Replies

I've just gotten done with a summer semester in Global Economics where I've been contesting my brazillian economics very pro-Free Trade professor. Even the text book plainly stated that in the long run, the US workers in both industry and agriculture will suffer a lower labor pay rate and a lower standard of living. But you see this is good, because the third worlders standards go up. Yup, if you're a One Worlder, then it's all good, if you're a patriot from a wealthy nation that was built on hard work, you're screwed.

As I pointed out in class (and most of the class agreed once I said it but the cowards were to scared to say the unPC thing themselves) when you hire a CEO for Ford you hire him to take care of Ford not IBM or HP or Exxon. When we elect a president, we are hiring a CEO and we are hiring him to take care of America first and to hell with the rest of the world.

When we elect a president, we are hiring a CEO and we are hiring him to take care of America first and to hell with the rest of the world.

Well said! I couldn't agree more!

RE: "But you see this [migrant labor, ILLEGAL or "guest"] is good, because the third worlders standards go up. Yup, if you're a One Worlder, then it's all good"

Right. It's not all government-subsidized "cheap" labor for U.S. business. Lots of do-gooders as well as globalists, both Republicans and New Democrat Third Way "progressives," have committed the U.S. to "raising everyone's boat" and remittances are very important to developing countries.

It seems to me that the amnesty argument that tends to dominate is mute and proponents of migrant labor (ILLEGAL or "guest") know it and have no plans for amnesty -- but the issue obscures their real purpose. To wit, transferring wealth to developing countries. For world peace, I guess.