Tomorrow's Jobs

Barron's ^ | 1/5/04 | Gene Epstein

[Texas_Dawg]

THE OLD, TIRED IDEA that America has only a finite number of jobs -- and that we must guard them zealously against raids from cheap foreign labor -- has been making a remarkable comeback. The only difference is that its upside-down view of the economy has plumbed new depths.

[Orangedog]

OK, Edison. If you want to go on asserting that questioning the mixing of logic and emotions is an attack on any religion, go right ahead. Rule #1: When you're in a hole, quit digging. Let us know when you dig your way to China.

[Texas_Dawg]

From Encarta:

2. believer in capitalism: a supporter of capitalism or a participant in a capitalist economy

[Beck_isright]

"Yet you are the biggest attack 'dog' here on FR."


Me thinkst not.

[Starwind]

I'm sorry you are so unhappy, Starwind. It explains your economic positions perfectly.

Yes, I'm unhappy you think to associate yourself with Americans.

My economic positions are I support enforcing subscription agreements and prosecuting IP theft. Do you?

I'm opposed to theft, opposed to taking someone elses property in violation of promises and giving it away. Are you?

I support restrictions on people who violate agreements. Are you?

What would a capitalist agree with?

Come on Khan. I'm laughing at your superior intellect.

[Beck_isright]

"2. believer in capitalism: a supporter of capitalism or a participant in a capitalist economy"

Good. Then you believe that is in my interest for the government which is supposed to represent me, a capitalist, to execute duties and penalties on nations which exploit my labor without returning profit to me? If not, then you are a fraud.

[Beck_isright]

And answer 156. I'm waiting....

[fso301]

The foreign white collar workers can either come here or, work can go there.

[Texas_Dawg]

What is the direct restriction on American business?

Let me give you an example. An American businessman wishes to buy merchandise at the lowest price, add value to it, and then sell the value-added product at a profit. (Hopefully you realize this describes literally tens of millions of American small-business owners and the people to whom they provide jobs.) Tariffs on the goods he freely chooses to buy are restrictions on capitalism and are also very detrimental to American businesses such as his.

[Texas_Dawg]

I'm waiting....

Maybe you'll appreciate the fact that I am one against many. FR is very hostile to capitalists. I can and do post at conservative forums as well, but at FR, economic conservatives are greatly out-numbered, so you might have to be patient in my responding to you.

[Orangedog]

Come on Khan. I'm laughing at your superior intellect.

LOL! Oh damn! Shatner has been invoked...the gloves are off now!

[Texas_Dawg]

That's a lot of questions for someone scared to answer just one.

[Starwind]

FR is very hostile to capitalists

We are hostile to frauds.

I've answered with my position on capitalism below. Still waiting for yours.

I support enforcing subscription agreements and prosecuting IP theft. Do you?

I'm opposed to theft, opposed to taking someone elses property in violation of promises and giving it away. Are you?

I support restrictions on people who violate agreements. Are you?

What would a capitalist agree with?

Come on Khan. I'm laughing at your superior intellect.

[Texas_Dawg]

OK, Edison. If you want to go on asserting that questioning the mixing of logic and emotions is an attack on any religion, go right ahead.

Never said "any religion". To say that logic and emotion is incompatible (as you did) is to say that Christianity is illogical. I didn't say this. You did. Sorry you think that.

[Beck_isright]

"Let me give you an example. An American businessman wishes to buy merchandise at the lowest price, add value to it, and then sell the value-added product at a profit. (Hopefully you realize this describes literally tens of millions of American small-business owners and the people to whom they provide jobs.) Tariffs on the goods he freely chooses to buy are restrictions on capitalism and are also very detrimental to American businesses such as his."

Thus, under your theory, the failure to penalize nations which illegaly violate patent and copyright laws and illegally duplicate the goods and services created by American capitalism is acceptable. Nice call comrade. Which is more derimental? Allowing unfettered one-sided theft by socialistic economies, or penalizing American capitalists for the fruits of their labor? 156 begs your answer....

[MissAmericanPie]

Like the tune.

[Starwind]

That's a lot of questions for someone scared to answer just one.

Surely an asute capitalist such as yourself (with a family history of business ownership and management) can handle 3 simple yes or no questions. Or should I make them multiple choice for you?

I support enforcing subscription agreements and prosecuting IP theft. Do you?

I'm opposed to theft, opposed to taking someone elses property in violation of promises and giving it away. Are you?

I support restrictions on people who violate agreements. Are you?

What would a capitalist agree with?

[Orangedog]

To say that logic and emotion is incompatible (as you did) is to say that Christianity is illogical.

Rule #2: Don't come to a battle of wits totally unarmed.

You're digging yourself in deeper.

[maui_hawaii]

would you describe yourself as a very happy person?

Actually yes. Absolutely. Secondly, what difference would that make at all?

You see, just by asking that question is sort of a personal attack from you.

If Albert Einstein was posting on FR and posted the theory of relativity, you would ask if he was a happy person.

That is completely irrelevant.

Look at the content. Thats it. There is a whole group of people trying to get you to do just that. But you refuse.

Thats just it, you are trying to demean, not discuss. If a professor went to the front of the room and said "the grass is green" you would sit in the back of the room repeatedly and rudely calling him an idiot. Then when he kicks you out, you would say "man, he has a chip on his shoulder".

You don't have basic respect for people. Thats the problem. You attack attack attack. Then you ignore what others actually say, then you attack attack attack again.

You see, there is no substance in your attacking. Its just a personal attack and thats it. Its not related at all to the topic of trade.

You want to know about coming to other's sides on issues? Thats funny coming from you. It doesn't matter what anyone says, because everyone else is WRONG. You won't even read what they write. How could you even consider coming to someone else's side when you won't even read or think about what they have to say.

I read posts from Willie Green and others here. I do think about them. It doesn't mean I always agree. But at least I put the effort into finding out where others are coming from. Its back to exactly what I was talking about. You don't even try to understand or read others posts.

If its not exactly "a bot" carbon image of texas-dawg's thinking they are complete morons and you make sure to tell them they are morons.

I don't even think you see how stupid you sound.

[Beck_isright]

" Maybe you'll appreciate the fact that I am one against many."

Not really. That's the cry of the weak. That's a very Eurocentric comment and I'm sure our French members appreciate it.

" FR is very hostile to capitalists."

JR, Savage, Rush, Hannity and others would strongly disagree with you. Freewheeling is capitalism. Mindless drivel is not.

"I can and do post at conservative forums as well, but at FR, economic conservatives are greatly out-numbered, so you might have to be patient in my responding to you."

Patience is a virtue. I have no virtues. I only buy, sell and short suckers. 156 still demands an answer. How for 150 years can we enjoy unlimited expansion, including the mega-expansion of the monopolists in the late 1800's, then suddenly decide neo-socialism is better? That's the question of 156. 156 shall be your curse. 156 shall be my mantra. Answer it, or begone...LOL!

[Texas_Dawg]

Thus, under your theory, the failure to penalize nations which illegaly violate patent and copyright laws and illegally duplicate the goods and services created by American capitalism is acceptable. Nice call comrade.

You said you were not for government restrictions on capitalism. I showed you one way in which you are. Now you are changing the subject by defending those restrictions (a totally different topic).