:thumbsup

and i'm an american! go figure.

not really, Stalin was probably a bigger cunt

how is that so, if the total russian losses for ww2 was 26 million?

Eh I guess i'm counting the 50 million Stalin killed.:1orglaugh

There's a difference between not wanting to go to war and not wanting to be the aggressor. The US elite wanted to go to war, but they didn't want to initiate it because there were too many protectionists with influence.... So they waited.

yes, and thats an estimate which includes civilian deaths

an unbelievably high number in itself but not 50-60 million

whats wrong with mainstream economics is that it hasn't accurately predicted a number of the critical events of the past 30 years, including specifically multiple bubbles, the systemic corruption that followed deregulation, and the recent loss of 12 trillion in individual wealth (using one commonly stated number, which I take from barry ritholtz), among dozens of other events. all of these events were defended by economists and pundits while they were happening, and have yet to be explained by said pundits.

so as far as I'm concerned, the entire edifice of economic theory is suspect.

and, more crucially, discussing theory doesn't accomplish anything real, that occurs in the actual economy and political and social systems.

so, I prefer to focus on real world examples and the complexities of realpolitik.

in your presentation above, you are arguing by assertion, you provide no evidence to support your assertions, you dont present your assertions particularly well, they are 80% or more editorial comment.

editorial is not argument, it is commentary.

now, like I said, I reject economic theory as the basis for real world problem solving, because it hasnt been predictive.

but if you want to restate your arguments so that it's not purely theoretical, using real world actual examples, who knows, we might get somewhere.

I think it's too bad you chose to defend theory rather than attacking my realpolitk suggestion.

I do not anticipate that you and I can debate particularly well. I'm not particularly interested in debating the things you care about, and I suspect you aren't interested in debating the things I care about. Unlike some, it's fairly hard to pull me into debating something I consider not relevant to my interests.

for example, this whole world war 2 debate, while vaguely interesting as a discussion of military history, is a digression into something that is an attempt to argue away an initial point argued early in this thread.

the argument went - "the US was once great, therefore you should repect us now and not say mean things about the US if you are from another country.".

what's interesting is, not one person commented on the inherent tragedy and ugly implications of that statement. that the US is like a old war hero or maybe an old footbal player, that once was famous and well thought of, but is now - well, what? trading on past glories?

that tragedy nobody wanted to touch.

hadn't heard it put that way, but that sounds right. :1orglaugh

while i abhor war, i've always been fascinated with military history, so much so, i have a degree in military history. while my focus was ancient military history, i took many courses on 20th century warfare.

in my experience, even scholars argue how/who won the war in europe. i tend to agree with the side that gives most of the credit to the russian army. fact is, they wiped out, what, 80-90% of the german forces. but it's not really accurate to discount the entire allies' contribution.

at least that is how i was taught.

Mainstream economics hasn't predicted, while classical and Austrian school economists have.

Not economic theory, but mainstream economic theory.

What I'm providing is fact, because it has happened before and just not in America. What "specifics" are you looking for?

Bullshit, I can name you 12 economics that predicted the .com bubble, as well as the financial/real estate crisis. The same economists predict an overall economic collapse and it's not based on theory, but rather common sense when you look at every economic indicator.


I have knowledge about a great deal of things. The problem with debating on this forum is that for every person who can debate, you'll get 100 who are complete morons and will troll the thread..


I must have missed that "argument" then. I'm not sure who'd be dumb enough to say something like that but on this forum, anything goes.

it's trendy to rag on the u.s.

especially from behind a keyboard.

I have no interest in debating theory alone, as I said. it's puffery, and lacks predictive power, as we have all so clearly seen with the dot com crash, the derivatives crash, the commodities bubbles, and the loss of real wealth this past decade.

and I didn't see anything in your comments but further defense of academic theory that hasn't predicted real world events.

I suspected you would retreat into your world of theory. I have no objection. you are useful to me as an example of your rhetorical type.

anytime you want to bring up real world proposals, go ahead. I liked your willlingness to state that we should stop outsourcing, altho you left the "how" theoretical.

---

as for the world war two argument, I am restating the content and subtext of billywatsons original argument.

This was his original statement of argument, mostly editorial. I extracted his main point, which is that the US acted like a great superpower in ww2, and his following points, which is that we should be respected because of that.

What free ride? You mean the part where we liberated the free world from tyranny and fascism?

That free ride?

If you think the Russians or the Japanese or the Germans would have won WWII they would have treated the rest of the world like the US has?

Look -- we ain't perfect. That's certain...but we're the best Super Power in the history of the world, which includes The Brits and The Spanish and The French.

Wait til it's over and China is running shit. Let's see how you're feeling then.

that we are now in tragic decline is the subtext of those points. you dont argue that you SHOULD be respected unless you know that you are already disprespected.

but I dont really care. nationalism is as nationalism does, and I'm willing to use nationalism as a tool in realpolitik.

It's not trendy at all. Trendy would imply that it's a "fad" of some sort. People have hated on the states for a long time now, and they will continue to for a long time. Have any of you stopped to consider for a moment that people hate on America because, well, you're not at all likable? As a nation you're loud, obnoxious, self-righteous, and aggressive, and that fact rubs people the wrong way? If the world were a highschool, the US is that asshole jock who nobody likes, but everybody deals with anyways because he might suckerpunch them in the face. The guy who is busy stuffing weak nerds into lockers, and telling anyone who questions him to fuck off or he'll go get his buddies and kick your ass too. :1orglaugh

I'm not sure how much economics you understand so unless you want me to get into the mechanics of the classical and Austrian theories and how they predicted the various crashes, I'm afraid all you're left with is theory.

I don't need to "retreat" into a world of theory, it's just a useful tool on a general forum. Theory wouldn't be argued on an economics board.

I said we should reduce outsourcing, and I thought the "how" was pretty self explanatory. Actually, I recall saying "the corporations will have to sacrifice profits for the unemployment rate to go down, and with unemployment rate going down, the efficiency and production of domestic goods will increase, as will our exports, as will consumer spending." I mean if you consider all of that "Theory", I'm not sure what you would consider as real life practicality.

---

Ok, that's ignorant, aside from the fact that China is running shit because they are.

thx for proving my point.

This is why I miss the 50's. Our country was loved world wide, and our citizens exuded a mostly unpretentious attitude. How far we have fallen. I blame the hippies.

Yes, I agree, altho I wouldn't have added the part about "even at the expense of corporate profits".

altho, I agree with your subtext, the multinational corporations would oppose most kinds of attempts to limit outsourcing. (using "outsourcing" as a term to cover the moving of the manufacturing and labor base out of the country.)

the virus-like directive to increase shareholder value would require most corporations to fight anything that prevented them from using cheaper non-US labor.

I'm curious as to HOW you would decrease outsourcing?

what political or economic action would have the power to decrease outsourcing?

It doesn't prove your point at all. Explain how that proves your point. The point you were trying to make is that is trendy and people do it for the simple sakes of doing it. You are wrong. People do it because you're not a likable nation at this point in time, and I can't see you becoming one in the foreseeable future either. American foreign policy is shit, and your country has rightfully earned the dislike of the international community. The inability of the American people to accept this point, and the expectation that everyone should just love America the great, proves my point more than anything I have said proves your own. :2 cents:

it was similar immediately after 9/11. then the wars began, and this current hater trend started.

Why not? If we reduce or stop outsourcing altogether, American workers aren't going to be working for 3rd world wages, so corporate profits will inevitably go down.


I agree, and this is destroying the American economy as a whole.

I'm not sure how, other than place a cap on the amount of outsourcing a company is allowed to do, while the rest of the jobs they would have had for outsourcing would go to Americans. Hell, give them a tax break or credit as incentive.

Sadly, a stimulus plan or tax credit.

you being a dick proved my point.

No, I think our country started getting backlash for Vietnam and the stupid hippies weren't helping. We got back up during Reagan's administration but then the Gulf War happened. But yea, the reaction to 9/11 ultimately did us in.

the HOW is absolutely NOT self explanatory.

it's the crux of the matter, and nobody has any idea how to make it happen, either politically, legally, or economically.

yes, that latter part is all theory. we don't currently have any mechanism to make the corporations sacrifice profits in order to get the unemployment to go down.

the conservative movement in particular lacks the tools to influence corporations. however, the liberals are just as helpless, as evidenced by the recent health care bill debacle.

let's see, how could one make the corporations do something for the good of the country, and against the directive to maximise shareholder value?

