I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
Joined: Jun 26, 2007 Posts: 1448 Location: The Canada of America
Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 10:18 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
AgentR wrote:
A lot of times people lose sight of exactly how much domestic production we really have. Its huge.
It's about 5 million barrels a day, a deficit of 15 million or so. And that 15 million only shows up as long as there's money to pay for it. You lose very much of it, say a third, and real questions arise about how food gets to the stores, and how does product A get from point B to point C, or Joe Six Pack get to his job, and what happens to the economy as a result? Having a quarter of what you need is better than nothing, but it hardly sets you up to take on the world. Can anybody else hear Ringo singing "I get by with a LOT of help from my friends?"
AgentR wrote:
Their income and real estate taxes will be due in US dollars. Currency to pay taxes is more than "worth something"; it keeps the business or corporation alive. And guess what, both types of taxation scale with inflation. No, even at $1000 US to 1 EU, the dollar is going to be in adequate demand domestically.
Oh, yes... never in history have we seen a run on a currency destroy it as a store of value and sink an economy. Never have we seen the common people of a country turn away from the valueless scrip officially issued by their government in favour of something they actually have faith in. Now here you are, ready for the whole world to go down the toilet in some Robert Ardrey fantasy of bestial inhumanity... but hey, the dollar's going to be solid all the way down, is that what you're saying? Clearly national pride goeth before the fall.
AgentR wrote:
Umm; again, an unrealistic view of the world; we have enough domestic productivity to keep doing that for a century.
No, you don't. Not by half. Certainly not facing others who DO, and whose economies ARE on a paying basis.
AgentR wrote:
The US ideology of world trade embraces the freedom to traverse shipping lanes, even (or most especially) sensitive ones, like the Strait of Taiwan. That is not going to stop until the US no longer has the capability to launch nuclear weapons.
Oh, we'll see. I feel that VERY soon, we're going to look back at the idea that the US could just sail up and down what China CLEARLY considers an internal water (militarily speaking, if not economically) is going to be as unbelievable an idea as the British marching up to the White House and setting it on fire. It won't take anybody nuking anybody; it just won't be DONE anymore. _________________ I can has cheezburger?
Joined: Apr 04, 2005 Posts: 473 Location: Seattle, WA
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 1:10 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Cashmere wrote:
They're idiots, as rats often are, if they're too stupid to see that the Empire is not in those two countries to play nanny.
Sign me up for being an idiot. I don't see why we can't do a better job for $ 700 billion.
Quote:
Quote:
"Why it couldn't do so even for its own citizens post-Katrina."
Of course it could - it chose not to. Why is a different conversation. At the end of the day, the total death toll was a paltry 1,800. How many of the 1,800 could have been saved if the entire U.S. army arrived 10 minutes after the storm? Probably very few.
What made Katrina different was images of thousands of poor black people in the Superdome for a week. They didn't starve, they didn't die of thirst. The worst that can be said was that they lived in more-than-usual squalor for a few days.
Are you from the south? The attitude you have and the America you speak of is not the same as the America I live in. With attitudes like yours, who needs enemies?
Quote:
In the end, I couldn't give a crap less about people who were . . .
1. Dumb enough to live below sea level on the coast in Hurricane Alley.
and
2. Dumb enough not to leave when the storm passed over Florida and was predicted to hit near New Orleans a full 2 days in advance of land fall.
What's already been said in response to this comment was said in a more civil manner than the words that come to my mind.
I do have to admit there is a certain logic to your view cashmere.
Joined: Oct 06, 2006 Posts: 1367 Location: East Texas
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Nickel, I think I've expressed all the points I intended to in this thread, no sense repeating them. Repeating them won't help you understand my point any better, so I am content that you take both the first and last comment. _________________ Yes, we are. As we are.
And so shall we remain; Until the end.
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:10 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
What I think is funny is that people on this board (which are most of them US based) think that US has always have been a superpower. What they need to remember is that US became one of the 2 superpowers that divided the world after the second world war, and that was an "accident" (due to the fact that they won the war in pacific). Russia won the war in Europe and basically conquered half of it. The remaining half was an US dominion kept "independent" by the US nuclear arsenal.
However, after USSR collapsed all hell broke loose in Europe and half of the continent got their freedom. We are talking about like 150-200 million of educated people and more or less functional societies that went from a corrupt and idiotic system to a less corrupt and less idiotic system - meaning the EU. Reconstructing these countries is a very good business for the capitalist systems from the EU - as the system can expand itself as in the good old days.
