quote:
I actually do think I would do well in a world wide level playing field. I do dominate my field so to speak I could change hats tommorow to a different venue and still whoop the compitition in the end. God that sounds arrogant?
No ..I'd term it rather confident ..
More power to you!! I'm not out of the world market by any means. There are situations that I could get into that are quite lucritive ..but I don't want to "run" anymore. My "obligations" as a parent are nearing the end of the contract. I've done my best to provide all that I should and am looking forward to having a life less burdened by maximum performance. I've had a good run. Was it all that it could have been?
Let me offer you an alternative view of "advantaged".
After the fall of South Vietnam to the communist north ..sometime later..journalists toured some of the villages. An interview of one chief was quite informative. He displayed his non-functional Citreon and his shed/garage that housed it. He, with confidence, assured the interviewer that he was indeed a wealthy and powerful man.
Right now we perceive "advantaged" as towering like the Rockies over Death Valley ...
In the future, however, I have a feeling that your "hill" will be more like those described in Midland Texas.
That is, although you may be the "king of the hill" so to speak ..indexed for saturated global economy your "step up" will not be all that substantial. I already see that you think that it is not as high as it should be. You are married to the rabble in one form or another...just like a metropolitan urban environment is a loser fiscally ..yet represents such a tremendous economic force that it can't be abandoned. Try and read into what I'm trying to communticate here.
We've got a planet/nation with xxx # of people on/in it. This is much like wildlife managment. You have to, in some manner, condition the enviroment or the behavior of the population to exist in some form of equalibrium. Look at most of your "hot spots" in the world. They are places of unstable or non-existant economy. Where a sound economy exists ..civilization wins. Where there is economic turmoil ...chaos reigns. It's hard to start a war or a riot when people are fed and housed in relative comfort.
Do you propose that we let our "useless eaters" fend for themselves? ...and with what resources? Where will they derive their existance from? Shall we "devolve" as a society?
Take the assembly of Mistubishis in Australia. This is a jobs program brokered between the US and Japan ..who are partners in population managment. Australia is a steadfast ally and a very cooperative member of keeping up "their part of the alliance". Their government says "We're running short on resources to maintain our population functional and happy ...can we navigate some resouces over my way?" The US then channels a segment of our economic might via Japan taking a detour through Australia. In exchage, the US maybe gets some military hardware contracts or whatever.
Sounds rather socialistic to me, no??
The race we are in, and are running low on fuel for, doesn't have a finish line. But when the forward momentum slows to a crawl, the goal is to have the "level playing field" as high as possible.
Why do you think Republicans appear more like Democrats and Democrats appear more like socialists? This evolution obviously isn't because of some realignment of coservative doctrin. It has everything to do with necessity due to prevailiing conditions.
Expect more of the same.
visions of Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men" (minus the harsh tone):
"You want the TRUTH!! You can't handle the TRUTH!!"
That's why politicians don't give it to you. No one is going to get elected spelling out the inevitable and sensible outcomes of the future.
XS650
quote:
You are easily the most rational person in the OT forum.
You don't know how much the thought of that scares the heck out of me
[ August 13, 2004, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]