GEITHNER

There are similarities with Carter

He came in as the 'clean' candidate after Nixon/Ford and took on some 'big' ideas. The rest is history.

Globalization is the drivee and the sales pitch

of the extreme capital. There is whole vernacular for this and a dictionary/thesaurus can be developed for it, if not already out there. It'll look something like this:

Globalization= race to the bottom with a catchy name

Economies of scale= screwing small business

Productivity= squeezing life out of human resources and measuring it quarterly

Change we can believe in= Choosing the leader that will screw you, AKA lesser of the 2 evils, and not-Bush

OKtaby

We are not likely to survive another world war

and even best case scenarios are not very entertaining. Another cold war seems more feasible and perhaps Bush was trying to start it with a lucrative war on terror and inadvertantly set the ground for a multipolar world. That multipolar seems to be pushing globalization with smaller percentage of population having a say in it !?

Zal

Another world war will stop it. Another Cold War will stop it too. Though there would still be "regionalization" or "factionalization" or some such.

Is globalization the driver or drivee? and can it be undone?

Not sure about the first and on the second not likely in my opinion. Absent a viable alternative, it seems like an unstoppable avalanche.

RE: Past tense vs. present and is there more?

Oktaby, I agree and there is a lot more.

Again, this is such a large and encompassing issue that is related to just about every current event and economics down to individual level.

Also, I need to correct myself from stating "the divergence of interest between the nation and multinationals", it is no longer the multinationals. Today this divergence includes even the small businesses across the country who hire illegal aliens, to "offshore" R&D and production of even small startups.  

Past tense vs. present and is there more?

Kaveh, your points are quite valid and referenced in some way in this thread. I would only change the tense of your assertion on divergence of corporate interest from is to has been.

Zal, from my perspective transfer of wealth is the initiation of morphing the very structure and constitution of power. The intensity and size of the transfer indicates a threshold has been or will be met soon. And keep in mind both in terms of political and economic power U.S. is not The key player.

OKtaby

Domestic, global and complex

This topic is vast and multifaceted. Unfortunately, there are several issues and at multiple levels that are facing the US today. These range from the recent massive financial debacle with expensive short term solutions that only suggests an even more massive financial failure in the long term, to increasingly unaffordable foreign policy ventures, to disappearing manufacturing/production base along with valuable R&D capability and the illegal immigration. Most, or all of these complex problems have one underlying characteristic, or a common denominator; return on investment, or profits. It is becoming apparent the economic interests of the multinationals is diverging from national interests of the nation. Ignoring these trends will have severe consequences on the stability and security of the US on multiple levels, needless to say. 

Oktaby & vildermose, if Obama is the Manchrian Candidate

then is it just transfer of Wealth he is driving? or is there more?

BTW: great discussion

Issues?

That is Your issue, Says the one who takes upon himself to declare what is the "truth" and what is not.

You should have started to observe a long time ago. Everytime you walk into one of these blogs, chaos ensues. So shhhh!

KS

I tell you truth and you call it lies. There's nothing I can do for you. That's your issue, not mine. I'm just observing this thread to see what everyone else has to say at this point, because it's an interesting discussion :)

EPC

So, anyway, that's twice I've corrected you on that one. Don't make me come back here and do it again!

Is that what you think you were doing? LOL I'll let you have fun with that thought. sure, why not. You deserve some attention on this site after all.

Read more carefully.

LOL.  I will do that . don't you worry. You respected and Highly-accomplished Ex-marine.

You don't want to be like mister I got my masters degree yesterday, right?
NO. because i know you have already filled that position up. So no worries.

 Because, he gets fired a lot. And that's not good, with the economy like it is, right? And you don't want to be one of those I have a master's degree but I work at Seven Eleven guys, right?

No. because i know that you and your friends are doing a great job working there and meeting customer needs.

Go back to your fantasy "I am the Genius programmer" or "I Knew Professors who had no knowledge on The latest programming languages" World.

Benross, you bring us to some foundational issues

That I have touched on latherally as they are big subjects and tend to be either ideological or emotional. The link of economics to American individualism that also touches on Adam Smith's ideas and so on. I recall reading a personal interview with Freeman Dyson (father of Quantum Electrodynamics and a prolific mind) in early 2000. Being left leaning and married to an East German woman, he was asked of his opinion about Capitalism. He said: "I'm amazed that it has worked as well as it has and for as long as it has.". Capitalism is what I think Craig represents majority view when he says I like to take my chances based on my abilities and let the chips fall where there may. Dyson's point was that the when you crunch all the numbers Capitalism does not make sense (I personally am not suggesting Socialism will). That it has worked is more of an anomaly than any inherent advantage of it as a school of thought. Adam Smith's 'invisible hand', for example, that is core to modern capitalism, specially to the Milton Friedman/Regan variety is in my opinion, the biggest pile of horse manure about which you can find massive scholarly work and Noble prize winners. To me its value and validity is in same category as religious belief. It fails at logical level, as it assigns essentially supernatural quality to an economic idea. And at practical level it has been a miserable failure and not just due to last year's 'financial meltdown' but a history of miserable failure from Argentina to Asian Flu, to China's so called miracle economy. Economic ideas are nothing but that, ideas and the question is what are the driving forces and objectives. Given the finite resource that is our planet, doing the math is not too difficult to figure out that we cannot do what we have done and expect different results. That is the definition of insanity.

As for Obama juggling and your refence to 'national', both are good points and that is where minute reasonable doubt remains. My reference to national interests is only in its generic sense of doing well by one's country not the reality of global nature of most interactions at some level. However, as I pointed out in the article, how is saving bunch of corrupt and incompetent institutions that benefit very few and promising jobs for the masses in 2010 or 2011 jive after having spent several trillions of dollars? Even the assumption that saving these institutions saved us from economic annihiliation is nothing but further utility of Globalization, concentration and Shock Doctorine. I will write on this as it is a big and complex issue but Naomi Klein has written a very interesting book on history and utility of the latter, the Shock Doctrine.

OKtaby

oktaby

Obama's actions are driving one of the largest ever transfers of wealth from public to few private hands and without any clear accountability, return or overall benefit.

I really don't follow U.S national news so I'd rather read this thread than respond. But to this point made by you, and as a global assumption, isn't that how capitalism work? more to the point, for this massive public 'investment', isn't it the safest bet for the return of the investment during and after the economy recovery? You mentioned that there is no accountability. This is an issue that bound to explode if it is true. But if by 'accontability' you mean micromanagement of financial institutions, this may not be easy, or given the nature of how these institutions work, even not advisable. After all, the government has a huge stake in it, and the fastest and safest return for that investment is to leave these institutions to do what they do best. I noticed that the focus of the government in 'micromanagement' is only surrounding that 'exuberant' approach that crashed the economy in the first place. Not anything else. This has nothing of 'left' policy into it. Couldn't have anything of left into it (with the exception of the initial public investment idea that was disputed) and for the better control of exuberance, I think Obama knows that no policy can be fail safe and he emphasized that there will be corrections on the road as we go. I vaguely remember a speech of Obama in that nature.

And is Obama serving the American people or the new Global masters? And specifically for what agenda and purpose?

That's why I follow this thread! I want to know! My assumption would be that Obama is juggling between the interest of the both. When it comes to the economy, nothing is purely 'national' anymore.

Euro/U.S. juxtaposition is worth a whole discussion but

Abarmard berings up an interesting point about Democrats and Republicans. Benross's point on American individualism also resonates. There are parts of American heritage and character that are very strong and attractive and certainly Iranians expats find it quite comfortable and found a home here. It is in that vein that I think the people of America and the very strengths of this country have been undermined and being sapped by forces that have 'Un-American' or ultra-american agenda. That would include the undermining of the american ingenuity Craig refers to. The extreme capitalism and transfer of wealth I have pointed has a context beyond America which I have wrote an article (//iranian.com/main/2009/oct/democracy-relic-past and blogged on //iranian.com/main/news/2009/10/04/theyre-global-citizens-theyre-hugely-rich-and-they-pull-strings). There is an old saying: "capital has no parents and no home" or more politely, Capital is fluid, it flows where is gets the most return and protection. So we can engage the conversation on pros and cons of America but the discussion is what is America's role in this emerging global 'order'? Are American people being manipulated and lied to? And is Obama serving the American people or the new Global masters? And specifically for what agenda and purpose?

OKtaby

See?

This was to show you that US had achieved its superpower status Long before the "15 year" cap that you have placed on it.

That's the reading comprehension part I was talking about. I clearly stated that the US was acknowledged as a superpower at the end of World War II, 60 years ago. The 15 year number was when I stated the US reached its peak. That's an undisputable fact that you could easily find out on your own with Google (you should try Google sometime! It's pretty cool!). The US does not have the level of economic and military supremacy it had 15 years ago, and I think it's fairly safe to say that it never will again no matter what happens in the future. That was an untenable position for the US to be in. No 1 country should have that big a piece of the pie.

So, anyway, that's twice I've corrected you on that one. Don't make me come back here and do it again! Read more carefully. You don't want to be like mister I got my masters degree yesterday, right? Because, he gets fired a lot. And that's not good, with the economy like it is, right? And you don't want to be one of those I have a master's degree but I work at Seven Eleven guys, right?

Ok CRaig

I will Take your advice. I will work on it:)

What Would we have done if god had not sent you THE TEACHER and PREACHER Straight from the Heaven?

I am ignorant and You are not. LOL thanks man. You seem to be on the roll today supplying me with Jokes

 What about all the progress that was acheived Prior to that in Aerospace and Agriculture and medical sceiences?

This was to show you that US had achieved its superpower status Long before the "15 year" cap that you have placed on it. SO  THIS IS about YOU reading and COMPREHENDING more than anything else... You should have read and comprehended before you launcehd into your shallow "what about it" attack mode.

Arrogance.... Oh Dear God aroggance... Give it up.

And another thing!

One of my friends got hired by an undisclosed to protect the innocent major university in Los Angeles in 1994! When he told me about that it went somegthing like this:

Him: "Dude, I just got hired by "unisclosed state university"!"

me: "Dude, no way!"

Him: "Yup! Sure did! I'm doing classes on C++ and object oriented design for their graduate program!"

me: "Dude... you don't even have a degree... "

Him: "I know! Ain't it great!"

So, DUDE, who is driving who? Eh? The colleges had been so far out of date for so long that when they did have to try and catch up with the computer industry they had to pull people out of the software industry who had educated themselves on the job.

And by the way, Bill Gates doesn't have a degree either! He dropped out of Harvard :o

KS

Do you even read your own writings?

Reading is not the issue. Comprehending is the issue. And that's an issue you need to work on, especially since you don't have any firsthand life experience on these matters and you are arguing with somebody who does.

MEANING  that it has been competeing thislong as a
superpower with japan and USSR.

And we won that competition 2 decades ago. The Europeans didn't. We (the US) did. If we'd been doing things the way the Europeans do them, we would have likely gotten the same results the Europeans got. Right?

It started from humble beginnings, A
Capitalistic economic system was developed and eventually it has gotten
to this point.

You state the obvious, but did you have a point?

US could not have possibly hit its peak in just the past
15 years, That is a Joke. LOL Ah.. God. that was a good laugh LOL

You laugh at your own ignorance? Wel, allow me to laugh right along with you! :D

What about all the progress that was acheived Prior to that in Aerospace and Agriculture and medical sceiences?

What about it? The US has led the world in innovation ever since the industrail revolution. Some products - like the telephone - were invented by 1st generation immigrants. The question is whetehre we want to be able to continue that way or if we want to just surrender and start on a downhill slope... which is what you are suggesting. If we do go into decline it won't be because it was unavoidable. It will be because we make incorrect fundamental changes to the way we have always done things.

I am sorry that you had to go looking around for a training program
but the reality is that Buddy You can NOT have academia and Innovation
separate from each other.

Tell that to academia! I looked long and hard to find the best Computer Science curriculum in Southern California and that turned out to be Cal Poly Pomona. They were 20 years behind the times, and offered nothing but Mainframe related IT studies like COBOL I & II, CIS, etc. Oh, and their latest and greatest attempt to catch up to the Industry was offering RPG on IBM mini-computers... at a time when IBM minicomputers were being phased out of IT workshops as irrelevencies. It was so far beyond ridiculous to me that their administrators and professors seemed so incapable of comprehending what was actually going on in the industry in ~1990, let alone where the industry was headed, that I just went out and got a job doing C programming while I was still in classes. And then I got to thinking... what the hell am I taking all these classes on how they used to do things in the 1970s when I already have an actual job doing things in the 1990s!? 

It is a mutual relationship and they thrive
on one another.

That used to be true, in the 1960s when my dad got his PhD. Colleges are little more than diploma mills these days. They are for-profit enterprises. I've worked with dozens of recent college grads who were hired as programmers, and not one of them was prepared for the job on the day they started work.The most annoying part of that is having to listen to them tell you how they did things in school and howmuch better taht is! Oh, gee, lets have all the professional programmers spend 90% of their time doing documentation instead of writing code! That's a great idea mister I got my master's degree yesterday! It will make it so much easier for the non-technical administrative people to understand the work that has not been done because we were too busy doing documentation to make our deadlines! Bleh...

I'm not here to criticize Universities... they do have substantial value for students who have the luxury of investing the time and the money to attend (I had just gotten out of the Marines and didn't) - but that's mainly in learning how to function in a mostly unstructured environment and developing the necessary self-discipline to complete classes with good grades when there isn't anyone telling you what to do all the time. Academia is not driving innovation in any industry I'm aware of, and it hasn't in a very long time.

Wrong.

Do you even read your own writings?
You say that It has been at least 6 decades that US has been rated as a superpower at all, MEANING  that it has been competeing thislong as a superpower with japan and USSR. It started from humble beginnings, A Capitalistic economic system was developed and eventually it has gotten to this point. US could not have possibly hit its peak in just the past 15 years, That is a Joke. LOL Ah.. God. that was a good laugh LOL

What about all the progress that was acheived Prior to that in Aerospace and Agriculture and medical sceiences?

I am sorry that you had to go looking around for a training program but the reality is that Buddy You can NOT have academia and Innovation separate from each other. It is a mutual relationship and they thrive on one another.

PS to KS

Eurowinees whine? Since when?

Since de Gaulle? Just a guess!

Are you dreaming again? Why should they
even care if one is looking up to them?

You are aware that the only reason the EU was created was to try to make Europe as influential as the US, right? It was their attempt to get out from underneath America's shadow. Their attempts to dominate the UN far beyond the degree to which they should by rights be able to exert influence are another example. What makes Europeans so special? France is the equivalent in size, population and economy to the state of California. Should California have a Security Council veto? Should California be putting itself front and center on the world stage and demanding respect?

Being obssessed with being
looked up to and number one is an american invention.

lol. The euroes have been looking down on us since we came into existance. It really pisses them off that we've eclipsed them. That wasn't supposed to happen! That's why (in my opinion) they are so obsessed with making the US a subordinate part of the Western World. We can do all the grunt work as long as we let them assume the leadership position. Pffffttt. Whatever the future holds for the US, being baby-sat by Europeans isn't part of it!

KS

And America has not? You don't suppose that the root of the mess we are in and have been in, goes back to many decades? You don't think that the seed was planted years ago?

Many decades? Dude, KS... I know you are young, but two decades ago there was another military superpower(USSR). Two decades ago, there was another economic super-power (Japan) that looked like it was going to surpass us. The US just hit its peak 15 years ago, when we had roughly a third of the global economy.

It's only been 6 decades that the US even rated as a super-power at all. Prior to WWII we were merely one of many global powers.

The "information age" occurred during the 1990s, and it was entirely US driven. That's one decade ago, and it was the largest change in the basic state of humanity since the Industrial Revolution.

So where does this "many decades" come from? What is your definition of "many"? One? lol.

PS-And as somebody who was a PC programmer in the early 1990s when the information age happened, let me tell you that academics had nothing to do with it! Colleges weren't even teaching PC technology and PC programming languages at the time, I had to drop out and go to a trade school to learn assembly language and C language. And neither did government, despite Al Gore's claims. It was privately run software and hardware companies, both large and small, that made that happen. If the US wants to be able to keep doing things like that, we need to keep academia and government as far away from our innovative sectors as possible!

EPC

Here you go again with your outright exaggerations and lies oh, sorry, let me be a bit more politically correct here: Deceptions:)

Yes, it does. It made us a superpower and it made immigrants who came in their millions with nothing but the clothes on their back as prosperous as people anyone else.

Compare and contrast how Muslim immigrants have fared in the US to how they have fared in Europe if you wish. There have been recent studies on the matter.

What makes you think that i have not done that? Like i said,. I do agree that in some way this country has been more generous to immigrants, But that does not diminish the significant role that immigration to europe has brought, Muslim or non-muslims alike.

In your comments to Zal.

Europe has been in a downward spiral for a century. Why should the US follow them down the tubes? The whole premise seems to me to be absurd

And America has not? You don't suppose that the root of the mess we are in and have been in, goes back to many decades? You don't think that the seed was planted years ago?

I think one big reason that no one is suggesting we should emulate or copy china or india (maybe some do) is because mainly they have been the new kids on the block. The Mighty germany and the french and British and The scandinavian systems proven success and sttability has been around for ages. Nothing new.

Eurowinees whine? Since when? Are you dreaming again? Why should they even care if one is looking up to them? Being obssessed with being looked up to and number one is an american invention.

Americans are quite competitive but i am not sure that would extent or can be extended on a global scale. I think you should go back and rethink that.

KS

...but does that really make an impact on the Rate of your professional, economical and financial and even Social sucess and improvemnet? I mean
Really does it make any difference?

Yes, it does. It made us a superpower and it made immigrants who came in their millions with nothing but the clothes on their back as prosperous as people anywhere else.

Compare and contrast how Muslim immigrants have fared in the US to how they have fared in Europe if you wish. There have been recent studies on the matter.

Zal

Is it even possible to recover America?

Is it possible not to? And to remain a great country? To retain the ideals that have made us so strong? Do Americans even want to be like Europe? Does the world need another Europe? Europe has been in a downward spiral for a century. Why should the US follow them down the tubes? The whole premise seems to me to be absurd. Why is nobody suggesting we should copy China? At least they are on the rise! Or maybe we should copy India? One or both of them is going to surpass us economically in the not too distant future. But that doesn't mean we have to become a second rate power that spends all of it's time whining about everyone nobody looks up to us anymore, like the euroweenies do! We've only had unchallened supremacy for a couple of decades, it's not like we are addicted to be number one like the European empires used to be! We can function and function quite well in a competitive global environment! In fact that's one of the things we are best at!

I do not

Understand the concern some have with regards to losing individual freedom and the ability to succeed based on individual efforts and hardwork in a socially-oriented government system. That to me, as said here before, has much to do with the american pysche and what they believe, rather than being based on anything factual. Not that i am saying there is wrong there, But that is just it. They don't like it. Well too bad! :)

 You may not have certain rights to do certain things in Europe as you do in the US. but does that really make an impact on the Rate of your professional, economical and financial and even Social sucess and improvemnet? I mean Really does it make any difference?

This is a period of significant change

What change have the American people chosen based on Obama's 'change we can believe in'? Did they vote for a fundamental change or do they expect someone to recover from the mess we are in and go back to same old? Is it even possible to recover America?

The reality is that Obama's

The reality is that Obama's actions are driving one of the largest ever transfers of wealth from public to few private hands and without any clear accountability, return or overall benefit. Meanwhile, somehow he is to be solver of problems. Hence, the Manchurian Candidate.

Bingo!

benross

Don't give too much credit to anti "big government" if you like, mentality. The fact that most farmers, or lower middle class think that the Republican are a proper representative of them is not based on any freedom minded ideology, nor smaller government. Since the Republican Party was successful to align itself with religion and in some cases backward mentality, those who simply see things in the concept of God and evil, became diehard supporters of GOP.

Simply the major difference between the Republican and Democrat, unlike naive political views, is not the size of the government, nor taxes. A simple research would be a reasonable proof that both parties have raised taxes (overall). neither parties have been successful in reducing the size of government, and in most cases Democrats have been better in balancing the budget than Reps because of lowering spending, mostly in Military.

What separates the two is minor differences in social spending vs military defense. That's about it.

The joke is on those who believe those elite and perhaps more intelligent people in the US, educated thinkers are more align with democrats. Well you can know a party by its followers. Take the religion out of GOP and see how many farmers or lower middle class America will follow them. In this case is religion vs. intellect.

In other cases, which are more acceptable arguments, stand business sense, economics with relation to taxes. I still suggest to take a look at the historical data as which party has been more successful to small businesses and economy as a whole.

The counter argument to Obama's socialist myth

is well made by Paul Krugman in his blog Conscience of a Liberal: 'he criticizes the Obamaites for trying to prop up a financial system that he regards as essentially a dead man walking. In conversation, he portrays Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and other top officials as, in effect, tools of Wall Street'.

We have an interesting phenomenon where the public perception is, as Zal points out, that Obama is moving in a socialist direction. And because of the 'financial crisis' the masses are buying into it out of insecurity. The reality is that Obama's actions are driving one of the largest ever transfers of wealth from public to few private hands and without any clear accountability, return or overall benefit. Meanwhile, somehow he is to be solver of problems. Hence, the Manchurian Candidate.