Today's Washington Post and why libertarians fear Dems

[Al68]

Has anyone ever looked up the word "Liberal" in a dictionary? I don't even like to use the word. Historically, the word "Liberal" is basically a synonym for AC. Strange, isn't it?

[bisonbison]

Has anyone ever looked up the word "Liberal" in a dictionary? I don't even like to use the word. Historically, the word "Liberal" is basically a synonym for AC. Strange, isn't it?

Ya ever notice how we drive in a parkway, but park in a driveway?

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone ever looked up the word "Liberal" in a dictionary? I don't even like to use the word. Historically, the word "Liberal" is basically a synonym for AC. Strange, isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I prefer to use the "leftist" instead, as well as "rightist". Even ignoring what it used to mean politically, the words "liberal" and "conservative" have entirely nonpolitical meanings which people often mistakenly associate with the political ones, making many, especially children, think of liberals as more open-minded and pro-change and conservatives as the opposite, something which is not at all true.

[WillMagic]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that the op-ed writer is not talking specifically about propping up GM, but rather a more general approach to expanding American Manufacturing. I think he has a point there. Manufacturing has been declining in this country for the last 40 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

For good reason. Other countries have a comparative advantage when it comes to manufacturing. And because of that, we are better off letting other countries manufacture and allowing our entrepreneurs to direct capital towards areas where we have a comparative advantage. Basic Ricardo.

[ QUOTE ]
Do we really want to stop making things and turn our economy entirely over to the service industry? That's the direction we're heading and I'm not looking forward to that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ugh. So many things I hate about they way you put this. First off, I had the way you phrase it as though we are "turning over" the economy to any specific sector. Good economic policy is letting the economy do what it will, because consumers and producers are far more capable of judging what should or should not be produced than disinterested government bureaucrats. Secondly, what is so inherently bad about service as opposed to manufacturing? Third, the measures that would be put in place to protect manufacturing would have to be either tariffs or quotas. Either one of those HURTS American consumers. All of them. At the expense of some mediocre, inefficient companies.



[ QUOTE ]
Sure. While I personally support free trade,

[/ QUOTE ]

Bulls***. Sorry, free trade is completely incompatible with supporting a "general approach to expanding American Manufacturing."


[ QUOTE ]
I have to admit that the Democratic Party is more protectionist than the Republican Party. Of course, the reason why the Democratic Party makes economic conservatives nervous is because we are liberals. But to be honest, I'm not aware of any Democratic plans to roll back trade agreements or otherwise pursue protectionist policies. Also, I think part of what Dorgan is talking about is countries that we open our markets to that don't reciprocate.

[/ QUOTE ]

So they don't reciprocate. If we were to close our markets we would hurt us and them. Just because another country is shooting itself in the foot doesn't mean we shouldn't either.

[wdcbooks]

[ QUOTE ]
I think he has a point there. Manufacturing has been declining in this country for the last 40 years. Do we really want to stop making things and turn our economy entirely over to the service industry?

[/ QUOTE ]

Iron, I have to admit that this line of thinking gives me the willies. It is the same type of romantic thinking I hear when people start talking about the small family farmer. Google Earth is no less a 'thing' than a Buick Riviera. It is just a hell of a lot better concieved and produced. There is no manufactured good that is so vital it must be produced in the US.

It is certainly true that we are a much more service oriented economy than the US was in years past. It is also true that Democrats tend to romanticize manufactured goods, when there is no real difference between something made with steel and a high tech product.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think he has a point there. Manufacturing has been declining in this country for the last 40 years. Do we really want to stop making things and turn our economy entirely over to the service industry?

[/ QUOTE ]

Iron, I have to admit that this line of thinking gives me the willies. It is the same type of romantic thinking I hear when people start talking about the small family farmer. Google Earth is no less a 'thing' than a Buick Riviera. It is just a hell of a lot better concieved and produced. There is no manufactured good that is so vital it must be produced in the US.

It is certainly true that we are a much more service oriented economy than the US was in years past. It is also true that Democrats tend to romanticize manufactured goods, when there is no real difference between something made with steel and a high tech product.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the rhetoric is often over the top, but there is a problem with an economy that is too service oriented.

The extreme example of an economy that is almost totally service is tourist destinations, and they function reasonably well with minimal manufacturing. The problem is the standard of living of the typical worker never rises to the standard of the people they are serving.

The reason is that ultimately service industries are labor intensive and human capital cannot be leveraged into profits as well as capital intensive industries.

The end effect of the export of large amoutns of manufacturing to other countries has to be to lower the standard of living of the US.

(Google Earth is not a good example. I don't think anyone considers technology companies to be "service" companies. The human capital investment that goes into the production of software is highly leveraged, and is closer to manufacturing ROI, assuming they can get the advertising revenue to follow.)

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
The extreme example of an economy that is almost totally service is tourist destinations, and they function reasonably well with minimal manufacturing. The problem is the standard of living of the typical worker never rises to the standard of the people they are serving.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this a "problem"? The standard of living of the typical worker in a yacht manufacturing facility never rises to the standard of the people he's servicing.

[lehighguy]

Actually I do consider google and other high tech companies service companies. Lawyers, doctors, and engineers all are in the service industry. When you see services rolled at as a part of GDP they are part of it.

All good economies turn to services. There are inherint limits of the productivity of physical production, but human capital can be incredibly productive (how else could youtube be worth billions on the labor of a few kids).

Nearly all developed economies are going through the same thing right now. Even Japan, who was the china scapegoat of the 80s, is turning over more and more of its manufacturing to China.

It scares me to death that we want to keep [censored] assembly line jobs in this country. If we keep this up, one day China will let us work [censored] jobs in factories while thier educated populace designs, markets, and manages the process.

[hmkpoker]

A question for Copernicus and Iron:

Let's say that the United States cuts off trade with foreign countries. All products are domestically produced.

Some states become wealthier/poorer than others. Let's say New York becomes very wealthy, and most of the manufacturing jobs in the United States are shipped off to the heartland where the businesses can find people to work for lower wages. New York gets goods cheaper than they'd be able to get had they been produced in that state, but they have almost no manufacturing industry. Jobs are being exported to Kansas and the quality of life in New York is going down.

Should New York be lobbied into severing manufacturing trade with other states? How is this situation any different than the global economic situation?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The extreme example of an economy that is almost totally service is tourist destinations, and they function reasonably well with minimal manufacturing. The problem is the standard of living of the typical worker never rises to the standard of the people they are serving.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this a "problem"? The standard of living of the typical worker in a yacht manufacturing facility never rises to the standard of the people he's servicing.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are talking about an individual worker compared to other individuals within the same economy. Obviously there will be disparities between individuals inall economies. My "island" analogy was comparing the AVERAGE standard of living between two different economies.