[Cringing Negativism Network]

Pat's right about this.

He's right on trade. He's right on the border.

And he's being proven more right, every day, in the headline news.

America is for sale.

In fact, most of America has already been sold...

Yet the fire sale continues.

Perhaps our new president can just put the whole country, up on eBay.

Sell us to the Saudis. Ought to bring enough, to pay for 300 million burkas.

[sobieski]

Hope you are prepared for the coming abuse (hehehehe)

You are right, of course, about PJB

[jwalsh07]

Pat's right about this.

Undoubtedly, my life's goal has been to subsidize, with my tax dollars, UAW workers with compensation packages of 78 bucks an hour. Pat and those like him make that goal attainable.

Thanks Pat!

[SolidWood]

You mean UAW Pat?

[randomhero97]

Great read.

[woofie]

Move in with Pat then

[Ron Jeremy]

By traditional free-trade theory, a nation should import what it does not produce from the nations that produce it most cheaply.

That is simply not correct, and would not be stated by anybody who has ever read a basic economics text. When nations trade, they each produce what they have a comparative advantage in. Comparative advantage and "cheapness" are not the same thing.

If anyone doesn't understand this, just google "comparative advantage" and become enlightened.

[ex-snook]

Pat is right about abortion, gay demands, immigration, foreign entanglements bring war, deficit trade deals bring unemployment and Toyota Republicans sold out the American family worker.

[Regulator]

In general Buchanan is right that a nation-state should look after its own first and foremost.

Sometimes that isn't the most "efficient" thing to do from a purely mechanical point of view, but then "free trade" -- which should be re-labeled merely "foreign trade" -- depends on simplistic analyses which are far more mechanistic and devoid of political / cultural considerations.

It is clear from the history of the auto industry in the last 30 years that foreign competitors designed and built better machines. That they did so with design, engineering and manufacturing talent in this country is not so well known. What they actually ended up proving was that the management in Detroit is perhaps beyond help.

The real bottom line for GM in particular can be summed up with a couple of points:

- They created a corporate culture of go-along to get-along "yes men" - anyone who sticks out is immediately hammered into compliance or forced out. I personally observed this there, and it still amazes me how ruthless it was.

- They believe that their problems are due to bad marketing, not bad design and manufacture. Rather then fix their vehicles, they simply intensify their marketing campaigns - something that is going on right now (you've seen the "Red Tag" sale ads without doubt). This is fundamental to their customer contempt: to them, it's always assumed that you can eventually con the rubes into signing.

Another former GM'er and I spent the better part of 4 hours the other day discussing all of this, and these were the two things that really stand out. If there is one thing that the foreign car companies and their sponsor governments did (make no mistake, those are subsidized corporations), it was to kill that culture in Detroit. Recall that at the beginning of the "free trade" resurgence in the 80's, GM was the chief cheerleader. They really thought they would win.

But that's because at GM, if you say something different....you get stepped on.

[Theodore R.]

So soundly repudiated by the American people, Pat had to be right! from the beginning, as they are nearly always wrong.

[Ron Jeremy]

By traditional free-trade theory, a nation should import what it does not produce from the nations that produce it most cheaply.

That is an incorrect statement. Everything else said by him or you might be true, but that is a factually incorrect statement.

[plain talk]

Pat and his ilk are WRONG on trade, NAFTA, etc etc Its a global market. Deal with it.