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 Americas 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 Walmarts 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. Lets not hide behind patriotic-sounding slogans. Lets 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 ...
This is not true. But they are working on it. Actually the GDP of China and USA are about the same size. They just have 4X the people we do.
Most cars in the US are domestically produced, even the foreign labels. I drive a Ford.
Most cars in the US are domestically produced, even the foreign labels. I drive a Ford.
So what I am saying it is better for the country to pay the additional cost to for domestic production, which is really pennies on the dollar, to save US jobs.
You and rudeboy will not acknowledge there is a social and economic cost to outsourcing. There is huge personal cost if its your job outsourced. IMO the social/economic costs are greater than the few pennies per dollar playing footsies with the ChiComs.
And don't get me started on the dollar sent to Washington that results in $1.50 more being spent.
I came across three articles today that you might find interesting:
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/07/29/escape-from-economics/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/02/19/economists-in-denial/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/10/01/the-new-face-of-class-war/
Now I’s off to read another one that just caught my eye;
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/07/30/nationalize-money-not-banks-herman-daly/
Damn. Why don’t you simply post from socialism.gov, and avoid the hassle?
Why should the public pay interest to the private banking sector to provide a medium of exchange that the government can provide at little or no cost?
I don't pay interest for the FRNs in my wallet. Do you? Where do you mail the check?
Why should seigniorage (profit to the issuer of fiat money) go largely to the private sector rather than entirely to the government (the commonwealth)?
The private sector doesn't mint our coins or issue our FRNs, so why would they earn seigniorage?
Keep fiat money, but move from fractional reserve banking to a system of 100% reserve requirements.
Great idea, who wants to earn interest from bank deposits or have the ability to borrow from a bank? No more mortgages will be a sure way to help home values improve.
This would put control of the money supply and seigniorage entirely with the government rather than largely with private banks.
Excellent! If we need a loan, we can just borrow from government. What could go wrong? (See the government issued student loan bubble for a clue).
Banks would no longer be able to live the alchemists dream by creating money out of nothing and lending it at interest.
Banks don't create money out of thin air, they create it out of customer deposits.
With 100% reserves every dollar loaned to a borrower would be a dollar previously saved by a depositor
Kinda like now, you silly doofus.
To make up for the decline and eventual elimination of bank- created, interest-bearing money, the government can pay some of its expenses by issuing more non interest-bearing fiat money.
Yes, let's eliminate bank lending so the government can run the printing press to pay for wasteful spending.
Returning to domestic institutions, the Treasury would replace the Fed (which is owned by and operated in the interests of the commercial banks).
Is that why the commercial banks got $1.6 billion in Fed dividends while the US Treasury got $76.9 billion last year?
It's been a while since I've said it, but it's still true, Paul Craig Roberts is an assclown.
In your opinion? Any data a little harder than that?
It can't because the cost of labor for each manufactured item only is only 10% (in average in the USA) of the retail price
Is that your opinion again?
You and rudeboy will not acknowledge there is a social and economic cost to outsourcing.
Yes, there is a cost to US unemployment. Just as there is a cost when the government imposes a tariff to protect a domestic producer. Look at the idiocy of our sugar quotas to see how that works.
There is huge personal cost if its your job outsourced.
Or when your job is eliminated because the government raised the price of the steel that's used to manufacture your product.
Don’t forget, according to the “wisdom” on this thread, free-traders are Marxists, but their opponents can post from Counterpunch with impunity. Can we reform our school system now, please?
China is a bubble..
I must have read/heard that somewhere I am not knowledgeable enough to judge. But I believe it and like it. Go directly to democracy after the crash and revolution? I don't think so. Back behind the Bamboo Curtain as the Maoists take over? More likely the latter.
Even as Mao was taking over China in the late 1940s my grandmother was telling me that China will rule the world. She was no fan of "agrarian reform" it's just what her Bible belt churches told her was God's punishment.
Well Grandma missed it by just that tiny bit.
More like, standing atop history yelling, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Paranoia & Fantasy on the RightThe election season is upon us and along with it comes the standard Republican claims to be up against a powerful Democratic Party machine backed by the awesome clout of the union bosses of American labor. We have been told this endlessly by pundits on the reactionary right such as Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck those happy to misrepresent and distort the long decline and near-extinction of the American labor movement.
www.counterpunch.org
The Real Story Behind Issa v. HolderAll my life I would have sympathized with the Black man being hounded by a vicious Caucasian (who happens to be the richest man in the United States Congress). But watching Attorney General Eric Holder taking verbal abuse from Rep. Darrell Issa last week, all that came to mind were lines by Martin Niemoller . . . .
www.counterpunch.org
Enjoy!
Interesting analysis of China to ponder.
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.