You should consider the power of these 159 million people and how much the EU power increased because of them. US tried to insert itself into this area, but it is very hard as they do not have the money to do it. In the meantime Germany has reconstructed itself from ground-up and now they are preparing for the world domination - and I am not talking about military power, but economic and technological power.
Consequently EU power increased while US power remained the same, or advanced only a little. However this move only generated a power shift big enough to change the world.
Independently on this, ASIA became the worlds leaders in computers and other processor industries, and the most innovative societies from the world. Consequently Asia's standing vs US and EU increased. Relatively to that, the US power decreased.
And this is how we entered a multipolar world and how US global domination came to an end. Once again: the US domination was a result of the fact that her competitors exhausted themselves in the second world war, otherwise it would have never ever got to that level. Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).
In economics there are games where everybody wins from a deal (positive sum game I think is the english term) - and this is how we are educated to believe in school by the capitalist thinkers and writers that capitalism is. However I believe that in the current economic (capitalist) system the game is based on the quantity of energy available to the system. As long as the energy available is expanding, we are talking about a positive sum game (as depicted by the economic thinkers). However when we are evolving in a world with contracting energy available then the theory isn't valid anymore as we enter into a negative sum game ( a game where everyone looses from a deal). And this is where the capitalism ends, and some other economic systems start. IN other words in the future EVERYBODY will loose and the winner will be the one that looses less, at least until a new equilibrium is reached. That is NOT capitalism but something else...
Obviously, post PO the quantity of energy will decrease so we will see that the freedoms of companies and individuals will be decreased and organizations with greater economic and military power will be created to cope with the new situation (EU once more). You must be BIG to live in a world of giants.
Joined: Jun 15, 2006 Posts: 107 Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:10 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Egomancer wrote:
Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).
I have told people this for ages too. As an historian it´s not that hard to see the weak grasp and it´s reasons the US is in the current situation. In the simplest of terms the resources that matter are in Eurasia; the US is on the other side of the planet. To leave a "footprint" it has to spend resources like no other. Which is easy to see that it´s failing. Add to that a host of other reasons, but in the simplest terms the 2 gigantic moats it has to cross will suffice.
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:29 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Scactha wrote:
Egomancer wrote:
Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).
I have told people this for ages too. As an historian it´s not that hard to see the weak grasp and it´s reasons the US is in the current situation. In the simplest of terms the resources that matter are in Eurasia; the US is on the other side of the planet. To leave a "footprint" it has to spend resources like no other. Which is easy to see that it´s failing. Add to that a host of other reasons, but in the simplest terms the 2 gigantic moats it has to cross will suffice.
Not to mention that Bush Empire has not even been able to keep Latin America under US boot. IMF kicked out and Venezuela outspending US on manifold scale for influence, which of course is also qualitatively from different planet when compared to quality of US influence.
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Scactha wrote:
Egomancer wrote:
Now the world went back to "normal", the exceptional conditions are over, and US will get back to it's former status of regional power (which I assume it deserves).
I have told people this for ages too. As an historian it´s not that hard to see the weak grasp and it´s reasons the US is in the current situation. In the simplest of terms the resources that matter are in Eurasia; the US is on the other side of the planet. To leave a "footprint" it has to spend resources like no other. Which is easy to see that it´s failing. Add to that a host of other reasons, but in the simplest terms the 2 gigantic moats it has to cross will suffice.
What about the influence of the American multinationals, like GE, Microsoft, IBM and the motor companies? They are not by any means instruments of U.S. government policy, but they carry American influence. I don't think they dominate the world as they used to, but they are still powerful, no?
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:41 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
The 20th century was indeed the American Century. In the post WWII period we enjoyed an unprecedented expansion of domestic and then global energy supplies, massive expansion of the money supply of US dollars held outside the United States that facilitated a massive expansion of domestic credit, thereby resulting in 60 years of overall strong economic growth.
The 21st century will be a very different era. First and foremost, the two defining factors of this century being the imminent peak in global oil production, and the unknown but likely unpleasant consequences of excessive levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, and the resulting global warming. Secondly, and in conjunction with those global issues, the opening decades of this century will be noted for massive shifts in the macroeconomic landscape.
