Thanks to three factors - Reagan's supply-side economics, three decades of the gospel of deregulation, and the idea that all government is corrupt and somehow inherently evil, America's manufacturing sector is a shell of what it once was. This is not news, this is a fait accompli. America will never again be the economic powerhouse it once was.
So what do we do now? First of all, we don't give power back to those who got us into this economic mess in the first place. The majority of economists - including Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker - agree that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy need to go away. The majority of economists agree that the Obama stimulus was, if anything, too modest, too small to get the job done. Of course, the fact that the majority of professional economists agree on these matters is all that the Republicans need to know in order for them to oppose the economists. Why? Because the economists are the professionals, and Republicans certainly seem to distrust professionals. The proof lies in their opposition to the idea of global warming caused by human civilization despite the fact that 97% of climatologists know that it's very real, and in that many in the religious right oppose the teaching of evolution despite what any child knows after having been to a museum of natural history.
Second, we need to remember that we are not the first country that has had to adjust to a significant reduction of its manufacturing base. England has already traveled this road, from being the world's preeminent industrial economy in the late 1800's to its present state. How did England adjust? I suspect most economists would agree that they finally realized that they could not compete with the American economic colossus, so they concentrated instead where they still had the advantage: high finance. This is why the LIBOR, the London Interbank Offering Rate, is perhaps the single most influential factor in the determination of credit offering rates in the West. Of course England's financial sector probably cannot compare to what Wall Street has become, but the efforts and opinions of London's finance industry still matter significantly in the world. England has already blazed the trail of how to adapt to diminishing influence while maintaining dignity, and we should bear their example in mind.
.jpg?t=20120209092158)
Article comments
1 - jeannie danna
Arch,
You aren't reading any of these articles, are you?
What did you read on page 2...test to follow
2 - jeannie danna
Glenn,
I'm so happy that you are on board with solar energy.
I have one question, while looking at the solar map, What were all the deep red squiggly lines?
I agree that these fossil fuel industries need to be brought into the fold and nurtured, or they are just going to continue to obstruct any progress towards green.
I wonder how the horse buggy industry was changed over to automobiles...Did Henry Ford have to include them?
and you know...I just loved your closing statement!
Really well done! This was a great way to start my day. :)
3 - jeannie danna
Glenn,
:0 well, If I'm your lone commenter, at least you wont be repeatedly-insulted.
There is a real push for Green Energy Jobs. check this out!
: )
4 - Glenn Contrarian
thanks Jeannie -
Actually, I expected few if any comments on this article - it simply wasn't controversial enough to grab attention, so please don't feel bad!
I've submitted my article on my current stay in the Philippines - hopefully it will be published today.
5 - jeannie danna
Well, I'll be there, Glenn,
Nite, now... :)
6 - Dan(Miller)
Glen, I read the article and found it interesting.
You say, Spend hundreds of billions of tax dollars converting our empty factories to manufacture solar cells.
I think solar power can be great, and understand that there have been technological improvements since we installed two big solar panels on our sailboat fourteen years ago. They worked, but not well-- and that was in the sunny Caribbean. We also installed a wind generator. Ditto. Both require expensive inverters from 12 v. D.C. to 120 v. A.C.(a couple of thousand dollars) and a bank of deep cycle batteries (another six or seven hundred dollars). It was necessary to "supplement" them with a $10,000 diesel powered generator to run refrigeration and other stuff reliably.
Here in Panama, we looked into solar power. However, we have 5 - 6 months when the sun shines all day and 5 - 6 months when it shines only in the mornings. In our micro-climate, there is very little wind; a wind generator seemed not to be a great idea either. We looked, briefly, into installing a hydro electric plant but that seemed not to be a satisfactory solution. Accordingly, we spent about $3,000 to bring in electricity from the grid and it works just fine (we don't have and we don't need either air conditioning or heating and use less than 600 KWh per month). Electricity costs us about $50.00 per month.
Solar power probably works satisfactorily in some places. If it does and is economically sensible, I don't understand why the federal government needs to get involved. It turns out* that private enterprise can do at least as well, and probably better if the demand exists; if it doesn't exist, it seems like a silly idea. You apparently think otherwise. Why?
Dan(Miller)
_______________
*According to Douglas Adams, Incidentally, am I alone in finding the expression ‘it turns out’ to be incredibly useful? It allows you to make swift, succinct, and authoritative connections between otherwise randomly unconnected statements without the trouble of explaining what your source or authority actually is. It’s great. It’s hugely better than its predecessors "I read somewhere that..." or the craven "they say that..." because it suggests not only that whatever flimsy bit of urban mythology you are passing on is actually based on brand new, ground breaking research, but that it’s research in which you yourself were intimately involved. But again, with no actual authority anywhere in sight.
7 - Glenn Contrarian
Dan -
Solar power is now more efficient than nuclear power. Solar power is NOT as green as modern ultra-safe nuclear power plants IMO (but that's for another discussion), but solar panels are far easier to manufacture by workers who are less professionally qualified - thus enabling the opportunity for many, many jobs. Nuclear power engineers, OTOH, are without exception graduated from college or from the Naval Nuclear Power School (with which I suspect you're familiar). I flunked the NNPS back in '82, btw - a rural MS Delta education simply did not prepare me to drink from the firehose of NNPS instruction.
But just as nuclear power is far safer now than it was thirty years ago, solar power is far more efficient and user-friendly than it was three decades ago. I say let's give it a shot...if your boys on the Right would do something completely out of character and let it happen, that is.
8 - Realist
Careful, Glenn! You tread dangerous waters! You are threatening the continued profitability of the entrenched oil and nuclear power industries, and you know that your life isn't worth to them as much as the bullet they would use to end it! [/snark]
9 - Ruvy
Glenn,
Sounds like all is not quite right in the land of the not-so-free and not-so-brave. I thought the stimulus plans were just what the doctor ordered. Sounds like you want to buy the whole drug store now...
How many more trillions do you need minted to get you out of trouble, anyway? Not you personally, of course....
10 - Dan(Miller)
Glen,
I don't think we boys on the right are keeping it from happening; if it works and is economically viable, I'm all for it. Which brings me back to my earlier statement/question:
Solar power probably works satisfactorily in some places. If it does and is economically sensible, I don't understand why the federal government needs to get involved. It turns out* that private enterprise can do at least as well, and probably better if the demand exists; if it doesn't exist, it seems like a silly idea. You apparently think otherwise. Why?
Dan(Miller)
11 - Glenn Contrarian
Dan -
The main ones who would keep it from happening are those whose industries would be adversely affected by such an investment in solar power - the coal and nuclear power industries.
The Right would certainly oppose it for two reasons - one, it requires more tax dollar being sent (which they wouldn't mind if they were in office), and two, in case you haven't noticed, the Right's been opposing nearly everything - even bills they co-authored and co-sponsored with Democrats. Why? Think about it....
12 - roger nowosielski
As for private enterprise Dan is talking about in such superlative terms, there is of course the outside possibility they're more intent for the time being to squeeze every cent of profit they possibly can while the good thing last.
Which brings me to a side point. I've noticed that in many areas of private enterprise, from car rentals to hotel reservations, the prices have skyrocketed, reflecting the good ole policy of charging as much as the market can bear.
Again, what I see in these policies is but another example of squeezing as much profit as possible before the cash cow disappears altogether. So yes, the harsh times that many of us experience and go through is no kind of obstacle from stopping the big boys from gauging the market while the going is still good. Just like the rats who won't leave the sinking ship until they've had their fill.
"Nehmen die Gelt and run" appears to be the current MO.
13 - John Wilson
Dan says: "Solar power probably works satisfactorily in some places. If it does and is economically sensible, I don't understand why the federal government needs to get involved"
Because the feds are already involved in actively subsidizing competitive offerings, such as "clean coal" ($5billion). They either have to stop subsidizing competition or equalize subsidies.
The government is in the business of choosing winners and losers, whether you like it or not, and the impetus to do that has come from the business community. The influence of the public has been weak.
The USA Federal government has been actively subsidizing business since the Republics founding.
14 - Dan(Miller)
They either have to stop subsidizing competition or equalize subsidies. I would much prefer the former.
The government is in the business of choosing winners and losers, whether you like it or not . . . I don't like it. [T]he impetus to do that has come from the business community. The influence of the public has been weak. I hope we can eventually fix both; we had better.
Dan(Miller)
15 - John Wilson
Good luck getting the business community to not bully politicians around, especially with this perverse SCOTUS decision to allow unlimited bribery.
It appears the only hope is to allow The Public equal bribery facility, however one might imagine that to be done.
I'm not hopeful.
16 - free man
please please save America otherwise we will not survive muslims will make our living difficult plz take ur army out of pajistan afganistan because as a pakistani i know their diplomacy of leting american economy down its their propaganda plz [lz plz