Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

User avatar
ditchdoc
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Flatlands of Kansas

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by ditchdoc » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:44 am

SLSS wrote:
befuddled wrote:wtf? Since when is globalization an issue of right vs. left?

This country has to become comfortable with the idea that we have to be an economy of ideas, of invention, versus an economy of manufacturing or it just isn't feasible for us to be in the top of the economic demographic. That's why it's important for us to be in the top of the Math/Science/Biology sectors. No Child left behind (except the exceptional) just won't do
When you stop in your average big box store, you see an awful lot of our population that are not going to be part of an economy based solely on ideas and invention. Unless we want to have huge numbers of people on assistance programs, or huge government payrolls of maintenance workers, I don't see how our country has anywhere near full-employment without a strong manufacturing sector.

I also don't think we can avoid a global economy. Corporations have little or no national loyalty, but they are driving most of the governments business/policy decisions.

I can agree, for the most part. But I think we need to be a country which excels at everything. Since the Industrial Revolution, the US was at the top of the heap in most everything--ideas, manufacturing, education, economics, democracy, blah, blah, blah. We lost that somewhere. I'm not sure what we excel at today. We still have the best democracy, but that don't pay the rent. I really think that if we stopped pissing money away on stupid wars and trying to be the protector of the world, we could begin to rebuild our own country. We need to set an example for the rest of the world, as we once did. We need to focus our resources on us. Fix our shit. Get off the OPEC tit. Get out of other people's business. Take the money we're pissing away and spend it on research in hydrogen-based electrical power and fuel cell technology. Spend it on guarding our borders, rebuilding infrastucture, keeping our military the strongest and best equipped in the world. The WPA and CCC worked during The Great Depression, by putting people to work, and giving them hope for the future. It could work again.

I say, tell the rest of the world they're on their own. We are going to take care of us first. We have a history of being the first-in to help in any disaster, with money and manpower. What has it gotten us? Nothing. Not even good will. Every time an issue comes up in the UN, it's like, "What have you done for us lately?" Well, let's see what they do without us. If we can take care of our own house, and put ourselves back on top, only then will we get the respect we deserve. You lead by example.
Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is forever.

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Plow » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:49 am

BigCliff wrote:
Plow wrote:
BigCliff wrote:
You're right, increasing free trade and transforming the world's economy to function more like our own has to be awful.
That's funny, you got it backwards. We'll be transforming our economy to be more like the looser nations Obama looks up to (during and after the bow).
To clarify, are you opposed to free trade? Or are you trying to say that the President you bemoan for wanting to put greater controls on the health insurers looks up to countries that let industry get away with whatever they want?

Or is there no coherent thought behind it and you're just arguing with me and badmouthing Obama because it amuses you?
Read it again. We're not transforming the world the world is transforming us. If we had strong competent leadership who believed in the greatness of America it might be different story. Globalization is not about free trade, minimizing and limiting government involvement is.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
SLSS
Posts: 6997
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:24 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by SLSS » Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:00 am

BigCliff wrote:
The trouble with this is that most things found in various big-box stores are only likely to be manufactured here due to transportation costs. We're not likely to have electronics, affordable clothing or toys mostly made here any time soon because its so cheap to make them elsewhere. Cleaning liquids, drinks, lumber and such is likely only still made here because its not cost effective to ship it over from Asia. More expensive fuel prices might bring a few more jobs here, but it will cause production to switch from Asia to Mexico first.

Ignoring AGW, green energy is still likely to be the fastest growing manufacturing sector over the next 50 years, and this is the niche we need to take charge of. Fossil fuel energy is constantly becoming more scarce and expensive, and solar and wind power generation equipment is going to fill the needs of the developing third world because like cell phones, it requires much less infrastructure.
The point I was trying to make is that there is a good share of the population that needs a job if they are not going to be on public assistance, and a lot of those folks are not the type that are going to be among the innovators. One of my fears is that we have reached a point of efficiency that enables us to make what we need with far fewer people than we have. Part of whatever successful economy we are going to have has to have enough job opening- and real living wage jobs- for the population we have, or we are going to have a huge number of people on public assistance. We may need to rethink a lot of basic assumptions- 40 hr work week, etc.

There has been a lot of crowing in business reports about our ever increasing productivity numbers- production/hours worked. This seems to be largely a matter of people being laid off, but production levels maintained by working those left even harder. Good for the stockholder, not so much for employees, and worse for those laid off.

I'm not saying I have a solution, but I don't see how we have the job numbers we need without a strong/large manufacturing component.
It's lime the battles between sperm whales and giant squid half a mile below the surface of the ocean. Only it happens in the palm I your hand.- thndr

when I fall, I am still cold and wet, but much more stylishly dressed. as my hat disappears in the riffle- flybug.pa


"Sugar? No thank you Turkish, I'm sweet enough."

