Freedom though dependence? Less government by global ceding of sovereignty?
Tell me why we can't make everything we need, especially the parts for our machines of national defense, here. 
Posted on 01/16/2008 4:01:09 AM PST by LowCountryJoe
Rochester
IN the days before Tuesday’s Republican presidential primary in Michigan, Mitt Romney and John McCain battled over what the government owes to workers who lose their jobs because of the foreign competition unleashed by free trade. Their rhetoric differed — Mr. Romney said he would “fight for every single job,” while Mr. McCain said some jobs “are not coming back” — but their proposed policies were remarkably similar: educate and retrain the workers for new jobs.
All economists know that when American jobs are outsourced, Americans as a group are net winners. What we lose through lower wages is more than offset by what we gain through lower prices. In other words, the winners can more than afford to compensate the losers. Does that mean they ought to? Does it create a moral mandate for the taxpayer-subsidized retraining programs proposed by Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney?
Um, no. Even if you’ve just lost your job, there’s something fundamentally churlish about blaming the very phenomenon that’s elevated you above the subsistence level since the day you were born. If the world owes you compensation for enduring the downside of trade, what do you owe the world for enjoying the upside?
[Snip]
One way to think about that is to ask what your moral instincts tell you in analogous situations. Suppose, after years of buying shampoo at your local pharmacy, you discover you can order the same shampoo for less money on the Web. Do you have an obligation to compensate your pharmacist? If you move to a cheaper apartment, should you compensate your landlord? When you eat at McDonald’s, should you compensate the owners of the diner next door? Public policy should not be designed to advance moral instincts that we all reject every day of our lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Freedom though dependence? Less government by global ceding of sovereignty?
Tell me why we can't make everything we need, especially the parts for our machines of national defense, here.
This appears to be a strawman. Why does the tool of laid monopoly groundwork have to be seized by one company, or a "company" at all?
It sounds like something that happens every day, according to your posts. You must have dozens of examples. Why haven't you posted them?
Foreigners aren't evil. They just are not controllable by our democratic process and many are unstable, and many of both don't like America. If you rely in any way on something unstable, you are unstable to that extent.
Why would it matter if prices were higher if American industries met the demand and all the work of production and distribution that can be done were done by American workers, and those workers were such a market that their wages enables them to afford those prices?
What you call "protectionism" I call self-sufficiency, and we became a world power with the highest standard of living in that world using that approach.
It is dependency that inevitably results in economic disaster. It always entertains me when someone argues in the face of commonsense and observation.
Learn the concept of comparative advantage. If you make everything we "need" in this country alone, prices would rise dramatically.
Well first technically a monopoly is one company. But if your suggesting that multiple companies will collude together to essentially act as one monopoly, basic game theory will show why such a situation is very short lived and invariably resorts back to competition.
You still haven't said what company, or even industry, will become this monopoly.
Because a declining standard of living is not the way to economic prosperity.
What you call "protectionism" I call self-sufficiency, and we became a world power with the highest standard of living in that world using that approach.
Uh huh, explain to me why the 20th Century is littered with examples of countries that have stagnated when protectionism is put into place (i.e India) yet prospered greatly as soon as those protectionist policies were removed?
If protectionism is so great, why is our standard of living higher than ever today? Why is our GDP at all time highs? If you state this isn't due to trade, you better have facts to back this up.
Actually, just to make this air-tight [in the case that WT goes all nutty and attempts to wade through the minutia], real prices would rise dramatically. We do not know what would happen to nominal prices given the new arangement and the Fed/Treasury response to it. In other words, Mr. Terrell, the number of hours of labor it would take, on average for most people, to pay for the stuff that they currently consume, would increase substantially. This would lead them to make choices between sacrificing leisure time or sacrificing some of the consumption that they currently enjoy.
When was that? Be specific.
As late as '50s, '60s, as I remember.
So? You don't think we can do that today? Why not?
Because, increasingly, we may be fighting those who make the things we need, especially parts necessary to our national defense and prosecuting that very war.
No, I don't believe we can fight a war on the level of WWII, or even WWI. If you do, then give me some hard evidence to hope.
Do any of those laws prevent the price driven dependency from being taken advantage by foreign entities?
Why the strawman? You know very well I am not claiming monopolies are occurring any day. I have been trying mightily to get you to see that foreign monopoly setups are happening in just the same way domestic monopolies used to be.
What makes you think I said that? Here's what I said, " I think all our vital components should be made here or by our close allies"
No, I don't believe we can fight a war on the level of WWII,
How long was it before we could fight a war on the level of WWII, during WWII? And who would we be fighting this WWII level war against?
If you do, then give me some hard evidence to hope.
All I could find was this.
Ask DeBeers.
You know very well I am not claiming monopolies are occurring any day.
Oh, so there aren't monopolies? Great.
I have been trying mightily to get you to see that foreign monopoly setups are happening in just the same way domestic monopolies used to be.
But none have happened yet. Thanks.
Learn the simplest fact about internal economics. If production and distribution of our needs occurs here the prices can never rise beyond the capability of people to afford them, else wages must rise to achieve parity.
Besides, we have done it here, becoming great by dent of the standard of living and self sufficiency it brought. It is foolish to predict some different outcome than that which has already happened with the same approach.
It takes the same foolishness that it takes to repeatedly try something expecting different results.
That's why North Koreans eat grass and bark.
That sums up protectionism very well.
Enough with the strawmen. Deal with the reality at hand.
Enough with the hyperbole. Give examples of this monopoly. What is it? What industry is it in? Without facts to back up your claim, your argument has no point.
Be advised that, for the balance of our existence, we have already done it, achieving economic prosperity.
Uh huh, explain to me why the 20th Century is littered with examples of countries that have stagnated when protectionism is put into place (i.e India) yet prospered greatly as soon as those protectionist policies were removed?
Not this one. I couldn't care less about the others. Let them deal with their own problems.
If protectionism is so great, why is our standard of living higher than ever today? Why is our GDP at all time highs? If you state this isn't due to trade, you better have facts to back this up.
Government welfare systems. And already beginning to wear out and go in the hole. Trade inequities are making it worse.
Facts to back this up?
We have already done what you say will ruin us for the greatest part of our existence, with the return of great wealth and prosperity. I really don't need to make an argument beyond that.
You need to show me have laws of the physical universe has changed such that we can't do it again.
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.