Helping Americans understand just how rich we are

@Cycloptichorn,

If they sell their dollars for local scrip, somebody has to be buying the dollars for local scrip. And then the buyer spends it on something American. Either way, it makes no difference whether you sell them to someone in America for American goods, or to someone abroad who will sell them to someone in America for American goods, or sell them to someone who'll sell them to someone who'll sell them to someone who .... Whatever you do, the dollar that goes around when you spend it, comes around to buy something American.

The logic underlying your argument for protectionism is a very old fallacy, debunked as far back as in David Hume's essay On the Balance of Trade (1755). It does not justify why I should care more for a poor person who has the same country's passport as I, and less for an equally poor person who has a different country's passport.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yaknow, one of the problems in this conversation is nobody is ever going to be able to live up to your purity ******* pony standards, Robert.

There are plenty of people who put humanity over nationality and don't share your attitudes. So spare me this nonsense, on this thread I can name several people who share my priorities.

Just because you put Americans over others doesn't mean others are as jingoistic.

Quote:

It ain't my fault that standards are worse in other countries and it's not my problem to fix it.

Nobody said it is. I just said you are disgustingly selfish for prioritizing American affluence over that of people who are suffering in ways you can't even stand to hear about.

Quote:

I give money and time to charity every year in order to try and help the situation, not because I have to or am responsible for them, but because I wish to. But I am hardly obligated to, and if that makes you want to call me names, all I can say is: who gives a ****?

I do. Isn't that obvious? If you don't give a **** bully for you, I find it disgusting and this is the attitude that made me post this thread.

Quote:

Right now we're the top dog. So was Rome, China and England in their day. Soon someone else will be the top dog. It's not our job to fix the whole ******* world while we're on top and nobody has any reason to be made to feel bad for not focusing on it.

Whatever, "top dog". Your smug sense of superiority just makes your nationalistic selfishness that much uglier.

Quote:

Policies designed to benefit our nation are not 'national selfishness.' Any more than your desire to pay low taxes is personal selfishness - wouldn't you agree?

No, my desire not to pay large amounts of taxes is not a financial motivation but a political and economic one of how I like a civic to be structured.

I simply do not subscribe to your politics as it regards to civic structure or taxation, but the taxation I have argued with you about never applies to me personally. I don't fall into those brackets, I argue against them in principle because I find your preferred taxation rates obscene.

But, again, this isn't a thread about your crazy tax rates. We have threads for that, you asked me to substantiate my position of government cuts and I did, and you never replied. Take the tax stuff there if you want to argue it, it has nothing to do with:

1) Whether Americans are more fortunate than the majority of the world.

2) Whether we could be less niggardly in our economic policies to spur more economic growth elsewhere where it is more needed.

2 Replies

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

And I don't think you're acknowledging that the improvements in the material lives of people working in sweatshops in "poor" countries has often been gained at the expense of the unskilled workers (who were not exactly comfortably off when they held those jobs) in "wealthy" countries.

I don't think Robert is ignoring that, although I agree his two-or-three-car analogy is exaggerated. The core of what he's saying is a point about how to prioritize material improvements. He's saying -- and I agree -- that the highest-priority material improvements are those for people who have the least to begin with. And these people are much more likely to live in poor countries rather than rich countries.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

But, again, this isn't a thread about your crazy tax rates. We have threads for that, you asked me to substantiate my position of government cuts and I did, and you never replied. Take the tax stuff there if you want to argue it, it has nothing to do with:

I didn't see that you had responded, but I'll respond to it now.

Quote:

1) Whether Americans are more fortunate than the majority of the world.

2) Whether we could be less niggardly in our economic policies to spur more economic growth elsewhere where it is more needed.

1 is perfectly true and I have never argued against this point. 2 is less true for a variety of reasons which I will outline in my next post.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

Oh for heaven's sake. That is not what it means to be extremely poor in a "wealthy" country at all.

