While America is only exactly as rich as it was 2 years ago, the world GDP did better. The world as a whole is the richest its ever been.
$74.43 trillion (2010 est.)
$71.17 trillion (2009 est.)
$71.67 trillion (2008 est.)
Gross World Product growth was an impressive:
4.6% (2010 est.)
-0.7% (2009 est.)
2.7% (2008 est.)
And per capita GWP numbers show that this growth outpaced population growth to make 2010 the richest year the world has ever had:
$11,100 (2010 est.)
$10,800 (2009 est.)
$11,000 (2008 est.)
My argument that economically, 2010 was the best year ever has been completely vindicated. This was helped along by massive growth in developing countries:
Brazil's GDP growth: 7.5% (2010 est.)
Brazils's GDP per capita:
$10,900 (2010 est.)
$10,300 (2009 est.)
$10,400 (2008 est.)
China's GDP growth: 10.1% (2010 est.)
China's GDP per capita:
$7,400 (2010 est.)
$6,800 (2009 est.)
$6,200 (2008 est.)
India's GDP growth: 8.3% (2010 est.)
India's GDP per capita:
$3,400 (2010 est.)
$3,200 (2009 est.)
$3,000 (2008 est.)
Indonesia's GDP growth: 6% (2010 est.)
Indonesia's GDP per capita:
$4,300 (2010 est.)
$4,100 (2009 est.)
$3,900 (2008 est.)
This doesn't look like the end of the world to me. More like the beginning of a bright new dawn. If continued political reforms lead to continued economic growth in the developing world, they'll be able to afford luxury products the advanced nations are skilled in making: playstations, HD TV's, cars, phones, computers, airplanes, you name it. Once they can afford our products the advanced countries can crawl their way out of deep unemployment and debt holes on the backs of hard-working but savings-flushed Indians and Chinese. Since most of the world's population resides in these developing nations, the market for our products is practically inexhaustible once they can afford to buy them. The way they will become rich enough to waste their money on our luxuries is by our buying their products and investing in their companies. It's win-win. We get their manufactured goods now, we get their consumption market later, and in-between our investors get their rising stock values and high interest bonds. What's not to like? The worst thing we could possibly do now is slap protectionist trade barriers against these countries, ruin their per capita GDP growth, and then make the whole world too poor to afford the products we're best able to market. We are on the verge of something truly great -- an entire world living in a civilized and technologically advanced manner, no longer subject to hunger, disease, cold, heat, or premature death. Only protectionism could stop us now.
When life is good, why rock the boat? This is the question people must ask themselves when advocating revolutionary change. Sure, there are signs that things might get worse in the future, but there are plenty of signs also pointing to how things will get better in the future. The future is notoriously unpredictable, and it's silly to wage a revolutionary war to avoid a phantom future fear before we even know it will occur. The American revolution was not fought over fear that unemployment might go up, or fear that the economy might go down, or fear that crime rates would rise -- it was over a real and present issue of British taxation without representation, exclusion of lands west of the Appalachians for settlement, increasingly tyrannical rule by appointed british governers, etc. No one wants to kill or die over phantasmal future fears that may or may not ever occur. So long as they can have a high quality of life, and it's apparent their kids can have a high quality of life, and that quality of life keeps going up, what is there to complain about?
As of yet, the economy is extremely favorable for Americans. We're the richest large country on Earth, by a wide margin. We are some of the politically freest people on Earth as well, with the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, and a powerful states rights' structure that limits federal overreach. Because of America's unity, we have the most powerful military by far, which allows us to act with impunity on the world stage. We can visit relatives wherever they might live in the 50 states, and vacation in a wide variety of locales cheaply and easily. We have great sports leagues and always win the most medals in the Olympics. The whole world speaks English due to our united strength, giving ourselves and our children a free advantage over the rest of the world that has to struggle to adapt to us. The dollar is the international reserve currency, giving us more financial clout than we could ever deserve meritocraticly. Quite simply, the advantages to union still outweigh the advantages to disunion.
Only a truly horrific future will destabilize this equation, and there is no proof this future is bound to come about. For the foreseeable future, whites will have enough voting power to protect their vital economic and political interests. Not even liberals are calling for the liquidation of the rich or the repeal of the 1st and 2nd amendment. By the time whites lose the ability to protect themselves, due to say, changing demographics caused by immigration, it's unclear whether technology won't have so fundamentally changed the world that these things no longer matter. It's also unclear whether rising living standards in the rest of the world won't have made the whole world, instead of just white-inhabited areas, a pleasant place to live. There isn't much to fear from Mexican immigration if Mexico in 2100 is as rich as America is today. Does this sound ludicrous? Then compare the USA's per capita GDP in 1913 http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/steckel.standard.living.us to Mexico's in 2010:
USA 1913: 5,301
Mexico 2010: $13,800
Granted, the 5,301 is in 1990 US dollars, so this doesn't take into account inflation since 1990. However, I find it hard to believe inflation has reduced the US dollar to 1/3 of its value since 1990. Therefore, the result stands. Mexico is richer one hundred years later than the USA of 100 years ago. The US already has plenty of wealth. So if the USA in 100 years becomes a New Mexico, that implies it will still be richer than the USA of today. This just goes to show that future trends are extremely unstable. If you only look at one trend you could say the USA's income would decrease to Mexico's, at $13,800, but if you look at others it could well increase to $100,000 a year, even with all the Mexican demographic flooding (I mean look, Mexico's twice as rich, even inflation adjusted, than the America of 1910.)
This is why calls for secession or revolution fall on deaf ears. This is a good country. It suits most people in it. They have found a way to get by, somehow or other, and they don't want anything to disrupt that. They can't see any threatening force about to get them, and scaremongers have been talking about collapses for decades, millenia, without a collapse ever coming true. Even if some trends could be mathematically proven beyond all doubt, it's still questionable whether they're worth paying any attention to. A lot can happen in 100 years.
Instead of calling for secession or revolution, its pragmatic to ask Americans to vote in two fundamental policy shifts. Stop immigration -- something around 80% of Americans agree with and want -- and replace all current social spending with a citizen's dividend, something everyone would want if only they were educated enough about the issue. >.<. Combine this with other minor reforms, like admitting that IQ is genetic and that standardized tests will always show asians outperforming whites who in turn outperform hispanics who in turn outperform blacks, and that therefore affirmative action, accusations of racism, and integration efforts are obnoxious and useless. Like cutting the military and getting out of foreign nation-building. Like requiring English to be the sole language of the USA. Like deporting illegal immigrants. Like reducing the national debt through careful budget management -- all of which policies are achievable through the ordinary political process and popular amongst the masses -- and we could have a decent country.
It won't be perfect, not without moral utopian legislation designed for a special few who chart their own course away from the world's sinfulness, but it at least can *be*.
The argument should run something like this. "I love my country, and because I love the USA, I want to make sure its as strong and safe as it can possibly be. Though I'm sure the USA will always be the best country on Earth, there's no reason not to amend errors when we see them, and make improvements where we can. The two most important improvements America could make right now is to stop our runaway immigration numbers and to switch social spending from failed, bankrupt programs to the financially secure and reliable Citizen's dividend. When everyone knows their present and future are safe, rather than looking at suspect IOU's in our Social Security 'lockbox,' I think everyone will breathe a sigh of relief. And when we lower immigration, we give the people already living here a chance to assimilate the already largest wave of immigration in American history. Everyone wins. There are no losers to either improvement, so there's no reason to delay passage of either bill. Thank you, and God bless America!"
Who wouldn't vote for that? He could be the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. No need to win hearts and minds. No need to 'change the culture.' No need to fundamentally change the character of our country before they're willing to listen to us. Just speak in a reasonable, saccharine, and optimistic fashion, and the problem is solved. With those two policies in place there's nothing left that couldn't be endured or overcome. Both policies are eminently achievable within present-day political realities. It's just a question of someone stepping up to the plate.
No comments:
Post a Comment