The decline and eventual fall of the USA as world superpower?

[narveen]

No. That is the actual debt of my government. The amount of money it has borrowed from individuals, corporations, and other countries. That is a no-default, unsecured real debt. It borrowed this much money to do all the things it has wanted to do without asking permission of those who will be required to pay the interest on that debt, that is, in the most part, the middle income working Americans.

 

 

Edit to add: I won't question the rest of your data because I don't want to spend the time looking it up.

 

don't waste your time checking my data up. they are current.

 

your 17 trillion debt figure includes intra-governmental debt which is held by institutions like social security

those government institutions are not influenced by dangerous market forces banging on uncle sam's door to collect.

this is why japan can rack up public debt to over 200% of gdp and still perceived by the market as a save haven!

singapore's public debt is 100% of gdp and a bastion of economic stability in south east asia.

 

i won't discuss why the us is spending beyond it's means

because it's too complex an issue and it's no point fingering out scapegoats.

but if i have the mandate of heaven to straighten things out

i would trim the debt by cutting federal spending of our tax dollars as follows:

shutdown the whitehouse (us presidential duties assigned to a sitting state governor chosen by his peers)

trim down the military to purely a defense force (scrap the pentagon, the navy and shutdown all us bases abroad)

shut down the irs and implement a consumption tax

shutdown the department of justice and the fbi

shutdown all other federal departments, except homeland security and the nsa, and let states manage their own affairs

all social programs to be instituted and funded by respective states (if you want it, you pay for it)

 

and last but not least,

shutdown the department of state

our foreign policies have served to messed up the world

because we have been absolutely clueless and incapable of understanding other cultures

stay at home, mind our goddam business

and leave foreign contacts and relationships to us corporations operating abroad.

Edited July 15, 2013 by narveen

[narveen]

Debt for instance is always there for economies which work in the way that ours do.

 

i question that because it doesn't make sense.

an economic system that produces more than it consumes is net cash and has no debt

 

think rumplestiltskin spinning gold

[narveen]

It is obvious that you are beating the drum for the U.S. but it is time to take off the 'rose colored glasses' and face reality.

 

i am not beating the drum for the usa.

i am taking the rose colored glasses off those heaping one-sided criticisms on america

and getting them to face their own realities

to put things in perspective

 

they are acting like

either a bunch of beggars pissing on the door of a rich man, or

wealthy brats thinking it is chic identifying with hoodlums in the "hoods"

Edited July 15, 2013 by narveen

[narveen]

narveen,

 

ratios and stats and numbers can be arranged and viewed to support any perspective.

the way I sort this out - is to look at raw data, rather than debt to gdp, or debt to whatever.

 

yes, but your chart showing exponential debt growth is misleading on two counts,

one, if you stretch out the horizontal axis and compress the vertical axis, the debt growth rate wouldn't look as scary, and

two, you have not included in your graph the growth of the us economy over the years

percentage of debt to gdp gives a balanced view

because it shows how much you owe in relation to your income.

that's how your bank assesses your credit rating

 

finally, you compare how you're doing with the rest of the kids on the block

to see how they stack up against you.

so that when the debt collecting thug comes a'calling

you know he's going to cut them up first

while you skip out the backdoor to live another day

Edited July 15, 2013 by narveen

[rene]

but if i have the mandate of heaven to straighten things out

i would trim the debt by cutting federal spending of our tax dollars as follows:

shutdown the whitehouse (us presidential duties assigned to a sitting state governor chosen by his peers)

trim down the military to purely a defense force (scrap the pentagon, the navy and shutdown all us bases abroad)

shut down the irs and implement a consumption tax

shutdown the department of justice and the fbi

shutdown all other federal departments, except homeland security and the nsa, and let states manage their own affairs

all social programs to be instituted and funded by respective states (if you want it, you pay for it)

 

and last but not least,

shutdown the department of state

our foreign policies have served to messed up the world

because we have been absolutely clueless and incapable of understanding other cultures

stay at home, mind our goddam business

and leave foreign contacts and relationships to us corporations operating abroad.

 

I like it.

Have you determined yet how many federal employees would then be unemployed?

The extra military could be sent south...for border duty.

What would you then see the role of Congress being? same only smaller?

I'd keep the doj - but it would be a shadow of what it is. still necessary to represent fed in litigation cases.

