Replies

Sounds more like a first step to socialism.

I am truly amazed at the number of "conservatives" who see nothing wrong with robbing their fellow Americans by forcing those fellow Americans to buy their products regardless of the price.

You seem to think that other Americans owe you something, that it is acceptable to use the power of the government to coerce other Americans to give up part of their paycheck, paying more for a product just so you have a job at the salary and benefits you think appropriate. How democratic, a "living wage" for IT professionals.

When you demand the government protect your job, you are, in effect, demanding the right to force other Americans to part with their money to support you. Explain how this is different from a Democrat demanding higher taxes to support some Democrat constituency, or a "living wage".

Sounds more like a first step to socialism.Actually it is just the reverse. What is about using taxpayer dollars to pick winners and losers in an economy that you find so anti-socialist. The letter addresses two specific issues First and primary is OPIC which is funding the development of private enterprise operations outside the borders of the USA. It is against that internationalist socialist program that the letter is about. Your attack on this is clear support of Socialism per se. Further it is clearly in support of other nations against the USA as it is for taking money by force from Americans to give to poor foreign nations.

I am truly amazed at the number of "conservatives" who see nothing wrong with robbing their fellow Americans by forcing those fellow Americans to buy their products regardless of the price.You see nothing wrong with robbing your fellow Americans to get goods and services for your to use. I am against robbery. You are saying robbery is fine as long as you are the one who personally benefits. You are not a conservative as a Conservative does not believe in using the power of the state to take money from some citizens to guive to others for no value recieved.

You seem to think that other Americans owe you something, that it is acceptable to use the power of the government to coerce other Americans to give up part of their paycheck, paying more for a product just so you have a job at the salary and benefits you think appropriate.

On the contrary I am against forcing anyone to give up a part of their paycheck to arbitarily benefit any other regardless of who if you are on the recieveing end or not.

How democratic, a "living wage" for IT professionals.

I did not mention a living wage for IT professionals you did. Let the wages be determined by a Free Market. I have pointed out a programs and policies which interfere with a Free market within the USA. You have set up a straw man and knocked it down. In the future if you are addressing this post please address the points raised. When you demand the government protect your job, you are, in effect, demanding the right to force other Americans to part with their money to support you. Explain how this is different from a Democrat demanding higher taxes to support some Democrat constituency, or a "living wage

Further please do not misrepresent what I wrote.

You 'free traders' almost always get it wrong with your argument that protectionism cost consumers money. Think about it... we do live in a socialist country. When another american (or another million americans!) loses his job and can't find another, he doesn't disappear and neither does his family. He does however still consume, require health care, a home, etc. And who pays? I do! So in effect I subsidize your ability to export more job to china, because the price you pay the chicoms for cheap junk, and the price your customers pay you, in no way is equal to the actual cost to the US as a whole. Factor in the social welfare benefits that are paid out and I think you'll find that the cost differential between american and most foreign goods just about disappears.

The above also applies to your 'free trader' argument about mass immigration. Sure, the individual businessman benefits from the cheap labor, but society picks up the tab for that cheap laborer's housing, food, medical care, schooling, etc. Only an idiot would think that a uneducated mexican with 12 dependents and a $5 an hour under-the-table income is a benefit to our nation as a whole.

Bottom line? a socialist welfare state combined with the greed and self-centeredness of people like you equals a increasingly rapid trip down the path to national suicide. I hope your gated community has strong gates because before long they will surely be tested.

Ummm... I think if one thinks about something totally, not just a 'little bit', they would see that nike tennis shoes ten years ago cost $100 with American labor. Today, they cost $100 + with two dollar an hour Chinese labor... It's a no brainer buddy. Get with it...

You seem to think that other Americans owe you something

If members of a nation did not owe anything one to another, what would be a reason for such nation to exist? To protect and serve the international corporations? You got it wrong, sir.

I suspect you will find this thread of interest.

I am truly amazed at the number of "conservatives" who see nothing wrong with robbing their fellow Americans by forcing those fellow Americans to buy their products regardless of the price.

It might help to actually read the text of the letter. It does not advocate subsidizing American jobs. It urges that we can OPIC, a government agency that not only subsidizes sending jobs overseas but insures businesses against the extra political risk of overseas operations.