Sinking Currency, Sinking Country

World Net Daily ^ | 11/02/07 | Pat Buchanan

[Thorin]

The euro, worth 83 cents in the early George W. Bush years, is at $1.45.

The British pound is back up over $2, the highest level since the Carter era. The Canadian dollar, which used to be worth 65 cents, is worth more than the U.S. dollar for the first time in half a century.

Oil is over $90 a barrel. Gold, down to $260 an ounce not so long ago, has hit $800.

Have gold, silver, oil, the euro, the pound and the Canadian dollar all suddenly soared in value in just a few years?

Nope. The dollar has plummeted in value, more so in Bush's term than during any comparable period of U.S. history. Indeed, Bush is presiding over a worldwide abandonment of the American dollar.

Is it all Bush's fault? Nope.

The dollar is plunging because America has been living beyond her means, borrowing $2 billion a day from foreign nations to maintain her standard of living and to sustain the American Imperium.

[texastoo]

It probably is. LOL!

[1rudeboy]

Don't count on it: hedgetrimmer had her panties in a wad for months about whether my parents were U.S. citizens. I would've answered the question if she had only explained what the hell that had to do with anything.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Avoiding the question? I wonder why?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Can't answer the question. I'm shocked!

[Toddsterpatriot]

Taxes on foreign companies ensure that the US government receives funds without increasing the amount of tax placed on US corporations and persons.

Tariffs on foreign goods cost US corporations and persons money.

Therefore, that ensures a lower tax rate for domestic business and keeps more money in the pockets of US consumers.

Except the consumers who have to pay higher prices.

It also acts as an incentive for our consumers, who have more money to spend, to buy domestic... as the foreign goods have a higher sale price

And those domestic prices won't rise when the foreign prices increase?

[hedgetrimmer]

US corporations

LOLOL! Only transnational and foreign corporations complain about tariffs! LOLOL!

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only transnational and foreign corporations complain about tariffs!

Only a foreign citizen would say that.

[hedgetrimmer]

You’ve really lost your touch there, Toddsternotapatriot. You used to be much more creative.

[Freedom4US]

The fact is that there are people in the world who will do your job for less money.

Sure. It's always been that way. Except, in addition to making oh, 10 bucks a day, the employer pays no social security taxes, no workers compensation premiums, there are no OSHA standards, no EPA requirements, are not subject to punitive bullshit lawsuits, corporate taxes, etc etc. The US then lets these folks sell their products in US markets and avoid ALL of those additional expenses. This is laughingly called "free trade". Give me a break.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Still not answering the question. Tell me you at least came here legally.

[redgolum]

.

[hedgetrimmer]

Except, in addition to making oh, 10 bucks a day

You know that many countries the "free traders" adore have slave labor, and their wages are more like $.30 a day ( the nonprison labor).

These countries are China,India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Viet Nam-- all the countries that embrace socialism and communism are the friends of the "free traders".

They lie and deny, but the "free traders" wanting to preserve slavery in the United States were in part responsible for starting the civil war. You can lay the blame for the irish genocide brought on by the potato famine at the feet of the "free traders" as well. Their hands may be as bloody as the communists, when all is said and done.

[1rudeboy]

This is laughingly called "free trade."

Not really. You call it "free trade," because opponents of free markets use the term in whatever fashion suits their argument of the moment.

[1rudeboy]

Say, hedgetrimmer, read my comment above and please direct me to the FTA’s in force with “China,India, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Viet Nam.” Thanks in advance.

[Freedom4US]

So it is your contention that the current state of affairs are free markets? (I should also point out that those same countries that flood our markets under the conditions outlined above have all sorts of hoops to jump through preventing exports into their countries)

[1rudeboy]

Of course not. The purpose of a FTA is to remove unnatural barriers to our exports. It is an agreement between two countries that goods and services are treated equally by the two. Duncan Hunter refers to the concept as a “mirror.”

[hedgetrimmer]

It is an agreement between two countries that goods and services are treated equally by the two.

Actually its slightly more complicated than that. With "free trade" goods produced by slaves in third world countries have to be treated equally with goods produced domestically by free people. US citizens must purchase goods produced by communists to bolster economies of communist countries and make communist dictators wealthy beyond belief, at the same time suppressing any repulsion or horror that free people are contributing to the maintenance of communism in the world. Under "free trade", there cannot be any discrimination against communism as a form of government in their purchases, because the transnational corporations and our corrupt government want it that way.

That's why we call it "free trade". It's a horrible terrible joke on the American people. We're not even 'free' to keep money out of communist countries anymore, because that would be anti-"free trade". And as the "free trade" agenda is pursued, communism is strengthening in the world.

[hedgetrimmer]

unnatural barriers

aversion to communism is an 'unnatural barrier' to the "free traders".

[1rudeboy]

I guess that explains why you opposed our FTA with Australia. Not.

[hedgetrimmer]

Huh?