# American manufacturing isn't dead.



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 17, 2009)

You learn something every day.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090217/na_us_th ... .html?.v=4

Excerpt:

"The U.S. by far remains the world's leading manufacturer by value of goods produced. It hit a record $1.6 trillion in 2007 -- nearly double the $811 billion in 1987. For every $1 of value produced in China's factories, America generates $2.50."


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 17, 2009)

Yes but it's the same old story...HOW MUCH are the lives worth that are lost in Americas pursuit of captain Progress and luxury.

If we are the great inventors (thanks to all the world-wide efforts of those who collaborate with us) why not invent no more human toll. I wasn't born to beta test government lies.

There's nothing progressive about a kingdom of walmart. Absolute horror. 

Why can't we create something technical that isn't a huge missile or protester grenade.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 17, 2009)

That's sort of a general rant, no?

The reason I posted that is that America used to be an industrial powerhouse, and I think most people thought as I did that all our manufacturing has been shipped overseas. Actually that's not the case, that article points out.


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 18, 2009)

Core principles, core deficiencies. They look at the technical data while the flawed core is staring them in the face, like the newborn criminals from lost positions they were in denial about. The leverage concepts, where you are either trash or gold doesn't do it for me. The numbers in the article don't reflect the population surge or the fact that the value in income and benefits have gone down while inflation has risen.

These concepts only protect "some of the people" and it's very random, not even just a class thing. People working on these issues aren't thinking about the full span of life. Why, because they're totally drugged up and desperate, there's no humanity only "thick skins"....please how weak.

We keep creating jobs where you don't need as much "hired help" but what is being done structurally in the economic system to compensate for this. Let alone globalism impacts. Those moves should be made before the kids starve not after. Most poor kids and seniors try to be strong and keep quiet but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem, usually when they speak up they find they're already in jail. Instead of having brilliant minds, people in that field are trained to be statistical parrots and be grateful for the money they have *that others don't.* Now the internet has killed the stores, yes even wal-mart should be afraid of ebay/amazon. People in media have been robbed completely for around a decade. YOUTUBE are criminals, totally intellectual property exploitation. What is Obama doing to enforce copyright, the thing that may or may not afford us dinner in next 20 years. 

We are musicians and we are not in denial about this thing.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 18, 2009)

That article isn't saying things aren't as bad as they are, it's reporting facts about how our economy is structured. As a matter of fact I find it alarming that (as I knew, just not in detail) such a high percentage of our manufacturing is for the military.

Now I have a question - not a rhetorical one: do we actually need the low-end manufacturing in this country? I know we're not going to get it back, but we had essentially full employment without it in the late 90s.


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 18, 2009)

Nick, I'm saying there's a lot that's not in the article and what's missing is important. The data is incomplete, doesn't detail how much those bucks are worth. There's nothing rosy about it. Doesn't mention who in these corps are actually getting the money that matters--exploiters or workers? If you read just about any book from a top ceo the ugliness is right there in plain sight. 

Wallstreet is like having ANOTHER TAX to work.

Tax 1.
Gov
Tax 2.
Fed
Tax 3.
Wallstreet - (LOWER THEIR WAGES, SELL THEIR SUPPLIES, FILL MY POCKETS) that's passive taxation. Money is gutted from the wage. If you have a 401k/IRA even more money is absorbed, for you maybe to have in the future, but for their firms to spend right now.

America has been ponzified.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 18, 2009)

Two separate things: how much manufacturing we have in this country, and how our government works. That article only deals with the first, saying that we still have a lot of high-end manufacturing in this country. It doesn't sound to me like there's anything missing from that, and it's not trying to be a rosy report.

As to the other part, we've had a generation of conservative "free market" economics with the result that you're describing (if I understand what you're saying, and I'm not sure I do). CEOs now get paid 500-odd times what their workers make, and they essentially own the legislature.


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 18, 2009)

Yeah, I can't imagine anyone thinks things are rosy.

Illuminati, the title of the thread is only saying that _American manufacturing isn't dead_ which is a positive and certainly necessary if any of the problems you sighted can be solved. Unless a total collapse of the economy would be helpful. One can certainly argue that greed and exploitation is so bad that maybe that's the only answer.

I think if the founding fathers came back they would indeed perhaps invoke the constitutional provision to _reform the government._


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 18, 2009)

"reform the government."

I like the sound of that...Just a little house cleaning in the name of humanity and making families not careers the cornerstone of civic structure. Because it won't be a recession/depression, it'll be a revolution and they know it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 19, 2009)

Huh?


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 19, 2009)

I just addressed both views here Nick

1. You, manufacturing is not dead: true obviously.

2. Illuminati, we manufacture things to kill people, exploiting our workforce, everything's a hideous mess: reform the government.

On the latter, if Washington and Jefferson etc., came back what would they think? The tax rebellion was in response to a tiny little tea tax. They wanted representation. Now we insure massive taxes for a few generations and our representatives don't really understand the details. I think the old boys would pass out at the current situation.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 19, 2009)

I wasn't huh-ing you, Dave, it's that I can't follow what Illuminati is saying beyond that the world is a mess.

And I have a different take on what Washington and Jefferson would think. To me they'd be delighted that what they started is still growing in spite of all the problems. They recognized that the world changes, and that was built into the system back then.

As to taxes, there are two choices: have the government simply print money and have everyone pay for all the services we need with inflation, or have taxes. I prefer the latter, although the trickle-down tax structure we've had for the past generation isn't working.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 19, 2009)

" i have to wonder if you're being honest with yourself here or with us for that matter"

No you don't have to wonder.

We just had eight years of a total assault on the Constitution, yet the country managed to elect an administration - and a Congress - that is doing everything it can to reverse that.

Note that I'm restraining myself from just telling you to go XXXX. It's not necessary to be patronizing just because you disagree.


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 19, 2009)

Hi Nick,

I have socialist tendencies and I also believe that there is only socialism.

Question is, how is it executed. It's nasty execution is why it's gotten such a bad wrap.

Obama, isn't doing anything harmonious with nature, nothing organic about his decision or planning. If you don't harmonize with nature you fail.

I'm sure you know, a lot of the money in the bailout is going overseas due to the globalized nature of the economy. Only the people in the business community want globalization, to relieve trade boundaries. Workers don't want it because they are the ones in the gears as these thinkers try to figure out how to make a better world while simultaneously demoting their own people. When you feel like you've earned something and it's taken away due to poorly executed ideology, it's a civic breach.

The whole concept of taxation is flawed. You can't charge someone for being born, yeah it's simple. They can build whatever hula-hoop they want, they just can't charge the unborn for it.

At this time, I feel the government/elders should have "their own" money for civic projects and civilians their own for everyday needs. This way all the governments of the world can enjoy their incestuous relations and people can act like real people and not have to be implicated in elite decisions and war. This is a divided "synthetic" approach which won't be able to contaminate human welfare but will unite civic progressives globally. And neither has to worry about messing with the others efficiency as a community.

But, that's never gonna happen or anything close....at least we have sophisticated means of denial in the meantime.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 19, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> " i have to wonder if you're being honest with yourself here or with us for that matter"
> 
> No you don't have to wonder.
> 
> ...



Sorry there, Nick. I didn't mean to come off as patronizing.  It's just that i thought you were way off with that comment and it created a reaction. In these last years, I've discovered bits and pieces about the US constitution and i have to say these guys had the right idea. 

Reading the last 8 years, i didn't really see the democrats do anything to oppose the neocons.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 19, 2009)

You're right, they just rubber stamped everything because they didn't want to be seen as soft on terrorism. That backfired.

Illuminati, I'm something of of a social democrat but not a socialist. Obama is doing what he can to reverse what's happened since the Reagan revolution, where we've created incredible inequality, and from everything he says it's clear that he wants to be harmonious with nature - in the sense that he understands very well that we're headed toward ecological collapse. The problem is that there are still lots of Republicans in Congress standing in the way, so politically it's not possible just to do what he knows we need to do.

I'm definitely in favor of taxation. The concept isn't flawed at all; the way we've been moving toward shifting the tax burden downward is flawed.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 19, 2009)

Illuminati @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> Hi Nick,
> 
> I have socialist tendencies and I also believe that there is only socialism.
> 
> ...



You seem to contradict yourself quite a bit.

Socialism doesn't work. Never will work and hasn't worked. Socialism is just a softer form of communism the only difference is that communism is so absolute that it kills a society quickly. Socialism does it slowly by raising taxation so high over a period of time that nobody can then afford anything and so the state then has to have a stake in all the major industries in order to keep the country going. But it's a progressive spiral. The more the government takes over industry, the more it has to tax, the less money people have to start industry of their own, the more the government has to step in to business maters,ect... Socialism is a downward spiral and you can't say that you're against taxes and for socialism. Socialism just leads to higher and higher taxation. Just ask any Canadian.

At the beginning of your post you seem to allude to the fact that socialism is "natural" and according to the laws of nature. Not so. 20th century socialism is just watered down Marxism pure and simple.

The only thing that went wrong with our financial system is that too many people were allowed for too long to engage in unethical practices that are on the books illegal. America has experienced a failure in justice more than anything. What the Obaminator is missing more than anything is that the laws have to be enforced. What he's getting right is that most problems go away if you throw enough money at them.

Jose


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 20, 2009)

Jose, it will never work?....It just took over America. Besides I'm talking about socialism as an evolving medium....

To me it's seems like this...if you have more than one person at a time on earth then you have a socialized system not a "capitalist - privately owned" system. 

There's no way capitalism is the last system because it's already changed shape and the free-market is on life support and Socialism bailed it out. Let's not split commie hairs. Socialism will only get stronger so long as humans continue to care about children and the elderly, health and their reincarnations, the question is in what variety.

The other question is which corporations will do their very best to fear monger people in to feeling great about being exploited and anti-socialist. All this while they live in mansions and eat caviar and the little guy gets a nice adjustable rate mortgage for a shack that has a 2 hour commute to work.

In my book, if you want to solve problems, you have to keep coming up with enhanced ideas not just protect flawed ideas with prosecution ( denial of your incomplete idea ). It's not ok for people to cage people without doing something to fix the source of the problem because that just makes a loop of pain.

Capitalism -- what a great learning experience, now it's over and time to implement our lessons and grow. And we've had a wonderful time making criminals of human beings.

Contradict....things are gray scale, what can I say. As a musician my main objective is to make the world better, period. I think about everyone in the picture, not just the middle and upper class. Those people that die for these systems aren't doing so voluntarily. It's too easy for people to be apathetic towards war in the high chair of indifference and self-pity. But I'm concerned with my brothers bloodshed. There's no need to bleed for people on this earth.

I have a great deal of respect for the foundation laid but I still need to carve my name in the pavement.

ALL MUSICIANS ARE SOCIALIST by their very purpose. =o 

Capitalism 2, it's already here.


----------



## Hannes_F (Feb 20, 2009)

Illuminati @ Fri Feb 20 said:


> I have a great deal of respect for the foundation laid but I still need to carve my name in the pavement.



Huh?
So you are not really concerned about socialism or capitalism or whatever - what drives you forward is your EGO ... ?

I am disappointed.


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 20, 2009)

Sorry to be so unclear. Not ego, humility.

What I means is:
I have respect for the brilliant minds and endless work to get this society where it is. But if I've been exposed to a fault, I have to blow the whistle. If I have skills and knowledge to do more than blow the whistle, I'll do what I can. But I will not lay down and accept a recurring problem has no solution.

To me, capitislm is just another part of the socialist ideal. But just captilism means neglecting countless obligations, especially the young and old.

Example, pension plans work great. 401ks failed.

No system should ever hold back free thought to make improvements and add your 2 cents, that would be a complete fault.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 20, 2009)

> There's no way capitalism is the last system because it's already changed shape and the free-market is on life support and Socialism bailed it out. Let's not split commie hairs. Socialism will only get stronger so long as humans continue to care about children and the elderly, health and their reincarnations, the question is in what variety.



I agree with what I think you're saying in the first part, although maybe I don't see it from the same angle. There is no such thing as a free market. The invention was used by Reagan when he came into power, and it was turned by the political right into meaning the same thing as political freedom. But it's bullshit.

You're right that socialism (small s) keeps our economy going. As I think I posted here before, we have socialized education, medicine (not universal health coverage, but Medicaid and Medicare), agricultural subsidies, food stamps (better than soup kitchens), Social Security, and of course the military.

The second part I don't agree with, even though it is rational that it would happen. You'd think that the majority of the people would get tired of the income inequality and simply vote in a much more socialized system, but for a couple of reasons I can think of that hasn't happened. It has on a smaller scale, like the very strict rent control voted in by the renters in Santa Monica, CA in the 80s, but not around the world.

Jose, pure Socialism (capital S) is tied to Communism and of course it doesn't work. But price controls in some industries and compressed wage controls across the board could work.

I just read an eye-opening book about all this by James Galbraith called "Predator State: how conservatives abandoned the free market and why liberals should too." It caused me to re-think a lot of assumptions I held.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 20, 2009)

I agree with all of that 100%, with the exception of Europe's woes being because they're socialist.


----------



## Illuminati (Feb 20, 2009)

I can see your points Nick, Jose but I'm pretty stubborn over the human toll element.

I'm worried for Obama, it's not that I don't like him, I voted for him. His being elected was one of america's biggest steps forward in my lifetime. The people he's up against though are extreme sadistic sociopaths however. And I feel the system coached them to be that way because it didn't give them soft pillow to cry on.

I don't think the average republican is as bad as they seem, look at Ron Paul. They want their due respect, family, guns, freedom and their money. They don't want to be pushed around and want to remain individuals. But as Nick said, Reagan ruined their party and invited a new generation people who didn't realize they're just selfish, which is nothing like the traditional Republican. But Reagan exposed the flaw as well, the flaw of privatizing earths resources.

Capitalism never rewards the smart or the hard workers, just the people who take advantage. People who find new ways to build empires upon poor people are suckers assets. I don't mind that not everyone wants to be forced to work every day for 10 or 11 hours but they get too many perks and too much leverage over their peers for their philosophy.

A system that elects George Satan Bush twice, well something just isn't right. His stinking agenda, whatever it was, made the United States a world wide target of hatred. I don't think people should have to wait their entire lives for these guys to get us back up to speed while seniors starve to death. So that's the main issue. It's too easily sabotaged and takes too long to recover.

Plus, if you check into some of the how to earn wealth books, you see a recurring theme.

Step 1.
Tax loopholes
Step 2.
Investing and Tax theft
Step 3.
Collecting assets that are non-taxable and hedging against america.
Step 4.
Investing overseas currency and ending the dollar tax magic.
Step 5.
Real Estate Tax Shelter. 
Step 6.
Buy gold, don't buy american and take the tax-free fast pass.

They're not even IN the capitalist system, why should we be. Real treason, up close, published and cheered. And it makes the loop of pain again.

How many more hundreds of thousands of regulators and police will be needed to actually achieve a sense of justice.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 20, 2009)

Most of that makes sense, but I get the impression that you're looking at both capitalism and socialism as all or nothing. In the real world we have a lot of both.

Either one on its own would be very scary. The problems come when politicians look at the world through ideological filters rather than as it is.


