/press, pro-limited government, pro-separation of church and state, anti-subsidies, anti-tariffs, anti-protectionism, anti-welfare, etc.
HARM

That's great, HARM, except that 10 minutes into your first sociology lecture, you would realise that 'libertarianism' is actually a sort of brainwashing of the American people and an overly simplistic and convenient grab-bag and that they represent the dull echo of some of the most banal and dated ideas of the 18th and 19th century.

Many of them are outright harmful to societies if taken to their logical conclusion, and some of them show no guaranteed benefit to anyone but the few vested interests who threw them up in the first place to advance their own personal cause, usually to make money.

Monolithic theories like 'libertarianism' as a guiding principle tend not to work well in practice.

Nobody wants to be over-governed, but there is a role for sensible governance. No other high income OECD country allows freedom of gun ownership like the US, and no other country reaps the shocking whirlwind of hospital treatment costs, deaths and maiming, accidental discharges, ready availablility of lethal weapons, living in anxiety and fear, suffering grief and loss, etc. Hardly a civilised way for 280 million people to live in a modern civilised society with no threat of invasion, it made some small amount of sense in the 18th century in order to raise a militia in the eastern colonies if under attack from the British.

Let me know the day you get transparency from corporations and government. Remember the big stick of government and the judiciary is what makes corporations accountable (often after the fact). The big stick in turn for government is the electorate, but they're all brainwashed and fooled, so no great threat there...

The welfare state in its present form arose during the Depression to deal with systemic unemployment due to failures in the capitalist market, added to by old age pensions for those too old to work, for other economically disadvantaged people like single mothers, low income earners, etc. There's plenty of middle class welfare out there as well. Other, simpler societies know how to look after their own without prodding...

But there's too much philosophy and sociology and political economy to go into here... Other countries work entirely differently from the US, often more successfully, and 'libertarians' would be seen as right-wing fringe lunatics in those places...

Monolithic theories like ‘libertarianism’ as a guiding principle tend not to work well in practice.

I agree.

I don’t think that is what he is saying at all. In fact, he clearly states that criticism of all anti-terror measures, combined with failure to provide alternative suggestions, and an unwillingness to criticize Muslim terrorists, could be evidence of 5th column behavior.

In some sense, I have agree. We need protection from the government. The enemy is adapting fast and unnecessarily constraining the government is unwise.

On the other hand, criticism and failure to provide alternatives is not necessarily bad. It merely provokes further thinking. The same person may end up supporting the measure when it is clear that alternatives are not available.

Criticism is not the necessarily the same as opposition.

In some sense, I have agree. We need protection from the government. The enemy is adapting fast and unnecessarily constraining the government is unwise.

What about the whole idea that 9/11 was aided and abetted, if not outright orchestrated, by the US neocon administration as a 'false flag' operation, with the encouragement of the vested interest of big oil and the PNAC crew? Given the bizarre standdown of interception forces, the simultaneous running of identical training exercises on the same day, the controlled demolition of 4 buildings in the WTC complex, the frantic shipping away of the steel columns, the govt confiscation of all film and video never to be seen again, the strange impact at the pentagon, the presence of extra aircraft over PA and at the WTC, etc...

And why do you have so many 'enemies' when France, Germany, etc don't? I would include the UK and Australia in the list of people without enemies, except that they got sucked into the 'Coalition' by bullyboy tactics and bribes, thus making them a target for retaliation.

Truman has a lot to answer for for the unnecessary and extreme militarisation of the US as a policy approach to mitigating wars - it has created more of them...

What about the whole idea that 9/11 was aided and abetted, if not outright orchestrated, by the US neocon administration ...

Sorry, but this is downright silly.

And why do you have so many ‘enemies’ when France, Germany, etc don’t?

Why does Bill Gates have more enemies than me?

Where is YOUR blog, by the way?

quod erat demonstrandum

I'll refrain from feeding trolls when it's not my thread in the future. Sorry HARM.

for reference Juku,
http://patrick.net/wp/?p=170

The fact you don't know about my other blogs is evidence that we don't share the same interests. They are not political blogs.

I am not advocating any conspiracy theory, but I do have one question. Anyone who has driven near the Pentagon knows that the surrounding area is packed with anti-aircraft devices. Why did none of them work to protect the Pentagon on 9/11?

Since this topic is on libertarianism, let me have one more post here. Harry Browne, one of my favorite writers and the libertarian party presidential candidate for 1996 and 2000, dies yesterday. RIP.

For anyone open-minded, I would highly recommend his simple and straightforward books like "Why government doesn't work". A must read for anyone interested in politics whether you agree or not.

Personally, his "How I found freedom in an unfree world" is the best self-help book I have ever read. It really changed my approach to life. It clearly describes the various traps that get into, mentally and how to break free from them and live free.

If you are open-minded and like reading, consider checking out these books from the library. Also recommended is his website http://www.harrybrowne.org and the articles therein. I wonder who will maintain it now?

It's a bit discomfiting to think that a major nerve center for the U.S. military has such a poorly implemented defense shield.