|
|
|
|
|
|
by ajross
2909 days ago
|
|
|
> He doesn't suggest some kind of time travel -- so that we have to take it all, the good and the bad, of an earlier era. He/you are hardly illustrating a clear example either. You're just flinging poop, basically, with your "bad teaching" and "progress is a myth". The bottom line is that trade with the developing world over the past half century has been a staggering engine of growth. So if you don't want "globalization" then you have to explain how you get China to grow at 9% year after year for like three decades (or whatever the numbers were) without that trade. You don't get to wave a magic wand and assume that part. |
|
|
My argument is: if we want to change society in a way that resembles how one thing was in another era, there's no law or necessity that dictates that we also adopt everything else from that era.
We can pick and match.
>You're just flinging poop, basically, with your "bad teaching" and "progress is a myth"
Not sure what the "bad teaching" refers to.
The "Flinging poop" part, I find rude.
With 'progress is a myth' I made a statement, and gave two supporting examples just below it.
>The bottom line is that trade with the developing world over the past half century has been a staggering engine of growth. So if you don't want "globalization" then you have to explain how you get China to grow at 9% year after year for like three decades (or whatever the numbers were) without that trade. You don't get to wave a magic wand and assume that part.
I don't want "China to grow at 9% year after year". I want them to have a stable economy and work on redistribution. Similar for everybody else.
I don't want ever growing pies and larger slices. I want better cut slices of the already existing pies. Growth "year after year" is not sustainable (not just not sustainable itself, not sustainable for the environment and society either).
Besides, the net result of that "growth" was to make a middle class in China by deflating the middle class elsewhere (including the US).
The rich get to produce stuff in China and increase their margins (so the "economy grows"), but their country's working class (that used to produce similar stuff at home) is dealt a heavy blow and the middle class is squeezed.
The end result is not some large pie / bigger harmony slices and other fictional unicorns, rather it's trillion dollar bailouts of Wall Street and Detroit, plus "99% percent" on one side, and the "Tea Party" and Trump on the other side.