What Mac said!

alan S.
re milton friedman//free markets.
exactly mate.
you might be interested to know i had an exchange in the past year with
a govt mandarin about the free trade topic.
he trotted out all the normal stuff n homolies bout free trade.
to which i replied...and you might like this cos uk has the same
problem..(notice the rise of pound stores selling imported stuff
and employing people on the cheap ??)...
i said.."when your retired in the future and your grankids come to you and
say they cant find a decent paying job and are stuck on welfare
cos there is no manufacturing left in canada;
you can always sit him/her on your imported sofa, watching the imported
tv, and sleep on the imported bed...etc etc"..
answer..there was no response. point made.

lets not forget central banks in all of this mess.
typically staffed by economists n theoreticians whove never
ever built a product in their lives. and who dont seem
to understand the importance of industrial strategy in building
strong job/wage growth.
the bank of england is a joke imho. as an example.
because of their policies the major employers in uk are
financial institutions. (being bailed out.).
my major tenet is you cant run a country on just financial institution jobs.
you need a strong manufacturing base..but the good ole B of E ,
(and the bank of canada) have failed to grasp this important fact imho.
but hey..lol...i can still buy marmite here in canada..


frankly alan..
one has to step back cos i think its all geopolitics
the poor are being caught in.
viz big games tween govts.
my theory is manufacturing moved to the far east
due to big picture western govt geopolitics.
ie..western govts were concerned bout millions of people needing jobs
in the far east. irrespective of lots of
people in western countries ending up on welfare.
gotta see the big picture in all of this.

I don't think US or Canada gave a hoot about the unemployed in the far east.
It was cheap goods and cheap labor. Not sympathy.



Anyone know what our largest export is? It is more of a necessity than oil, yet we literally give a lot of it away.

The US *could* turn the deficit around, but at the cost of many lives in other countries. When you see 'the big picture' we are not the bad guys many make us out to be.

rharv.
i have never thought you were the bad guys.
gotta ton of respect for your country.

your last para is very telling imho.
which seems to imply, and ive wondered the same as to whether
the usa in certain industrial areas is sacrificing itself
to help lives in other countries.

I know your opinion of the US is good, manning, we have talked enough privately to see that.

The question is more are we 'knowingly' doing it.. or are we using it wisely?
Serious problem that we can't make it up with paper companies.
We need to adjust the money coming in vs going out somehow. It would be sad if it came to using that commodity to balance a budget.
There is lots of talk about the world's oil supply falling short of demand in the not too distant future. It appears to me the world's food supply has already fallen short of the demand. Which is more important? In a global economy, that one commodity IMO is what keeps the US secure.


BTW, thanks to Canada for being the largest importer of US goods.

That first one is a good point and accurate example in many cases, Mike.

In my eyes it falls into the 'entitlement' frame of mind mentioned earlier. It occurs at both ends of the system.

Around 1776 Adam Smith published his book "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" (generally referred to by the short title The Wealth of Nations) in which he declared that manufacturing is what leads to the wealth of a nation. During the time when this book served as the model for most developed counties' economic policy, the living standard of those countries increased dramatically.

Many people today seem to believe that wealth is a bad thing; but it can be used to purchase the things any society needs to benefit its citizens.


What disturbs me is that we are going in two directions that fly in the face of what has worked in the past:

1) the west has decided to abandon manufacturing in favor of service industies
2) During the time of manufacturing "plenty", social programs were enacted because in times of plenty there is money to do that.
3) but now that manufacturing is going away, we continue spending deficit dollars to increase and expand such programs even though it seems obvious to everyone with any sense that the ability to pay for them is declining while the cost for them is increasing.

The left likes to point the finger at the right and presume that we don't care about the needy, which is bull. We care about managing the needs of society in a way that is finacially maintainable. And what we are doing now (and getting ready to do on a much larger scale) is simply NOT sustainable.

It doesn't do anybody any permanent good to get people addicted to services that you cannot guarantee. What will happen to the people who are not self-supporting (for a number of reasons ) when the bottom drops out and there is no more money? You can't tax income that went overseas.

to Alan and manning,

I agree with much of what you both said about what happens during the unemployment process, and the dehumanization of it. We could pursue this discussion asking what's the best way to alleviate symptoms as they currently exist... but I would rather pursue the discussion by asking how to change the symptoms altogether.

My point from the beginning has been that all policy has the effect of reinforcing certain behaviors. People tend to redirect their behavior to wherever the advantage lies. When the advantages shifts position, behavior follows.

All I'm saying is that if the system rewards abuse, you will get more abuse. Obviously, it is necessary to have some recourse for people who have no options. Nobody argues that point. But here is an example of how to change the incentive inherent in the system:

For example:
when a person becomes unemployed, there is a certain amount of money set aside to pay his unemployment benefits. If he gets a job before he uses all those benefits, then benefits stop being paid and he feels cheated... so there is an incentive to remain unemployed until the benefits are gone. This exacerbates the problem, because people should be using that money as a buffer while they look for work, but they don't look for work because they want to get the full benefits. The incentive is in the wrong place, because the need is to encourage activity, but instead inactivity is encouraged.

But, since a set amount of cash is already earmarked for each unemployed individual (and most of them will use it all up, and more) .. what if the government offered to pay the remaining sum directly to the person as soon as he got a job? In that case, people would have an incentive to accept work quickly because they would get a nice lump sum of cash. We're not talking small change. If I were unemployed and could get a check for well over $10,000 USD by accepting a job, I would do it. Even if they withheld the check for a year to make sure I kept the job.

At the LEAST, they shouldn't discourage taking a lower paying job by reducing benefits. I fpeople could get a short-term raise by taking a lower paying job, and continue collecting benefits, they would haver an incentive to find jobs.

All I'm saying is that policy should encourage the better option, not the most debilitating option.

your thoughts?

Just remember, we pay for that health care. The money doesn't grow on trees. We have a fee schedule. You go to the doc and get a flu shot. He does not see you. The vaccine is paid for, it's cheaper than treating sick people. The doc bills $10. to the gov't for the service. (I think that's right). It's a computerized system. But there are clinics all over with signs, docs that do it for a pharmacy on Sundays, the Health Unit runs drive in clinics in flu season. We used to have the city doctor come to the Fire Station and give us our shots when I worked.

But we pay for it. Lots. Taxes. Yet our per capita health care costs are less than in other countries. ie. USA.

That's an old debate, but..I spent 4 hours with a team of Doctors yesterday. I bet that would cost thousands if I didn't have health care. They had copies of every xray, scan and blood test for the past 8 years. I wrote 'tests', questionaires, had 3 exams by different specialists. All the routine stuff too, but bp in both arms a legs, an ultrasound of my neck for plaque, eyes, ears, throat.

The meeting at the end..osteoporosis, getting worse.
Rheumatoid arthritis, not under control.
Blood pressure, all over the map, based on adrenalin amount at the time it's taken.
Macular Degeneration of the right eye, stable.
Blood Sugar..mostly ok, NO raw sugar and 1/2 glass of juice is ok.
Fibromyalgia. This is the newest thing.

3 medications changed.
1 added.
Now I waited 5 weeks for that appointment.

There is a private clinic downtown you can go to. That same workup, was available in 10 days for $1700. (They bill the gov't for what they can).
They offer next day doctor, a once a year exam for 4 hours, and access to cat and pet scans in Michigan at a discount over what you'd have to pay if you just showed up at the US hospital. You cannot get those scans here unless you have a reason for them. But employers are paying a bonus to executives to have every test run, trips to the US for stuff they don't do to a healthy 30 year old, like PSA tests etc. You get a nice leather bound report on your health and a plan to keep you that way.

BTW, they found a lump in my neck and I was given a doctors appt. for noon today.

I am very unhappy with the fibromyalgia thing, but it at least explains why I thought I only needed 4 hours sleep a night and my hips hurt if I lay on my side.

John

Very sorry to hear about the various health issues. Fibromyalgia is certainly no walk in the park. Neither is the osteoporosis, arthritis, macular degeneration and high blood pressure. And lumps on the neck are not normally something to rejoice about. I'm glad that you are in a position to receive the care you need. That is indeed a completely separate issue from whether or not health care is an entitlement. I'm glad that health care exists in various forms in every country.

The purpose of this thread is not to advocate screwing people out of a good thing, but rather to emphasize that the method of providing a good thing can influence the sustainability of providing it. We are in danger of being unable to sustain existing programs. The system as it exists is in danger of insolvency. The million dollar question is this: given the system we already have, what is the best way to improve it?

I noticed an interesting phenomenon a long time ago as a young man. It has remained true in all of my observations so far in my life. The observation is this:


When I first meet someone (whether in person or online, the same thing appears to be true) within a few minutes he/she will try to establish common ground. Some people do it by talking about what they hate, hoping I hate the same things.

Others reveal themselves by talking about the things they love. Often, these people don't care if I love the same things, they are just so full of their own passion that they can't NOT talk about it!

I have found that the second situation inspires me, and the first situation discourages me. That's the main distinction. Both types may or may not make equally good friends


I don't know if this is a corollary or not to the topic of excellence vs equality, but at this point in the conversation I feel compelled to mention this observation and ask for other peoples comments along those lines.

If nothing else, this observation has led me to identify myself by what I love rather than by what I hate. I don't care what you hate... but I am very very interested in knowing what you love, and why you love it.

That's why this is such a great forum. People here all love music! Me too!

And not just music, but also they love home recording! Me too!

And not just that, they also love evluating and buying gear! ME TOO!

And they all love BIAB and/or RB! Me Too!

In the final analysis, we have far more in common than we have as differences. If we steadfastly communicate around our common love, then we will never have to censor the topics of disagreement. A healthy system allows for difference, it doesn't suppress it.

Thoughts?

John Conley
so sorry to hear of your health situation mate..sincerely.
i pray for your good health to return.

to all....
frankly i can only speak of the uk and canada that i know very well.
haveing lived in each for many years.
and frankly i feel for obama in the usa..cos i was hoping
with his background social aspects would be addressed.
i said to my wife when he was elected that i really hoped he could address important
strategic issuess, but i also said if he didnt his rateings would drop.
which i understand from media reports here,sadly this has occurred.

generally i feel these poor economic times for many people
are not going to end soon. and thus interest rates will stay low.
cos too many people are scared to spend lest they too loose their jobs.

pat marr asked..what is the solution ??
the answer to my mind is western govts have got to get off
their backsides and implement a top to bottom re industrialisation
strategy.
lets look at two cases.
england and canada.
in englands case the manufacturing rot set in decades back.
i can remember for example when i was a young physics student in uk...
brilliant minds spending too much time analyseing the internals of the atom ,
rather than researching new advanced products to sell to the world
and manufacture.
how england soaks up unemployment is to create more govt
pencil pusher jobs.
same here in canada. we have a big network of universities and research
places , but they are often focussed on "pure research"
rather than building for example the next great computer tech to export
to the rest of the world and manufacture.
so in summary both england and canada produce thousands of well
educated grads, but many waste their education working in low level jobs
cos the advanced manufacturing industry dont exist to employ them.
its been in all the papers here...many phd's driving taxis for example.


let me make an analogy n see if it makes sense.
if i keep on coming to your house and selling you "stuff"..
n "gadgets" pretty soon your gonna be bankrupt arent you ??
in essence this is what the govts of canada and uk have
allowed to occur (and i suspect usa too.) for years and years
thanks to the free world trade policies, which have flooded
uk and canada and usa markets with imports.
as a result i'm reading in the papers today that the province of ontario
is gonna be in the red for many years to come.
no wonder..govt is a big buyer of imported computers n hi tech gear.
if you ever go into govt offices in ottawa , the capital, youll see all
imported puter gear.
same in uk. all govt offices are useing imported puter gear in london.
and i suspect the same in washington.
(remember when i said up post if i keep on coming to your house
and selling "stuff" to you..??)
in canadas' case we have i believe an accumulated deficit of 600 billion.
in the early 70's canada had no deficit i understand, or a small one.
what event caused such a build up of deficits ??
yup..the house example. in the intervening decades since the early 70's
canada (and uk) imported oodles of puter gear. oodles of cash were sent abroad..
now the bills are coming due.
if , instead , the uk and canada had have developed its own
advanced puter industry billions would not have left both countries,
and jobs would have created at home.
it all comes back to lack of manufacturing strategy imho.
and letting the world free traders have their way policy wise.
the sad fact is both the uk and canada have been led for years by
people with no vision when it comes to manufacturing and job creation.
aided by myopic central bankers who were too focused on price controls etc etc.
i raised sternly all these issues with a senior mandarin at the bank of canada
years n years ago, because i felt at the time some of the problems we are
seeing today would occur. being an economist , he failed to grasp
the various nuances. as i said..people in charge with no vision imho.

so whats the solution ??
answer...rapid strategic new manufacturing advanced industries imho.
but it aint gonna happen cos the people in charge dont se it as important.
i hope i make some sense.
as i once said to a senior mandarin...
"where the heck are future generations of young canadians gonna work
if all manufacturing has been off shored".

regarding the incentive to avoid looking for work:

Years ago I owned a small business. People would routinely stop by and enquire about employment, then ask me to sign something saying they were here and had looked for work. Some of them told me directly that they did not want a job, they just needed my signature so they could comply with the rule that would enable them to continue collecting benefits. Interesting.

On a similar note, I once approached a guy who was holding a "will work for food" sign. I offered him money in exchange for helping me to move a big stack of wood from where I had cut down a tree that was threatening to fall on my house.

He quite honestly told me that he didn't want to work, but that people wouldn't give him money if he didn't portray himself as being down and out. I still don't understand why he came clean to me, except that I called him on his offer to work, and he was more willing to be embarrassed than he was to work.

true stories.

Your thoughts?

manning,

regarding manufacturing, we are on the same page I think. Same goes for the USA. Our local community colleges don't even offer manufacturing curricula anymore. It's all medical, IT and arts & crafts

However, I have been to German and Swiss factories, and they are serious about preserving manufacturing in those countries. THey are very good at it, with state of the art equipment and a skilled work force. Technical education is part of a well-conceived goal of positioning their children for the future.

ps..heres what i love.
as you asked pat.
1. my dear wife. who has put up with my creative music madness.
god bless her. plus my dear mum of 92 yrs of age.
and whats left of my family in the uk.
2. makeing songs and singing. either on my own or with other nice folks via collabs.
3. aston martin and porsche cars..
tho i'll never be able to afford either. lol.
4. happiness and peace.