[ion]

i won't discuss why the us is spending beyond it's means

because it's too complex an issue and it's no point fingering out scapegoats

Its because our government is a reflection of our society.

 

 

 

Debt for instance is always there for economies which work in the way that ours do.

If Im not mistaken, it cost the citezens of the USA 1 dollar 10 cents to put 1 dollar into circulation. It has something to do with the fact that we have to buy each dollar from the fed reserve. Does anyone know the deal with that or maybe Im way off?

[rene]

yes, but your chart showing exponential debt growth is misleading on two counts,

one, if you stretch out the horizontal axis and compress the vertical axis, the debt growth rate wouldn't look as scary,

 

Only to those who dont understand graphs. Stretch and squeeze all you want - the numbers dont change.

 

and

two, you have not included in your graph the growth of the us economy over the years

 

does it show the same rate of growth? doubling over the last 5 years?

 

percentage of debt to gdp gives a balanced view

because it shows how much you owe in relation to your income.

that's how your bank assesses your credit rating

 

finally, you compare how you're doing with the rest of the kids on the block

to see where how they stack up against you.

so that when the debt collecting thug comes a'calling

you know he's going to them cut up first

while you skip out the backdoor to live another day

 

yeah except no where to run to this time, bucky,

and why would the thug pass up the choicest chunk?

LOL

[narveen]

may i ask for a reality check?

everybody is sounding off like world class experts

never mind the professional job experience

is there anybody here with an mba in economics even?

 

just asking

[rene]

econ mba? not me. how about you, narveen?

[ralis]

may i ask for a reality check?

everybody is sounding off like world class experts

never mind the professional job experience

is there anybody here with an mba in economics even?

 

just asking

 

Do you have an MBA? You seem to be here to instruct, while assuming incorrectly that persons participating in this discussion haven't a clue. Please stop the condescending attitude and discuss the OP.

[narveen]

oh, a compardre

am glad you are not bullheaded

I like it.

Have you determined yet how many federal employees would then be unemployed?

 

a lot will have to find real jobs

and their ridiculous pensions need to be scrapped

 

The extra military could be sent south...for border duty.

 

the military could be assigned all kinds of cross-border duties so as to help in times of natural disasters

border patrol is appropriate

 

What would you then see the role of Congress being? same only smaller?

 

don't forget that each state's governmental set-up mirrors the federal government

my proposal practically scraps the federal government

as such the congress in washington has no role and should be scraped too

 

if you look at the world which is a grouping of nations

america should function as a grouping of states

each country is like a us state

there is no world government

what need is there for a national congress for the usa?

 

I'd keep the doj - but it would be a shadow of what it is. still necessary to represent fed in litigation cases.

 

why? why can't each arizonian or new yorker accepts the decision of its own state supreme court as final?

every state will have its own way of life

if folks in oregon want to have same sex marriage, it's their business

if folks in utah don't want abortion, it's their business.

if folks in wyoming want guns, it's their business.

if folks in new york want multi-culturalism, it's their business.

let no one mess with his neighbor's house.

 

switzerland is kind of neat in that way.

Edited July 15, 2013 by narveen

[narveen]

econ mba? not me. how about you, narveen?

 

i'm actually illiterate like most folks here

dropped out of college like steve jobs and bill gates

[ralis]

 

oh, a compardre

am glad you are not bullheaded

 

the military could be assigned all kinds of cross-border duties so as to help in times of natural disasters

border patrol is appropriate

 

 

don't forget that each state's governmental set-up mirrors the federal government

my proposal practically scraps the federal government

as such the congress in washington has no role and should be scraped too

 

if you look at the world which is a grouping of nations

america should function as a grouping of states

each country is like a us state

there is no world government

what need is there for a national congress for the usa?

 

 

why? why can't each arizonian or new yorker accept the decision of its own state supreme court as final?

every state will have its own way of life

if folks in oregon want to have same sex marriage, it's their business

if folks in utah don't want abortion, it's their business.

if folks in wyoming want guns, it's their business.

if folks in new york want multi-culturalism, it's their business.

let no one mess with his neighbor's house.

 

switzerland is kind of neat in that way.

 

Your delusional idea of states rights was thrown out before the Constitutional Convention. Read the Articles of Confederation for a brief reminder and the history of the problems the articles caused. The Civil War and 'states rights' is another place to refresh your memory. It amazes me how little history people know!

 

In your view each state will become a kingdom with a unitary rule such as kings?

