[arvinjoar]

When is enough enough? No-one gets to say. For better or for worse, a race to the bottom is a coordination problem where the incentive is always to be the defecting party. This means that however well-intentioned you are, global capitalism marches on without you, your choice is to jump on the bandwagon or become irrelevant. Politics doesn't matter much, it can only stall the inevitable, usually at great cost.

[TheAdamAndChe]

> When is enough enough? No-one gets to say.

Yet we do get to say. A big cause of the political instability in the US is due to increasing inequality and a declining quality of life for much of the country. If such economic forces cause protectionist legislation to be passed, isn't that the people getting a say?

Also, the idea that you must jump on the global capitalist bandwagon to remain relevant is odd to me. Is being an economic powerhouse the only factor in a country's relevance?

[justin_vanw]

What political instability in the US? Please define what you mean by instability, the US has been the most stable national government since it was founded, with a big exception of the Civil War of course. Even then, compare it to the governments of any continental European or Asian or African nation that isn't part of the British Commonwealth, and we have had a stable democracy while basically every single non-commonwealth government has gone through collapse, been reformed, and collapsed again in the meantime.

I mean it's easy to say 'inequality' as some kind of Marxist trump card that you think automatically ends all possible debate, but meanwhile things in the US are fine. Fine != Perfect, of course, but it is yet to be demonstrated that you can have a socialist/market capitalist welfare state that functions outside of the Nordic countries. Every other attempt at it has been a complete disaster.