OT Food for thought

On 27 Feb 2004 05:44:35 -0800, (Jonathan Cook)
wrote:

Peter Charles wrote in message . ..

Is it all bad?

Of course not, for the top 10% or so (of which I am one, I guess).
We still need the 90% to serve us meals, fix our car, do our
yardwork, and be our ghillie on the river (OBROFF).

Structural unemployment is an artifact of this reality.

That's nice and sanitized, but _people_ are having to live it.

Modern economies are very resilient
and Ontario turned around so much so that, by the end of the decade,
it was roaring along

For the top 10% or for everyone?

... Consequently, much of our public
infrastructure is eroding. But, we're doing OK. We do have a growing
disparity in wages as the working poor contiue to decline

Sounds like you're heading towards feudalization as fast as we are...

laugh when I hear the righties wail about the need for protectionism
because it's such a lefty thing to do.

IMO it's populist, not right or left.

that were developed in American, by America, for the benefit of
America. This game is being played out according to your rules so it
still works out in your favour more often than not.

Oh, I know. It makes it easier to delude the 90% (of Americans) that
they're not heading towards serfdom because the effects aren't seen
by them as quickly.

Jon.

PS: Actually, I don't begrudge other countries wanting to provide
more and better jobs for their people -- 90% of the gradute students
who have worked with me are foreign, and are great people. But as
you say, the global trade rules don't really help them either -- just
treats them as more serfs. I understand the world that technology,
communication, transportation, and all that makes, and no, I don't
have any answers. I just think it's plain as day that the ROFFians
my age (quickly heading towards 40) and under better start thinking
about how they might plan for some _serious_ societal upheaval.


You mistake me for someone who believes the neo-con rational. I
don't. I believe in the power of the neo-con approach to globalize
the US economy and to produce enormous amounts of wealth. I have
absolutely no confidence that the neo-con approach is capoable of
distributing it in any sort of equitable fashion.

When I use the word "equitable", it will likely strike one of two
chords. The neo-con (BTW, can we use the proper term here --
"Neo-liberal"? The neo-con ideology is actually a return to classic
Liberalism.) considers "equitable" to be the accumulation of wealth by
anyone who "earns" it. The Socialist postion would consider
"equitable" to mean that the government redistributes the wealth to
the poor.

The Neo-liberal approach results in three classes, a super wealthy
class, a professional cadre who provide essential knowlege and skill
serives to the super wealthy, and a vast under class of desparately
poor. The Socialist approach, if talken to the extreme, results in
everyone being poor, but not to extent of the desparate state of the
Neo-liberal under-class.

The sucess of the liberal-deomcratic state, has been to balance these
two extremes into a reasonable third way. However, with the decline
of the relative power of the nation state vs. the corporate sector,
the balance has been shifted. To illustrate this point, 50 of the top
100 economies in the world are trans-national corporations. 350
corporations control 50% of the world's trade. As the US leads the
world in this regard, what passes for US policy influences the rest.
Canada, for example, cannot forge an independent economic policy as
the immense economic power of the US overwhelms any attempt at
independence. This is the primary reason why the Canadian health care
system is under such pressure.

Unless we can restore some balance, expect the drift toward the
Neo-liberal ideal to continue. And with that drift, expect more wars
and more Osama bin Ladens to emerge, for the under-class never wants
to go away quietly. Unfortunately, the redress of this balance can
only be achieved through serious US electoral finance reform and that
doesn't appear to be anywhere on the horizon anytime soon.



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

Canada, for example, cannot forge an independent economic policy as
the immense economic power of the US overwhelms any attempt at
independence. This is the primary reason why the Canadian health care
system is under such pressure. BRBR
Peter Charles BRBR
Missed the connection on how that occurs. Not arguing, just trying to
understand the specific connection.
Thanks.

GKT

ArnSaga wrote:
Canada, for example, cannot forge an independent economic policy as
the immense economic power of the US overwhelms any attempt at
independence. This is the primary reason why the Canadian health care
system is under such pressure. BRBR
Peter Charles BRBR
Missed the connection on how that occurs. Not arguing, just trying to
understand the specific connection.
Thanks.

Canadians have a tendency to blame all their problems on the US. This is
the first time, however, I've heard a Canadian blaming the looming
failure of their health care system on the US.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

On 28 Feb 2004 22:17:14 GMT, RKSPAM (ArnSaga) wrote:

Canada, for example, cannot forge an independent economic policy as
the immense economic power of the US overwhelms any attempt at
independence. This is the primary reason why the Canadian health care
system is under such pressure. BRBR
Peter Charles BRBR
Missed the connection on how that occurs. Not arguing, just trying to
understand the specific connection.
Thanks.

GKT


On health care?

It occurs at multiple levels. Without going into a great song and
dance -- here's the highlights:

Low US tax regimes and free trade prevent Canadian jurisdictions from
taxing corporations at a sufficient level that would ensure the
viability of the system. If we raise taxes, they leave.

The for-profit US medical system lobbies hard to open up the Canadian
market. There is a significant corporate interest in seeing our
health care system fail. With the increasing influence of the
corporate sector on government policy, it is only a matter of time
before their viewpoint prevails. This will be sold to the Canadian
public on the basis that we could no longer "afford universal health
care". How we will afford the more expensive for-profit version won't
be explained.

The best and the brightest are attracted to the US by the high
salaries of the for-profit system. As an example, US hospitals
regularly send teams to Toronto to hire away our nurses as they are
better trained than their US counterparts.

US right wing ideology influences Canadian right wing parties to adopt
free market solutions for social problems (e.g. Mike Harris style
approaches). The free markety ideologues first wreck the public
system by systematic underfunding and politically directed
bureaucratic interference, then introduce free market approaches to
"save" it. Standard tactics used on a wide range of public
institutions.

NAFTA provisions restrict Canadian governments in a variety of policy
areas, one of which being health care, so Canadian governments cannot
formulate a Canadian policy on the Canadian medical industry --
whatever it regulates must be subservient to NAFTA treaty provisions.

Candian governments have dificulty maintaining distinct policies
against heavy US pressure. The current drug pricing controversy being
the most recent example. In past years, the Canadian government caved
in to the US drug industry regarding patent protection.

Someone more versed in the industry than I can no doubt produce a
dozens more examples.



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:39:28 -0700, rw
wrote:

ArnSaga wrote:
Canada, for example, cannot forge an independent economic policy as
the immense economic power of the US overwhelms any attempt at
independence. This is the primary reason why the Canadian health care
system is under such pressure. BRBR
Peter Charles BRBR
Missed the connection on how that occurs. Not arguing, just trying to
understand the specific connection.
Thanks.

Canadians have a tendency to blame all their problems on the US. This is
the first time, however, I've heard a Canadian blaming the looming
failure of their health care system on the US.


Not true, we blame almost everything on ourselves. The Canadian
pysche tends to be neurotic and lacking in self-confidence. The US
example is usually trotted out as the saviour, not the cause. You
should read the Toronto Sun newspaper -- it loves everything US and
can't wait to replicate it in Canada.



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

Greg Pavlov wrote:

On 26 Feb 2004 15:29:27 -0800, (Jonathan Cook)
wrote:


We live at a standard that is unsustainable, as it is achieved through
unsustainable "optimizations". It _will_ fail eventually, the only
question is when. And I for one am starting to think sooner rather
than later...


It will fail for the majority of our citizens, but
several million will do quite well. With sufficient
protection, they will enjoy their status. In other
words, look at any country with a small or non-
existent middle class and you will see a mirror of
our future. And it will come about through the
collapse of the value of the dollar: that will be
the only way, at the rate we are going, that we
will ever be able to repay our major debt holders
overseas. There is some belief that Communist
China, which is currently propping up this
administration by buying up billions of dollars in
US currency, is beginning to catch on to this
possibility.


Both China and Japan are very heavily invested in the US dollar.

The Chinese are beginning to put moneys into currencies other than the
US dollar and there are rumblings about China freeing their yuan from
its ties to the US dollar. It is the consensus opinion that the yuan is
significantly under valued because of these ties.

Willi

Peter Charles wrote:


Unless we can restore some balance, expect the drift toward the
Neo-liberal ideal to continue. And with that drift, expect more wars
and more Osama bin Ladens to emerge, for the under-class never wants
to go away quietly. Unfortunately, the redress of this balance can
only be achieved through serious US electoral finance reform and that
doesn't appear to be anywhere on the horizon anytime soon.

The "reform" that I think is likely to happen will occur when the US
loses its leading economic position, which is something I believe we'll
see within our life times. There are other countries in the World with
much more vibrant, stronger growing economies that will soon surpass
that of the US and I don't think the US is going to know how to be
"second rate."

Willi

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:04:43 -0700, Willi wrote:



Greg Pavlov wrote:

On 26 Feb 2004 15:29:27 -0800, (Jonathan Cook)
wrote:


We live at a standard that is unsustainable, as it is achieved through
unsustainable "optimizations". It _will_ fail eventually, the only
question is when. And I for one am starting to think sooner rather
than later...


It will fail for the majority of our citizens, but
several million will do quite well. With sufficient
protection, they will enjoy their status. In other
words, look at any country with a small or non-
existent middle class and you will see a mirror of
our future. And it will come about through the
collapse of the value of the dollar: that will be
the only way, at the rate we are going, that we
will ever be able to repay our major debt holders
overseas. There is some belief that Communist
China, which is currently propping up this
administration by buying up billions of dollars in
US currency, is beginning to catch on to this
possibility.


Both China and Japan are very heavily invested in the US dollar.

The Chinese are beginning to put moneys into currencies other than the
US dollar and there are rumblings about China freeing their yuan from
its ties to the US dollar. It is the consensus opinion that the yuan is
significantly under valued because of these ties.

Willi



Britain is still the biggest contributor of FDI to the US by a long
shot -- maybe that explains Blair's rational . . . . .

2001 numbers, Britain 217.7 billion USD. Japan is next at 160 billion.
This trend has been ongoing for years. Britain's contribution is
larger than all of Asia and the Pacific in 2001.

There is a second problem that isn't covered in these numbers and
that's the accumulation of US dollars in countries enjoying a current
account surplus with the US. Most of those countries are friendly
trading partners of the US and are not likely to cause any problems.
The last time this was a major problem, the oil crisis of 1974
conveniently redressed the balance.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:05:44 -0700, Willi wrote:



Peter Charles wrote:


Unless we can restore some balance, expect the drift toward the
Neo-liberal ideal to continue. And with that drift, expect more wars
and more Osama bin Ladens to emerge, for the under-class never wants
to go away quietly. Unfortunately, the redress of this balance can
only be achieved through serious US electoral finance reform and that
doesn't appear to be anywhere on the horizon anytime soon.

The "reform" that I think is likely to happen will occur when the US
loses its leading economic position, which is something I believe we'll
see within our life times. There are other countries in the World with
much more vibrant, stronger growing economies that will soon surpass
that of the US and I don't think the US is going to know how to be
"second rate."

Willi




There's no doubt that the WalMartification of the US ecponomy is
causing some shifts and that the current adiminstration's policies are
making things worse, but I doubt the US is going to drop into second
place any time soon. The EU is a bigger economy than that of the US
but, unless the US bullies and scares it into greater unitly, its
members will continue to behave like squabbling hens. China still has
a very long way to go. Russia is only just emerging from basket case
status.

The biggest threat to the US primacy is still an internal one.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

rw wrote:
Canadians have a tendency to blame all their problems on the US. This is
the first time, however, I've heard a Canadian blaming the looming
failure of their health care system on the US.

Quite the opposite. It is usually the US who blames their problems on
Canada. Canada was blamed for the attack against the WTC (the
accusations were made that the terrorists enetered the US from Canada,
whic was ludricous); the US blamed Canada for the power outage last
summer (it started in Ohio). The US has a rather large trade deficit
with Canada; Canada sends a lot more goods to the US than the US does to
Canada. As a result, the US usually drums up some bogus reason for
imposing imposing tarriffs on goods imported from Canada because you
cannot compete otherwise (softwood lumber, durum wheat....). The WTO
has ruled against the US 10 of the last 14 times the US has placed
tariffs on imports from Canada.

As far as our health care system....most Canadians are still satisifed
with it, and the only reason it is peril is because of the efforts of
corporate medical care companies to convince us otherwise. I get
excellent care, so does my mother who is institutionalized because of
Alzheimer's, so does my wife and kids. I pay $600 a year for complete
health care coverage. When I lived in the US, it cost us over $3,000 for
our child to be born. The differnece in care....Canada's was better.

Tim Lysyk