For those of you who desire government centrally controlled economies

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

That's not even a sentence, Archaea. Everybody is what?

Anyway, I'm way out of my element and just fooling around. I really do have grave concerns about the impact of globalization on the lower half of the American workforce.

But I know nothing about economic theory and I was having some fun. (I thought the oil in China would be the giveaway there but I guess not.)

Oil in China?

I thought you were just ridiculing us.

China is impacting pricing by driving demand, and will be for now on our greatest competitor in the world for resources.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Right now, everybody in the US except the bottom few who do not receive adequate education and skill development.

I'm still curious as to what you meant by your half sentence? What was the second half going to be?

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Lost Student

Okay, so in my limited understanding, this is saying that as long as someone here is more skilled than workers other countries, their wages will increase, while those with the same or less skill will decrease to be on par with the wages of the other countries.

Is my statement a correct application of the theorem? (Sincere question; my entire economics education consists of Kearl's Econ 110 class 5 years ago.)

edit: Page 5 pwnt

Your statement in the preceding paragraph or from before? Above, yes, it is.

[Lost Student]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

(I thought the oil in China would be the giveaway there but I guess not.)

You had me going..


(Note: this is my first emoticon post at CG. If my calculations are correct, my next emoticon post will be in approx. 800 posts--see http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9098)

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I'm still curious as to what you meant by your half sentence? What was the second half going to be?

I corrected the original. Nothing special.

[Lost Student]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Your statement in the preceding paragraph or from before? Above, yes, it is.

Yes, I was asking if my interpretation of this theorem was anywhere close to the mark.

My previous statements were reflections of my personal fears/thoughts that admitedly contravene the logic of economics that I learned from master Kearl.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Lost Student

(Note: this is my first emoticon post at CG. If my calculations are correct, my next emoticon post will be in approx. 800 posts--see http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9098)

You are free to refrain from emoticons but then I claim the right to misinterpret all of your comments for the next 799 posts.

[Lost Student]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

You are free to refrain from emoticons but then I claim the right to misinterpret all of your comments for the next 799 posts.

I'm not sold that emoticons are the best way for me to communicate what I want to say.

For example, what if I used that winking emote? Would other men think I was flirting with them? I could see a lot of awkward situations such as this from using emoticons. Yes, I beleive that I will exercise my freedom to refrain.

If you really misinterpret all my posts, it's probably because I am an engineer that sucks at communication. Little smilies probably can't help me, as much as they would like to.

[Colly Wolly]

And another cool thread killed by digression.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Colly Wolly

And another cool thread killed by digression.

Sorry, carry on.

I have a question. Serious.

Assume we have three classes of Americans.

Lower tier (barely subsisting)
Middle tier (most of us)
wealthy (define as you will)

How do you see global free-market employment affecting these three groups. Why?