蒙古青年论坛

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
楼主: habur

西方为什么领先了几百年

[复制链接]
发表于 2010-1-15 06:46:22 | 显示全部楼层
这是美国人的看法

The Globalization Trap: The 20-80 Society

author: H.P. Martin and H. Schuhmann





"Social expenditures in Germany have in no way exploded. In 1995 their share in the gross domestic product was even less than 20 years ago.. Deregulation instead of state supervision, liberalization of trade and privatization of state enterprises were the strategic weapons.."



Globalization: The 20-80 Society

World Leaders Underway to Another Civilization

By H.P. Martin and H. Schuhmann



... The pragmatists in the Fairmont Hotel reduce the future to a pair of numbers and a term: "20 to 80" and "tittytainment".

20 percent of the working age population will be enough in the coming century to keep the world economy going. "More workers will not be needed", said magnate Washington SyCip. A fifth of all jobseekers will be enough to produce all the goods and perform all the top-flight services that the world society can afford. This 20 percent will actively participate in living, earning and consuming. One or two percent may be added, the discussants admit, perhaps wealthy heirs.

What about the others? Will 80 percent of those willing to work be without a job? "Certainly", says the US author Jeremy Rifkin, author of the book "The End of Work". "80 percent will have enormous problems." Sun manager Gage puts some more coal on the fire and appeals to his boss Scott McNealy: The question in the future will be "to have lunch or be lunch", to eat or be devoured.

As a result, the top-flight discussion circle on the "future of work" focuses on those who without work. According to their firm conviction, dozens of millions of people worldwide may feel nearer the pleasant everyday life in the San Francisco Bay area than the struggle for survival without a secure job. In the Fairmont, a new social order was sketched: rich countries without an appreciable middle class and without opposition.

The term "tittytainment" makes the rounds. This term was coined by the old war-horse Zbigniew Brzezinski. The native Pole, National Security advisor of US president Jimmy Carter, has been occupied with geo-strategic questions. "Tittytainment", Brzezinski explains, is a combination of "entertainment" and "tits", the American slang for bosoms. Brzezinski thinks more of the milk streaming from the breast of a nursing mother than of sex. The frustrated population of the world could be kept happy with as mixture of numbing entertainment and adequate food.

The managers soberly discuss the possible doses and reflect how the wealthy fifth can employ the superfluous remnant. Given the global competitive pressure, social engagement of businesses is unreasonable. Others must worry about the unemployed. The discussants expect creative meaning and integration from a wide field of voluntary community services, neighborhood assistance, sports activities or all kinds of associations. "These activities could be upgraded by a modest salary that would promote the self-esteem of millions of citizens", Professor Roy remarked. People will clean the streets for almost nothing or work as house servants in the industrial countries, the corporate leaders imagine. The industrial age with its mass prosperity was no more than a "blip in the history of the economy", future researcher John Naisbitt concludes.

The organizers of the three memorable days in the Fairmont imagined themselves underway to a new civilization. However the direction envisaged by the assembled experts from the executive floors and science leads directly back into the pre-modern age. The two-thirds society, feared by Europeans since the 1980s, no longer describes the future distribution of prosperity and social positions. The world model of the future follows the formula 20 to 80. The one-fifth society is brewing in which the excluded will be immobilized with "tittytainment". Is all this a vast exaggeration?

"The Real Hurricane"

In Germany 1996, more than six million persons willing to work cannot find a steady job, more than ever since the founding of the German republic. The average net income of West Germans fell for five years. This was only the beginning according to pundits from the government, science and business. At least 1.5 million additional jobs could be eliminated in industry in the coming decade alone, the prominent German business advisor Roland Berger predicts. "On top of everything, every second job in middle management is endangered." His colleague Herbert Henzler, head of the German branch of the McKinsey consultation firm, goes even further: "Industry will go the way of agriculture", he forecasts. Goods production will only offer wages and bread for a few percent of the working population in the future. In Austria the authorities announce increasingly modest trade figures. Every year 10,000 industrial jobs fall away. In 1997 the unemployment rate was eight percent, nearly twice as high as in 1994.

The explanations for the decline advanced by economists and politicians always culminate in one word: globalization. High-tech communication, low transportation charges and boundless free trade allow the world to fuse into a single market. This also creates severe global competition even on the labor market. German businesses will only create new jobs in low-cost foreign countries. Leaders of the German republic from corporate executives to the Labor minister know only one answer: adjustment downward. Citizens are incessantly exposed to a cacophony of renunciation demands. Germans and Austrians work too little, draw e4xcessively high incomes, take overly long vacations and are sick too often, a chorus of officials, economists, experts and ministers claim. Press and television help in the cacophony. The "western claimant society collides with ambitious Asian renunciation societies", the Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper writes. The welfare threat has become "a future threat". "More social inequality is inevitable." Austria's dominant mass paper, the Neue Kronenzeitung, marches into the tabloid battle: "The Continent Lives Beyond Its Means - New Austerity Wave Shocks Europe". Even the President of Germany, Roman Herzog, seconded this. Change is "unavoidable. Everyone must make sacrifices."

Reality is sometimes misunderstood. Necessary sacrifices for everyone in times of crises are not possible. Cuts in continued pay (in case of sickness), suspension of termination protection, radical cuts in all social benefits and wage reductions despite increasing productivity are not crisis management. Rather the reformers in the sign of globalization announce the unwritten social contract of the republic that keeps social inequality tolerable by redistribution from top to bottom.

The model of the European welfare state has had its day, they proclaimed. In the worldwide comparison, the welfare state is now too expensive. The marginalized understand all this very well. Unions and welfare associations send a cry of indignation through the republic. The usually conservative IG chemical union threatens with an industry-wide strike. Dieter Schulte, chairperson of the German union alliance, warns of "conditions" that will make the mass French rebellion in December 1995 seem like "a mild prelude".

Still the defenders of the social state are fighting a losing battle. Many arguments of their opponents are simply false. On balance, Germany's corporations abroad hardly create additional jobs. They mostly only buy businesses there, thin out the personnel and supply regional markets. The social expenditures in Germany have in no way exploded. In 1995 their share in the gross domestic product was even less than 20 years ago. What is true is the constant reference to the policy of other formerly industrial countries. In its core the program is the same from Sweden and Austria to Spain: cutting state spending, lowering wages and canceling social benefits. Everywhere the protest ends in resignation.

In a global pincer-movement, the new international of capital unhinges whole states and their past social structures. On one front, capital flight is threatened here and there. A drastic tax discount, billions of subsidies or free infrastructure, is forced. Where this doesn't occur, tax planning on a large scale helps. Profits are only show on the books in countries where the tax rate is very low. The share contributed by owners of capital and owners of assets to financing state expenditures falls worldwide. On the other side, the leaders of global capital streams continuously drive down the wage level of their tax-paying employees. The wage rate, the share of wage earners in the social wealth, declines in the world standard. No nation alone can resist this pressure. As the US economist Rudiger Dornbusch comments, the model Germany is now "regularly cooked" in the transnational competition.

Stock prices and corporate profits rise at double-digit rates while wages and salaries sink. At the same time unemployment grows parallel with the deficits of the public budgets. No one needs special economic knowledge to understand what is happening.

113 years after the death of Karl Marx, capitalism again drives in that direction that the revolutionary economist described so correctly for his age. "The general tendency of capitalist production is to lower not raise average wages and to force the value of labor to its minimum level." So he lectured in 1865 before the 1st International in London without imagining that primitive capitalism could be tamed democratically one day. A counter-reform of historical dimensions is now initiated after the reforms of the social democratic century. This counter-reform goes backwards into the future. Winners like Heinrich von Pierer, the head of the world corporation Siemens, gloat: "The competitive wind has become a storm. The real hurricane is approaching."

The choice of words of Pierer and other standard bearers of the new globalism should convince people that a natural process is involved, the result of an irresistible technical and economic progress. That is nonsense. The global international interlocking is by no means a natural process but was consciously brought about by a single-minded policy. In treaty after treaty, law after law, resolutions of governments and parliaments removed barriers for the border-crossing traffic of capital and goods. From the decontrol of currency trading on the domestic European market to the continuous expansion of the world trade agreement GATT, government politicians of western industrial countries systematically decry that state that they no longer accept.

Democracy in the Trap

Global integration is accompanied by the ascent of an economic doctrine of salvation continuously brought into politics by a host of economic advisors: neoliberalism. Their basic thesis is that the market is good and state interventions are bad. Starting from the ideas of the leading representative of this economic school, US economist and Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman, the majority of the governments of the West made this dogma into the guiding principle of their policy during the 1980s. Deregulation instead of state supervision, liberalization of trade and capital transactions as well as privatization of state enterprises were the strategic weapons in the arsenal of market-fundamentalist governments and the international economic organizations supported by them, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). With these instruments, they fought a struggle for independence for capital that continues up to today. Nothing and no one should evade the law of supply and demand, whether air transport or telecommunications, banks or insurances, the construction industry, software development or the labor forces.

The collapse of the party dictatorships of the Eastern block gave a further impetus and global force to this belief. Liberated from the threat of the dictatorship of the proletariat, establishing the dictatorship of the world market has been a priority. Suddenly the massive participation of employees in the general value creation only appears as a concession in the Cold War to take away the base from communist agitation.

Nevertheless the "turbo-capitalism" whose worldwide enforcement now seems irresistible destroys the foundations of its own existence: the functioning state and democratic stability. The speed of the change and the redistribution of power and prosperity erode the old social units faster than the new can develop. Countries prosperous in the past consume their social substance faster than their ecological substance. Neoliberal economists and politicians preach the "American model" to the world. However this slogan is just as frightening as the propaganda of the East German government that up to its end wanted to learn victory from the Soviet Union.

Social disintegration is nowhere clearer than in the country of origin of the capitalist counter-revolution, the US. Criminality has reached epidemic proportions. In the state of California, in itself the seventh largest economic power of the earth, spending for prisons exceeds the entire education budget. Already 28 million Americans, more than ten percent of the population, have entrenched themselves in guarded skyscrapers and housing estates. US citizens spend twice as much money for private armed guards than their state spends for its police. Europe and Japan, China and India are also divided in a minority of winners and a majority of losers.

The globalized progress is not an advance for many hundreds of millions of people. The formula that the heads of state from the seven leading industrial nations raised as the leitmotif of their G7 summit at the end of June 1996 must sound like a mockery to them: "Make success from globalization benefit everyone".

The protest of the losers is directed to governments and politicians whose creative power continuously shrivels. The individual nation state is always overstrained, whether in producing social justice, protecting the environment, limiting the power of the media or combating internationalized criminality. The international concert also regularly fails. But when governments only stress the overpowering practical necessities of the transnational economy, all politics congeals into a spectacle of powerlessness and the democratic state loses its legitimacy. Globalization becomes a trap for democracy.

Only naïve theoreticians or shortsighted politicians believe that millions of people could gain jobs and social security year after year in Europe without paying the political price sometime. Contrary to the operational logic of corporate strategists, there are no "surplus people" or unnecessary citizens in democratic societies.

The losers have voices and will use them. There is no reason for reassurance. The political earthquake will follow the social earthquake. Social democrats or social Christians will not quickly celebrate any new triumphs. Instead more and more voters take seriously the stereotyped formulas of the globalizers. In every second news broadcast of those who should represent his interests, the citizen learns that foreign competition is responsible, not us. From this economically false argument, it is only a small step to open hostility toward everything foreign. Millions of alarmed middle class citizens have long taken flight in hatred of foreigners, separatism and screening from the world market. The excluded answer with exclusion.

In 1992 the national-authoritarian populist Ross Perot gained 19 percent of the votes in his first attempt in a presidential election. The French preacher of national rebirth Jean-Marie Le Pen and the Austrian radical rightwing populist Jorg Haider achieved similar election results. Separatists have enjoyed increasing popularity from Quebec and Scotland to Lombard, Italy. Separatists supplement the canon of hatred of foreigners with anger toward central governments and separation from alleged boarders in poorer parts of the country. Simultaneously the multitude of vagabond migrants seeking to escape abject poverty grows all over the world.

The 20-80, one-fifth society, as the elitist visionaries in the Fairmont hotel envisioned the next century, follows the technical and economic logic with which corporate leaders and governments push global integration. However the world race for the greatest efficiency and the lowest wages opens the gates to the irrationality of power. The persons who are rebelling are not the persons who are truly distressed. Rather incalculable political explosiveness arises from the fear of degradation that is now spreading in the middle of society. The fear of poverty endangers democracy, not poverty itself.

The economic suspension of all politics already led to the global catastrophe. In 1930, a year after the great stock market crash, the British magazine The Economist that is always friendly to capital commented: "The greatest problem of our generation is that our successes on the economic plane exceed the success on the political plane. The economy and politics cannot keep pace with each other. Economically the world is a comprehensive unity of action. Politically the world remains cut up in pieces or dismembered. The tensions between the two opposite developments have caused shocks and breakdowns by the dozens in the social life of humanity."

History does not repeat itself. War is still the most likely outlet when social conflicts become unbearable, whether in the form of civil war against ethnic minorities or breakaway regions. Globalization need not lead to belligerent conflicts. However this can happen if the de-controlled forces of the transnational economy are not socially restrained. The long formulated political responses to the economic interlocking of the world deny that this process can be controlled. Still there are instruments and ways that put control into the hands of elected governments again without setting the nations against each other. Some of these ways are presented and discussed in this book ("The Globalization trap").

The most urgent task of democratic politicians at the threshold to the next century will be the renovation or repair of the state and the restoration of the primacy of politics over the economy. If this does not happen, the dramatically rapid fusion of humanity through technology and trade will soon capsize in the opposite and lead to the global short-circuit. Our children and grandchildren will then only have the memory of the golden nineties when the world still seemed ordered and redirection was still possible.
发表于 2010-1-15 06:51:49 | 显示全部楼层
你完全没必要回避我的问题,仅仅是个简单问题,用你自己的理解能力来回答就够了,你真可以直接回答,不必兜圈子,不必顾左右而言它,跟蒙古相同人口的有完整工业体系的发达国家你能找不着?我不信.
发表于 2010-1-15 06:54:40 | 显示全部楼层
       对不起,奥地利是蒙古人口的3.2倍,也就是819万。这远远超出设定问题的范围, 并且含有大量日耳曼人,
terguun 发表于 2010-1-15 06:34


让你看的是,那个公司只有1200人!是的,造VLJ只需要1200人就够了!!!

另外,日耳曼人也是人
发表于 2010-1-15 06:55:45 | 显示全部楼层
你完全没必要回避我的问题,仅仅是个简单问题,用你自己的理解能力来回答就够了,你真可以直接回答,不必兜圈子,不必顾左右而言它,跟蒙古相同人口的有完整工业体系的发达国家你能找不着?我不信.
terguun 发表于 2010-1-15 06:51


不存在这样的国家,说的很清楚的了,迄今为止根本不存在

但是,这样的国家是有可能发展出来的
发表于 2010-1-15 06:57:11 | 显示全部楼层
你不发展自己的工业,等到资源紧缺,人家开始真正地打你的最后两亩三分地的主意的时候,你根本就连最后的老本都也给保不住!
发表于 2010-1-15 06:57:37 | 显示全部楼层
蒙古人还能够侥幸有个蒙古国,仅仅因为莫斯科需要一片同北京之间的缓冲区,事实上都几乎是没有蒙古人的事。正如在今天的内蒙古,HITAD在大搞伪民俗,仅仅是为了赚个旅游者的门票钱,不管什么“崇拜蒙古历史”“发扬蒙 ...
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 06:38
     所谓历史文化暂不谈,这题跑远了,只是简单谈谈人口数据的比较等,你不总说别人没有数据概念吗?相信你会有,
发表于 2010-1-15 07:00:24 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 henanhujaa 于 2010-1-15 07:06 编辑

人口数据就是个,今天的地球上根本不存在人口不到三百万的工业发达国家

但是,在第二次工业革命时期,美国德国的工业人口都是万,乃至十万这个数量级的
发表于 2010-1-15 07:05:01 | 显示全部楼层
不存在这样的国家,说的很清楚的了,迄今为止根本不存在

但是,这样的国家是有可能发展出来的
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 06:55
    既然不存在 那问题怎么办?可一个活生生的蒙古就在哪儿?我也没说不发展呀?
发表于 2010-1-15 07:08:05 | 显示全部楼层
发展自己的工业体系,不仅是必须的,也是可能的

很简单
发表于 2010-1-15 07:10:58 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 terguun 于 2010-1-15 07:19 编辑
人口数据就是个,迄今为止,地球上根本不存在不到三百万人口的工业国

但是,在第二次工业革命时期,美国德国的工业人口都是万,乃至十万这个数量级的
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 07:00
又绕回来了,在第二次工业革命时期,难道美国德国人口也是250万?难道德国用工业科技武装起来的几百万军队是大猩猩呢?还是人呢?既然你说地球上根本不存在不到三百万人口的工业国,那蒙古该怎么办?完了你又说学学人家德国如何强大等,这没错, 可人口就那些,是不德国能借几千万人口给蒙古发展一下啊?完了再还呢?这不有成科幻小说了嘛/
发表于 2010-1-15 07:13:38 | 显示全部楼层
工业人口,和人口的定义,说的很清楚了

军队,不是工业人口,懂了吗?

不要混淆工业人口和人口的定义!
发表于 2010-1-15 07:14:42 | 显示全部楼层
日本在1938年,人口少于中国,但是工业人口却大大高于中国

先弄清楚基本概念,再来跟我狡辩,呵呵。。。
发表于 2010-1-15 07:28:43 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 terguun 于 2010-1-15 07:43 编辑
日本在1938年,人口少于中国,但是工业人口却大大高于中国

先弄清楚基本概念,再来跟我狡辩,呵呵。。。
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 07:14
   我到不是狡辩,是在问问题, 日本是在多少农业人口和城市商业人口的基础上来培养壮大工业人口的呢?假如1938年的日本有250万人口会有多少工业人口呢?军队会有多少呢?农民会有多少呢?他们之间没有依存关系嘛?说实话你码字的功夫实在了得,很是佩服的,但是云里雾里的就是不回答问题,
发表于 2010-1-15 07:54:43 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 henanhujaa 于 2010-1-15 07:58 编辑

如果是250万人,按照1938年的日本技术,假设有石油资源,而且土地和矿产资源充足,再假设70%的人口年龄段在18到50之间,那么工业人口大约20-25万,农业人口也大约10万,在战时军队能够扩编到50万,能够做到摩托化,并能够装备坦克和零式战斗机。

如果按照今天的日本技术,同样还是250万人口,假设有石油资源,而且土地和矿产资源充足,再假设70%的人口年龄段在18到50之间,那么工业人口大约35-45万,农业人口大约3-5万左右,军队可以装备分导式多弹头的中程导弹和超音速中程轰炸机。
发表于 2010-1-15 08:00:38 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 terguun 于 2010-1-15 08:06 编辑

你这样的假设真实世界里有这样的国家吗? 那么这样的国家又是哪一个呢?我相信你的假设是有根据的,现今世界有你说的这样人口及工业人口比例的强大国家吗?外星空间的不用谈,来个真实的行不?
发表于 2010-1-15 08:17:24 | 显示全部楼层
如果是250万人,按照1938年的日本技术,假设有石油资源,而且土地和矿产资源充足,再假设70%的人口年龄段在18到50之间,那么工业人口大约20-25万,农业人口也大约10万,在战时军队能够扩编到50万,能够做到摩托化,并 ...
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 07:54
      你说的这样一个250万人口的工业国家,在人类近100年历史中是否存在过呢?找一个看看如何呢?怎么会没有呢?德国的工业发展史里没有嘛?我不太信,请问有吗?
发表于 2010-1-15 08:20:56 | 显示全部楼层
理由简单:在有充足石油的情况下,而且假设气候,土地和矿产条件良好,那么按照今天的技术,农业可以做到一个人来耕种至少1000公顷耕地,事实上即便是在60年代的美国,一个人耕作三千到四千英亩的耕地也都是极其平常的事情。大约5万人即可做到足以养活至少700万人,并保证充足的蔬菜,肉类,乳类,水果和禽蛋的供应。

一座年产钢超过两百万吨的德国现代化钢铁厂,所需员工一般不超过四百到五百人。(Badische Stahlwerke GmbH)

一座年产小汽车超过一百万辆的德国小汽车公司,所需员工事实上不超过三万人。(OPEL)

一座年产CPU超过五千万颗的德国现代化芯片厂,所需员工不超过一千两百人。(AMD Dresden)
发表于 2010-1-15 08:26:42 | 显示全部楼层
两百五十万人?十万工业人口?有充足的面积和资源?按照今天的西方技术。。。可以试着搞航天的了,比如说类似于联盟号宇宙飞船之类的东西,应该可以搞载人航天的。

不但可以制造钢铁,小汽车和芯片,连宇宙飞船都不是问题。。。

德国只是资源贫乏,地小人多,所以才不能不忍痛割爱。。。
发表于 2010-1-15 08:38:36 | 显示全部楼层
是的,按照今日西方技术,什么叫正常?

一个农民耕种一千公顷的耕地叫正常

一千多人的工厂年产五千万颗CPU叫正常

一个刚刚走出校门的大学毕业生的税前月薪加起来在半年之内足够买一辆崭新的奔驰车叫正常

在美国和德国这都是极其平常的事情。。。就如同在13世纪的蒙古地区,一个青年人会骑着马并使用弓箭来准确地击中50米外的目标是很平常的事情一般
发表于 2010-1-15 08:39:00 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 terguun 于 2010-1-15 09:04 编辑
两百五十万人?十万工业人口?有充足的面积和资源?按照今天的西方技术。。。可以试着搞航天的了,比如说类似于联盟号宇宙飞船之类的东西,应该可以搞载人航天的。

不但可以制造钢铁,小汽车和芯片,连宇宙飞船都 ...
henanhujaa 发表于 2010-1-15 08:26
  难道说这又是上帝的不是了? 你更多的是在假设,如果蒙古有8300万人口的话,你肯定会拿德国比较这说事,这是肯定的, 但蒙古真的只有250万人口,你却找不出现实中的解答呢? 我没否定德国的强大,你看人家德国二战中死亡700多万人也没伤筋动骨嘛,还不是好好地? 可蒙古就不同了,就算三个蒙古也还不够折腾凑数的嘛?蒙古不发达是真的, 你能从欧美发达国家里找一个跟蒙古人口相当的国家来比较嘛?并且能搞航天还带核武核弹等高端科技的吗? 你那么大学问我就不信找不着。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|蒙古青年论坛

GMT+8, 2026-8-30 08:22

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2023 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表