Danny Schechter: Do Americans Realize How The Crisis Breeds Global Chaos?

[marmar]

Published on Monday, March 9, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
Do Americans Realize How The Crisis Breeds Global Chaos?

by Danny Schechter


KREMS, Austria - Obsessed as we are about our own crumbling economy, it's hard for most Americans to see and appreciate the global nature of the crisis and how it is impacting, and will impact, others throughout the world. We don't recognize how many in other countries blame the fall of their own economies on a kind of "financial aids" born in the United States.

And even as protests spread with Britain just putting its own army on alert for fear of disruptions this summer by anarchists with bent on class war with slogans like "burn a banker," mass demonstrations show no sign of abating in France, Iceland, Ireland Greece and other EU countries. People here have politicized economic issues perhaps because of a more thorough and diverse media environment as well as an expectation that their governments have a duty to protect their people.

When I arrived in Vienna for a film forum and festival at the Danube University, I was surprised to see merchandise and remainders marked down to flea market prices at stalls in the usual pricey booths at an airport usually only known for pedaling luxury brands.

Some think the European Union and the Euro zone may not survive the tremors. European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said on Friday. "The European Union is facing an unprecedented situation due to the economic crisis and needs to work at different levels to restore credit flows." He said the bloc's economy is expected to contract by 2 percent this year.

General Motors wants a bailout from European governments, too, with 32,000 jobs at risk. ...............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/09-7

[Hello_Kitty]

1. They should let us get to work rebuilding our economy and stop screaming "protectionism"

When we try to create and protect jobs here. Practically every other country is implementing protectionist measures while hypocritically demanding that we keep our markets and industries wide open. Other countries were complicit in creating the U.S. consumer driven bubble economy so they need to zip it and let President Obama and the Democratic Congress clean up the mess.

[Deja Q]

4. Agreed. It's almost funny how that works.

[anigbrowl]

6. On the contrary

Protectionism is the problem. Just as we all fell into this mess together, so we need to cooperate in order to get through it. Trying to shove the blame onto other countries is just as stupid as them trying the lump all the blame onto us. If isolationism was the answer, North Korea would be the world's most successful economy.

[Hello_Kitty]

9. Whose protectionism caused this? Do tell.

[anigbrowl]

10. not what I said. Please read again.

[Hello_Kitty]

11. You said protectionism caused the problem

I asked you to elaborate on that.

[anigbrowl]

14. No I didn't. You inferred that and decided that was what I said.

this is pointless. Obviously, you have no intention of having a discussion.

[Hello_Kitty]

15. It's hard to have a discussion with someone when I can't figure out WTF they are trying to say.

You said protectionism IS the problem and I asked why and then you deny you said it

[anigbrowl]

16. And that is my fault, how?

Saying that protectionism is the problem does not equate to saying it caused the recession. I'm saying that protectionism is exactly what we want to avoid in circumstances like this. Going into protectionist mode will exacerbate a recession, severely. It's a mistake to think you can isolate your way out of recession; it would just destroy our export markets, and make the cost of imports prohibitive. It is beyond me why people of both the left and right think the solution to touch economic times lies in autarky.

If you still don't get what I'm trying to say, I can't help you.

[Hello_Kitty]

17. Can you substantiate your claim that protectionism exacerbates a recession?

Hint: If you say "Smoot Hawley" I will know you have nothing.

[anigbrowl]

18. LOL

I guess you don't believe in things falling either, as gravitation is only a theory. There's a reason I mentioned North Korea in my first post, and autarky in the one just above. You can also look at recessions in European countries prior to the implementation of the single market. Or look at Egypt's economy, or Iran's. There's any number of examples; the history of Smoot-Hawley in the US is just the best-known and clearest example, and you'd do well to go back and study it with an open mind.

Enjoy the company of Lou Dobbs and the freepers.

[Hello_Kitty]

19. No, you're the one who needs to study the economy around the time of Smoot Hawley

Hint: International trade was a minor and insignificant part of our GDP at the time.

Enjoy the company of Lou Dobbs and the freepers.

Go Cheney yourself. BTW, I'm sure there's a person from another country who is willing to do whatever it is you do for less money. Why don't you volunteer to give it up to them? Put your money where your sanctimonious mouth is. Give up your job. Go on unemployment for a while. Then, out of desperation, take whatever you can get, even if it pays half what you used to make. Welcome to the New Global World Order. Seriously, give up YOUR job or STFU.


