American Entropy - Salem-News.Com

America has been a net debtor nation since 1986 with a current national debt of about $12 trillion, and a deficit of nearly $2 trillion.

(CALGARY, Alberta) - Entropy, also known as the second law of thermodynamics, is the measure of disorder in a system. The entropy of the universe as a whole tends to a maximum.

In the context of nations, this means that no nation or empire lasts indefinitely. On this point history is clear and unequivocal: Ancient Greece and Rome, Persian empire, Turkish empire, British empire, the Mongol empire of the 13th century which was the world’s largest contiguous empire. None lasted and all eventually disintegrated. The American Empire is next in line; the how is in progress, it’s just a matter of when (how soon).

“I heard of a phrase being bandied about here by non-Americans—about the United States—that I can honestly say I’ve never heard before: “political instability”. “Political instability” was a phrase normally reserved for countries like Russia or Iran or Honduras. But now, an American businessman here remarked to me, “people ask me about ‘political instability’ in the U.S. We’ve become unpredictable to the world.”

This raises the question, normal in some eyes, abnormal in others: Whither the U.S. in the 21st century?

Manifest Destiny is a term used by Jacksonian Democrats in the 1840s to promote the acquisition of much of what is now the Western United States (the Oregon Territory, the Texas Annexation, the Gadsden Purchase, and the Mexican Cession). The concept of "manifest destiny" was later used in the 1890s by members of the Republican Party as a theoretical justification for the seizure and retention of former Spanish foreign colonies as the colonies and protectorates of the United States during the Spanish-American War of 1898. This short-lived phenomenon of classical colonial imperialism, was an arguably aberrational episode of US history that involved the occupation of the Philippines, as well as Puerto Rico, in addition to the establishment of a protectorate over Cuba, and an imperial adventure in Panama prior to the construction of the Panama Canal. This took place during a period from around 1898 to 1913 in the U.S. expansion outside of North America.

“If the young United States had a mission, it was not to liberate but to expand. ‘Of course,’ declared Theodore Roosevelt in 1899, as if explaining the self-evident to the obtuse, ‘our whole national history has been one of expansion.’ TR spoke truthfully. The founders viewed stasis as tantamount to suicide. From the outset, Americans evinced a compulsion to acquire territory and extend their commercial reach abroad.

“How was this expansion achieved? On this point, the historical record leaves no room for debate: by any means necessary. Depending on the circumstances, the United States relied on diplomacy, hard bargaining, bluster, chicanery, intimidation, or naked coercion. We infiltrated land belonging to our neighbors and then brazenly proclaimed it our own. We harassed, filibustered, and, when the situation called for it, launched full-scale invasions. We engaged in ethnic cleansing. At times, we insisted that treaties be considered sacrosanct. On other occasions, we blithely jettisoned solemn agreements that had outlived their usefulness.”

“In purchasing Louisiana from the French, Thomas Jefferson may have overstepped the bounds of his authority and in seizing California from Mexico, James Polk may have perpetrated a war of conquest, but their actions ensured that the United States would one day become a great power.”

“Just look at how a sharp public slap provoked Justice Alito, threw a spotlight on the court’s dubious jurisprudence and sparked an embarrassing over-the-top hissy fit on the right. A do-nothing Congress, at a time when ever more Americans are losing their jobs and homes, is an even riper target than the Supreme Court — and far more politically vulnerable. Without strong medicine from Obama, we can be certain of the same result: a heedless Congress will keep doing nothing. If he steps it up, there’s at least a shot that his presidency, and maybe even the country, will be pulled back from the brink.”

Rich concludes that “we will soon enter the fourth decade in which Congress—and therefore government as a whole—has failed to deal with any major national problem, from infrastructure to education. The gridlock isn’t only a function of polarized politics and special interests. There’s also been a gaping leadership deficit.”

There’s a saying, “whistling past the graveyard” which means that someone has their fingers crossed that things will turn out, against all odds. Americans, collectively as a nation, can be said to be whistling past the graveyard. It’s not a pretty sight.

Bruce Judson is a senior faculty fellow at the Yale School of Management—not an outside agitator. Last year he published It could happen here: America on the brink. It’s about inequality across the nation. As Robert Reich (Labor Secretary under Clinton) asks: “How unequal can America get before we snap?”

I have personally been following this issue since I read Ferdinand Lundberg’s The Rich and the Super Rich (1968) in 1972. Wealth concentration has continued here in Canada, as well, but not nearly to the extent that it has in the U.S.

“Most Americans—citizens of the wealthiest, most powerful and most ideal-swathed country in the world—by a very wide margin own nothing more than their household goods, a few glittering gadgets such as automobiles and television sets (usually purchased on the installment plan, many at second hand) and the clothes on their backs. A horde if not a majority of Americans live in shacks, cabins, hovels, shanties, hand-me-down Victorian eyesores, rickety tenements and flaky apartment buildings—as the newspapers from time to time chortle that new Russian apartment-house construction is falling apart….It would be difficult in the 1960s for a large majority of Americans to show fewer significant possessions if the country had long labored under a grasping dictatorship.”

The situation across the nation, except for a favored minority is, overall, worse today, with the real decline beginning a mere twelve years later with the election of Ronald Reagan who, pandering to the booboisie, cut taxes for the wealthy and began the dismantling of whatever government regulations there were—beginning with the airline industry.

In 1979 the level of debt compared to a family’s income was 79%. In 2008 it had reached 132%.

“America in 1979 was a far more equal country than it is today. As noted earlier, the era starting at the end of the end of World War II and continuing until the 1970s has been called the ‘Golden Age’ of economic equality in America. Consciously or inadvertently, that Golden Age was engineered through a combination of tax policies and social benefits. A large portion of the work force in the 1950s and 1960s was educated via the GI Bill. In 2006, Congress’s Joint Economic Committee updated a cost-benefit analysis of this bill. In 2006 dollars, the GI Bill cost $51 billion. The Committee found that, in return, the GI participants created $260 in increased output relative to their less-educated peers, and an additional $93 billion in taxes. The net return was seven dollars for every dollar invested. The GI Bill may be one of the greatest pieces of legislation ever enacted by our Congress.”

“Economic inequality in the nation is now at it highest level since the availability of accurate records in the early 1900s.” You can verify this for yourself by checking out The Forbes 400 Richest Americans. Their total wealth for 2009 is $1.3 trillion ($1,267,000,000,000) for an average individual wealth of $3,160,000,000 EACH!

“A rising tide lifts all yachts. Inequality in America is now widening at a rate not seen in three quarters of a century. A young male in his 30s today has an income, adjusted for inflation, that is 12 percent less than what his father was making 30 years ago…America’s class structure may not have arrived there yet, but it’s heading in the direction of Brazil’s and Mexico’s.”

“More and more Americans are concluding that their children will live a less prosperous life than their own. If the middle class disappears, our society polarizes with the rich on one side and everyone else on the other side.”

“There is the possibility despite a mandate for change, wealthy constituencies will employ their influence as large campaign donors, and through their lobbyists, prevent the adoption of meaningful government policies.”

He wrote this a year before the Supreme Court recognition of corporations as citizens.

The wars in the Middle East will probably prove to be the last straw. As Judson writes:

“The Middle East has traditionally been the ‘graveyard of empire’. From Alexander the Great to Julius Caesar to Napoleon, from the British Empire to the Soviet Union, all come to the Middle East and [quoting historian Rufus Fears] “failed, frequently bringing down their empires in the process’.”

“ The United States is not the Soviet Union. Our economy is not as terrible. Our government is not as despised. But nobody thought the U.S.S.R. could collapse. Could everybody be wrong again ?”

As inequality increases, the rich increasingly isolate themselves from the hoi polloi.

“As a consequence, they become less dependent on public services and less connected to the concerns of the rest of society. Inevitably, this leads the bulk of those in the top income strata to oppose tax increases that would fund enhanced public amenities. Instead they use their wealth to obtain political influence that solidifies their privileges. At this point, the divided nation becomes polarized and the government becomes incapable of decisive action.”

One solution to American economic quandary would be if President Obama had said something like this in his State of the Union Address: There will be 10% tax surcharge on all incomes greater than $250,000.

