Reply With Quote
DarrinS is basically urging that multinational corporations remain free to strip the nation's wealth, and trample us all underfoot. Make way for progress.
Letting the core of productive value continue to be stripped away is basically a vote for the pauperization of Americans and the future dependency of the USA as a nation.
DarrinS is basically urging that multinational corporations remain free to strip the nation's wealth, and trample us all underfoot. Make way for progress.
Not sure about tires, but all my cars (four) have been American. Though that's mostly been because I've liked those cars, and not out of some deep seated loyalty to American business.
Smoot-Hawley. Are you a johnny-one-note, doobs?
Are you? You're pro-protectionist arguments are growing tired.
And you're so very wrong, to boot. I think it's helpful to remind everyone what happened last time the economy was really bad and we responded with protectionism.
A measured response to unfair trade practices by an unfree country doesn't even approach Smoot Hawley.
And the idea that we don't already protect domestic industry in a mul ude of ways is just wrong.
Isn't our government supposed to protect US trade interests?
Whoah, when did I say that?
You suggested case in point is equivalent to Smoot-Hawley. It isn't.
Really? Are you even remotely aware of the consequences of the US using the vague, catch-all section 421 of the Trade Act? Why do you think China is considering severe retaliation? Do you think that's a good thing?
Yep. Protectionism hurts both countries involved.
You said, "And the idea that we don't already protect domestic industry in a mul ude of ways is just wrong."
What is that a response to?
Care to explain to the board why protectionism is bad?
So then, no trade policy at all would be preferable in your view? No distinction between free and unfree partners?
That there's a target-rich environment for you, and little reason to pick on what seems (to me, ok?) like a legit beef about China's predatory trade practices directly affecting us. What, we're supposed to lie back and take it, for the sake of economic efficiency and low, low prices?
Come on. China creates lots of $8 an hour jobs with no health benefits for our nation's citizens at Wal-Mart, Target, and so on.
If it fosters US independence from China, in the long run it could be. I won't pretend there's no downside. You seem to be arguing for China's upside, at our expense.
This is the upside. Economic efficiency trumps standard of living for Americans.
Meh, I think you're being a little dramatic. I'd rather have Americans doing the science and engineering and leave the fab to someone else.
Basically, in the name of economic rationality, absolutist free traders like doobs are willing to see our own self-sufficiency and standard of living go to .
, maybe they even want it.
Can someone explain to me why a guy on an assembly line making widgets justifies $25/hour, medical benefits, and a pension?
Actually, as things are produced at a lower cost by Asians, et. al., our standard of living rises.
How ubiquitous are cell phones these days?
Is this the case now? America isn't producing enough scientists and engineers to meet global demand. It's my understanding that this expertise is moving, has been moving, offshore for some time. India and China are the main markets for engineering talent these days.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
