The F word: Philanthro-Feudalisim is the future! By Laura Flanders 3/9/11
I read a blog post written by Laura Flanders that is comparing China to the United States.
A comparison on China’s five-year plan focuses on lowering inequality, investing in railroads, highways, hospitals and expanding domestic demand through income subsidies. The writer stated that “those old works Chinese just don’t seem to get it, that the modern way is the American way: deregulate, concentrate wealth in the top 1% and them make sure those at the top don’t pay taxes”. She also talks about how the rich will fund desperately-need things like cancer research, as long as the Institute is names after them. The writer ends the blog with stating that China has a lot to learn, and suggest “let’s give ‘em our thanks for still buying our bonds – and taking all those jobs off our hands”. She also suggests that names matter. “The poor aren’t eating so much these days in the US, but don’t call them peasants. They don’t like that. Here we call them consumers”.
What I got from this blog post was that China wants a new economic plan and the writer compares the United States economy to China. She knocks China and the United states, and gives kudos at the same time. She was stating both positive and negative facts about both. The writer talks about how the United States basically has rich or poor economy and blames China for taking jobs away from the United States which I agree with. Either you are rich or poor in the United States; there is no longer a middle class group. Most products that we purchase are made in China. So we are basically helping fund the economy of China.
The writer gave good comparisons to support her argument. She stated facts and kept it informative and short to where she did not ramble, or get off topic. I found it to be a good read and wanted to share it.
No comments:
Post a Comment