- ‹ previous
- 2691 of 2838
- next ›
Educational Nationalism
EDUCATIONAL NATIONALISM....Kevin Carey quotes Barack Obama on education:
If we want to keep building the cars of the future here in America, we can't afford to see the number of PhDs in engineering climbing in China, South Korea, and Japan even as it's dropped here in America.
Carey isn't happy with the way Obama phrases this:
I'd like to see this and similar sentiments phrased so it's clear that more PhDs in China, South Korea, Japan, and elsewhere is a good thing that will help America in the long run. The world has many vexing problems and the more smart, well-educated people to solve them, the better. An expanded well-educated class in China and elsewhere will create new markets for the kind of high-value goods and services that America produces, and they'll make newer, better products that we'd like to buy. Perhaps most importantly, they'll improve the lives of people in those countries, which we should all care about.
This comes via Matt Yglesias, who finds this tic even more annoying than Carey does. But I wonder if we're all being a little too high-minded here?
Paul Glastris told me something interesting the other day. He said he had recently read every convention acceptance speech of the past few decades, and that successful candidates invariably framed a significant chunk of their message in nationalistic terms. Sometimes it was military nationalism, sometimes it was economic nationalism, but one way or another successful candidates always framed their message as us vs. them to at least some degree.
Obviously you can argue that this situation is unfortunate — and perhaps it is — but if that's what it takes, then that's what it takes. And Obama's formulation is certainly as benign a form of economic nationalism as you're likely to find. If that's what he needs to say in order to get Americans interested in serious improvements to our educational system, it's a pretty small price to pay.
Couldn't agree more! I go to a lot of meetings with academics and they always want to footnote and nuance the hell out of even the most simple statement or policy.
Listen, there is a place for nuance and getting the pitch just right all the time, but excuse me for thinking that in talking to millions of people you might mostly just want to be clear about one point at a time. Framing things in nationalistic terms doesn't have to pit the US against the rest of the world. And the pc critics on the left who want every eff'ing nuance to be captured in every utterance ought to just hand McCain/Palin the keys to the WH right now.
Would you please focus on the opponents and their larger distortions and lies of fact and not obsess so much about shades of gray.
Couldn't agree more. At its heart, all Obama is doing here is encouraging America to set our own bar higher. He's not talking about undercutting the ability of other countries to produce Ph.D.'s, he's talking about our ability to keep pace and exceed the rate at which they produce Ph.D.'s. If we're going to get into what it takes for America to be a great country, this is one of the measures that I like and one that we should be focusing on.
If there was a zero-sum worldwide situation with PhD's in engineering they might have a point.
Quibble of the Day
I agree with the criticism.
Also, I think it's a good thing that Dems set an extremely high bar for their president. I have an expectation that Obama is able to pursue good policy, and educate, and lead etc.
It's a much better gig that pretending that torture is okay. Going to be a good 8 years I hope.
The reason America is light on tech Ph.D.s is that M.B.A.s and J.D.s pay a whole lot more. It's not the educational system, folks; it's the incentives.
Math education among better high schools has gotten a whole lot more rigorous over the last 20 years, even as the number of US tech Ph.D.s has gone down. These well-educated kids then go to Wall Street, because that's where the money is. You won't get them back into a lab unless lab work becomes a lot more lucrative.
Which it won't. Which is why rely on foreign techies, to whom US tech salaries are high. Their kids, however, go to law school.
McCain's creeping ahead in the polls, swing states are dropping like flies, America thinks Obama's a pedophile/misogynist/wimp/elitist/gansta/terrorist, and you're worried about whether he's sufficiently clear about the importance of a strong middle class to Korea's development???!!!!???
This is war, people! It's futzing around with subtleties like this that got us into this mess!! If putting a mildly nationalistic shade on your argument for better education policy will help keep that psychotic hot-tempered child-man and his idiot holy-rolling running mate out of the White House than not using this argument is pure suicide!!!!
Sorry, "then".
The problem with the quote is that it mentions the Chinese et al first. He should have said, "If we want to keep building the cars of the future here in America, we can't afford to see the number of engineering PhDs in the US falling while their number is climbing in China, South Korea, and Japan."
The problem is not that they're going up, it's that we're falling.
My God, stop quibbling. Stop complaining about minor policy points and ELECT THE MAN. Geez. This is how we lost the last two.
Paul Glastris told me something interesting the other day. He said he had recently read every convention acceptance speech of the past few decades, and that successful candidates invariably framed a significant chunk of their message in nationalistic terms.
Ja wohl, the USA public dutifully responds.
As an engineering graduate student, just let me point out this: America still has the most desired universities in the world. My department is populated with roughly 90% foreign students (mostly from India, China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong).
The simple best thing we could do would be to make it easier for those students to stay here. As it is, they face a bureaucratic nightmare, and many of them end up returning home after they receive their degree.
In this case, we're not talking about whether or not to encourage China to mint more PhDs. It's a matter of a fresh PhD in Boston or Palo Alto winding up in China instead of Cupertino.
I wouldn't be too concerned about this line of argument. His point is about the relative situations of the US vs. other places. I don't read this as lamenting the increase in PhDs in other places.
BTW, I don't understand the comments to the effect of "we don't have time to discuss this sort of thing, we have an election to win". I wouldn't overestimate the centrality of comments to blogs to the outcome of the election ;) And I really don't think substantive discussion of policies is a problem.
I do have to say that this seems like a quibble too far, or at the very least, missing a larger point.
Obama's currently being attacked for wanting to teaching sex ed to kindergartners, and calling Sarah Palin a pig. Both of which are lies.
It does seem like a bit much to ask Obama to respond effectively to the sleazestorm he is being subjected to daily, and explain the finer points of international political economy at the same time. We do want the guy to win, don't we?
I'm a teacher who is strongly backing Obama.
That being said, no Presidential candidate ever has said anything seriously correct about education. This statement from Obama is meaningless, and it is similar to statements by Clinton in the 1990s.
Our federal government is using Title I funds, which are supposed to help schools with students in poverty, to write and administer standardized tests. It is severely underfunding IDEA, which means that every school district has to spend a large chunk of its money on Special Ed rather than improving itself.
Enough of that. Let's talk about the fact that McCain has all the same policies as Bush and lies to our faces every day.
Basilisc, your exclamation point key seems to be stuck. Perhaps you should get a new keyboard.
Eric, good point. From a purely self-interested perspective, the U.S. should be keeping these smart people around instead of sending them back home. (From a more cosmopolitan perspective, we'd be contributing to brain-drain in other countries. But I doubt that outweighs the good of allowing smart people to immigrate to wherever their skills are most needed.)
Why is everyone backing away from comparing Sarah Palin to a pig? I think it's pretty clear that he was and it was great fun and an effective little political jab. His audience seemed to think so too. I don't think he crossed the line at all. The stupid bitch started it at the convention. Anyone who proudly compares themself to an aggressive animal (as she did with the pitbull comment) is asking to be mocked (e.g. "Don't mess with the bull, you'll get the horns")
I think we're starting to see an impish side to Barack. It's actually closer to sports trash talk than politics. It's basically a way of undermining your enemy's confidence and support with ridicule.
You have the ball. You want to score. To do it, you have to get past me.
You're ugly.
You're stupid.
Your family is ugly and stupid.
What are you going to do about it?
Think fast.
Why not consider that Obama actually MEANS it? One apology after another, and you're still not getting that he is not who you thought he was.
Why is his "change" mantra being so easily appropriated by McCain? I think because his message is so mildly delivered that it is thought all he means is "of course I'm for change - just LOOK at me". Such timidity can be looked upon as no way to make change happen.
We have several problems here: a candidate who actually adheres to some very old-fashioned ideals and dresses them prettily in a cloak of cool - very attractive to youngsters but perceived correctly as superficial by many average folk, and a message perceived as normal liberal stuff, where they think we're already living, just messed up by Bush.
It IS a brave, new world out there, and we have to be brave and new to greet it. Instead we are looking for ways to seem unthreatening, just like the next guy, covering our butts, pretending, artfully dodging right into four more years of Bush with Palin hovering over it all.
You're ugly.
You're stupid.
Your family is ugly and stupid.
What are you going to do about it?
Think fast.
Posted by: Jacques Strap
Yup, that's the way to win an election. The election of course being for President of the Local Little Boy's Tree House Society (where no girls are allowed).
Ph.D.s? How about high school grads reading and writing at 12th-grade levels?
Our cars won't be put together by Ph.D.s, right?
An expanded well-educated class in China and elsewhere will create new markets for the kind of high-value goods and services that America produces,...
Extraordinary that someone is still stupid enough to believe this after the greatest transfer of wealth in history from the US to China via trade deficits.
The Chinese want cheap Chinese goods just like Americans. They do not want the same goods made by labor that costs ten times as much.
While the rest of the world competes, the US borrows and spends.
Ooh, it's 1957 and the USSR has one-upped us by launching Sputnik.
The whole notion that there is a shortage of engineering Ph.D.'s is nonsense. There's a shortage of jobs for the engineering Ph.D.'s that we do produce. Only about half of them have jobs that require a Ph.D.
In fact getting an engineering Ph.D. is usually a losing proposition for anyone who's already a citizen or LPR. On average you'll retire before your higher salary will compensate for the expense involved in getting your Ph.D.
The same is true for Ph.D.'s in many other STEM (scientific, technical, engineering and mathematical) fields.
Search on "Norman Matloff" (a computer science prof) for some hard facts and statistics instead of the usual feel-good nonsense that we'd all be sitting pretty if everyone in America had a Ph.D.
See here for a good Matloff article on the myth of an engineering shortage.
Also, his critique of Obama (and Hillary and Kerry) Obama On Offshoring.
Like I always say - vote for the Democrats, they're not quite as bad as the Republicans! Some day though I'd like to actually vote for a candidate instead of against his opponent. In this day of "finest government that money can buy" though, I'm not holding my breath.
See the parent directory of these links for much other debunking of such myths.
I think somewhere around 60% of advanced degrees in engineering are awarded to foreign students in the US. They are not exceptional students. If it wasn't for the foreign applicants many departments would have to shut down, so they get in. In other scientific fields they are able to hold the number down but there are enough Indian and Chinese applicants to American universities to fill up every science department. It turns out that since 1970 the number of men entering the sciences generally has been declining- and now the number of women is going down. Americans could be responding to the high degree of risk in going to school for such a long time and then facing a very competitive job market. For foreigners it is always better than staying at home.
The question is why are American's paying to educate foreigners that only increase the glut and put downward pressure on wages? Also, if we think making more scientists is important why don't we figure out how to get more Americans into those heavily subsidized university spots? Given the low mobility in the US I am sure there would be takers. But again, the cost and the risk are too high when you have to take on the debt of doing undergraduate work. Your lifetime earnings are probably greater as a plumber than as a research scientist.
One of the recommendations of progressive neoliberalism- a New Labour tradition Obama seems to embrace- is to up-skill the work force as it is deindustrilalized. This includes educating more scientists and knowledge workers and investing in technology development. But after nearly 20 years of progressive neoliberal policies in the UK the effect has been limited and has not compensated for the decline in manufacturing. Knowledge economy seems to be a myth. The US will have a much more limited progressive neoliberalism, if any at all. By and large the economic shift will be shouldered by individuals in a much larger and less integrated country. We should expect even less than in the UK.
Quibbling quibbling. If you're going to attack Obama for this statement, how about addressing his actual point about "building the cars of the future here in America." Will such a thing require a bunch of new PhDs? He said nothing about PhDs in general.
Wow, sure are strict around here about links. My (attempted) post only had 2 HTML links. Ok, one at a time, non-HTML.
See
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Archive/ChinaIndiaEngineers.txt
for a good Matloff article on the myth of an engineering shortage.
See the parent directory of that link for much other debunking of such myths.
I'm a computer science prof at a large public research university. The proportion of American graduate students has noticably decreased over the past few years. In my masters level course this semester, of 45 or so students, only about 3 of them are not from China, India, or Korea. Each of these groups ethnic groups form a strong peer group that provide considerable support to each other--among other things, they keep files of all the exams and homework solutions given by any prof in the department and pass them down to younger students from their country. The American students are at a disadvantage because they don't have this. It can be uncomforable socially for the American students as well since they frequently find themselves in situations where they are in a group of people speaking a language they don't understand. This further discourages American students from doing graduate work.
It is only a matter of time before this becomes a big problem for the US.
I would certainly support grinding the Chinese into the dirt again if it 1) was safe (i.e. no loose nukes) 2) benefited us directly.
bellumregio: The question is why are American's paying to educate foreigners that only increase the glut and put downward pressure on wages?
1. Academia. They make their money on students. Like anybody else selling a product, they want to sell, but don't especially worry if it's useful for the consumer.
2. Industry. A nice glut keeps salaries down. Often foreign students/graduates are willing to work cheaper as they know it's their ticket to the US. And, when quitting or being terminated from school or your job means loss of your visa, it provides a nice non-monetary incentive to be compliant. That last one applies to academia as well as industry.
3. Mythology. Everybody talks about the (actually nonexistent) shortage of such people. It's a myth that everyone loves to buy into. We need more bright, educated people! If there aren't enough Ph.D. jobs then they make great burger flippers too.
One of the recommendations ... is to up-skill the work force as it is deindustrilalized. This includes educating more scientists and knowledge workers and investing in technology development. But after nearly 20 years of progressive neoliberal policies in the UK the effect has been limited and has not compensated for the decline in manufacturing. Knowledge economy seems to be a myth.
You only say that because it's true. While America has deindustrialized, "American" companies have not. They simply make things in China and ship them here. About half of our Chinese imports are actually intra-company transfers. That explains why in decades past (e.g. 1920's) the "pro-business" faction liked high tariffs, but now embraces so-called free trade.
I have issues with all candidates position on education. Not a single one of them has a single innovative idea on reform. Not a single one of them even supports big old ideas like a national curriculum.
They all pretty much lose credibility in my books because they all send their kids to private schools.
Yes, it was ill-put to complain of too many doctorates elsewhere. The only complaint should be of our falling behind, of our not being competitive in the world market.
That's a valid concern for a national leader, or a candidate therefor.
In this context, it's not "Nationalism" of the sabre-rattling, goose-stepping, Vaterland-Über-Alles variety.
Don't believe one optimistic word from any public figure about the economy or humanity in general. They are all part of the problem. Its like a game of Monopoly. In America, the richest 1% now hold 1/2 OF ALL UNITED STATES WEALTH. Unlike 'lesser' estimates, this includes all stocks, bonds, cash, and material assets held by America's richest 1%. Even that filthy pig Oprah acknowledged that it was at about 50% in 2006. Naturally, she put her own 'humanitarian' spin on it. Calling attention to her own 'good will'. WHAT A DISGUSTING HYPOCRITE SLOB. THE RICHEST ONE PERCENT HAVE LITERALLY MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. Don't fall for any of their 'humanitarian' CRAP. ITS A SHAM. THESE PEOPLE ARE CAUSING THE SAME PROBLEMS THEY PRETEND TO CARE ABOUT. Ask any professor of economics. Money does not grow on trees. The government can't just print up more on a whim. At any given time, there is a relative limit to the wealth within ANY economy of ANY size. So when too much wealth accumulates at the top, the middle class slip further into debt and the lower class further into poverty. A similar rule applies worldwide. The world's richest 1% now own over 40% of ALL WORLD WEALTH. This is EVEN AFTER you account for all of this 'good will' 'humanitarian' BS from celebrities and executives. ITS A SHAM. As they get richer and richer, less wealth is left circulating beneath them. This is the single greatest underlying cause for the current US recession. The middle class can no longer afford to sustain their share of the economy. Their wealth has been gradually transfered to the richest 1%. One way or another, we suffer because of their incredible greed. We are talking about TRILLIONS of dollars which have been transfered FROM US TO THEM. All over a period of about 27 years. Thats Reaganomics for you. The wealth does not 'trickle down' as we were told it would. It just accumulates at the top. Shrinking the middle class and expanding the lower class. Causing a domino effect of socio-economic problems. But the rich will never stop. They just keep getting richer. Leaving even less of the pie for the other 99% of us to share. At the same time, they throw back a few tax deductible crumbs and call themselves 'humanitarians'. Cashing in on the PR and getting even richer the following year. IT CAN'T WORK THIS WAY. Their bogus efforts to make the world a better place can not possibly succeed. Any 'humanitarian' progress made in one area will be lost in another. EVERY SINGLE TIME. IT ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK THIS WAY. This is going to end just like a game of Monopoly. The current US recession will drag on for years and lead into the worst US depression of all time. The richest 1% will live like royalty while the rest of us fight over jobs, food, and gasoline. So don't fall for any of this PR CRAP from Hollywood, Pro Sports, and Wall Street PIGS. ITS A SHAM. Remember: They are filthy rich EVEN AFTER their tax deductible contributions. Greedy pigs. Now, we are headed for the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time. Crime, poverty, and suicide will skyrocket. SEND A "THANK YOU" NOTE TO YOUR FAVORITE MILLIONAIRE. ITS THEIR FAULT. I'm not discounting other factors like China, sub-prime, or gas prices. But all of those factors combined still pale in comparison to that HUGE transfer of wealth to the rich. Anyway, those other factors are all related and further aggrivated because of GREED. If it weren't for the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our country, there never would have been such a market for sub-prime to begin with. Which by the way, was another trick whipped up by greedy bankers and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. The credit industry has been ENDORSED by people like Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGenerous, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. Now, there are commercial ties between nearly every industry and every public figure. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don't fall for their 'good will' BS. ITS A LIE. If you fall for it, then you're a fool. If you see any real difference between the moral character of a celebrity, politician, attorney, or executive, then you're a fool. No offense fellow citizens. But we have been mislead by nearly every public figure. We still are. Even now, they claim to be 'hurting' right along with the rest of us. As if gas prices actually effect the lifestyle of a millionaire. ITS A LIE. IN 2007, THE RICHEST 1% INCREASED THEIR AVERAGE BOTTOM LINE WEALTH AGAIN. On average, they are now worth over $4,000,000 each. Thats an all time high. As a group, they are now worth well over $17,000,000,000,000. THATS WELL OVER SEVENTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS. Another all time high. Which by the way, is much more than the entire middle and lower classes combined. Also more than enough to pay off our national debt, fund the Iraq war for twenty years, repair our infrastructure, and bail out the US housing market. Still think that our biggest problem is China? Think again. Its the 1% club. That means every big name celebrity, athlete, executive, entrepreneur, developer, banker, and lottery winner. Along with many attorneys, doctors, politicians, and bankers. If they are rich, then they are part of the problem. Their incredible wealth was not 'created', 'generated', grown in their back yard, or printed up on their command. It was transfered FROM US TO THEM. Directly and indirectly. Its become near impossible to spend a dollar without making some greedy pig even richer. Don't be fooled by the occasional loss of a millionaire's fortune. Overall, they just keep getting richer. They absolutely will not stop. Still, they have the nerve to pretend as if they care about ordinary people. ITS A LIE. NOTHING BUT CALCULATED PR CRAP. WAKE UP PEOPLE. THEIR GOAL IS TO WIN THE GAME. The 1% club will always say or do whatever it takes to get as rich as possible. Without the slightest regard for anything or anyone but themselves. Reaganomics. Their idea. Loans from China. Their idea. NAFTA. Their idea. Outsourcing. Their idea. Sub-prime. Their idea. High energy prices. Their idea. Oil 'futures'. Their idea. Obscene health care charges. Their idea. The commercial lobbyist. Their idea. The multi-million dollar lawsuit. Their idea. The multi-million dollar endorsement deal. Their idea. $200 cell phone bills. Their idea. $200 basketball shoes. Their idea. $30 late fees. Their idea. $30 NSF fees. Their idea. $20 DVDs. Their idea. Subliminal advertising. Their idea. Brainwash plots on TV. Their idea. Vioxx, and Celebrex. Their idea. Excessive medical testing. Their idea. The MASSIVE campaign to turn every American into a brainwashed, credit card, pharmaceutical, medical testing, love-sick, celebrity junkie. Their idea. All of the above shrink the middle class, concentrate the world's wealth and resources, create a dominoe effect of socio-economic problems, and wreak havok on society. All of which have been CREATED AND ENDORSED by celebrities, athletes, executives, entrepreneurs, attorneys, and politicians. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don't fall for any of their 'good will' 'humanitarian' BS. ITS A SHAM. NOTHING BUT TAX DEDUCTIBLE PR CRAP. In many cases, the 'charitable' contribution is almost entirely offset. Not to mention the opportunity to plug their name, image, product, and 'good will' all at once. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. These filthy pigs even have the nerve to throw a fit and spin up a misleading defense with regard to 'federal tax revenue'. ITS A SHAM. THEY SCREWED UP THE EQUATION TO BEGIN WITH. If the middle and lower classes had a greater share of the pie, they could easily cover a greater share of the federal tax revenue. They are held down in many ways because of greed. Wages remain stagnant for millions because the executives, celebrities, athletes, attorneys, and entrepreneurs, are paid millions. They over-sell, over-charge, under-pay, outsource, cut jobs, and benefits to increase their bottom line. As their profits rise, so do the stock values. Which are owned primarily by the richest 5%. As more United States wealth rises to the top, the middle and lower classes inevitably suffer. This reduces the potential tax reveue drawn from those brackets. At the same time, it wreaks havok on middle and lower class communities and increases the need for financial aid. Not to mention the spike in crime because of it. There is a dominoe effect to consider. IT CAN'T WORK THIS WAY. But our leaders refuse to acknowledge this. Instead they come up with one trick after another to milk the system and screw the majority. These decisions are heavily influensed by the 1% club. Every year, billions of federal tax dollars are diverted behind the scenes back to the rich and their respective industries. Loans from China have been necessary to compensate in part, for the red ink and multi-trillion dollar transfer of wealth to the rich. At the same time, the feds have been pushing more financial burden onto the states who push them lower onto the cities. Again, the hardship is felt more by the majority and less by the 1% club. The rich prefer to live in exclusive areas or upper class communities. They get the best of everything. Reliable city services, new schools, freshly paved roads, upscale parks, ect. The middle and lower class communities get little or nothing without a local tax increase. Which, they usually can't afford. So the red ink flows followed by service cuts and lay-offs. All because of the OBSCENE distribution of bottom line wealth in this country. Anyway, when you account for all federal, state, and local taxes, the middle class actually pay about the same rate as the rich. The devil is in the details. So when people forgive the rich for their incredible greed and then praise them for paying a greater share of the FEDERAL income taxes, its like nails on a chalk board. I can not accept any theory that our economy would suffer in any way with a more reasonable distribution of wealth. Afterall, it was more reasonable 30 years ago. Before Reaganomics came along. Before GREED became such an epidemic. Before we had an army of over-paid executives, bankers, celebrities, athletes, attorneys, doctors, investors, entrepreneurs, developers, and sold-out politicians to kiss their asses. As a nation, we were in much better shape. Strong middle class, free and clear assets, lower crime rate, more widespread prosperity, stable job market, lower deficit, ect. Our economy as a whole was much more stable and prosperous for the majority. WITHOUT LOANS FROM CHINA. Now, we have a more obscene distribution of bottom line wealth than ever before. We have a sold-out government, crumbling infrastructure, energy crisis, home forclosure epidemic, credit crunch, weak US dollar, 13 figure national deficit, and 12 figure annual shortfall. The cost of living is higher than ever before. Most people can't even afford basic health care. ALL BECAUSE OF GREED. I really don't blame the 2nd -5th percentiles in general. No economy could ever function without some reasonable scale of personal wealth and income. But it can't be allowed to run wild like a mad dog. ALBERT EINSTEIN TRIED TO MAKE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND. UNBRIDLED CAPITALISM ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK. TOP HEAVY ECONOMIES ALWAYS COLLAPSE. Bottom line: The richest 1% will soon tank the largest economy in the world. It will be like nothing we've ever seen before. The American dream will be shattered. and thats just the beginning. Greed will eventually tank every major economy in the world. Causing millions to suffer and die. Oprah, Angelina, Brad, Bono, and Bill are not part of the solution. They are part of the problem. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MULTI-MILLIONAIRE HUMANITARIAN. EXTREME WEALTH MAKES WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. WITHOUT WORLD PROSPERITY, THERE WILL NEVER BE WORLD PEACE OR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL. Of course, the rich will throw a fit and call me a madman.. Of course, they will jump to small minded conclusions about 'jealousy', 'envy', or 'socialism'. Of course, their ignorant fans will do the same. You have to expect that. But I speak the truth. If you don't believe me, then copy this entry and run it by any professor of economics or socio-economics. Then tell a friend. Call the local radio station. Re-post this entry or put it in your own words. Be one of the first to predict the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time and explain its cause. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.
So what can we do about it? Well, not much. Unfortunately, we are stuck on a runaway train. The problem has gone unchecked for too many years. The US/global depression is comming thanks to the 1% club. It would take a massive effort by the vast majority to prevent it. Along with a voluntary sacrifice by the rich. THATS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. But if you believe in miracles, then spend your money as wisely as possible. Especially in middle and lower class communities. Check the Fortune 500 list and limit your support of high profit/low labor industries (Hollywood, pro sports, energy, credit, pharmaceutical, cable, satelite, internet advertising, cell phone, high fashion, jewelry, ect.). Cancel all but one credit card for emergencies only. If you need a cell phone, then do your homework and find the best deal on a local pre-pay. If you want home internet access, then use the least expensive provider, and share accounts whenever possible. If you need to search, then use the less popular search engines. They usually produce the same results anyway. Don't click on any internet ad. If you need the product or service, then look up the phone number or address and contact that business directly. Don't pay to see any blockbuster movie. Instead, wait a few months and rent the DVD from a local store or buy it USED. If you want to see a big name game or event, then watch it in a local bar, club, or at home on network TV. Don't buy any high end official merchendise and don't support the high end sponsors. If its endorsed by a big name celebrity, then don't buy it. If you can afford a new car, then make an exception for GM, Ford, and Dodge. If they don't increase their market share soon, then a lot more people are going to get screwed out of their pensions and/or benefits. Of course, you must know by now to avoid those big trucks and SUVs unless you truly need one for its intended purpose. Don't be ashamed to buy a foreign car if you prefer it. Afterall, those with the most fuel efficient vehicles consume a lot less foreign oil. Which accounts for a pretty big chunk of our trade deficit. Anyway, the global economy is worth supporting to some extent. Its the obscene profit margins, trade deficits, and BS from OPEC that get us into trouble. Otherwise, the global economy would be a good thing for everyone. Just keep in mind that the big 3 are struggling and they do produce a few smaller reliable cars. Don't frequent any high end department store or any business in a newly developed upper class community. By doing so, you make developers richer and draw support away from industrial areas and away from the middle class communities. Instead, support the local retailer and the less popular shopping centers. Especially in lower or middle class communities. If you can afford to buy a home, then do so. But go smaller and less expensive. Don't get yourself in too deep and don't buy into the newly developed condos or gated communities. Instead, find a modest home in a building or neighborhood at least 20 years old. If you live in one of the poorer states, then try to support its economy first and foremost. Be on the lookout for commercial brainwash plots on TV. They are written into nearly every scene of nearly every show. Most cater to network sponsors and parent companies. Especially commercial health care. Big business is fine on occasion depending on the profit margins and profit sharing. Do your homework. If you want to support any legitimate charity, then do so directly. Never support any celebrity foundation. They spend most of their funding on PR campaigns, travel, and high end accomodations for themselves. Instead, go to Charitywatch.org and look up a top rated charity to support your favorite cause. In general, support the little guy as much as possible and the big guy as little as possible. Do your part to reverse the transfer of wealth away from the rich and back to the middle and lower classes. Unfortunately, there is no perfect answer. Jobs will be lost either way. Innocent children will starve and die either way. But we need to support the largest group of workers with the most reasonable profit margins. We also need to support LEGITIMATE charities (Check that list at Charitywatch.org). This is our only chance to limit the severity and/or duration of the comming US/global depression. In the meantime, don't listen to Bernanke, Paulson, Bartiromo, Orman, Dobbs, Kramer, OReiley, or any other public figure with regard to the economy. They are all plenty smart but I swear to you that they will lie right through their rotten teeth. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. These people work for big business. The 'experts' they cite also work for big business. They are all motivated by their desire to accumulate more wealth. THEY WILL LIE RIGHT THROUGH THEIR ROTTEN TEETH. So don't fall for their tricks. Instead, look at the big picture. The economic problems we face have been mounting for well over 20 years. All of them caused or aggrivated by a constant transfer of wealth from poorer to richer. Soon, it will cause the first ever GLOBAL DEPRESION. Its not brain surgery. Its simple math. Like I said, you are welcome to run this by any professor of economics or socio-economics. If thats not good enough, then look up what Einstein had to say about greed, extreme wealth, and its horrible concequences. I speak the truth. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.
Its already underway. A massive campaign to divert our attention. Trump, Buffet, OReiley, Pickens, Norris, and several other well known public figures have been running their mouths about the economy. Finally admitting a hint of severity. They even have the nerve to acknowledge the possibility of a US/global depression. Still, they refuse to acknowledge the single greatest underlying cause. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.
A word for those who respond with the usual 'I know more than you. Look how smart, knowledgable, and articulate I am' crap. Let me say this in advance. I don't claim to be an expert in this field. But I did go on record with these predictions long before any public figure uttered the word 'recession'. If you search long enough, you will find my early postings from '05' and '06'. Including the first draft of this rant. Since then, I've gone on record against people like Greenspan, Bernanke, and Paulson. So far, my predictions have been accurate. Like I said. This is not brain surgery. For the mostpart, its simple math. When you concentrate the world's wealth, you also concentrate its capital and shrink the middle class along with the potential market for every major industry. Homes go unsold. Bills go unpaid. Banks fail. More products go unsold. Jobs are lost. More banks fail. and so on. and so on. Throughout the cycle, the rich will tighten their grip. Concentrating the world's wealth and resources even further and ensuring the collapse of every major economy worldwide. Think it can't happen? Think again. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.
Another thing. I don't want credit for any of this. Otherwise, I would have given my full name a long time ago. As far as I'm concerned, you can put this rant in your own words and take credit for all of it. I don't care. Just spread the word. Otherwise, the greatest injustice of all time will go down in history unchecked.
Few rants deserve the space and time they take to absorb. This is one of the few.