Most American companies (corporations) are corrupt. Okay, but foreign companies are not corrupt? Why is it that, or what is it that has corrupted the American corporations? Could it be rampant greed, the spawn of capitalism?
By forcing competition you get a better product. For example, my neighbor's always screaming "buy American" and brags about his "great" Cadillac. The reason Cadillac is a much improved car is because they're FORCED to compete against Mercedes, Lexus and BMW. Otherwise they'd still be selling the same crap they always have. I'm not saying that foreign auto makers aren't corrupt because I'm sure they are, but there's no question that competition forces ALL companies to produce a higher quality product and a better value to compete for the consumer's dollar.
Forcing competition? What forces a business to take the risk to compete with a clearly superior product that they can't afford to duplicate or compete with? Interesting that a capitalist talks of forcing competition...sounds almost, totalitarian... Hate to sound critical, but forcing competition goes against a free market concept, and does not work. Competition is a reaction to the market, not reverse, which may be one of the reasons that we see the corruption. Driven by greed, rather than a truly uncorrupted competitive spirit to make a better product, we see what we have today. Not genuine capitalism, but greed driven production with no concern for real competition, which would reward excellence and not just a better marketed product. When Japan grew in competitiveness is when the corporations emphasized pride in the workers, or they emphasized a collective spirit in the workers to defeat America, etc. Our greatest triumphs in America have been a collective effort driven by pride and or nationalism...not greed by corporations. Inventiveness is not driven by greed, because inventiveness has been around even when it didn't pay. The inventive people are that way by nature, they are not that way due to getting paid. That's why Microsoft, who has the cash, but can't buy the most inventive engineers and designers any more. Those cats want a progressive emerging challenge, which Microsoft doesn't represent...Google does, and if you examine Google and their "campus" it is more of a collective than you might think. It is a team effort to compete, not a greed alone driven company...though that will change as the need to be more inventive and genuinely competitive declines. Scientific advancement driven by greed? Not likely. A scientist has a bent that is not about the money, but about solving a problem. Interestingly, I heard comments from Jason Whitlock, a well known sports writer who was suggesting the same thing has happened in pro sports, where the hype of a young player before they actually win anything, makes them wealthy without actually competing in the market. Call it the power of marketing and image over the consumers, who have corrupted them away from quality and real performance, to opt for buying into the image over substance. Same could also be said of our political system, where voters vote for the image of the pol, rather than the reality of the pol. Same could be said of Fox News or MSNBC, who sell the image, not unvarnished independent news. These days someone buys a refrigerator or washing machine, that does not last as long as the ones built 20 years ago. Why? Marketing, not fact. They have not been sold a better product, they have been sold a better image. I think you will find this across the board, that quality has declined, especially with the Chinese products. All image and no substance has corrupted capitalism, and of course, third world countries and emerging markets are following the same game plan. Additionally, with the rise of greed over a truly competitive spirit, we have seen a rise in cheating in all areas of competition on all levels. Wall Street, sports with roids and on the college level paying players under the table, contractors hiring illegals, substandard production, BP taking dangerous unnecessary risks in the gulf which led to a horrible oil spill, etc. Less focus on pride of the workers in their work, and more focus on greed. The rise of Wal-Mart that cannibalizes the community they end up in, etc., etc., etc. When talking about relative purity of competition, just compare the purity of genuine competition on a pride level vs. greed/image of today to the past great competitive efforts in sports, manufacturing, politics, etc.
If you want to drive a Chrysler, that's your choice. I prefer my Lexus. "Forcing" competiton does not at all go against free market capitalism. What I meant by "force" was not allowing American companies to hide behind protectionism. If they can't hide, they're "forced" to compete. Yes, that is capitalism. Compete and let the consumer decide. I've been to Japan several times and I can guarantee you that Toyota and Honda are not just making cars for "pride," they're making them to compete in world markets. If you want a Sears washing machine, that's what you should buy. I prefer our LG front loaders. They use less water, less energy and have been 100% reliable for 6 years. By restricting contracts to American companies only, you're saying that taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to have a full range of choices. If I understand you correctly, you're saying I shouldn't be allowed to buy a Lexus or an LG washing machine because they're not on your approved list of products. I believe that consumers (and taxpayers) should be allowed to have as many choices as possible when making purchasing decisions. I'm not sure why you think that giving people choices is anti-capitalist.
In golf among the non professionals who play against each other, they have a handicap system to level the playing field. In horse racing, they have a handicap system based on weight. In sports they have rules to level the playing field of competition. It is not a level playing field between the US and China, when the US has the regulations to protect the workers and the public...not to mention the cost of living difference. When we allow illegal aliens into America, it is not allowing proper competition for US workers, but the business owners complain that they can't compete without it. So, to open the door to world wide competition, when there is no way we can compete reasonably, is silly and destructive to the well being of our nation. I don't think for a moment the founders of our country would go for a system that by its nature would harm the overall well being of the American people, so a few could profit, and so countries that want to destroy us can make a profit. Call it patriotism over capitalism if you wish. I know people oppose tariffs, but there has never been a time in history like today. All I ask for is a level playing field, for without it there can be no legitimate and real competition. Can the Kansas City Royals really compete with the Yankees? Nope. As far as the more "energy efficient" washers, etc. that really can be a misnomer. A full and complete analysis of the savings over a long period of time, the cost to our environment to have more an more scrap crap that doesn't last, etc. Reduction in the cost of energy, which is high, especially in California changes the equation. More cheap energy, via implementation of solar, etc. changes that equation dramatically. Your system is designed to lower the standard of living for most Americans, that's a fact. It is happening, and it will continue to happen...until the people revolt against the government that allowed this to happen.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that even if a Japanese or German company can produce a better product at a lower price, the US government should be "forced" to do business with an American company and spend taxpayer dollars on an inferior product at a higher cost. Why would anyone pay a higher price for a lesser quality product? And why should taxpayers' money be spent that way?
Say the New York Yankees can produce a better hitter with roids. The question is why can a company produce a better product at a cheaper price? In sports, it is acknowledged that roids are cheating. In reality, it should be acknowledged that a level playing field is where competition takes place. The playing field is not level with globalization, and puts America at a a distinct and unfair inability to compete. Additionally, there are other factors. Compaq computers used to have the best tech support in the world. You would call them, get someone who speaks English, they would spend hours with you, and their computers would last for years and years. Of course their computers cost $3,000.00. Now what do you get now? A $500.00 computer and support that doesn't speak English. The playing field changed. Americans decided not to favor quality or support, but went on the cheap side of things, which is what we see in products these days...a lack of quality and poor support. The consumers are the lifeblood of capitalism, and they have been duped by marketing into going away from quality to glitz and image. Bottom line though is America is at an unfair disadvantage, for a variety of reasons, and if those reasons are not taken into account, and if we do not protect our own country, there will be no country to protect in the future. Yes, there are a few who will get and have gotten rich with the destruction of America by allowing this all to happen, but as a whole system, the "progress" has not been beneficial to America as a whole.
I don't assume that if someone is better than me they must be cheating. Michael Jordan was much better than most of the other players. Does that mean that he was cheating? Maybe he's just better. Some companies are better than others without cheating. They're more innovative and more efficient. Some of those companies are in other countries. If there's a Japanese company or a German company (or anyone else) who can deliver a superior product at a lower price that's where the taxpayers dollars should be spent. You seem believe that a level playing field is very important. After WWII, the United States had a huge "unfair" adavantage. Japan, Germany and the other major manufacturing centers were bombed to ashes. The US had 5% of the world's population and 70% of the world's intact manufacturing and transportation infrastructure. Should we have bombed our own factories, railroads and ports to "level the playing field?" Or is an unfair advantage okay, as long as it's our unfair advantage?
This is a tough one, but I do have to agree with you. Isolationism just won't work going forward in our global economy. We, as Americans, have overcome many crisis points in our history. The next 20 years will be as trying as all our war years combined. Our wars will hopefully be economic this time around, but with the way things look, who the hell knows? c
Isolationism could work for America better than most other nations. You really can't say it won't work, unless you think the rest of the world would gang up on the US. I'm a big believer that the US can rise to most any challenge if we all pull together, and isolationism and a feeling that we are in this together against the world would actually bring some solidarity to the nation. Most remember initial feelings post 9/11. It is just a shame that that wasn't an opportunity to become energy independent, get our own house in order, strengthen our borders, etc. Instead, we do what we have done for way to long...we threw money and lives into a money pit called the middle east. Are we better off for Bush's course, or would we have been better off spending the money and time to become energy independent and free of that area of the world? It will be 10 years since 9/11 this year, and looking back, it is pretty easy to see how stupid our reaction actually was, and the opportunity we lost as a nation to pull together to effect real long term solutions.