Top Talk Radio Shows by Audience Size and Ideology

Speculation wrt Bush's beliefs about CFR are irrelevant as is the law as far as anything important is concerned. It crimps political parties to a small degree but certainly stops nothing significant. Congress has the authority to regulate federal elections as per the Constitution and the Supreme Court.

We do not have a "Trade Deficit" since that concept has meaning only when Gold is the ultimate standard of settlement. Currently we trade dollars for goods but that does not have the same impact as sending gold to another country as was the case prior to 1973. It may also be of interest for you to know that the US persistently had a Trade Deficit until the 1870s when it really did mean something. This period was one of tremendous economic growth for the nation.

It is in the National Interest that states in Africa not collapse thus aid is defensible when its provision will reduce the potential for even greater costs in the future.
Conservativism is not hiding in a hole and pulling the covers over one's head hoping everything will turn out ok somehow.

I will reveal such thoughs as I wish and do not consider "dittohead" much of an insult particularly coming from a Lover of Losers.

Please reference articles and essays that discuss your understanding of the theory of international trade. I can reference several essays on theories that refute yours. Theories are like opinions and you know what is said of them, they are like..., everybody has got one and most of them stink.

BTW, who here is a lover of losers? All I know is what you have posted on these FR threads and as far as I can see, everybody you refer to is either stupid, dumb, or idiots. That my dear man is a sign of a very insecure and emotionally immature person.

There are many authors of books on International Trade, International Finance and International Monetary Systems which can be of use in beginning to understand the subject.

David Hume wrote a short essay, Of the Balance of Trade, over two hundred years ago which describes how a monetary system based upon gold worked. Jones and Caves have a good textbook on the International Economy which explains many of the issues under current discussion. My copy is an old one but newer editions likely accommodate the advent of floating exchange rates.

I have read dozens of books about this subject over the decades I have been studying these issues. Any recommendations would have to be tempered by the degree of mathematical sophistication you have but H. Robert Heller has two excellent short books on International Monetary Economics and International Trade. But there are several other authors which have written about these issues. In no particular order you could see what you could find from Charles Kindelberger, Robert Mundell, Arnold Harberger, Harry G. Johnson, Fritz Machlup, Leland Yeager, James Meade, Lloyd Metzler, Gottfried Haberler and Jacob Viner are some of the universally recognized authorities in these matters. Penguin has a book of essays on International economic matters as does the AEA which collect the writings of many authors.

Those on the fringe or writers for newspapers are not capable of refuting the theories of the masters of economic theory and they are far from being equal. Milton Friedman's thinking is not the equivalent of John Q. Knownothing.

Those who advocate a third/fourth/fifth/tenth party as an alternative the GOP are Lovers of Losers and they damage conservativism under the delusion of helping.

Thanks for the reply.
It is unusual for direct questions to be answered in detail and I appreciate it.

I wonder how our present trade imbalance with China fits the models of the theories you cite? Are there any conflicts that need to be resolved? Can you see any problems with exchange, culture, economic systems, ideology, etc.? If there are conflicts, are the theories you cite applicable? Simply put, do the real world conditions require the theories to be reexamined?

BTW, again you question my sophistication and you know nothing of it. Considering I have several advanced degrees in science and engineering and have made my living as a consultant for years I think you need not concern yourself.
You also minimize the understanding of the people as if to claim your superiority of the facts and knowledge of the issue at hand. You would be surprised how much people know from experience and not by reading text books on theories.

What do you think of Tancredo? How about Mitt Romney? Who is your candidate for 2008?

I get a bit testy when people speak of things they know little of and economics is particularly poorly served by the Media. There is a lot of commonly accepted mythology and rhetoric which does not accurately describe events. And there are many things in economics which are counter-intuitive. Few people grasp even the basics of the field hence the appeal of the democrat party for so many.

It is as if I started discussing engineering or highly scientific matters as though I knew what the hell I was talking about. Lets put it this way- you wouldn't want to go across a bridge I built nor base policy on the common man's experience or knowledge of economics. Anyway nothing personal is intended.

Your background will have equipped you with the mathematics to understand economics very well and I recommend the Heller books if you can find them since they are highly concentrated via the math.

Any advocate of Free trade must admit it is an ideal and has never been completely realized in the world and in spite of efforts to remove political from Political Economy (the 19th century name for Economics) trade and business remain highly political. As I see it China is in the position of the man riding the tiger wrt the dollar. It can't encourage a fall or it hurts itself. But one of the key concepts in economics is that of equilibrium which cannot be prevented over the long run. Thus, any disequilibriums created by China's trade policy will eventually be removed by the markets. China's policy of over valuing the yuan has the negative effect of restricting its trade with Europe as well as the US and has already provoked bad feelings there.

Tancredo I see as a One Note Samba without much appeal to the ordinary voter. Personally I like him alright though his throwing of Delay under the bus was not very smart and has hurt him here. Mitt Romney seems ok though I am not terribly familiar with his political views. Certainly he appears to be a terrific administrator. However, I believe it is still very early to be able to reasonably forecast the candidate for 08. My candidate would probably be a governor since they are the most likely to win the presidency (this helps Romney.) George Allen has a lot of appeal to me. I like Jeb but he provoked the Schiavo crowd by not throwing all law to the wind and the idea of a dynasty is not attractive. I can sum up all that indecisiveness by saying "I don't know."

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.