@Arjuna,
Arjuna;100118 wrote:I don't know what RMB is: could you explain? I think there's been talk of creating a global currency... like the EU did with the euro... seems like it was the Chinese who want it. More investigation is needed here, on my part.
RMB refers to: Renminbi, the currency of the People's Republic of China.
The point is, Arjuna, that, as we sit here today, there is no global currency. This is what traps the U.S. within an amount of debt that by all rights should utterly destroy us. The only reason the U.S. economy is still on its feet is due to the fact that the U.S.D. is the world's reserve currency. This is the heart of our debt trap. We are risking hyperinflation like the kind found in Zimbabwe today.
Arjuna;100118 wrote:
Yea, but the present debt started with the Vietnam war. I think that time period created a lot of short sightedness, because there was an apocolyptic vision clouding people's judgement: the eminent success off the USSR. They invisioned it as some sort of super productive bee-hive or something. They thought that a free society is inherently crippled by all the energy-wasting shenanigans that go with it. They saw the USSR as an amoral foe, unencumbered by the inner weakness of organic life. Obviously, they were seeing their own fear, not the actual USSR. Thusly they created a gigantic nuclear arsenal that nobody wants to use. In the process, they created radioactive waste and stored it in barrels. There's now hydrogen gas forming at the top of those barrels. Not good. As far as I know, we haven't even started research on what to do about it. The point is, we live with the legacy of a particularly insane period of human history: the 20th century. I think we're still trying to get our bearings. Good time for a global crisis, huh?
Very funny.
The situation today is a result of the decline of the manufacturing sector. The United States presently consumes more than we actually produce, unlike the Japanese and the Chinese who produce more (way more) than they consume. They are savers and we are big spenders. This is commonly referred to as the "global trading imbalance" or the new Breton Woods.
Now add in the free trade ideology which puts even more downward pressure on the manufacturing sector of the U.S. The corporations of the U.S. are sending jobs overseas and we are facing a 10% unemployment picture. There is a manic rush to offshore jobs in the U.S. which has been going on for over a decade now. Everything here is now finance related, we are a "service" economy. There is little of actual goods that we produce and this is the heart of matter. As the Chinese and the Japanese can well attest actual manufacturing production means real money!!! And as we can clearly see by the amount of debt we're in here in America the lack of manufacturing jobs means the opposite i.e. bankruptcy.
In 1965 the U.S. produced 95% of all of the clothing that it consumed. In 1985 it shrank to something like 60%. Today, in 2009 the United States produces a paltry 5% of all of the clothing that it uses. But that's not the full picture. The same trend has manifested itself across the board.
Arjuna;100118 wrote:
Well, when a mouse in a maze goes down a one-way street, he just turns around when he gets to the end. I know cultural turn-arounds are traumatic. I don't downplay the suffering involved, because that would be a betrayal.
I couldn't agree more. But you don't understand: the alternative to turning around means the status quo. Not turning around means to keep piling on the debt until we reach hyperinflation.
I think we should turn around and I know it will be painful. So we agree then, the United States must default on its debt no matter how 'painful' the process is. There is no moral alternative.
---------- Post added 10-27-2009 at 01:24 PM ----------
Aedes;100125 wrote:
Well, as a function of GDP our national debt has been considerably higher in the past, and we seemed to make it through that ok.
You are mistaken. The debt to GDP ratio has never been this high during peace time. It seems you aren't aware of the type of growth potential that awaited America in 1945 compared to the prospects today.
Aedes;100125 wrote:
I didn't say "America", I said cities, and this was cities by rather specific measures. Call me unreasonable, but suffrage, access to education, access to health services, access to legal protections, access to sanitation, life expectancy, and maternal and child mortality have all dramatically improved in American cities in the last 50-100 years. What is worse about that?
I'm not talking about the level of health care in the last 100 years, I'm tallking about the total decline in the American economy as represented by the debt.
I would agree the health care is greater now than ever in the past. But I would stipulate that the original causes for such a high standard have crumbled long ago and we are now at a kind of peak.
I had an old Neurologist who recently retired. He was an outstanding doctor. My PCP says he is the last of a certain breed; they don't come like that anymore. So I see a dark future in the health business myself, especially in the event of an economic metldown in the real economy like we are beginning to see with official U.S. unemployment at 9.8% and unofficial unemployment at 17% and expected to rise some more as we'll see on the 6th of November, 2009 when the monthly jobs data for October are released.