I must admit, this i suspect what i'm about to say could be uttered by an liberal but believe me i don't say this out of anti-wall street, anti-captilist agenda. With no futher ado....
Let me begin by direct your mind toward the captilism of that beatiful world depicted in "Atlas Shrugged" Ayn Rand's masterpiece and the greatest gateway drug to life on the right (with William F. Buckley's "Firing Line" coming in a close second). I suspect that part of the reason for the current Randian revial sweeping America has to do with, besides the hardcover's great evocative cover (painted by Frank O'Connor, Ayn Rand's devoted male wife), the type of captilism the book depicts which is one of tangible, manly industries of steel mills (Rearden Metal), rail roads (Taggart Rail), oil fields (the Wyatt Oil Fields) which is altogether more attractive and inspiring then the digital, largely invisible and abstract American economy of which today's John Galt's make there fortunes in. The captilist as inventor of a new better metal is more inspirational than the captilist as Pimpco bond trader who spends his day in front of 4 computer screen trading loans and bonds made up things he doesn't really know. And Ellis Wyatt is more awe-inspiring than, Jamie Diamond, because Ellis Wyatt seems to deserve his wealth more than bank CEO's, for Ellis Wyatt was a progidy who invented things while Jamie Diamond and Bernie Madoff, just had to go to elite schools and find clever ways of redirecting money (not to say options traders don't deserve there profits).
If the tycoons of the new American captilism are less attractive than the old Henry Ford's or Herbert Hoovers or Hank Rearden's, the stoic-everyman worker of the new American economy is even less glamorous than. We have lost our manafucturing economy, in exchange for a service sector, fincial sector hybrid economny. Certainly, life is better, despite all the downsides, today than in the 40's. But for the everyman, working in the coal mines or the railroad has it's charm compared to feminizing service sector jobs working at Verizon Wireless stores, in a ugly uniform polo, having to go up to every customer, put on a fake smile and say "can i help you with anything today, ma'm?". The new service sector eceonomy is largely more female oriented. Women are good at fake smiles, fake laughs and acting nice out of girlish etiquette.
But let me get to my main point which is this: could be that having Wall Street as the destinatation for the best young minds that talent is being subsquently wasted analyzing tedious data points when such minds could (perhaps in the old US economy) have been put to use inventing, stuff like, a better oil tanker, more strong steel, etc.?
Economists do not talk enough about the great dilemma of free trade and tarrifs and are all too often caught up in the eternal domestic battles between partisans pf high taxes/more regulation/more goverment control /high debt and partisans of low taxes/fiscal discpline/ less regulation/etc. which is unfortunate because that economic debate/question is far easier to solve: the true conservatives are right about domestic economic issues (almost always), raising taxes does not get economies out of slumps, China won't buy up our debt forever and so fourth. But less energy is focused on the question of free trade and tarrifs. It seems as if no one besides the few free thinkers like Pat Buchanan, Steve Sailer and the Vdare.com collective agiates for erecting trade tarrifs. The left, which doesn't ncare about economics, only has the Unions arguing for tarrifs and no one wants to hear what they have to say because they have such a dog in that race is comprmises there objectivity.
I predict that debate and anxiety will grow over free trade once the bombardment of non-stop leglistation and action from the Obama adminstration settles down (which may never happen until the menace is gone). I sence, i'm not the only one who finds Pat Buchanan's free trade arguments compelling but who is increasingly anxious about the rickety footing of a purely service sector economy anyway. And then again, people, especially males in there 20's and 30's are going to disapointed with the wages of service sector jobs and the belittling nature of many such service sector jobs have upon male pride compared to, say, factory work not to mention the like of job security in the service sector compared to manafucturing jobs.
Perhaps, free trade is the way to go and America could have prospered without it's one-time manafucturing base (though i find that uncertain looking at the kind of jobs that have replaced manafucturing jobs) but one thing is clear: in order for this huge transition from manafucturing economy to service sector economy to happen as smoothily as the most devotte free traders claim it will, America must remain the brains of the world, the hotbed of innovation and entrupnership and social mobility. However all of those traditional proud charcterstics of the America, we know and love, are fading as, quite simply, that America (the America ofRonald Reagan and Gary Cooper and Andrew Cargnigie) itself fades, waterdowned by the discnerible entity i call "the New America" which is more mexican than english in all the worst ways, it's the America of Barak Obama, of gansta rap and Rev. Wright). The New America is a majority latino-black America, whererin whites are minority, society is extremly stratsfied and divided geographically, culturally, educationally, etc. The New America will have the economic inuequalities of latin American nations, a de facto caste society, largely divided by IQ (straight out of the bell curve), where a minority master caste of whites and asians reign atop (though whites will start leaving in droves as they decline in poltical power and start to feel the onerous poltical repruccusion of losing electoral power as the Al Sharpton's ascend to unthinkable positions of poltical power (thanks to a much less relevant white voting bloc)). There will be far less social mobility. As we can predict with almost exact certainy, assuming societal patterns (e.i. educational achievement by race, racial voting habits) don't radically alter themselves, then worse and worse economic policies veering closer and closer to socialism will be in ecacted by a growing black-latino poltical coalition which whose policies will destroy the once fertile soil of enturpenership America possesed. The reckless immigration policies of today will also result in a massive population crises down the road in America. Besides sqaundering America's priceless natural habitat and wilderness, in the short run, as the population nearly doubles in just 35-40 years, classroom sizes will double, schools will grow much worse in part due to a lowering of the national IQ aswell. America will fall even further down in international rankings scholasticly, biting the dust of the Chinese, (perhaps the Indians) and european nations like Sweden and Iceland assuming they come to settle there muslim immigration problem.
America, in it's new conception as a economic power is supposed and likely has to be, the brains of the world, producing the best, most orginal, best networking and most entrupunerial labor force on earth. In this ideal conception of the new American economy, America may not produce the world's steel but will serve as the world's marketing agency, web designers, banking center, and not to mention the place where the best minds come to learn. I don't care how "bad" it sounds, I don't see a America that is 35% european, 2% asian and the rest latino-black being the brains of the world and i don't see how anyone can see it being such without ancipating the totally unprecedentted change in patterns among latinos and african americans as far as drop out, birth out of wedlock, crime and unemploment rates for those two groups are concerned. We have simply chosen, a absent-minded immigration policy that merey increases the size of America's underclass and inturn the amount of social problems that will increasingly hamper our society especially as a service sector economy which will increasingly relie on brain-power, ingenuinity and the indepdence and industry of a nations population. Europeans are more indepdent and social mobile than much more fuedal and stagnant African and latin american cultures which in America, atleast, have become used to sucking on the nipple of the state, reliying on the taxing of the productive parts of the economy(population) for a good deal of there livielhood, most especially in the case of Africa-Americans, millions of whom are out of school, unemployed, not looking for work and living off assortment of intractable welfare programs payed for by an ever-lessening and ever more tax burdened number of largely white and asian affluent Americans.
To put it simply, in all probablilty, the less white and asian America gets as a nation the less wealth we will be, the worse educational we will be, the higher and more stifling American tax rates and govermental regulations and prodocules will be, and the less attractive the US will be, in every sence, to business aswell as european-Americans (once know as simply Americans) who will be subject to greater affirmtive action type goverment discrimination not less over time.
Basically in 1965, we as a nation came to a fork in the road. America could choose to be either Switzerland or Brazil. We could have kept our traditional immigration quota system which was designed to maitain the basic ethnic make up of America (over 90% white) and become Switzerland which is to say, a nation with a slightly declining population/birth rate, that is extremly well educated, productive, efficient and entrupnerial, not to mention, a nation that would be united culturally, patriotic with great schools, contuiningly unprecdent social mobility, a large middle class and a very low amount of income inequality and, finally, a over all, extremly affluent population.
But instead thanks to Ted Kennedy and many lies, America decided to become Brazil and in 1965 reconfigure it's immigration system. Kennedy the 1965 Immigration Reform Act's legsliative shurpa, wheather on purpose or not, ended up being able to pass the bill by lying to the nation, promising that the bill wouldn't do everyhing the bill would do-which is to say Kennedy empathically promised that the bill would not inendudate American citys(ghettos) with millions of 3rd world immigrants creating unassmilated, crime-infested 3rd world ghetto enclaves in major cities nor would the reform act, the bill's sponsors promised dramatically alter the ethnic composistion of the nation over time. In fact that's exactly what the Immigration Reform Act of 65' did.
Thus the bill put us on the way to becoming Brazil which is to say a extremly diverse, multi-racial (balkanized) chaotic society divided by de facto racial castes, a minatature middle class, huge economy inequality, a far less educated population which is altogether less united and more prone to break downs of civil order, racial tension and govermental corruption. A nation that is far poor as a whole, with overcrowding and over population problems (especially in the already over-devloped south west) and massive crime as well as other huge social problems that come along with a vast menacing underclass dislocated from the rest of society.
On so we are on are way at the current rate to becoming Brazil though perhaps we can stop amnesty, impose a moratarium, cut off all free education and free non-emergency healthcare and welfare services to illegals as well derpive them of sanctuary citys, enable police to arrest illegals and ask for proof citizenship, punish employers who hiring illegals more and inturn cut the illegal population down to 1/3rd it's current size and then build a border for the cost of fighting the Iraq and Afgan wars for 1 month and save America from turning into Brazil.
But what we know FOR SURE is that immigration is absolutely central to the success of the "new American economy" which can be lost and shipped away faster than a manafucturing economy. Wheather we face the stark poltically incorrect facts of immigrations overall effects and the way inwhich we handle illegal and legal mass immigration will determine wheather our standarded of living in 20-30 years will be worse than in 1956 or better than it is today, wheather we are living a nightmare of our nation's former self.