----------



## rgames (Apr 13, 2009)

Anybody remember a recent thread where there was a call to soften supposedly threatening wording? There was discussion about using this word or that because the language was a bit too confrontational and offensive to some.

In honor of that thread I copy these quotes from this one:

"A system that elects George Satan Bush twice"

"Friggin' republicans can't even read."


Check yourselves, guys...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 13, 2009)

I think if Hugo Chavez can call Bush Satan it in front of the UN, it's fair to say it here.

But you have a point about the other: friggin' Republicans do know how to read.

That's why it's so hard to fathom how they could be so wrong all the time.


----------



## José Herring (Apr 13, 2009)

I make no excuses. I'm hard on any party that advocates over throwing the constitution of the US. It's documented that Bush, Cheney and gang were actively trying to find ways to circumvent the constitution. And that the republicans did it while portraying themselves as patriots makes me want to throw up.

Now the party is trying to paint Obama as a socialist when in actual fact all he's trying to do is extend the constitution of the US to all citizens. I was pointing out that the word "welfare" in the preamble of the constitution means that the Federal Government has an obligation to the people of the US to insure Health, happiness and well being. That's what "welfare" really means. But, as soon as somebody mentions making health care affordable for everybody then the damn Republicans are out in the streets screaming socialism. To that I say FRIGGIN' REPUBLICANS CAN'T EVEN READ the preamble to the constitution of the US.

It's tiring. I'm sick of it. I'm sorry if you're offended but it's time that that party become a footnote in history. It's become a minority party. Only 28% of the population considers themselves Republican now. That number is far too high.

If you consider my language hard or offensive, then consider this. I grew up in a Republican state. I grew up with the ak47 carrying bible thumping maniacs that now make up the core of the party. To be sure there are more moderate republicans but they by far have no say in the party these days. The evangelicals and the "survivalist" types have taken over the heart of that party. Maybe someday the party will turn it's back on the Sarah Pallins of the world. But until then I'll do my part to make sure that they never see the light of any political dawn.

best,

Jose


----------



## rgames (Apr 14, 2009)

Let's consider those AK47-carrying bible-thumpers - are your comments so different from theirs? Is your zealotry any less intense?

In this forum, blatant attacks against groups of people or individuals are, ostensibly, discouraged. Unless, of course, those people are conservatives, in which case the attacks are not only tolerated but also, normally, amplified. The mods have banned people for making marginally deragatory statements regarding liberals but have, themselves, actively written with the explicit intent of offending conservatives.

And no, I'm not offended. I'm seldom offended, actually. However, consider those who might be and decide not to participate under the assumption that they're not welcome here. Are we fostering a community of exclusion? I'll refrain from answering for fear of offending someone.

Again, just check yourselves...


----------



## José Herring (Apr 14, 2009)

I assume by zealot you're thinking that I'm some kind of ideological liberal. Nothing can be further from the truth. And, I assume from your comment that you consider "conservative" to be some sort of class of people. I don't. Conservative is a trumped up political philosophy thereby subject to attack as an idea nothing more or nothing less.

So please don't consider my words an attack on any person but on a philosophy that's outmoded. I have no tolerance for the Rush Limbaugh crowd. Not only that it has proven to be and still is dangerous to society.

And having grown up on the edge of the desert back in the day when there still was a wild west I'm proud to say that some of my best friends were AK47 carrying bible thumpers. Ok, I exaggerate a bit. The crowd I grew up with were more into their guns than their bibles.

My words come from the heart. I try not to hold back even if it gets me in trouble. And, to understand my heart you have to understand where I've been.

I was born in Puerto Rico. At the age of 5 my family moved to a desert. South East Tucson out by Houton Rd. Back then it was a desert. Hard core. Killed rattle snakes at the age of 6. Carried knives and all that. As I grew I went to somewhat of a preppy highschool that was all Regan republicans. Later I went to music school in New York. I've been subject to all forms of political beliefs. So I don't have anything personally against anything. I just hit hard on ideas I know have failed. Further, I can't stand it when people hold on to beliefs and try to implement them on a government level. I'm a firm believer in the separation of church and state. For a church to get involved in politics debases religion which should really concentrate their efforts on higher ground. If the churches really did their jobs there would be no need for abortion, prisons, ect.... But they don't. So we need a state to handle these things. I think a church getting involved in politics is just admitting their failure.

but I ramble....it's late.


Jose


----------



## david robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

hi,
very entertaining debate.

you guys should come live in australia for a while.


DR9.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 14, 2009)

"Let's consider those AK47-carrying bible-thumpers - are your comments so different from theirs? Is your zealotry any less intense?"

Let's pretend Jose is a total left-wing kook whose zeal is way more intense.

He's still far better than the gun-toting moron.

Why? Because there's this phenomenon known as reality. His point of view is correct 95% of the time vs. 0% of the time for the ape.


----------



## George Caplan (Apr 19, 2009)

Illuminati @ Thu Feb 19 said:


> I have socialist tendencies and I also believe that there is only socialism.




You should live in Britain then. Looking forward to the next socialist cull. Coming soon.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 19, 2009)

George, do you mean socialists are getting culled or that the cull is socialist?

What do you mean?


----------



## George Caplan (Apr 22, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Apr 19 said:


> George, do you mean socialists are getting culled or that the cull is socialist?
> 
> What do you mean?



The political cull of socialism will start in Britain around June 5th. This is the time of county council and European MEP elections. 
After today's Budget, the truth may finally hit home regarding the level of debt the labourites have accrued over 12 years

The next General election is supposed to be in 12 months or so and won't be about whether you live in some northern craphole or Scotland or any of that - it will be about whether or not you're braindead. Last chance saloon and socialism needs to be finally eradicated. 

Watch out for your own President and his government and the level of borrowing that could occur over time.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 22, 2009)

Ah. Well, I disagree due to the facts - at least for this country. A sustainable level of debt is good; without it our economy will collapse.

I've probably posted before that we absolutely need to borrow like crazy and *invest* (not throw money away) if we hope to avoid a permanent depression. Look at what's going on in Ireland - they don't have that luxury, and they're fooked. Keynesian economics is the only short-term answer that makes any sense for this country; the deficits are going to be here no matter what, so we may as well have an economy.

And Obama's priorities are absolutely right on: new energy economy, better education so we can compete with China and India turning out several times as many college graduates every year, and healthcare reform to constrain the costs. Contrary to what the useless Republican politicians keep saying over and over, this is the best time to take care of those issues.

Socialism is being thrown around by conservatives in America as a substitute for "liberal," since it doesn't have the same sting anymore. The truth is that we've always lived in a mixed economy, so the word as used is a bunch of bullshit.

That aside, we have huge income inequality in this country right now, and that's led to the problems facing the whole world. Too much income inequality is not a good thing, for several reasons.

Shifting the tax burden back up to its historical levels makes a lot of sense. We need more democratic socialism, not less.

And we need to eradicate conservative thought from America, Britain, and the rest of the world. It's been tried and failed. Reagan and Margaret Thatcher have been thoroughly disgraced, even though most people don't know it.


----------



## George Caplan (Apr 27, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Apr 22 said:


> Ah. Well, I disagree due to the facts - at least for this country. A sustainable level of debt is good; without it our economy will collapse.
> 
> I've probably posted before that we absolutely need to borrow like crazy and *invest* (not throw money away) if we hope to avoid a permanent depression. Look at what's going on in Ireland - they don't have that luxury, and they're fooked. Keynesian economics is the only short-term answer that makes any sense for this country; the deficits are going to be here no matter what, so we may as well have an economy.



I take your points on board and completely understand.

George


----------

