The bailout, so far, has failed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Random thoughts and interesting tidbits. . .
. . .focused on current economical and political events.
"But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
Thomas Jefferson
The Colonies
Oft Visited Websites
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(193)
-
▼
September
(29)
- National Posts Talks Austrian Economics
- Gotta love Dennis Kucinich...
- Ron Paul's Interview with Glenn Beck
- Who knew Republicans could do something right?
- Gold and Silver Coins
- This guy is smart....
- A Nation Of Debtors
- Frederic Bastiat
- The Road To Serfdom
- Wonderful Central Banks
- What A Shock
- Peter Schiff Tell Us How It Is
- The Credit Card of the 2nd Great Depression
- Canada's Own Housing Crisis
- Here's something that could make you a little nerv...
- Christmas gone?
- Fascism
- Ron Paul On Neil Cavuto
- Lew Rockwell on the current financial crisis
- "The 'poetry of the possible' is that things are o...
- The Law
- An Interesting Perspective on US Foreign Policy
- On Goverment Service and Ending Poverty
- The Missing Ingredient in Modern Main Stream Ameri...
- An Interesting Comic
- WHO SAID IT?
- A Beautiful Song: Universal Soldier
- Pics @ home around the wedding.
- Pics in Woodstock during the Wedding
-
▼
September
(29)
19 comments:
Ron Paul has got his head up his ass. The millions of jobs lost plus the more than half of the private companies that offered shoddly loans is the problem. If you offer loans that are bottom barrel, because the people who want them work lower middle class or lower class wage jobs, with two adults working the family, when wages drop dramatically, you will have a disaster. In short, the 700 billion should be pumped into laws that bar companies from selling in the US who use foreign labour to produce their products.
I enjoy my Honda thank you very much.
I never knew you to be such an isolationist. That's almost more disturbing than your communist views.
The jobs lost, the bad loans, the lower wages are all just symptoms of a disease.
Start focusing on the disease.
Okay, but when the Chinese get powerful enough to eliminate their dependence on the American dollar you are going to feel the full cost of Chinese made products. And, no, Honda is a shitty example. The Japanese have a domestic market that developed by itself. They have unions, subsidies, and all the bells and whistles. Therefore, as a unionist, and not an isolationist, I think Honda is a legitimate company. The American companies that outsource to China and Mexico and pay near slave wages, however, are not legitimate. They are betrayers of freedom and the last 150 years of struggle.
I not an isolationist nor a communist. Isolationists are right wingers who think their race/nation is the best and hence distrust "the world". My focus is one the capital/wage relation, which makes me a unionist. I am not a communist, either, because I do not believe we can predict what form future society will take. At best, I am a Marxist, but even that is mixed with a lot of other theories.
The low wages, loans that became bad because of jobs lost and reduced wages, and the lost jobs are all symptomatic of the free market ideology. Period. End.
The funny thing is, is that you most likely would have been a liberal 80 years ago. It is only because you have the high salary opportunities that you can be libertarian. You can be a libertarian BECAUSE of the last 160 years of struggle for fair wages.
Oh yeah, saying that the "bailout has failed" a mere week after it was implemented is stupid. You have to wait some time, say six months, before you gauge whether an economic decision was correct.
1. libertarian and small government ideas have lasted a long time via republicans. thomas jefferson was elected president based on his small government leanings and from what I understand there were not a lot of unions back in the early 1800s. You cannot say my political leanings are only how they are because of when I'm alive.
2. By saying the "bailout failed" i mean, the bailout IS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED AS IT THE CONGRESS VOTED IT DOWN. Read the news.
LOL. I live in a foreign country and I'm an isolationist! Think about that for a second.
The idea that companies should be held within the borders of one country and only be able to used the labor of that particular country would crush a country's economy. Why do you think trade sanctions against Iraq and Iran have been so devastating to their people? Why do you think North Korea's economy is so poor? I think its very isolationist, to the extreme, to suggest commerce in a country should be restricted to only products manufactured in that country.
First of all, Iran and Iraq have trade sanctions leveled against them due to political concerns, not economic. Second, I was not arguing that companies could not sell in other countries. I was arguing that they should not be able to shift their production to poorer nations. Poorer nations should build their own national economies.
Again, history proves you wrong. The American economy during the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and even 90s was not "crushed". The economy of those decades worked just fine. The capitalists made less profit, but they still made profit. Similarly, the national economies of Japan, South Korea, Canada, and Europe are all successful for this reason. During the decades in which labor was protected, those countries enjoyed the greatest times of wealth and prosperity and innovation.
It is definitely not isolationist. It is unionist. Get your terminology straight.
"During the decades in which labor was protected" - Can you provide examples of how labour is less protected in the US now? Or is just that with advances in technology alongside unions forcing higher wages on corporations, it just made more economic sense recently to move jobs overseas?
" Iran and Iraq have trade sanctions leveled against them due to political concerns" - Yes, they have had economic isolationism forced on them. You instead advocate we choose to use this punishment against ourselves.
"I was not arguing that companies could not sell in other countries", but you did say "700 billion should be pumped into laws that bar companies from selling in the US who use foreign labour to produce their products."...so you're saying american companies can sell in other countries, but americans shouldn't be able to buy good from foreign companies?
"Can you provide examples of how labour is less protected in the US now?"
The government has done nothing to reel in the benedict arnold corporations.
"Or is just that with advances in technology alongside unions forcing higher wages on corporations, it just made more economic sense recently to move jobs overseas?"
Partially, technology, but mostly a favorable international and working class political environment. In other words, China and Russia are no longer communist. I say this, because the factories definitely could have been moved to poorer countries earlier. It was only the threat of revolution that held them back.
"Yes, they have had economic isolationism forced on them."
No, they had political sanctions leveled against them.
"You instead advocate we choose to use this punishment against ourselves."
Nope. Iraqi and Iranian companies can not trade outside of Iraq and Iran because of the trade sanctions, while I think corporations should be able to trade outside of their home countries.
"..so you're saying american companies can sell in other countries, but americans shouldn't be able to buy good from foreign companies?"
Read before you respond. No, Americans should be able to buy from foreign companies that pay fair wages. Foreign companies that pay slave wages should be barred just like the American corps that produce product by using the labor of totalitarian, slave wage earners.
"The government has done nothing to reel in the benedict arnold corporations."
That is not an example. Thats a statement you need to support.
"No, they had political sanctions leveled against them."
In an effort to isolate them
"Foreign companies that pay slave wages should be barred just like the American corps that produce product by using the labor of totalitarian, slave wage earners."
I read, and your initial statement said "foreign labor" not "slave labor". And slave wages by whose standards? If an individual chooses to work in order to pay for food and shelter, but that income is only 100th of mine, is it a slave wage? or is it simply what his particular labor market will bare? He has the same choice as me. He can decide to not work. Yes. We are all forced to work in this world because that is how we contribute to each other. And I do think wages are far too low in other countries, but they're too high in the west. If there were true free markets world wide, working a tech support job would pay the same here in NS as it would in Malaysia. Unfortunately, too many people think they can control markets and skewer the whole system.
"That is not an example. Thats a statement you need to support."
No I don't. The government has done diddly squat to punish corporations that pay slave wages through the legislative process.
"In an effort to isolate them"
No, in an effort to destroy their economies. Josh, "isolate" is a propaganda term when used beyond the true isolationists: the nationalists who are scared of other cultures and races because they think their's superior.
"And slave wages by whose standards?"
By the standards of profit - those corporations are making tons of money, but not paying a fair wage - and the standard definition of poverty/the necessities.
"If an individual chooses to work in order to pay for food and shelter, but that income is only 100th of mine, is it a slave wage?"
Yes.
"or is it simply what his particular labor market will bare?"
No, it is a slave wage. Asking rhetorical questions is not argumentation.
"He has the same choice as me. He can decide to not work."
No, if you decide not to work you can go on welfare or use any saving you accumulated from your high paying job. The worker in China, however, can not accumulate savings, nor is his or her "choice" protected by a welfare system.
Besides, you already admitted that free will and cause and effect are mutually exclusive, so right now you are merely appealing to me to have Faith in "choice".
"Yes. We are all forced to work in this world because that is how we contribute to each other."
What other world is there?
"And I do think wages are far too low in other countries, but they're too high in the west."
And what standard do you base that on, Josh? The whining and complaining of millionaires? Or the bitching and moaning of the Garth's and Cookie's? Christ, Cookie wanted to pay that slow guy he had working for him less than minimum wage.
"If there were true free markets world wide, working a tech support job would pay the same here in NS as it would in Malaysia."
LOL. You are not thinking things through. How many people in the world?
"Unfortunately, too many people think they can control markets and skewer the whole system."
The day they stop thinking that is the day that the megacorportions take over completely. Welcome to Mexico, Amigo.
Oh yeah, about the change in terminology: I don't think many American companies are going to move to France to save overhead on wages. By "foreign" I meant slave wage labourers.
My bad.
Whatever you may feel "isolationist" means, Iran is still being "isolated". You propose to "isolate" the American economy from lower wage workers from abroad, but this would "isolate" america, in the same way we are "isolating" Iran in an effort to hurt them economically. If we do it on purpose to Iran to hurt them, its not going to help us to do it on purpose ourselves.
"if you decide not to work you can go on welfare or use any saving you accumulated from your high paying job."
There is no welfare for those that quit their jobs. If I quit, I have no money. The same as anyone else in the world. And most people my age are so overwhelmed with debt, the thought of having real savings is simply a far off dream.
"but not paying a fair wage"
Please define 'fair wage'.
"The day they stop thinking that is the day that the megacorportions take over completely."
Only if they buy off government in an effort to infringe on individuals liberties a la USA.
And yes. Your bad.
It is not isolationism. It is unionism and protectionism, but not isolationism. Nor are the trade sanctions "isolationism". They are a punishment.
No, if the wages of the workers in a nation were protected it would not cause any harm. Again, the 40s to 90s are proof of this.
If you quit and can't find a job, you can go on welfare.
So the debt you have effectively eliminates your choice?
"please define 'fair wage'"
Wages that pay the basic necessities and allow significant luxury.
Please define 'high wages'.
And what standard do you base that on, Josh? The whining and complaining of millionaires? Or the bitching and moaning of the Garth's and Cookie's? Christ, Cookie wanted to pay that slow guy he had working for him less than minimum wage.
Individual liberties useless if they lead to widespread poverty in the long-term.
Post a Comment