Not all corporations are bad

 I do not have the opinion that all corporations are bad. Too large of corporations and networking have concentrated wealth and power. I would like to downsize corporate size and stimulate competition perhaps with more corporations.

Social organizations tend to develop characteristics at scale that brings them toward similar behaviors and personnel in my opinion. They exist and prosper because they have concentrated power and are overly determinative on national economics and political goals.

I have written elsewhere about new forms of government organization that would reform capitalism for the modern era so it functions well with democracy in a directed environmental economic paradigm. I have dismissed socialism and communism as other dysfunction social organizations that inhibit actualizing intelligence, innovation and free enterprise.

Governments and nations aren't useless though the USA supported people first and the F.S.U. the state first

 A reductio ad absurdam (arguing for the opposite to show enfilade the remainder) would indicate that all right-minded citizens should revolt against the state- any state, and destroy it so far as possible as the most evil oppressor of humankind. There should be a perpetual revolution against social organizations that have the potential to become states. Individuals should war ceaselessly and never give up, fighting against the slings and arrows of statism to their last breath. In every hollow and every nook and cranny let anarchy reign.

States are primarily at the start shared culture and value. The Soviet Union failed because it killed off Lenin with poison most likely causing him to have three strokes and out so he could kill off about all of the original communist revolutionaries in keeping up with contemporary social Darwinism theory. Tremendous subsequent purges and mediocre bureaucratic led industrialization coupled with a repressive state authoritarianism helped keep the multicultural society together than eventual happily broke apart without the governor of tyranny. Atheists and Muslims tend to be an antipathetic cultural mix.

The United States had a common culture to start with and repressed minorities outside of the political system although liberating black slaves as soon as it became practical. Different cultures have tended to war upon each other. As the United States brought in more people they tended to merge into a common national culture- today made more challenging because of the technological advances that allow people to keep in touch with their home cultures. In a sense immigration into the United States has stopped, although people keep arriving, because they can talk to home on a cell phone or have live internet face-to-face chat.

The United States had the blessing of developing in a sparsely populated continent with vast natural resources while the Soviet Union developed in a more modern era closer to nations that would war on it because of its political system. China was a problem to the east- forever eyeballing the vast underpopulated regions of Siberia, and of course the Nazis and Germany to the west were always trying to bite off the Ukraine or take the entire country altogether.

In a sense virtually all of the free world of capitalism were locked in a planetary ideological cold and hot war against the Soviet Union. The decline of the F.S.U. and victory of Wall Street is res judicata, stare decisis and all that. The west and capitalism out-produced the Soviet Union and in time made better weapons with deficit spending.

It is somewhat difficult to say though that the Soviet Union ‘lost’ if its people actually were inclined to improve their standard of living with a move toward free market economics. After the death of the Dictator Joseph Stalin the aborted socialist experiment killed by Stalin was on a clock ticking down to the end of its existence in my opinion. It wasn’t an easy course yet one that the hearts and minds of the people themselves probably moved toward.

Why and when America stopped being great

 President Ronald Reagan was the creator of the phrase ‘making America great again’. With the end of the Vietnam War a strong recession struck the U.S.A., unemployment was high and inflation rampant. Iran had seized the U.S. embassy in Teheran and held the Americans there as hostages. The price of oil was very high per barrel- the Carter administration had created a synthetic fuels pilot program at parachute Colorado that wasn’t yet productive; making America great again without debt and with the economy going well was an appealing idea that the great communicator sold rather easily.

President Trump exploited the Reagan slogan that few remembered to contrast himself with vast left-leaning changes the Obama administration brought, or at least perceived changes. Many of those changes were offensive to naturally conservative American blue-collar workers yet were fine with Democrats. So the phrase was naturally contentious to start.

It was a simple reply to the changes brought about by prior administrations that had exported U.S. manufacturing to China, permitted too lax of border security to prevent millions of illegal migrants to enter the nation, allowed legalization of dope in some states, created a number of ‘sanctuary from U.S. immigration law’ cities, piled up trillions and trillions of dollars of U.S. public debt, ended marriage as strictly heterosexual etc. The United States had allowed the 9–11 disaster to happen, had a perennial public debt, trashed its ecosphere and destroyed its wilderness areas generally, declined in its comparative international standing in education achievement by students. It had great military expenses and protracted foreign wars. In short there were many challenges that President Trump thought he could correct.

The total 90 pound weakling defense and restoration of wilderness- especially in Alaska, that Mr. Trump proved to be in regard to environmental protection made a few people disappointed with his ability to ‘make America great again’ On some other points he did work to return to a stronger America with a dose of nationalism. His lack of a savoir fare regarding education, philosophy, science and so forth were other disappointments with the Trump administration. Yet his one redeeming factor was making SCOTUS somewhat conservative again. It is too bad he did not make the Bush II court appointments.