 

http://americanhistory.about.com/od/civilwarmenu/a/cause_civil_war.htm

Edited July 15, 2013 by ralis

[ralis]

i'm actually illiterate like most folks here

dropped out of college like steve jobs and bill gates

 

Who are you referring to as illiterate here? Most folks? Illiterate in what way?

[narveen]

All empires must have resources and the U.S. is no different. Whether it was Rome or the British, resources were sought after as the empires expanded. The U.S. must maintain a bloated empire with a military watchdog.

 

the usa control no other nation except through free market forces.

america's resources are its creativity and entrepreneurial drive

it produces things that the whole world likes

it's america, and not china, that exports more by far

 

To claim that the U.S. is only a cultural empire is a simplistic point of view. The U.S. sets up and takes down regimes on a continuing basis. Whether the coups in S. America, Vietnam or supporting strongmen (Saddam Hussein) in the middle east, the U.S. has been involved in social and political affairs. Whether you believe it or not, the facts are written in the historical archives.

 

america's foreign policy is totally unnecessary and self-defeating

america was never suited to play world leader.

because she was incapable of articulating a coherent vision for world rule.

it's been a mess

 

The U.S. is becoming less of an economic force given the destruction of the middle class which in the past represented the largest per capita purchasing power in the world.

 

think global, pal

the paradigm has changed

american business has gone global

america's middle class is now in china and wherever they may be

 

american's had better buck up

life is going to get faster and harder

they can't hide behind social programs anymore

because there are no more borders to protect them

[rene]

don't forget that each state's governmental set-up mirrors the federal government

my proposal practically scraps the federal government

as such the congress in washington has no role and should be scraped too

if you look at the world which is a grouping of nations

america should function as a grouping of states

each country is like a us state

there is no world government

what need is there for a national congress for the usa?

 

Here's where we part ways, I guess.

Still need fed gov for a lot of practical reasons.

You want 50 different currencies to deal with?

You want 50 different sets of laws dealing with contracts? I assume you want to eliminate the UBC as well. Or maybe you don't want trade at all between the states... If Wyoming needs to sue South Dakota for breach of contract - where would they file their suit? The UN?? ahahahaha

 

You want basically 50 little countries not united by their commonalities for the most efficient distributions that are geographically dispersed? You want Texas and Oklahoma to hold hostage Iowa and Kansas over sale of refined petrochemicals?

 

That's fuckin nuts, all due respect.

 

Thought you were such a big fan of America?

 

I'm all for a smaller fed gov, and for the Fed not having any powers not spelled out in the Constitution - but there still should be a balance, imo. All State and no Fed, is no better than all Fed and no State.

 

 

why? why can't each arizonian or new yorker accepts the decision of its own state supreme court as final?

every state will have its own way of life

if folks in oregon want to have same sex marriage, it's their business

if folks in utah don't want abortion, it's their business.

if folks in wyoming want guns, it's their business.

if folks in new york want multi-culturalism, it's their business.

let no one mess with his neighbor's house.

 

switzerland is kind of neat in that way.

[ralis]

the usa control no other nation except through free market forces.

america's resources are its creativity and entrepreneurial drive

it produces things that the whole world likes

it's america, and not china, that exports more by far

 

 

america's foreign policy is totally unnecessary and self-defeating

america was never suited to play world leader.

because she was incapable of articulating a coherent vision for world rule.

it's been a mess

 

 

think global, pal

the paradigm has changed

american business has gone global

america's middle class is now in china and wherever they may be

 

american's had better buck up

life is going to get faster and harder

they can't hide behind social programs anymore

because there are no more borders to protect them

 

 

Don't refer to me as "pal". I am not interested in condescending remarks. I am acutely aware of the global economic climate and the so called 'global village'. I saw it coming in the 80's while taking some marketing classes for my degree. That does not preclude or excuse the corporate climate of turning the U.S. into a second rate country for the purposes of profit and greed!

Edited July 15, 2013 by ralis

[rene]

Ralis - before this all got derailed... I had a question for you in my post 216, and a follow up in 220. At your convenience, please, but only if you wish. Thanks.

[narveen]

Here's where we part ways, I guess.

 

not so quick.

if you want fiscal control, you must downsize your community to a controllable level

you can't have your cake and eat it too.

there will be issues

but you must decide which are things you want to give up.

 

Still need fed gov for a lot of practical reasons.

You want 50 different currencies to deal with?

