Obama's Fuel Efficient Car of the Future-Video!

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

In one way the lack of regulation could go that way, but I tend to see the present time as fundamentally different than the past. Today it is very hard for anyone to control a market for an item due to the internet. The internet has done more to bring down pricing, and even large corporations than anything before it. It is the market economy on speed as now anyone from anywhere in the world can sell to anyone provided both parties have access to a internet connection. This tends to mitigate against monopolistic practices unless regulations prohibit the sale of items from people of one nation to another. While there should be some minimal regulations against things like lead laced crayons for children, adults should have the choice to buy whatever they choose. Also, the massive amount of data out there acts as a sort of consumer protection scheme as bad products get panned online much faster than government regulations can act. I am not saying it would be a perfect system. If that is what is expected, then you will always be disappointed. However, I do believe that the internet age represents a fundamental seed change for humanity. If we can keep from destroying our society with wars and instead learn to live and let live on a global level, then we will continue to expand the interconnected nature of our world and use the internet to speed the development of mankind. However, this too is a dream as well as we all know that mankind cannot live at peace as long as ambition exists. Some men strive to improve technologies with their ambition, but some use their ambition to dominate others. Like everything else in human civilization, ambition is both beneficial and detrimental to our future. Sorry... I'll stop rambling now...

 

[CaStylin]

Not rambling, well i guess for some all this posting looks like ramble because they chouse not to read its words even if they disagree with that is being said/written

although i agree with the effect of the internet on prices it only works for those thing we can live with out or buy only so often (TV's DVD's books, cd's, so on and so forth) the thing we by daily don’t have such a tie to the internet as the internet can not supply the product in a timely manner with out an increased shipping cost that is if the items are shippable. The necessities such as food & gas can not be view as easily in this way. Also allowing free trade (as in trade with out import tax because of the lack of government regulation) would kill each American industry. We already have corporations that are only based here solely because they can avoid import taxes, with out it we can kiss those corps and the jobs they supply goodbye. With our inflated wage rate (compared to other nations rich and poor) we can not compete with other nations that make goods at much cheaper cost

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

The death of those industries is inevitable as is the rebalancing of the world's markets. Eventually, it will all reach a new equilibrium of value for the work performed. As formerly developing nations join the developed world, their people demand more in the way of lifestyle and goods for the work they perform. This can best be illustrated by the emergence of a middle class in China and India right now. However, this level of economic prosperity is limited only to nations with stable governments and enough personal freedom to allow for the development of a market economy. China is no longer as cheap to buy products from as it used to be, and the price of Chinese labor will continue to rise. The same is true of any developing nation with significant economic freedoms. My prediction for the next area of the world to develop into a first world economy is either going to be part of Africa or South America, if those nations can ever get their sh*t together. They don't lack brain power, but they do lack common sense governance.

Remember, it's not a zero sum game. Market economics are inherently risky in nature due to their ever changing nature. Attempts to manage them do not have long term benefits. You cannot guarantee the financial security of everyone with legislation. In order for the system to work, there must be winners and losers.

I also did not mean to imply the need to reduce regulation on food products. I tend to lump them in to a category that still needs oversight to protect the public from short term-minded scumbags who do not care about having a long term business model. I would also keep reasonable restrictions on pharmaceuticals as well. Even though I research every prescription my doctor gives me, I realize the need to protect those who lack my almost anal retentive need for data acquisition.

 

[CaStylin]

The death of those industries is inevitable as is the rebalancing of the world's markets. Eventually, it will all reach a new equilibrium of value for the work performed. As formerly developing nations join the developed world, their people demand more in the way of lifestyle and goods for the work they perform. This can best be illustrated by the emergence of a middle class in China and India right now. However, this level of economic prosperity is limited only to nations with stable governments and enough personal freedom to allow for the development of a market economy. China is no longer as cheap to buy products from as it used to be, and the price of Chinese labor will continue to rise. The same is true of any developing nation with significant economic freedoms. My prediction for the next area of the world to develop into a first world economy is either going to be part of Africa or South America, if those nations can ever get their sh*t together. They don't lack brain power, but they do lack common sense governance.

Well said... i have written something similar in another tread weeks ago except my revolution of the American industry comes its own inability to compete in global wage in the production of export products and the change of our nation into a data based economy. deregulation will likely expedite either scenario as a stubborn Americans (my self included) i am not sure if we can adapt fast enough to dodge the initial punch that has the possibly to complexly cripple our current ways of life

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

Well, much of this was predicted by futurist Alvin Toffler during the 1970's-80' in two books: "Future Shock" and "The Third Wave" in which the first wave is an agrarian economy and the second is mass industrialization. I learned about him from watching a teaching series led by Then-House-Speaker Newt Gingrich.

The problem I have with the Third Wave concept is that it leaves little space for those who are not tech savvy. I may be the "evil conservative", but it does not mean I do not empathize with those who are left behind by the rapid technological and societal changes we are now seeing. However, my feelings are irrelevant though to the reality of the times we live in. Good or bad, we are all headed in that direction.

Unlike Tofler though, I do see it as a flexible change. Once the world's economies achieve the equilibrium point, I do believe that manufacturing will return to the US and other developed nations. At that point, there will be no reason to have things made in other nations as the pay rate will have equalized. However, I tend to think this will take another 15-20 years to happen, at minimum. There is also the possibility that the US will go into decline as the infrastructure that we rely on reaches the end of it's life. Since our nation was developed at an earlier time than those coming on line now, it will be harder for us to adjust to the necessary structural changes in our cities, roads, bridges, etc. than nations that are now starting from scratch and therefore have more flexibility.


*edited for factual accuracy*