Speculating about when a global Republic or Evil Empire might occur

 Maybe a galactic republic or alternatively, an evil empire, if it occurs someday will happen instantly through quantum computing shortcutting space-time barriers of three-dimensions to place tax collectors and bureaucrats at all-possible worldlines of locations with valuable materials within the galactic habitation zone.

Hypothetically a galactic republic or alternatively, evil empire may have formed retroactively at some time in the distant past as the timeline of the present is happening within the four-dimensional space-time Universe and I suppose that theoretically if one disassociated 3-d mass from the subluminal entanglements of the Higgs field and could send the information via quantum computer mapping to a state of 2-dimensioal massless Higgs field existence then one might relocate the data when it is once more downloaded into quantum entanglement and three dimensions of mass at a place in the past.

On Earth the present humans may destroy their ecosphere and themselves before they can destroy Mars or other planets very well as they plunder the natural resources available so the best hope may lie in the past or perhaps distant future if survivors find a way to detour around the global economic inertia of the present. Maybe there is a Tattler tabloid that has better information on the topic.

Globalization is a potential ghost ship fire

 Globalization is the easy, undisciplined way to go with economics. Physical facts tend to supplant any kind of philosophical reasoning in economics.

There are great dangers in the global approach to economics with the risk of collapsing national sovereignties and properties of human rights. With planetary human overpopulation seeking to consume natural resources like a plague of locusts and some few environmentalists seeking to defend dwindling remnants, the 18th century free trade capitalist point of view of Adam Smith dominates reinforcing present maladaptive economic habits.

Globalization reminds me of that ramshackle converted warehouse firetrap in Oakland California (the Ghost ship fire) that caught fire and killed dozens of people inside. It was a great somewhat unplanned funhouse to be in until the lack of reasonable planning and the risks inherent in constructing such a ramshackle evolution caught flame. A nation should have secure borders and disciplined ecological economic planning to transform classical economics to ecological economics with minimal disruption to individuals and organizations on the way.

What exists instead of rational national ecological economic reform and planning is loose borders, cheap illegal immigration to replace labor supply and a quest for $15 minimum wage without much thought about the effects of that. It probably would send the remainder of any national manufacturing jobs overseas as far as possible because for each U.S. worker at $15 one could hire 7 foreign workers abroad at $2 hourly- and perhaps a couple besides with the extra costs of social security, unemployment etc. That global relocation of manufacturing and cheap labor pursuit is classical liberal economics of course, yet it is on a scale that can destroy nations as well as increase profit margins of global plutocrats trickling down the lowest common wage denominator and greatest planetary environmental cost possible.

Inventions of technology that are in some ways too great for the natural resources of the world to contain or host have shrunk those natural boundaries and limits to the size of vestigial abstractions safely ignored. Communists and the corporate plutocrat class and managers can simply consider abstract velocity of money, material, labor costs and personnel factors without regard to the externality of the natural ecosphere. Until the fall of mankind.

Basic elements of a modern nation-state

 This is an interesting question with many ways to expand it, and I won’t go far into that. I liked reading Toynbee’s ‘A Study of History’ with the S/R or challenge-response paradigm concerning the development of civilization and the stage it goes through (about four) as part of a cycle of civilization. There are many other theories though- too many to sort through the best for simple answers for a course question unless one knows what they are looking for.

Toynbee believed (among other ideas) that a creative minority stimulates the existence and culture of a state and the uncreative majority follows those values. If the creative minority of founders fades away the uncreative majority’s ideas and culture may evolve obsolescence.

The main point of a modern state seems to be that of a common culture promoted by the state. The U.S. government in the past few decades seems have put some effort into dissolving that common culture in preference for multiculturalism- and that seems apropos of the Universal phase of a civilization aka globalism.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory/chapter/introduction-to-nation-states/

One may of course discount that point about culture and place the being of a modern state in institutions, financial structures and laws. Developing nations famously tend to lack adequate non-governmental institutions or to have weak ones. Consider the value of Universal free public education to the intellectual capital of a modern nation-state and the perpetuating poverty of nations with weak educational institutions.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2017/07/26/why-developing-countries-get-stuck-with-weak-institutions-and-how-foreign-actors-can-help/

Some may believe that the world culture is a modern nation-state that has transcended national boundaries. The heterodox global financial structure might support that thesis.

The U.S.A. as a superpower might not be in decline yet morality may be

 Probably the U.S.A. isn’t in decline, except in the sense that the entire world is in environmental decline because of overuse of resources and a population of 8 billion that want a higher standard of living preponderantly that requires more use of resources.

One could argue that the nation is in moral decline, yet if the majority are actually immoral there aren’t enough people to convince them, as they might believe it requires a majority vote.

In my opinion the Augustinian paradigm of original sin and complete human depravity of nature may be that humans have no good about them except as goodness is a reflection of God. A decline in morality would then coincide with a decline of faith and quantitative eclipse of spirit

Science and technology can increase well being yet human character may use it badly to harm people and the ecosphere.

The U.S.A. isn't a business partner

 I would add to the pile of comments that the U.S. (a nation) isn’t a partner of anything. The U.S. government has some contracts with foreign entities and those are about as good as those of any other nation that pays off its contracts. The first U.S. president- George Washington, warned in his farewell address about making any permanent foreign alliances. Staying out of those permanent foreign agreements is a useful way to remain nationally sovereign and free. If the U.S.A. cannot make good ecological economic policy domestically for example, it cannot do so with high-sounding international agreements that pass the buck in some respects beyond the borders, sound grand and accomplish little that isn’t reversible by another administration.

Large U.S. corporations are a tip of the iceberg of global corporations that are multinational and owned by the 1% on the planet. When they are listed publicly on stock exchanges even if they are based in the U.S.A. about anyone might own them.

Governments including that of the U.S.A. tend not to be good partners- bureaucrats aren’t as good at business as the private sector. It is a terrible idea in some ways to even consider the U.S. government as having foreign ‘partners’ influencing or levering its sovereignty. That would be some sort of crass corporatism more suitable for communist China that is a big brother so far as it can be in anyone’s business, if I understand that development correctly, and I may not.

Adapting economics to prevent Covid 19 virus mutations would be useful

As I understand it, virus mutations occur more with a greater pool of infected people. Therefore the newer and possibly more lethal variants are of great concern since it takes a year or more to develop a resistant vaccine. Increasing the rate of spread of the virus can promote the opportunity for viral mutations to occur.

Economics is a different topic. Of course its necessary to develop an economics program that can function in a viral contaminated social environment until the virus is nearly entirely eradicated. Loosening restrictions early could be compared to taking a cast off a broken leg too early even though one wants to go jogging. Political leadership that isn’t capable of tailoring an economy to work with virus out there demonstrates the lack of creative thought in politics i.m.o. One cannot morally just say the heck with those that will die from Covid and proceed recklessly without moving into a fascist mode, and there are of course some that are happy with that. In the movie 1900 Mussolini drives over a guy injured in the road and keeps on going untroubled. I suggested adapting Halloween masks for full face coverings so people could work and travel more safely in a contaminated environment. When I was an Army reservist I learned the method of firing a rifle while wearing a chemical mask accurately- it requires some adaptation over normal procedures. Adapting economic procedures too-change is difficult for organizations and establishments that are indignant about it. The results of failing to do so can be fatal for some.

 Dr. Fauci at least seems to believe that wearing masks is a good idea. As states loosen restrictions and variants spread, Fauci warns that the U.S. could be headed for yet another virus spike.

What the USA today would be like if the Berlin Wall had fallen in the other direction

 Great question that would require an alternative history novel to explore meaningfully.

The reason for a collapse of the west and the U.S.A. would have been financial, for that is the main point people bring out about the value of democracy these days. The economy was in something of a shambles after the Vietnam War yet it wasn’t terminally dire. If Hinkley had killed Ronald Reagan instead of wounding him maybe the supply side massive tax cuts and deficit spending wouldn’t have happened and the economy would have deflated.

A George Bush I administration wouldn’t have had Reagan’s ideas about getting rid of nuclear weapons at all- that idea and the ‘tear down this wall’ speech were entirely Ronald’s. Maybe the F.S.U. would have invented a cure for cancer and Yuri Andropov would have remained leader of the C.P.S.U. and not have died of lung cancer before mentoring the soft-on-capitalism Gorbachev.

With Andropov at the help of the Soviet Union during the critical 1980s Soviets might have invented a commie red shave cream that was the best stuff ever made for cold weather shaves heating right out of the can on exposure to air and the prestige of the stuff coupled with the decline of western economics would have brought more investors in the Soviet Union from Wall Street traders looking for a deal.

Gorbachev as a pupil of Andropov might have developed a theory about tolerating capitalist investment in the Soviet economy and given bargains to a flock of investors defecting with their money to build their prompting a run on the dollar and rise of the ruble.

The United States then would have withdrawn its military from western Europe and given them jobs making the U.S. capitol secure digging a moat around it to prevent looters and rioters from taking all of the good furniture during the final phase of decline when apartments with a view of Central Park in New York went for a fraction of the cost of new dachas in Venezuela and Siberia.

Today, if the wall had fallen the other direction., China would be expanding with Gorbachev’s mixed economy and CEOs and the U.S. government would be developing corporatism globally to build a brave new world order with benevolent plutocrats from the west and the former communist party leadership of the F.S.U. finding ways to improve the U.S. National Basketball Association and unfairly try to harm the L.A. Lakers chances of repeating as N.B.A. champions.