Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Your piece is a nice start to a discussion we've only begun to have (or have not!) about the material being of our society and, indeed, our world.
I have stopped nodding in assent when someone says, "I mean America doesn't make anything anymore" and then goes on to say that that is the root of the problem--that more material goods are not produced here to be consumed here. While manufacturing represents jobs and numerous jobs have gone overseas, I think consumerism is not only not sustainable but also will not sustain a country's or the world's economy.
I am becoming convinced that services--not goods--for "good" wages are our only hope for survival economically,spiritually (in the larger, not the religious sense) and ecologically. I do think that our government needs to use our tax dollars and the money it prints and that is secured by other countries, principally China, to fund WPA-like projects to renew our physical infrastructure. At least we will get something tangible and vital for the debt. By services, I do not mean the self-service (in other words, serve themselves) "industries" like insurance and other brokerage-type money shuffling that have overall become dishonest and greedy.
Like Andrew Leonard in his essay, I will contain the nature of this comment. Pulling the string of the consumerism topic just leads to more and more. All of it must be discussed and acted on for the survival of our country and our planet.
I suggest a donation, however big or small, to the charity of one's choice.
Nothing economic about it. I think whining about Wal Mart is useless. If more had their common sense we'd be better off. Profit margins help no one but the rich. Wasn't it unrealistic values and loans to procure that played a major part in all this? How can expanding on that make the problem go away when that IS the problem?
Yeah, the whole system needs a rethink and revamp. I saw one thought on here a while back I thought might work. Why give money to those who's concerns about profit margins got us here in the first place? Why not give the money to the general public, those who were duped into believing they were some how helping by going into debt? Makes more sense to me then giving more to the hand that bit you.
When the majority of our economy is based upon consumer spending and not manufacturing or technology- we've got a huge problem.
Think about what has happened- the government, in league with corporations- created the false bubble which we are now seeing burst. They sold the infrastructure of this nation out through travesties like NAFTA and outsourcing. It was good for them in the short term- they were able to make large profits up front, but this kind of thinking is unsustainable and disastrous. It's the equivalent of selling the roof off your house when the weather is good just to have some extra pocket change.
Even if most Americans could afford to buy a flat screen TV right now, it won't help us. Where are those TV's made? China. Nice. So all of that money that could be re-circulating in our own economy gets sent overseas where it disappears. All because the people at the top thought a service economy was better than an economy based upon manufacturing.
A better idea than buying Chinese-made goods, would be to give a government rebate (direct subsidy) to every property owner for installing thermo-pane windows, insulation, solar panels, and install American-made, energy-efficient appliances in or on building they own. This would help us go green, result in energy-cost savings over a few years, and not incite more wasteful spending that increased endebtedness on individuals.
Obama should begin with the White House, Capitol Building, and then all federal government buildings. This would create jobs, and create new American businesses, whose jobs won't be easily outsourced, and improve the manufacturing base of our economy. Obama could offer the same incentives to states and counties. This would alleviate a lot of the energy and environmental solutions we need. He could mandate that Detroit begin manufacturing "green," electric or hydrogen cell buses (mass transit), or light rail (train cars) to promote public transportation as well.
Spending money wisely in cost-savings, energy efficiency, and lessening pollution or global warming, is an investment in our future, whereas going to Walmart for a Chinese-made TV will get us back in the same hole we're trying to dig ourselves out of.
An Uncle Sam buying spree can help in the short run - and all that infrastructure will be nice. However, what about the long term economy? How do we create an economy that works without infinite growth of consumtion? How do we employ everybody when so much of what we actually need has been mechanized?
There's a fourth reason that follows implicitly from the third. The "shop now" propaganda is based on a myth: consumer spending is the driving force of the economy(s). Rather, this is a capitalist crisis, one involving artificially cheap credit gone haywire (turnover of capital), speculation with fictitious capital blown up, overproduction in some markets, and ultimately the collapse of the financial system, cuts in production of capital goods, and hence consumer ones. But to admit all this would be to expose the way capitalism and capitalists actually work. Thus, the demagogic propaganda from the capitalist press/media that lays the solution - and implicitly the continuing cause - at the feet of the mass of consumers.
Problem with this theory is that:
A, it sounds like George Bush.
B, the government is running out of money, because they are handing it all to the banking industry.
C, spending on 'infrastructure' in the abstract means nothing except more of the same 'infrastructure." I.E. what infrastructure? Green infrastructure? Is education infrastructure? Is single payer health care infrastructure? I, for one, don't want more roads and bridges. What about our energy infrastructure, like transmission lines from solar and wind generating facilities?
I.E. 'infrastructure' is like soup - what soup? The guide should be what will benefit the most people, and prepare us for a future of sustainability. Shopping heedlessly is unsustainable, whether by government or individuals.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