He couldn’t say it because the tens of millions of taxpayers below this would not support it because they believe they will one day be among the wealthy. But, writes Judson:

“Revolutions occur—or do not occur—because people believe in something. Mobility in the United States is actually lower than mobility in almost all European countries and Canada, despite the abiding myth of the Horatio Alger rags-to-riches story. The myth is more important than the reality. As long as we believe that the United States is the land of opportunity, then we will remain loyal. But if that belief collapses, watch out.”

“The 110th Congress, which operated in 2007 and 2008, had the fewest legislative accomplishments of any Congress since World War II. Prior to the Democratic sweep in late 2008, our national government had ceased to effectively function, in part because of extreme polarization between Democrats and Republicans.” So much for the genius of the Founding Fathers.

Judson quotes Eric M. Ulsaner from his book The Moral Foundations of Trust who writes that “Trust cannot thrive in an unequal world. People at the top will have no reason to trust those below them. Those at the top can enforce their will against people who have less…And those at the bottom have little reason to believe that they share common values, and thus they might be wary of others’ motives.”

Judson: “Today, according to the most recent data, the United States is at the highest level of income inequality in our nation’s history .” How can this inequality be possibly reversed? Aristocracies have never in history given up any part of their privileges willingly. There is no reason to believe that the United States is any different.

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have pledged to give the bulk of their fortunes away. But that’s only two men and there is no evidence that a flood of financial philanthropy and wealth redistribution is imminent.

Even the United Nations has sounded the alarm about American inequality. Says Judson:

“The State of the World’s Cities Report 2008/2009 found that the major U.S. cities with the highest levels of economic inequality included Atlanta, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., Miami and New York. They face levels of inequality similar to such African and Latin American cities as Abidjan, Nairobi, Buenos Aires, and Santiago.”

“Do we put up with squalor amidst excess because we all have a shot at ‘making it’? In fact, our belief in mobility no longer has a basis in reality. Today, the best means of predicting the socio-economic status of an individual in the United States is to look at the status of his or her parents. Multiple studies have demonstrated that U.S. economic mobility is now substantially less than comparable mobility in European nations. A startling study published in 2006 reviewed mobility patterns between the mid-1980s and mid-1990s and actually found that among OECD countries the United States had the lowest share of low-income workers who change their status from one year to the next.”

“Americans have been willing to forego the European-style safety net, with guaranteed health care and typically greater vacation and pension benefits, in return for the perception of greater opportunity. We believe our business environment is the world’s most dynamic. But if an overwhelming majority of us fails to benefit from that system or, worse, suffers misery and drastic reductions in our standard of living, how long will we continue to support it?

The key factor behind the increasing inequality is the tax rate. In 1952, the top marginal tax rate for individuals was 92%. These were reduced from 69% when Reagan entered office, to 28% when he left in 1988. After the first Bush presidency the top tax on capital gains was reduced to 28%, then 20% in 1997 under Clinton and finally 15% under George W. Bush.

“The IRS reports that in 2006 the effective tax rate for the top earning 400 Americans, those with reported incomes of $263 million or more, was a shockingly low 17.2 percent. This was the lowest rate in the 15 years the IRS has tracked the data.”

“Warren Buffet quips that if you take payroll taxes into consideration, these top earners pay lower tax rates than their receptionists. In fact, Buffet isn’t joking. In 2006, he paid 17.7 percent of his taxable income, which exceeded $46 million, in taxes. His receptionist paid about 30 percent.”

Judson quotes Larry Bartels from Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age:

“The most significant domestic policy initiative of the decade has been a massive government-engineered transfer of additional wealth from the lower and middle classes to the rich in the form of substantial reductions in federal income taxes.

“Economic inequality has also harmed the fundamental way members of our society relate to each other….Between 1972 and 1980, the percentage of people who agreed that ‘most people can be trusted’ (as opposed to ‘you can’t be too careful in dealing with people’) remained essentially constant. However, from 1980 to 2006, the percentage of people who generally trust others declined from 44 percent to 32 percent, the lowest level ever recorded by the survey.”

This is the source of the gun-nuts’ paranoia who feel more secure at the movies, the mall and Chuck E. Cheeses, when they are packing heat. “We now live in a society permeated by mistrust,” says Judson.

“An old English judge once said: ‘Necessitous men are not free men.’ Liberty requires opportunity to make a living—a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives a man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.

“For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated in their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor—other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.”

Judson says: “One shudders at the idea of millions upon millions of Americans who previously led middle-class lives losing their homes, their remaining assets, and their sense that that they share a stake in the outcome of our society.”

“If we have learned one thing from the current economic storm it is this: We are all connected. Whether I like it or not, may well-being depends on the well-being of my neighbor. If my neighbor’s house goes into foreclosure, the value of my house decreases. If an abundance of people lack decent paying jobs, the economy goes into a tailspin, stock values decline, pension funds are diminished, and everyone suffers. We cannot build a lasting society that assumes greed is good and civic virtue is irrelevant….In his first inaugural address, Roosevelt also declared, ‘We now realize, as we have never realized before, our interdependence on each other.”

Judson asks a related question: “Do you know why most credit card bills originate in South Dakota or Delaware? Because unlike many other states they have no usury laws, which effectively means the United States as a whole operates without usury laws, rules that are fundamental to most religious and ethical systems.”

I can’t conclude without bringing up health care. This is because, although it has probably not made your news, the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador had heart surgery yesterday at an undisclosed clinic in the United States making him the poster boy for the health care debate in the U.S. But the Canadian right-wing think tank Fraser Institute, hardly a group to underestimate numbers, says that about 41,000 Canadians go to the U.S. for health care each year—fewer than 800 per week out of tens of thousands of hospital and clinic visits each week across Canada.

Williams had been told by his doctors (plural—ordinary people should be so lucky) to go out of province for his surgery but there are any number of places in Canada he could have gone. It’s undeniable that there are locations in the U.S. that are more prestigious and Williams was able to do this because he was a multi-millionaire before entering politics. It’s the same with the other 41,000—they have the money to go to prestigious American clinics, or get medical care sooner at for-profit American clinics. None of this, however, is relevant to the health care decisions of ordinary Canadians or Americans. As Judson says:

“As a nation, we spend twice as much in GNP on healthcare as the average OECD country, but rank twenty-eighth in life expectancy according to the World Health Organization, on par with Portugal and just above the Czech Republic. These out-of-control costs threaten the future of Medicare and undermine the economic security of all but the wealthiest Americans. In fact, our healthcare system is now so dysfunctional that even health insurance can be insufficient to protect a family’s finances.

“Do you really believe that the greatest nation on earth can survive in its current form without providing decent health care to its citizens, when every comparable society does?

For you trolls and gun-nuts with fingers itching to get to your keyboard and make contrary comments let me point out that in this analysis the facts do speak for themselves. America is in deep doodoo and trotting out the old chestnuts that America is great, has always been great and will continue to be great is contradicted by reality. America has been a net debtor nation since 1986 with a current national debt of about $12 trillion and about to run a deficit of nearly $2 trillion. The existing prognosis is grim. The U.S. doesn’t even have the military might to invade some country (like Canada) to make up its shortfall in both fresh water and oil (both of which Canada has in abundance. I probably shouldn’t mention this because the U.S. has a long history of taking what it believes it needs regardless of legality or any other nation’s sovereignty.)

Daniel Johnson was born near the midpoint of the twentieth century in Calgary, Alberta. In his teens he knew he was going to be a writer, which is why he was one of only a handful of boys in his high school typing class — a skill he knew was going to be necessary. He defines himself as a social reformer, not a left winger, the latter being an ideological label which, he says, is why he is not an ideologue. From 1975 to 1981 he was reporter, photographer, then editor of the weekly Airdrie Echo. For more than ten years after that he worked with Peter C. Newman, Canada’s top business writer (notably on a series of books, The Canadian Establishment). Through this period Daniel also did some national radio and TV broadcasting. He gave up journalism in the early 1980s because he had no interest in being a hack writer for the mainstream media and became a software developer and programmer. He retired from computers last year and is now back to doing what he loves — writing and trying to make the world a better place

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Roger von Bütow February 9, 2010 6:06 am (Pacific time)

