Posted on 10/14/2012 11:13:02 AM PDT by null and void
In our most recent 5 Engineers post — part of this blog and our Fun Friday newsletter, where we toss out a question and invite our audience to respond with their wittiest answers — we asked: What question would you liked posed here in 5 Engineers to the community of engineers and management that visit EDN.com?
You’ll see some of the great questions that were presented in coming 5 Engineers posts. Visit this page to share your own question to be asked. -
This Friday, though, we find ourselves fresh off of the vice presidential debates here in the United States. That followed the presidential debates by a week and there are still more head-to-head debates coming.
At this point, we're just weeks away from voting and the election could go either way. As is the case, we’ve heard snippets here and there regarding technology and engineering from the candidates. We’d like your take on their positions.
So for this week’s question we’re asking: Who is better for engineering and tech: Obama or Romney? Strictly in terms of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and not regarding the hot button issues that seem to make up most political debates, whose election would do more to better the world? And we do mean the world. This may be a US position but America’s actions influence the globe.
Post your short, constructive answer below. Be sure to stay tuned to this blog for more 5 Engineers questions in the weeks to come.
I saw some video from the control room for the recent Mars landings. The people looked horrible. Obvious gays, men with earrings, slovenly dress. It looked like a kindergarten staff meeting.
R.I.P. NASA.
You couldn't be any more wrong on this point. I am an engineer, working for a small (100 employees) US company. Because of free trade, we manufacture products in the US (only), and we export about half of our sales to China and Japan.
Obama has an iPhone, right? So of course he would be better for high tech. /s
Patently False. It was used by the founding fathers and was in place the first 170 years of our country's existence.
The facts are that we have 25% unemployment and everything in Wal-mart is made in China. There is nothing wrong with Protecting the American Market so that Americans employee other Americans. It's cheaper in the long run than employing Chinese and paying for Americans to sit idle.
You need to read something other than libertarian CATO institute crap.
The real history of free trade is that it devastated England's industrial base in the 1800's. It's devastated our's now. And protectionism has actually a long history of success.
The facts are that we embarked on a record era of lowering of import tariffs in the 1970's and the 1980's and now have the worst unemployment since the great depression.
Kicking Away the Ladder: The “Real” History of Free Trade
Free trade has devastated American Industry
Candidate Hurt says free trade agreements devastated Va. industry
OFFSHORING THE MISSOURI ECONOMY: FREE TRADE JOB LOSSES AND THEIR IMPACT ON MISSOURI WORKERS
I could do this all day.
PS. I've had graduate level courses in Economics. Don't tell me I need to learn how things work. You need to get beyond the basics. Take something besides economics 101. Or just look around you at what has happened to our country since we've implemented free trade policies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.