Posted on 04/09/2005 6:06:24 PM PDT by Lorianne
Or, from another perspective, why should the hypothetical UAW member pay more for a chip so some engineer could get more money for less work?
Ultimately, the present imbalance makes China and India stronger - while the U.S becomes weaker. That will ultimately have consequences on the geopolitical balance of power. And U.S. service men and women will bleed and die in the resulting wars.
The free traitors' cheap garbage has a hidden price - one which will become all too apparent in the years ahead.
"There will come a day when free traitors are utterly repudiated. I await that day."
America has been a big trading nation for a very long time. We've traded with poor areas, rich areas, depressed areas, booming areas etc.. And it hasn't hurt us in the past. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a future day when trade will hurt us a nation.
And if one were to leap off a twenty story building, one would not be hurt...until the last instant.
>Or, from another perspective, why should the hypothetical UAW member pay more for a chip so some engineer could get more money for less work?
The UAW member shouldn't. We engineers can and do compete worldwide.
I disagree that free trade makes the US weaker. Only by doing what we can do best, will we be as strong as we can be.
Restricting trade is more likely to lead to war.
Ahh, now I understand. Free traitin' is, essentially, a protection scheme. We give the Chinese all our jobs, our manufacturing, and our technology. And they give us "insurance" that nothing bad will happen to us. Al Capone would be proud.
Free traitin' - the latest form of organized crime.
You are absolutly right concerning open markets and doing what we do best. Trying to explain freedom to the protectionists however is frustrating since their passion over-rules their manners and it is all name calling, hyperbole and inappropriate nationalism.
They want the gummint to control production, distribution and pricing and all opposed are traitors. Pitiful.
Maybe we ought to learn from them and pursue our national interests with equal dedication!
>Maybe we ought to learn from them and pursue our national interests with equal dedication!
Yeah, it works really well for the French...
I suggest we let our individual people make their own decisions, something they can do much better than the government, if we want to stay ahead.
I suggest we protect our nation, our markets, and our industries from predatory incursions by our enemies.
Treason is, after all, nothing other than helping the enemies of one's country - something the free traitors will do for ninety-nine cents any day of the week.
Which can only be accomplished by maintaining the entire infrastructure necessary to support our military. Once upon a time, America was known as the arsenal of democracy. Free traitin' is transforming us from formidable arsenal into a pathetic discount retail outlet - unable to produce anything ourselves. If our suppliers don't like our national policies, they can twitch their wrist and choke our supplies.
>If our suppliers don't like our national policies, they can twitch their wrist and choke our supplies.
Supplies of what, toys and underwear?
There are some military critical resource and manufacturing capabilities, of course. Selectively maintaining those could be worthwhile, but trying to distort our whole free economy to avoid using low cost labor in India and China would only cause us to eventually fall behind the rest of the world.
Which we are ignoring as the free traitors do their Michael Jackson imitations while simpering about low prices for consumers.
Free traitin' - knifing America in the back for a few pennies.
Why protectionism is a lot like racism.
Not long ago in American history accidents of birth were considered legitimate grounds for employment discrimination. Political platforms contained phrases like: "Federal contracts, whenever possible, should be performed by white workers." Politicians demanded tax incentives to reward firms for hiring whites instead of blacks or showing other kinds of favoritism. Those same politicians endorsed "Right to Know" legislation to alert consumers when products were produced by the "wrong" kind of workers. They embraced slogans like "Buy white!"
When I say this kind of thing was commonplace "not long ago," I really mean not long ago. Except for one minor and morally insignificant difference, I got all of the above from John Kerry's Web site. The only change I made is this: Where Kerry said "American," I substituted "white."
It's not just Kerry, of course. Both major parties (and most of the minor ones) are infested with protectionist fellow travelers who would discriminate on the basis of national origin no less virulently than David Duke or any other overt racist would discriminate on the basis of skin color. But if racism is morally repugnant-and it is-then so is xenophobia, and for exactly the same reasons.
Now hold on a minute, you might say. Isn't the U.S. government elected by Americans to serve Americans? Indeed, don't governments exist in the first place for the express purpose of favoring their own citizens? The U. S. Army discriminates by defending American soil more vigorously than the soil of, say, Peru. We discriminate against Icelanders by locating our interstate highways in North America for our own convenience rather than in Reykjavik for theirs. So why shouldn't American government policies favor American workers at the expense of foreigners?
I have answers.
First: Yes, the U.S. government is elected by Americans to serve Americans. There was a time when a lot of southern sheriffs could have said they'd been elected by white citizens to serve white citizens. It does not follow that it's okay to run roughshod over the rights of everyone else.
Second: Defense and interstate highways are great collective undertakings. We pay for them through our taxes. It makes sense that those who pay the costs should reap the benefits. It is no more inappropriate for the U.S. Army to defend Americans instead of Peruvians than it is for Burger King to provide food for Burger King customers instead of McDonald's customers.
But the labor market isn't like that at all. When General Motors hires an American in Detroit or a Mexican in Ciudad Juarez, the rest of us are not footing the bill. And that makes it none of our business. Nor should we want it to be.
I hold this truth to be self-evident: It is just plain ugly to care more about total strangers in Detroit than about total strangers in Juarez. Of course we care most about the people closest to us-our families more than our friends and our friends more than our acquaintances. But once you start talking about total strangers, they all ought to be on pretty much the same footing. You could say you care more about white strangers than black strangers because you've got more in common with whites. Does that make it okay to punish firms for hiring blacks?
It's also worth mentioning that laws intended to "protect" Americans raise the price of goods that Americans buy. I won't dwell on this because it's already obvious to anyone with a dollop of economic literacy. Besides, it's tangential to my main point, which is this: Even if Kerry-style (or Nader-style or Buchanan-style) protectionism could improve Americans' well-being at the expense of foreigners, it would still be wrong.
After all, if it's okay to enrich ourselves by denying foreigners the right to earn a living, why not enrich ourselves by invading peaceful countries and seizing their assets? Most of us don't think that's a good idea, and not just because it might backfire. We don't think it's a good idea because we believe human beings have human rights, whatever their color and wherever they live. Stealing assets is wrong, and so is stealing the right to earn a living, no matter where the victim was born.
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.