Posted on 10/01/2006 3:30:13 AM PDT by NapkinUser
And if I were to guess, I would venture to suggest you probably got an F in Economics 101 as well as a D- in English comprehension?
READ THE FREAKIN ARTICLE again and try and absorb what the author is trying to convey as opposed to being "closed-minded" simply because of who he is.
If this was written by Clintoon, it would still resonate as long as the figures and facts are acurate--which IMHO, THEY ARE!!!!
Modern humans may have driven Neanderthals to extinction 30,000 years ago because Homo sapiens unlocked the secrets of free trade, say a group of US and Dutch economists. The theory could shed new light on the mysterious and sudden demise of the Neanderthals after over 260,000 years of healthy survival.
Anthropologists have considered a wide range of factors which may explain Neanderthal extinction, including biological, environmental and cultural causes. For example, one major study concluded that Neanderthals were less able to deal with plunging temperatures during the last glacial period.
Another possibility is that they were less able hunters as a result of poorer mental abilities, says Eric Delson, an anthropologist at Lehman College, City University of New York, US. But he adds that most theories are reliant on guesswork. Exactly how humans ousted Neanderthals remains a puzzle. “They were successful for such a long time,” he points out.
Jason Shogren, an economist at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, US, says part of the answer may lie in humans’ superior trading habits. Trading would have allowed the division of labour, freeing up skilled individuals, such as hunters, to focus on the tasks they are best at. Others, perhaps making tools or clothes or gathering food, would give the hunters resources in return for meat.
Largely unorganised
The idea that specialisation leads to greater success was first used in the 18th century to explain why some nations were wealthier than others. But this is the first time it has been applied to the Neanderthal extinction puzzle, says Shogren.
He cites archaeological evidence that suggests that humans, who joined Neanderthals in Europe about 40,000 years ago, specialised and traded both within and between regions. The evidence includes complex living quarters with different sections partitioned for different functions. Neanderthals, in contrast, lived in “largely unorganised” living spaces.
There is also evidence that the early humans, mainly one population called the Gravettians, imported materials. Ivory, stones, fossils, seashells and crafted tools were found dispersed through many regions. This greater pool of resources led to increased innovation, says Shogren.
Simulated circumstances
Shogren tested his theory with simulations of population growth. He even gave the Neanderthals, who were larger than Homo sapiens, a head start by assuming they were better hunters and individually brought home more meat - which may or may not be true.
But because humans were allowed to trade, in two of three similar simulations, they overcame this initial handicap and ousted the Neanderthals within 7000 years. In the third simulation, the two ended up co-existing.
“It’s an intriguing and novel idea,” says Delson. “But it requires stronger support.” He points out that the Gravettians in particular only emerged 28,000 years ago, while the last of the Neanderthals died about 29,000 years ago.
So the Gravettians could not have had very much influence in the extinction of the Neanderthals, he argues. “He also assumes that all they ate was meat, which of course is not true,” he adds.
The study will be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, co-authored by Erwin Bulte of Tilburg University in the Netherlands and Richard Horan at Michigan State University in East Lansing, US.
I'm looking at our GDP and low bond yields. I don't see how we're losing.
I think W's push for free trade is one of the few things he gets right in economics.
Carolyn
You forgot the Foreign investment graph back at your office... Add that to the equation, and if you can, find out who exactly is buying those bonds(foreign or domestic purchasers) a two bar graph should suffice... Then come back and present it to us.
For instance, I work with some manufacturers. Do you know that they have to account to the EPA for every fluorescent light bulb, ballast, and bottle of Wite Out (maybe obsolete by now, but you get the drift - any "toxic" chemical, no matter how much they use)/
Do you know how NAFTA works (the central letters FT standing for "Free Trade", amusingly enough)? If you product a product here in the US, and ship it to Mexico, it is untaxed under NAFTA. If you buy the product from China and ship it directly to Mexico, you have to pay taxes on it. If you buy it from China and perform a value add process on it (assemble it into something else or modify it) then there are no taxes on it. Got all that?
Of course, you have to account to the government for this once a quarter, and they'll fine you if you're wrong. They sometimes audit for this, so then you've got government bureaucrats in your already over-worked accounting office taking up your accountants' time with this crap.
Want to hear my rant about SOX audits (Sarbanes-Oxley)? No? Come on, it's a good one. Oh, alright, I'll hold off.
What I'm getting at of course is that it's regulations that are killing our manufacturing, not some silly tax policy that our competitors have. We're doing just fine at killing it ourselves, thank you very much.
screw free trade! how about just one time....fair trade!
free trade such as nafta/cafta/all first trade partners with the US have been nothing but shams....each time the agreements although good in design have worked adversely against the US!
And when the US protests at the most "impartial fair & balanced" body at the hague...it always loses to the eu or some 3rd world nation....
Free trade should be just that free trade...but it also must be fair trade!!!!
well that was a short list they provided you!
This is just a swipe at the Administration by a liberal whiner. I don't see any mention of Jimmuh Carter who single handedly set the US manufacturing economy into the biggest tailspin in US History.
SO, I CALL BS!
OK, I'll go to his defense.
Weapons themselves may not be imported, but quite a few electronic and sensor components already are. In many cases because they are simply not produced in this country.
DoD has no problem offshoring software development to India, even for weapons systems.
Even some of our military grade steel has to be imported because no-one here makes it anymore.
High-tech - buggy whip industry of today. We all will be managers and entrepreneurs.
I hope that was sarcasm.
It has been happening for decades.
Pat fails to realize that the post WW2 golden age of mfg in the US happened because our mfg infrastructure was untouched by the war and that infrastructure was destroyed elsewhere.
Manufacturing is not the only way to "add value". In fact, manufacturing, as a way to add value, has, is, and will continue to diminish.
"a nation that manufactures nothing IS nothing"
Well said. It would make a fine tagline, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.