U.S. can't snooze on U.N. power grab

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | August 20, 2005 | JOHN O'SULLIVAN

[Victoria Delsoul]

America is fighting terrorism in Iraq. In the words of GW, "America must fight the enemy abroad, so we do not have to face them here at home. By using every available tool to keep the enemy on the run, America's Armed Forces can ensure that terrorists spend their days trying to avoid capture, not planning their next attack."

[aquila48]

I know... they're trying to get "sustainable development" through the back door. Most people don't understand that what it means is the government taking control of all the details of our lives.

We already have true "sustainable development" - it's called capitalism!

[hedgetrimmer]

I understand that.

However, installing a UN-style constitution will not stop terrorism, given the history of the UN and its predilection for terrorists and totalitarian dictators.

Furthermore, our "free trade" agreements make us vulnerable to terrorism-- through "free trade" the globalists in power in our government fully expect the US to produce only 20% of its necessary goods by the year 2025. That means we will be dependent on mostly third world countries for 80% of our life's necessities.

Take a look at the third world.... Chavez in Venezuela, Ecuador now has a leftist government cozying up to China, India is socialist/communist, Viet Nam, communist, Malaysia totalitarian, China -which can no longer be consider third world- communist.


We were once a free self sustaining country. The globalists in our government are changing that. We will be dependent on the worst that the world has to offer in terms of political systems, for our very survival.

[Victoria Delsoul]

But isn't Free Trade good for the economy? It increases access to foreign markets which benefit American producers and US companies sell considerably more than before. Also, it is Free Trade which is changing communists countries like China into a more capitalistic one, and with these changes also come social changes. All these doesn't happen in a vacuum, but take time.

[Victoria Delsoul]

= This doesn't happen in a vacuum, but takes time. Yikes, sorry about that.

[hedgetrimmer]

It increases access to foreign markets which benefit American producers

"free trade" allows for Direct Foreign Investment, or DFI. Before DFI, investors had to invest in the foreign companies as shareholders rather than own assets in that country outright. With DFI corporations now can own property in these countries and invest in real assets in them. DFI established by "free trade" set the stage for the outsourcing and offshoring that is weakening the American economy. You see, when American companies have real assets abroad, they no longer invest in their host country, or contribute to the infrastructure or job market. The profits are strictly capital which flows into the offshore assets, where they used to be reinvested in America. This is bad for the US, our economy and our people, but good for the third world.

US companies sell considerably more than before

Not so. The CAFTA countries can afford only minuscule trade with the US. The claim that American farmers would be selling more products to the CAFTA countries was a lie. Even the globalist Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Johanns heard at one of his phony "listening sessions" that the people in the CAFTA countries cannot afford to buy American agricultural products.BUT, the CAFTA countries will be big recipients of US tax dollars for "capacity building", Inter-American development Bank loans for social justice engineering, and the services of our department of the treasury, department of transportation, deparment of Agriculture and EPA-- so that businesses can relocate their manufacturing to these cheap labor countries and not have to risk any of their own capital to do it. The American taxpayer assumes all the risk for them. Good for the economy? I think not.

Free Trade which is changing communists countries like China into a more capitalistic one

Finally, China is NOT more capitalistic. They are more communistic than ever, more aggressive than ever, and they are achieving their goal of hegemon in Asia and expanding their sphere of influence in the western hemisphere all because of "free trade". China does not allow real ownership of assets, all companies that have foreign investment are owned at least 50% by the Chinese communists or the PLA. They place strict controls on the businesses so there is no free market at all that operates in china with foreign companies. This also shows the lie that the name "free trade" engenders. It is not "free trade" at all, but rather a managed trade plan that is centralized in Switzerland under the WTO.

What "free trade" is doing is creating great wealth for the communist masters in China, Viet Nam, Malaysia and elsewhere. It is enabling them to become more of a danger to freedom than ever before in history. "Free trade" is reviving slavery around the world too. Many of the nations most favored by "free traders" for business have slave labor. In the CAFTA countries, the country that the agreement was named for, the Domican Republic, has one of the worst records for human trafficking in the world, and now with our "free trade" agreement, we have an open border, just like Mexico, with the Dominican Republic human traffickers.

The social changes that are happening because of "free trade" is to insitutionalize socialism and communism in the marketplace, where the US once shunned commmunism, we are now giving communism new life. I do not call that a good change. And no, these countries are not going to free their people anytime soon, because too much money can be made from their servitude.

[McGavin999]

I say shut the place down and then we don't have to worry about it. I really don't know how things ever got to this point, but it needs to stop.

I think a little public speech about the weaknesses and corruption of the UN might just slow things down a bit.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Well, in one word according to you, we can say that Free Trade is bad. It's bad for business, bad for the economy, bad for progress and social changes because they aren't happening and won't happen, in fact, life in communist countries is worsening, and all that I believe about Free Trade is a big lie. Well, I disagree.

But I thank you for your post.

[hedgetrimmer]

Well, just for giggles, what is "free" about "free trade"?

[hedgetrimmer]

Oh and I didn't say it was bad for at least some businesses. Some of them are getting quite wealthy with the taxpayer subsidzing their movement of capital offshore.

I know you are a thinking person, and think about a centralized trading system that is overseen by a selection of countries that are either socialist, communist or totalitarian dictators. Why should they have anything to say about how America develops its trade and immigration policies? Can you see how this is quite unconstitutional?

[Victoria Delsoul]

No giggles - and I think you know the answer to that.

[pax_et_bonum]

ping to read later

[hedgetrimmer]

The answer? "Free trade" frees trade from congress' constitutional authority to regulate it and gives it to an international body.

[Victoria Delsoul]

That's not what I understand free trade is. Basically, free trade is the mechanism by which reducing or eliminating trade barriers, free markets are able to compete in a global market balancing supply and demand more effectively. Free trade isn't only about trading goods and services, but it is also a way to promote a free market of ideas. Generally, the ones who benefit from this market of ideas are the less developed countries.

If the countries involved in free trade enjoy prosperity and greater development, I don't see how this is bad. After all, America's wealth has a lot to do with 100 years of free trade.

However, I know you won't like my answer, so feel free to have the last word.