So if nobody has any idea how to make it happen, all you're left with is theory and if you're not in the business of debating theory, you might as well not debate anything. In fact, theory is all of us non politicians have because we don't have the power to do anything.

I disagree, the conservatives DO have the power, it's just that most of them are corporate bosses.

Oh, it would be political suicide, I'm just saying if one were to do that with the promise of tax credits or cash incentives, then we could do away with outsourcing.

you were prolly lurking around gfy pre-9/11 as i was. there wasn't anything like the current trend of gfy keyboard warrioring re: the u.s. before that here.

Nah dude I was 18. I was still busy playing with punters and proxies, getting into aol and playing with FDO.. Ah the good old days.

it's was pretty harsh around here but not about the u.s. like it is now.

don't get me wrong, we've got some shit to work out, and while i'm not advocating everyone should hug it out and love america, the fact is, the hate the u.s. bandwagon is rolling.

You know what I found interesting. The most self hating Americans you'll find would be liberal arts students or professors. The people that love and respect America happen to be the intelligent communities of other countries. This is by no means the rule but I have found it interesting.

you must live near a college campus! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Not anymore lol but when I went to college, that's what I found out. My college in particular was predominantly conservative. But I hung out with friends from other colleges and the liberal arts departments were a haven for modern hippies.

i graduated from UC berkeley '96. i know exactly what you are talking about. and i grew up in south texas, hah, it was an eye opener making that transition.

Where in South Texas? I've spent my whole life down here..

I do not care if anyone...other than Americans love America...I only care that they kiss my ass when I order them to...and not on the left cheek and not on the right cheek but right in the middle. Got it...sport.

i grew up in pasadena, went to j. frank dobie high school.

yourself?

How can you miss them if you weren't there to experience them? Think watching I Love Lucy while growing up makes you an expert.

I think you said somewhere that you majored in military history. I am surprised that Berkeley even has such a major.

Beaumont/Houston/Bellaire

yup. the history department there is, or was, pretty diversified, they thought it was liberal to offer those sorts of programs, not sure if it's still the same. but the focus was on ancient history, the 20th century warfare courses were filler and i enjoyed them immensely.

while the overall campus was liberal, it's primarily an academically focused school, lot's of asians studying biology, chem, or computer science.

:thumbsup good ole south texas, love ya blue! hahahahahah

What years were you attending? BTW...I attended L.A. State...and I would not recommend it. I accumulated around 232 units...but did not apply for a degree...as I never really found a major that I liked and did not need a degree for a job as I was self employed.

i was there 94-96, i transferred in from jr college. prop 186 at the time made it difficult for an average white guy like me to get in directly, so i had to go at it roundabout.

i hear ya about majors, i initially majored in computer science but did not like it at all, wasn't near as good at it as my colleagues and my grades were poor.

232 units, that sounds like enough to get a sheepskin eh.

The only reason why you americans think the the worldwide anti-u.s. sentiment is reasonably new is due to the internet, the anti-u.s. feelings have been going on for years but you guys have only found out about it in the last few years.

Yeah, a great way to rape the countries fighting for world freedom! Well fucking done america - the land of the free and the home of the mercenary.

That is pretty much true...as the U.S. has been the richest most powerful and most influential nation on the earth since the end of the Second World War...and that breeds resentment.

Or a great way to assist countries that would have been totally conquered with out it...such as England.

you have a reading comprehension problem.

i always get a kick outta gfy peeps generalizing the views of 300 million people and how we view things over years and years.

It wasn't really assiting now was it? Britain had no choice to agree to a deal that helped destroy the British Empire, almost broke the British economy more than once after the war years to such a point that the UK even considered applying to become a us state and was only paid back in full a couple of years back. Thats assisting?

Look at it this way. IF Britain fell to the Nazis then you guys could well have been conquered too, Germany would only be fighting on one front (the east) and america would have lost the best (and possibly the only practical) landing point to mainland europe but Germany had plenty of allies in Southern America to launch an attack after dealing or comming to a truce with Russia

a great book on russia, it's role in ww2, detailed information on the lend-lease program and how it benefited russia is "russia's war" by richard overy.

in the book, he states that stalin and zhukov both claimed to other high level russian officers that with out lend-lease aid they could not have beaten Germany.

the lions share of trains, rail road track, aviation fuel, and transport vehicles on the eastern front and virtually all of the radio equipment used was from the lend-lease program.