The real problem lies with the Chinese government and its monetary policy.
If they stop practically pegging their currency to the US Dollar by buying our debt, their currency would rise and the Chinese people purchasing power would increase.
When their purchasing power increase, they could buy more stuff and their standard of living would rise. When that happens, they wouldn't work in shitty conditions because they're comfortable and companies would have to reinvest their profit to make better working conditions.
You then gave me an example of your brother, who lives in Los Angeles by himself, making half as much as you did, and gets by with some help.
You start by complaining this country might as well be communist because you're working like a slave, ignoring all the choices you were given and allowed to make, but now you admit you are not a communist expert and can't give me EVEN ONE EXAMPLE of a country which can give you the basics without work.
So, now is the time to admit, there is no law in nature or by man, that says one must be given the basics at ANY amount of labor, that's what the market is for. If you don't like how much you need to work to make ends meet, feel free to move to a country that's better. I don't doubt we can be much more free than we are, but we are far from communist and if there's a country which as better quality of life for less work I'd consider moving there, unless there's something else that I find valuable where I live, in which case, that's what I am paying for.
You are starting to sound like you're never going to be happy unless you get everything you want and then some.
Why should you save 80% of your salary? Why not 100%? Why not have basics given to you?
And I say it is, I don't agree with your method of measuring it.Quote:
If this country was run correctly, our standard of living should be significantly higher than 1912.
If you compare the fact that humans still need food and water to survive, we've still not found a way to travel at the speed of light, then yes.Quote:
Based our discussion, it seems that 1912 is actually quite comparable to 2012. This shouldn't be the case.
If you insist on ignoring that you are allowed to take out student loans to work in the entertainment industry, talk on a phone while driving, and watch more films and listen to more music sitting outdoors than you could ever in a year back in 1912, then yes, it's comparable.
Ok, this is where you get into utopialand....what do you mean SHOULD? How are you so sure it will be what you expect?Quote:
If this were a true market, the standard of living should be far and away better than 1912. Industries such as cars, planes, education, health care, etc are all shit.
Just because I don't sympathize with your complaints doesn't mean I defend the status quo.Quote:
Imagine how much better things would be if the government got out of the way. Thats the point I'm getting at. I'm surprised someone who is apparently a Ron Paul supporter would be defending the status quo the way you are.
No, far from it. Obama supporters WANT change, and WANT it handed to them. I advocate BE the change or move away, or shut up.Quote:
Honestly you sound like an Obama supporter (no offense), everything is shitty but there's nothing you can do about it. It this failed philosophy that gets us in trouble. Everyone just accepts that everything has to be shitty, and nobody demands results from the government.
As for why I argue with you, look back at your own posts. You claim one thing, then when I correct you, you change what you say.
You ask me how we're better than 1912, then you say you didn't say we're not better. You say we might as well be communist, then you admit you don't know what communist country fits your dream. You call our current state slavery, but you can't tell me what country is better. You say I must agree with you if I'm a Ron Paul supporter, otherwise I must be, or might as well be an Obama supporter...that's why I argue with you, I don't take nicely people cheapshooting.