User talk:Dunshi
维基百科，自由的百科全书
感謝您對維基百科的興趣與貢獻，希望您會喜歡這裡。除了歡迎辭外，也請您了解以下重要文章：
 |
 |
 |
  按鈕。
If you have any questions about the Chinese Wikipedia, please leave a message here. Thank you for visiting!
|
||
希望您能享受编写人類共有之自由百科的快乐，成为一名维基百科人。我是欢迎您的维基百科人：~~~~--百无一用是书生 (Talk) 08:11 2004年10月31日 (UTC)
When Jean Christophe Rufin speaks of structure of the world in the, “Roman Empire of the fourth century AD,” his goal is to describe a set up such that there exists an area of land that was prosperous and successful, and was kept separate from the undeveloped uncivilized hinterland by a belt of enslaved kingdoms. He compares the contemporary world to his description of the Roman Empire by saying that the United States, Germany, and Japan are similar to the prosperous barricaded area of land and the enslaved kingdoms that act as a perimeter to protect this area from the barbarous unknown hinterland is Latin America, Africa, the interior of India, and China. Furthermore, besides the enslaved kingdom and the empire are countries that want to be a part of this prosperous empire or in other words join the OECD. The tetrachy that existed in the Roman Empire later split into two and was called the East and the West Roman Empire, similar to the split up of the Western World and the Eastern World in contemporary times. Consequently, Rufin argues that the similarity exists not only in the set up of our contemporary world but also he finds a similarity in the fall of the Roman Empire and to what he predicts will be the fall of the Western World. The important fact that is missing from the provided quote is the fact that the Western Roman Empire fell due to Odavacar’s disposed of the last emperor. In general, what these two blocs, Eastern and Western World, have in common is the heterogeneity of the economies of which they consist in each of their blocs. This heterogeneity of the economies is what causes the existence of the capital/labour relationship and the properties of this relationships is what will cause the fall of the Western World.
The capital labour relationship that has emerged under post Fordism is the crisis of the dominant postwar wage relation. It has caused a lot of changes in the developed world countries such as the United States, Germany, and Japan. It is believed that the long boom of the Golden Age is what triggered the growth of prices becoming relative to labour. Furthermore, profits were low because workers were too strong. The reason for this was because the rules of the game were too 'inflexible'. Policies of 'liberal flexibility' were put in place by the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States, eventually followed by some other OECD countries. This liberal flexibility tended to lean toward ideas like wages increase to the breadth and depth of social security, and from the liberalization of employment laws to the proliferation of insecure jobs. The U.S. suffered simultaneous deindustrialization and a deepening deficit in the balance of payments for manufactured goods. By the end of the 1980s, the ones who won this manufacturing competition were Japan and West Germany because they chose an alternative solution to the crisis of supply than the US did.
In short, the U.S. chose ' liberal flexibility' while Germany and Japan stressed the 'mobilization of human resources' during this postwar wage relation. And as for the newly industrializing countries, they have emphasized their competitiveness and specialized amongst themselves. An example would be the recent development of India and its telecommunication industry and China in its specialization in textile. The result has been a vast reshaping of the world's economic hierarchy. As noted earlier, the American bloc has chosen a different route from the others, and this explains its predicted decline, similar to the decline of Rome faced with the rise of Constantinople. In recent years, the current OECD countries differ in the paths they followed in comparison to the three countries we compared to the Roman Empire: U.S., Germany, and Japan. The U.S. along with Britain chose flexibility and ignored negotiated involvement. On the other hand, some of the countries that chose negotiated involvement on an individual level were France and Japan. Furthermore, the country practicing negotiated involvement at the large company level is Germany. Finally, the country practicing at the sectoral level would be Sweden. Japan seems to occupy the centre of the spectrum, which Alain Lipietz calls 'Toyotism', with a strong duality (rigid /flexible) in its external labour market. The States are focused on the supply-side problem of international competitiveness and they are trying to make the demands of flexibility have priority over welfare policy which Rufin predicts will cause their demise. (PAR)The mentioned demise of the U.S. will become evident beginning with a shift in power due to the change in capital-labour relationship. A shift in power is observed currently in many ways, for example in production of important material such as steel. Steel production is more efficient and competitive in countries such as South Korea and these lead to problems such as efficiency in military production and what not. Although the U.S. are trying to build their empire through excessive military use, it is not sustainable in the long-run with their non-existent comparative advantage in production.
[编辑] 您好
你的用戶子頁面/translate己被刪除，原因是內容侵權，並已送到投票刪除討論頁一個星期。如認為需要恢復請提交到Wikipedia:恢復條目投票討論，謝謝。-- Gakmo (Talk) 18:29 2005年8月12日 (UTC)
[编辑] 二次动员令
为了增加中文维基的条目数量，8月15日到10月1日为止，请每个维基人编辑至少5个新条目，条目必须符合维基的规则，内容至少要达到条目标准，不可是小条目或小小条目，如果可以的话，请尽量提高所编写条目的质量、内容，甚至达到推荐新条目的水平，创建新条目，创建后请在“二次动员令”内设链接，谢谢！
收到此动员令的维基人，请将此动员令贴到至少5个还未收到此动员令的维基人讨论页上，就算不想建立新条目，也请帮忙散发动员令，因为能否将动员令传播出去，是成败关键之一，“首次动员令”效果不大，就是因为没有在传播。
现在中文维基百科有9万注册用户，只要有4000人参加动员令，10月1日就会增加2万条目，意味著中文维基将迅速超越俄文维基，进而突破10万条目大关，且是很漂亮的突破10万大关，因为增加的是有质量的条目，非滥竽充数者，请大家尽力帮忙完成这壮举，就算是新人，也不要害怕，尽量创建新条目，若有问题就改正，参加这次动员令活动，也可让新人们更快学会如何创建条目。--真實事求是 12:36 2006年8月16日 (UTC)
