The plan going forward.

[glockmail]

Look it up yoself, friendgirl.

I just did: efficient productivity and increase wealth of the common man, at least that's my interpretation. But I'm still confused about your post. You must be on a higher cerebral plane this morning, Yoseph.

 

[Said1]

I just did: efficient productivity and increase wealth of the common man, at least that's my interpretation. But I'm still confused about your post. You must be on a higher cerebral plane this morning, Yoseph.

That's not it exactly, but in any case, what are you confused about, specifically?

 

[glockmail]

That's not it exactly, but in any case, what are you confused about, specifically?

How did Post-Fordism somehow fail in Japan? They have a vibrant economy, democracy, and are allies of the US.

 

[Said1]

How did Post-Fordism somehow fail in Japan? They have a vibrant economy, democracy, and are allies of the US.

I didn't say they were a failed state, did I? Again, you need to make a trip to wikipedia.

 

[glockmail]

I didn't say they were a failed state, did I? Again, you need to make a trip to wikipedia.

I wouldn't know where to start. Maybe its the cold Canadian air giving you a few extra IQ points this morning. You must be well into ski season.

 

[Said1]

I wouldn't know where to start. Maybe its the cold Canadian air giving you a few extra IQ points this morning. You must be well into ski season.

Not likely. Sent you a pm, though.

 

[glockmail]

You're right, the reality of China is much different. However, Post-Fordism somehow failed in Japan, too - maybe they should have hoarded all the money. :huh:

From the early 1990s the flexibility of the Japanese system with regard to work has been questioned in three areas. One concerns questions of choice and multiculturalism at work. Here “multiculturalism” refers not only to the level of tolerance shown toward newcomers and Japan’s different ethnic minorities, but also to flexibility in recognizing or accepting different work patterns to accommodate the handicapped, those with special family responsibilities, those at different points in their life, those with different sexual preferences, and those with different work–leisure ethics. Much of the discussion of these matters by business interests in Japan has correctly pointed out that this kind of flexibility is often very expensive in terms of a firm’s economic competitiveness. Chapters 5 and 6 discuss the labor market and suggest that Japan’s system for organizing work still appears to be rigidly modernist and assimilationist (i.e. monocultural), although internationalization and various internal forces for postmodernism seem to be producing greater flexibility at work than has been the case in the past.

A second area of concern involves the shift from the clearly defined and easily measured goal of income maximization and more national GDP per capita to the nebulous goal of improving the standard of living and lifestyles. Workers have come increasingly to reassess their goals at work, both materially and psychologically. Those in the modernist mode tend to conclude that the younger generation, spoilt by affluence, has lost the work ethic. Modernists may also push to widen the scope for individual choice, but relate workways and lifestyle to fairly predictable stages in life. However, the Japanese now access vast information about the outside world via the media and the internet. A growing number tour, study, and do business abroad, often accompanied by their families. During the bubble years many came to see irony in Japan having the highest GNP per capita and the most advanced electronic gadgetry in the world while many citizens experienced circumstances associated with the early stages of economic development: substandard housing, long hours of work, and poor infrastructure for leisure-time activities and for medical care.

The third set of choices relate to the nature of the work ethic, the commitment of the Japanese to their work organizations, and the balance between voluntarism and regimentation or between self-discipline and institutionalized discipline. The distinction between institutional structures and culture is important in assessing the extent to which the Japanese approach to work still relies on structures rather than on culture or shared values. This is odd, given that much of the literature on work in Japan has traditionally placed heavy emphasis on uniquely Japanese cultural traits or values as major factors facilitating Japan’s past economic achievements at the enterprise level. Structures exist at several levels, and behavior in the firm is often shaped by institutions at the national level, and increasingly by global arrangements.

[bold by me] I don't see this as a failure. First, it's a liberal wish-list of how society should be run. Second, any impending problems with work ethic can be solved by renewing emphasis to the cultural values that made Japan great, not steering toward some liberal utopia.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I think that your liberal agenda is to think every country should be like Sweden. Sorry pal, but the reality is much different.

No. Im for low taxes. I simply believe we should put moral constraints on our trading partner selection, so as not to empower people who use slave labor and have nukes pointed at us. It's really not difficult to comprehend. Only in the new neocon insanity is trade with enemies considered rational.

 

[Said1]

[bold by me] I don't see this as a failure. First, it's a liberal wish-list of how society should be run. Second, any impending problems with work ethic can be solved by renewing emphasis to the cultural values that made Japan great, not steering toward some liberal utopia.

My point had more to do with production dependant economies, such as China. Still, Japan had to reinvent itself after their big crash, their society allowed(s) for this, both culturally and economically. China is following a similar economic model, but without such flexibility for both people and corportions. Anyway, despite all the liberalisation, the bottom stil fell out from under Japan (yes I know, there is more to it than that).

Can you expand a little on the work ethic thing and nationalism solving work ethic problems (production)?

 

[glockmail]

.... Only in the new neocon insanity is trade with enemies considered rational.

I'm not sure who theses neo-neocons are. But I don't consider China to be our enemy. They never have had designs on the US.

 

[glockmail]

....

Can you expand a little on the work ethic thing and nationalism solving work ethic problems (production)?

I think that Japan has a very strong work ethic, religion, and family values, which will ensure them sucess for a very long time. I aslo think most of China shares these traits.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Your plan does not guarantee it won't cause escalation. You have no model. Just your pipe dream, and South Africa.

No. The model is we force china to human rights concessions before we will buy their stuff. ANd in the meantime we will recoup our own production capacities so we aren't dependant on totalitarian fascists. What don't you understand?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I think that Japan has a very strong work ethic, religion, and family values, which will ensure them sucess for a very long time. I aslo think most of China shares these traits.

They make work hard, but their years of totalitarianism has rid the society of inidividual innovation and self-determination amongst the people, the qualities which have led to America's supremacy.

You really need to open your mind and consider paths other than the road to destruction we're on.

 

[Said1]

I think that Japan has a very strong work ethic, religion, and family values, which will ensure them sucess for a very long time. I aslo think most of China shares these traits.

Flexiblity, democracy, education and freer markets ensures success.

 

[theHawk]

I'm not sure who theses neo-neocons are. But I don't consider China to be our enemy. They never have had designs on the US.

China's military leaders all consider the U.S. to be their enemy. China is very similar to Imperial Japan of the late 19th and early 20th century - they are modernizing their infrastructure and war machine. But this time, a 21st century Pearl Harbor from a nuclear power would end the war the same day its started.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm not sure who theses neo-neocons are. But I don't consider China to be our enemy. They never have had designs on the US.

Look in the mirror.

You have your head in the sand.

 

[glockmail]

China's military leaders all consider the U.S. to be their enemy. China is very similar to Imperial Japan of the late 19th and early 20th century - they are modernizing their infrastructure and war machine. But this time, a 21st century Pearl Harbor from a nuclear power would end the war the same day its started.

They may indeed consider us their enemy, based on the belief that we wish to take them over. But again, the history of China has alway been one of isolationism. At least, from what I have read from Kissinger. I think their "Imperialism" is limited to what they see as their natural borders, and it is very patient, not like WW2 Japan at all.

 

[glockmail]

Look in the mirror.

You have your head in the sand.

I think you need to focus on the true enemy of the US instead of this made up one. Our enemies are Islam and US Liberals.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I think you need to focus on the true enemy of the US instead of this made up one. Our enemies are Islam and US Liberals.

Whatever you say, brainwash victim. China is not our friend. They say so themselves. You're like a liberal ignoring Iran's threats.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Exactly. That's my point. Trade sanctions work. all you brainwashed globalists are acting like somehow trade sanctions are off the table for evermore. That's nonsense and it's just the new world order crowd corroding public opinion with lies and wrong conclusions.

No. You obviously didn't read the rest of my post.

Trade sanctions work against countries where the people have power over their rulers. In other words:

A) Embargo causes unemployment and misery;
B) People petition their rulers, and/or vote them out
C) Laws change

Trade sanctions against dictatorships?

A) Embargo causes unemployment and misery;
B) People are scared shitless to petition El Presidente, and cannot vote him out; if they do criticize him he laughs and sends them to the gulags
C) Laws do not change, El Presidente keeps on doing bad things, and continues enjoying his life of luxury.

See the problem? Your solution works against democracies that aren't likely to have any serious problems in the first place. And it doesn't work against dictatorships that mistreat their citizens, because well....by definition, they don't give a shit about their citizens' well-being! Really, your idea is like having an amazing new pill that cures cancer, but the only slight catch is that it only works if you don't have any tumors.