4 ms·

The US emerged from World War II the global superpower while much of the rest of the world was literally decimated and turned to ruins. We built an incredible i

The US emerged from World War II the global superpower while much of the rest of the world was literally decimated and turned to ruins. We built an incredible industrial and commercial base to support and profit from the war. This overlapped with (and drove) major leaps forward in technology that the US was uniquely positioned to take advantage of. The "good old days" did exist but they were an extreme anomaly following the largest war in human history. I think people have a hard time realizing this because the mores and culture from that time period were encoded, broadcast and digested by the rest of the world. We still live orbiting around 20th century mass media cultural concepts.

deogeo 8y ago
> We built an incredible industrial and commercial base to support and profit from the war. Doesn't this conflict with the teachings of free trade? That other countries growing their industries and rebuilding themselves left the US worse off (if that is the reason)? If you buy that logic, then shouldn't you be very worried about moving production abroad?
- malvosenior 8y ago
  Yes, globalization would be one of the main reasons the "good old days" are no longer achievable. Lifestyle is being globally normalized. Note I keep putting "good" in quotes as a reference to the term. I'm not making a value judgement.
  - Barrin92 8y ago
    globalisation isn't a zero sum game. Rise of industry in developing nations didn't mean that some static output shifted around. Only a relatively small percentage (about 15% or so according to most research) of job loss is attributable to globalisation, and it isn't the jobs that were responsible for the 'good old times', but rather the very worst, environmentally damaging manufacturing. Gains in productivity and corresponding automation account for the lion's share of job loss. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs...
    - hopler 8y ago
      Globalization might be negative sum, when accounting for the lower marginal utility of monetary wealth captured by a few super wealthy capital owners instead of the masses of laborers

deogeo 8y ago

> We built an incredible industrial and commercial base to support and profit from the war. Doesn't this conflict with the teachings of free trade? That other countries growing their industries and rebuilding themselves left the US worse off (if that is the reason)? If you buy that logic, then shouldn't you be very worried about moving production abroad?

malvosenior 8y ago
Yes, globalization would be one of the main reasons the "good old days" are no longer achievable. Lifestyle is being globally normalized. Note I keep putting "good" in quotes as a reference to the term. I'm not making a value judgement.
- Barrin92 8y ago
  globalisation isn't a zero sum game. Rise of industry in developing nations didn't mean that some static output shifted around. Only a relatively small percentage (about 15% or so according to most research) of job loss is attributable to globalisation, and it isn't the jobs that were responsible for the 'good old times', but rather the very worst, environmentally damaging manufacturing. Gains in productivity and corresponding automation account for the lion's share of job loss. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs...
  - hopler 8y ago
    Globalization might be negative sum, when accounting for the lower marginal utility of monetary wealth captured by a few super wealthy capital owners instead of the masses of laborers