Don't Let The Establishment Win

[kaz]

1) Those trends were not created by NAFTA, they were already happening.

2) Our economy's not driven on low margin jobs

3) Lower costs benefit our businesses competing with foreign competition

4) Lower prices benefit consumers

5) Economics contradicts that our economy is harmed by free trade, it's a clear benefit even when it's not "fair."

6) I sure as hell don't trust politicians to decide what's "fair," for some reason, "fair" always benefits ... them ...

aka............the American workers are fucked so I'm gonna hit the gas peddle and fuck them faster...........

Thanks for playing...............

BOHICA.

Me and you have went round and round on this issue........Hell will Freeze over before I agree with you.............You can't make me think that the Millions of jobs gone are good for me.....

You eat that damned Spinach..............I don't like Spinach.

And you know the field of economics is wrong and politicians are right how exactly?

Keeping blacksmiths wouldn't have been good for the economy

How about you go tell that in person to a blacksmith who lost his job....................I'm sure he'll give you a hug...................

Ah, so you want to hold hands and jump off a cliff. No one is stopping a blacksmith from being a blacksmith. There just isn't a market for it. Your argument with NAFTA is that to help blacksmiths, government should step in and keep them in business and force everyone else to pay for that, which is ridiculous

Try it.................I'll never forget your quote on how we don't need blue collar workers anyway......ever since then..........me and you have went round and round.

Strawman, I never said that. Amazing the one thing you remember is wrong

Lose industry and you lose your country................and destroy the middle class...........but as long as your foreign investments get you greenbacks you don't give a shit about the Millions of Americans who are losing everything in the process.................

You say........so sorry.......You are FUCKED ANYWAY DEAL WITH IT..................No dice..........

Take that Econ book and shove it..........

Tariffs and one on one Trade deals worked for over 200 years until someone said it was broken..........

If it is PROTECTIONISM then so be it......................I don't like seeing so many losing their dang jobs.......you not so much..............you just discard them like they were garbage.

People who have economically inefficient jobs need to find new work. All government does is kill more jobs along the way, in the long run it never works. As for your believing politicians over economists over economics, well, I suppose that's your choice. I find politicians to be a consistently bad source of information myself

And My memory is clear on what you said.............

I didn't say your memory is not clear, I said it's wrong. I never thought that we don't need blue collar workers and certainly didn't say it. And clearly I'm not afraid to say what I think if you read any of my posts. Of course we need blue collar workers, most people are blue collar and always will be. An economy needs indians, not just chiefs

 

[mudwhistle]

It is good for corporate America. It's also good for consumers, employment and the economy in general

You'd literally learn this in an economics 101 class, and why it's true

Some basics

Benefits of free trade | Economics Help

Free Trade is only free for other countries with the US.

The problem is they don't give us the same considerations we give them..

Free Trade only works if all parties are honest.

 

[kaz]

It is good for corporate America. It's also good for consumers, employment and the economy in general

You'd literally learn this in an economics 101 class, and why it's true

Some basics

Benefits of free trade | Economics Help

Free Trade is only free for other countries with the US.

The problem is they don't give us the same considerations we give them..

Free Trade only works if all parties are honest.

Certainly in economics free trade both ways is the maximum benefit. However, in an economics 101 class, literally, you would learn that we are still best served by opening our own markets even if they are closed the other way.

There is also a basic liberty issue, I don't agree government has a legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[mudwhistle]

It is good for corporate America. It's also good for consumers, employment and the economy in general

You'd literally learn this in an economics 101 class, and why it's true

Some basics

Benefits of free trade | Economics Help

Free Trade is only free for other countries with the US.

The problem is they don't give us the same considerations we give them..

Free Trade only works if all parties are honest.

Certainly in economics free trade both ways is the maximum benefit. However, in an economics 101 class, literally, you would learn that we are still best served by opening our own markets even if they are closed the other way.

There is also a basic liberty issue, I don't agree government has a legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with

Well, they do....and there are reasons why.

 

[kaz]

Again, your trust politicians know more economics than economists do escapes me. You know they went to law school, they know nothing about economics, just what gives themselves the most power

BTW, I'm an MBA in finance, which is a field of economics. I suppose if I were a lawyer you'd find me more trustworthy though

 

[kaz]

It is good for corporate America. It's also good for consumers, employment and the economy in general

You'd literally learn this in an economics 101 class, and why it's true

Some basics

Benefits of free trade | Economics Help

Free Trade is only free for other countries with the US.

The problem is they don't give us the same considerations we give them..

Free Trade only works if all parties are honest.

Certainly in economics free trade both ways is the maximum benefit. However, in an economics 101 class, literally, you would learn that we are still best served by opening our own markets even if they are closed the other way.

There is also a basic liberty issue, I don't agree government has a legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with

Well, they do....and there are reasons why.

They have the power, I didn't say they don't. I said they don't have a "legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with," and they don't

 

[eagle1462010]

Again, your trust politicians know more economics than economists do escapes me. You know they went to law school, they know nothing about economics, just what gives themselves the most power

BTW, I'm an MBA in finance, which is a field of economics. I suppose if I were a lawyer you'd find me more trustworthy though

I don't give a fuck about your degrees..............to me it is a degree in Stupidity............or it is a degree in GREED.......

Our people are getting slaughtered by these deals............and Sessions is above your dang level no matter how great YOU THINK YOU ARE...........

My point..............I'm gonna piss on your econ book and Tariff your ass on the way back in.............to STOP MILLIONS OF JOBS FROM LEAVING.............

Now you can quote the book all you want...............isn't gonna change this deal if you haul ass to make more money.........Don't expect a Kiss on the way back...........It's not gonna happen.

We can't keep losing these jobs unless you want to FUCK the entire population.............which it seems you don't care about at all.

 

[mudwhistle]

You'd literally learn this in an economics 101 class, and why it's true

Some basics

Benefits of free trade | Economics Help

Free Trade is only free for other countries with the US.

The problem is they don't give us the same considerations we give them..

Free Trade only works if all parties are honest.

Certainly in economics free trade both ways is the maximum benefit. However, in an economics 101 class, literally, you would learn that we are still best served by opening our own markets even if they are closed the other way.

There is also a basic liberty issue, I don't agree government has a legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with

Well, they do....and there are reasons why.

They have the power, I didn't say they don't. I said they don't have a "legitimate right to tell me who I am free to do business with," and they don't

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

 

[kaz]

Again, your trust politicians know more economics than economists do escapes me. You know they went to law school, they know nothing about economics, just what gives themselves the most power

BTW, I'm an MBA in finance, which is a field of economics. I suppose if I were a lawyer you'd find me more trustworthy though

I don't give a fuck about your degrees..............to me it is a degree in Stupidity............or it is a degree in GREED.......

Our people are getting slaughtered by these deals............and Sessions is above your dang level no matter how great YOU THINK YOU ARE...........

My point..............I'm gonna piss on your econ book and Tariff your ass on the way back in.............to STOP MILLIONS OF JOBS FROM LEAVING.............

Now you can quote the book all you want...............isn't gonna change this deal if you haul ass to make more money.........Don't expect a Kiss on the way back...........It's not gonna happen.

We can't keep losing these jobs unless you want to FUCK the entire population.............which it seems you don't care about at all.

Your trust in politicians and belief they won't use any and all power to enrich themselves is completely unsupported by empirical data. BTW, I was a math major as an undergrad ...

 

[eagle1462010]

Too little, too late for the US aluminum industry?

Fact: 155,000 workers are directly employed in the U.S. aluminum industry, generating more than $65 billion a year. While the figures are impressive, accounting for all secondary jobs created and adding up all indirect economic benefits resulting from the production of the silver-grey metal, more than 670,000 people and some $152 billion (or 1 percent of US GDP) can be traced back to aluminum. But now, because of a combination of tax rebates, cheap energy prices, lax regulatory environments and immoral business practices, Chinese aluminum producers could send US smelters into bankruptcy, axing hundreds of thousands of jobs in the process. Alcoa, the largest US producer already announced the closing of three smelters, leaving it with just one facility in the entire country. Century Aluminum, a Glencore-owned company, saw 82 percent of its market capitalization wiped off and posted losses of $56 million that will lead to a dramatic cut in output capacity and further job losses.

However, unlike manufacturing, the American aluminum industry is not on its deathbed, a victim of globalization that should just be left to expire. Indeed, much of China’s comparative advantage is purely artificial and comes from lower operating costs derived from softer industrial standards. In the case of aluminum, a third of its ultimate price rests on energy costs. Beijing continues to fuel a large portion of its aluminum plants with coal – far cheaper, albeit dirtier, than what American companies are using. And when that isn’t enough, the government steps in to rescue its loss-making producers. Recently, a Chinese aluminum producer on the brink of closure, secured lower energy prices from a state-run electricity company in order to keep them afloat.


We are witnessing the death our countries Industry........and Kaz...........goes OH WELL.......LET THEM DIE..............

As long as it isn't you..........Isn't that right Kaz............China manipulates it's currency to hell and back as well............

Perhaps next you'll tell Americans to move to China if you want to work................

I suggest you do that to displaced workers in person.........as I said before they will give you a kiss.

 

[kaz]

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

I'm always stunned when conservatives don't know the difference between private companies and government. I said I support free markets, I'm referring to private business and private citizens, these are all government. Really, you don't know the difference? As to your questions:

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?

- No, but she was a government employee

Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?

- With technology that government paid for and owns? No

Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

- Same

 

[eagle1462010]

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

I'm always stunned when conservatives don't know the difference between private companies and government. I said I support free markets, I'm referring to private business and private citizens, these are all government. Really, you don't know the difference? As to your questions:

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?

- No, but she was a government employee

Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?

- With technology that government paid for and owns? No

Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

- Same

We now enter the debate of Crony Capitalism...........which is exactly what was inferred by Clinton and Uranium One............They used their influence to cut deals with Russia to make a lot of money...............for Uranium in the United States............as Hillary helped scoot the deal through the bank..........

She was laughing all the way to the bank...............This is how the Politicians get filthy rich up there...........and they are nothing more than whores.......

Here's hillary on that issue........enjoy....

 

[bripat9643]

Trump won't be the nominee if too many Republicans support Cruz. But one thing is certain: Cruz will never be the nominee. If we go to a brokered convention, then the establishment Republicans will choose some Bush clone to be the nominee. They will never pick Cruz

I don't agree that will happen, I think Cruz will be the nominee. I agree what you say is what the establishment wants, but with Trump and Cruz winning 56 of the 57 States, it's got to be one of them or they are just throwing the election. Trump supporters will in the end largely support Cruz, but if the party picks someone else, they'll lose so many Trump and Cruz supporters they'll get crushed and they know that. If it's not Trump, it has to be Cruz. And as other candidates drop out, they are proving Trump is no one's second choice, his numbers don't change. Cruz and Kasich's numbers change

Cruz will never be the nominee. If it goes to a brokered convention, the estblishment will engineer a nominee of their own choosing. They would prefer to have Hillary in office than have Cruz or Trump.

As for Hillary, she will get to pick up to 3 SC justices, and that will throw the court to the left for at least a generation. That's hardly an outcome you would want

That horse is already out of the barn

How so? If Hillary doesn't get elected, then how will any leftwing justices get nominated?

The main thing Trump wants to get done is control the border, end Obamacare, cut taxes, and cut government agencies like the EPA and the DOE. I don't see how you can have a problem with that.

Free trade is at the heart of free markets, it's the most important issue. Even Democrats as extreme as Obama don't close our economic borders once they become President, there's a reason. Unfortunately in your argument, if I believe he's serious about the things you listed, I have to believe he's serious about his being an anti free market capitalist as well

Trump is against these huge trade deals, but not against free trade specifically. You should also be against these trade deals because they are written by lobbyists and they are stuffed full of all kind of industry favors, like allowing them to bring in as many foreign workers as they want. Trump is using the threat of tariffs to get better deals with foreign competitors, but I don't that he's actually going to raise tariffs to any significant degree. I'm a free trader myself, but I'll take Trump over Hillary and TPP any day of the week.

 

[bripat9643]

If you truly where on your own side you wouldn't want Hillary in the White House

On this, I don't, and you know that. But I don't want Trump either. So where does that get me?

The only issue is whether you prefer Trump to Hillary because Cruz can't get the nomination.

 

[kaz]

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

I'm always stunned when conservatives don't know the difference between private companies and government. I said I support free markets, I'm referring to private business and private citizens, these are all government. Really, you don't know the difference? As to your questions:

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?

- No, but she was a government employee

Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?

- With technology that government paid for and owns? No

Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

- Same

We now enter the debate of Crony Capitalism...........which is exactly what was inferred by Clinton and Uranium One............They used their influence to cut deals with Russia to make a lot of money...............for Uranium in the United States............as Hillary helped scoot the deal through the bank..........

She was laughing all the way to the bank...............This is how the Politicians get filthy rich up there...........and they are nothing more than whores.......

Here's hillary on that issue........enjoy....

And yet you believe them when they say they know more about economics than the field of economics does ...

 

[kaz]

Trump won't be the nominee if too many Republicans support Cruz. But one thing is certain: Cruz will never be the nominee. If we go to a brokered convention, then the establishment Republicans will choose some Bush clone to be the nominee. They will never pick Cruz

I don't agree that will happen, I think Cruz will be the nominee. I agree what you say is what the establishment wants, but with Trump and Cruz winning 56 of the 57 States, it's got to be one of them or they are just throwing the election. Trump supporters will in the end largely support Cruz, but if the party picks someone else, they'll lose so many Trump and Cruz supporters they'll get crushed and they know that. If it's not Trump, it has to be Cruz. And as other candidates drop out, they are proving Trump is no one's second choice, his numbers don't change. Cruz and Kasich's numbers change

Cruz will never be the nominee. If it goes to a brokered convention, the estblishment will engineer a nominee of their own choosing. They would prefer to have Hillary in office than have Cruz or Trump.

I don't agree, and it looks like we'll find out who's right ...

As for Hillary, she will get to pick up to 3 SC justices, and that will throw the court to the left for at least a generation. That's hardly an outcome you would want

That horse is already out of the barn

How so? If Hillary doesn't get elected, then how will any leftwing justices get nominated?

Roberts, Kennedy, Stewart, O'Conner, Miers, all nominated by Republicans. Roberts upheld one of the most Unconstitutional laws in history, government control of healthcare. A direct and flagrant violation of the 10th Amendment. Even if the penalty is a "tax," the rest of Obamacare sure isn't. The Supreme Court has just become a the Constitution says whatever 5/9 want it to say institution. I don't see Republicans defending that at all. We lost, we're fighting the inevitable. And I am tired of being told I need to vote between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. It makes me feel dirty

The main thing Trump wants to get done is control the border, end Obamacare, cut taxes, and cut government agencies like the EPA and the DOE. I don't see how you can have a problem with that.

Free trade is at the heart of free markets, it's the most important issue. Even Democrats as extreme as Obama don't close our economic borders once they become President, there's a reason. Unfortunately in your argument, if I believe he's serious about the things you listed, I have to believe he's serious about his being an anti free market capitalist as well

Trump is against these huge trade deals, but not against free trade specifically. You should also be against these trade deals because they are written by lobbyists and they are stuffed full of all kind of industry favors, like allowing them to bring in as many foreign workers as they want. Trump is using the threat of tariffs to get better deals with foreign competitors, but I don't that he's actually going to raise tariffs to any significant degree. I'm a free trader myself, but I'll take Trump over Hillary and TPP any day of the week.

When government tells me that's what they are going to do, I just don't believe them. I totally believe they are all corrupt. When you finally accept that truth, it's liberating. The difference with Cruz is that I'm not expecting him to do anything, just be less hostile towards free markets than we have been getting

 

[kaz]

If you truly where on your own side you wouldn't want Hillary in the White House

On this, I don't, and you know that. But I don't want Trump either. So where does that get me?

The only issue is whether you prefer Trump to Hillary because Cruz can't get the nomination.

I don't agree, and I don't prefer either of them so it doesn't matter anyway

 

[mudwhistle]

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

I'm always stunned when conservatives don't know the difference between private companies and government. I said I support free markets, I'm referring to private business and private citizens, these are all government. Really, you don't know the difference? As to your questions:

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?

- No, but she was a government employee

Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?

- With technology that government paid for and owns? No

Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

- Same

Every single defense contractor is a private company.

 

[kaz]

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?
Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?
Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

I'm always stunned when conservatives don't know the difference between private companies and government. I said I support free markets, I'm referring to private business and private citizens, these are all government. Really, you don't know the difference? As to your questions:

So you think it's okay for a US Senator or Secretary of State, like Hillary, to arrange the sale of uranium to foreign countries?

- No, but she was a government employee

Do you think American companies should be allowed to sell air defense weapons systems to Iran?

- With technology that government paid for and owns? No

Do you think that these companies should be allowed to sell missiles to Cuba?

- Same

Every single defense contractor is a private company.

I already addressed that. If you could acknowledge and build on my answer rather than just repeating a point I agreed with I'd appreciate it