Posted on 03/07/2002 11:27:12 PM PST by JohnHuang2
Martin Anderson was a skeptic in Reagan's 1976 campaign and was against tax cuts because he believed in the "fiscal responsibility" school of thought. Only after reading "The Way the World Works", published in 1978, did he become a convert. Wanniski, a Kemp supporter, was wary of Anderson and they had a meeting, after which Reagan became the new standard bearer of supply side. Wanniski was still troubled that the Reagan campaign wasn't going to go for a return to the gold standard.
There's no point in denying that Wanniski is godfather to the Reagan revolution and ought to have a large statue in a theoretical Republican hall of fame. Wanniski's independent thinking and unwillingness to go with the flow, as evidenced by his embrace of Farrakhan, is the reason he has not been more recently been so directly and publicly involved.
On another note, Mundell won the 1999 Nobel prize in economics. If those socialistic Swedes are finally catching on, then that bodes well for the future. :)
Stupid, stupid statement. What this is about is the fact that America needs to be self-sufficient. Would you rather have all your raw material delivered to you from people that may (will) turn on you? Where does that place your loyalty?
I know. "CHEAP" seems to be blinking in neon letters all across the brains of some Americans. Somehow, they always manage to transform their terminal thirst for "cheap" into whines. And when we look at some "America First" poseurs, when the squeeze is on they somehow morph into "Europe Firsters". Or "Saudi Firsters". Or "Islam Firsters". All in the interest of "America First", of course ;).
Patso got it right this time. Good for him.
Cheap is not the end-all and be-all of life. Cheap is a drug. The more we become addicted to international cheap for its own sake, the more we will suffer the economic equivalents of a drug addict's bad health and dysfunction.
Japanese power brokers, in any capacity whatsoever, only comply very late in the day, at the last possible moment, when the enraged people they're shafting resort to force. Japanese are taught, however, that suffering and sacrifice are virtues, and that the "mature" thing is to endure silently with patience. Since Japan is the only country I know in which masochism is virtuous behavior, all this means is that the vast majority of complaints come from foreigners. This way the self-fulfilling pronouncement of gaijin mendokusaii! is validated yet again in the popular Japanese mind.
***
The WTO is a panel of anonymous foreign bureaucrats who meet secretly in Brussels.
Constitutionally, only our congress can regulate America's commerce, (Article 1, Section 8)
Therefore, why would congress listen to anything muttered by the WTO?
SCRAP THE CODE, ABOLISHTHE IRS
That'll get rid of not only the income tax but, all those payroll taxes and other taxes that are destroying America's industry base.
Than slap a 30-?% tariffs on ALL imports.
The last part of that statement makes no sense at all. If they were to move to Mexico or wherever and started to export their goods from these foreign countries into these united States they'd be hit with a 30-?% tariff, thus raising the price of their goods. Why would any company (operating in these united States) want to do such a ridiculous thing?
I can't remember where I saw it in the Bible but, somewhere it says that a country should pay a foreigner more than one from that country. That makes a lot of sense.
All those that believe tariffs are a bad thing to place upon foreign goods are IMHO delusional. Lets look at this in a logical way. If a domestic company is selling doohickeys (manufactured in this country) at 2 bucks a piece and a foreign company that is receiving subsidies from their governments and paying it workers dirt cheap wages is exporting those doohickeys into these united States and selling them at below cost for say 50c each. What do you think will happen to the doohickey company in these united States? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
What would happen to the entire manufacturing base of this Country if ALL the products that the people purchase were made overseas? In fact there'd probably be no one left that'd be able to purchase those goods except the very rich and as everyone knows (or should know) its not the very rich that that keep a company afloat.
Evans Talks Steel
By JANET L. METZNER
Speaking of dreams and trust, and specifically of President Bush's action to impose tariffs on foreign steel imports, U.S. Commerce Secretary Donald Evans on Monday addressed those who have the most to gain from the industry's survival - the youth of the Ohio Valley.
During a gathering at Steubenville High School, the secretary informed the nearly 350 students in attendance that the president's action sent a clear message to foreign steel producers.
"As I look at you, and I think of the hopes and dreams you have, "I know why the president enforced the 201,'' Evans told the Steubenville High School audience which held 350 students.
"He (Bush) was sending a clear message: 'Yes, we're for free trade. We're not afraid to compete with anyone. And, we're all (countries throughout the world) going to play by the same rules. When there is a problem in this country, we're going to take a leadership role in restructuring it.'''
Industry officials in attendance cited Bush's action as an opportunity, a pause in the crisis, for the industry to regain its footing. However, they also cautioned that restructuring will continue, and that the industry may be different after an anticipated changing environment of acquisitions and mergers over the next few years.
"Finally there is somebody in the White House who cares enough about (enforcing trade laws),'' said James G. Bradley, president and chief executive officer of Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
On the panel were Bradley, Bernie Ravasio, president of the United Steelworkers of America Local 1190 in Steubenville, U.S. Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, who coordinated Evans' visit, Mark Glyptis, president of the Independent Steelworkers Union, and John H. Walker, chairman and chief executive officer of Weirton Steel.
Already in place, Evans said, is a plan to eliminate 120 million tons of 'surplus capacity' steel, out of a surplus of 200 million tons. The industry worldwide, he said, produces 1 billion tons. "We still have a way to go but we will solve this problem once and for all.''
Walker pointed out that the United States is an importer of steel, falling short of production by 20 million tons each year. He promotes the idea of increasing the production of steel here, because there is a demand for it.
Approximately 80 percent of the students in attendance raised their hand when asked if a member of their family works in the steel industry. Evans, no stranger to the industry, spent four years working in a steel mill while attending school and also worked 'roughnecking on an oil rig.'
Monday, however, as the 34th secretary to lead the U.S. Department of Commerce, Evans created an historic day for the students. Two secret service agents flanked each stage door as Evans and panel members addressed them.
"Know that the world will continue to open up for trade. Know that the United States will remain competitive. And know that we will keep a level playing field," Evans said, explaining Bush's comprehensive plan for restructuring the global steel industry.
Besides the temporary tariffs from the 201 investigation, which range from 8 to 30 percent, Bush's plan includes sitting down with global steel producers in order to promote fairness in the steel industry.
"Where we find countries using market-distorting practices, and creating subsidies, we will put the spotlight on them, and say 'you are wrong, and you need to fix it,'" Evans said.
"You don't see other countries bringing the whole world together to solve a problem," he said. "But the U.S. is - under this president's leadership."
Evans' visit to Steubenville High School was a show of support for the industry, Ravasio said. "This school (Steubenville High School) depends on tax dollars directly or indirectly ... from steel.''
After comments from the panel, the floor was open to prepared questions from students. One student questioned whether American companies who buy illegal steel are the cause of the industry's problems. Evans negated this possibility, emphasizing the importance of allowing a free market to work while the government enforces the laws.
The trade commission, he said, is responsible for enforcing 350 orders, 165 of which are steel-related. Just as the steel industry did last year, when an industry finds there is a problem, the process allows that industry to petition the commission, which will then investigate. Otherwise, the market should be free to work, he said.
When asked what would happen if 'spotlight' countries dissent from the imposed tariffs, Evans said so far, the measures taken by the Bush administration have caused the steel market to improve, and the price of steel to go up.
The countries of Canada, Mexico, Jordan and Israel have a free trade agreement with the United States, he continued, and are therefore exempt from the tariffs, as are approximately 80 less-developed or developing countries.
Most affected are larger governments, such as the European Union, Japan, Korea and China, which have been "hit hard by the tariffs.''
"Exactly what interplay between these countries might occur, I don't know,'' he said.
Restructuring among the domestic steel industry - a key to its survival - has been taking place for decades, perhaps 30 to 40 years, Evans explained.
In the mid-1980s, 75 percent of the global capacity for steel was owned by governments. During the past 15 to 17 years, however, other countries have "subsidized their companies as they have privatized them,'' including paying off their debt and eliminating "legacy costs.''
"This industry has undergone years and years of turmoil, downsizing and suffering,'' he said. "But you can trust this president.''
Glyptis said while industry officials began their fight to resolve the crisis during the Clinton Administration, nothing has been done until now. "All we got was rhetoric," he said. "Clinton is a master of disguise, as I have said before. There are times when I would walk out of a conversation (with a member of his administration) and would feel as if we got something. But he wouldn't do anything. The previous administration made promises, but did not honor their promises. The Bush administration reacted swiftly in, at least, giving the industry an opportunity,'' Glyptis said.
The domestic steel industry, with 31 companies in bankruptcy, was "on its knees,'' he added.
Evans told the students to keep the principle of trust in their actions each day. "You can trust this president. He has demonstrated this through his actions. ... When you say something, you have to mean it. And this president does,'' he said.
He expressed his admiration of the steel workers, and the residents of the Ohio Valley. "When I was driving up from the airport, I saw the mills, and the houses with flags flying. The best of this country lives here.''
Bradley agreed, and discussed the level of detail and attention the steelworkers have put into their jobs, despite wondering if they will have jobs, or if they will have to leave the area.
"I am totally amazed at the level of concentration in these steel mills despite what is going on. ... Our job is to keep this mill (Wheeling-Pitt) going, to do our best job in the day-to-day activities.''
Ahh, geez, my mistake. And here I thought I was dealing with a rational, sentient being. Shows what I know.
The real focus of Adam Smith was free markets, and not free trade; the free trade cult often uses the terms interchangeably, and they are not even remotely synonymous.
I still contend that two states with differing economic systems (free market vs. socialist) can never share a common market through "free trade". Sure they can trade with each other, but there are, by the very natures of the two economic systems inherent rules, prohibitions, tariffs, conditions...These are in place to try to strike a "balanced trade"; it is by no means "free trade", and to try to force free trade out of it is economic suicide.
How can we have free trade with a government that controls the means of production and distribution? It is, by it's very nature, not free!
But more important than all that is the fact that economic suvival and sovereignty trumps the ability to buy cheaper steel widgets. Any day, every day.
That's the 16th Amendment, the one that establishes the income tax. I found a pretty good thread on FR:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3785caf25970.htm
And I apologize - I never mastered the art of pasting an actual link, so you'll have to type it the old fashioned way.
Hope that helps!
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.