Where's the big surprise here? Countries, like species become extinct...Maybe not actually extirpated in our case, they are perhaps more like stars, go through the evolutionary processes similar to stars, expand/contract, some explode or implode like the former Soviet Union, some collapse into smaller dwarfs (think Great Britain, France, Nederlands, Spain, Portugal) into being dwarfs (having a much smaller global influence). Since China and international conglomerates/cartels now own the USA, we will wane as they wax. Whoever thinks that we're in a steady state universe (same countries control all of the rest forever) needs to understand that global power is more akin to an endless series of big bangs. China may be the next one, but as they eat up their own natural resources as well as the rest of the Earth's, accelerated/exacerbated by global consumerism as 3rd world nations try to catch up to industrialized ones, entropy (collapse) will occur. And if we enter that dystopian, post-apocalyptic era of Blade Runner, The Road, Mad Max et al, so what? We might be a fluke of the universe, maybe we have no right to be here much longer, and like powerful nations, we'll be replaced or succeeded by subsequent life forms. So what? What a self-indulgent, narcissistic, exaggerated sense of entitlement we have. Who in their right natural mind would actually bet their life that we're the pinnacle predator of the universe, the only salient or conscious species? Maybe eschatological evangelicals, but not many more. There's plenty of science to postulate other forms, perhaps silicon-based instead of carbon might exist----see Carl Sagan's collaborative book (with a Russian cosmologist) about this, written what 40 years ago? I think it was titled "Intelligent Life in the Universe" or something like that. And considering our gobbling up of our life resources, going beyond the carrying capacities for our population numbers, we do mime a virus, even a cancer that won't/can't stop until the body ceases to exist, until it eats up its own host (Earth). By then, perhaps we will have packed up, gone to the stars, gobbling up other solar system's resources like the Pac-People we are. Isn't this why some religions MUST create after-lives, because we're so ego-centric we can't comprehend our own extinction? We created God to justify our existence and justify our self-centered actions, and if we're supposed to hold dominion over the life forms in our care we're piss-poor stewards of that Heavenly Trust. What incredible arrogance. We're not really that important, less than a grain of sand on an infinitely long beach of our own galaxy. Get over it, puny humans.

Jerry Madison February 8, 2010 9:01 am (Pacific time)

Daniel Johnson you wrote "As Lincoln said, a nation divided against itself cannot stand." You also made reference to all the differences between geographical locations, but what you missed is what we have in commonality. It's human nature to be motivated by one's self-interest, and when that self-interest goes from individual to group, any past disunity becomes "water under the bridge." I see the point you are making, but it does not apply to the United States, though we have been balkanizing, we still have cultural ties that bind us. In case of an attack like 9/11, as you might have noticed back then, we all pulled together. This is happening now in political terms, so the next national election will most likely reflect a growing consensus that we are trending towards "binding" shared values, more so than you have allowed for. Time will tell.

Daniel Johnson February 7, 2010 4:54 pm (Pacific time)

Jerry Madison: Your comment responding to Eddie Z. is head-in-the-sand denial--The U.S. is great, it's always been great and it always will be great. The collapse of America may not be imminent, but the evidence is piling up. You fear a terror attack--I think the collapse will come from something far smaller and more mundane--a small bank collapses somewhere, a plant closes and effectively cripples a small town, that sort of thing. There will be an unpredictable and unstoppable ripple effect through the whole country. Let's not lose sight of the fact that America is not united. The interests of southerners are not the same as the midwest, is not the same as the New England states, is not the same as California, is not the same as the Pacific Northwest, is not the same as Texas. As Lincoln said, a nation divided against itself cannot stand.

Jerry Madison February 7, 2010 8:08 am (Pacific time)

Eddie Z you wrote: "Political instability is everywhere. The US is the best example. If the tea party theocrats aren't a sure sign of systemic problems in the political system,..." In my opinion this clearly shows how our system of government works. These so called Tea Party protestors are made up of people of all major political parties, ages,genders and other demographics who have come together exercising their 1st Amendment rights protesting policies coming out of DC. The elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and especially Massachusetts reflect how our system of protesting via the vote works. This cross-section of American citizens have been generally mischaracterized by their political opponents and much of the media, but this currently "leaderless" group is growing and has become a potent political force. I expect it to receive ongoing criticism, but that will simply make it more cohesive as the above-referenced elections clearly acknowledge. Because of this movement, the collapse of America is not imminent, nor is it on the horizon. Expect new economic policies from an older and successful model to be introduced, in spite of what current ledership (soon to be removed by the voters) is attempting to do. Our political instability is based on poor leadership, and our system of government will allow for us to resolve most any internal problem. My biggest worry is a massive terrorist attack, for that is when evil can cause a severe delay in our economic recovery, but we will recover regardless of what the future brings us.

eddie zawaski February 6, 2010 1:58 pm (Pacific time)

Political instability is everywhere. The US is the best example. If the tea party theocrats aren't a sure sign of systemic problems in the political system, I offer the super majority/filibuster rule in the national legislature. US political insanity makes Argentina look positively conservative. You are right about Argentina collapsing; it has done so several times and will probably do so again soon. The point is that when the US collapses, the aftermath and effect on ordinary people will be more profound especially for all those who don't believe it can happen and are therefore unprepared.

Hank Ruark February 6, 2010 12:29 pm (Pacific time)

Intriguing to see all these doom-sayers speaking from their retreats overseas...
Whatever happened with the concept of keeping right on fighting for democracy at home rather than running and then whining away about how bad things are and "gonna get WORSE, too !!"

For those seeking further fact re Gopster god Reagan, files disgorged 50-page report by Hendrik Hertzberg ("Talk of the Town" and Edmund Morris, Reagan biograper, in "The Unknowable"; in New Yorker issue June 28,2004; still available in many libraries.

Jerry Madison February 6, 2010 11:22 am (Pacific time)

Eddie zawaski, you remember doomsayer Ted Danson (actor "CHEERS") an ecological activist who did several national commercials, claiming with scientific certainty that all the oceans would be devoid of life by 1999? Many "Chicken Littles'" out there, and many who make their predictions who, coincidentally, are selling books at the time of their predictions. In your previous review of President Carter, we are so lucky he did not have a second term, for he may also have pursued the same Keynesian fantasy that we are currently observing, rather than pursuing an economic model that really did save us considerable grief. Enjoy Argentina, but it will collapse long before either America or Canada. Though Canada has but one tenth of our population, we will always be very close not in just cultural terms, but economically, so our futures are secure because we will become closer in economic downturns, and this will allow us to improve our respective self-interests. Those countries in South America, including Argentina, are all resting on a house of cards placed on shifting sands. Considerable political instability down Argentina way...

Hank Ruark February 6, 2010 10:12 am (Pacific time)

Madison et al: You wrote: "Those of us who lived through the Cold War period are the ones who know more about our world than the younger generation, but then we have had a failing education system for some it appears. Narcissism of youth and inexperience? Maybe uneducated/disinformed arrogance." There are varying levels of arrogance, sir...just as there are some who have lived even longer than YOU-now, and have spectacularly different points of view, too...

douglas benson February 6, 2010 8:26 am (Pacific time)

Oh we have net worth all right but we dont control it . Every American citizen has been turned into a corporation {your contract name + soc sec #] this is used as credit with the IMF and WBO .combined with the goverments right to unlimited contract .A group called the Freemen tried to use letters of credit to use these funds but found themselves in prison because they were not an international bank . Our entire system is credit . Now for the good part mutually assured financial destruction .The entire world is so invested in us that if we go they go so calling in the debt is suicide for the system so they wont at least not yet .

Jerry Madison February 6, 2010 8:09 am (Pacific time)

Vic glad to hear you enjoy the lifestyle you have in Mexico, which as you clearly know is a matter of choice. Not to mention that you are at the mercy of the "political winds" down there in as far as how that government treats their visitors/immigrants now, and in the future. You have no real rights as you do here. Just the same considering the notion of free choice, millions of hispanics, and other groups, feel they have a better life here in America and I assume many are also going to Canada. Me thinks, that it is much safer to live and work (make a life) in the states than in Mexico and those other world locations people come from. In my view America will be around for a long time while many other places will be in the dustpan of history. Have you seen the unemployment rate went down from 10% to 9.7%? Which is utterly fascinating considering that we have an increase of those losing their jobs along with those who have quit looking for work. Maybe the real danger we have here is the fuzzy math coming out of the current administration? Those of us who lived through the Cold War period are the ones who know more about our world than the younger generation, but then we have had a failing education system for some it appears. Narcissism of youth and inexperience? Maybe uneducated/disinformed arrogance?

eddie zawaski February 6, 2010 6:48 am (Pacific time)

Thanks, Daniel, for the reminder that the US empire is on the down escalator. Back in 1976 when Jimmy Carter and his flawed national security adviser Zibgniew Brzezinski were marshalling US resources to combat what they considered a growing threat from the USSR, a young French sociologist, Emmanuel Todd, told them not to bother. Based on is demographic studies, Todd predicted that the USSR was on the verge of internal collapse. Carter and his successor, Ronald Reagan, ignored Todd and continued to pour resources into doing battle with the collapsing giant. When the USSR did collapse in 1991 in the manner Todd had predicted it would, American experts were taken by surprise. Gratefully, the US economy enjoyed a big bump afterwards from the incorporation of new countries, the former soviet bloc, into its global marketing system. Then in 2001, Todd published a second paper with the prediction that the same forces that had brought down the soviet empire were at work in America and the USA collapse was immanent. With its emphasis on fantasy issues and financialization of of every aspect of civil and political life, America continues to ignore the spectre of growing inequality and breakdown of public health and services gnawing at its core. If Todd is as prescient as he was back in 1976 the USA has at most six years left before complete breakdown. I notice that the commentator vic has made his escape to Mexico. I made mine to Argentina and am hoping that I can lock in my residency on a permanent basis before the collapse comes on full and millions seek escape. Whatever post-collapse US looks like, it will not be pretty and many countries will be increasingly reluctant to admit fleeing US citizens.

Hank Ruark February 5, 2010 2:23 pm (Pacific time)

Reporter brings new source with solid documented reports: Republicans losing their way on campaign finance reform By Warren Rudman Friday, February 5, 2010; A17 When I arrived in the U.S. Senate 30 years ago, I was a proud member of a Republican Party known for championing moderation in Congress, restraint in the courts and good-government reform. In fact, the Republican tradition of campaign finance reform in which I stand dates to the trust-buster, Theodore Roosevelt. In his 1905 message to Congress, President Roosevelt proposed that "contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law." His logic was straightforward enough: "If [legislators] are extorted by any kind of pressure or promise, express or implied, direct or indirect, in the way of favor or immunity, then the giving or receiving becomes not only improper but criminal." The resulting Tillman Act of 1907 and Federal Corrupt Practices Act of 1910 were the first laws limiting corporate money in federal elections and requiring strict disclosure of campaign funds. With the rise of organized labor in the 1930s, Republican Sen. Robert Taft and Republican Rep. Fred Hartley extended the ban on corporate contributions to unions. Those laws were dealt a serious blow by last month's Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That such a rash and immoderate ruling could come from a chief justice once committed to respecting precedent, and win praise from leaders of my party, is beyond my comprehension.

Vic February 5, 2010 2:23 pm (Pacific time)

Here in Mexico, people have smaller houses and live much more frugally than the average American...however, most of the people I talked to owe nothing on their houses..credit cards are non-existent for the most part, and there is a level of happiness and enjoyment of life that sadly is missing in the US. I see more family activities and people are quick to smile and share...I hope that perhaps a dose or two of reality/humility will bring Americans down to earth a bit. In Oregon, we had to bring in $120 every single day at a minimum to pay our mortgage and bills and eat. Now we live in a rented house...the two of us live for about $15 per day, and we have NO debts. I'd never go back to the old way...Great article, BTW ! And I'm glad to see that you got the mustache evened out...;)

Ersun Warncke February 5, 2010 1:27 pm (Pacific time)

The Soviet Union measured their economy by gross industrial output (a physical measure of production). The United States measures its economy by GDP (a measure of paper exchanged). The Soviet Union went into "economic decline" in the early 70's and collapsed in the 90's. The United States "grew" steadily during the same period. Unfortunately, we have a generation of people who grew up in the "cold war" who cannot comprehend the meaning of these facts.

Mike Layton February 5, 2010 11:21 am (Pacific time)

So very true that civilizations come and go, but what has remained a constant is man's ongoing desire to live free. Unfortunately we have always been cursed by people/cabals who want that "right" to be subjugated to their control (tyranny) and/or those busybodies who define freedom as those who follow their particular interpretation of freedom. The "my way, or the highway" type of leaders. Health care for all American citizens is something we all want and I'm quite confident that we are on the road to achieving that coverage. But once again we have busybodies who have failed to understand that the American people do not want what some have attempted to foist on us. Last summer Speaker Pelosi and those in her leadership "group" said an HC bill would be complete before the August recess. Then it was before Thanksgiving. Before Christmas. Before the State of the Union Speech. Now it is anytime soon if they can sneak it past normal congressional processes. Please note that Pelosi's party had a super majority and it could pass anything they wanted. Obviously there are members of her party who recognized the significant problems with their legislation. Considering that close to 60% of Americans want to start all over and have a bi-partisan bill, the Pelosi gang remains both blind and tone deaf. Regarding the Canadian HealthCare program up in Canada, is this like the Orwellian scenario where "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others?" I refer to that phrase in regards to many Canadians of financial means (and many who liquidate personal resources) who come to the states for medical care. Recently the Premier of Newfoundland, Danny Williams, is coming to the states for heart surgery. Does not the Canadian system in other parts of Canada provide this medical procedure? If it is highly specialized and only America has the "technique" to meet his needs, how about other Canadians citizens with similar medical needs? Please see the below link for more insight on this story, it is an excellent heads-up on why America still has what the world not only wants, but needs. Of course if America fails, or "when," as prefaced by the author of this article, what will happen to other countries, including Canada who has all that oil and fresh water? I would update the writer that in terms of energy reserves and fresh water sources, we are just fine here in your projected about to fail America. http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700

Thanks Mike for your detailed comment. The link unfortunately, is old news. He apparently had the surgery yesterday (Thurs Feb 4).

Why he would go to the U.S. is at this point, a mystery, as is where he actually went.

It would have to have been a pretty rare procedure that could not have been done here in Canada. I suspect it revolves around a particular doctor in that his Canadian doctors would have said the best guy in the world for procedure is Dr. X and he is in the U.S. I think we'll find that it is not so much going to the U.S. but going to a particular doctor. We'll see.

And he has the money to go where ever he wants something denied to almost everyone in NA, on both sides of the border. If people want a quick MRI, for example, and there is a waiting list for the machine where they live (it may only be a couple of weeks) and they can afford to fly down to the U.S., that's what they do.

As for your comment "we are just fine here"--you're missing an awful lot of evidence. It's like a volcano--the rumbling is going on and there is smoke spewing out. Will it erupt? That's the question. Judson is a patriotic American and he certainly hopes not, but he's put together sizeable argument. I recommend you read the book yourself and make your own judgment.

As for the universal wish that all have to "live free" is American Kool-Aid. You've listened to GWB too much. What people want is to be left alone and unbothered to do their own thing--which is not the same as "freedom".

douglas benson February 5, 2010 6:48 am (Pacific time)

Great idea Dan .Canada is ripe for the picking and the citizens have no significant weapons or military might to fight back with . I know its not even funny . Just last month Washington state legislature was talking about banning assault weapons .Why? The politicians are scared that so many people are repressed and angry that they might decide to take it out on them in a violent manner [they said it not me ]. They didnt think things through when they decided to take so much from the middle class at once . We are seeing a shift in taxing the rich and they dont like it at all .They call it job killing taxes ect. Didnt do them much good here in Oregon because folks are fed up with paying taxes while the rich pay nothing or very little . The corprate personhood means nothing much in reallity because they dont VOTE ,they buy the vote . I think that just might change quickly and there will be a huge change in all levels of goverment because the people will elect independent representation in mass .

Reminds me of what Gordon Gekko said in 1987's Wall Street: "The richest one percent of this country owns half our country's wealth, five trillion dollars. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's bullshit. You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how the hell we did it."

People saw the movie, but didn't get it. There's a sequel in production. Will that make a difference, I wonder?

[Return to Top]