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by BigCliff » Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:23 am

Plow wrote:Read it again. We're not transforming the world the world is transforming us. If we had strong competent leadership who believed in the greatness of America it might be different story. Globalization is not about free trade, minimizing and limiting government involvement is.
I simply disagree, I think we're pulling the world along more than its pushing us.

I agree that minimizing and limiting governmental involvement in international commerce is beneficial to freeing trade, but stating that globalization is not about free trade is just crap.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Plow » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:00 am

BigCliff wrote: Ignoring AGW, green energy is still likely to be the fastest growing manufacturing sector over the next 50 years, and this is the niche we need to take charge of. Fossil fuel energy is constantly becoming more scarce and expensive, and solar and wind power generation equipment is going to fill the needs of the developing third world because like cell phones, it requires much less infrastructure.
Yea, green jobs might be booming but if each green job cost 2 jobs and a ton of investment capital to create we’re still in a hole. Inconvenient point I know but something we should consider.

Take a look at Spain and the problems they’ve had trying to go green.
The study, which was directed by an economics professor at Juan Carlos University of Madrid, found that every green job created by the Spanish government destroyed an average of 2.2 other jobs, and that only 1 in 10 were permanent.
link

So just how much power do you think the developing third world needs? If you’re talking about serious developing countries solar and wind are just too expensive and un-reliable. Serious wind generation still requires power lines not to mention the installation, support and maintenance cost (in a third world country).

If all you need is a few lights in a trinket makers hut solar might work. There are still collectors, batteries and electronics to support. I got a buddy who has a double E and he can barely keep his shit running.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Plow » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:05 am

BigCliff wrote:
Plow wrote:Read it again. We're not transforming the world the world is transforming us. If we had strong competent leadership who believed in the greatness of America it might be different story. Globalization is not about free trade, minimizing and limiting government involvement is.
I simply disagree, I think we're pulling the world along more than its pushing us.

I agree that minimizing and limiting governmental involvement in international commerce is beneficial to freeing trade, but stating that globalization is not about free trade is just crap.
Free trade is the sellable buzz-word being used but is it really the intent of this administration? I've seen enough of this administration's hope and change and have zero trust that they will do the right think.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by BigCliff » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:25 am

Plow wrote:
BigCliff wrote: Ignoring AGW, green energy is still likely to be the fastest growing manufacturing sector over the next 50 years, and this is the niche we need to take charge of. Fossil fuel energy is constantly becoming more scarce and expensive, and solar and wind power generation equipment is going to fill the needs of the developing third world because like cell phones, it requires much less infrastructure.
Yea, green jobs might be booming but if each green job cost 2 jobs and a ton of investment capital to create we’re still in a hole. Inconvenient point I know but something we should consider.

Take a look at Spain and the problems they’ve had trying to go green.
The study, which was directed by an economics professor at Juan Carlos University of Madrid, found that every green job created by the Spanish government destroyed an average of 2.2 other jobs, and that only 1 in 10 were permanent.
link

So just how much power do you think the developing third world needs? If you’re talking about serious developing countries solar and wind are just too expensive and un-reliable. Serious wind generation still requires power lines not to mention the installation, support and maintenance cost (in a third world country).

If all you need is a few lights in a trinket makers hut solar might work. There are still collectors, batteries and electronics to support. I got a buddy who has a double E and he can barely keep his shit running.
I'm not talking about government created jobs, though I think a well designed federal incentive system is both wise and necessary. I'm quite convinced that we can do green-jobs better than the Spanish, based on the fact that we still lead the world in innovation, productivity, product development, and ways to bring products to market.

I don't know how much power rural China and sub-Saharan Africa needs, but I'm sure they'd like a way to have 5% of the electricity the western world enjoys, and the devices it allows us to operate. Green power generation is still too expensive for now, but that's going to change. The equipment is going to experience adoption in bell-curve fashion, just like everything does, and the prices will drop way off just like what happened with fax machines, car phones, and flat tv's.

The wind turbines you're talking about, whose blades are transported via big rigs, aren't what is going to spread to the third world. Smaller turbines that are currently used to add power to one home here, or vertical axis turbines that could power a village http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9956965-54.html will work much better.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
Overcast
Posts: 1197
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:21 am
Location: On the mainland next to an Island

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Overcast » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:36 pm

They say the Danish build a bitch'n Wind Turbine.Jus say'n

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7nSB1SdVHqQ&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7nSB1SdVHqQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
The difference between sentiment and being sentimental is the following: Sentiment is when a driver swerves out of the way to avoid hitting a rabbit on the road. Being sentimental is when the same driver, when swerving away from the rabbit, hits a pedestrian.
~Frank Herbert~

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Plow » Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:34 am

BigCliff wrote:
I'm not talking about government created jobs, though I think a well designed federal incentive system is both wise and necessary. I'm quite convinced that we can do green-jobs better than the Spanish, based on the fact that we still lead the world in innovation, productivity, product development, and ways to bring products to market.
Where’d you come up with government jobs? Does that somehow dismiss the realism of 2 jobs lost for every one created? And how about ONLY 1 in 10 of those new jobs is permanent? That’s some serious suckage you’re dismissing.

You're right American business under a capitalist system leads the world in innovation, productivity, product development and delivering products (that people want). By the time this administration has run its course this will no longer be the case so don’t automatically think we can do better than Spain.

An even bigger stumbling block to success is that solar and wind generation is just not ready for prime time - too damn many shortcomings and too many hurdles to be successful.

If the left were serious about alternative energy they’d be talking about nuclear (fission and fusion).
I don't know how much power rural China and sub-Saharan Africa needs, but I'm sure they'd like a way to have 5% of the electricity the western world enjoys, and the devices it allows us to operate. Green power generation is still too expensive for now, but that's going to change. The equipment is going to experience adoption in bell-curve fashion, just like everything does, and the prices will drop way off just like what happened with fax machines, car phones, and flat tv's.

The wind turbines you're talking about, whose blades are transported via big rigs, aren't what is going to spread to the third world. Smaller turbines that are currently used to add power to one home here, or vertical axis turbines that could power a village http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9956965-54.html will work much better.
Bet those folks in rural China and sub-Saharan Africa would love electricity. We need to figure out who’s responsible and tell them to get on the ball. Last time I looked it was not in my area of responsibility.

That $5k windmill generator looks great but cost more than most folks who need it make in a lifetime. Since you’re so concerned take some of your money and go make a difference in their lives. You might even get on Oprah.

Thinking everything will somehow magically work out as planned without thinking is typical for you libs. With y'all its the thought not the result. If results were important you'd be conservative.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
Shufisher
Posts: 2342
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Disputed Territory, Texas

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by Shufisher » Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:56 am

Plow wrote: An even bigger stumbling block to success is that solar and wind generation is just not ready for prime time - too damn many shortcomings and too many hurdles to be successful.

Thinking everything will somehow magically work out as planned without thinking is typical for you libs. With y'all its the thought not the result. If results were important you'd be conservative.
There is also a tremendous double standard when it comes to wind energy...which is one reason I quoted your last paragraph...the other reason is cuz it's oh so true.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 99048.html
My shit stinks like a 3rd world country, but dammit, if I'm in Hood River, I'm not drinking Ranier! The Wandering Blues

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by BigCliff » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:15 pm

Plow wrote: Where’d you come up with government jobs? That Spanish program you linked to was based solely on government created jobs. I was commenting on what you posted.

You're right American business under a capitalist system leads the world in innovation, productivity, product development and delivering products (that people want). By the time this administration has run its course this will no longer be the case so don’t automatically think we can do better than Spain. It seems odd that you think this president who "can't accomplish anything" is going to be so remarkably effective at taking American capitalism to hell in a handbasket. Besides the fact that I don't see that happening, I think its impossible for any president.

An even bigger stumbling block to success is that solar and wind generation is just not ready for prime time - too damn many shortcomings and too many hurdles to be successful. I'm sorry to hear that you have so little faith in American innovation.

If the left were serious about alternative energy they’d be talking about nuclear (fission and fusion). Many are and the numbers are growing. The problem is that the current permitting process takes 30 years, and NIMBYism is rampant. The current commercial lending environment, combined with so many governments being completely out of funding makes near-term expansion of nuclear power daunting if not impossible.

Bet those folks in rural China and sub-Saharan Africa would love electricity. We need to figure out who’s responsible and tell them to get on the ball. Last time I looked it was not in my area of responsibility. I'm not talking about any supposed responsibility to those people, I'm talking about potential new customers and opportunity. You're welcome to think that we're going to continue our traditional GDP growth rate by selling the same stuff to the same folks, but I just don't see that working out.

That $5k windmill generator looks great but cost more than most folks who need it make in a lifetime. Since you’re so concerned take some of your money and go make a difference in their lives. You might even get on Oprah. Once again, its too expensive for now, but once adoption takes off that will change. You might refer back to this thing called the automobile that was only for rich people at first, but then came this guy named Henry...

Thinking everything will somehow magically work out as planned without thinking is typical for you libs. With y'all its the thought not the result. If results were important you'd be conservative. You're just not convinced that anything can work out until it does. While this might be the definition of conservative thought, its not exactly a way to foster innovation and improve the status quo. I simply reject the notion that the current pace of change means the world is going to hell in a handbasket because that long-popular notion continues to be wrong. Its also been quite effectively ignored by those wanting to make piles of money and improve people's lives in the process.
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
m.b.
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: U.S.-occupied Texas

Re: Globalization and Foreign Policy Realism

Post by m.b. » Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:24 pm

BigCliff wrote:
m.b. wrote:it's that globalism mentality that going to fucking kill this country.
You're right, increasing free trade and transforming the world's economy to function more like our own has to be awful.
that would be a good response if it was accurate.

instead, your boy and his congress are busting their asses to transform our economy to function more like the socialist economies around the world.
III

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests