Posted on 08/19/2003 10:51:25 AM PDT by MonroeDNA
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:06:58 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Whenever an expert touts a totally new theory, invention or miracle medicine, a healthy dose of skepticism is called for. The recent writings of Paul Craig Roberts fit the mold. He claims that two centuries of economic thought in support of free trade, dating back to Adam Smith and David Ricardo, have been overturned by new developments and his own unique insights. But reality is more straightforward, and far less ominous, than he depicts.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
So if his facts were true, you would change your mind about things?
The reason is that they want accuracy. If you contend the facts are wrong, prove it.
Now there is a scientific number! And you wonder where he came up with his numbers? LOL
Does your momma know you have a mouth like this? Perhaps you should start a forum called "Free-Trade Republic" for you and your like-minded friends. Until then, I think you should stop the abuse and lighten up. Your arguments gain no respect with name calling attached.
Never feed an angry troll.
No reality there either is there?
Reality is a bitch for those who can't get the concepts behind them. Learn the concepts and then you won't fall for the false reality rhetoric they are sloshing around here.
In other words, no facts can be known. So I guess we are back to concepts.
Actually I don't think it's off topic at all.
Of course it's off topic. You went to my profile to see if you could find out anything about ME, instead of simply responding to what I said. Who I am is irrelevant. What I believe is irrelevant. Why I believe it is irrelevant. Where "I'm coming from" is irrelevant.
Ideas and concepts are the same as theories.
That is incorrect. I can have a concept about factual things. I can have ideas about factual things. That is not theory.
If it cost nothing to set up shop in India then, by definition, zero US capital investment would flow to India.
Exactly. Griswold concentrates only on the movement of capital, not of jobs. Regarding the number of jobs expected to be outsourced, following is an excerpt from an article titled "Pink Slips Continue Unabated Over U.S. Technology Drain" that can be found at http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/1/8/39313681.html:
“A grassroots movement to stop offshore is emerging. On June 23, the AFL-CIO gave testimony before a U.S House of Representatives Committee on Small Business and quoted a study, by Forester Research, that estimates 3.3 million jobs and 136 billion in wages to shift overseas in the next decade. A survey by DeLoitte Research forecasts a shift of 2 million jobs and 356 billion by 2008, and this is just within top 100 financial services firms. Both studies paint a bleak picture for white-collar technology jobs."
Regarding the target countries for the outsourced jobs, it states:
“India for now is, by far, the biggest but not the only beneficiary of this trend. Russia, China, and others, with an educated and cheaper workforce, are getting involved as well. Every year hundreds of thousands of college grads, in those countries, with degrees in computer science, are replacing U.S. programmers, and unfortunately this trend has just begun.
The DeLoitte Research survey can be found at http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/dtt_research_fsi_offshorefinance_063003.pdf. Concerning the number jobs expected to be outsourced in the financial-services area, it states:
We estimate that 13 million people are employed in financial-services jobs in mature industrial economies. Taking the same 15 per cent cost savings, this translates into the potential movement of up to two million jobs.
Regarding where the jobs are expected to go, it states:
In the future, we anticipate that offshore activity will be spread around the Indian Ocean Rim — from South Africa, through the Indian sub-continent, to China, Malaysia and down to Australia. The hub market will be India, potentially accounting for as many as one million new positions from offshored financial services.
Well said!!!!
Net harm from tariffs. Surely if one exists the Cato institute would have it to back up their claims. I believe that the Cato institute claims that India's economic advantage is merely their low wage hard working well educated workforce Maybe I wrong but this site disporves that canard Link
I do not believe I asked you to.
You want every other American to support your underqualified, underproductive ass at the checkout counter, we have to pay so you get paid.
Now should I mention personal abus e and teh rules of this web site? Naw.
Take a hike.No comment.
Step up a like a trouper and confront your shameful vocational defecits vis-a-vis some third world guy, or be an assclown among a thundering herd of dismal assclowns who are marginalizing Free Republic right now.
Now should I respond with a report of personal abuse to the admin moderator now? No, I think I will let this stand.
This place has become the wet dream of every lefty as a caricature right wing world John Birch Society pantloads and retarded redneck turds
Now from this little peice of personal abuse I would be forced to coclude you are incapable of forming an intellectual argument other than to repeat internationalist drivel.
I've got a twelve point proposal that has every bit the reality and plausibility of political implementation as yours.
1. I'd like to build the world a home
2. And furnish it with love
3. Grow apple trees and honey bees
4. And snow-white turtle doves
5. I'd like to teach the world to sing
6. In perfect harmony
7. I'd like to hold it in my arms
8. And keep it company
9. I'd like to see the world for once
10.All standing hand in hand
11.And hear them echo through the hills
12."Ah, peace throughout the land"
How about a little Freeper dignity, derring do and pride?
After this post I must confess I am amazed at your gaul. At this point I really should hit the abuse button. If anyone can point ourt where I have addressed an abusive post to this "master debater" I would dearly love to see it.
Actually the academic standard if one is presenting something as fact is to reference the source and to allow the reader easy verification of a questionable fact. The presumption being a controversial assertion of fact can then be checked against sources for verification. Now clearly an assertion of fact made before a knowledgeable audience that could be clearly contradicted by the public records does not require such reference. But a "fact" on the actual dollar amount on the investment in China needs an impartial reference. Or are you going to claim the Cato institute is an impartial source of facts. The Cato institute is a clear advocate for open borders and no import duties levied by the USA at least IMHO. if you are alleging this is not the case I will listen to the discussion and I will if necessary back up my assertion with refernces to Cato Institute documents.
I had one of these Free Trade advocates last night who was actively looking forward to Civil War in the USA because it would lead to a break up of the USA. I did hit the abuse button on my own post responding to him because I was concerned that he was walking the line about advocating the violent overthrow of the US government. I did not ask that his posts be pulled but I did ask the admin moderator to review for the sake of Free Republic
I guess I am becoming a leader of the Sane Trade Policy movement. I guess that carriers some responsibilities. So I will control my anger.
The Cato institute is a clear advocate for open borders and no import duties levied by the USA at least IMHO.
I'm glad that you claimed this as opinion. Because as fact, it is incorrect.
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.