Posted on 01/11/2006 11:16:53 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
El Salvador can help. It has free market experts who know how to deal with pesky unions and nuns.
What kind of remark was that?
I mean, back that up. Where do you get off saying that the the people in El Salvador who favor open trade kill nuns and union members?
Or are you all just hot air and BS? I really want to know.
"KILL"?!! Did you say "kill"?! I said "deal" not "kill"! See my tagline.
Okay, "deal". Whatever you intended to imply with that statement, which the rest of us damn well know.
Now, provide the backup for your assertion that free traders know how to "deal" with them.
And don't be cute.
Why not? There is a nice Polish proverb: "Jaki kon jest to kazdy widzi" (How the horse looks, everybody can see for himself).
Just enter the following on Google:
"free market" "El Salvador" union nuns
You will get 21,700 returns. Some showing how the horse looks like, some supporting your position.
Your position is really, uh, interesting. I'm going to round up a few of my corporate buddies to go "deal" with some nuns next week.
Or maybe we'll rejoin reality before then.
By all means, do it please.
Not your reality. Thanks anyway.
Don't you get it? Capitalism kills nuns and union members. Communism doesn't kill anybody. Get it?
I think he misses living under Communism. Makes you wonder why he moved to America instead of Cuba or Vietnam or North Korea. Makes you wonder why he doesn't move now? Before the capitalists kill him.
"U.S. corporations want strict fines and penalties in place before they set up their businesses there,"Everyone knows businesses need US taxpayer funded infrastructure before they set up shop in a foreign country...Why don't we build them a nice sports stadium while we're at it...South Americans love Baseball and Soccer.-----
Over $1.14 billion in already approved loans in support of CAFTAs reform agenda. Loans include financing for roads, ports, electricity, customs modernization, reductions in costs of doing business, rural development, strengthening governance and institutions.
You fellows are wrong on two counts:
1.The conservatives are not on the "far right wing" as the dopes in the MSM would have you believe.
2.The communists object to trade agreements for different reasons than do patriots. Do not confuse the coincidental appearance of "agreement" between leftists and conservatives with fundamental differences.
When you have sufficiently digested these two facts, you are then ready to examine the rest of the issue, namely; why is it, exactly, are the conservatives against those so-called "trade" agreements?
Once a pattern is established, the "coincidence" excuse fails . . . and in my opinion, repeated reliance on such sources creates a permissible inference that the person citing to them is a Leftist as well.
One more fact that is missing, is that the "free traders" embrace communists. Their policies have allowd China MFN, and they are making the communist oppressors in many countries very very wealthy with their phony "free trade" policies.
So who takes the same side as the openly communist? Clearly the "free traders".
So who takes the same side as the openly communist? Clearly the "free traders".
"free trader" WTO president MIKE MOORE waxes poetic about enriching the Chinese communist party.
"The benefits for China are clear. Opening its markets to foreign trade and investment will make it richer."
He explains how WTO membership will make the Chinese communists more powerful.
"It will also give Beijing a seat at the WTO table and a stake in the world trading system"
Just what the world needs, Beijing dictating our trade. Yes, the "free traders" gladly give the communist dictators in China power over global economy.
I've always considered Pat Buchanan and his minions to be on the far right fringe of the political spectrum. What these folks miss is that free trade takes place between individuals and not governments unless of course, government has complete control of the economy. When people think of trade as between governments they also think of trade as having winners and losers. Hence, the misunderstanding and hand-wringing associated with trade deficits.
The next step for these folks is to claim that, within a market economy that creates winners and losers, there will undoubtedly be conflict between the varying interests of social classes as well as between nations. If you follow these threads you will witness numerous claims that the working class is suffering greatly and that the middle class is being decimated. They can never offer proof of this from any reputable sources. Instead, they rely on left wing websites to support their dubious claims. This activity, IMO, is very leftist in nature.
Free trade is simply based on freedom. The freedom of any citizen of one country to trade with a citizen from another. If both parties didn't benefit, they wouldn't trade.
The alternative to free trade is protectionism. Conservatives who support protectionist measures such as tariffs and quotas, are arguing for allowing the government to take more of our money, increased prices for American citizens and for additional governmental control of our economy. Criticizing the freedom to trade while advocating for more government control of our money and economy strikes me as very socialistic in nature.
The thought that the state can appropriately determine what industry is in need of protection, what quotas or tariffs should apply, and for how long, is laughable. Protectionists must believe that the government is responsible, capable and reliable. To me, this sounds very familiar to those on the left.
Conservatives have, in the past, been in favor of political isolationism. they have never been, like Pat Buchanan, in favor of economic isolationism. Far right conservatives believe that through protectionist policies, we can protect jobs and create domestic strength and prosperity. History however, has taught us otherwise.
Small points, but a government grabbing land to build a road is not socialism. Nor is having a private developer build it in exchange for a lease that permits toll-collecting. I know nothing of your situation in Colorado. Almost everything hinges on whether the road is actually necessary, I think.
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.