Is the recession government orchastrated

Philheim in another thread suggested that the recession may be a government plan. Well this reminds me of something I talked about on another board, when the economy first started its slide. Now let me first begin by saying I am not a big conspiracy person other than Oswald did not kill Kennedy. But here goes. In discussions with a couple of friends we had come to the conclusion that the economic recession was actually an economic restructuring. Here is the basics of my theory.

American is now firmly involved in the world economy. One of the necessities of a strong world economy is strong worldwide trade. As it stands now there is a trade deficit that the US operates in. One of the primary causes of this deficit is that we buy more from them, than they do from us, why? We buy more from them they do from us because they cannot afford out stuff. It is imperative that we reduce the trade deficit, To do this the standard level of income for American workers must go done, and the standard of living and economic strength must increase in other countrys. This started during Bush 1 and continues through today. Many people do not realize that before the problems at GM, they had negotiated a new national agreement with the unions which lowered the starting pay for workers from $15.00 to $12.00. A lot of people are upset because companys are leaving the US for 3rd world nations. Many believe that this is to increase company profits. The reality is that companies have to compete globally now and in order for them to sell there products outside of America, the number one expense for a company, the labor cost had to be reduced. Our government knows that it cannot allow companies to keep leaving, but it also knows the labor costs must come down. Enter the recession, people get laid off, lost their jobs, hours cut back. But whats not being reported. Many people are rehired by the same company for less money, or they accept work for less money. Everyone talks about the unemployment rate, the realith is there are a lot of jobs out there, if you will work for $8.00 an hour.

So here is the outline, now lets debate it, keep in mind, this has nothing to do with party politics, the current government etc. This has been going on for years and is not reaching the critical point. Now if you want to call be crazy, thats cool, just tell me why I am crazy and please do say because our government would never do such a thing, I think history has shown our government, regardless of party is capable or shocking us with what it will do.

Philheim in another thread suggested that the recession may be a government plan. Well this reminds me of something I talked about on another board, when the economy first started its slide. Now let me first begin by saying I am not a big conspiracy person other than Oswald did not kill Kennedy. But here goes. In discussions with a couple of friends we had come to the conclusion that the economic recession was actually an economic restructuring. Here is the basics of my theory.

American is now firmly involved in the world economy. One of the necessities of a strong world economy is strong worldwide trade. As it stands now there is a trade deficit that the US operates in. One of the primary causes of this deficit is that we buy more from them, than they do from us, why? We buy more from them they do from us because they cannot afford out stuff. It is imperative that we reduce the trade deficit, To do this the standard level of income for American workers must go done, and the standard of living and economic strength must increase in other countrys. This started during Bush 1 and continues through today. Many people do not realize that before the problems at GM, they had negotiated a new national agreement with the unions which lowered the starting pay for workers from $15.00 to $12.00. A lot of people are upset because companys are leaving the US for 3rd world nations. Many believe that this is to increase company profits. The reality is that companies have to compete globally now and in order for them to sell there products outside of America, the number one expense for a company, the labor cost had to be reduced. Our government knows that it cannot allow companies to keep leaving, but it also knows the labor costs must come down. Enter the recession, people get laid off, lost their jobs, hours cut back. But whats not being reported. Many people are rehired by the same company for less money, or they accept work for less money. Everyone talks about the unemployment rate, the realith is there are a lot of jobs out there, if you will work for $8.00 an hour.

So here is the outline, now lets debate it, keep in mind, this has nothing to do with party politics, the current government etc. This has been going on for years and is not reaching the critical point. Now if you want to call be crazy, thats cool, just tell me why I am crazy and please do say because our government would never do such a thing, I think history has shown our government, regardless of party is capable or shocking us with what it will do. Originally Posted by dirty dog

While your theory has merit, there is a flaw in it. You mentioned the GM example of the unions negotiating a minimum wage from $12/hr to $15/hr. That's still in place. In fact, Government Motors has entered into a deal with the UAW to jointly run GM. So, there's no sign of the unions reducing their minimum wage. In addition, Obamacare has exempted the union-backed medical plans from the Cadillac tax.

Indeed, I do believe it is intentional. First, the leaders we have might be fools and they might be corrupt, but they are not stupid. At the very least, they are educated enough to know better. They aren't even following the faulty Keynsian method of economics.

Also, you are right. It's not an attempt to destroy the economy for its own sake, but in order to usher in a restructuring. It makes me wonder if the New World Order has anything to do with it. Before someone dismisses the NWO, it's important to realize that our presidents since Bush Sr. have mentioned it. Henry Kissinger had said that Obama would be a good president to usher in the NWO. The specific term has been used, and is still used, despite the fact that the DHS Report on Rightwing Extremism had listed belief in the NWO as a trait of militias.

Also, I think the NWO gets dismissed as a conspiracy too quickly. It wasn't until relatively recently that I have paid attention to it, but it seems very plausible. I don't believe in chemtrails, flouride poisoning our water, FEMA camps, and secret lizard people, but that is just the fringe element of the NWO theorists, in my opinion. Perhaps it would be more excepted if it were called Anglo-American Hegemony.

Just as we all learned in high school that there used to be no proper nations, and that France and England were among the first in Europe, perhaps we are witnessing the next trend toward a globalized government. Certainly the U.N., and especially the European Union, are evidence pointing toward this direction. Is the possibility of a North American Union truly that far-fetched?

Obviously, if there is a New World Order, one would have to define it. While there is certainly evidence which would suggest that it may exist in some capacity, there is also much misinformation about it. It may be something relatively mundane, but with the implication of global governance of some form. Some are certainly calling for global governance in the EU.

If there is no NWO, at the very least, our leaders do not have Americans and America in their best interests. Whatever the moving force behind the scenes, it is likely that they will use panic in order to get Americans to accept a restructuring of some sort. The one defense we have is that we are a heavily armed society, so at least reclaiming liberty is possible.

By the way I notice an unusual number of typos in my post it was late and I was tired, reading it, I thought I must have been channelling Cheaper LOL.

Actually Frits if you re-read it you will see that the pay rate dropped from $15.00 to $12.00. This was negotiated by GM with the unions, you tell me when you have ever heard of a union backing a lower pay rate. So the national agreement lowered the starting rate to $12.00 and according to my friend who works at GM this is still in effect.

Actually Frits if you re-read it you will see that the pay rate dropped from $15.00 to $12.00. This was negotiated by GM with the unions, you tell me when you have ever heard of a union backing a lower pay rate. So the national agreement lowered the starting rate to $12.00 and according to my friend who works at GM this is still in effect. Originally Posted by dirty dog

I stand corrected, again. And, if this is so, strengthens your assertion regarding the government-directed recession.

I took a class a couple of years ago at KU in 20th century American history. The teacher made a point of talking about the failure of the mutual aid societies; The Hibernias, the Catholic League, the Polish Protection Fund, etc. He pointed out that the depression was so long lived that these institutions failed and many lost their holdings of building, offices, and such. I pointed out to the teacher that many of the false steps by FDR extended the economic crisis so couldn't it be theorized that he did it on purpose. After all of these groups failed the only place to turn to for help was the federal government. How convienent. The left leaning teacher then changed the subject.

One could argue that the past several recessions in the United States have been caused by inept government policies (both regulation and deregulation), but I do not believe that our government leaders, nor the lobbies that greatly influence the political players, are capable of sufficient forethought to have purposely caused the economic declines of the past several decades.

Essentially, most of the lobbying that occurs is focused on fairly short term outcomes that are aimed specifically at the industry in question: The petroleum industry wants to sell more oil, the auto industry wants more roads and less restrictions, the unions want more wages and benefits, the health industry wants more profits: THEY ALL want more profits, each in their own sector, with little regard for the long term costs and/or benefits to their customers (the public).

After the Great Depression of 1929 (history will tell if the current mess ends up exceeding 1929), public outcry (votes and new Representatives) regained some measure of control over corporations and protection for the consumers. Sixty years of corporate lobbying has finally removed most, if not all, of those consumer protection laws. The result: Another big recession.

The only consistent government policy that can be identified over the past half- century has been "Consume More". This has replaced our previous mantra of "Produce More", which now has been adopted by Asia Incorporated (please refer to the Rise and Decline of the British Empire for a preview of of our future).

We are to blame for our current representative government. So long as we vote for politicians who promise to "give" us benefits (paid by our sweat and taxes), we will continue to ride a roller coaster to economic disaster.

Democracy is not easy. Most of us do not take the right choices because they are too hard. We have been following the path of least resistance for too many years and now the tab is coming due. The effort and pain that will be required to fix our problems will be much greater than those hard choices would have been. Delaying or ignoring the problems just rolls up more interest, which will probably have to be paid to new Masters.

"the unions want more wages and benefits"

Then how do you explain unions agreeing to contract which pay less and to other concessions.

"The only consistent government policy that can be identified over the past half- century has been "Consume More"

Your forgetting about NAFTA

"Democracy is not easy. Most of us do not take the right choices because they are too hard. We have been following the path of least resistance for too many years and now the tab is coming due. The effort and pain that will be required to fix our problems will be much greater than those hard choices would have been. Delaying or ignoring the problems just rolls up more interest, which will probably have to be paid to new Masters."

Well we will see in a couple of years when were all working for $10.00 and hour.

i know this tread was coming damn dirty you beat me & yes I was helping you type this with my 5th eye

"the unions want more wages and benefits"

Then how do you explain unions agreeing to contract which pay less and to other concessions.
Originally Posted by dirty dog

The union would rather have some members at a lower wage than no members at all. Still the short term view, taking the longer view would surely raise the question: "Why pay Union dues, if no wage/benefit/job security?"

I sure some members with lower wages are discussing such finer points right now.

"The only consistent government policy that can be identified over the past half- century has been "Consume More"

Your forgetting about NAFTA
Originally Posted by dirty dog

NAFTA was always about increasing consumption by adding more clients.

The USA is still number one in GDP, both total and per capita, but GDP measurements are skewed to dollar holdings and stock growth, not real, tangible commodities, like cars, airplanes, grain, computers. This makes Law firms and Insurance companies appear to add to productivity, rather than reflect the drain on productivity their overhead represents.

By GDP measure, the European Union is a bigger economy than the USA, but that again is capital growth rather than "real" products.

With a approximate growth rate of 65% in the current decade, the USA should pass the European Union in total combined GDP over the next five years (the World Bank says this has already occurred). However, many of the economies in Asia are growing at rates well above 100% (China at 300+%), which will probably place China, India, and Korea ahead of the USA by the end of the decade.

This may place the USA in the role of a corporation with diminishing sales, but big cash holdings, ripe for hostile takeover. China and Japan nearly own us now, but they need a consumer for their products, so I hope they'll let us be until we are really bankrupt. Given the current trends, that may be sooner than we wish.

The trend that really scares me is the reduction of viable HUMAN capital in the USA. I firmly believe that the physical assets of corporations are of less value than their human assets. The real value of any corporation is in the accumulated experience and specific knowledge of its employees. That runs counter to the current HR FTE philosophy (any employee is a full time equivalent, and can be interchanged/replaced by any other FTE), but I believe that the decisions of good people, at every level of a corporation, are the engine that determines success or failure.

If a business hires off the street and cannot effectively train or cannot discern which employees learned and applied the training, the inevitable inept idiots can quickly run your business into the ground. Small businesses understand this concept, large corporations seem to disregard this in favor of more "enlightened" hiring practices (hire the cheapest).

As I watch the poorer 50% (and growing) of the nation become less and less literate and decay into the next third world country, I wonder where the next generation of capable productive citizens will develop. Surely not from our current education system, some of those Grads can't effectively sack groceries. McD's is having trouble hiring competent help.

Maybe we'll import them.

The "New World Order" has been called for in speeches by Bush Sr., Kissinger and Gordon Brown. Prime Minister Brown has routinely called for a global governance and a global currency. Russian Premier Medvedev pulled out a sample global currency at last year's G8 meeting. It is no conspiracy if the politicians are calling out loud for it. The vast majority of world leaders and politicians are calling for new global and carbon taxes for all citizens. The dollar is almost certain to lose its status as the "reserve" currency. The Fed continues to pump trillions more dollars that are nothing but pieces of paper backed by nothing into the failing banks which will ultimately lead to hyperinflation.

If the Cap and Trade Bill passes the Senate, it will put such strong restrictions on U.S. manufacturers that millions of those jobs will go to Mexico, China, India, and 3rd world countries where carbon restrictions aren't imposed. This will cause a massive drop in U.S. production rates while causing a massive rise in unemployment. Oh, and Obama has also said that electricity and other energy costs would necessarily skyrocket with this plan. Does any of that sound like it will help the American people?

Our gov't. is either being run by people who are incredibly incompetent or people that want to take down the economy down on purpose. All of this legislation is severely weakening the dollar.

ok all my smart thinkers did Bush think that if he stared a war that it would make the economy better like it has all the years before the 21st times. why are we really going into the tank why is the world going bad after Greece you can't say every thing is on home owners.

I outlined my reasoning Cheaper in addition to what I have already stated you add in decisions being made which counted on the greed part of capitalizm to cause an economic dip which when added to fear creates an atmopshere that causes the necessary money cycle to slow or stop which then causes a real recession. Two decisions which played significant roles in this recession process, Clintons decison to force banks to give loans to people who could not afford to pay them back and then Bush's decision to open up Gold and Oil to significant speculation on the commodites market. This speculation drove gas prices through the roof which combined with a large portion of the population already struggling to make their house payments and you get what we got here, a mess. Then stir in not doing a thing to slow illegal immigration and the use of the split market theory to drive wages down. For those who dont know the split market theory is the theory that the rich uses low paid workers as leverage against high paid employers to get the overall labor costs down. i.e. if the high paid employees feel that they are going to lose their jobs to the lower paid employees, they agree to work for less which lowers the cost of labor overall. I am not an economy nut, I am an anti government, the government is selling us out nut LOL.