 

that won't be necessary

we maintain the same federal reserve system

 

You want 50 different sets of laws dealing with contracts?

 

you see a problem with that?

if you want standardization, others will have to give up their personal freedoms

are you pro-life? gay? like marijuana?

 

I assume you want to eliminate the UBC as well. Or maybe you don't want trade at all between the states... If Wyoming needs to sue South Dakota for breach of contract - where would they file their suit? The UN?? ahahahaha

 

we will just have to learn to co-operate and live together without conflict

otherwise, it's back in the federal pentitentiary

with an ass as ceo and a 17 trillion dollar debt

 

You want basically 50 little countries not united by their commonalities for the most efficient distributions that are geographically dispersed? You want Texas and Oklahoma to hold hostage Iowa and Kansas over sale of refined petrochemicals?

 

you are arguing for a road to where we are right now

 

That's fuckin nuts, all due respect.

 

Thought you were such a big fan of America?

 

i am a big fan of whatever works

 

I'm all for a smaller fed gov, and for the Fed not having any powers not spelled out in the Constitution - but there still should be a balance, imo. All State and no Fed, is no better than all Fed and no State.

 

for your information, the federal government has grown way beyond its role as spelled out in the constitution.

if we trim it back the way i propose

it will be in accord with the intent and spirit of the constitution

and abolish the beast that piled up that 17 trillion dollar debt

[rene]

 

rene said:

You want 50 different sets of laws dealing with contracts?

you see a problem with that?

 

The fact that you don't, is astonishing.

 

warm regards

[narveen]

Don't refer to me as "pal". I am not interested in condescending remarks.

 

i thought we were supposed to be cordial in this forum.

perhaps you need to temper your perception of me as an american

and i should be cognizant of the possibility that not everyone i talk to is american

and adjust my demeanor, which may come across as condescending, accordingly.

i can do that because i do travel quite a bit

and have been to africa, south america, and asia

which country do you come from?

 

I am acutely aware of the global economic climate and the so called 'global village'. I saw it coming in the 80's while taking some marketing classes for my degree. That does not preclude or excuse the corporate climate of turning the U.S. into a second rate country for the purposes of profit and greed!

 

it's not called profit and greed

here in america, it's called economic viability

american corporations do not start up unless they are economically viable business enterprises

exxonmobil's net margin is only 5%

a kolkata street vendor can make 20% profit selling puri and dosai snacks.

Edited July 15, 2013 by narveen

[Marblehead]

Only problem, though, is it would take shutting the doors.

 

 

Are those part of the things that would "have to be done to get it started" ?

Yes, and all the rest you said. The doors would have to be shut both ways but for only a short start-up period, say 6 months. Then open competition after that with import taxes on products to reflect the difference in wages between various countries.

 

I'm not sure about the migrant workers though. I think it would be hard for many producers to get only Americans to do the work. I worked on a farm when I was young and that is very hard work for very little pay. If decent wages were paid for the work it would cause the cost of food products to rise dramatically. But perhaps with import tariffs and auto phase-out subsidies it could be done.

[narveen]

 

The fact that you don't, is astonishing.

 

warm regards

 

come on, rene,

let's not get alarmed over nothing.

 

law school curricula are not all that different from state to state

contract laws are basically the same, even internationally

at any rate, differences and terms are worked out by parties to the contract

and each side's lawyer go through every clause and iron them out

before the contracts are executed.

 

next question please.

[Marblehead]

don't waste your time checking my data up. they are current.

Okay. But I still say that it is irresponsible to be that far in debt.

[rene]

Yes, and all the rest you said. The doors would have to be shut both ways but for only a short start-up period, say 6 months. Then open competition after that with import taxes on products to reflect the difference in wages between various countries.

 

I'm not so sure that they would ever open back up. Consider the global turmoil if the US closed shop for even a month. Wonder what we'd find when we eventually peeked out.

 

I'm not sure about the migrant workers though. I think it would be hard for many producers to get only Americans to do the work. I worked on a farm when I was young and that is very hard work for very little pay. If decent wages were paid for the work it would cause the cost of food products to rise dramatically. But perhaps with import tariffs and auto phase-out subsidies it could be done.

 

There would be an over-supply of workers, initially. They'll crop pick and will be glad for the opportunity to not starve.

 

This is all fun and games conjecture, sure. Just keep in mind, though, what happens to the whole web even when you really really lightly tug on one strand....