[Red Jones]

This article I know is very long, but it is excellent.

[Red Jones]

fyi

[rohry]

"This article I know is very long..."

This is not an article, it is a book...

I would love to read it but I don't have enough paper in my printer to print it out...

People need to make a point in 3-5 pages on this forum or it will not be read...

[Red Jones]

bump

[Red Jones]

Contratulations RLK. This is excellent work. In my mind it demonstrates clearly how some important paradigms we think with today about globalism and international trade are simply false.

[SauronOfMordor]

FASCINATING

[SauronOfMordor]

As I originally wrote this particular passage, President Clinton was negotiating expanded free trade with the mainland Chinese. Negotiating is not the proper word. That there was negotiation was a pretense and a deception. While there may have been some outward show of toughness and grumbling, Clinton wanted to do it or he wouldn't have invited the Chinese premier to come here. And for China it's like dying and going to heaven. It's going to tear hell out of this economy and this country for reasons already explained, and the Chinese know it. Given the pattern of destructiveness seen in everything else Clinton did, Clinton, even at his feeble intelligence level, also probably knew it. When the agreement is concluded, we will remedy the past deficiencies of an adversary, and create a mighty ideological and military opponent who even now is testing long range missiles. (Please notice the same people who are adamantly in favor of gun control over here do not apply the same logic to Marxist missile development.)

[per loin]

Excellent in all except offering some pathway out of our impending economic doom.

[rdb3]

Many southern whites were worse off economically than most Black slaves. Before you seize on that and laugh, think about it. The South was the last place any white person would go to find economic opportunity. In 1860, out of a Southern population of 9,000,000 people, 4,000,000 were slaves. Most work of any significance was done by slaves and there was no way to take a job and make a start to work your way up. Unless you had enough money to buy land and fifty slaves, you were at an economic dead end and would starve before finding any opportunity in the Old South. Slavery was economically disastrous to white people. The only opportunity for a white person born without inherited position was to head North.

Wait a second! You mean to tell me that the statement, "[t]he North was jealous of Southern prosperity..." is either a myth or propaganda?

Wow!

[SauronOfMordor]

Note: Whatever happened to the important word "manufacturing?" When one puts these three paragraphs together it's seen that what is being re-formed is essentially a downgraded company and an industry being gutted into becoming an empty shell with a clique of executives making money through shuffling around work and products done on plantations in other nations. "Very few people in the world can build an airplane and make it safe." Yes, and soon Boeing will no longer be one of them. And neither will America. These people aren't building airplanes or anything else. They are basically a breed of incompetent useless bullshitters who don't want responsibility for serious concrete production, who have found a place to hide and are making quick profits from destroying the economy needed to maintain the company. The bullcrap part of the business will be kept here while substance will be let go. This entire nation is on the way to being gutted of substance.

250 years ago, about 95% of the human race was engaged in agriculture. Then came the Industrial Revolution, steam-power, followed by the internal-combustion engine. By the late 20th Century, less than 5% of the population was growing the food for the other 95%. It came about because a skilled farmer with tractors, combines, etc could out-produce an army of peasants

We are on the edge of another fundamental transformation. At the moment, semi-skilled Chinese workers are cheaper than semi-skilled American labor. Within ten years, computer-controlled robotic machinery will be cheaper than even semi-skilled slave-labor Third-world workers. In that environment, the only people in a position to create value will be engineers and designers

[calenel]

So, essentially, we think we have enslaved the rest of the world for a few worthless pieces of paper, but in reality we have sold the Golden Goose for a few omlets?

[Red Jones]

bump

[philman_36]

In 1860, out of a Southern population of 9,000,000 people, 4,000,000 were slaves.
These are figures for all States, not just Southern States.
AGGR. NO. OF SLAVES
Total...3,950,546
Population of the United States (1860)

Total 1860 Population

Total Free Population	27,489,561
Total Slave Population	3,953,760
Grand Total	31,443,321

Source: "The Civil War and Reconstruction" by Randall and Donald (Their source was U.S. Census, 1860, Population, pp. 598-599)
Where did you get your population figures from?

[x]

Great article but way too long for a casual read. Just seeing how much was left was enough to make me sigh or shudder. While I'm grateful for the article, a synopsis or summary would be helpful.

Two sidelights, though. Hinton Rowan Helper advanced many of the arguments expressed here about slavery in his 1857 book, The Impending Crisis of the South: How to Meet It. His book was banned in many states and regarded as a provocation not far short of John Brown's.

In 1974, Fogel and Engelman's perverse book Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery, advanced the revisionist argument that slavery was profitable. It was a very controversial, counterintuitive argument that provoked endless discussion, as did Fogel's earlier book on Railroads and American Economic Growth.

It seems obvious to all that slavery is indeed incompatible with advanced economic development. A servile population, denied mobility and the proceeds of its own increased productivity clearly seems to be incompatible with a dynamic, high technology economy. But the point in the course of economic development at which this becomes true is unclear. And it's worth noting that there has been some debate about the economic success of slavery.

[lelio]

bump for later reading. Thanks for the post.

[Uncle Bill]

Hello sarcasm. Hope all is well.

[A. Pole]

[...] Now, somewhere in the evolution of a finite healthy free enterprise market economy a close to optimum equilibrium of worker salaries develops, or should develop, vis-a-vis other groups. Anything that is destructive to that equilibrium is destructive to the economy in the entirety. A destructive action upon that equilibrium may have a sequential cascading effect that will eventually maul much of the entire economy over time. What that means is that exporting industries to nations where there is slave, semi-slave, or cheap labor is likely to produce recession or worse. Importing large amounts of cheap labor will result in the same thing. The consequences can be long term or permanent.

It doesn't make any difference if you get something cheaper as a result of destroying that equilibrium. Deterioration of the greater long term economy is the realistic result. That's the way the economy works. But, people selling economic theories that will create that deterioration will focus upon what you get cheap or for free. That's the way economic sophistry works.[...]

Briliant text from 2002 by Robert L. Kocher, to be read again and remembered.

[harpseal]

It is excellent therefor i have put it on my economic ping list which has been idle for a couple of weeks now but I am recovering from my illness.

Ping


On or off let me know

[adam_az]

bump

[Ciexyz]

Most interesting.

[AmericanVictory]

So what do you suggest as an alternative?