Do you feel it's difficult to provide a modest middle class life today?

so then why so afraid to give us best example of capitalist/communist hybrid??

 

Sweden. It was actually working ok until the refugee crisis.

 

Nothing was working!! It was a typical European county. Europe has about 60% of our per capita income about like Arkansas our poorest state. And,they totally depend on American freedom for inventions and defense. Do you understand?

 

Given European countries have benefited economically from immigration, your far right wing obsession with immigration struggles to hit home!

 

I continue to believe the world and the USA are much too complex to be pigeonholed in one direction or another. We have myriad scenarios which require myriad solutions...not one stereotyped approach. And as always...it depends on what the goals might be at the moment...

 

Well, we know what made america the greatest industrial power in the world, and it wasn't slave labor globalism, but quite the contrary. But just common sense of our founders. Slave labor globalism does not create large middle classes as what the founders put into place.

Some common sense is rather simple and not at all complex. Common sense created history's largest middle class in america. Globalism did not. And cannot. Not rocket science.

 

It's the economic paradigm that's complex. To attempt change requires a decision to be made, be it right wingers crowing about corporate power or left wingers highlighting the efficiency of worker ownership.

Those that suggest 'a bit of this and a tad of that' are usually fork tongue types trying to manipulate the median voter.

 

slave labor globalism?? no one is a slave who takes a better job and is free to quit it for yet an even better job.
Did you see the common sense here?

 

Yes, the term slave labor is hyperbole, but it looks like slavery when the poor chinese had little choice and were sent to work in those factories. We even had to put up nets to keep them from jumping to their deaths. You remember? So, it smells of slavery, or the conditions of slavery even if they are paid wages.

A communist run nation is the perfect place to get really cheap labor. For their people have to do as they are told or suffer the consequences. You think that those people who jumped off of the top of factories, wanted to be there? ha ha. Apparently they were not free to leave and find another job, although changing factories when all are alike, is not exactly an improvement.

We have another source of slave labor in vietnam, and I hear they work cheaper than the chinese. Trump doing away with TPP did not end our MNCs exploiting those poor there for max profits. But at least the american people did not lose more sovereignty which came with TPP. And of course we would have lost even more jobs, since our people cannot work for 80 cents an hour and survive. But as long as we have dirt poor people in the world, our MNCs and banksters will send the jobs there. As long as congress and the president allows it. And they have no problem in allowing it. For all that matters is that our elites max out their profits, even if you have to gut our own economy to do it, leaving so many people with low wage, part time service sector work.

 

The USA would be 1/10th it's size and success if the global marketplace did not exist.

The 'founders' did not speak about 'middle class'?

One man's 'common sense' is another man's idiocy.

Myriad reasons for USA economic maturing...none of which was something called 'common sense'...

 

'Economic paradigm' and 'attempt change' and 'corporate power' and 'worker ownership' only exist in the moment...not stereotyped economic systems.

Regarding your 'bits and tads'...absolutely I prefer a hybrid providing two things; First, solutions to short term issues, and second, a balance of economic actions that provide something for all sides for the long term...

 

You cannot say that it would be 1/10 the size. But you decided to say it regarless. Is that what I can expect from you? ha ha

I did not say the founders spoke of a middle class. But they had enough sense and cared about their new nation, so that they put into place what eventually created history's largest middle class.

They were trying to build up a nation that did not have to depend upon france for uniforms and guns, or anything else for that matter. Or to depend upon any other nation for that matter. And their model created the american empire, and gave us the manufacturing base that was capable of winning a huge war. Protecting our own people from the poor of the world helped to create history's largest middle class. Globalism does not expand or create middle classes, it shrinks them, destroys them.

A nation, using its own citizens, to make what those citizens consume, is what the founders knew was very important, to the nation and her people and this is what created the empire and helped greatly in creating that middle class.

In short, the founders put the nation and her people above the self interests of the elites. For there is more to a nation than just its rich elites.

We have seen what the founders put into place, what it yielded over our history and we have seen what the newest scheme of the elites, globalism has done to america and her people. That you would choose what has hurt america and her non elites, while having to ignore the fact that globalism is not a middle class expanding economic model, nor could we have ever used it to create an empire nor could we have out produced our enemies using globalism....
The idiocy lies in choosing a model which cannot and does not produce what was produced in america using what our founders put into place.

From the big picture view, globalism does not and by its design produce what was produced by the system our founders put into place. America has never needed to export in order to have a viable economy, employing its own people in producing what is consumed. In fact, making what we consumed while being paid enough to have a disposable income is what created the largest consumer market in the world. Making our own consumption is in part what created the american dream. The american dream would never have arose under globalism, that is based upon maxing out profits for the top dogs, by being allowed to offshore production to nations that have large very poor populations who have to work for cents on the dollar. Not even be paid enough to buy most of those goods made for americans. In workiing conditions so bad that our MNCs had to put up nets to keep their employees from getting out of the misery by jumping to their deaths.

 

totally absurd of course!! free trade( globalism) between individuals or countries makes us all richer. Imagine if every person or country had to make everything he/it consumed. 1+1=2

 

Tony Blair said something very similar. Of course all that delivered is neoliberalism and a financial elite running amok

 

Boston Tea Party was about international trade. Jefferson wanted all farmers so that manufactured goods came from Europe. Why not read American History before you pretend to know about it.

 

thats was a goofy media left wing lie of course. suicide rate in USA was far higher than at Chinese factories. Do you understand.

 

Why don't you go back a couple hundred years and calculate the value of all US exports and imports realized as well as total foreign investments and operations within the USA as well as immigration policies and sales of US military products, etc. etc. and let us know what this global impact was?

The 'founders' did not create today's middle class? They had nothing to do with it.

I'd say you should thank the private sector.

I disagree.

There are over 7 billion consumers in the world and FYI the US only represents about 6% of them. Therefore...94% of consumer power lies outside of the USA. Further, most of this 94% are developing nations meaning their demands for goods and services will be relatively positive.

Our founders put into place the documents to govern the nation and these are modified as necessary over time. Capitalism and consumerism takes place in spite of government...

 

Good for Tony...more time is needed to realize how things turn out...there has always been 'financial elite' and I don't have a problem with this as long as society keeps them in check...

 

No, not good for Tony. The consequences have been spectacularly bad. That's the 'third way' myth for you

 

Forget Tony...a hybrid economic system works best in our complex and ever-changing world. However, only open-minded thinkers can conceive of hybrid solutions which is almost impossible for people to fathom...

 

Why? Tony said the same thing. He referred to a hybrid, eliminating Labour as a socialist party. He also referred to openness to solutions (e.g. PFI initiatives, integrating private and public sectors).

End result? Thatcher called him and New Labour her greatest triumph. Vocab such as openness and hybrid are really just excuses to give up on principles. It's those principles which generate real change!

 

Yes, that is not a complete misrepresentation of history. But it is a partial misrepresentation. An argument can be made that you are correct in saying that is what happened in poorer, undeveloped countries where a communist party seized state power. But the world learned from those mistakes and has mostly moved on. Communist parties are largely out of favor, and in fact, the strategy of seizing state power as the way to bring about socialism is also losing acceptance as in every case thus far it has not brought about socialism. It has brought about state capitalism. And in many cases that then turns into common capitalism. And the problems resume.

Today, capitalism is in deepening crisis around the world. Different ways of ending it are being examined since capitalism has proven to be unable to solve the problems it is creating. And a very appealing and growing answer is to create worker-owned, worker controlled businesses that operate cooperatively. That is an infant "socialism" as it ends private ownership of business for private profit. And it allows the problems capitalism created to be solved.

 

Granted capitalism is not gonna solve the problems it is creating. Yet I do not think it is going anywhere. I figure it is trending towards a huge poor working class, a tiny middle and a small number of very rich elites at the top. The current neoliberal capitalism being practiced which is dependent upon extremely low labor costs from poor people in the East is destroying our middle class and then throw into the mix the death knell, robotics and AI displacing much of a work force and you got a lethal virus that kills its host. Capitalism as we know it is toast. But what replaces it? I don't think worker controlled businesses will happen. The elites will not accept it.

I think we have a revolution ahead of us. For you cannot save a capitalism that needs hardly any of it consumers to have jobs to buy what AI and robots produce, which will be most of everything consumed. Removing the income for consumption from capitalism destroys it.

 

so then you oppose the liberal policies that shipped our jobs East? i.e., Liberal unions taxes regulations? and you oppose liberals letting in another 30 million illegals to take our jobs and drive down our wages still further? You love Trump??

 

yes a sure sign is that where it is practiced most you have have the highest growth rates. China for example just switched to Republican capitalism and instantly eliminated 40% of the entire planets poverty. Do you understand?