Thomas Sowell is quite simply the man! He is one of my few "go to" guys, like Charles Krauthammer. Dr Sowell used to be a Marxist BTW. That tells you that he has come to his current position through much thought. Most conservatives are former liberals. It's called maturity. Can anybody tell me if Oprah has ever had Dr Sowell on? If Oprah truly cared about black people, she would have had a panel consisting of black men like Dr Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elder etc on discussing welfare etc.
Because his race is unimportant to the fact that he's an intellectual. I wouldn't want to be known as a great "white" intellectual. The addition of my race is superfluous, as it is in that poster's statement.
I generally agree with Sowell's views, the problem a lot of whites are racist and moronic, even if they don't know it, and they use ideas like libertarianism and conservatism to hide their racism. It's not about affirmative action it's about people not wanting or believing that blacks should be in college at all. This is why this guy says "what a great black intellectual" it's like he's saying "I approve of this black" very sick. Blacks should never rely on or trust whites!
What has experience taught you? That certain white men are racist bigots? Duh. But my experiences have taught me that there are black racist bigots, too. You're thinking that, because he used the adjective "black", he must be racist. I agree that it's unnecessary, but not racist, and people like you who play the race card keep racism from dissolving itself. You're a racist, yourself, by claiming blacks can't trust whites, as if we're our own segregated cults.
@PuuMastaFunk The race card? Sowell is playing the race card, you're playing the race card. You're just disappointed that i don't agree with your views. Truth is black and whites are already segregated. Talking about the way society is does not make me a racist. I used to believe we're all the same and race is something stupid to talk about but here we are watching a video about race. If it race didn't matter this video would not exist.
@merciless15ify And I'd love for Harvard to only consider race and require applicants to be white. That way, a moderately intelligent white man, like myself, wouldn't have to compete against minorities or even those who are smarter and more qualified than I am. That doesn't mean they should do it, though.
@mazerrackham001 Harvard only considering 1 race and not the other is segregation, and thats against the law, so your statement doesnt make any sense. Are you trying to say only your rigor of secondary school record should be the only factor in your admission or what
@merciless15ify I was purposefully suggesting something that shouldn't ever be actually done, which if you read my whole comment you'd know. It's irrelevant what the laws of the land or the laws of physics are, when using such a device.
The point was that you want Harvard to consider race because it would help you and I countered that I'd like it if they did everything to help me instead of you, even if you're more academically qualified, but that doesn't mean they should do it.
@PuuMastaFunk i didn't say my ethnicity should be an important admission factor i just said i would not mind them considering it. What is your main point, is it that them considering race as an admission factor is unfair or what?
THERE IS nothing stranger than watching a black person argue against blacks on welfare and whites defend it...bizarre....but true. So many Whites are such idiots.
I was just gonna ask how long it would take someone to call Sowell an Uncle Tom, then I read three quotes down. Just like Pavlovs dogs, people are trained to call an intellectual black conservative an Uncle Tom. I say Kudos to him for being so damned smart!
@oehlda2000 They are. A pacifist who will not stand up for their own right to life and liberty forfeits both. A pacifist who furthers a terrorists' propaganda agenda by offering aid to the enemy in the form of comfort to said enemy, is in fact a sympathizer.
The classic Liberal fascist move is to label people you disagree with rather than attack their argument. It's called Ad Hominem, and you are egregiously guilty of it. It's usually a reaction to cognitive dissonance, a liberal disease.
@qualityrkc So then what's your point about a Republican war on drugs? Why don't you put the joint down, and read the conversation you are having again, from the beginning.
@WhereHawksFly You mentioned how liberals have cognative dissonance. I stated how the republicans claim to be in favor of personal responsibility yet started the war on drugs aka the war on americans. In other words the party of personal responsibility wants to control which substances you are allowed to put into your own body. You don't think this is an example of the dissonance you claim is only displayed by liberals? Im at work so I dont have any "joints" to put down. Thats for later:)
@qualityrkc No, I'm trying to point you square at your incorrect assumption that Republican and Conservative are synonymous. I said Liberals, I never said Democrats. A Conservative doesn't think it's the place of the federal government to dictate what any individual puts in their own body. I'm sure some Liberal Republicans do. See what I'm saying now?
@WhereHawksFly Ok so what you are saying is that a vast majority of the people at cpac are actually republicans and not conservative? I can agree with that but it still doesnt change the fact that these self appointed conservatives preach the values of personal responsibility yet support policies that promote the opposite? To take it even further how can you say liberals have cognative dissonance? How do you know they are not just democrats claiming to be liberals?
@qualityrkc Romney was at CPAC too, it wasn't just Conservatives there.
It's a spectrum thing, at one end you have a Republic of Law, at the other you have a totalitarian Socialist regime. Everyone falls along that spectrum to varying degrees. If a person does 90% of the Conservative thing, they are still more or less Conservative. That's not Cognitive Dissonance. That's pragmatism, as no one candidate is going to be 100%.
@WhereHawksFly preaching personal responsibility then supported the war on drugs is an example of cognitive dissonane whether you want to admit it or not. Nothing in your rant contained any evidence refuting that fact. I heard a sad attempt at an excuse. And I disagree bc ron paul is conservative 100% of the time. If you disagree, name an instance. I work with facts here dude so you gotta keep up. You need to give real life examples to back your assertions.
@qualityrkc I'm not a 'dude', child. Nor have I ever made a single comment about Paul, so now you sound like a raving lunatic. Like most Paulbots.
Your problem is you think your candidate is infallible, when he isn't. You are suffering from the same messianic delusion that Obamabots suffered in 2008.
Would I take Paul over Obama? Absolutely.
You make the presumption that deficit spending is a non-conservative action, when in of itself it isn't, as long as it's CONSTITUTIONAL.
@WhereHawksFly paul isn't infallible but his ideals of personal responsibility and states rights are. Deficit spending is not conservative in the most literal sense. Spending money you dont have is not conserving money.
Actually, just really quickly, I wanted to point out that the far right isn't Republic of law, it's anarchy (dystopianism), complete and absolute removal of government, and the far right is Communism (utopianism), complete and absolute control of government. Just thought I'd point that out.
@qualityrkc He didn't start it, it was around a lot longer than him. Not that it matters. More importantly, it was spent largely on defense, one of the few powers enumerated by the Constitution for the federal government to actually do. Deficit spending is stupid, deficit spending on social and domestic programs that overstep the bounds and limits of the US Constitution is stupid AND an assault on the law and our liberty.
@WhereHawksFly "He didn't start it, it was around a lot longer than him." Who started deficit spending at the federal level? "Not that it matters." It matters when I am trying to prove a point that cognative dissonance is bipartisan and not just liberals.
@qualityrkc Disappeared? When? I'm away from computers for days at a time sometimes. It means I have more pressing matters to attend to, not that I've gone anywhere or am ignoring anyone.
The community college B student taking poli sci courses, living in his parents' basement in his 40s, just doesn't stop. I hope the wisdom will never stop flowing. Just kidding. I think you're a huge douche. Read "a Confederacy of Dunces" right away. It's a famous book but maybe you've never heard of it. You remind me of the main character something awful. Good luck with your revolution, comrade. And leave that boy alone.
@craig4252 Well, Well another un-american pig heard form. Hey I believe I told you this a few dozen times before. You are a Chicken Rooting for Colonel Sanders. You are eagerly awaiting the day you can trade in your American citizenship for a global one. Please go back to sleep.
@tehatemachine Hey bright child, I never heard a debate, I just heard one uncle tom asking another uncle tom scripted questions, with scripted answers.
all yall need to get aquainted with ayn rand, we need a laizi fair capital system without gov't interferrence, where the markets take care of itself not obama, bush, clinton or any other political fig, friedman and sowell are right by putting that woman in her place
Rock on Thomas Sowell. What a troglodyte that Piven.
That said- my essays are the unified theory, join the movement thesaneparty d com or visit my channel for my latest interview on the Mark Davis show in Dallas and other lectures.
I love how white liberals are always telling black Americans what they think and how they feel and what is best for them. How arrogant and condescending of these elitists. Maybe the “progressives” would love to put all the black people in zoos so they can have complete control of them.
The amazing thing is, that bitch Pivens claim to fame is that she advocated a method--a "plot" if you will--TO DESTROY THE UNITED STATES. This is a matter of history. The bitch worked to DESTROY THE US--literally--and she said so openly!
See, this is a prime example of the SUICIDAL nature of our political culture. In past ages a treasonous bitch like this would be PUT BEFORE A FIRING SQUAD.
The fact that this bitch is not DEAD or IN PRISON completely explains how America shall destroy itself.
American history is based on Affirmative action for white people, things like the GI Bill, Social security for non-farm workers and "whites only" policies for suburbs created the white middle class and left blacks out of it.
Not surprisingly, Affirmative action has quadrupled the black middle class the same way it helped whites.
@AndroidPolitician not at all, affirmative action has done nothing but keep blacks down. the free market has quadrupled the black middle class, and blacks would be far better off today had we never enacted affirmative action or the other welfare programs that have destroyed the black family. how can you explain that before civil rights legislation most black families were intact, when now 80% of blacks are born to a single mother?
Well first there's a difference between the black middle class which came out of budding professionals from Affirmative action and that's been documented.
There's also a black underclass of low skilled workers who now face chronic joblessness because of outsourcing and deindustrialization the US.
It's a matter of both government policies reward budding professionals and market/government policies that destroyed low skilled workers.
@Welsh How do you expain that probably about 50% of those are born to white women. The answer to your queston is simple. When young women realize that they can escape mom and pops authority, simply by having a child, that the government will pay their rent, buy their food, and support their lifestyle, and even give them a raise for having another child. These young women white or black, to immature to know the stresses of single parenting buys in. Men, black or white is off the hook financially.
No. I think economic policies that lean toward free trade/markets are good for America. I've never had any interest in "trading in" my citizenship. I'm glad my previous post brought some humor to your morning. Obviously, I tend to subscribe to the economic theories of people like Friedman and Sowell because I think they're correct. Your ideas are more in line with traditional populist politics than any economic theory. Real question: Have you traveled extensively in the US or abroad?
@cr Did you ask me if I could remember the 80s. Yes I can, actually it would have been impossible to buy an american made radio or tv in the 80s. The macine tool industry was in Japan, and Taiwan, the textile industry was almost gone by then, i believe Levi's had only one factory left in the US. Rubber was gone, steel was gone, ceramics were gone. Actually our Radio, TV, and Machine Tool Industries had been given to Japan. It was as simple as they had access to our markets, while they tariffed.
@craig4252 Regardless of what you will admit to, you are anti US. and pro globalization. My economic ideology came more from Adam. Jeffierson, Hamilton, Lincoln. and Madison, because they were right when they extablished a economy based on protectionism, which produced the greatest middleclass in the world. While, the Austrian School has completely reversed the gains made by two centeries of protectionism. Sowell and Friedman were little more than paid, pawns of the Hoover Institute.
The look on Piven's face at the end is priceless! I wish Thomas Sowell would have been our first black president. Sowell would have exposed Obama for who he really is, and he would have blown B.O. away in any debate! Welfare usually keeps people in poverty unless they have enough pride in themselves to get off of it.
@Xantheus07 Hey look in the mirror and see if you can see a Chicken Rooting for Colonal Sanders. You are not one of the 10% of ameicans who are recieving the wealth created, by these traitors policies.
@louiethegreater Yes i am because of THESE capitalistic policies i have a job that allows me to feed and cloth my family. I count myself among the lucky who still have a job despite idiots such as your self trying to create policiesfurther forcing companies to move their business overseas.
@Xantheus07 You are mixed up, free trade, and neo-liberalism is the policy that created outsourcing. Those are both liberal,and conservative policies. Free trade continues its distruction to our economy regardless of who is in controll of he politics of the county. Outsourcing is the result of the removal of tariffs.When multinationals were assured tariffs would be removed, and there would be no future threat of tariffs, they made a b-line for the cheap thirdworld labor markets.
@louiethegreater So are you for legalizing drugs yet against free trade? Free trade is not harming our country 35% corporate tax is. Even though company's have cheaper labor overseas they pay shipping cost and tariffs which is cheaper then keeping manufacturing here in the states.
@Xantheus07 Did you know that the 18,000 of he largest corporations are parked offshore in the Cayman Islands, and do not pay taxes. Did you know that multinatonals can employ 47 Chinese for one american. Corporations do not pay tariffs, they have sponsered people like Sowell, Freidman and many other to convince unthinking people that the U.S. should not use the protections that the founders gave by example. Tariffs were fixed on imports as early as The Hamilton Tariff Act of 1789.
@louiethegreater History lesson: Hamilton was a Big government British douche. Thomas Jefferson was a free marketer and a REAL American that was anti-tariff. Tariffs protect American corporations and make products more expensive for the consumer. If corporations hire Chinese for low wage, that means that we get products cheaper. So for the purpose of keeping employment for a few people here, everything should be more expensive for everyone? This is unfair and why prices are so high.
@john Perhaps through your vast knowlege of ameican history. You could explain this Jefferson quote " The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles fo foreign manufacture, which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination fo every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made within ourselves, WITHOUT REGARD TO DIFFERECE IN PRICE secures us against a relapse into foreign dependency"
--- end quote---- You are incorrect on your cheap price assessment.
@louiethegreater First of all, buying products from China has nothing to do with the national debt, but that's not too important right now. As for Jefferson's quote, it has to do with encouraging voluntarily buying domestic products. If you want to know what he thinks about the government regulating it, here are some quotes:
@johnsurs22 What do you mean the national debt is not preportional to China supplying our consumer goods. What about the revenue of those 80,000 manufacturing facilities that have been outsourced. What about the federal income taxes from the millions of displaced workers. What about all those displaced workers, who now look to government for support. GM is now the larges employer in Mexico, who is making the income off that cheap labor, answer----- Wall Street, so they can create jobs in Asia.
@johnsurs22 if that is your openion of the Jefferson quote I supplied you, than Jefferson could not be a free trader. You do not agree, that we should manufacture of own consumption, you believe we should buy it from the thirdworld. Jefferson said REGARDLESS OF PRICE, you do not beleive that. It appears that you would terminate every job in the U.S. so you could buy a five dollar t-shirt for three dollars.
@louiethegreater Are you going to ignore the quotes that I supplied? Anyway, when did I say that I buy everything from China? I buy American products when I think that they are worth it. If you really wanted to compete with China, you would stop making it so expensive to produce here through so much regulation. Even if the country passes tariffs, it doesn't mean that Jefferson agreed with passing them.Do you run a business? Do you know how much American businesses rip us off?Why not buy Chinese?
@johnsurs22 I didn't ignore the quotes, i just believe they were made in the context of a protected economy. Jefferson was a protectionist. So was all the rest of the founders, so was the country, that is apparant by the many, many tariff laws put in place over two centuries. Ameican was built on tariffs, the middleclass was built on tariffs. I frankly believe you would be hard pressed to find american made consumer goods, even if you wanted to buy them. I buy Chinese because i have no choice.
@johnsurs22 Regulation has nothing to do with oursourcing, that is just a globaist by-line to move .15/hr jobs to the third world and replace them with .57/hr labor. When corporations would announce their plan to close US operations and move offshore, Wall St. would respond by a serge in stock prices. Of course the investment class would ignore the 30,000 employees left jobless. You don't seem to understand society is not here to serve Wall St. and the corporate structure.
@louiethegreater Our national debt has little to do with revenue problems. The government sucks every dollar out of the pockets of Americans. No, the problem is that it spends too much, plain and simple. Economics is a science, very well researched in fact. Why have even protectionist countries worldwide moved towards free trade? They see the benefits. In fact, let me show you how your plan is causing MORE unemployment. If I have to pay higher prices because of tariffs, that means that I can buy
@johnsurs22 Every developed economy in the world today was developed by protectionism, central planning, subsidies,and market minipulation, none, not one was built on free trade. Why? because free trade does not work, and will never work as long as there are nationstates. It is apparant the globalization is riding on the vehicle of free trade. Yes protectionist countries did adopt free trade, but that doesn't change the fact their economies were built by protectionism, state planning.
The U.S was founded on protecitonism, and became the envy of the world through protectionist policies. No honest person could deny that. Only a distortion of facts, produced by the advocates of globalizaton pretends that free trade produced ameican society.
@louiethegreater The quotes explicitly show Jefferson's philosophy on tariffs. He explicitly was against tariffs. Here is a quiz question from an American history book: "Thomas Jefferson and his followers opposed Alexander Hamilton’s tariff policy in part because they believed that high tariffs would cause problems for" I think that means that he was against tariffs. Just because tariffs were passed doesn't mean everyone agreed with them.
@louiethegreater I'm not for the government supporting Wal-Street nor am I for the government supporting any special interest group, which is exactly what tariffs do. Because overpayed steel workers in the East coast want to keep their jobs, we have to pay higher prices for all of our products. US, THE PEOPLE- do you get that? The steel workers wouldn't even lose their jobs; they would simply lower their wages to a reasonable amount given the skill. You act as if Chinese wage is the only factor
@johnsurs22 Yes you are: you are for the government supporting free trade,which is just the leading edge of globalization. You don't want american to have access to the products made by their own countrymen. If you have a problem with that walk through the Walmart and check out the courntry of origin labels, 95% will be from the third world. That my friend is lack of freedom, don't even attempt to tell me that the american people concented to that, distruction of our economy. Get serious.
@louiethegreater They still have to pay the expense of shipping the products over here! That means that steel workers would still be payed a reasonable amount without tariffs. It seems like you are just another government special interest man. You want your job; you want your pay; you don't care about what prices people have to pay all around you. BTW, Hong Kong has TOTAL free trade. It has one of the best economies in the world. Explain that, and don't talk about cheap labor either, because
@johnsurs22 No, I am just another ameican who is loyal to his own country. I believe every american should earn a living wage. Did you say steelworkers in the east, you should re-thing that one. The steel industry was given to Japan 40 years ago. Pittsburg, Pa. and Youngstown Ohio were devistated by the action. Japan became so polluted by the coal fired power plants that the royal swans were dieing.
@johnsurs22 If you want to understand Hong Kongs economy, you really only have to understand what I have already told you. Hong Kong's economy was developed through protective trade berriers, tariffs, heavily subsidized domestic industries, redistributed the land. When Hong Kong became fat from the rejection of neo-liberal policies, they today are advocates of free trade. Simply because they need third world resources, and need them cheap, to keep their economie afloat. It is as simple as that!
@louiethegreater Sure man- Hong Kong became "fat" off of the government and now it is draining resources from the third world countries... it's a service based economy. They hardly produce anything and hardly need any resources. They rarely have. This is the problem with your understanding of the economy. We are moving towards almost full service economy (meaning better quality of life for everyone) and your notion that jobs mean production only hinders us.
@johnsurs22 You are telling me that Hong Kong started her life as a service based economy. I don't think so. The Brits colonized her and decided her economic future for her. After the treaty of Nanking, Hong Kong has no autonomy they were of product of colonization, and yes subject to the manufacturing economy of Britian.
@j You are right about one thing, the US has moved toward a service based economy. That is why we have a giant national debty, a giant trade deficit, that is why we have 20 million unemployed, that is why government spending has gone through the ceilning. Unemployed people who have had their jobs oursourced since the 1960s now depend on government for support. The U.S. gets no tax revenue from crporations, they keep their money off shore, or they front the corporate logo in the Cayman Islands.
@louiethegreater Okay there are some things below which I think are factually wrong, but you did make me think of something important, so I'll ignore those and we can move on. You care a lot about US jobs right? Well if you place a tariff on steel, then all the industries that use steel (the car industry for example) have higher costs. That means that they can hire less people. So it's easy to say that you've saved American jobs, but what about the jobs that were never created to begin with?
@johnsurs22 Why does higher costs mean they hire less people. Doesn't demand dictate production. Place a $2,000 tariff on Toyota, Honda and Volkswagon and the Ameican Auto industry wii take off like a rocket. I would guess that they would hire 100,000 workers in the next 10 years. Good wages, benefits and retirement. A step further, and place a 100% tariff on auto parts and that would be repeated again. Retalitary tariff are not a problem just. consider the trade deficit with Japan and Mexico.
@john Don't quite know what you mean by : the jobs that were never created ". Sounds like some of that Arthur Anderson creative accounting done for Enron. We don't really consider the jobs that were not created, they are hypothetical. My tariff plan are real job, they are being preformed in Japan and Mexico as we speak. The reason is because we threw our economy open to Japan, and they protected theirs through tariffs, and subidies. The auto parts industry's move Mexico and China the same.
@johnsurs22 Have you considered that the products we are getting from the third world might not be cheap. How do we know, without American made examples we can compare to. