• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Can America Restore Its Global Competitiveness?

Oh... its a fake economy of some-sort. I see.

You can snarky if you like, but ask your professors why the Soviet Union collapsed. I'm sure they aren't going to give any credit to Reagan, so they're going to say that the USSR acted like it had an economy it really didn't and the whole thing collapsed.

You think China can't be doing the same thing? You would be naive.
 
With fake skyscrapers, fake bullet trains, fake factories, and fake trade surpluses, apparently...:) I'll never understand the need of people with a strong ideological bent to deny that something is real because their beliefs say it shouldn't exist.

I'll never understand the need for some to be fascinated with authoritarian regimes and their dog and pony shows just because they don't happen to like the nation of their birth. But there's a century-long tradition of that in this country, especially among the progressive left. Yup, fascism was the dynamic, youthful, inevitable wave of the futre. Then communism. Then . . . whatever else. Apparently these days, it's China.

But you and Tom Friedman can swoon at your leisure, as is your right. You wouldn't have such a right in the place you're swooning over.
 
Same place they've always been - Appalachia.

kayford5.jpg

Yeah, that's TOTALLY the size of Montana. And the ground is just covered with toxic waste of all kinds, and people are being born with defects willy-nilly, livestock is growing extra limbs, and the ground is contaminated ten feet down. Exactly the same thing. Sure.



But they're also investing more of their economy in infrastructure overall. That's just sound planning for the future, regardless of how your political system is structured. They don't just pray to the god of capitalism to make growth happen, they facilitate it with forward-looking public budget priorities.

They're building things they've never had before, so of course they're spending more.

And what does it mean for a country to go in 30 years from being a global hyperpower to being a tired foreign-commodity junkie with no manufacturing base, crumbling infrastructure, and Third World services?

That's just flat-out self-loathing horse****. Perhaps you should request an immigration visa to China and see if it's really all you think is.
 
Last edited:
Nope. I ain't that much of an asshole, in case you were wondering. I simply find your belief in the equivalence of Slovenian and American health care hilarious, that's all.

Slovenia is only one step below us in World Health Organization rankings.

I'll never understand the need for some to be fascinated with authoritarian regimes and their dog and pony shows just because they don't happen to like the nation of their birth.

First of all, you can keep your bitter speculations on my feelings toward America to yourself. The fact that I debate issues with people who often barely seem to acknowledge the difference between true and false is pretty strong evidence that I care what happens to this country. Secondly, a functioning city is not a "dog and pony show," and you are not going to make any valid points by pretending that because something didn't come about in ways prescribed by your ideology that it's somehow not real. That's laughable Pravda-esque thinking. China is making investments and reaping major returns. We, on the other hand, have not made those investments because for thirty years Republicans and their ideological cadres have held our government hostage to market fundamentalism. For thirty years we have flushed unfathomable amounts of wealth down the toilet in worthless private stock market speculation rather than taxing that money at a reasonable rate and putting it into public infrastructure.

But there's a century-long tradition of that in this country, especially among the progressive left.

Learning from the experiences of other countries would seem wiser than ignoring them.

Yup, fascism was the dynamic, youthful, inevitable wave of the futre.

Fascism was the movement of the wealthy, industrial right. Stop trying to rewrite history like the people you're criticizing.

Then communism.

That we can legitimately take responsibility for, at least in the early decades before it became a vehicle for Russian nationalism. But history unfolds as it will, "best laid plans" and whatnot. At very least it spurred America toward its greatest achievements in order to compete with the Soviet Union. Tragic, don't you think, that we feel no similar impulse to compete with China instead of being passive consumers of its exports?

But you and Tom Friedman can swoon at your leisure, as is your right.

Do you even know what you're talking about, or is this all just one long ideological reaction?

You wouldn't have such a right in the place you're swooning over.

And I wouldn't have had the right in the 1960s Soviet Union either, but that doesn't mean I would fail to recognize the need to compete with them. Now just answer the question this thread asks: How does America restore its global competitiveness?

They're building things they've never had before, so of course they're spending more.

Why aren't we building anything we've never had before?

That's just flat-out self-loathing horse****.

You mistake a fact for a judgment. Believe it or not, a country is not a woman asking you if a dress makes her look fat - honestly assessing its present situation in historical context is helpful.

Perhaps you should request an immigration visa to China and see if it's really all you think is.

Rather than trashing other countries whose performance embarrasses us, couldn't you be spending your time coming up with ideas for how to make America more competitive?
 
First of all, you can keep your bitter speculations on my feelings toward America to yourself.

Oh, boo hoo hoo. I've seen enough of your posts to know it's not "speculation," and if you think it's "bitter" rather than bemused, well, that says something, too.


The fact that I debate issues with people who often barely seem to acknowledge the difference between true and false is pretty strong evidence that I care what happens to this country.

Yeah, that made no sense at all.

Secondly, a functioning city is not a "dog and pony show,"

It is when the government builds such a city specifically to "show" the West that it's on par with them. It's rather cargo-cultish. It's not my fault you refuse to look behind the veil.


and you are not going to make any valid points by pretending that because something didn't come about in ways prescribed by your ideology that it's somehow not real. That's laughable Pravda-esque thinking.

See, now you're making assumptions about me. I never said it was because they don't follow my political views.

China is making investments and reaping major returns. We, on the other hand, have not made those investments because for thirty years Republicans and their ideological cadres have held our government hostage to market fundamentalism. For thirty years we have flushed unfathomable amounts of wealth down the toilet in worthless private stock market speculation rather than taxing that money at a reasonable rate and putting it into public infrastructure.

