Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The New Protectionists
opinionjournal ^ | March 10, 2006 | WSJ

Posted on 03/10/2006 12:33:17 PM PST by groanup

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

The New Protectionists - How to create a real security crisis.

Friday, March 10, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

Dubai Ports World finally threw in the kaffiyah on its American operations yesterday, agreeing to sell them "to a U.S. entity." We hope that entity turns out to be Halliburton, if only for the torment that would cause certain eminences on Capitol Hill.

Dubai Ports was susceptible to this political stampede because it was an Arab-owned company buying port operations, which Democrats have played up as uniquely vulnerable. But this is also the second such mugging of a foreign investor in recent months, following last year's demagoguery against a Chinese company's bid to buy Unocal, a middling American oil company. If Members of Congress want a real security crisis--a financial security crisis--they'll keep this up.

What's especially dangerous here is that we're seeing the re-emergence of the "national security" protectionists. They were last seen in the late 1980s, when Japan in particular was the target of a political foreign-investment panic. The Japanese were buying Pebble Beach and Rockefeller Center, and so America was soon going to be a colony of Tokyo. A Japanese bid for Fairchild Semiconductor of Silicon Valley was seen as a threat to American defense. Those fears seem laughable now. But here we go again, with new targets of anxiety.

snip

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial
KEYWORDS: dpworld; dubai; newprotectionists; oldsellouts; ports; protectionism; wsj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 581-590 next last
To: jec41
Actually America succeeded most because it accepted science and by luck found a cheap and plentiful source of energy and we became very rich selling it


If you want to believe that America got lucky that's fine. America did fine before oil. We expanded west from ocean to ocean on the backs of horses and mules. We conquered the Indian nations, We defeated the Mexicans, We helped tip the balance in favor of the Allies in WW1. We invented the light bulb, the telephone. We tamed one of the greatest rivers in the world, we invented flight, we landed a man on the moon. We freed millions of people around the world and in our own country too. Yet you say we were just "lucky" because we found oil?
It is our system of government that has caused all of this not luck. That is why the Middle east with all their oil is still where it is. That is why Mexico with all its oil is still a third world country because it is the type of government that lets people flourish not luck.

And as oil gets higher we will use less of it and develop other sources of energy and the Middle east will revert back to the backwater of the world that it has been since Mohammad rode out of the desert.
381 posted on 03/12/2006 10:35:23 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
and what's their ratio of deals struck down or corrected, to deals approved?

Very few. Companies don't just go up there with a hand full of papers and say approve me. In a deal this big it probably cost them 10% of the cost. Most even hire a firm specialized in the requirements and it sometimes takes years. The work is all done before they make the official request. People treat this like its the first time DP or the UAE ever went through a US security check. We have bases in their country and they have been a Alli since their inception and they don't have a security check? No one would buy a company for 6.7 billion dollars without being sure of passing a security check. That would be insane. One of the agreements they had made was a open Israel office in Dubai even thought they have been doing business through the back door for years.

They also have a good track record and have been through the check many times. They lease several airport terminals in the US and they are handled in the same manner as seaport terminal. In addition they own CSX containers, home office Charlotte NC and already have access to port terminals. There was simply no reason to turn them down except politics. If you look it up you will find they have been through the CFIUS security check many times.

382 posted on 03/12/2006 10:37:17 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: jec41
we've done quite well without protectionism the last 45 years

There you go again.

Pursuant to Section 202(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (P.L. 93 - 618, 88 Stat. 1978), I have determined the action I will take with respect to the report of the United States International Trade Commission (USITC), transmitted to me on February 1, 1983, concerning the results of its investigation of a petition for import relief filed by the Harley-Davidson Motor Co., Inc., and Harley-Davidson York, Inc., producers of heavyweight motorcycles, provided for in item 692.50 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS).

After considering all relevant aspects of the case, including those set forth in Section 202(c) of the Trade Act of 1974, I have determined that granting import relief is consistent with our national economic interest. Therefore, I will proclaim the USITC five-year import relief remedy with one modification. I will impose tariff increases of 45 percent ad valorem in the first year,
--Ronald Reagan
383 posted on 03/12/2006 10:42:53 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: jec41
mutual agreement.

Really? And I thought DP World already had the right of first refusal, so the deal didn't go to the highest bidder, as you pretend to believe.
384 posted on 03/12/2006 10:44:21 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: jec41
That would be insane

Yes, many people feel the same way, about "free trade".
385 posted on 03/12/2006 10:45:53 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies]

To: jec41
Where exactly in all those dates do we rebel because we don't have free trade with the world. Yes we rebelled due to unfair taxation and unfair laws passed to give England a monopoly on our trade but We didn't say let's rebel and let the world have free trade with us. We wanted the tariffs to go to our local economy not an end to tariffs. We wanted fair trade not free trade. In fact it could be argued that the free trade that England was receiving had effects on the rebellion. Thus the free traders of England and the special money interest of England(i.e the East India tea company (sounds a lot like present day buying of congress to me) where the ones that started the ball rolling. If the founding fathers believed in free trade they would not have made them the central revenue source for the new country. I can not understand how someone can take that history and come away thinking that we fought for free trade. We were getting cheated then in trade and we are getting cheated now and the people are acting in the same manner.
386 posted on 03/12/2006 10:51:31 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies]

To: unseen
You forget to mention all that happened before the Chicoms took over. Politics changes things.

You are deceived. Politicians are masters at minupulating the masses. Thats what they do for a living. They produce no product and will make most any deal for reelection. When they are up there saying some irrational thing don't think them dumb. They have a reason and 99% of the time its money. Politics never change, it's always the most money. They can reverse course in one day if the money is greater. Keep your eye open. DP will sell the leases to some American company. When they do you might want to take a look at those companies political connections. You should hear something next week.

387 posted on 03/12/2006 10:52:06 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]

To: jec41

OK one last time. CFIUS ok'ed the deal. They reached their conclusion in lightning fast time not even using the full 45 days review. The deal was ok'ed by the P&O company shareholders. The crap hit the fan only when the story gained national media attention thanks to the Internet and blogging. So from your post you state that the President or his admin had to have been notified of the CFIUS decision. Now the President and Sec Snow say they didn't know about it. So either someone broke the law or someone is lying or they are so clueless that they were notified and forgot. Knowing politics I would say someone is lying to try not to appear weak on national security. I'll leave you to figure out who is lying.


388 posted on 03/12/2006 11:04:57 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: unseen
And as oil gets higher we will use less of it and develop other sources of energy and the Middle east will revert back to the backwater of the world that it has been since Mohammad rode out of the desert.

In all of history the average time of a government has been but 250 years, Democracy as we know it is a new experiment. We have already declined from a republic to a democracy. What ever the form no government survives ruled by the everyday whim of the masses. Unfortunately most people from their experience think they are unique and that a significant change will not occur in their life time. they ignore history at their peril.

389 posted on 03/12/2006 11:09:33 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: unseen

England a monopoly on our trade You said it yourself. they were restricted to trade with England.


390 posted on 03/12/2006 11:12:39 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 386 | View Replies]

To: jec41
The Chicoms don't have elections. Not having elections changes things. They don't care if the people are ok with the decsion.

And has far as politicians being Masters of manipulation. Hah. I don't know one person that believes anything a politician says outright. They are Masters of lies nothing more and nothing else. Only by a free independent press do politicians come close to saying the truth.
391 posted on 03/12/2006 11:13:35 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies]

To: jec41
It isn't the same thing as free trade. We WANTED the TARIFFS to go to US not to ENGLAND. What part of that is hard to grasp. That is not the same as free trade. England had free trade with us. We rebelled AGAINST free trade.
392 posted on 03/12/2006 11:16:54 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
mutual agreement.

Really? And I thought DP World already had the right of first refusal, so the deal didn't go to the highest bidder, as you pretend to believe.

As I pretend to believe. What conspiracy is in your mind? I didn't pretend to believe anything. The information has been in the business papers since last September. The last two bidders were DP and a Indonesian shipping company. DP made the last and highest bid. The stockholders voted and accepted the bid. Thats mutual agreement. They didn't have to accept it.

393 posted on 03/12/2006 11:22:46 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: jec41
We have already declined from a republic to a democracy. What ever the form no government survives ruled by the everyday whim of the masses


How very noble of you. I take it you are not one of the masses and your voice should be heard?

I look at it as an evolution. We have moved to a higher form of government.

In your view then Rome rose to a higher form of government when they shook off the tatters of the repressive Republic and donned the imperial robes then. To me that was a decline. When we turned away form the King and choose our own way that was an improvement to you it would seem a decline. The more power the people have received the stronger the country has become.
394 posted on 03/12/2006 11:26:43 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: jec41
In all of history the average time of a government has been but 250 years


And most of those that fell fell from within due to rank corruption, repressiveness, and elitism before any conquering force can close to its borders.
395 posted on 03/12/2006 11:31:32 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: unseen
So from your post you state that the President or his admin had to have been notified of the CFIUS decision.

I didn't state anything I gave you a copy of that part of the act. If you will go to the site you will find they have to give him a written conclusion and recommendation. They advised him there was no security risk and no reason to veto the deal. He has 15 days to read the recommendation and decide. Since DP has been approve many times by security checks no one saw a problem. You can figure out who's lying, I don't spend my time on conspiracy. If you don't like him don't vote for him. Its simple, you get a chance every four years to vote for the perfect candidate. If you want a liar think back to the first time you heard Arabs are buying our ports.

396 posted on 03/12/2006 11:42:12 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 388 | View Replies]

To: unseen
It isn't the same thing as free trade. We WANTED the TARIFFS to go to US not to ENGLAND. What part of that is hard to grasp. That is not the same as free trade. England had free trade with us. We rebelled AGAINST free trade.

Yes and they also wanted to be free to trade with other than England and without paying tariffs.

397 posted on 03/12/2006 11:45:58 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: jec41

Granted but they still wanted the other nations to pay them tariffs. Any way you cut it, it was not free trade.


398 posted on 03/12/2006 11:50:14 PM PST by unseen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: unseen

Thats your opinion and I would not attempt change however I think we grow more socialist.


399 posted on 03/12/2006 11:50:35 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: unseen
And most of those that fell fell from within due to rank corruption, repressiveness, and elitism before any conquering force can close to its borders.

I would agree. I fear the acts of those here more than any foreign enemy.

400 posted on 03/12/2006 11:57:00 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 581-590 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson