Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

America--great--so fast

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
TheGreatSimba View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 22-Nov-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
  Quote TheGreatSimba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: America--great--so fast
    Posted: 02-Nov-2010 at 13:12
Originally posted by BIG D

of course, AND considering your points, Germany and Japan do EXTREMELY well per GNP--with Germany just behind China and Japan just ahead[[2009]]--and this is my question from before, how do they do so well WITHOUT the things you mention[natural resources,etc.??ty


Japan and Germany are both export reliant countries. As long as they export goods, they prosper. Both make high tech and luxury equipment, which is why their economies do so well.

For example, prior to WWI, Germany was a leading exporter. What the British did was they blockaded Germany during WWI to prevent any natural resources going to Germany and prevent any exports going out, therefore the German economy collapse.

Its the same with Japan, Japan needs to export goods for its economy to do well.
I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time.
Back to Top
BIG D View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 19-Oct-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 128
  Quote BIG D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Nov-2010 at 13:31
Originally posted by TheGreatSimba

Originally posted by BIG D

of course, AND considering your points, Germany and Japan do EXTREMELY well per GNP--with Germany just behind China and Japan just ahead[[2009]]--and this is my question from before, how do they do so well WITHOUT the things you mention[natural resources,etc.??ty


Japan and Germany are both export reliant countries. As long as they export goods, they prosper. Both make high tech and luxury equipment, which is why their economies do so well.

For example, prior to WWI, Germany was a leading exporter. What the British did was they blockaded Germany during WWI to prevent any natural resources going to Germany and prevent any exports going out, therefore the German economy collapse.

Its the same with Japan, Japan needs to export goods for its economy to do well.
as opposed to the US having a 'self-reliant' economy'??well, why are these 2 countries doing better than others that are roughly equal in size and resources???
Back to Top
TheGreatSimba View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 22-Nov-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
  Quote TheGreatSimba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Nov-2010 at 14:21
Originally posted by BIG D

as opposed to the US having a 'self-reliant' economy'??


The United States is both a producer of natural resources and a producer of manufactured and high tech goods.

Originally posted by BIG D


well, why are these 2 countries doing better than others that are roughly equal in size and resources???


Better management, less corruption, better infrastructure, more educated public, stability, etc... there are mny factors and this is in fact a very important and interesting question which many people have and are currently discussing.

Why is it that, for example, Vietnam is poor, while South Korea is rich? Its an interesting question really.
I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Nov-2010 at 09:25
TGS wrote;
"Why is it that, for example, Vietnam is poor, while South Korea is rich? Its an interesting question really."

Yes it is a really interesting question! And, I suppose the only real answer is the fact that S. Korea was occupied and restored by the USA as an allied nation! Thus American aid was passed to its allies in more ways than military aid, developement grants or loans became available, and the nations government held a pro-American stance!

One can only compare the situation in Vietnam after America retreated from it! Aid was eliminated, the Viet rulers were violently anti-Amercian and Pro Soviet or Chinese, and pro-Communist, anti-Capitalist, etc.!

Surely that is the most easily accepted explanation?

Regards,
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
TheGreatSimba View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 22-Nov-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
  Quote TheGreatSimba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Nov-2010 at 10:05
Originally posted by opuslola

TGS wrote;
"Why is it that, for example, Vietnam is poor, while South Korea is rich? Its an interesting question really."

Yes it is a really interesting question! And, I suppose the only real answer is the fact that S. Korea was occupied and restored by the USA as an allied nation! Thus American aid was passed to its allies in more ways than military aid, developement grants or loans became available, and the nations government held a pro-American stance!

One can only compare the situation in Vietnam after America retreated from it! Aid was eliminated, the Viet rulers were violently anti-Amercian and Pro Soviet or Chinese, and pro-Communist, anti-Capitalist, etc.!

Surely that is the most easily accepted explanation?

Regards,


Actually:

South Korea was the poorest country in the world in the and a dictatorship after the end of the Korean War.

During the 1960's the South Korean government made a decision to force its companies to focus on high tech manufacturing and exporting, therefore forcing its companies to compete on international markets. It paid off.

The most significant factor in rapid industrialization was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s. This strategy was particularly well suited to that time because of South Korea's poor natural resource endowment, low savings rate, and tiny domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government initiatives played an important role in this process. The inflow of foreign capital was greatly encouraged to supplement the shortage of domestic savings. These efforts enabled South Korea to achieve rapid growth in exports and subsequent increases in income.


The credit goes to the Koreans themselves.




Edited by TheGreatSimba - 04-Nov-2010 at 10:06
I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time.
Back to Top
Mosquito View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
  Quote Mosquito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Nov-2010 at 10:48
One of the reasons why Germany is so big economy is that Americans likes to buy German goods, especially cars. In the technology France is more advanced than Germany ;)
"I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Back to Top
shadowshine View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 10-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9
  Quote shadowshine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2010 at 21:21
Originally posted by opuslola



Of course being blessed with a nation of abundant natural resources, as well as a religiously inspired work ethic, helped also!


Who are you referring to, here? The settlers or the founders? The founders were secularists, first and foremost. 

Maybe you're talking about the ideals that were ultimately adopted later.


Oops. Looks like I've potentially started one of those 'debates' I told myself I wouldn't get mixed up in. Embarrassed


Edited by shadowshine - 10-Nov-2010 at 21:31
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Nov-2010 at 23:07
Shadowshine! Wow what an entrance!

No sir and yes sir, what I was referring to can be found on this site as well as others;

http://www.coe.uga.edu/~rhill/workethic/hist.htm

From the above site;

"With the Reformation, a period of religious and political upheaval in western Europe during the sixteenth century, came a new perspective on work. Two key religious leaders who influenced the development of western culture during this period were Martin Luther and John Calvin. Luther was an Augustinian friar who became discontent with the Catholic church and was a leader within the Protestant movement. He believed that people could serve God through their work, that the professions were useful, that work was the universal base of society and the cause of differing social classes, and that a person should work diligently in their own occupation and should not try to change from the profession to which he was born. To do so would be to go against God's laws since God assigned each person to his own place in the social hierarchy (Lipset, 1990; Tilgher, 1930).

The major point at which Luther differed from the medieval concept of work was regarding the superiority of one form of work over another. Luther regarded the monastic and contemplative life, held up as the ideal during the middle ages, as an egotistic and unaffectionate exercise on the part of the monks, and he accused them of evading their duty to their neighbors (Tilgher, 1930). For Luther, a person's vocation was equated as his calling, but all calling's were of equal spiritual dignity. This tenant was significant because it affirmed manual labor.

Luther still did not pave the way for a profit-oriented economic system because he disapproved of commerce as an occupation (Lipset, 1990; Tilgher, 1930). From his perspective, commerce did not involve any real work. Luther also believed that each person should earn an income which would meet his basic needs, but to accumulate or horde wealth was sinful.

According to Weber (1904, 1905), it was John Calvin who introduced the theological doctrines which combined with those of Martin Luther to form a significant new attitude toward work. Calvin was a French theologian whose concept of predestination was revolutionary. Central to Calvinist belief was the Elect, those persons chosen by God to inherit eternal life. All other people were damned and nothing could change that since God was unchanging. While it was impossible to know for certain whether a person was one of the Elect, one could have a sense of it based on his own personal encounters with God. Outwardly the only evidence was in the person's daily life and deeds, and success in one's worldly endeavors was a sign of possible inclusion as one of the Elect. A person who was indifferent and displayed idleness was most certainly one of the damned, but a person who was active, austere, and hard-working gave evidence to himself and to others that he was one of God's chosen ones (Tilgher, 1930).

Calvin taught that all men must work, even the rich, because to work was the will of God. It was the duty of men to serve as God's instruments here on earth, to reshape the world in the fashion of the Kingdom of God, and to become a part of the continuing process of His creation (Braude, 1975). Men were not to lust after wealth, possessions, or easy living, but were to reinvest the profits of their labor into financing further ventures. Earnings were thus to be reinvested over and over again, ad infinitum, or to the end of time (Lipset, 1990). Using profits to help others rise from a lessor level of subsistence violated God's will since persons could only demonstrate that they were among the Elect through their own labor (Lipset, 1990).

Selection of an occupation and pursuing it to achieve the greatest profit possible was considered by Calvinists to be a religious duty. Not only condoning, but encouraging the pursuit of unlimited profit was a radical departure from the Christian beliefs of the middle ages. In addition, unlike Luther, Calvin considered it appropriate to seek an occupation which would provide the greatest earnings possible. If that meant abandoning the family trade or profession, the change was not only allowed, but it was considered to be one's religious duty (Tilgher, 1930).

The norms regarding work which developed out of the Protestant Reformation, based on the combined theological teachings of Luther and Calvin, encouraged work in a chosen occupation with an attitude of service to God, viewed work as a calling and avoided placing greater spiritual dignity on one job than another, approved of working diligently to achieve maximum profits, required reinvestment of profits back into one's business, allowed a person to change from the craft or profession of his father, and associated success in one's work with the likelihood of being one of God's Elect."

So I hope you now understand what I meant?

Regards,



Edited by opuslola - 10-Nov-2010 at 23:08
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
shadowshine View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 10-Nov-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9
  Quote shadowshine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Nov-2010 at 00:08
Originally posted by opuslola

Shadowshine! Wow what an entrance!

No sir and yes sir, what I was referring to can be found on this site as well as others;

http://www.coe.uga.edu/~rhill/workethic/hist.htm

From the above site;

"With the Reformation, a period of religious and political upheaval in western Europe during the sixteenth century, came a new perspective on work. Two key religious leaders who influenced the development of western culture during this period were Martin Luther and John Calvin. Luther was an Augustinian friar who became discontent with the Catholic church and was a leader within the Protestant movement. He believed that people could serve God through their work, that the professions were useful, that work was the universal base of society and the cause of differing social classes, and that a person should work diligently in their own occupation and should not try to change from the profession to which he was born. To do so would be to go against God's laws since God assigned each person to his own place in the social hierarchy (Lipset, 1990; Tilgher, 1930).

The major point at which Luther differed from the medieval concept of work was regarding the superiority of one form of work over another. Luther regarded the monastic and contemplative life, held up as the ideal during the middle ages, as an egotistic and unaffectionate exercise on the part of the monks, and he accused them of evading their duty to their neighbors (Tilgher, 1930). For Luther, a person's vocation was equated as his calling, but all calling's were of equal spiritual dignity. This tenant was significant because it affirmed manual labor.

Luther still did not pave the way for a profit-oriented economic system because he disapproved of commerce as an occupation (Lipset, 1990; Tilgher, 1930). From his perspective, commerce did not involve any real work. Luther also believed that each person should earn an income which would meet his basic needs, but to accumulate or horde wealth was sinful.

According to Weber (1904, 1905), it was John Calvin who introduced the theological doctrines which combined with those of Martin Luther to form a significant new attitude toward work. Calvin was a French theologian whose concept of predestination was revolutionary. Central to Calvinist belief was the Elect, those persons chosen by God to inherit eternal life. All other people were damned and nothing could change that since God was unchanging. While it was impossible to know for certain whether a person was one of the Elect, one could have a sense of it based on his own personal encounters with God. Outwardly the only evidence was in the person's daily life and deeds, and success in one's worldly endeavors was a sign of possible inclusion as one of the Elect. A person who was indifferent and displayed idleness was most certainly one of the damned, but a person who was active, austere, and hard-working gave evidence to himself and to others that he was one of God's chosen ones (Tilgher, 1930).

Calvin taught that all men must work, even the rich, because to work was the will of God. It was the duty of men to serve as God's instruments here on earth, to reshape the world in the fashion of the Kingdom of God, and to become a part of the continuing process of His creation (Braude, 1975). Men were not to lust after wealth, possessions, or easy living, but were to reinvest the profits of their labor into financing further ventures. Earnings were thus to be reinvested over and over again, ad infinitum, or to the end of time (Lipset, 1990). Using profits to help others rise from a lessor level of subsistence violated God's will since persons could only demonstrate that they were among the Elect through their own labor (Lipset, 1990).

Selection of an occupation and pursuing it to achieve the greatest profit possible was considered by Calvinists to be a religious duty. Not only condoning, but encouraging the pursuit of unlimited profit was a radical departure from the Christian beliefs of the middle ages. In addition, unlike Luther, Calvin considered it appropriate to seek an occupation which would provide the greatest earnings possible. If that meant abandoning the family trade or profession, the change was not only allowed, but it was considered to be one's religious duty (Tilgher, 1930).

The norms regarding work which developed out of the Protestant Reformation, based on the combined theological teachings of Luther and Calvin, encouraged work in a chosen occupation with an attitude of service to God, viewed work as a calling and avoided placing greater spiritual dignity on one job than another, approved of working diligently to achieve maximum profits, required reinvestment of profits back into one's business, allowed a person to change from the craft or profession of his father, and associated success in one's work with the likelihood of being one of God's Elect."

So I hope you now understand what I meant?

Regards,


Yes, I see what you were referring to, now. Thanks for the references. Thumbs Up 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.