They're replacing their shacks with stuff we've had for a century. And yeah, it's all "Republicans" behind it. Of course you'd see it that way.


Learning from the experiences of other countries would seem wiser than ignoring them.

And you're ignoring my point. It wasn't about "learning from the experiences of other countries." It was about swooning over authoritarian systems which appeared, for a little while, to be making strides past our own "lethargic" and "backwards" way of doing things. Sound familiar?



Fascism was the movement of the wealthy, industrial right. Stop trying to rewrite history like the people you're criticizing.

What history am I "rewriting"? The Progressive left loved the fascist movements, particularly when they were making strides during the Depression. (Again, sound familiar?) If you don't think so, then you need to learn the history you think I'm "rewriting."


That we can legitimately take responsibility for, at least in the early decades before it became a vehicle for Russian nationalism.

Didn't stop smug lefty treatises on the subject all the way up to and throughout the '80s, and the moaning after that house of cards collapsed. And hey, even now among members of this board.

But history unfolds as it will, "best laid plans" and whatnot. At very least it spurred America toward its greatest achievements in order to compete with the Soviet Union. Tragic, don't you think, that we feel no similar impulse to compete with China instead of being passive consumers of its exports?

I don't think that's true at all. But I also think the major impetus NOT to compete with them comes from YOUR side of things.

Do you even know what you're talking about, or is this all just one long ideological reaction?

Do you have any better response?


And I wouldn't have had the right in the 1960s Soviet Union either, but that doesn't mean I would fail to recognize the need to compete with them. Now just answer the question this thread asks: How does America restore its global competitiveness?

In ways you would almost certainly oppose.


Why aren't we building anything we've never had before?

Well, THAT is a legitimately good question. No doubt you blame it all on "right-wingers," but perhaps you might also take a look at the staggering entitlement spending and wonder where else that money could go.


You mistake a fact for a judgment. Believe it or not, a country is not a woman asking you if a dress makes her look fat - honestly assessing its present situation in historical context is helpful.

Yeaaaaaaah. I'll just bet you'd rather go to Slovenia for your health care. Yeaaaaaah. "Fact" indeed.


Rather than trashing other countries whose performance embarrasses us, couldn't you be spending your time coming up with ideas for how to make America more competitive?

If you're "embarrassed," you make my point for me.
 
Last edited:
Getting rid of that pesky deficit is a great start. Then investing in new technologies would be the next step, because that is where most new industry comes from. Then just getting the companies who manufacture these new technologies to stay in America so we have some exports for a change.
 
Oh lord where to begin ...

Troubadour said:
"Ever since the Reagan administration first began the trend of liquidating our infrastructure for tax cuts"

False. From 1956 to 2004 public spending on infrastructure capital (ie. new stuff, not operating costs) grew by 1.7%. Since 1987 public spending on infrastructure capital has been rising by 2.1% per year. While I'll grant you that Reagan may have been responsible for the brief spending drop from $100 Billion per year (constant 2006 dollars) to $80 Billion per year circa 1983, you would still have to reconcile the fact that spending then steadily increased so that by 1988 spending was back over $100 Billion per year (again, constant 2006 dollars). [1] Your claim that Reagan "liquidated" infrastructure is simply false.

Troubadour said:
"the United States has steadily lost its global leadership in practically every area of society and economics."

Since you are comparing us primarily to China and their rise in manufacturing, I'm going to say false again. The US continues to be the worlds largest manufacturer. In 2005 the US accounted for 22.4% of Global Manufacturing Output (we produced 22.4% of the "stuff" in the world), while China accounted for 8% (or just under 1/3 of US output). [2] So, false. The US has not lost its global leadership in manufacturing, especially when compared to china.

Troubadour said:
"I realize it's difficult to understand just how far ahead of us China is getting just by hearing all the statistics that are by now so commonplace, so I'd like to present you with some visual aids."

Why are you showing us pictures of skyscrapers? 0% of US public infrastructure spending goes towards skyscrapers. Are you suggesting we start doing so? How is that an example of "forward-thinking infrastructure"? How are skyscrapers going to improve our manufacturing or health statistics? Conversely if somehow our manufacturing or health statistics were even better how would this translate directly into more skyscrapers? This is complete non-sense.

Troubadour said:
"They don't just pray to the god of capitalism to make growth happen, they facilitate it with forward-looking public budget priorities."

Like what? There are relatively few infrastructure projects that lead directly to growth, especially when compared to other uses of the same money. [1]

Troubadour said:
"And what does it mean for a country to go in 30 years from being a global hyperpower to being a tired foreign-commodity junkie with no manufacturing base, crumbling infrastructure ..."

False, see above. Just because you repeat it, doesn't make it so.

Troubadour said:
"For thirty years we have flushed unfathomable amounts of wealth down the toilet in worthless private stock market speculation rather than taxing that money at a reasonable rate and putting it into public infrastructure."

Again, like what? Not once in your whole tired, baseless, tirade have you identified a single infrastructure investment that was either forgone here in the US or made in China.

"How Can America Restore Its Global Competitiveness?"

1) Stop spending money we don't have (this goes as much for individuals as for the government).
2) Eliminate the corporate income tax (we can tax capital gains / dividends the same as income in exchange).
3) Let us actually, you know, compete by eliminating subsidies and tariffs (preferably in exchange for other countries eliminating their subsidies and tariffs).

J

[1] http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/95xx/doc9534/7-10-Infrastructure.pdf
[2] http://www.uschina.org/public/documents/2006/09/us-manufacturing.pdf
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom