Here are some exchanges btwn myself and Space re his Friday, May 20, 2011 blog article entitled "你用膳 我付鈔?"
(http://mindnecessity.blogspot.com/2011/05/us14300000000000000-hk10440000000000000.html)
Haricot 微豆 said...
>> .... 美國是要在國內國外的巨額花費,去保衛民主,保持民主,保留民主,今天美國負了一萬四千三百萬億元的國債,可見民主是一個花費金錢的主義,民主選票是由要用鬪派得錢多,爭回來換回來買回來的....
There is no doubt the US economy is in bad shape and one can come up with many reasons, but I do not believe保衛民主,保持民主,保留民主are the key ones. A country's foreign policy involves more than fighting for ideology. Even during the height of the Cold War, when the US and its allies were fighting against communism, politicians knew they were fighting to preserve not just western style democracy but also control of the world's economy, resources and power. In that sense, it is similar to what China is doing now!!!
Haricot 微豆 said...
>> .... 全世界最大的民主國家 = 全世界最高的負債國家
Are you generalizing then that 民主 is equated with 負債 (i.e. not a good thing)?
I would submit that the United States' political system and its national/foreign debts cannot and should not be linked/represented by a one-one, cause-result type of simple equation.
In terms of population, I believe India is the largest democracy in the world.
Haricot 微豆 said...
>> ... 但是中國卻是美國國債的最大持有者(約23%),中國人民暫時沒有享受到美式民主,而美國也沒有償還的意願,即是:“你用膳 我付鈔?”
When China agreed to become the "lender", there was no stipulations as to how the US should or should not spend the borrowed money. So, I do not understand your logic: 中國人民暫時沒有享受到美式民主 ... “你用膳 我付鈔?”
It would have been very different if you had lent money to Uncle Sam, and had stipulated that 中國人民要享受到美式民主 in return !!!
the inner space said...
哈哈哈 Hari 兄:我只是說用錢去爭回來換回來買回來的民主不是真的民主。若你間接承認了美國的民主是用錢爭回來換回來買回來,哈哈哈哈哈哈!我也無話可說了!
the inner space said...
哈哈哈哈 Hari 兄:
全世界最大的民主國家 = 全世界最高的負債國家
我是由英文翻譯出來的 Highest democratic country = highest debt country
讓我改正翻譯:
全世界最高度民主的國家 = 全世界最高負債的國家
the inner space said...
哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈!hari 兄:“你用膳 我付鈔?”是中國人常講的話,意思不用細表矣。
而我寫:
中國卻是美國國債的最大持有者(約23%),中國人民暫時沒有享受到美式民主,而美國也沒有償還的意願,即是:“你用膳 我付鈔?”
最尾尾是個問號?
我是想不出道理來呢,遂向各方好友網友發問,祈望若有所悟,不嫌棄告訴我個中緣因。
Haricot 微豆 said...
Finally, I am not an economist and will let experts in that field to explain the root causes of the reported US$14,300,000,000,000,000 debt.
Just like the restructuring of a corporation that is close to bankruptcy, the share-holders, the lenders and the borrower will all have to come up with acceptable financial measures, as well as new terms and conditions.
I believe it is irrelevant to refer to the past lend-borrow transaction as 你用膳 我付鈔?because there were no stipulations on how the money should be spent.
However, it may be fair to use the 你用膳 我付鈔?challenge now as part of the pre-conditions for restructuring the debts.
But then, the US is not exactly like Greece !!
the inner space said...
哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈! Hari 兄:
我在伸延閱覽做的其中一個連結:美國國債
有以下的資料:
財政年度末。美國國債十億美元
1950 。。。。257.4
1960 。。。。290.2
1970 。。。。389.2
1980 。。。。930.2
1990 。。。。3,233
2000 。。。。5,674
2005 。。。。7,933
2007 。。。。9,008
2008 。。。。10,024.7
2009 。。。。11,910
2010 。。。。13,562
可供閣下參考,看出有甚麽端倪!
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
依我記憶,
space時常恐懼的是"民主"會帶來議員為了討好選民而強迫政府派糖,
因而產生免費午餐的思想,
所以導致"最大民主國家就是負債最多"的國家的說話。
人人不少人所關心的不是什麼政治,
而是自己可以得到幾多利益,
而民主就很容易變成謀取己利的手段了。
我當然不同意這種想法,
民主政體是現今較合法和公平的政治體制,
但space所擔心的亦有道理,
因為人總是自私的,
至少大部份擔心的是由自身利益開始,
因此民主當中的"人權利益"很容易就會被扭曲和利用,
從而出現space所說的結果了,
當然一個國家的經濟不單會因為一個因數而成,
但space這些想法亦不算是全錯的!
新鮮人:
No political system is 100% perfect !!!
One system might be better for a particular country at any given time and space, while the same system could be a bad fit for another country, or for the same country unde another set of conditions.
I think one needs to, among other things:
- assess the past, present and future conditions of the country/place (e.g. culture, traditions, religions, beliefs, principles, geopolitical realities, etc);
- assess the present and anticipate the future needs, values, skills, and capacity of the leaders and citizens;
- weigh objectively all the pros and cons of each option in the short- and long-term;
- assess and manage the risks associated with each option, including risk mitigation measures e.g. check-and-balance of power and authourity to deal with possible structural, process and/or people problems;
- allow the political process to be flexible enough to deal with any emerging time, place, and people-specific governance issues (e.g. Quebec separatism in Canada)
So, as I said: There is no perfect political system. Water is good for you. But too much of it is called drowning.
但係美國搞到今日經濟咁差,
仲要別人幫手揹飛就好唔啱囉,
佢嘅system係要別人俾錢架,
唔公平囉!
新鮮人: 美國經濟、政治前途未卜,現任民主黨總統奥巴馬希望連任,但共和黨步步追擊,大選誰勝誰敗,之後外交政策何去何從,对世界經濟影響轉好轉壞,暫難定斷。
Post a Comment