Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,922
Rehan removed me from his friends on Facebook,
because he had a status saying smth like:
"At the end of the day I'd kick your ass",
to which I commented "At the end of the day I'd come back and shoot you in the fuckin crotch" :lol:

I probably should've put a smiley face or something :D
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,996
Really? You don't think they are over reliant on this west buying their crappy products, we have contributed massively to their economic growth
Lets put it this way. Suppose you have six castaways on an island, five of which are Asians and one American. One Asian works to fish, another looks for vegetables, another hunts for land animals, another is the chef, the last Asian builds the fire, and the American does nothing but eat and tan all day. The Asians work every single day to feed the American, who operates his own tanning service for himself. The Asians are allowed only a bit of food to have enough strength to start the process of building the economy again the next day.

Now, Keynesian economists will tell you that if it wasn't for the American, the Asians would all be unemployed. But obviously that's not the case. The Asians are the ones driving the economy's growth and sustainability, while the American just operates a service sector for himself.

If you were one of the six Asians, would you rather continue working hard for the American so his service industry to himself can prosper, or would you rather kick him off the island so you can enjoy less work, more leisure time and more food? The answer is obvious.

Obviously, it's more complicated than this in a multivariate open economy, but this example will suffice.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,968
yea but nothing compares to the homeless folks in SF, greg

those fuckers literally smoke a rock just to muster up the balls to ask you for some change or just to talk shit to you. especially at Union Station
Homeless folks in SF are often wannabees. A lot of them are suburban kids with parents who drive BMWs, and they hang out on Haight Street stoned on weed begging for change until their trust funds kick in.

There ain't no Union Station in SF, so I'm guessing you're referring to Union Square. All the shoppers from Japan, Korea, and Russia hang out there with their designer bags... it's a different kind of homeless and it's far more patrolled by the authorities making sure the retail cash flow is safe.

The homeless in S.F. aren't that bad except late at night, the ones in Berkeley are way freakier most are fuckin crazy.
Amen to that, really -- having lived years in Berkeley as well as SF myself. In fact, everything in Berkeley is crazier and angrier than SF. Hippies, homeless people ... you name it.

An SF hippie, for example, is more a drug-toking Dead-Head. Pretty mellow. A Berkeley hippie, on the other hand, wants to yell at you, piss in your car's gas tank, and set your house on fire for supporting "The Man". It's a whole different vibe.
 

X Æ A-12

Senior Member
Contributor
Sep 4, 2006
88,228
Lets put it this way. Suppose you have six castaways on an island, five of which are Asians and one American. One Asian works to fish, another looks for vegetables, another hunts for land animals, another is the chef, the last Asian builds the fire, and the American does nothing but eat and tan all day. The Asians work every single day to feed the American, who operates his own tanning service for himself. The Asians are allowed only a bit of food to have enough strength to start the process of building the economy again the next day.

Now, Keynesian economists will tell you that if it wasn't for the American, the Asians would all be unemployed. But obviously that's not the case. The Asians are the ones driving the economy's growth and sustainability, while the American just operates a service sector for himself.

If you were one of the six Asians, would you rather continue working hard for the American so his service industry to himself can prosper, or would you rather kick him off the island so you can enjoy less work, more leisure time and more food? The answer is obvious.

Obviously, it's more complicated than this in a multivariate open economy, but this example will suffice.
You have a point but this a completely different scenario, you can't just simplify intricate economies into six people on an island doing menial tasks. Plus they don't benefit from us because we take their crap they benefit from us because we buy it. The chief thing missing from your scenario is that the Asians aren't receiving anything from the American in return, but in reality we pump money into their economy through everything we buy from them and our companies that go over there and set up factories for cheap labor employ thousands maybe even millions of their citizens. If America and Americans simply dissapeared from the face so much of the their market for these products would dry up. Sure you can say they have a huge home based market because they have so many people but these people aren't like Americans, they don't have the leisure time to use and the money to buy all of these products. Many of them probably have no interest or use in a large percentage of these products. Americans here are doing what we do best, consuming and sure there are other countries out there but none of them can match our desire for useless crap
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,968
Lets put it this way. Suppose you have six castaways on an island, five of which are Asians and one American. One Asian works to fish, another looks for vegetables, another hunts for land animals, another is the chef, the last Asian builds the fire, and the American does nothing but eat and tan all day. The Asians work every single day to feed the American, who operates his own tanning service for himself. The Asians are allowed only a bit of food to have enough strength to start the process of building the economy again the next day.

Now, Keynesian economists will tell you that if it wasn't for the American, the Asians would all be unemployed. But obviously that's not the case. The Asians are the ones driving the economy's growth and sustainability, while the American just operates a service sector for himself.

If you were one of the six Asians, would you rather continue working hard for the American so his service industry to himself can prosper, or would you rather kick him off the island so you can enjoy less work, more leisure time and more food? The answer is obvious.

Obviously, it's more complicated than this in a multivariate open economy, but this example will suffice.
I really like this analogy. My only problem with it is that the Chinese standard of living was a zero-sum game for them until they started exporting the fruits of their labor. China has had too much of a taste of the "good life" to go back to the provincial Maoist ways anymore. To cut off their customer lines in the West would be to invite stasis in their economy.

Sure, they'd survive. But they would no longer grow. And the country is too hungry for growth and hungry for international status in the world economy to go back.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,996
You have a point but this a completely different scenario, you can't just simplify intricate economies into six people on an island doing menial tasks. Plus they don't benefit from us because we take their crap they benefit from us because we buy it. The chief thing missing from your scenario is that the Asians aren't receiving anything from the American in return, but in reality we pump money into their economy through everything we buy from them and our companies that go over there and set up factories for cheap labor employ thousands maybe even millions of their citizens. If America and Americans simply dissapeared from the face so much of the their market for these products would dry up. Sure you can say they have a huge home based market because they have so many people but these people aren't like Americans, they don't have the leisure time to use and the money to buy all of these products. Many of them probably have no interest or use in a large percentage of these products. Americans here are doing what we do best, consuming and sure there are other countries out there but none of them can match our desire for useless crap
Yes, we pay for what we receive -- through IOU's. So lets say that the American issues IOU's to the Asians for each meal they prepare him. The five other guys on the Island accept these IOU's at first, but then realize that because the American produces zero needed goods to them in return, these IOU's will never be fully paid. But despite this, the Asians keep producing and piling up IOU's which the American will not repay. Does this make them better off? No, it doesn't.

This is exactly what is happening now. Our trade deficit and current account deficit is astronomically high as China purchases government bonds (IOU's, debt) while they ship in products into the States. Do we have the ability to repay this debt so the Asians can reclaim what we owe them? No, because we keep adding on debt to save our economy and have a 70% consumer economy where our top business sector is the service sector. So are the Asians better off with this US government debt they're holding? No, they are not.

The thing people forget is that everybody wants a better life. Since the boom in China's economy started over the past decade, more and more Chinese are buying cars every single day. Just because many of them live in poverty and under a command and control government doesn't mean they aren't like us.

And this is why the Chinese will probably stop funding our consumption once the time is right. The problem for them right now is that the US Dollar is the world's reserve currency, so once that goes kaput they'll start to thrive.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,996
I really like this analogy. My only problem with it is that the Chinese standard of living was a zero-sum game for them until they started exporting the fruits of their labor. China has had too much of a taste of the "good life" to go back to the provincial Maoist ways anymore. To cut off their customer lines in the West would be to invite stasis in their economy.

Sure, they'd survive. But they would no longer grow. And the country is too hungry for growth and hungry for international status in the world economy to go back.
How would they no longer grow? There are other emerging markets in Asia as well.

China's export-driven economy is really no different than ours during WWII.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,968
How would they no longer grow? There are other emerging markets in Asia as well.

China's export-driven economy is really no different than ours during WWII.
Because nothing can consume like the eating machines of America.

No 120-cm, 30-kg Thai boy in flip flops can match the black hole vortex created by the mighty SUV-driving, surburban-ranch-dwelling, food-chugging American consumer. The weight of just one of our ass cheeks alone could crush that poor kid.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,996
Because nothing can consume like the eating machines of America.

No 120-cm, 30-kg Thai boy in flip flops can match the black hole vortex created by the mighty SUV-driving, surburban-ranch-dwelling, food-chugging American consumer. The weight of just one of our ass cheeks alone could crush that poor kid.
Hey, I know some fat Asian Americans. :p
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,996
The fucking IDIOT keeper Wicks for DC stomps on Freddy Montero, gets a red.

I hate that piece of shit Wicks. He ruined the game for them again, dickhead.

Don't play him anymore.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 7, Guests: 180)