3 ms·

You can embrace globalism without damaging your economy. You just have to choose to only deal with countries that play fairly. China does not play fairly and,

by cwhiz 6y ago

You can embrace globalism without damaging your economy. You just have to choose to only deal with countries that play fairly. China does not play fairly and, as such, we should not do business with them.

marsrover 6y ago
I'm not in agreement or disagreement but I'm genuinely curious how you can embrace globalism without damaging your economy? I have found myself leaning more towards neo-liberalism in some aspects but I don't know how this piece fits in.
- yahnu 6y ago
  USA has embraced globalism and benefitting from it. American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders. "The recent stability in the share of adults living in middle-income households marks a shift from a decades-long downward trend. From 1971 to 2011, the share of adults in the middle class fell by 10 percentage points. But that shift was not all down the economic ladder. Indeed, the increase in the share of adults who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income over that period, a sign of economic progress overall." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-american-middle-class-is-stable-in-size-but-losing-ground-financially-to-upper-income-families/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-america...
  - njarboe 6y ago
    "American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders." As your quote says, it's not the wealth that has moved per say, but that people have moved upward out of the middle class and brought that wealth with them with more people moving up than moving down.
    - yahnu 6y ago
      Right. I see how my wording can be wrong. I saw some comments (in this thread and some others) that seems to be of the opinion that USA has not benefitted by embracing globalization. That opinion is in contrast to what I have seen in data analysis/reports. So I wanted to say that maybe problem is not that USA hasn't benefitted from globalization but rather that benefit hasn't been distributed appropriately. I'm not from USA and my knowledge comes by reading about news reports and expert data analysis so I might be missing something.
vkou 6y ago
Why should the American middle class give two shits about American businesses having to jump through hoops to operate in China? 90% of their income comes from wages, not investments. The last thing they want is for American businesses to operate in China, period - because operating in China typically means that manufacturing capacity gets moved there. This unfairness is only unfair to the owner class - the middle class is actually a net beneficiary of policies that make offshoring harder. China's policies that make foreign operation in it difficult are, in that sense, actually a gift to the American middle class.

by cwhiz 6y ago

marsrover 6y ago

I'm not in agreement or disagreement but I'm genuinely curious how you can embrace globalism without damaging your economy? I have found myself leaning more towards neo-liberalism in some aspects but I don't know how this piece fits in.

yahnu 6y ago
USA has embraced globalism and benefitting from it. American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders. "The recent stability in the share of adults living in middle-income households marks a shift from a decades-long downward trend. From 1971 to 2011, the share of adults in the middle class fell by 10 percentage points. But that shift was not all down the economic ladder. Indeed, the increase in the share of adults who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income over that period, a sign of economic progress overall." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-american-middle-class-is-stable-in-size-but-losing-ground-financially-to-upper-income-families/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/06/the-america...
- njarboe 6y ago
  "American middle-class wealth has moved to upper-class rather than to outsiders." As your quote says, it's not the wealth that has moved per say, but that people have moved upward out of the middle class and brought that wealth with them with more people moving up than moving down.
  - yahnu 6y ago
    Right. I see how my wording can be wrong. I saw some comments (in this thread and some others) that seems to be of the opinion that USA has not benefitted by embracing globalization. That opinion is in contrast to what I have seen in data analysis/reports. So I wanted to say that maybe problem is not that USA hasn't benefitted from globalization but rather that benefit hasn't been distributed appropriately. I'm not from USA and my knowledge comes by reading about news reports and expert data analysis so I might be missing something.

vkou 6y ago

Why should the American middle class give two shits about American businesses having to jump through hoops to operate in China? 90% of their income comes from wages, not investments. The last thing they want is for American businesses to operate in China, period - because operating in China typically means that manufacturing capacity gets moved there. This unfairness is only unfair to the owner class - the middle class is actually a net beneficiary of policies that make offshoring harder. China's policies that make foreign operation in it difficult are, in that sense, actually a gift to the American middle class.