The US economy for dummies

[ymu]

I do apologise for not wording my posts to your satisfaction. I'll pass a draft by you before I dare post in P&P again. Thanks for your tolerance thus far.

 

[butchersapron]

Don't.

 

[ymu]

I don't for a second subscribe to any sort of fall of empire in the next few years nonsense though. That's just political bollocks.

It may be wishful thinking, but the thread on China (and the world) dumping the dollar suggests maybe otherwise. The British Empire was very much alive and kicking in 1939 and pretty much dead by 1948. The iron curtain rusted away very quickly. China has prevented the neocons being very effective at agitating in S America, plus they've been investing heavily in Africa for some time. And all the US creditors are in the same economic grouping, ASEAN - none of them are too happy at the ME shenanigans.

So who knows. I think it could be rapid, but a lot depends on how the neocons react to all this. A lot depends on who does what next. IMO, obv.

 

[butchersapron]

It may be wishful thinking, but the thread on China (and the world) dumping the dollar suggests maybe otherwise. The British Empire was very much alive and kicking in 1939 and pretty much dead by 1948. The iron curtain rusted away very quickly. China has prevented the neocons being very effective at agitating in S America, plus they've been investing heavily in Africa for some time. And all the US creditors are in the same economic grouping, ASEAN - none of them are too happy at the ME shenanigans.

So who knows. I think it could be rapid, but a lot depends on how the neocons react to all this. A lot depends on who does what next. IMO, obv.

What happened inbetween 1939 and 1948?

 

[ymu]

What happened inbetween 1939 and 1948?

Went into fuckloads of debt getting overstretched by war on too many fronts; US and Russia emerged as global superpowers; US launched Cold War I with the dropping of nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to stop the Russians getting there first. Had to give in to the longstanding popular struggles for independence, leaving the former colonies in varying states of poverty and civil war, often in the hands of dictators who continued to rule on the colonial model; managed to hitch a ride with Uncle Sam.

Burma might provide a trigger for summat this time around, but I can't articulate what or how; it triggered significant unrest in ASEAN that seems to be about more than just Burma. I think there is likely to be some kind of substantial shift in the way the world conducts its affairs. I don't think it could be any worse than now, but whether or not it gets substantially better is down to what happens and how the various agents respond. Asia will play an important role; it's hard to know where Europe fits in as we're heavily dependent on the US economy but it's also the euro that is emerging as one of the petrodollar's key rivals. US propaganda is still working well in Europe, with the media obediently going nuts about Iran, especially in Germany and France.

I have no crystal ball, but I think the next 10 years will be interesting regardless.

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, world war two happend.

 

[ymu]

Not sure what you're saying. The US is also in massive debt and stretching itself on too many fronts and will have to introduce conscription if they're serious about invading Iran. The US military are deeply unimpressed with the White House. I'm not seeing how the decline of the US Empire is likely to be any less rapid than the British - especially as their colonialism has mostly been by proxy. They've already lost S America in the space of a few years.

 

[butchersapron]

World war 2 happened and killed the british empire. It didn't just jump frorm 1939 to 1948 and boom! There it is. You seem reluctant to even acknowledge that the war happened. Very odd.

 

[ymu]

Ah. I thought that was a given, as I named the date and noted that they were [militarily overstretched fighting] a war on too many fronts.

Still not seeing how the US, Iraq and the ME is very different. Can you explain?

 

[butchersapron]

Ah. I thought that was a given, as I named the date and noted that they were [militarily overstretched] fighting a war on too many fronts.

Still not seeing how Iraq and the ME is very different. Can you explain?

I don't know what your 2nd line means. Your first, when related to your earlier posts about imperial breakdown means that you've missed out WW2 in any historical comparisons you choose to make. And certainly in relation to the breakdown of the hegemomic role of the UK, which you seem to say just happened between 1939 and 1948 without saying why (maybe it's racist?). And, as i've noted, the US whilst losing financial hegemomy has not lost military hegemony as the dutch and british did. They are not the same conditions no matter how much you wish they were.

 

[ymu]

Huh?

Went into fuckloads of debt getting overstretched by war on too many fronts; US and Russia emerged as global superpowers; US launched Cold War I with the dropping of nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to stop the Russians getting there first. Had to give in to the longstanding popular struggles for independence, leaving the former colonies in varying states of poverty and civil war, often in the hands of dictators who continued to rule on the colonial model; managed to hitch a ride with Uncle Sam.

How on earth do you miss multiple references to WII in there? You use word search to scan for correctness before reading anything?

I said I thought that the US empire could collapse very quickly. You said it was unlikely. I said I didn't think it was that unlikely given how quickly the British Empire collapsed.

Show me where I've said it wasn't (obviously, duh) due to WWII. Why the fuck would I choose 1939 as a date where it was healthy instead of just saying it was dead by the late 1940s?

The US is massively overstretched militarily and utterly reliant on ASEAN to keep funding its adventurism. So I disagree with your analysis. I think you're demanding far too close a parallel. How do you fit the collapse of the USSR into your slavishly accurate model?

It fits the pattern of empire in decline; massive foreign debt, increasing military activity far away from home, neglect of social issues and education at home. Feel free to disagree, but fucking respond to what I said instead of this stream of bizarre non sequiturs.

 

[butchersapron]

Huh?

I said I thought that the US empire could collapse very quickly. You said it was unlikely. I said I didn't think it was that unlikely given how quickly the British Empire collapsed.

Show me where I've said it wasn't (obviously, duh) due to WWII. Why the fuck would I choose 1939 as a date where it was healthy instead of just saying it was dead by the late 1940s?

The US is massively overstretched militarily and utterly reliant on ASEAN to keep funding its adventurism. So I disagree with your analysis. I think you're demanding far too close a parallel. How do you fit the collapse of the USSR into your slavishly accurate model?

It fits the pattern of empire in decline; massive foreign debt, increasing military activity far away from home, neglect of social issues and education at home. Feel free to disagree, but fucking respond to what I said instead of this stream of bizarre non sequiturs.

Uh, when you said that the british state collapsed remarkably quickly between 1939 and 1948 without mentioning WW2, even on your 2nd go when i asked you what happened between those dates. Offered no analysis of what the war meant beyond the usual colonies bollocks. So, where is WW3? You're the one making the direct comparison between the UK and the US, and the speed of collapse - not me. If you think Burma (as you argued) is the erquivalent of WW2 then you really are off in a phantasy world.

Overstreched military? What does that mean? With a 360 million size market and the highest technology production in the world that doesn't mean that much. That's another factor that's not comparable to the UK in 1939 or 1948. It's fantasy, the US collapsing in 10 years time. You do no one any favours woth this millenaraian-type bollocks.

I'd like to see what model i'm being accused of adopting here btw, because the only one i can see is you saying that the UK collapsed and the US will too -so there.

 

[ymu]

See, you're lying about what I said. Just like you did on the Fisk thread.

If you want to make claims about what I have said, quote me. In context, obv.

The model you're adopting appears to require a slavish parallel with a single historical example. Much as you think the comparison between NI and Palestine is inappropriate because israel doesn't use Palestinian serf labour. Except they did up until 1991, and it's still pointless to dismiss relevant parallels because they're not precise in every detail.

 

[butchersapron]

It fits the pattern of empire in decline; massive foreign debt, increasing military activity far away from home, neglect of social issues and education at home. Feel free to disagree, but fucking respond to what I said instead of this stream of bizarre non sequiturs.

No it doesn't. As the world systems model you've unwittingly adopted recognises.

And sorry, i did, if you can't actually grasp what's being said, well, not my problem.

 

[Detroit City]

I said I thought that the US empire could collapse very quickly. You said it was unlikely. I said I didn't think it was that unlikely given how quickly the British Empire collapsed.

its possible.... look what 9/11 did to the US economy and that was just a few moslem blokes flying planes into a few buildings.

the depression in the US during the 1920s & 1930s could happen again too...

you never know what will happen.

 

[butchersapron]

See, you're lying about what I said. Just like you did on the Fisk thread.

If you want to make claims about what I have said, quote me. In context, obv.

You mean quote you in full like above? And like i generally do?

 

[ymu]

I have no crystal ball, but I think the next 10 years will be interesting regardless.

But BA knows. He can't even recognise 1939 as a reference to WWII but he knows.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah, it will see the end of the evil empire by late 2017. Get a fucking grip.

 

[ymu]

Yeah, it will see the end of the evil empire by late 2017. Get a fucking grip.

So you're not going to quote me to back up your assertions? Quelle surprise.

 

[butchersapron]

Quote you? The thread is up above. It hasn't wandered off.

 

[butchersapron]

The model you're adopting appears to require a slavish parallel with a single historical example. Much as you think the comparison between NI and Palestine is inappropriate because israel doesn't use Palestinian serf labour. Except they did up until 1991, and it's still pointless to dismiss relevant parallels because they're not precise in every detail.

Here's a reply to your late edit. Go back and read my post on that. It says the exact opposite of what you think. Jesus. What a mind.

 

[ymu]

You mean quote you in full like above? And like i generally do?

The fuck you did or you'd be accusing me of ignoring WWII in the same posts as you quote me mentioning war on too many fronts, Hiroshima and Nagasaki - not to mention missing the original very obvious reference to WWII. And then accusing me of comparing Burma to WWII when I'd already asked you to explain why Iraq and the ME were so very different vis-a-vis the US empire. It should be kind of obvious that China is deeply involved in Burma and it might have an influence on the way China starts to assert its power.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah, it's just like WW2.

 

[butchersapron]

Given that you've just shown me (again) that you're unable to follow a simple argument, how confident am i that you've followed my case on this thread? Not that confident really.

 

[ymu]

You mean like you noting that I'd completely failed to mention WWII as a reason for the collapse of the British Empire (amidst all those opaque references to 1939, war on too many fronts, and nuking Japanese cities) and then proceeding to say that it was due to racism on my part?

Before I bother to reread it, is the rest of your argument any more convincing?

 

[Gmart]

I don't know why Butcher's Apron is giving ymu such grief, his posts have been quite succinct, cogent and polite, even if I don't agree with everything.

Some suggest that class is an issue, but I disagree, as the distinctions are not as accurate now as they were in the past (they are also more prevalent in the older systems which have more ingrained inequality).

That's not to say that inequality of opportunity doesn't play a part, but sadly the class debate has shifted into much less certain ground. The old labels don't really work and the closest you can get is the have's and the havenot's, blaming each other for everything wrong in the world.

I don't think the empire will come crashing yet, but there is a shift of power certainly, but these will happen, the US will remain strong for some time, they have too many advantages, tho they are likely to have a depression of some sort, that debt is a problem, and we'll get it too.

A bit of a crash might do the markets good. It will let more people buy a house!

The US losing relative power could end up being a good thing coz we had the same arrogance when we had an empire, and the US might learn some diplomacy lessons if they are not quite so dominant.

That said both the US and UK could get some lessons in democracy and freedom considering what's happening with individual rights!

 

[ymu]

Overstreched military? What does that mean? With a 360 million size market and the highest technology production in the world that doesn't mean that much.

It means a lot when the US military already state that they are at breaking point and can't even train troops because there's hardly anyone left at home any more; it's more or less openly acknowledged now that if they don't withdraw altogether they are going to need more troops in Iraq. It's also significant that ASEAN are bankrolling the military spending and the legalised theft from those at home is getting increasing notice in the US media and (as yet meaningless) noises in Congress. Africa and S America are telling the IMF where to stick their thieving advice. Venezuela is operating through Petrocaribe instead of subsidising US oil consumption. Iran is barely trading in dollars any more; OPEC and others seem set to follow. Globally, states are getting rid of the dollar from their reserves and replacing it with more stable currencies and gold.

The blank cheque may not exist much longer; I don't know the timescale because what happens next is highly unpredictable, but I have no idea why you're so sure it will be business as usual for a long time. Maybe for another imperial state, but it's hard to see how you are so confident that the US can steer itself out of this mess when analysts have been warning of it for so long and there's no sign at all of them trying to turn the boat around.

 

[nino_savatte]

Ok chaps. Been reading and re-reading this thread and I understand some of it.

1. M-I = military industry?
2. Like the qulag wealth fund
3. Is it that simple for a nation to decide to go to war just to make a buck or "bump up" the ecomony?
4. How could being in the environment be a useless job?

Surely someone has to know where the water is, how clean it is and how much we need to use whilst I'm out there tapping away on the keyboard? I mention water b/cos of a vested interest and also that it's related to the "global debate".

"M-I" = Military Industrial Complex.

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

Here's a natty little cartoon from 1949 that explains the US economy: 'Meet King Joe' - http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=3631570909182553450

 

[mears]

Not sure what you're saying. The US is also in massive debt and stretching itself on too many fronts and will have to introduce conscription if they're serious about invading Iran. The US military are deeply unimpressed with the White House. I'm not seeing how the decline of the US Empire is likely to be any less rapid than the British - especially as their colonialism has mostly been by proxy. They've already lost S America in the space of a few years.

This is stupid shit. What do you mean the US lost S. America?

First of all the US is a lot bigger thant he UK and retains a hugh domestic market which is something the British empire never possessed.

You are right however, the world will move from unipolar to bipolar or tripolar. It will be the US and China with maybe India or Russia in the future calling the shots.

Since the European states and North America have more in common than the aforementioned countries we will keep our close friendship.

Relax, our bonds remain tight.