Re: Space travel not war

On Mar 26, 4:53 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:06dc7cd5-5e0b-4e96-b260-038001e58f6b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 25, 9:12 am, Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:







On Mar 24, 3:35 am, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Not well understood is that the banking and trading systems set up
as
extensions to the Marshall Plan were designed to enforce a trading
regime that was permanently favorable to the United States. It has
been known since the beginning that this advantage would be
temporary. George Kennan and others who authored these plans to
maintain peace in the nuclear age that they would one day fail. So,
alternatives would have to be developed. These alternatives include
'direct military action to maintain US superiority' or 'alternatives
to the present control regime'.

Unfortunately the United States cannot maintain a disparity of
income
through trade if it is at war with those it is trading with - so
this
direct military action angle wasn't well thought out. Also
unfortunate, is there appears that no alternative to the present
control regime has been seriously considered or pursued.

The obvious thing for the U.S. to do is to admit that wide-open
international trade leaves American jobs vulnerable to cheap imports,
and so dump the WTO and go back to the days when countries set their
own tariffs, and only let in the imports that they decide they can
afford once they total up what sales they can make in exports.

After all, we can't force other countries to buy our goods, and the
only other way to limit how much we import would be to contract the
economy, throwing people out of work. This is what we're doing now,
and that alternative should be the one that's unthinkable.

John Savard

John, you don't get it.

The US supports WTO because in the past it benefited the US *because*
it transferred assembly and farming and mining jobs overseas. That's
the point. The short term impact was to accentuate retail, banking
and other high value jobs. In effect our 'allies' were
building,mining and growing stuff for us at wholesale, and we sold it
back to them at retail.

This worked fine for the short term, but had longer term downside.

That's HOW the USA with 4% of the world's people is able to touch 80%
of everything that's made, consume 30% of everything that's made, and
make nothing! lol.

This let the USA maintain a constant war footing throughout the Cold
War.

It killed our currency, and un-appreciated is the ability of
manufacturers to create their own independent retailing and banking
and market structures. Also, new to the mix, is the development of
information technologies and their impact on the retailing and banking
functions that reduce the importance and income potential of these
functions - shifting control and profitability back to manufacturing.

My suggestion is that the US continue to touch 80% or more of
everything that's made, but at the mining/farming level, using
advanced technology and off-world resources to maintain hegemony in a
growing world economy where everyone's boat rises, the US slower than
the rest, as it falls from 30% to 4% eventually. If done right,
especially if it commits itself to peace as the Swiss did 500 years
ago, it can maintain control of banking and finance in the world,
along with raw materials and access to off-world resources.

An explicit tax and a US dominated global peace force should replace
the rights to engage in warfare going forward. But, the need for this
is unlikely to be generally appreciated until God forbid - a few loose
nukes destroy a few major cities - which is too damned bad.

================================

I must own up to a mistake I made a few weeks back,
when I thought "Willie Mookie" was not some actual
person's name. Oops.

This update is needed because as I follow the Guth
vs Mookie debate, it looks like, ...well, it shows
Guth in a terribly bad light and I wonder if he can
change his ways? Guth, for openers, how about if
you read a book on American Constitutional
government, namely, upon the idea of the executive,
judicial, and legislative parts adding up to a
stable structure as they provide checks and balances
upon each other. If this idea is too large for your
head, I'm sorry; it's central in the American past
and present and I think it will prove an essential
component of how us Terrestrial primates adjust our
selves and our social systems to a space environment.
So how about if, you look outside yourself and see
some of what's out there? ??

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Mar 26]

So, you think more of our born-again corrupted government is the best
global domination answer, along with keeping more of the rest of us
poor folks either incarcerated or sequestered as brown nosed minions,
is the best do-everything course of global actions that should be
taken.

No wonder there's going to be a WWIII, especially with the likes of
yourself and Willie.Moo pulling out all the stops.

Remember that I'm the truly honest guy having discovered intelligent
other life that's existing/coexisting on Venus, and unlike so many
others, at least I've got perfectly good pictures plus all of those
regular laws of physics and the best available peer replicated science
to boot that's pulling on my side of this rant.

I'm also that pesky village idiot with the LSE-CM/ISS. So, how much
further off-world than my LSE-CM/ISS, POOF City at Venus L2 or the
planet Venus itself would you like to try for?
.. - Brad Guth
.

Quantcast