Newsflash: Embracing all this globalism doesn't make you hip and multicultural. It makes you an idiot.

[anigbrowl]

20. Sorry, but your argument is identical to that of the Freepers

Trade was a small part of the US GDP at the time, but that doesn't make it insignificant. The trade war instituted in the 1930s had terrible effects for the whole world. Like it or not, this is exactly the meme being pushed by Ron Paul, Lou Dobbs and a bunch of other right-wing xenophobes. Economic populists ALWAYS play the xenophobia card in a recession and try to pass off the idea that autarky will solve everything and create full employment. The current rewriting of history about trade comes from the same people who are arguing that the new deal did nothing to improve conditions during the depression, an 'intellectual' (I use the term loosely) trope which has been gaining currency in GOP circles since last year - but which doesn't stand up to analysis.

What actually happens is that corporate welfare increases, wages are frozen, and prices go up. To the extent that prices are controlled by the government of the day, shortages occur because there is no motivation or spare capital to invest in increasing productivity. As I've pointed out several times, North Korea has the world's most closed economy, and a fully collectivist one to boot. Officially, they even have full employment. But nobody in their right mind would want to live in North Korea.

As for me...

a) I'm an immigrant (from Europe)
b) I'm self-employed
c) so I pay out a higher proportion of my income in taxes because I have to cover the employer contributions too
d) and I also know plenty about being poor, both here and elsewhere - but I don't get any govt. benefits
e) I'm in favor of free movement of goods, capital AND labor
f) I don't need to embrace globalism to feel multicultural, I just have to look at my own household

If you still think protectionism is the answer, how about if my state imposes a 10% tariff on goods and services from your state, and vice versa? Do you think that reducing interstate commerce and making the 50 US states isolate themselves economically would improve everyone's economic situation? Because that's what you're suggesting, just on a larger scale.

[Hello_Kitty]

21. LMAO

Economic populists ALWAYS play the xenophobia card in a recession and try to pass off the idea that autarky will solve everything and create full employment.

:rofl: No, Flat Earth unfair trade policy loving cheapslave labor apologist corporate stooges like you ALWAYS accuse people of "xenophobia" so you can shut down the discussion and pretend that "globalism" will solve everything. But here's something you sanctimonious disingenuous globalists have failed to acknowledge: The whole thing depended on the U.S. consumer!! You know, the consumer who has been seeing wages stagnate and good paying jobs being offshored and outsourced and insourced. While dipshits like Thomas Friedman told us everything would be fine because we'd "retrain" and "innovate". Why, we'd all be Internet millionaires!

Gee, didn't exactly work out that way, did it? :sarcasm:

And now, because those dumb fat lazy xenophobic hateful benighted Amurkins can no longer charge the cheap crap from China and Bangladesh on Visa or their HELOCs, trade has pretty much come to a screeching halt. See, that's the problem with trade policies based on corporations trolling the world for the cheapest slavesworkers and most lax labor and environmental standards. Eventually there's no one left who can actually buy anything.

If you still think protectionism is the answer, how about if my state imposes a 10% tariff on goods and services from your state, and vice versa? Do you think that reducing interstate commerce and making the 50 US states isolate themselves economically would improve everyone's economic situation? Because that's what you're suggesting, just on a larger scale.

Aww, how cute. Maybe it had escaped your notice, lo these past two decades, but what many states (and many cities) are actually doing is trying to lure big companies with tax cuts, subsidies, and TIFs. Regions are trying to outdo each other in a race to the bottom that is bankrupting their governments and usually NOT providing as many good jobs as they promised to the local community. It functions in a similar way to the way globalism does, with companies packing up and leaving as soon as another state or city offers them a more generous tax break or subsidy. In some cases they end up leaving the U.S. altogether, for even greener grass in Mexico. But hey, it's all good because, as you globalists like to say: "Outsourcing is GOOD for the economy!"

Edit to add: Calling people Freepers is against the rules of this board.

[anigbrowl]

22. Laugh all you want. You ahve no argument, just snark.

'The whole thing depended on the U.S. consumer!!' No it didn't. Do you thinkt hat nothing from Asia is bought or sold in Europe, or that goods don't circulate around different countries in Asia? Or that these countries don't import anything from us in return? Maybe you should try looking outside the borders of the US and see how global trade actually works. This idea that the US consumer is subsidizing the entire world is, frankly, bullshit.

'Aww, how cute. Maybe it had escaped your notice, lo these past two decades, but what many states (and many cities) are actually doing is trying to lure big companies with tax cuts, subsidies, and TIFs.' ...which are another form of protectionism, and equally harmful. This is the sort of thing I want to get away from - corporate welfare and compromising standards and lowballing on taxes. I'm absolutely fine with strict standards on product safety, working conditions and environmental conditions on both ourselves and our trading partners, which has gone by the wayside in favor of quick-fix wheeling and dealing like the above. A protectionist outlook is only going to result in more of what's already not working, because it tends to wind up 'protecting' producers' interests rather than those of consumers and workers.

Did I call you a Freeper? No. I pointed out the similarity to the arguments they put out. Google 'Smoot Hawley trade GDP' and you'll get links to Lou Dobbs and FR on the first page. That's where this meme is coming from.

[Hello_Kitty]

23. Sigh.

This idea that the US consumer is subsidizing the entire world is, frankly, bullshit.

Yeah, that's why tankers full of merchandise are sitting in Chinese ports. That's why trade has come to a screeching halt. It's not that there are no other markets in the world but ours was the biggest and the 2 biggest countries, population-wise, in the world are our 2 biggest trading so-called "partners". China and India were not going to have a consumer base that rivaled ours anytime soon with the low wages they pay, and the corporations were already starting to move operations out of those countries for even cheaper ones.

...which are another form of protectionism, and equally harmful. This is the sort of thing I want to get away from - corporate welfare and compromising standards and lowballing on taxes. I'm absolutely fine with strict standards on product safety, working conditions and environmental conditions on both ourselves and our trading partners, which has gone by the wayside in favor of quick-fix wheeling and dealing like the above. A protectionist outlook is only going to result in more of what's already not working, because it tends to wind up 'protecting' producers' interests rather than those of consumers and workers.

Well then you are just as critical of all the other countries passing "protectionist" measures right now, right? Like India, who is kicking foreign workers out while crying "protectionism" at us because of Buy American clauses. How about China, who slaps a 20% tariff on our products while we only tariff theirs 2%? What about countries that subsidize certain industries or manipulate currency - in gross violation of trade pacts? Why do the globalists on DU only howl when Americans have the audacity to want to protect our jobs and industries? Why the one-sidedness?

Oh, and right, you weren't calling me a freeper. You were just pointing out the similarities in the arguments! Honest you were! Except that you will never find a single racist or xenophobic thing in anything I say on this matter. Do a search on my posts. This is about economics to me, not culture or ethnicity. If anything, you cheap labor fans might want to check your own racism and classism, since you guys act like every American worker is white and well educated. Last time I checked American workers came from every color, creed, socio-economic group. You guys are the ones who use racist, elitist, and downright offensive phrases like "jobs that Americans won't do". You guys were the ones who tried to sell globalism with the "retraining into BETTER jobs" lie. Assuming that was true (and it wasn't) why are YOU so comfortable with the notion of importing an underclass to do "lesser" jobs or exporting them to "lesser" countries?

BTW, google "benefits of free trade and globalism". First entry is some propaganda from the CATO institute. Ya know who else worries about "protectionism"? George W. Bush and John McCain, along with several other GOP Senators and Congressmembers.

[Karenina]

2. Fasten your seatbelts securely.

Turbulence ahead. :hide:

[CJCRANE]

3. Lucky old Shrub hands over the keys to the bus

as it falls off the cliff.

[leftstreet]

5. We could 'appreciate' it more if they'd let us 'see' it

The M$M acts as if USA! USA! is the only country on the planet.

Hell, they won't even let Canada and Mexico have weather!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. So much for "We're all in this together."

[SoCalDem]

8. Sadly, many Americans think no further than their own driveway

and see NO corellation between their own profligate living, and worldwide conditions.

[Hello_Kitty]

12. Sadly, multi-national corporations fashioned an economy that was driven by the U.S. consumer

And now you want to blame those consumers for the world's problems, instead of the institutions that created them.

[SoCalDem]

13. Not "blaming" the "consumers"

Just wishing we were CITIZENS, first..."consumerism" is the PROBLEM...and sadly, we LET it happen to us:cry: