Posted on 07/28/2012 4:02:37 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are currently fighting over who is the more patriotic. Obama slams Romney for having outsourced jobs to China during his Bain Capital days. Romney punches back by labeling Obama “Outsourcer in Chief.” The latest is that both John Boehner and Harry Reid are voicing outrage over America’s made-in-China Olympic uniforms. “Burn them!” thunders Reid.
Republicans and Democrats strangely agree that outsourcing is unpatriotic, and that the moral and patriotic thing to do is to “Hire American” and “Buy American.”
Well, no. Not in a thousand years. The fear of outsourcing and international trade is economic nonsense and moral blindness. More than that: this anti-profit attitude is un-American.
Despite the ongoing Europeanization of America, America still symbolizes the land of freedom, entrepreneurship, profit-making, above all, individualism.
But collectivism is the premise of “Hire/Buy American”: we are to view ourselves and others not as individuals, but as units of a nation. Businesses are urged to pay more in labor costs, simply to hire workers who are American; consumers are urged to forgo Walmart’s low prices, pay more, simply because the pricier goods were made by “our guys.” This is not rational patriotism, it is not Americanism, it's primitive tribalism.
American individualism means making buying decisions on the basis of economic merit, giving no regard to the nationality or race of the seller. Let’s not hide behind patriotic-sounding slogans. Let’s name things straight for a change: giving preference to American sellers over foreign sellers is the same mindless injustice as giving preference to sellers who are white over those who are black.
Economic nationalism is as morally outrageous as racism. Buying on the basis of nationality or race is the same collectivist evil: judging men and their products by the group from which they come, not by merit.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Ooookay... ;^)
Trillions of dollars in lop-sided trade with China, had no effect on China. Okay then. I appreciate you bringing me up to speed.
Tens of trillions of dollars worth of trade over a decade didn’t have as big an impact as the decision to allow some capitalist principles to come into play.
Anotherwords, if those changes allowing capitalist principles to come into play, and the U. S. and the rest of the West had not traded with China, China would be just as advanced as it is today? I don’t think you believe that.
I sure as hell don’t.
So now referring to important similar events in history is to be ignored if they don’t back your arguments? They’re to be seen as straw-man arguments?
The fact is, other European nations had robust trade with Germany. Did that stave off WWII or not?
China is militaristic and expansionist. Deal with it.
I can explain to you what a strawman argument is, if you desire.
Your taxes wouldn't go up if the opportunities to invest capital profitably existed in this country. That's the problem. Not the freedom of Americans to buy the best bargain wherever that may be.
All of you protectionists behave as if it's an act of God to have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, deficit government spending, and constant monetary inflation. Your choice to "fix" things is to penalize ourselves.
Makes no sense to me.
We approached it in the late nineteenth century up till WWI. Interestingly enough, it coincided with the classical gold standard.
And even if it never existed as you say, it is still a goal we should seek. Governments/kings/lords notwithstanding.
My freedom should only be abridged by a declaration that a particular country is, indeed, an enemy. We've done it with Cuba and North Korea. I have no problem with either.
Bear in mind, though, that your exuberance to punish China will result in untold thousands of job losses and bankruptcies in the U.S.. It isn't only cheap TV's and underwear we buy from the Chinese; businesses import a lot, too. They will be left high and dry.
There are always consequences. Economics is the study of alternatives.
By the way, your assumption that I'm not concerned with the country's security is insulting and unnecessary to the discussion. We have exchanged comments before. You should know better.
I generally find such insults an indication of the weakness of the insulter's argument.
That’s a lot of rhetoric in defense of communism. Don’t be blind to their fanaticism; it’s as strong as the Islamic fanaticism. China’s military buildup is not without purpose any more than Russia’s is. Not a good sign when those countries build up their militaries while the US continually downsizes.
Tell me, does it make you feel safer knowing our manufacturing base is being decimated - from a national security point of view? Or perhaps you feel you will be dead and gone long before another "real" war takes place. And no, no President in the future will use nukes even if the invading commmie hordes have made it to the shores of the Potomac.
Nothing is more vital to us security than a strong manufacturing base. Commies love your type. Sellout free trade gloBULLists aren't called Free Traitors for nuthin'.
1rudboy, you don’t have the tools. Thanks anyway.
And don't forget, their solution to the high tax rate driving our corporations overseas is to raise taxes even higher. It is a cognitive dissonance of the highest order.
Small wonder they wrap themselves in the flag and call others "traitors." Alinsky would be proud.
Down or up, you’ve made it clear you don’t have the tools. Not my problem child...
No one likes to be told they chose the weakest argument they could, deliberately, in order to appear intelligent. I fully understand. You have to play to your level.
1RudeBoy, it’s okay with me if that’s your take on it.
I think that it’s best if we avoid even the slightest chance of China becoming what NAZI Germany was to the world. China is much larger, and the impact would potentially be much more dire.
If you wish to dismiss this reality, I’m okay with how that will reflect on either of us. If no other person on earth can see the validity of my argument, so be it.
People trashed Winston Churchill too. I’ll never be as great a man as him, but there are things I will stand up for, even if people with the intellect of a child refuse to acknowledge the validity of the argument.
Later...
And I'm not "dismissing" anything other than your bone-headed comparison. As for the rest, if telling folks the obvious makes you feel bigger, go right ahead.
The current tax rates are to high, i agree. A cancer patient can be cured by killing them, just as high tax rates can be cured by killing domestic manufacturing. See the logic there? I am in favor of zero taxes on anyone, get it? Until we get there we have to keep out means of production here. I just has to be that way, otherwise you sell out future generations of AMERICANS and put them in danger.
Fixed.
There is no protectionist logic there, at all. You appear to be taking it on faith that taxes will fall after our domestic manufacturing is killed. Why should they, when protectionists argue that taxes should rise because domestic manufacturing is dying. Deathbed conversion, but only after death?
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.