We are witnessing the rapid decline of US economic and energy superiority, due in equal parts to a credit/debt crisis, an inflationary monetary strategy, increasing geopolitical divisions over strategic control of hydrocarbon energy supplies, and ongoing US militay overstretch in an attempt to control the world's largest remaining supplies of oil and gas.
Regarding the last item, we are now 5 years into what future historians will undoubtedly refer to "Imperial Overstretch," eloquently defined by Paul Kennedy in his famous book...
Quote:
Great Powers in relative decline instinctively respond by spending more on ‘security,’ and thereby divert potential resources from ‘investment’ and compound their long-term dilemma.
— Historian Paul Kennedy describing “imperial overstretch” in The Rise and Fall of Great Powers (1989)
In his classic study of empires, The Rise and Fall of Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000, Yale historian Paul Kennedy observes that when great powers begin to decline, they almost invariably resort to war and belligerency, thereby accelerating their demise as they waste their national treasuries on military spending to the detriment of their economies and their peoples.
Kennedy described this pattern as "overstretch." The United States is not immune to these historical patterns — the ultimate legacy of the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq — may in time be viewed by future historians as the pivotal event that solidified our own classical “imperial overstretch.”
So, where is all this heading? To a multi-polar world order - a world that will look much different than the pre WWII era where the US was a rising star, different from the bi-polar Cold War period of 1945 to 1991, and different from the brief uni-polar world order circa 1991 to 2003. The March 2003 invasion of Iraq ushered in a new era which I refer to as the "petrodollar warfare" era (hence the name of my book). For those curious, here are some random excerpts from Chapter 6:
New Realities of the 21st Century: Emerging Tri-Polar World
...here's what the Europeans think (BTW, Emmanuel Todd famously predicted the fall of the USSR in 1976, and now is predicting the fall of the US empire...)
Quote:
Let the present America expend what remains of its energy, if that is what it wants to do, on the “war on terrorism” — a substitute battle for the perpetuation of a hegemony that it has already lost. If it stubbornly decides to continue showing off its supreme power, it will only end up exposing to the world its powerlessness….What the world needs is not that America disappear but that it return to its true self — democratic, liberal, and productive."
— Emmanuel Todd, After the Empire: Breakdown of the American Order, 2004
...here's what the Chinese think...and they typically take a long view of history...
Quote:
In the last century, American people were pioneers of system and technology innovation. However, the interests of a few American financial monopolies now lead this country to war. This is such a tragedy for the American people.
— Wang Jian, Chinese bureaucrat, 2003
...and the Chinese view of our Imperial Overstretch...
Quote:
The current US predicament in Iraq serves as another example that when a country’s superiority psychology inflates beyond its real capability, a lot of trouble can be caused. But the troubles and disasters the United States has met do not stem from the threats by others, but from its own cocksureness and arrogance. …The 21st century is not the ‘American Century.’ That does not mean that the United States does not want the dream. Rather it is incapable of realizing the goal.
— Qian Qichen, former Chinese minister regarded as one of the “main architects” of China’s foreign policy, October, 2004
...and their view of the dollar losing its world reserve currency status (note: 6 months after this statement the Chinese divorced their RNB currency from the dollar peg and went to a basket of currencies. Once OPEC does the same circa 2008-2012, we can officially end the American Empire on that date...)
Quote:
The US dollar is no longer … in our opinion [seen] as a stable currency, and is devaluating all the time, and that's putting troubles all the time. So the real issue is how to change the regime from a US dollar pegging ... to a more manageable reference, say euros, yen, dollars — those kind of more diversified systems.
— Fan Gang, director of the National Economic Research Institute, China Reform Foundation, quoted at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 26, 2005
...and from an American who knows a bit about economics...
Quote:
The US can lose its dominance only as a result of its own mistakes. At present the country is in the process of committing such mistakes because it is in the hands of a group of extremists whose strong sense of mission is matched only by their false sense of certitude.
This distorted view postulates that because we are stronger than others, we must know better and we must have right on our side. That is where religious fundamentalism comes together with market fundamentalism to form the ideology of American supremacy.
— George Soros, The Bubble of American Supremacy, 2003
...Why is the US committing these mistakes in Iraq? Iran? Venezuela? Antagonzing Russia? Alienating the EU? In essence, why is the "bubble of American supremacy" beginning to falter? Why such desperation? Follow the trends in global oil production...and always - follow the money...
Quote:
In the real world … the one factor underpinning American prosperity is keeping the dollar the World Reserve Currency. This can only be done if the oil producing states keep oil priced in dollars, and all their currency reserves in dollar assets. If anything put the final nail in Saddam Hussein’s coffin, it was his move to start selling oil for Euros.
— Richard Benson, “Oil, the Dollar, and US Prosperity,” www.prudentbear.com, August 2003
..summarzing how we arrived at this period of Imperial Overstretch...
Quote:
There were only two credible reasons for invading Iraq: control over oil and preservation of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
— John Chapman, “The Real Reasons Bush Went to War,” the Guardian (UK), July 2004
...and from a macroeconomic perspective, here's why the 21st century will likely not be another American Century...
Quote:
Beneath the surface of current security debates, therefore, and in stark contrast to the perceived mismatch of strategic competence and geopolitical power between the US and Europe, lies a sleeping tiger. Despite the many arguments that would question Europe’s capacity to take economic and political advantage from such a tectonic shift in monetary realities, the only likely future scenario of change in the realm of currencies is one of greater relative weight for the euro. This is the one area in which long-run dynamics seem to place Europe in a relative structural advantage vis-a-vis the US — despite the appearance of the contrary in the realm of economic productivity and with respect to the current military gap.
— Paul Isbell, “The Shifting Geopolitics of the Euro,” 2002
Here's are some excerpts from my book regarding the rapid decline of US economic, political, and military power, as we enter this new century:
From a macroeconomic perspective, global trends suggest the probable emergence of a multipolar world, which itself can be destabilizing if the poles act unilaterally rather than multilaterally. Right now the United States government is increasingly relying on unilateral military power to shore up its global position economically. Despite this strategy, the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency is slowing eroding.
In essence, the petrodollar-recycling system is now under pressure from a competing currency, a problem that has been exacerbated for the US by political tensions arising from the Iraq War and from US neoconservative ideology. The Bush administration probably believed that the occupation of Iraq and the installation of large and permanent US military bases there would keep the remaining OPEC producers from even considering switching the denomination of their oil sales from dollars to euros. It appears that any attempt by OPEC members in the Middle East or Latin America to do so will be met with either overt or covert expressions of US power.
Regrettably, Bush and his neoconservative advisers chose to apply a military option to a US economic problem that ultimately requires a multilateral treaty. Under the guise of the “war on terror,” Bush deceived the American people about the unspoken, but real economic reasons for the invasion of Iraq. While doing so, this administration sent an authoritarian message to other OPEC members: “You are either with us or against us.”
However, the blowback against US foreign policies, including nuanced statements by foreign leaders, OPEC, and even allies, reveals the limitations of the unilateral hard power that lacks international support. The lesson is clear: the US cannot unilaterally overthrow sovereign nations at will under the pretext of an expanding “war on terror” without considering the world’s potential to retaliate economically by abandoning the US dollar.
The neoconservatives have chosen to pursue a military-centric approach to the Peak Oil conundrum. However, the challenges presented by Peak Oil cannot be resolved by military force — but in fact would only be exacerbated by the levels of capital, energy, and people that would ultimately be wasted on military operations when these resources should be allocated toward energy reconfiguration.
The only rational strategy regarding Peak Oil would involve the G8 nations plus China and India (in conjunction with the UN) devising an exceedingly difficult treaty regarding the allocation of hydrocarbon reserves (i.e., Oil Depletion Protocol). Failure to reach a multilateral accord could result in the systemic breakdown of international relationships and destabilization of the global community.
So, if we are to have a multipolar world, let us hope it is a balanced one in which incorrigible greed give way to enlightened cooperative action. The world community, and especially the highly industrialized nations, desperately need leaders who are fundamentally committed to arrive at multilateral compromises and concessions. Although not guaranteed of success, the only rational policy regarding Peak Oil is an unprecedented attempt at international cooperation and coordination.
A collective approach is the only strategy that could conceivably result in the development and implementation of both demand-side strategies and alternative-energy technologies in the post–Peak Oil world. Developing and adhering to a multilateral approach to Peak Oil is the foremost challenge to mankind at the dawning of the 21st century.
The beginning of the 21st century will be an epochal moment in history; either a disastrous period of resource-related military and economic warfare, or an unprecedented and noble effort at international cooperation. Either way, the status quo is no longer plausible due to both physics and macroeconomics, nor is it desirable if we wish to preserve our humanity.
The American experiment has reached a historic crossroad. Our political, social, and economic choices in the next few years will decide these questions. Will America march on to an endless “war on terror” and economic ruin in a desperate attempt to maintain its superpower status, or will it rejoin the community of nations as an equal among allies and collectively work on today's energy and climate challenges? Will future historians write that America was just another reckless, selfish empire that collapsed — as all empires do? Or will they sing praises of a long-lived, enlightened democratic republic that resisted the temptations and follies of empire — and compromised for peace, justice, and the rule of law as it entered the 21st century?
Quote:
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:28 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Petrodollar wrote:
The 20th century was indeed the American Century. In the post WWII period we enjoyed an unprecedented expansion of domestic and then global energy supplies, massive expansion of the money supply of US dollars held outside the United States that facilitated a massive expansion of domestic credit, thereby resulting in 60 years of overall strong economic growth.
Agreed, but only partially - the first half of the century was not American at all, and in the second part the power was split with Russia. However the general idea is correct and the formula has caught at the buffaloes so we can use it without any problem, and without thinking if this is actually true.
Petrodollar wrote:
The neoconservatives have chosen to pursue a military-centric approach to the Peak Oil conundrum. However, the challenges presented by Peak Oil cannot be resolved by military force — but in fact would only be exacerbated by the levels of capital, energy, and people that would ultimately be wasted on military operations when these resources should be allocated toward energy reconfiguration.
Any problem in the world can be solved using war, and if it can not, then we are all dead so it does not matter anymore....
Petrodollar wrote:
The only rational strategy regarding Peak Oil would involve the G8 nations plus China and India (in conjunction with the UN) devising an exceedingly difficult treaty regarding the allocation of hydrocarbon reserves (i.e., Oil Depletion Protocol). Failure to reach a multilateral accord could result in the systemic breakdown of international relationships and destabilization of the global community.
Dream on...
Petrodollar wrote:
So, if we are to have a multipolar world, let us hope it is a balanced one in which incorrigible greed give way to enlightened cooperative action. The world community, and especially the highly industrialized nations, desperately need leaders who are fundamentally committed to arrive at multilateral compromises and concessions. Although not guaranteed of success, the only rational policy regarding Peak Oil is an unprecedented attempt at international cooperation and coordination.
You must stop smoking your hyppie stuff and get into the real world...
Petrodollar wrote:
The beginning of the 21st century will be an epochal moment in history; either a disastrous period of resource-related military and economic warfare, or an unprecedented and noble effort at international cooperation. Either way, the status quo is no longer plausible due to both physics and macroeconomics, nor is it desirable if we wish to preserve our humanity.
There is a guy called Jarred Diamond and this guy has a book called Collapse. Read it and I think that it will solve your dillema .
People look at the history like a long period of peace broke from time to time with a war. I strongly suggest to look at the history as a long period of war broke by peace from time to time because the combatants are exhausted. I think that most of you will have quite some revelations!!!
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:30 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
America exsisted before the auto and mass oil consumption.
Don't forget that.
It was a major and wealthy nation before the auto and mass oil consumption also.
A lot of these developing nations that think they are thinking outside of American demands, etc, whatever are in for a painful surprise.
A lot of the economic growth in these regions is powered by demand from the US or companies relocating to the regions from the US. Another thing is that even if the demand comes from other nations a lot of those nations(especially in Asia and the middle east) are powered by demand from the US.
Companies will probably start returning to the US due to shipping costs and the prosperous economy that has been developing in the middle east and parts of Asia will collapse.
Though not all of the economic prosperity comes from the US or NA it does make up a major chunk that allowed poorer nations to start developing more(Such as India, rural china, etc).
Before WWII England was still basically god of the world but the US was growing in power and influence.
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
socrates1fan wrote:
America exsisted before the auto and mass oil consumption.
Don't forget that.
Yes it did, and it will exist after peak oil too. However the population of America increased faster than the population of Europe. Not faster than the asians I think, but nevertheless...
socrates1fan wrote:
It was a major and wealthy nation before the auto and mass oil consumption also.
Indeed. Not anymore....
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of these developing nations that think they are thinking outside of American demands, etc, whatever are in for a painful surprise.
The world is slowly decoupling from USA. In EU, 80% of the trade is done INSIDE the union, so if US fails, that will not be a mortal blow to EU.
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of the economic growth in these regions is powered by demand from the US or companies relocating to the regions from the US. Another thing is that even if the demand comes from other nations a lot of those nations(especially in Asia and the middle east) are powered by demand from the US.
Indeed...
socrates1fan wrote:
Companies will probably start returning to the US due to shipping costs and the prosperous economy that has been developing in the middle east and parts of Asia will collapse.
That is not correct. USA will NOT have money to pay for those goods, and once the system founds another equilibrium point, they will not invest in a bankrupt country....
socrates1fan wrote:
Though not all of the economic prosperity comes from the US or NA it does make up a major chunk that allowed poorer nations to start developing more(Such as India, rural china, etc).
Correct, and they try to decouple from USA as fast as possible.
socrates1fan wrote:
Before WWII England was still basically god of the world but the US was growing in power and influence.
Yes, and 2000 years before that, the Roman empire was the greatest nation in the world. I fail to see the relevance of this statement...
What we are witnessing now is a similar process with the one when Russia imploded in 1988 - 1989 ...
Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:56 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Egomancer wrote:
socrates1fan wrote:
America exsisted before the auto and mass oil consumption.
Don't forget that.
Yes it did, and it will exist after peak oil too. However the population of America increased faster than the population of Europe. Not faster than the asians I think, but nevertheless...
socrates1fan wrote:
It was a major and wealthy nation before the auto and mass oil consumption also.
Indeed. Not anymore....
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of these developing nations that think they are thinking outside of American demands, etc, whatever are in for a painful surprise.
The world is slowly decoupling from USA. In EU, 80% of the trade is done INSIDE the union, so if US fails, that will not be a mortal blow to EU.
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of the economic growth in these regions is powered by demand from the US or companies relocating to the regions from the US. Another thing is that even if the demand comes from other nations a lot of those nations(especially in Asia and the middle east) are powered by demand from the US.
Indeed...
socrates1fan wrote:
Companies will probably start returning to the US due to shipping costs and the prosperous economy that has been developing in the middle east and parts of Asia will collapse.
That is not correct. USA will NOT have money to pay for those goods, and once the system founds another equilibrium point, they will not invest in a bankrupt country....
socrates1fan wrote:
Though not all of the economic prosperity comes from the US or NA it does make up a major chunk that allowed poorer nations to start developing more(Such as India, rural china, etc).
Correct, and they try to decouple from USA as fast as possible.
socrates1fan wrote:
Before WWII England was still basically god of the world but the US was growing in power and influence.
Yes, and 2000 years before that, the Roman empire was the greatest nation in the world. I fail to see the relevance of this statement...
What we are witnessing now is a similar process with the one when Russia imploded in 1988 - 1989 ...
Egomancer
Yup, we were popping out babies in the 50's while much of Europe was still rebuilding.
I think the world is trying but won't be able to fast enough.
Europe can I think but not Asia. In order to gain independance from the US economic need they would have to be able to produce enough demand amongst their poorer population to lead to the construction of enough factories to employ all of those people.
Its just not likely. I believe that Europe can be independant from the economic crush we are having but that doesn't mean they arent having their own economic crunch.
Asia hurts a lot more from our economic despair than Europe does.
Joined: Jun 26, 2007 Posts: 1448 Location: The Canada of America
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:51 am Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of these developing nations that think they are thinking outside of American demands, etc, whatever are in for a painful surprise.
A lot of the economic growth in these regions is powered by demand from the US or companies relocating to the regions from the US. Another thing is that even if the demand comes from other nations a lot of those nations(especially in Asia and the middle east) are powered by demand from the US....
Before WWII England was still basically god of the world but the US was growing in power and influence.
I find it amazing that you can breathe these blithe platitudes about the US and its unalterable, immovable place at the centre of things, and then in the very same treatise, turn around and evoke the spectre of Britain's previous (and easily dispensed with) pre-eminence without grasping the irony or gleaning a caveat. I suppose it's hubris like that that explains a $700 billion annual deficit... what else possibly could? _________________ I can has cheezburger?
Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: Is the American Era over?
Nickel wrote:
socrates1fan wrote:
A lot of these developing nations that think they are thinking outside of American demands, etc, whatever are in for a painful surprise.
A lot of the economic growth in these regions is powered by demand from the US or companies relocating to the regions from the US. Another thing is that even if the demand comes from other nations a lot of those nations(especially in Asia and the middle east) are powered by demand from the US....
Before WWII England was still basically god of the world but the US was growing in power and influence.
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
.