I was responding to people talking about wealth distribution for the lower 90% of America and yes that is pretty much what the people they are talking about live like.

Quote:

And I don't think you're acknowledging that the improvements in the material lives of people working in sweatshops in "poor" countries has often been gained at the expense of the unskilled workers (who were not exactly comfortably off when they held those jobs) in "wealthy" countries.

I not only recognized it, I celebrated it. Remember? I'm GLAD they lost their jobs so that less fortunate people who are willing to do it for less gained jobs. Now more fortunate people in their area can lose their jobs for less fortunate ones to do it for less.

This is a process I celebrate, where the most needy compete on a level playing field and if jobs trend that way it makes me happy.

Quote:

You might think that's a fair enough trade off, but the genuinely wealthy have not been affected greatly by the loss of those jobs at all.

That isn't how I measure fair though. My life isn't about sticking it to the rich, I think you have me confused with Cyclo.

I think it's fair because they wouldn't get the job if they didn't need it more and weren't willing to do it for less. The economic benefits trend in the direction of greatest need in this scenario (unless the rich country erects barriers) and I am all for it.

I know it comes with growing pains, but it's still less pain than what it is replacing. I am for less overall pain, so I am happy with this outcome.

Quote:

It is the unskilled, former low income earners who have worn the brunt of most of the job losses. As I mentioned in my above post, many former workers in the manufacturing sector in my own country became the permanent unemployed.

Better them than the even more unfortunate. They won't starve to death, they'll be in heaven in comparison to the quality of life they are lifting others out of.

I wish them no ill, but if first-worlders are so concerned about them then they should help them instead of trying to begrudge the third world their piece of the pie.

0 Replies

So did anyone enter this thread and say that we actually DO need to buy more aircraft carriers?

I don't recall seeing any such posts.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

unless they, say, convert their dollars into the local scrip and spend them there. Which has been known to happen.

Oh, wait a minute -- did you mean places like Ecuador, where they have de facto established dollars as the local currency? That's nothing. When dollar bills are stashed away in Ecuadorian bank safes, or even circulating in Ecuador, they don't affect America at all. To the American economy, they're just green paper that America has printed and shipped there.

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

I brought up Poland not as an example of poverty, but as an example of wealth and income not being measured in pure dollars. I never said that Poland was impoverished, I said exactly the opposite.

Cut the quibbling already, you can't exchange rate and buying power away my point, it's still there huge as ever no matter how you cut it.

1) Americans are more fortunate than the majority of the world.

2) We could easily be less selfish in economic policy and make a huge difference for the quality of lives of people who need it more.

Dispute that. Your Poland example does nothing at all to address my point. It's just another red herring.

Quote:

Calm. the. ****. down.

No. I will continue to express open disgust for the attitudes that put spoiled Americans before starving and misery.

Quote:

I've only said that the poor in the USA are no less miserable.

This is ignorant enough to get me going. You don't know what misery is if you think this is true.

Quote:

So even if their numbers are smaller, they do exist. They aren't inherently fortunate by virtue of living in the USA.

Yes they are TKO! I was once on homeless on that American bench, and I was much more fortunate than most of the world because I was born with huge equity: American citizenship.

Just the lack of that barrier to entry to this economy is a fundamental advantage that is worth money (I bet you could get a couple grand for a fake marriage to the right person). The homeless guy in America is more fortunate than the homeless guy in India. He has access to much more public infrastructure (libraries, schools). He is in an economy with so much money that you just have to stick your hand out and catch some (might not be as much as you want but it's pretty hard to starve in America). He'll likely have to eat shitty Jack in the Box tacos at an undesirable frequency while the guy in India might resort to eating sewage.

You have no ******* idea what you are talking about if you want to equate the misery in America with the misery elsewhere. I'm not knocking the American poor, I've been almost as far down on that ladder as it goes and I have a hell of a lot more compassion for them and understanding about what it is like than I believe any of you guys do. But to compare them to the true misery out there is just plain ignorance. You guys don't even know what misery is and are splitting hairs about it when it's not even close.

Anyway, I'm off to Brazil now and Ill make sure to tell their unfortunate how lucky Diest TKO says they have it.

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

[ - and these are the same feelings that every country in the world shares, re: their wealth and self-interest.

Cycloptichorn

Cyclo has certainly a point here.
The main difference between Robert and the majority of us (and I gotta include myself) is that he is not nationalistic at all. He's a true citizen of the world and we are not.
I, for myself and generally speaking for there are cases in which this is not true, tend to have more sympathy for a suffering Mexican that for a suffering "alien". And I feel more for an earthquake victim in Haiti or Chile than for a just as human victim in China. The ones closest to me affect me the most.
So yes, Robert is moralizing, in a way.

Robert has certainly several other points.
Americans don't realize how rich they are in comparison with the rest of the world.
The majority of them usually watch their bellies and don't give a **** about the rest of the world. They honestly don't.
This is not an intelligent thing to do, if you are a member of the most powerful nation.
There's a lot of propaganda -both from the right and left- about how should the US intervene elsewhere, and is all wrong and hypocritical. The falsely progessive ecological blah-blah (in the middle of the oil spill) and the "protection" of the First World working class ( Marx would call them "worker aristocracy" ), as pharisaical ways of protectionism are among the most disgusting arguments that can be made, not to speak about the right wing idea of free trade, but with closed labor markets.
The US spends obscene amounts of money in its military. This resources would have better use elsewhere. The old military-industrial machine is still at work.

0 Replies

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

Why are were comparing the very poor & disadvantaged of one country with another, as if there's some virtue in being at the bottom of the barrel in a wealthy country compared to an underdeveloped one? It's a crap existence anywhere.

Robert and I agree, and we never said there's a virtue in being poor in wealthy countries. All we're saying is that most people living crap existences are living them in poor countries. Therefore, whenever rich-country citizens sincerely try to support poor people, they will inevitably tend to focus on the welfare of poor foreigners, not poor compatriots.

msolga wrote:

As if any of us have any control over the way governments (including those of "poor" countries) spend obscene amounts of money on stupid wars, as if any of us have any control about about the distribution of wealth in India (were poverty could be eradicated if the rights to obscene wealth by a few were not so entrenched ), as if ordinary people can have any control at all over the fall-out from the global recession ....

Fair enough, let's focus on our own governments, which we have at least some control over. And let's begin by telling them to stop sabotaging poor foreigners struggling to work themselves out of poverty. The way things stand now, our governments' customs officers take more tariff money away from the Third World than our state departments are giving them in foreign aid money. I find that utterly unconscionable.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

The scale of my eleemosynary activities has nothing at all to do with the merits of my argument, it's just an ad hominem argument that seeks to make it about me.

And while I have no interest in getting into details I will say that I have no regrets about my own generosity and my commitment to helping others.

You can try to paint me as the greedy one here if you want, but you don't understand my motivations very well if you do.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

Robert Gentel wrote:
There is no way you can cut it where the American existence is worse than the majority of the world.

Nobody is making this argument.

Then stop quibbling with stuff like Poland and splitting hairs over poverty. If you cede this that is just a red herring.

The point is simple:

1) Americans are a very fortunate group.

2) They could be less stingy with economic barriers they put in the way of others and help people who really need it.

How does Poland dispute that? Do you even dispute that? Beyond splitting hairs about poverty this is the basic point, we do well for ourselves and it wouldn't hurt us to put fewer obstacles (trade barriers and other protectionism) in the way of others.

We shouldn't begrudge the migrant worker so, we shouldn't nickel and dime developing economies (through unfair trade agreements) and we should be more ******* grateful for our lot in life and act less entitled.

If you don't dispute that then you might just object to my abrasive style, and that's cool, I do too sometimes.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

msolga wrote:

As if any of us have any control over the way governments (including those of "poor" countries) spend obscene amounts of money on stupid wars, as if any of us have any control about about the distribution of wealth in India (were poverty could be eradicated if the rights to obscene wealth by a few were not so entrenched )

msolga, enough stereotypes already! India has a better income distribution than the USA.
Gini coefficients:
Australia 30.5
India 36.8
USA 45

(On the image: countries in green have the most equal income distribution, countries in red have the most unequal)

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

I am all for sweatshops! Sweatshops bring people out of real poverty and real misery. Sweatshops are better than eating ****, sweatshops are better than living in the garbage dump.

Quote:

"MADE IN USA" SWEATSHOPS

...

Indentured Labor

Over 90% of garment industry jobs in the Marianas are held by foreign "guest workers," predominantly young women from China, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Thailand. With promises of high pay and quality work in the US, workers agree to repay recruitment fees from $2,000 to $7,000, trapping them in a state of indentured servitude. They often must sign "shadow contracts" waiving basic human rights, including the freedom to join unions, attend religious services, quit, or marry.

Poor Working/Living Conditions

In the last five years, contractors in Saipan have received more than 1,000 citations for violating US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards, many of which were characterized as capable of causing death or serious injury, including blocked exits, fire hazards, unsanitary restrooms, and exposed electrical wiring. The crowded, unsanitary factories and shanty-like housing compounds are in flagrant violation of federal law. The heat in some factories is so extreme it can cause workers to faint. Many live in a room with up to seven other people in inward-pointing, barbed-wire-enclosed barracks. Their movements are strictly supervised by guards, and they are subject to lockdowns or curfews. Complaints about the conditions are met with threats of termination, physical harm, and summary deportation.

http://sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/00-06%20SUM/madein.html

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

1) Americans are more fortunate than the majority of the world.

2) We could easily be less selfish in economic policy and make a huge difference for the quality of lives of people who need it more.

Agreed and agreed. Nobody has argued contrary.

Robert Gentel wrote:

Quote:
Calm. the. ****. down.

No. I will continue to express open disgust for the attitudes that put spoiled Americans before starving and misery.

This includes yourself RG. More to the point, I think this thread is about addressing your guilt by projecting it on others. You're taking this to a personal level which some how makes Cyclo's or my situation somehow different from yours.

Where is the A2K server hosted? The company that maintains it?

Robert Gentel wrote:

Quote:
So even if their numbers are smaller, they do exist. They aren't inherently fortunate by virtue of living in the USA.

Yes they are TKO! I was once on homeless on that American bench, and I was much more fortunate than most of the world because I was born with huge equity: American citizenship.

Were you the only person on a bench with an American citizenship?

Robert Gentel wrote:

You have no ******* idea what you are talking about if you want to equate the misery in America with the misery elsewhere. I'm not knocking the American poor, I've been almost as far down on that ladder as it goes and I have a hell of a lot more compassion for them and understanding about what it is like than I believe any of you guys do. But to compare them to the true misery out there is just plain ignorance. You guys don't even know what misery is and are splitting hairs about it when it's not even close.

Anyway, I'm off to Brazil now and Ill make sure to tell their unfortunate how lucky Diest TKO says they have it.

Thanks for the uninvitation to contribute here RG. It's clear you came to talk and not listen. Why even start a thread RG? You came to read your own words. Thanks for reminding us of your superior vantage point on this matter. Your message: Stop complaining. Well nobody here is complaining.

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest about the upward climb I've had to get where I am and how low I came from. I'm too damn smart to waste my time. I know exactly how fortunate I am. Exactly. I know exactly the privilege of nationality. I don't need your guilt exercise to help me see that we don't need another aircraft carrier or a fighter jet. I don't need your incensed moral outrage to feel outrage myself, but damn man, you've lost you're cool. This kind of posting is below you.

If you think you care more about the poor of the world because you can point fingers at ultra privileged Americans and point out how comfortable they live, cool. It's not against any rule to be hypocritical.

There doesn't seem to be anything left to discuss here. I've agreed with everything you've said with exemption for your sentiment regarding the poor in the USA. You will not be able to convince me that I should feel any more or less sympathy for a poor person based on their nationality. If that makes me ******* ignorant, shi kata ga nai.

T
K
Owatta

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

Bullshit. They'd trade places with the American poor in a heartbeat. Don't give me this nonsense.

Here's a simple litmus test:

Would the Americans trade places with them? NO!

Would they trade places with the Americans? YES!

They are less fortunate. Full stop.

I'd say that they'd only trade places because of the expectation of doing better. Many would not trade places with Cy's homeless man just to be poor in the USA.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

You could triple the economy of Haiti with what we are going to spend on our next aircraft carrier, but Americans complain about some Mexican getting a couple of bucks an hour out of our economy? Americans need perspective. We spend more money than the whole economy of Haiti on a boat to boost military superiority that is already completely dominant but complain about a guy making an honest buck out of our economy. That. Is. Not. Toward.

But we elected a president in 2008 who was going to reduce military spending (bring our boys home from war within six months!) and make many other drastic changes in relationships around the world (especially our so-called enemies) just so we wouldn't really need to fight wars. We would just all work together to bring about changes that could eliminate poverty across the world, improve education, bring jobs here, take jobs there.

Robert Gentel, while I think these are all noble words that you say, you have to be a little concerned about someone, some town, some country, who feels the world's problems are balanced on its/their shoulders. Isn't it more that each person as an individual be concerned about his/her family, friends and neighbors, that each town is concerned about its residents, and that each country be concerned about its citizens? Isn't it more important that each person or entity acts in a manner that would indicate care and responsibility for those without proper food, clothing, housing, jobs? Worrying about the entire world could drive any one individual a little crazy.

I've always had a job, I buy the food I eat, clothes I wear, my home. I also volunteer to assist those who don't have jobs and can't buy these things for themselves and their families. I donate cash to my church who assists these same people, and I also donate to The Humane Society because animals in this world have no other organizations to see they have a home and food to eat.

In other words, I do what I can. People like George Soros and Oprah donate entire buildings or schools to the poor of this world, and they also donate millions to people in America who are in need of not just food but costly operations, trips to see long-lost relatives, whatever the need. There's no limit to the number of people who give, give. And, the more they give the more money they make, they more they give to others. The more you give, the more comes back to you - pushed down and running over - if the giver doesn't try to control people they "help."

I agree with all of what you say. But, you need only do your share, encourage others to do their share. I do honestly think that the 1st world countries know the extent of their wealth, and share much with countries in trouble. I think most individuals share whatever wealth they may acquire.

We (the entire world?) are going through an extremely difficult time, and how we emerge from it will prove just what humanity is made of. But, I will always think we are, always have been, going forward -- never backwards. History proves that. Life is pointing out to us exactly where we should make changes! It's coming at us from so many directions that it makes one dizzy.

I also think Obama is learning, relearning. Not an easy task for him, or any leader of any country.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Sure, upward mobility is a huge part of quality of life, security and all that jazz. I certainly wasn't happy to be in America and poor, I was happy that I didn't have a barrier to that economic playing field while many of my peers did.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

What the **** does that have to do with whether it we can be more compassionate ourselves in our trade policies?

compassion isn't what's needed, just basic fairness and honesty; two things that are sorely absent, two things that just don't match up to the incessant propaganda.

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Quote:

I know exactly the privilege of nationality. I don't need your guilt exercise to help me see that we don't need another aircraft carrier or a fighter jet. I don't need your incensed moral outrage to feel outrage myself, but damn man, you've lost you're cool. This kind of posting is below you.

A-*******-men. I was really surprised to see this level of discourse from someone who is usually so dispassionate.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Helping Americans understand just how rich we are

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know