Did we trade a real economy for a fake? - Page 5 - E46Fanatics E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-21-2016, 11:49 PM   #81
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 851
My Ride: 2015 Chevy SS
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta View Post
what about all of us pull an obama and go for a beer...i'm buying.
In. I'd buy jesse a twisted tea.
__________________

Present
2015 Chevrolet SS
Past
2011 BMW 335d, 2011 BMW 135i, 2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
evolved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 12:03 AM   #82
mistrzmiasta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,002
My Ride: GLK350,ML63, Duc1098
who's jesse , she sounds cute. bring her.
mistrzmiasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 08:42 AM   #83
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolved View Post
In. I'd buy jesse a twisted tea.
Tea for me!
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 09:09 AM   #84
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolved View Post
You post things from Breitbart and blogs from the alt right bowels of the internet to support your stances, and then ignore data that doesn't jive with what you already think often times labeling it as untrue, or doctored with little or no proof. Get a grip.

You're refusal to look at the broader picture, and consider other data points that don't confirm your bias' make your faux-bravado completely see through. Look back, I wasn't the one who felt the need to bring out the ruler. It's fitting for you, though, so I shouldn't be surprised.



Of course. Please tell me more about my voting record for local issues. Again, I'm not sure who "my people" are. But please, point me to my post where I'm saying the economy is perfect and going gang busters. Again, this goes back to the easy targets.
That's total BS, I'm referring to established economic minds and I just posted an email from the highest order of the Clinton campaign. You know, the smartest people in the room. Regardless of that, my argument is based in sound economic theory.

We are hollowing out the middle class, and it is going to bite us in the ass. Sure, we have a rising market and that is great for retirement accounts and corporate gains. I've already noted that.

It seems to be that the biggest plus to this "hemispheric" market (for the domestic citizen) is cheap consumer goods. Sure, it's great to get cheap things cheaper but at the end of the day what's the difference if wages are stagnant and inflation continues (albeit, trending fairly low lately)? You're in the same spot at the end, and now you have to deal with having to buy a $500,000 house just to be average. Enjoy that new wok, though!

You've always said that we did not lose many jobs due to these deals. You've also said that these jobs would have been lost to automation. I could not disagree more.

Every American job in Mexico is a job lost. If it was going to be lost to automation they wouldn't have people still doing it. Furthermore, the fact that we are ramping up immigration from all over the world (mostly south of the border and the middle east) we are flooding out own labor market and further diluting the wages of those jobs that remain. It's a compound problem.

Free trade is supposed to be the free exchange of goods between nations. No tariffs or additional taxes, that's textbook free trade. As I pointed out earlier, we have carefully crafted sweetheart deals that only serve to bolster politicians and select companies that have overseas capacities. It is never good for the government to be in the business of creating roadblocks to competition, and we are in the midst of another huge one.

Additionally, we are under no obligation to try to build another country's middle class. Do you think the Patriots should have to send their trainers to the Jets' facility to make them more competitive? The notion is ludicrous. Not only does it compound pollution issues, it naturally makes our own country less competitive. The last thing our government should be doing it lessening our standing in the world while raising another country's. One could argue that it is treasonous. I will concede to a thought that I had, though, which was that possibly it could lead to less illegal immigration. This does not seem to be the case, however, as working class folks aren't the ones who are sneaking over here. In essence, we are feeding their middle class and taking on their dregs. That's a lose-lose for America.

The notion of free trade is not "let American companies set up shop abroad to skirt our environmental, labor and tax laws and sell the products back to the American people on the cheap". If Ford wants to build everything in Mexico, then go be a Mexican company and lose the advantages of being an American company. I really feel like you've missed this point, that the companies involved with these deals are really looking to skirt the very laws that they've supported.

It's more of the same "for thee, not me" crap that the people are rebelling against.

At the end of the day, if you add up everything it may technically say that a deal like NAFTA "helped" America more than hurt it. That, however, does not tell the entire story. Studies we've already discussed have shown that the middle class is dwindling, while the upper class and lower class are growing (even if upper class is outpacing lower class, which it is). Is this the best situation for America, long-term? I've never been a proponent of an income inequality argument, but I do believe that if the country basically becomes only rich and poor we're in trouble. It's happening on Long Island now, basically turning into serfs and lords.

http://libn.com/2016/10/13/li-middle...emes-increase/
LI middle class shrinks as extremes increase

and elsewhere

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...re-in-america/
The middle class is shrinking just about everywhere in America

Food for thought.
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 11:27 AM   #85
VaderDave
Invictus
 
VaderDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: El Dorado Hills, CA
Posts: 12,055
My Ride: 330CiC ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta View Post
i'm also divorcing my wife because i got 3 models slobbing on my cock currently and it's a distraction.
Are you really getting divorced, though?
VaderDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 07:56 AM   #86
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 4,907
My Ride: E46 M3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
I don't need targets, I know what I'm talking about. I'm just as credible, if not more, than you on this subject.
Ahahaha
__________________
Quote:
“But as I look overall at the capitalist economies, there are a lot of good things doing, and I think you can tune the tax parameters and get way more equity and get some additional government services and still be in the same basic framework.”
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 09:02 AM   #87
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pingpong, NK
Posts: 631
My Ride: A car
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta View Post
i got a **** ton of money which makes me more qualified to talk about economics and finance.....i'm in a benzino and not some glorified nissan or an excuse for a jeep.....so both of you shut the fvck up because i also drink protein shakes and bench 405...once but still.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta View Post
i'm also divorcing my wife because i got 3 models slobbing on my cock currently and it's a distraction.

Sounds like you will be out of a **** ton of money in the near future.




Quote:
Originally Posted by evolved View Post


I guess I know who all of this anonymous linkedin profile views are now


AoG is a fan.

Last edited by badfast; 10-23-2016 at 09:07 AM.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 09:42 AM   #88
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post
Ahahaha


Care to weigh in?
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 12:33 PM   #89
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 4,907
My Ride: E46 M3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post


Care to weigh in?
Sure

























Ahahaha
__________________
Quote:
“But as I look overall at the capitalist economies, there are a lot of good things doing, and I think you can tune the tax parameters and get way more equity and get some additional government services and still be in the same basic framework.”
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 06:04 PM   #90
Rhumb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 148
My Ride: 2001 M3 Coupe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
That's total BS, I'm referring to established economic minds and I just posted an email from the highest order of the Clinton campaign. You know, the smartest people in the room. Regardless of that, my argument is based in sound economic theory.

We are hollowing out the middle class, and it is going to bite us in the ass. Sure, we have a rising market and that is great for retirement accounts and corporate gains. I've already noted that.

It seems to be that the biggest plus to this "hemispheric" market (for the domestic citizen) is cheap consumer goods. Sure, it's great to get cheap things cheaper but at the end of the day what's the difference if wages are stagnant and inflation continues (albeit, trending fairly low lately)? You're in the same spot at the end, and now you have to deal with having to buy a $500,000 house just to be average. Enjoy that new wok, though!

You've always said that we did not lose many jobs due to these deals. You've also said that these jobs would have been lost to automation. I could not disagree more.

Every American job in Mexico is a job lost. If it was going to be lost to automation they wouldn't have people still doing it. Furthermore, the fact that we are ramping up immigration from all over the world (mostly south of the border and the middle east) we are flooding out own labor market and further diluting the wages of those jobs that remain. It's a compound problem.

Free trade is supposed to be the free exchange of goods between nations. No tariffs or additional taxes, that's textbook free trade. As I pointed out earlier, we have carefully crafted sweetheart deals that only serve to bolster politicians and select companies that have overseas capacities. It is never good for the government to be in the business of creating roadblocks to competition, and we are in the midst of another huge one.

Additionally, we are under no obligation to try to build another country's middle class. Do you think the Patriots should have to send their trainers to the Jets' facility to make them more competitive? The notion is ludicrous. Not only does it compound pollution issues, it naturally makes our own country less competitive. The last thing our government should be doing it lessening our standing in the world while raising another country's. One could argue that it is treasonous. I will concede to a thought that I had, though, which was that possibly it could lead to less illegal immigration. This does not seem to be the case, however, as working class folks aren't the ones who are sneaking over here. In essence, we are feeding their middle class and taking on their dregs. That's a lose-lose for America.

The notion of free trade is not "let American companies set up shop abroad to skirt our environmental, labor and tax laws and sell the products back to the American people on the cheap". If Ford wants to build everything in Mexico, then go be a Mexican company and lose the advantages of being an American company. I really feel like you've missed this point, that the companies involved with these deals are really looking to skirt the very laws that they've supported.

It's more of the same "for thee, not me" crap that the people are rebelling against.

At the end of the day, if you add up everything it may technically say that a deal like NAFTA "helped" America more than hurt it. That, however, does not tell the entire story. Studies we've already discussed have shown that the middle class is dwindling, while the upper class and lower class are growing (even if upper class is outpacing lower class, which it is). Is this the best situation for America, long-term? I've never been a proponent of an income inequality argument, but I do believe that if the country basically becomes only rich and poor we're in trouble. It's happening on Long Island now, basically turning into serfs and lords.

http://libn.com/2016/10/13/li-middle...emes-increase/
LI middle class shrinks as extremes increase

and elsewhere

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...re-in-america/
The middle class is shrinking just about everywhere in America

Food for thought.
Bernie approves this message (mostly).
Rhumb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 07:41 PM   #91
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pingpong, NK
Posts: 631
My Ride: A car
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post
Sure



Ahahaha
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 10:45 PM   #92
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 View Post
Sure

























Ahahaha
If you're not going to participate then keep to yourself
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 10:45 PM   #93
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhumb View Post
Bernie approves this message (mostly).
Bernie and I just disagree on the cure
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 11:23 AM   #94
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 851
My Ride: 2015 Chevy SS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
That's total BS, I'm referring to established economic minds and I just posted an email from the highest order of the Clinton campaign. You know, the smartest people in the room. Regardless of that, my argument is based in sound economic theory.

We are hollowing out the middle class, and it is going to bite us in the ass. Sure, we have a rising market and that is great for retirement accounts and corporate gains. I've already noted that.

It seems to be that the biggest plus to this "hemispheric" market (for the domestic citizen) is cheap consumer goods. Sure, it's great to get cheap things cheaper but at the end of the day what's the difference if wages are stagnant and inflation continues (albeit, trending fairly low lately)? You're in the same spot at the end, and now you have to deal with having to buy a $500,000 house just to be average. Enjoy that new wok, though!

You've always said that we did not lose many jobs due to these deals. You've also said that these jobs would have been lost to automation. I could not disagree more.

Every American job in Mexico is a job lost. If it was going to be lost to automation they wouldn't have people still doing it. Furthermore, the fact that we are ramping up immigration from all over the world (mostly south of the border and the middle east) we are flooding out own labor market and further diluting the wages of those jobs that remain. It's a compound problem.

Free trade is supposed to be the free exchange of goods between nations. No tariffs or additional taxes, that's textbook free trade. As I pointed out earlier, we have carefully crafted sweetheart deals that only serve to bolster politicians and select companies that have overseas capacities. It is never good for the government to be in the business of creating roadblocks to competition, and we are in the midst of another huge one.

Additionally, we are under no obligation to try to build another country's middle class. Do you think the Patriots should have to send their trainers to the Jets' facility to make them more competitive? The notion is ludicrous. Not only does it compound pollution issues, it naturally makes our own country less competitive. The last thing our government should be doing it lessening our standing in the world while raising another country's. One could argue that it is treasonous. I will concede to a thought that I had, though, which was that possibly it could lead to less illegal immigration. This does not seem to be the case, however, as working class folks aren't the ones who are sneaking over here. In essence, we are feeding their middle class and taking on their dregs. That's a lose-lose for America.

The notion of free trade is not "let American companies set up shop abroad to skirt our environmental, labor and tax laws and sell the products back to the American people on the cheap". If Ford wants to build everything in Mexico, then go be a Mexican company and lose the advantages of being an American company. I really feel like you've missed this point, that the companies involved with these deals are really looking to skirt the very laws that they've supported.

It's more of the same "for thee, not me" crap that the people are rebelling against.

At the end of the day, if you add up everything it may technically say that a deal like NAFTA "helped" America more than hurt it. That, however, does not tell the entire story. Studies we've already discussed have shown that the middle class is dwindling, while the upper class and lower class are growing (even if upper class is outpacing lower class, which it is). Is this the best situation for America, long-term? I've never been a proponent of an income inequality argument, but I do believe that if the country basically becomes only rich and poor we're in trouble. It's happening on Long Island now, basically turning into serfs and lords.

http://libn.com/2016/10/13/li-middle...emes-increase/
LI middle class shrinks as extremes increase

and elsewhere

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...re-in-america/
The middle class is shrinking just about everywhere in America

Food for thought.

We've gone back and forth on this since the inception of this thread, and in others. I'm not saying all of your sources are questionable, but many of them are simple talking points and opinion articles. LFPR, for instance...you refuse to believe the main cause in the face of the evidence. In any event, What I find particularly interesting is that in the past (>1 year ago, if I recall) you thought the notion of growing economic disparity was ridiculous, but here you seem to think it's a major issue.

Another issue that you and I just fundamentally disagree on is the US jobs/Mexico thing. They are a company based here, but sell globally. They are not obligated to keep jobs here, and in most cases it is to their economic interest to build things outside of our country (supply chain, transport costs, etc.). With,or without trade deals, they also have an interest in maintaining operations in foreign countries because it helps their brand in that specific country.

Even if we assume, per your prior link, that we "lost" 700,000 jobs over the past 20ish years of NAFTA, that is a drop in the bucket. That amounts to several months of new jobs created, or stated differently, less than 4/10th's of a percent of the labor force.

You and I largely agree, however, on the shrinking middle class....where we diverge is largely the cause and somewhat on the solution. I am of the opinion that income/wealth disparity will become a huge issue in this country (if we do nothing). I do not think NAFTA created it, and I do not think going full protectionist/Trump is the answer, either, because his plans would further degrade the middle class. Another big issue that I do not think has been brought up is that with the huge drop in government jobs, both Federal and State, we have seen a lot of previously reliable middle class jobs dry up. Mass incarceration doesn't help, either.

Corporate tax reform, along with individual tax reform would help them tremendously. Corporate tax reform would incentivize corporations to bring funds back here, and give them a reason to expand. It would also lower the barrier of uncertainty and cash sitting on the sidelines, of which we have a historical glut of that going on right now. For the individual tax side of things, upper and lower class taxes, effectively, have gone down over the past 30+ years, whereas the middle class figures have stayed the same.
__________________

Present
2015 Chevrolet SS
Past
2011 BMW 335d, 2011 BMW 135i, 2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
evolved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 03:45 PM   #95
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Tax reform is absolutely necessary, the middle class has had a boot to its neck for far too long. I don't have a problem with income disparity, it is natural. I have a problem with government and select corporations meddling with the free market.

Disparity does not matter if middle class wages are strong and we have legit jobs. We can't risk losing the middle class as a stepping stone, which I fear we are nearing.
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 07:12 PM   #96
Stankia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Anywhere in an hour
Posts: 63
My Ride: Germans
With congress like that one can only dream of tax reform, even with a Republican president.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Stankia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 07:46 PM   #97
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankia View Post
With congress like that one can only dream of tax reform, even with a Republican president.
That's because both parties are on the same team and you're the opponent
__________________
“The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything,” - Andrew Breitbart
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 07:48 PM   #98
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 851
My Ride: 2015 Chevy SS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankia View Post
With congress like that one can only dream of tax reform, even with a Republican president.
Corporate tax reform is actually being considered by both parties. Hopefully something can get done next year.
__________________

Present
2015 Chevrolet SS
Past
2011 BMW 335d, 2011 BMW 135i, 2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
evolved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2016, 02:23 PM   #99
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 851
My Ride: 2015 Chevy SS
Excellent article that has some relevance, here. I don't feel the need to start a new thread for every little piece of info that I find, unlike some people

It does a good job of explaining why the growth of the so-called Golden Era is not to be expected as the norm.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-...ore-1476458742

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Levinson in WSJ
The U.S. presidential candidates have made the usual pile of promises, none more predictable than their pledge to make the U.S. economy grow faster. With the economy struggling to expand at 2% a year, they would have us believe that 3%, 4% or even 5% growth is within reach.

But of all the promises uttered by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton over the course of this disheartening campaign, none will be tougher to keep. Whoever sits in the Oval Office next year will swiftly find that faster productivity growth-the key to faster economic growth-isn't something a president can decree. It might be wiser to accept the truth: The U.S. economy isn't behaving badly. It is just being ordinary.

Historically, boom times are the exception, not the norm. That isn't true just in America. Over the past two centuries, per capita incomes in all advanced economies, from Sweden to Japan, have grown at compound rates of around 1.5% to 2% a year. Some memorable years were much better, of course, and many forgettable years were much worse. But these distinctly non-euphoric averages mean that most of the time, over the long sweep of history, people's incomes typically take about 40 years to double.

That is still significant progress. Looking back over an 80-year lifespan, a typical person in a wealthy country would have seen his or her annual income quadruple. But looking from one year to the next, the improvements in living standards that come from higher incomes are glacial. The data may show that life is getting better, but average families feel no reason to break out the champagne.

Today, that is no longer good enough. Americans expect the economy to be buoyant, not boring. Yet this expectation is shaped not by prosaic economic realities but by a most unusual period in history: the quarter-century that began in the ashes of World War II, when the world economy performed better than at any time before or since.

The victory of the Allies in 1945 was followed by economic chaos. In 1946, France's farms could produce only 60% as much as they did before the war; many of Germany's remaining factories were carted off to the Soviet Union as wartime reparations; and anger over price and wage controls-imposed during the war to stanch inflation and channel resources into critical industries-brought strikes across Europe, North America and Japan. Japan and most European countries couldn't import coal for power plants and grain to feed their people. The future looked bleak.



And then, in the first half of 1948, the fever broke. In January, U.S. officials administering occupied Japan announced a new policy, the "reverse course," which emphasized rebuilding the economy rather than exacting reparations. In April, President Harry Truman signed the Marshall Plan. In June, U.S., British and French military authorities in occupied Germany proclaimed a new currency, the deutsche mark, ending the Soviet Union's efforts to cripple the German economy.

During the same months, the Soviets lowered the Iron Curtain across Europe, destroying democracy in Czechoslovakia and risking nuclear war by blocking road access from western Germany to Berlin. By literally fencing themselves off and thereby limiting their ability to interfere with the Western economies' resurgence, the Soviets and their captive allies made it easier for the rest of the world to grow.

It did more than just grow. It leapt. The quarter-century from 1948 to 1973 was the most striking stretch of economic advance in human history. In the span of a single generation, hundreds of millions of people were lifted from penury to unimagined riches.

At the start of this extraordinary time, 2 million mules still plowed furrows on U.S. farms, Spanish homemakers needed ration books to buy olive oil, and in Tokyo, an average of three people had to cook, eat, relax and sleep in an area the size of a parking space. Within a few years, tens of millions of families had bought their own homes, high-school education had become universal, and a raft of government social programs had created an unprecedented sense of financial security.

People who had thought themselves condemned to be sharecroppers in the Alabama Cotton Belt or day laborers in the boot heel of Italy found opportunities they could never have imagined. The French called this period les trente glorieuses, the 30 glorious years. Germans spoke of the Wirtschaftswunder, the economic miracle, while the Japanese, more modestly, referred to "the era of high economic growth." In the English-speaking countries, it has more commonly been called the Golden Age.

The Golden Age was the first sustained period of economic growth in most countries since the 1920s. But it was built on far more than just pent-up demand and the stimulus of the postwar baby boom. Unprecedented productivity growth around the world made the Golden Age possible. In the 25 years that ended in 1973, the amount produced in an hour of work roughly doubled in the U.S. and Canada, tripled in Europe and quintupled in Japan.

Many factors played a role in this achievement. The workforce everywhere became vastly more educated. As millions of laborers shifted from tending sheep and hoeing potatoes to working in factories and construction sites, they could create far more economic value. New motorways boosted productivity in the transportation sector by letting truck drivers cover longer distances with larger vehicles. Faster ground transportation made it practical, in turn, for farms and factories to expand to sell not just locally but regionally or nationally, abandoning craft methods in favor of machinery that could produce more goods at lower cost. Six rounds of tariff reductions brought a massive increase in cross-border trade, putting even stronger competitive pressure on manufacturers to become more efficient.

Above all, technological innovation helped to create new products and offered better ways for workers to do their jobs. To take but one example: In the late 1940s, telephones were still rare and costly in Europe and Japan, but by the early 1970s, they were ubiquitous.

Economic performances that at first seemed miraculous were soon seen as normal. The boom went on year after year. Australia, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Sweden-all enjoyed a quarter-century with only the briefest of economic doldrums.

Unemployment, for all practical purposes, was nonexistent. Economic volatility seemed to have been consigned to the dustbin of history. And with experts such as Walter Heller, the head of the Council of Economic Advisers under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, and Karl Schiller, the West German economy minister from 1966 to 1972, telling the public that wise government management had made recession a thing of the past, there was every reason to expect the good times to continue.

And then, on Oct. 6, 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel, setting off the Yom Kippur War. Arab members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries showed their support by doubling the price of oil and cutting off exports to the Netherlands, Portugal, the U.S. and others.

The 1973 oil crisis meant more than just gasoline lines and lowered thermostats. It shocked the world economy. Politicians everywhere responded by putting energy high on their agendas. In the U.S., the crusade for "energy independence" led to energy efficiency standards, the creation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, large government investments in solar power and nuclear fusion, and price deregulation. But it wasn't the price of gasoline that brought the long run of global prosperity to an end. It just diverted attention from a more fundamental problem: Productivity growth had slowed sharply.

The consequences of the productivity bust were severe. Full employment vanished. It would be 24 years before the U.S. unemployment rate would again reach the low levels of late 1973, and the infinitesimal unemployment rates in France, Germany and Japan would never be reached again. Through the rest of the 20th century, the jobless rate in 28 wealthy economies would average nearly 7%.

According to the late British economist Angus Maddison, the world's overall economic growth rate dropped from 4.9% a year from 1951 through 1973 to an average of just 3.1% for the balance of the century. Economic growth slowed even more swiftly in the wealthy economies. Incomes merely crept ahead, and families' sense of stability vanished as weak economic growth undermined the financial underpinnings of the welfare state.

Government leaders in the 1970s knew, or thought they knew, how to use traditional methods of economic management-adjusting interest rates, taxes and government spending-to restore an economy to health. But when it came to finding a fix for declining productivity growth, their toolbox was embarrassingly empty.

With economic planners and central bankers unable to steady their economies, voters turned sharply to the right. After elections in 1976, Sweden's Social Democrats found themselves out of office for the first time since the Great Depression. Conservative politicians such as Margaret Thatcher in the U.K., Ronald Reagan in the U.S. and Helmut Kohl in West Germany swept into power, promising that freer markets and smaller government would reverse the decline, spur productivity and restore rapid growth.

But these leaders' policies-deregulation, privatization, lower tax rates, balanced budgets and rigid rules for monetary policy-proved no more successful at boosting productivity than the statist policies that had preceded them. Some insist that the conservative revolution stimulated an economic renaissance, but the facts say otherwise: Great Britain's productivity grew far more slowly under Thatcher's rule than during the miserable 1970s, and Reagan's supply-side tax cuts brought no productivity improvement at all. Even the few countries that seemed to buck the trend of sluggish productivity growth in the 1970s and 1980s, notably Japan, did so only temporarily. A few years later, they found themselves mired in the same productivity slump as everyone else.

What explains the global downshift in productivity growth? Some of the factors are obvious. Once tens of millions of workers had moved from the farm to the city, they could not do so again. After the drive for universal education in the 1950s and '60s made it possible for almost everyone in wealthy countries to attend high school and for many to go to university, further improvements in education levels were marginal. Projects to widen and extend expressways didn't deliver nearly the productivity pop of the initial construction of those roads.

But there is more to the story. Productivity, in historical context, grows in fits and starts. Innovation surely has something to do with it, but we have precious little idea how to stimulate innovation-and no way at all to predict which innovations will lead to higher productivity.

Moreover, the timetable cannot be foreseen. Thomas Edison began wiring lower Manhattan for electric light in 1882, but electrification didn't have a notable effect on productivity in U.S. factories until the 1920s. Computers were developed during World War II and widely used in business by the 1970s, but as late as 1987, the economist Robert Solow could quip, "You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics."

It is tempting to think that we know how to do better, that there is some secret sauce that governments can ladle out to make economies grow faster than the norm. But despite glib talk about "pro-growth" economic policies, productivity growth is something over which governments have very little control. Rapid productivity growth has occurred in countries with low tax rates but also in nations where tax rates were sky-high. Slashing government regulations has unleashed productivity growth at some times and places but undermined it at others. The claim that freer markets and smaller governments are always better for productivity than a larger, more powerful state is not one that can be verified by the data.

Here is the lesson: What some economists now call "secular stagnation" might better be termed "ordinary performance." Most of the time, in most economies, incomes increase slowly, and living standards rise bit by bit. The extraordinary experience of the Golden Age left us with the unfortunate legacy of unrealistic expectations about our governments' ability to deliver jobs, pay raises and steady growth.

Ever since the Golden Age vanished amid the gasoline lines of 1973, political leaders in every wealthy country have insisted that the right policies will bring back those heady days. Voters who have been trained to expect that their leaders can deliver something more than ordinary are likely to find reality disappointing.
__________________

Present
2015 Chevrolet SS
Past
2011 BMW 335d, 2011 BMW 135i, 2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
evolved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2016, 04:02 PM   #100
Stankia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Anywhere in an hour
Posts: 63
My Ride: Germans
Right, we are actually doing better than our fellow western counterparts which is who we should be measuring ourselves against, not China. China is like we were in the 60s, they just discovered "turbocharging" and are going crazy with it. Wait a few years when they top out just like the rest of the developed world.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Stankia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Censor is ON



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
(c) 1999 - VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.