White-collar jobs may not be back soon

Dallas Morning News via Boston Globe ^ | August 3, 2003 | Angela Shah

[LS]

Typical pro-tariff guy to favor slavery. Jefferson strongly opposed the tariff (he was right). Hamilton favored it.

Marx hated anything that involved individual choice, and favored any expansion of government power he could get. More tariffs, more power, more tariffs, more power. That, sir, is marxist, and it doesn't matter if the Founders, who understood things differently, didn't see it that way. Hamilton came from the old British mercantilist Big Government policies, and Adam Smith was quite new by the time he was Sec Treas. But you know SO much about history, just have at it.

[Fraulein]

True. A friend of mine's father has been a plumber for eons, and he has done well supporting himself and his family.

[LS]

Jefferson opposed tariffs.

[LS]

Nice to see you are advocating personal violence against me. You quasi-Marxists always end up in the same point---the end of a gun.

[harpseal]

Um. Our nation had slavery too. Didn't mean it was right, just, moral, or even good economics. And the GOP was wrong on this. Thank God they got some sense.

History shows that it was Abraham Linclon who issued the emanciapation proclomation. Therefor since the entire posts only mentions slavery we see that you are advocating slavery.

[LS]

You are pretty funny. I love to see Marxists trapped in their own stupid logic. Keep at it. So now you support tariffs and slavery?

[ninenot]

Name one technology that is not in immediate danger of being outsourced or off-shored? The only one I can think of is Nuclear Submarines!

...until HRC becomes President.

[harpseal]

Typical pro-tariff guy to favor slavery.

Actually you have your history and the present day wrong. By opposing reasonable tariffs to counter other nation's restrictions on trade one is acting against slavery wherever found.

Jefferson strongly opposed the tariff (he was right).

Jefferson's opposition to the tariff was limited as he favored tariffs primarily for revenue and in some induistries he recognized as crucial to American defense.

Hamilton favored it.Finally you got something correct not enough to pass basic history or economicsbut something correct.

Marx hated anything that involved individual choice, and favored any expansion of government power he could get.He also opposed tariffs by his own writings on teh subject 6they got in the way of a unified international system.

More tariffs, more power, more tariffs, more power.That is an ubsanstaiated allegation that contradiucts history.

That, sir, is marxist, and it doesn't matter if the Founders, who understood things differently, didn't see it that way.

Since your position is the position of Karl Marx and you try to contradict facts this allegation refutes itself.

Hamilton came from the old British mercantilist Big Government policies, and Adam Smith was quite new by the time he was Sec Treas. But you know SO much about history, just have at it.

I have and about the only thing you have gotten right was that Alexander Hamilton favored protective tariffs. Maybe you should read something that is outside of the reading list for Democratic underground or Beijing University.

[hedgetrimmer]

Tariffs protect private property, which is the cornerstone of the American Republic. They protect property by allowing the owner to keep its value relative to our nation's economy and not relative to an economic standard set by another nation. The American economic engine has been an entity unto itself and has done very well by the American people and yes, tariffs have assured this.

Through globalist socialist free trade the protective value of the tariff has been lost. You can see that now private property of Americans is now being related to the lowest economic standards in the world, those of low wage or slave labor nations.

It is marxist to promote the idea that Americans should lose all their wealth is it not? Isn't this the loss of private property Marx was so eager to accomplish?

You are destroying the meaning of the word tariff by expanding its meaning to be that it denies individuals the ability to create their own value. The fact that you are trying to do this is classic imposition of Marxist thought on another culture.

Here is what a tariff is:
A list or system of duties imposed by a government on imported or exported goods.

Remember our government was chartered by our founding fathers to _protect_ the individual, and that means protecting the value of his property, his money, his way of life, then so be it.

Our governments job is _not_ to give global corporations and third world countries the right to bankrupt us and throw our economy into chaos, which is clearly what it is doing now.

[harpseal]

Nice to see you are advocating personal violence against me. You quasi-Marxists always end up in the same point---the end of a gun.

I am merely advocating that all enemies of the USA foreign and domestic be tried convicted and punished appropriately. Now you call me a qausi Marxist and you are the one advocating Marxist policies. i have shown you that tariffs are not Marxist. Historically they predate marxism and Marx wqas opposed to tariffs. A "Communist" state has no need of tariffs because teh state controls the economy. tariffs are a capitalist concept and it was only when the socialist/communist economy of the PRC was changed to begin the introduction of some capitalist priciples to increase productivity that tariffs were enacted there.

What we have now is a situation where in the name of Communism/Sociaism tariffs and other trade barriers much higher than any the US has had since Smoot Hawley are in place in China and we are calling that Free Trade I call for tariffs to balance predatory trade practices and governmentsubsidies and you call me a Marxist while you mention nothing about the abuses of teh real Marxists and have not even read enough to understand basic History so that you presume the Republican Party favored slavery.

Call me when you have taken some thorazine.

[LS]

And call me when you plan to end the threats. I see you still haven't backed off them. Care to reconsider?

[LS]

Tariffs steal private property from some to benefit others, pure and simple. Marx would have no trouble with this, as it brings about an end to pure competition, and, especially, to individual liberty. That was his central goal. In that sense they are marxist.

It is baloney to say that they allow a producer to "keep the value." Value is not determined either by the producer or the GOVERNMENT---except in marxist societies. Value is determined by the MARKET, which is exactly what Marx opposed.

[LS]

So the south was wrong to oppose tariffs? I want to make sure I understand you: the support for tariffs and liberty go together, right?

(BTW, the tariff was our only source of income other than land sales. Didn't make it right.)

[LS]

Um, I'd watch that if I were you. Mr. Robinson does not take kindly to that crap. But I do expect it from some of you guys.

[RaceBannon]

Well, it is the quickest way right now for me, to go to the local Community College, I only need 5 courses for the ASEE since I already got an ASME, plus, I qualified for some aid due to being unemployed so long and underemployed fo the last 2 years!

Either way, I want to go into the trades more than the technology, unless I can learn some SCADA system and get a strong job as a programmer somewhere, but that means manufacturing has to increase, too!

So, TRADES seems to be the way to go, and the AS will get me in the door somewhere, my Nephew just got into his journeyman's and his dad is still friendly with the family, I have some pull somehwere now

Still need the courses...

Someone talkedme into calling a truck company, drive full time over the road, it sounds much more stable than anything I can think of, too...(sigh)

[renosathug]

One place to start is at Equiserve.com

[RaceBannon]

read?

I have been reading the material to retrain myself, that is what I spend my time reading, and allI dare to read now are the want ads!!

22 weeks, and people throw out cliches to people like me!

I swear, all these cheerleaders must have never worked in manufacturing!

No Offense, I know you are trying to help, but I am ready to give up on all the lies/half-truths I was taught as a child and up about the US being the world's leader in manufacturing, I saw too much in my 43 years, and being from Ct, I honestly worked for 2 companies that are now in China, 3 that are out of business otherwise.

I dont see any of this as bneing a simple market caused condition, I clearly see this as the result of politics supporting big business decisions.

There was a day when a business had a responsibility to the peope it employed and the township it was in. To move to another area just to make a bigger buck, and for no other reason was considered a form of treason because of the broken lives it left behind, and the shattered hopes and dreams.

We can lay the blame at the feet of many reasons, but when people try to tell me the problem is people like me whining about it, when in reality all we are doing is pointing out the emperor has no clothes...

Why cant people see? We have sent overseas the means to manufacture, the very machines that will be used against us!! The very industries that were our bread and butter that will be used to put ur remaining buisinesses out on the street because they are funded by Communist or Fascist countries artificially propping up their industries with government monies while we try to do it with Persoan money of the business owner!

We cannot compete against this unless we impose tariffs on imported goods!!

[MatthewViti]

"Totalitarianism is when people believe they can punish their way to perfection."
-- House Speaker Newt Gingrich, at a President's Day Republican fundraiser, May 1998

[hedgetrimmer]

"Value is determined by the MARKET"

You are correct. And the value of _your_ property has been relative to American markets until recently. Because Marx wanted to devalue property, he would love your view. Because you are telling the people on FR that our property must be valued at the level of a third world country and its marketplace, and not relative to our own marketplace. Therefore you are telling the American people that they must lose all their wealth in order to be part of this so called market system that lets an individual compete on his own value without government intervention.

Again, in the words of the founding fathers, "what is the purpose of government?"

"the purpose of government was to protect the rights of the individual, preexisting rights granted by God rather than the state."

When did the government's purpose become the support of third world nations by forcing export of jobs and tax dollars to them through OPIC, the IMF, the INF and trade treaties? How does this serve the American people? Does it make us more free, or does it enslave us by irrevocably tying our economy to slave labor nations like China?

You are also wrong when you think there is no government intervention in your so called "free market" utopia. It has been shown over and over on this forum, our government is imposing limitations on us through regulation, that do not have to be met by our third world economic warriors. Our government does not protest the limitations the third world economic warriors impose on us, by the tariffs their governments lay onto our goods. This proves our government is clearly acting as an agent of the third world economic warriors instead of as an agent working on behalf of the American people.