Posted on 02/15/2006 10:42:45 AM PST by SirLinksalot
That's not the point. Pat's defenders have stated that "he is just isolationist, he doesn't pick on Israel, he just opposes all foreign aid." Well, it seems that when the rubber meets the sand, Pat isn't so very isolationist after all.
the 52% of my workplace collegaues, who are now my former colleagues - they care, the jobs bled out of the US tech industry that Pat lists here - that's them.
But is the FR about how to get rich quick or about the welfare of American Republic? You can get very rich while living in the middle of a ruined country. Is it what would make you satisfied?
Boy did you ever hit the nail on the head with this one!!!
Hedgetrimmer insists she's a conservative, but her answers always involve more government interference.
they don't want to be confused with the facts.
and the thing is, there is no end in sight to this. people think offshoring is a fad and its going to stop, its not.
No, I think it's that when your entire country isn't good at anything (except flippin' burgers) you are unlikely to be rich, in the conventional sense.
We used to clearly lead the world in dozens of industries, automobiles, low cost electronics, high end electronics, motorcycles, bicycles, quality furniture, cotton goods, linnen, steel, small arms (well the Russians were always the volume producers), airplanes, computer hardward, computer software, computer services.
If we lose the lead in all of these (as we already have or are currently) it is hard to see what our export economy will consist of. Gay cowboy movies?
"Where? In what way?"
Well, for starters, by requiring Google to censor themselves.
Less recently, by interfering with our ability to keep a nuclear weapon out of the hands of a certain madman in Southeast Asia...
Does anyone sincerely believe we would have allowed this to happen had we not feared Chinese intervention? They view Korea and Vietnam as provinces of their empire, and would never have allowed us to invade.
Anyone who views China's growth as benevolent needs to crack a history book. China's goal is, and has always been, global domination. As for all of that capital surplus coming back to us some day. It might, but you can bet your keister that there will be some SERIOUS strings attached when and if it does.
They take the LONG view. Time in their world-view has no meaning. Their overall societal goals remain the same as it has for the last 3000 years. Global domination. By treating ourselves to the short-term benifits of cheap goods, we are only assisting them. They have the numbers to get it done. They have for a long time. They just haven't had the capital... We're giving it to them WILLINGLY.
They are already requiring US-based companies to censor themselves. Their methods are much more subtle than the Islamicists, but their aims are no less sinister.
Enjoy those cheap goods, boys. Hope it was worth it.
Are you implying that Americans will have hundreds of casinos too?
Sorry Pat's defenders don't state that. So let's talk about US involvement in trade. Someone else brought up Hamas, not me.
Maybe we can all find common ground with the idea that taxes are bad.
Hedge, is there a chance that you'd favor a plan to save the US import taxpayer billions and billions of dollars?
Boy did you ever hit the nail on the head with this one!!!
LOL But the biggest government failure was the 'government to government' free trade deals. Clinton/Bush [also known as government] made China a permanent favorite trading partner. It's been downhill ever since.
Boy did you ever hit the nail on the head with this one!!!
LOL But the biggest government failure was the 'government to government' free trade deals. Clinton/Bush [also known as government] made China a permanent favorite trading partner. It's been downhill ever since.
Here I am. What's wrong with NAFTA?
LOL! Poor pat sure wasn't that concerned when the only President he successfully served established relations with them.
Here is proof of the happiness concept.
Yes, exactly like that.
Are you even reading a word I write? I want the government to interfere less in our economy and everybody else's. I've said it in almost every post I've made on this thread. Buchananites want the government to interfere more. Differently, but more.
Allow the free citizens of America to engage freely in the exchange of legal goods and services with the citizens of other nations. That's it. That's what the government should be doing. Not funding infrastructure improvements in third world crapholes. Not erecting tariffs to insulate inefficient domestic producers from global competition.
Allow Americans to trade freely in legal goods with the citizens of other nations.
they never answer those questions either - what's left for americans in the endgame. once it plays out, and we de-industrialize, now technology is going too - what's left. the "new industries" come from the technology industry, so once that goes offshore, innovation goes with it.
what's left are service jobs, the "paper economy" of financial services and real estate and banking and insurance, health care, government employment, teachers and education, construction, retail sales, travel and leisure, food services - and of course, lots of lawyers and expanding government payrolls at every level.
the main thing that keeps the US economy moving now - is population growth. its only an increasing population, increasing demand for more services et al, that grows the economy.
the difference between our one state presidential wins in 2000 and 2004, versus Reagan's landslides, is that our party has no economic message on this problem.
and just wait till you see what FTAA does to US agriculture - which is a major exporter. Brazil is going to be the worlds top ag producer.
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.