Posted on 07/09/2007 1:32:44 PM PDT by JKrive
Economically illiterate Congressmen. I'm shocked. Exactly why is trade with Mexico and Canada bad for us?
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would likely include funds from foreign consortiums and be controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States:
I'll have to show my passport when I use an American highway? That's funny!
I’m not interested in Corsi. I don’t follow him at all. I just googled awhile back and grabbed the .pdf docs off his site.
If it happens...every thing said by the supposed "skeptics" will have proven to have been either collossal ignorance (refusing to investigate) or knowingly disengenuous.
Let's wait and see. We are now less than three months away. But if it comes out, every single person on the list of this CSIS committee who approved of its and didn't dissent...on Constitutional framework grounds...needs to be run out of the country on a rail.
You were aware that even those nominally favorable to the SPP, such as the Press in Canada...openly admit that it has been highly secretive.
But they never ask why...or revisit their approval...which is clearly based on deceptive precepts.
Did you catch that reference to “market forces” for the labor supply? Clearly, they don’t care that the US workforce is more literate and better educated and capable than any other in the world. They just want cheaper...so bottom-line, what they euphemistically are saying in the White House, and their buddies in this CSIS....they think the US is overpaid.
So you are. How's that SPP/NAU debunking working for you now? Not too well I suspect, what with that section your NWO Senate buddies snuck into S.1639, not to mention the latest news about the entire fecal discharge to be submitted to Congress in the fall. Feel free to continue wasting your time on the debunking though...perhaps you will find someone dumb enough to deny what their eyes tell them.
"Pay higher prices, for the children!!"
Naw. You free-traitors are all about paying lower prices and letting the children down by destroying the American middle class. Free trade continues to be an illusion, promoted by well intentioned dolts who either don't know or don't care there is no level playing field. Free here but, for God's sake, don't ask our foreign partners to eliminate all of the same trade barriers.
They are a thick-headed bunch, a little smarter than the quislings but just as unpatriotic. Scratch one deep enough, and you will almost always find an open borders enthusiast.
Exactly why is switching to a ballooning trade deficit with each of those countries good for us? What was wrong with our sovereign trade system before, eh? Seems to me we traded with Mexico and Canda JUST FINE.
You are hoist by your own economic illiteracy, Todd.
“Market forces” include Americans that created the American market by working for themselves and their families. I think that side of the “market forces” should toss out the Congressmen that want to open the borders.
Pretty good. The NAU doesn't exist, the SPP does.
what with that section your NWO Senate buddies snuck into S.1639
I have no NWO buddies, in the Senate or elsewhere.
Naw. You free-traitors are all about paying lower prices and letting the children down by destroying the American middle class.
Is that why unemployment was 6.5% before NAFTA and 4.5% now?
Free trade continues to be an illusion, promoted by well intentioned dolts who either don't know or don't care there is no level playing field.
So freer trade is bad? Cheaper foreign goods are bad?
Free here but, for God's sake, don't ask our foreign partners to eliminate all of the same trade barriers.
NAFTA and CAFTA didn't reduce some foreign barriers? If we reduce our tariffs 60% but foreigners only reduce their tariffs by 30%, that's bad for us?
How has the deficit hurt us? Is it our 4.5% unemployment or our $13 trillion GDP?
What was wrong with our sovereign trade system before, eh?
More trade is better.
If Kissinger approves of anything,it worries me.
Weak. The SPP begat the NAU proposal. The NAU proposal is about to be put forward by its promoters. Try again.
"I have no NWO buddies, in the Senate or elsewhere."
You just think you don't. Birds of a feather...
"Is that why unemployment was 6.5% before NAFTA and 4.5% now?"
Gee, then your unemployment stat ought to really drop after NAU is adopted, right? NAFTA, CAFTA and the NAU--should be a real employment bonanza for the American middle class, right? Get real...
"So freer trade is bad? Cheaper foreign goods are bad?"
More dissembling. I'll take that as a "don't care that the playing field is not level" from you.
