Jonah Thomas wrote:
> I didn't notice him delete things except spam and Chomsky. He didn't
> delete it when I said it, just nobody paid any attention whatsoever over
> several attempts.
Well, that's pretty normal. The wonders of the PRC are de riguer in our
Master's Capital.
> There was the argument that the chinese government was
> desperate to provide lots of jobs because if the chinese people didn't
> have the chance to work hard enough they'd revolt and put in a
> government that let them work harder.
They probably would revolt if things stayed the same. Which would be
good, not bad.
> There was the argument that the
> chinese banking system was run by fools.
I'm guessing that was the big big wrongo.
> There was the argument that the
> USA is the only dependable consumers in the world and if they stop
> selling below cost for depreciated dollars they can't spend then their
> economy will collapse. Nobody was willing to consider that the chinese
> might like to mold our economy so they buy raw materials from us (wood,
> coal, oil, wheat, corn, etc) and sell us manufactured goods.
The U. Both ends of the U (raw materials & retail) are profitable and
the bottom of the U isn't profitable. Stupid people assume that will go
on forever.
>> I totally agree with you, dude. Except I wouldn't say they're so
>> much
>> following a mercantilist strategy as a communist party survival
>> strategy, since communists like factories. The mercantilist aspects
>> are the method, rather than the reason.
> It sounds like about the same thing to me, mercantilist theory says the
> nation will be strong when you buy raw materials and sell finished
> products.
Well, more, 'when you have all the gold'. There's a minor distinction
between being rich and being powerful.
> Not least because a strong manufacturing economy can produce
> war materials easier than a strong agricultural, forestry and mining
> economy.
Yes.
>> That must have been awhile back.
> Awhile back that Chomsky tended not to misquote? I don't say that the
> re****ts he quoted were correct, but he did find them and quote them.
Naw, awhile back that DeLong was going on about Chomsky.
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2007/03/my_allergic_rea.html
seems to be the latest with this
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2005/11/harrys_place_re.html
covering the rest. Basically he's taking a fairly eastern establishment
view of the world.
> Ah. I should do something about that.
> So, uh, what do you think about that Sebastian Tellier? Have you heard
> the new M83 album?
> And how about Depeche Mode? Cool stuff, huh?
Vanilla Ice an MC Hammer did a duet of 'Yesterday'! WOW!
>> ['You were filling a vital role as someone other than John Emerson.']
> I got tired of it. Mostly it was people who clearly didn't know what
> they were talking about.
Basically.
> Every now and then somebody slipped in
> something that made me think there might be a lot of information
> available that I hadn't looked at and didn't have time to digest, and
> maybe I didn't know what I was talking about either.
Ah, well. It's frequently not worth it, which is why I parachute into
and out of comments.
max
['Of course, it wasn't helping that everything was slowing
downnnnnnnnn....']
|
