Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

Full Version: Generational Dynamics World View
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(02-27-2017, 04:21 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> Except the actual US government hasn't been following my proposed
> foreign policy at any point in the last few decades John X. The
> actual government has for the most part been following ideas
> similar to yours. You neocons were wrong in 2003 and have no real
> credibility in maintaining US National Security given that you
> guys had complete power from 2001 to 2008 and during that time the
> US Nuclear Arsenal was slashed by more than half and heavy weapons
> built to fight a large scale war was replaced by pathetic Bradley
> fighting vehicles. Also I Remember your posts from 10 years ago on
> this subject: you said that China would attack as soon as the 2008
> Beijing Olympics were finished, and I said that there was no
> possibility of war until around 2020 at the earliest. I was right
> then you were wrong back then.


As usual, every time you write what you claim I believe, you end up
writing total gibberish.

First, I'm not a neocon. Neocon is a political ideology, and I have
no political ideology.

Second, I didn't propose any foreign policy in 2003 or any other time.
I almost never propose a policy. The only time in recent memory that
I have was the other day when I said that the border tax was a
dangerous idea.

The only part of the above gibberish that resembles reality is that
ten years ago I thought the attack by China was fairly imminent,
though even then I didn't set any absolute deadlines, certainly not
the Olympics. But if you really predicted 2020 at the time, then that
was a pretty good prediction.

So you're completely wrong about the deadline. I always treated the
timetable for a generational crisis war probabilistically. Instead of
writing gibberish, if you'd like to understand what I actually thought
ten years ago, take a look at the following article:

** Six most dangerous regions in world
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/w...041120.htm


Go to the end of the article, where I discuss "Probabilistic
Forecasts" and "Probability of a regional crisis war" This was a very
interesting speculative way of predicting a time frame for when the
next crisis war would start, whether by China's hand or some other
way. I even codified as a mathematical formula. I estimated that the
probability of a crisis war in 2005 was 20.89%, and would get a little
higher each year.

In 2006, I began to wonder if the above estimates were too high, and I
noted the fact that instead of moving toward war, the world was in a
kind of equilibrium. That's when I saw the movie "A Beautiful Mind,"
about the mathematician John Nash, and I applied his concepts about
game theory to the geopolitical situation, and wrote this article:

** A beautiful mind? The world is paralyzed into a 'Nash equilibrium'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/w...17nash.htm


As I read through that article today, for the first time in years,
it seems quite reasonable. In particular with regard to China
and Taiwan, it says the relationship was in an equilibrium,
but that the equilibrium was being undermined by generational changes
-- in particular the rise of a younger generation that favors
independence.

So if you want to understand what I really believed ten years ago,
rather than making up fake news, then read those two articles.

(02-27-2017, 05:15 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> Also on several of your posts you've speculated on the causes of
> right-wing and left-wing support for Assad. In these post you
> suggest that a naive ignorance of the fact that Assad is
> massacring thousands of people is the cause. In fact we are well
> aware that Assad has killed thousands in fact he is efficiently
> slaughtering islamists and noncombatant's, maybe even hundreds of
> thousands of civilians. We root for Assad because we don't care
> that he is killing tens of thousands, in fact that is the main
> reason we like him. Because as far as we are concerned the people
> Assad is killing are people who "needed killin" because otherwise
> they would have lived on to become islamists or give birth to more
> islamists.


Al-Assad is the worst genocidal monster of the 21st century so far, in
the same line as Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot. If you like
al-Assad, then I'm not surprised that you're willing to excuse Hitler.
(02-27-2017, 05:51 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-27-2017, 04:21 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   Except the actual US government hasn't been following my proposed
>   foreign policy at any point in the last few decades John X. The
>   actual government has for the most part been following ideas
>   similar to yours. You neocons were wrong in 2003 and have no real
>   credibility in maintaining US National Security given that you
>   guys had complete power from 2001 to 2008 and during that time the
>   US Nuclear Arsenal was slashed by more than half and heavy weapons
>   built to fight a large scale war was replaced by pathetic Bradley
>   fighting vehicles. Also I Remember your posts from 10 years ago on
>   this subject: you said that China would attack as soon as the 2008
>   Beijing Olympics were finished, and I said that there was no
>   possibility of war until around 2020 at the earliest. I was right
>   then you were wrong back then.  


As I read through that article today, for the first time in years,
it seems quite reasonable.  In particular with regard to China
and Taiwan, it says the relationship was in an equilibrium,
but that the equilibrium was being undermined by generational changes
-- in particular the rise of a younger generation that favors
independence.

Except that China has long ago informed the US that it regards Taiwanese independence for Taiwanese independence as a Casus Belli for war against Taiwan as well as against the US. Yet at no point did the last has the US changed its policy regarding the Taiwan issue. We're still De Facto allies of taiwan even though the alliance was supposed to be dissolved in 1978. Without the taiwan issue and other policy of open sealanes there would be little danger of war with the Chinese. Even if China expanded for "living space" such an expansionism is a far greater threat to Russia and India than it is to the US or even Japan and South Korea. 

This is also true of US policy toward other global flashpoints, our established policy is basically to ensure that no wars occur at all in those regions. This instead invites hostility toward the US by all sided except our main allies because it imposes a pressure cooker making the eventual war much more severe and increased likelihood of war coming to our shores as a result. This has already occurred once before on 9/11, yet the boomers refused to even consider any policy that doesn't involve interventionist global democratization.
(02-27-2017, 05:51 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-27-2017, 05:15 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   Also on several of your posts you've speculated on the causes of
>   right-wing and left-wing support for Assad. In these post you
>   suggest that a naive ignorance of the fact that Assad is
>   massacring thousands of people is the cause. In fact we are well
>   aware that Assad has killed thousands in fact he is efficiently
>   slaughtering islamists and noncombatant's, maybe even hundreds of
>   thousands of civilians. We root for Assad because we don't care
>   that he is killing tens of thousands, in fact that is the main
>   reason we like him. Because as far as we are concerned the people
>   Assad is killing are people who "needed killin" because otherwise
>   they would have lived on to become islamists or give birth to more
>   islamists.  


Al-Assad is the worst genocidal monster of the 21st century so far, in
the same line as Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot.  If you like
al-Assad, then I'm not surprised that you're willing to excuse Hitler.

Assad is an efficient leader and has been carrying out an efficient elimination of islamists; western Xers and Millies admire that fact. Hitler was a genocidal maniac, but it is undeniable that the Nazi Government was highly capable and efficient at getting things done.. Boomers have this obsession with totalitarian regimes; that such regimes are embodiments of absolute evil. Xers and Millies are on the other hand capable of understanding that certain aspects of such regimes are highly competent and efficient and often  outstrip democracies in terms of ability to Gather and Organize industrial, manpower and natural resources.
*** 28-Feb-17 World View -- ISIS forces hundreds of Christians to flee Egypt's North Sinai

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
  • ISIS forces hundreds of Christians to flee Egypt's North Sinai
  • ISIS-linked Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis in Sinai continues to confound Egypt's army

****
**** ISIS forces hundreds of Christians to flee Egypt's North Sinai
****


[Image: g170227b.jpg]
Coptic Christian families from El-Arish arriving at the Evangelical Church in Ismailia last week (Reuters)

At least 100 Coptic Christian families 200 Coptic Christian academic
students have been forced to flee from El-Arish, the capital city of
Egypt's North Sinai governate, after being threatened by the Sinai
terror group called Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (ABM - Ansar Jerusalem -
Champions of Jerusalem), which changed its name to Al Wilayat Sinai
(Province of Sinai) when it changed its allegiance in 2015 from
al-Qaeda to the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh).

The hundreds of Copts left their homes for the Suez Canal city of
Ismailia, 125 miles west, where they were received by a Protestant
Church, the Evangelical Church of Ismailia.

This comes after seven Coptic Christians were killed this month ABM
militants, including one who was burned alive. The killings occurred
after ISIS on February 19 released a video calling Copts "our priority
and our preferred prey." According to reports, ABM has "kill lists"
that include the names of at least 40 Copts living in Sinai.

The series of attacks is a major embarrassment to Egypt's president
Abdel al-Fattah al-Sisi, who has been promising to eradicate terrorism
from Northern Sinai after a series of terror attacks in the last two
years. On Saturday, he ordered the government to take all necessary
measures to provide assistance to the Coptic Christians who were
forced to flee, and renewed his pledge to eliminate ISIS from Sinai,
where the "undermine security and stability in Egypt."

The Muslim Brotherhood, not wanting to be blamed, has strongly
condemned the killings in Sinai, but blamed them on the "military coup
regime" of al-Sisi. This is an allusion to the 2013 coup, led by
then-army chief al-Sisi, ousting Mohammed Morsi and his Muslim
Brotherhood government. Christianity Today and Al Ahram (Cairo) and IkhwanWeb (Muslim Brotherhood) and Middle East Eye

Related Articles

****
**** ISIS-linked Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis in Sinai continues to confound Egypt's army
****


Egypt's army on Monday announced that it had killed six militants in
Northern Sinai since the Coptic families were forced to flee. "Law
enforcement forces will continue carrying out their mission with
determination to uproot terrorism and eliminate terrorist elements,"
said the statement.

However, this battle between Egypt's army and Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis has
been going on for years, and many people wonder why the army hasn't
defeated ABM by now.

According to one analysis, Egypt's army is ill-equipped to deal with
guerrilla warfare in urban and mountainous areas. Even more
important, ABM has been able to acquire sophisticated weapons from
stockpiles of weapons that were up for grabs in Libya after Muammar
Gaddafi was killed in 2011. A steady stream of these weapons was
smuggled by a Libyan jihadist group, Ansar al-Sharia ("Partisans of
Sharia law").

One of these weapons was the Russian Kornet, an antitank guided
missile, which was a game-changer. Other weapons included Grad
missiles, anti-tank rocket propelled grenades, air defense Strela
missiles, the latest Kalashnikov rifles, the Austrian Steyr sniper
rifles, and DShK Russian machine heavy guns. These weapons have
changed ABM from a small terrorist group into a large, well-armed
militia.

