Sen. Alexander today spoke an ugly truth.

[barbaraann]

He said, in talking about the declining number of foreign student visas, (rough paraphrase from memory here) that the US has 5% of the world's population but uses 15-25% of the world's resources and that we need more cream-of-the-crop foreign students to keep it that way. He spoke of wanting to keep our high standard of living.

Well, that's the underlying truth as to why we act the way we do internationally. Very few Democrats are willing to tell the American people that we need to lower our standard of living (which in my opinion could improve our quality of life if done right) to bring peace and justice to the world. Um, I can't think of any Dems who say this.

On edit--I should have said lower our consumption instead of our standard of living.

[DireStrike]

1. No politician will ever say we need to lower our standard of living.

At the most, they might suggest we should bring the rest of the world UP to our standard of living.

[IrateCitizen]

2. Yes, and they'll do it without saying...

... that it would take approximately FIVE planets to provide the natural resources necessary to accomplish this feat!

As it stands right now, we're using approximately 1.33 planets worth of resources. Not real smart, when you only have one planet....

[demnan]

3. Of course they won't say this

But actually for many people the standard of living is going down anyway.

You see all those condos going up in the suburbs? That's because people can't afford single family homes anymore. And the "single family" homes are now owned by multiples and by extended family relations. People are losing their one good paying job and taking on two or three poor paying ones.

[yurbud]

4. The GOP says this whenever a union makes a demand

"You make a lot more money than someone doing the same job in Bangladesh."

Other advanced nations do take steps to preserve their middle class' standard of living.

The democrats make some half hearted attempts at it, but the GOP thinks we have to even things out with Bangladesh as soon as possible.

[sandnsea]

5. Why we lose #3,528

No, we do not need to lower our standard of living. We need to change our standard of living and begin to incorporate sustainable energy, green building, clean transportation, etc. That also creates new industries, new jobs, and helps third world countries move into the 21st century with clean, sustainable environments as well. \

We have to offer the solutions if we're ever going to be a winning party again.

[Dora]

9. Amen! Woo-hoo!

Not "lower."

"Change..."

[brindis_desala]

6. a high rate of consumption does not= a higher standard of life

Because the country is underpopulated compared to most of the world Americans live in outlying communities far from work on land that require excessive amounts of energy to inhabit and supply. And that's before one talks about the advertiser driven "planned obsolescence", inefficiency and waste.

[MADem]

7. Whaddaya mean? We gots ta make the pie higher!!!!

Maybe if we actually encouraged and facilitated the education of our OWN young, if we fostered research into alternative and renewable energy resources, if we set national goals in these regards, we just might have a shot at not only KEEPING and even raising our standard of living, but exporting it to other countries as well.

The way things are going, though, it's "Everyone move in with Grandma, chip in your paltry part-time paychecks, and pray like hell you don't get sick!"

[David__77]

8. I wouldn't say it because it's not true.

We need new technologies, not a retrenchment of production. I only favor a reduction in US living standards to the extent that it represents a transfer of capital to developing countries, so as to industrialize that sector. International economic development must occur, but not at the expense of a particular part.

I disagree with "deep ecology" that posits that there are not enough resources to increase existing living standards. This is Luddite, reactionary and conservative in nature as a political program.

[tedzbear]

10. Our politicians are not at the helm, the multinational corporations are.

The multinationals are loyal to none and will betray any nation if it will improve their bottom line.

I just read that Pepsi's sales to China increased something like 35% in 2004.

[Robroy]

11. The more you know, the less you need.

n/t

[Johonny]

12. And

Education is a business too. It's was sure a good sign we were the world leader in world higher education if the elite of the world come to us to learn. But the cutting into the science research budget, state school budget and making it hard to get foreign visa's are all bad for Universities. Just another example of how this administration is BAD for business.