Hey, it could happen

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227115,00.html

This is a link to the article. This particular topic concerns me greatly. As the article suggests, there is a way to reverse this problem, unlike our ever decreasing oil reserves. I for one, enjoy being able to go to Nagoya (sushi restaurant) on the weekend and order about 2 dozen tuna rolls or California rolls, but am I contributing to the problem? Possibly. But how is this problem fixed? Take this in stride with Andy's last posting.  Is it my fault that I love fish but am also concerned about the ever-decreasing fish populations of the world? Is this another prime example of U.S. hypocritical consumerist conservatism. (those three words together hurt my head)
The fact is, our ways are much slower to change than the quantity of resources we consume. Thus, plans must be enacted which capitalize on our uberconsumerist tendencies. If we consume a ton of fish, we must use the billions in revenue to build natural saltwater fish farms to cultivate those species we most enjoy.

Do not for one second think that the U.S. is in any way totally responsible for depleting the world's fish populations either. I use the U.S. because I can talk about myself, but the truth is, many countries around the world consume much more of the commercial fish population than the U.S., particularly on a per-capita basis.

(check out the journal that does many studies on this called "Science")

A. Stubbs

Are Americans really against the outsourcing of jobs?

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/news_item.asp?NID=3038929

This short article in the link above discusses the amount of jobs that have been lost in the Super Tuesday primary states under the Bush administration (although it fails to mention how many jobs have been gained to replace those which were lost).  The article has a negative overtone towards the outsourcing of jobs and basically sends the blame towards President Bush.  But, is the outsourcing of jobs to countries like China really President Bush's fault?

I will not go as far to say that the President's policies have had no effect on the outsourcing of jobs because they obviously have had some effect.  However, the blame should not fall solely on the Bush Administration or the Republican party.  The U.S. is a consumer driven society-that fact should go uncontested.  Ordinary citizens usually look for the lowest prices when they are shopping, regardless of whether they are shopping for clothes, groceries, electronics, etc.  Even if a person is looking for a particular name brand, he or she will wait until the product goes on sale if possible.  Everyone wants the lowest prices so they can save a few dollars.  Businesses know this fact.  Therefore, they go where they can produce goods for the cheapest and then they can offer lower prices to consumers in the U.S.  This leads to the outsourcing of jobs and manufacturing of products in Asia where labor is cheaper.  Then the products are imported back to the U.S. to be sold.  So in the end, Americans get lower priced items and they save a few dollars.  The downside to this is that people in the U.S. lose their manufacturing jobs to outsourcing because companies do not want to pay an American $15 an hour when they can pay a Chinese person $4 an hour.  While most people will generally speak out against outsourcing, those same individuals are the ones searching for lower priced goods and supporting the very companies which have outsourced their labor to other countries--seems a bit like hypocrisy to me.  So before we, as citizens, go blaming the government and the president for job losses due to outsourcing, maybe we should examine our own priorities and decide if we want lower priced goods or more jobs for those individuals that work in manufacturing.  We have the ability to choose . . . we have the ability to boycott . . . but will we?

By: Andy Thomas

Calling All Economist . . . Recession or Media Obsession?

Stock markets falling, banks writing off billions, economists warning of decline-it all sounds like an economic doomsday.  Yet, that is exactly what we are seeing everyday in the news, an obsession with recession.  While I am no economist, I have to wonder . . . Is this so-called recession because of problems in the domestic and global economies, or is it because of media-driven scare stories.  The "experts" say that we will not know if the economy is in a recession until 6 months after the fact.  However, I cannot help but think that all of this speculation and so-called "news" is contributing to the problem rather than helping solve the problem.

Think about this.  People watch the news and hear about the stock market continually falling, unemployment rising, housing bubble-bust, and all of this leads the media to the conclusion that we must be in the middle of a recession.  But no one really knows.  So in an attempt to save their retirement portfolios, people start liquidating assets, and then boom . . . we find our economy on the downslide because people are saving all of their funds and liquidating assets.  So maybe, just maybe, if the media would scale back their economic scary recession talk, and quit terrifying soon-to-be retirees, this recession problem might just slow down, solve itself, and the economy could get back on track.  The market always has its ups and downs, but the media seems to make it worse than it really should be.  Lets face it, people make bad decisions when they are emotional (excited, scare, angry, etc.).  All of the media hype about a recession promotes those emotions and then people make irrational decisions regarding their investments.  Perhaps we should take a step back to evaluate the situation instead of running head first into a recession that does not have to occur.

By: Andy Thomas

Time to start talking

Okay ladies and gentlemen,

Just want to open the floor for some interesting new discussions on anything global. I know at least Brytt, Andy, and I need some hot topics for papers to write this spring for an international trade seminar. Of course, I don't want anyone to throw out paper topics per-se, instead I just want to spit ball some ideas out their and see if anyone shares my interests.

1. Hugo Chavez and his own personal piggy bank in South America that we know as Venezuela and PDVSA. This guy kills me. How he's avoided assasination is beyond me. A true politician though, with somewhat of an iron fist.

2. My name is Diego Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die! haha. okay, so, different name, and probably uses lots of huge guns instead of a sword, but no less entertaining and interesting to read or watch. Colombian drug lords are always fun to read about, especially if you know that at one time, the Colombian "bam-bam" industry was worth more than five of the U.S. top fortune 500's combined. Check Diego out. Anyone compared to Pablo Escobar is a big deal for international trade, at least in this hemisphere.

3. short and simple: Mexican Imigration into U.S. - Capital Flight out of U.S.? Any thoughts? Any input? Any opinions?

4. What is the UAE doing with all that money? The emirates' current ruler, Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, is also the Prime Minister and Vice President of the UAE. Check this guy out and is new building projects off the coast of Dubai.

5. Anything goes here. just write about what you feel interested in. time to talk.

Have fun people.