According to another report, hundreds of trained fighters, including
dozens of elite commandos, formerly in the al-Qassam Brigades, the
military wing of Hamas in Gaza, have been defecting to ABM-ISIS in the
Sinai. These same al-Qassam militants have been providing training to
the ISIS fighters in Sinai. Al-Ahram (Cairo) and Jerusalem Post and PJ Media

Related Articles


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Egypt, North Sinai, El-Arish,
Coptic Christians, Evangelical Church of Ismailia,
Ansar Jerusalem, Ansar Bayt al Maqdis, ABM, Champions of Jerusalem,
Sinai Province, Al Wilayat Sinai, Mohammed Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Gaza, Hamas, al-Qassam Brigades

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
(02-27-2017, 07:07 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> Assad is an efficient leader and has been carrying out an
> efficient elimination of islamists; western Xers and Millies
> admire that fact. Hitler was a genocidal maniac, but it is
> undeniable that the Nazi Government was highly capable and
> efficient at getting things done.. Boomers have this obsession
> with totalitarian regimes; that such regimes are embodiments of
> absolute evil. Xers and Millies are on the other hand capable of
> understanding that certain aspects of such regimes are highly
> competent and efficient and often outstrip democracies in terms of
> ability to Gather and Organize industrial, manpower and natural
> resources.

I can never really tell whether you're joking.
(02-27-2017, 06:57 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> This is also true of US policy toward other global flashpoints,
> our established policy is basically to ensure that no wars occur
> at all in those regions. This instead invites hostility toward the
> US by all sided except our main allies because it imposes a
> pressure cooker making the eventual war much more severe and
> increased likelihood of war coming to our shores as a result. This
> has already occurred once before on 9/11, yet the boomers refused
> to even consider any policy that doesn't involve interventionist
> global democratization.

Well you're right about Boomers. The Gen-Xers and Millies don't have
a clue whether Taiwan is kind of Chinese noodle or an Indonesian
drink, so they won't be worrying too much about defending. Of course
we could simply cut off all military ties with Taiwan. Then China
would invade and annex it immediately. Japan, the Philippines and
everyone else in the Asia would immediately realize that we couldn't
be counted on, and China could simply grab all of them. They'd
probably start importing Japanese comfort women. We could try to stay
out, but sooner or later China would bomb Pearl Harbor or San
Francisco or Washington, so we'd be at war anyway.
(02-27-2017, 11:40 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-27-2017, 07:07 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   Assad is an efficient leader and has been carrying out an
>   efficient elimination of islamists; western Xers and Millies
>   admire that fact. Hitler was a genocidal maniac, but it is
>   undeniable that the Nazi Government was highly capable and
>   efficient at getting things done.. Boomers have this obsession
>   with totalitarian regimes; that such regimes are embodiments of
>   absolute evil. Xers and Millies are on the other hand capable of
>   understanding that certain aspects of such regimes are highly
>   competent and efficient and often outstrip democracies in terms of
>   ability to Gather and Organize industrial, manpower and natural
>   resources.  

I can never really tell whether you're joking.

I wasn't joking here.
(02-27-2017, 11:47 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-27-2017, 06:57 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   This is also true of US policy toward other global flashpoints,
>   our established policy is basically to ensure that no wars occur
>   at all in those regions. This instead invites hostility toward the
>   US by all sided except our main allies because it imposes a
>   pressure cooker making the eventual war much more severe and
>   increased likelihood of war coming to our shores as a result. This
>   has already occurred once before on 9/11, yet the boomers refused
>   to even consider any policy that doesn't involve interventionist
>   global democratization.  

Well you're right about Boomers.  The Gen-Xers and Millies don't have
a clue whether Taiwan is kind of Chinese noodle or an Indonesian
drink, so they won't be worrying too much about defending.  Of course
we could simply cut off all military ties with Taiwan.  Then China
would invade and annex it immediately.  Japan, the Philippines and
everyone else in the Asia would immediately realize that we couldn't
be counted on, and China could simply grab all of them.  They'd
probably start importing Japanese comfort women.  We could try to stay
out, but sooner or later China would bomb Pearl Harbor or San
Francisco or Washington, so we'd be at war anyway.

Japan and south Korea would militarize Immediately thus negating the need for any US presence there. Any concession of Taiwan would be part of a broader spheres of Influence agreement which could be reached if the US would also include a "carrot and stick" policy. The stick would be US support and arming of South Korea and Japan (and Possibly Indonesia) with nuclear weapons and militarization of those nations. The carrot would be China being given a free hand with regards to expansion to its North and West (into Russian Siberia, India and Central Asia). Remember during many of China's previous dynasties Eastern Siberia was often part of china with numerous Chinese settlements used to be there before the Russian conquest. Thus China can easily engineer a casus belli to invade that region. Think of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Also During this Time, US would be converting itself into a military state, a nation geared for war.
Actually, what would really happen is that at the first hint that the
US was deserting Taiwan, Congress would be outraged, Australia would
completely freak out, and Britain and India would soon follow, along
with Japan. The US would quickly have to back down, just as Trump did
after calling Nato obsolete. This is the "stable equilibrium"
that I was writing about yesterday.
Xers and Millies despise the status quo politics that are beloved by boomers. Boomers Love for pathetic Globalistic values is quite obvious. First during the awakening boomers forced the military to become a volunteer force because they were afraid that the conscription system would gradually mutate America into an imperial state. The selfish boomers motivated by emotions and extreme selfishness dismantled this system even though the creation of an american empire would have served the interests of the american people. Later when 9/11 occurred the boomer again motivated by their so-called precious ideals imposed nonsensical solutions to the problem of the possibility of another 9/11 rather than implement the logical conclusions: The boomer chose to wage limited war and imposed nonsensical regulations in which grannys and children were being checked for bombs instead of total war with "mongol" type tactic and mass conscription as wells as profiling Muslims within the US. The logical evolution of America that should have happened after 911: The creation of an imperial state; a new roman empire, was prevented by boomers motivated by extreme selfishness and boomers effete love for "Human Rights" and their selfish desire to preserve the 1990s era "open society".
*** 1-Mar-17 World View -- Central African Republic war morphs from religious to ethnic war

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
  • Central African Republic war morphs from religious to ethnic war
  • United Nations peacekeeping force MINUSCA uses airstrikes to stop bloodbath in Bambari

****
**** Central African Republic war morphs from religious to ethnic war
****


[Image: car.gif]
Central African Republic

The Central African Republic (CAR) war began in March 2013, when
Muslim Séléka militias ousted François Bozizé, the Christian president
of CAR, and replaced him with Michel Djotodia, a Muslim.

Muslim Séléka militias began committing atrocities, particularly
targeting the Christian constituencies of the deposed François Bozizé.
In December 2013, French Foreign Legion peacekeeping troops arrived to
disarm the Séléka militias.

The actions of the French troops backfired. When the Muslim Séléka
troops were disarmed, the Christian anti-Balaka militias "rushed into
the vacuum," and began committing atrocities in 2014, for revenge
against the Sélékas. Since then, both Christians and Muslims have
been committing brutal atrocities, and it's become a full-scale
generational crisis war. As in any generational crisis war, bloody,
brutal atrocities are committed by all sides, irrespective of religion
or ethnicity.

In 2013, the Séléka was a coalition of ethnic militias that were
united in their opposition to the Christians and to
François Bozizé. Since then, the coalition has begun to
unravel, and different factions have been turning on one
another.

In the central region of CAR, around the country's second and
third largest cities, Bambari and Bria, two competing ethnic
militias have emerged.

One is the Union for Peace in the Central African Republic (UPC),
dominated by Muslims from the Fulani ethnic group, a nomadic herding
ethnic group. Their families travel with their herds of cattle to
greener pastures when grazing ground and water are scarce.

The second ethnic militia is the Popular Front for the Renaissance in
the Central African Republic (FPRC), dominated by the Gula and Runga
ethnic groups. These ethnic groups are primarily farmers, using hoe
cultivation and irrigation techniques, with millet and wheat are the
main crops grown. The FPRC is now allying with the Christian
"anti-Balaka" militias, which are also primarily farmers.

The FPRC is demanding an independent state in CAR's north. This is
opposed by the UPC. The FPRC have been seeking out and slaughtering
Fulani civilians in one village after another, including an extremely
brutal assault on the city of Bria. FPRC forces are now closing in on
Bambari, where it's feared the same could happen.

The core issue in the war is one that I've described many times -- the
battle between farmers and herders. Farmers and herders have two
completely different lifestyles. Battles between farmers and herders
occur in country after country, as I've described many times in
Central African Republic, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Sudan, South Sudan,
and even America in the 1800s. The farmers accuse the herders of
letting the cattle eat their crops, while the herders accuse the
farmers of planting on land that's meant for grazing. If the farmers
put up fences, then the herders knock them down.

Generational crisis wars are fought along demographic fault lines,
including religion, ethnicity, skin color and geography. Ethnicity is
a much more powerful force than religion because you can change your
religion but you can't change your ethnicity. As in many countries,
the war in Central African Republic is being fought along ethnic fault
lines, particular along the fault line between herders and farmers.
IRIN - United Nations and Reuters (26-Nov-2016)

Related Articles

****
**** United Nations peacekeeping force MINUSCA uses airstrikes to stop bloodbath in Bambari
****


There is a United Nations peacekeeping force in CAR known as MINUSCA,
which stands for Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in
the Central African Republic. MINUSCA has been largely a failure,
with its forces mainly concentrated in the capital city Bangui, and
has been riven with scandal, with accusations that peacekeepers have
been raping girls that they're supposed to be protecting.

MINUSCA has been watching the impending disaster, as the FPRC forces
approach Bambari, with the intention of exterminating the Fulani.
MINUSCA is forced to resort to airstrikes to try to halt the advance
of the FPRC, and has been targeting "heavily armed" FPRC fighters,
although it's not known whether the airstrikes have produced any
casualties. At any rate, based on the publicly available reports, it
appears that MINUSCA's attempt to stop the FPRC slaughter of Fulanis
will fail spectacularly.

I've been writing about the CAR war ever since it began in 2013, and
I've always said the same thing: This is a generational crisis war, a
force of nature that cannot be stopped until it reaches an explosive
climax. The climax is sometimes a real explosion, such as the nuking
of Japan that ended World War II. In the usual case, it's a genocidal
explosion of such enormity that it's remembered for decades or even
centuries, and it causes both sides to stop fighting, and say, "Never
again." And it doesn't happen again, as long as the survivors of the
war are still alive.

As I've explained in the past, CAR's last generational crisis war was
the 1928-1931 Kongo-Wara Rebellion ("War of the Hoe Handle"), which
was a very long time ago, putting CAR today deep into a generational
Crisis era, where a new crisis civil war has already started.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, this is a
generational crisis war, and it will not end until a lot of scores get
settled with some kind of massive bloody, genocidal climax that will
be remembered for decades. CAR is nowhere close to that point yet,
and MINUSCA can't do anything but watch the violence unfold. Reuters and AFP

Related Articles

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Central African Republic, CAR,
Bangui, Bria, Bambari, François Bozizé, Michel Djotodia,
Séléka, anti-Balaka, Fulani, Gula, Runga, MINUSCA, FPRC, UPC,
Popular Front for the Renaissance in the Central African Republic,
Union for Peace in the Central African Republic,
Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic,
Kongo-Wara Rebellion, War of the Hoe Handle,
Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Sudan, South Sudan

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
(02-25-2017, 09:01 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-24-2017, 10:42 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]I wrote the above in 2003, so it should not surprise anyone that today
I consider the proposed "border adjustment tax" to be a very dangerous
idea.

I'm glad you feel this way, and I agree.

I do want to note that there is an underlying trade issue that the border adjustment tax attempts to address.  Specifically, the EU provides a VAT rebate on exports, and imposes a VAT on imports.  This has the effect of subsidizing exports and putting a tariff on imports.

However, the border adjustment tax is the wrong way to respond, for the reasons you mention, and also for reasons having to do flaws in its basic structure.  Because it isn't based on the actual tax content of exports, it would distort economic incentives to manufacturers.  For example, companies will have an incentive internally to subsidize exports by charging lower prices for exported goods than they charge to Americans for the same goods.  It is also likely to run afoul of WTO rules.

Edit:  and let's not forget the increase in the value of the dollar, estimated by some at 25%, relative to other currencies.  This is said to 'cancel out' the effects of the border adjustments, but it also provides a huge windfall for overseas holders of dollars like China and Japan, with no benefit to Americans.

The right way to address this issue is to attack the VAT based subsidies and tariffs.  This might be possible to do under existing WTO rules.  If not, the US should pressure the WTO to change the rules to prevent the abuse of VAT rebates and tariffs.  In addition, the US should probably negotiate aggressively with the EU; the EU has become a de facto protectionist region, which runs strongly counter to US interests.

We could also shift the US federal government from being income tax supported to being VAT supported, but that would be a much heavier political lift, likely requiring repeal of the 16th amendment.

I have to change my position on this, because I didn't fully understand the proposal.

In fact, the proposal actually is to shift at least corporate taxes to a VAT instead of a corporate income tax, at a lower percentage tax rate.  This permits us to take advantage of the same border adjustment that the WTO has already ruled to meet its rules by states that already use a VAT, including for example most EU states.

That also means that, rather than initiating a trade war, all this does is put our policies in line with, for example, EU policies.

Given there will likely be an exchange rate adjustment that largely cancels the border adjustment, this will essentially make the corporate tax rate lower in the US, encouraging production in the US, in exchange for giving foreign holders of US currency a one time windfall, and in the longer term reducing the foreign holdings of US currency on which the US charges an effective inflation "tax".

I'm neutral to mildly positive on this deal.  In an ideal world, we would fix the WTO ruling that permitting border adjustments of VAT, but that would be harder to fix.

Paul Ryan needs to do a better job of explaining this package.
Well, Warren, maybe you're right and there's a way to "thread the
needle" and devise a border adjustment tax that won't be a total
international disaster like the Smoot-Hawley tax. But as you might
imagine, I'm way too cynical to expect success.

I really began to understand how the game was played in the 1970s.
First there was Nixon's wage-price controls, which were supposed to
reduce the inflation rate from 4% to 2%, but instead caused it to
increase to 12% and were a disaster for the economy of such
proportions that the economy didn't recover for a decade.

Then in 1976 Jimmy Carter was running for president. He promised to
reduce the number of government agencies. I don't recall the exact
numbers, but I think he said that of the 2,500 existing agencies, he
would eliminate 500 of them. Which 500 would he eliminate? He
wouldn't say. Well, he was elected, and he didn't eliminate any
agencies. Instead, his administration added two new cabinet-level
departments, the two DOEs -- the dept of energy and the dept of
education -- and added hundreds of new agencies.

So let's fast-forward to Barack Obama. He was going to reduce the $8
trillion deficit by spending another $1 trillion in a stimulus package
that would stimulate growth and reduce the deficit. The growth in the
economy would wipe out the deficity. Instead, the economy didn't
grow, and it was a total waste of money. The deficit today is $10
trillion higher. Obama was also going to reduce medical costs with
Obamacare. Instead, medical costs have exploded under Obamacare.
Obamacare is an incredibly destructive economy policy, even worse than
Nixon's wage-price controls, and it will take at least a decade for
the medical services industry to recover from the disaster.

So now let's take a side-trip to Greece. In 2010, Greece would need a
temporary bailout to give the economy a chance to grow again. The
growth in the economy would wipe out the deficit, and allow Greece to
repay its loans. Instead, the economy didn't grow, and Greece has no
chance of repaying its loans. Greece will be facing a major new
crisis by July.

So now we have a new president, Donald Trump. He's going to cut taxes
for the middle class and spend $1 trillion on infrastructure. And how
will this be paid for? Why, by the Border Adjustment Tax, of course.
And his proposal to repeal and replace Obamacare will reduce medical
costs. So, in summary, after 8 years of total economic disaster under
the Obama administration, we're facing the possibility of a new
economic disaster under the Trump administration.

That reality doesn't seem to affect investors. Champagne corks are
popping this morning, after the Dow breached 21,000. This is being
called the "Trump stock market rally," because the Dow is up 2,500
points since the election. So the already huge stock market bubble is
now even more explosively huge, just waiting for the bubble to pop,
which it will with 100% certainty.

What nobody wants to talk about, the so-called "elephant in the room,"
is the velocity of money. This indicates the rate at which people are
willing to spend money. You can't have economic growth if people
aren't willing to spend money, which means that the velocity of money
would have to increase. Instead, we have this:

[Image: g160129c.gif]

So the reason that there's been no growth since 2008 is that the
velocity of money has been plummeting since 2008. I posted the above
graph a year ago, but I've just checked, and the velocity of money has
continued to fall in the last year.

And so, Warren, maybe you're right that the Border Adjustment Tax,
along with a realignment of corporate taxes, will lead to great
economic growth and solve all our problems, as the Trump
administration hopes. As for myself, I've seen too much in the past
that I can't unsee. I would laugh, except that I'm too tired to
laugh.
"During the campaign, Carter promised the American people that if
elected he would reduce the number of government agencies and
committees from nearly 2,000 to 200. While the promise to cut the
number of agencies was compelling campaign rhetoric, the White House
realized after the election that it tied the president to a
questionable metric of success, so it was quietly abandoned after the
first 100 days. Instead, the White House saw eliminating agencies or
overlapping functions as a means towards better government, not an
end."

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/...anization/
Government policy is destroying any desire by the populace to spend any money. People carry out economic activity to put food on THEIR tables and the endless rules set up by silent and boomer bureaucrats suck up any chances for profit for businesses and also cause prices and costs of living to be increasingly ruinously expensive.
Carter was one of our least competent presidents. The policy of Carter was of unmitigated failure, his few successes were undone in the following decades by boomber globalists who considered those policies to not be globalist enough. There is a reason Reagan won in a landslide, most non-boomers like having strong native tech and manufacturing industries. Most non-boomers and non-silents like having the prospect of America converting into a roman empire-esque military state.
(03-01-2017, 12:46 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> Government policy is destroying any desire by the populace to
> spend any money. People carry out economic activity to put food on
> THEIR tables and the endless rules set up by silent and boomer
> bureaucrats suck up any chances for profit for businesses and also
> cause prices and costs of living to be increasingly ruinously
> expensive.

No, that's not why the velocity of money has been falling.

Gen-Xers took financial engineering courses in the 1990s and learned
how to create synthetic securities. They used these skills in the
2000s to purposely create fraudulent synthetic sub-prime mortgage
backed securities. They sold tens of trillions of dollars of these
fraudulent securities to investors, thinking that they were screwing
their parents' generation, since they shared your hatred and contempt
for Silents and Boomers. This created the real estate bubble. When
the bubble crashed, and millions of people lost their homes or went
bankrupt, people stopped going further into debt. Instead, they paid
off their existing debts, and starting saving money instead of
spending it. That's why the velocity of money has been crashing, and
it's entirely the fault of Gen-Xers.
(03-01-2017, 04:57 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2017, 12:46 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   Government policy is destroying any desire by the populace to
>   spend any money. People carry out economic activity to put food on
>   THEIR tables and the endless rules set up by silent and boomer
>   bureaucrats suck up any chances for profit for businesses and also
>   cause prices and costs of living to be increasingly ruinously
>   expensive.  

No, that's not why the velocity of money has been falling.

Gen-Xers took financial engineering courses in the 1990s and learned
how to create synthetic securities.  They used these skills in the
2000s to purposely create fraudulent synthetic sub-prime mortgage
backed securities.  They sold tens of trillions of dollars of these
fraudulent securities to investors, thinking that they were screwing
their parents' generation, since they shared your hatred and contempt
for Silents and Boomers.  This created the real estate bubble.  When
the bubble crashed, and millions of people lost their homes or went
bankrupt, people stopped going further into debt.  Instead, they paid
off their existing debts, and starting saving money instead of
spending it.  That's why the velocity of money has been crashing, and
it's entirely the fault of Gen-Xers.

Ahem, stop being such a butterball John.

How about all of those Boomer Wars of Choice?   What about the blood and treasure y'all Boomers wasted on that stuff. Tongue   And , I'm gonna do some victim blaming here as well 'cause y'all deserve some of that.  So...  what happened to the "if it's too good to be true, then it's a scam?"  That means that if I'm to believe what you're writing on this subject, then ALL Silents and Boomers were such rubes.  Surely not John?  And of course not all X'ers were scammeisters.
(03-01-2017, 12:54 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]Carter was one of our least competent presidents. The policy of Carter was of unmitigated failure, his few successes were undone in the following decades by boomber globalists who considered those policies to not be globalist enough. There is a reason Reagan won in a landslide, most non-boomers like having strong native tech and manufacturing industries. Most non-boomers and non-silents like having the prospect of America converting into a roman empire-esque military state.





Bwahshahahahahahahahaahahahahahahah~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tongue

lyrics Wrote:ou'd better sleep with your rifle
Keep your powder dry
Fighting for your country
See the colours fly
They'll be coming in the morning boys
You gotta hold the line
You're the men from Harloch
You are standing proud
You're the Queen's light infantry
Sing out loud
They'll be coming in the morning boys
You gotta hold the line
You came for the glory (*)
To fight and to die
You stood in the thin red line
Remember the heroes
When stories are told
They died in the thin red line
Stand stady in the ranks boys
You gotta hold your fire
We'll show them what we're made of
When they hit the wire
They'll be coming in the morning boys
You gotta hold the line
You'll be thinking of your love ones
That you left back there
Then the sound of the bugle
Cuts the cool night air
They'll be coming in the morning boys
We gotta hold the line

Now you lay with your comrades
Far across the sea
Where you fighting for the Empire
Did you die for me
They'll be coming in the morning boys
You gotta hold the line

I found this just for you, Cynic Here.  Enjoy, man. Cool

edda Wrote:Ragnarök
[Image: Battle-of-the-Doomed-Gods-300x175.jpg]“Battle of the Doomed Gods” by Friedrich Wilhelm Heine (1882)
Ragnarok (Old Norse Ragnarök, “The Doom of the Gods”) is the name the pre-Christian Norse gave to the end of their mythical cycle, during which the cosmos is destroyed and is subsequently re-created. “Ragnarok” is something of a play on words; an alternate form, which sounds almost identical when spoken, is Ragnarøkkr, “The Twilight of the Gods.” The significance of this variation will be discussed below.
But first, here’s the tale itself:
The Doom of the Gods
Ominous prophecies and dreams had long foretold the downfall of the cosmos and of its gods and goddesses along with it. When the first of these prophesied events came to pass – the beloved god Baldur was killed by Loki and consigned to the underworld – the gods had to face the fact they could no longer escape their tragic destiny. They prepared as well as they could. Odin took a great deal of time and care selecting the ablest human warriors to join him in the final battle against the world-devouring giants. But, deep down, they knew that all of their desperate actions were in vain.
In Midgard, the realm of human civilization, people abandoned their traditional ways, disregarded the bonds of kinship, and san
p, and sank into a wayward, listless nihilism. The gods weren’t exactly innocent of these same charges, however. They had broken oaths and fallen short of their expectations of one another on many occasions. (See, for example, The Fortification of Asgard and The Binding of Fenrir.) Three winters came in a row with no summer in between, a plodding, devastating season of darkness and frigidity which the prophecies had called the Fimbulwinter (“The Great Winter”).
At last, the pseudo-god Loki and his son, the dreaded wolf Fenrir, who had both been chained up to prevent them from wreaking further destruction in the Nine Worlds, broke free of their fetters and set about doing precisely what the gods who had imprisoned them had feared. Yggdrasil, the great world-tree that holds the Nine Worlds in its branches and roots, began to tremble.
The far-seeing Heimdall, the watchman of the gods’ fortress, Asgard, was the first to spy a vast army of giants headed for the celestial stronghold. Among the gruesome mass was the gods’ fickle friend, Loki, at the helm of the ship Naglfar (“Ship of the Dead”). Heimdall sounded his horn Gjallarhorn (“Resounding Horn”) to alert the gods, who were no doubt alarmed and despairing.
The giants set about destroying the abode of the gods and the entire cosmos along with it. Fenrir, the great wolf, ran across the land with his lower jaw on the ground and his upper jaw in the sky, consuming everything in between. Even the sun itself was dragged from its height and into the beast’s stomach. Surt, a giant bearing a flaming sword, swept across the earth and left nothing but an inferno in his wake.
But, like the heroes of a Greek tragedy, the gods fought valiantly to the end. Thor and the sea serpent Jormungand slew each other, as did Surt and the god Freyr, and likewise Heimdall and Loki. Odin and Tyr both fell to Fenrir (also called “Garmr” in some texts), who was then killed by Vidar, Odin’s son and avenger.
At last, in the ultimate reversal of the original process of creation, the ravaged land sank back into the sea and vanished below the waves. The perfect darkness and silence of the anti-cosmic void, Ginnungagap, reigned once more.
[Image: After_Ragnar%C3%B6k_by_Doepler-300x197.jpg]“After Ragnarok” by Emil Doepler (1905)
But this age of death and repose did not last forever. Soon the earth was once again raised from the ocean. Baldur returned from the underworld, and the gladdened land became more lush and fruitful than it had been since it was created the previous time. A new human pair, Lif and Lifthrasir, the equivalents of Ask and Embla in the Norse creation narrative, awakened in the green world. The gods, too, returned and resumed their merrymaking.[1][2][3]
*** 2-Mar-17 World View -- European leaders debate how the European Union can survive after Brexit

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
  • European leaders debate how the European Union can survive after Brexit
  • European nations split on the future of Europe

****
**** European leaders debate how the European Union can survive after Brexit
****


[Image: g170301b.jpg]
Italian politician Gianni Pittella calls the European Commission's white paper a 'clear political mistake' (Getty)

A variety of crises seem to get worse as time goes on is causing
anxieties about the future of the European Union and the euro
currency. The crises include the refugee crisis, financial crises in
Greece and Italy, and increasing euroscepticism in many countries,
following the Brexit referendum that called for Britain to leave the
European Union.

Recognition of these crises comes at a significant time. On March 25,
27 EU countries (Britain, the 28th, is not invited) will be meeting in
Rome to discuss the future of Europe on the 60th anniversary of the
1957 Treaty of Rome that contained the core principles that led to the
creation of the European Union.

When the Treaty of Rome was signed, Europe had been devastated by two
world wars, and everybody was fearful that there could be another
world war at any time. Finally, it was agreed by the war survivors
that Europe had to form a union like the United States to prevent
another war. That was the motivation behind the 1957 Treaty of Rome.

Today, many in Europe's older generations fear that Europe is headed
for new war like WW I and WW II, while younger generations, who have
lived in peace their whole lives, think that anyone who worries about
war must be an alarmist.

European Commission president Jean-Claude Jüncker on Wednesday
published a "White Paper On The Future Of Europe," which describes the
problems facing Europe and suggests five different paths. Jüncker
summarizes the problems as follows:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Europe’s challenges show no sign of abating. Our
> economy is recovering from the global financial crisis but this is
> still not felt evenly enough. Parts of our neighborhood are
> destabilized, resulting in the largest refugee crisis since the
> Second World War. Terrorist attacks have struck at the heart of
> our cities. New global powers are emerging as old ones face new
> realities. And last year, one of our Member States voted to leave
> the Union."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

Jüncker's approach is to present alternatives for the future of
Europe:
  • Carrying On. No new treaty.

  • Nothing but the Single Market. Loosen Brussels' control,
    give up citizens' rights, and just have a commercial trading
    agreement.

  • Those Who Want More Do More. Also called a "multi-speed"
    Europe, this is Jüncker's favored option. A small group of nations
    would proceed on a path toward greater integration, and other nations
    could join when they wish.

  • Doing Less More Efficiently. More than the "single market,"
    but less Brussels control than today, implement policies only when
    everyone agrees that they add real value.

  • Doing Much More Together. This would be the full
    integration of all 27 member states into a unified EU, but would
    require significant treaty changes.

The white paper will be discussed at the Rome meeting on March 25, and
the European Commission will published a series of discussion papers
throughout the year. European Commission - The Future of Europe and RTE (Ireland) and Bloomberg

****
**** European nations split on the future of Europe
****


Many member nations are disenchanted with the EU, and it's feared that
if one more nation follows Britain out of the EU, then others may
follow rapidly.
  • France: The thought that far-right National Front Party
    leader Marine Le Pen could win the upcoming election would have been
    considered impossible a year ago, but the nationalist populism
    displayed by the successful Brexit referendum and the victory of
    Donald Trump in America have shown that a Le Pen victory is a real
    popularity, and Le Pen favors the "Frexit" option of having France
    leave the European Union.
  • Poland: Poland is thought to be eurosceptic, but a poll
    says that 84.5% would vote to stay if there was a referendum.
  • The Netherlands: The Dutch are approximately evenly split
    on the "Nexit" option of leaving the EU.
  • Austria: The rise of right-wing Freedom Party of Austria
    has made the "Auxit" option appear to be a possibility.
  • Denmark: Denmark voted against the Maastricht treaty in
    1992, but was later drawn into the EU. However, Denmark voted to stay
    out of the euro currency.
  • Hungary: Hungary's anti-immigrant prime minister Viktor
    Orbán has been a fierce opponent of plans to resettle refugees to EU
    nations according to a quota system.
  • Czech Republic: The Czech people have been called the most
    eurosceptic people in Europe. Polls indicate that 57% consider EU
    membership to be a risk to their country.

The foreign ministers of France and Germany supported Jüncker's white
paper options, and particularly supported the "multi-speed Europe"
option, described in the white paper as follows:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"In a scenario where the EU27 proceeds as today but
> where certain Member States want to do more in common, one or
> several “coalitions of the willing” emerge to work together in
> specific policy areas. These may cover policies such as defense,
> internal security, taxation or social matters.
>
> As a result, new groups of Member States agree on specific legal
> and budgetary arrangements to deepen their cooperation in chosen
> domains. As was done for the Schengen area or the euro, this can
> build on the shared EU27 framework and requires a clarification of
> rights and responsibilities. The status of other Member States is
> preserved, and they retain the possibility to join those doing
> more over time."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

However, politicians in other countries disagreed. Far-right Dutch
politician Vicky Maeijer reacted harshly to the white paper:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The EU is collapsing and support for the project is
> crumbling. It seems we’re trying to keep the Brussels dream alive
> but its really more of the same – more, more, more European Union.
> What world do they come from? You’re playing with the lives of
> millions of citizens who you do not represent.
>
> The Dutch, I think, are going to have their feeling confirmed that
> they must get away from this suffocating Europe and get freedom
> and democracy back."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

Gianni Pittella, and Italian politician who leads the Progressive
Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, said
that the white paper was a "clear political mistake": "We would
consider it a clear political mistake to simply present five options
concerning the EU’s future without pointing out a clear political
preference. [The future of Europe can’t be sacrificed for] short
sightedness or fear of the next national elections."

But Spanish politician Esteban González Pons said that the EU must be
preserved:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"It is time to defend Europe because it is the best
> vaccine against nationalists and populists. ...
>
> Nobody should forget that the Union is already our present, and
> now we have to decide which way we want to go in the future in
> order to deal with common challenges such as globalization, the
> generational gap, terrorism, climate change, the migration and
> refugee crisis, and the rise of nationalism and
> populism."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

Daily Express (London) and Politico and Xinhua

Related Articles

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, European Union, Greece, Treaty of Rome,
European Commission, Jean-Claude Jüncker, Brexit,
France, Marine Le Pen, National Front Party,
Hungary, Viktor Orbán, Netherlands, Vicky Maeijer,
Italy, Gianni Pittella, Spain, Esteban González Pons

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe