Politics: J'accuse!

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
Originally posted by Atticus Grinch



Free trade with poor countries that have few natrual resources is often a stupid deal for developed countries. The only reason you've two minds about it is that you know it helps poor people in the third world by bidding up wages in their countries at the expense of workers in developed countries. Mass immigration into the US in the 1890s and early 1900s bid down wages in the US. US wages declined 1-1.5% for every 1% increase in immigration, and wages dropped even more in industries dominated by immigrants. In 1870, US wages were 136% higher in the US than in Europe, but by 1913, due to massive immigration from Europe to the US, the gap was cut in half. Finally, US workers lashed out by shutting down immigration in 1921.

You're looking at free trade the wrong way. Owners of capital and their libertarian cheerleaders like free trade for the same reason liberals like the judiciarry: it lets them do things they don't have the votes to do. Owners of capital and the libertarians see nothing wrong with repealing the 13th amendment, but that's no feasible, so the answer is to import goods and services produced by chinese people working as indentured servants or slaves. Owners of capital and libertarians don't like environmental protections, so the answer is to import goods and services produced by Chinese people with administrators that lack the power to shut down factors that pollute the environment, can only levy insignificant fines, and lack any incentive to shut down industry. Owners of capital and libertarians don't like the distributional results of giving US workers a wage premium by virtue of their residing in the US, the answer is to import as much as possible in any industry where US workers receive such a premium. Owners of capital and libertarians don't like a corporate income tax, so the answer is to import goods and services from countries that don't have one.

You see, ultimately, the goal of free trade is to force the US to adopt various measures that libertarians and owners of capital would like but lack the votes to get. Because, you see, if the US allows free trade, free immigration, and free movement of capital, the US is forced to compete with other countries for owners of capital to invest in the US. It pushes the US to reduce regulations, wages, taxes, and everything else libertarians and owners of capital don't like.

What we need are restrictions on immigration, trade and the flow of capital. The US isn't simply a system to promote capitalism; it's a democratic republic that's supposed to benefit its citizens, very few of whom are extremely wealthy.

At least you are consistent . . .

[sgtclub]

I heard an interesting point last night by Fred Barnes. Apparently, Rice previously gave 4 hours of closed door testimony to the 9/11 commission. There are 10 commissioners. Obviously, given the recent hubub, the commission thinks that Rice's testimony is essential. But guess how many of them attended her 4 hours of closed door testimony? 5. Half.

I was afraid this was going to happen, but I'm now convinced that the commission, like all other aspects of our public institutions, have been whored out to the partisans.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I was afraid this was going to happen, but I'm now convinced that the commission, like all other aspects of our public institutions, have been whored out to the partisans.

This has become terribly clear.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/...ote/index.html

Now, here's my question - is this illegal because it is vote buying, or because the dude offered beer to an 18 year old? I presume the later, but then find it curious that the way this is reported strongly suggests that the problem is vote buying, not underage drinking.

If the guy had offered the kid a CD instead, would the contract have been enforceable?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Agree with all of that. My confusion stems, I guess, from the demonization that resulted from the last mention of outsourcing being a good thing.

Ultimately, I think the reason people get so up in arms when someone speaks positively about outsourcing (or about moving factories to Mexico, or importing shoes from China, or whatever) is because it feels a bit like someone saying "bummer for you, but it's really good for everyone else."

That's not to suggest that these aspects of free trade are not good (although free trade with China is kind of an oxymoron, given the Chinese government's manipulation of the value of the yuan, but that's a different issue). It is merely to say that things which are good on a macroeconomic scale often have a very devastating micro/human cost, and it is very difficult to speak positively about the former while being sensitive to the latter.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Toronto experienced 145 days of precipitation (greater than 0.2 "mm", whatever the fuck that means) leaving, presumably, 220 days (or 31.43 metric weeks) of sun. So I'm afraid he's got you there, Sidd.

How many of those non-precipitation days were actually sunny (vs. foggy, overcast, etc), and how many were warm (note that my original post referenced both "sun" and "warmth")?

Atticus, we've discussed before how some of your research fails to answer essential questions. I'm disappointed.

After you complete this, please explain for Hank why using a racist term ("towelheads") is slightly different than making an obvious exaggeration about the weather. Perhaps you might posit the statements "it's always 72 degrees in LA" (a la "LA Story") and "LA is full of niggers, chinks and wetbacks" and see if he can figure out which is mere hyperbole, and which is filled with racist vitriol.

I appreciate you taking care of that for me -- I'm curious to find out how he'll respond, but find that talking to morons directly is a little too much like work.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
That's not to suggest that these aspects of free trade are not good (although free trade with China is kind of an oxymoron, given the Chinese government's manipulation of the value of the yuan, but that's a different issue). It is merely to say that things which are good on a macroeconomic scale often have a very devastating micro/human cost, and it is very difficult to speak positively about the former without speaking negatively about the latter.

I was chatting with a friend of mine who deals with steel in his industry, and I was shocked to discover that steel prices have skyrocketed almost 40% in the last six months. My friend said that his company will only guarantee bid prices for a week, because the market is so volitale right now and there's no way of knowing what the price will be from week to week. I thought that international steel prices were supposed to level out, and that domestic prices were supposed to fall when we dropped the embargo, but my understanding is that China has been driving up steel prices considerably. Part of it is that China is building cars for its own population at a great speed, and the demand in that country for steel is growing rapidly. The group of people that I was talking to speculated that China's growing demand may have something to do with the increase in oil prices recently, too. Per capita, there aren't that many cars in China, but that's apparently changing.

All of the above came from cocktail party type conversations. Does anyone have any thoughts or can anyone point me to articles refuting or confirming any of this?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
All of the above came from cocktail party type conversations. Does anyone have any thoughts or can anyone point me to articles refuting or confirming any of this?

There has been a series of articles in the NYTimes over recent weeks about the staggering demand for raw materials from China, and how this is driving up the cost of all such commodities -- including oil, steel, nickel, copper, even scrap metal.

It's not just from building cars, it's from building (and, quite possibly, over-building) all sorts of infrastructure, office towers, factories, etc.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
There has been a series of articles in the NYTimes over recent weeks about the staggering demand for raw materials from China, and how this is driving up the cost of all such commodities -- including oil, steel, nickel, copper, even scrap metal.

It's not just from building cars, it's from building (and, quite possibly, over-building) all sorts of infrastructure, office towers, factories, etc.

It's that outsourcing thing.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
There has been a series of articles in the NYTimes over recent weeks about the staggering demand for raw materials from China, and how this is driving up the cost of all such commodities -- including oil, steel, nickel, copper, even scrap metal.

It's not just from building cars, it's from building (and, quite possibly, over-building) all sorts of infrastructure, office towers, factories, etc.

It's been CW for about the last several quarters that this is what has been going on in the commodities markets, and is thought to be one of the chief reasons the Bushies let the idiotic steel tarrifs lapse.

More interesting are the knock-on effects - particularly w/r/t Japan's continued massive (and quite shockingly sucessful) intervention to support the Yen, Canada's continued inability to convince anyone that its economy (and currency) is not commodity based and is separate from the US, China's house of cards economic intervention (in the banking sector, not its longstanding and unchanged currency peg), the pummelling the rest of asia's export economy is taking, etc.

Oil is similar, but potentially more interesting given SA's recent announcement that it will cut production drastically if prices drop (meaningful only because SA, unlike Opec generally, has shown that it sometimes actually has the willpower to put its reserves where its mouth is) - china is far more reliant on oil for its economic productivity, and will be far, far less able to absorb such increases, than the US.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I heard an interesting point last night by Fred Barnes. Apparently, Rice previously gave 4 hours of closed door testimony to the 9/11 commission. There are 10 commissioners. Obviously, given the recent hubub, the commission thinks that Rice's testimony is essential. But guess how many of them attended her 4 hours of closed door testimony? 5. Half.

I was afraid this was going to happen, but I'm now convinced that the commission, like all other aspects of our public institutions, have been whored out to the partisans.

I always like a post that starts out citing an editor of the Weekly Standard and then ends with the phrase "whored out to the partisans."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I always like a post that starts out citing an editor of the Weekly Standard and then ends with the phrase "whored out to the partisans."

I wouldn't think that every commissioner would meet with every witness, even Rice. The President is the exception, as a matter of respect. Also, it seems obvious that they had further questions for Rice after everything that has been said in the last 10 days (by Clarke, by Rice, etc.). Not sure why this means things have been whored out to the partisans, whatever that means.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sgtclub
It's that outsourcing thing.

That was one of your wittier posts.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

What if this is what democracy looks like?

(spree: some of these pictures are really, really awful)

We keep talking about whether we're going to be able to establish a democracy in Iraq. What if we do, and -- aside from the Kurds -- they really don't like us? A country where people do the things seen in these pictures is a country that might, for example, support terrorism. Then where are we?

I'm afraid we're not winning hearts and minds.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You are the glass still-full guy looking constantly at his watch before claiming a family emergency and running out on the tab.

I never said it was my family's emergency. Your mom beeped me. Again.