"NAFTA and CAFTA didn't reduce some foreign barriers? If we reduce our tariffs 60% but foreigners only reduce their tariffs by 30%, that's bad for us?"
Weak and unpersuasive. Your usual deflection won't level that playing field. Wish I could say "Nice try". It wasn't.
In other words you can't answer the question, and try to turn it around with your own question. You lose.
Is it our 4.5% unemployment or our $13 trillion GDP?
Who cares. Our GDP would be at LEAST another three or four trillion higher if we weren't importing so dad blamed much.
And as I said, which you couldn't really answer with a legitimate response: What was wrong with our sovereign trade system before, eh?
More trade is better.
Oh, so chucking the Constitution is somehow made all better by a modest increment in exports...which is overwhelmed by a flood tide of imports that saps and hollows out our industrial infrastructure, leaving with us (and I do mean "us" advisedly) what? Paper currency?
Wow, a proposal. Scary!
Gee, then your unemployment stat ought to really drop after NAU is adopted, right?
But the NAU will never get adopted.
NAFTA, CAFTA and the NAU--should be a real employment bonanza for the American middle class, right?
The first two, yes. The third one will never happen.
I'll take that as a "don't care that the playing field is not level" from you.
How can the playing field ever be level? American workers are the most productive in the world. Even counting the ones, like you, who are bad at math.
Your usual deflection won't level that playing field.
Are tariffs on both sides lower than before? Is there more trade than before? Sounds like an improvement to me. Of course I'm always willing to cut more trade deals to lower tariffs and barriers even further. How about you?
Neither did you. Why aren't Japan's and Germany's economic performance better than ours over the last 2 decades? They have a surplus.
Oh, so chucking the Constitution
But we didn't chuck the Constitution.
is somehow made all better by a modest increment in exports..
Modest? Exports to Mexico better than tripled since NAFTA. Exports to Canada more than doubled.
which is overwhelmed by a flood tide of imports that saps and hollows out our industrial infrastructure
That's right, we don't manufacture anything. LOL!
leaving with us (and I do mean "us" advisedly) what? Paper currency?
When we import, the other party gets the paper currency.
Only to loyal American conservatives which, of course, would exclude you. Moreover, it wasn't that long ago you were claiming the NAU existed solely as a crackpot concept nobody could possibly view seriously. Now it's a proposl to be placed before the Congress. So far, your credibility index seems to be suffering.
"But the NAU will never get adopted."
So you say. But then your tiny gaggle of free-traitors used to say it didn't exist. Which is it--doesn't exist, is a mere proposal, or will never be adopted? You may want to start thinking about developing your Plan D backoff position. How about "Well, it may have been adopted but it will never be implemented"? Want to try that one next?
"The first two, yes. The third one will never happen."
On the first two, you're assuming facts not in evidence and, on the third one, we probably will choose not to rely on the dependability of your prediction given your past record on such matters.
"How can the playing field ever be level?
See, both trading "partners" not only agree to remove all impediments to free trade--they actually do it. A concept that even someone as dense as you should be able to grasp.
"Sounds like an improvement to me."
Anything sounds like an improvement to you as long as it has a "free trade" tag swinging from it.
It wasn't that long ago that you were claiming it was going to be implemented with no vote. Now you think Congress will have a say? You're making progress.
But then your tiny gaggle of free-traitors used to say it didn't exist.
Unless it is passed and signed into law, it doesn't exist.
On the first two, you're assuming facts not in evidence
Please feel free to post the damage caused by NAFTA and CAFTA.
See, both trading "partners" not only agree to remove all impediments to free trade--they actually do it.
So because we have some trade rules, we don't benefit from reduced tariffs?
Anything sounds like an improvement to you as long as it has a "free trade" tag swinging from it.
Lower tariffs and more trade is an improvement. A concept that even someone as dense as you should be able to grasp.
Its been fun, but not enough to motivate me to delay Happy Hour.
Later.
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.