Dennis wirtes:
> US imperialism certainly still exists, but you don't have to be a hegemon
> to get away with consuming more than you spend: this is the classic
> physiognomy of numerous Second World countries, e.g. Brazil, Argentina,
> Thailand, etc. In the past, you could argue that US didn't need to worry
> about repayment, because its debt was denominated in dollars. But in
> exactly 100 days, the euro arrives, and with it, a whole new era of
> post-US geopolitics.
The euro is already being held, and lots of bonds are issued in it. I do not see how its going to undercut the status of the dollar. Afterall, its the German and French currencies combined with the Spanish and Italian ones, by and large.
Good point about the second world. I wonder which of the second world countries, plus the US, has better health cover for its middle class. Could we say that US lower middle and working class enjoy their own second or third world status? In that case, you could also say, no one pays more to get so little.
It's not so much consuming but investing and controlling. Sure, trade deficits might reflect the deindustrialization (manufacturing and producing overseas) and the hyper-capitalism of global corporate America. The dynamic goal is not just profits, and not just growth in profits, but sigmoid growth in profits and accumulations for a few--which is what fed and in turn was fed by the last equity run up.
But trade deficits seem more a sympton than a cause of anything, especially for the elite and their diversified portfolios (hint, if you are rich, you don't need to invest in mutual funds or stocks, especially now, goodness no). What goes around comes around and around and around, in dollars, lots of them.
One very real problem with letting American management (and their godawful ideas from business school ) run so much of the world economy is: they are terrible at what they do (agreeing with an earlier post on this thread). For one thing, they are terrible at making things--they always cheap out and cut corners in order to try and boost profits. TQM is not for improving quality, it's for keeping b-school types busy while the financial officers figure out how to keep profits going up--usually with carefully placed bets on the bourses.
The US gave us the MSDOS and then Windows computer, Japan gave us the Sony (walkman, playstation, etc). Panasonic/National makes damn near everything under the consumerist and industrial suns and can't now turn a profit. Meanwhile, GE--America's, no the world's-- greatest industrial conglomerate makes most of its money in financial services (at least the last time I looked). I think I did own an 8-track player with their name on it in 1978.
Charles Jannuzi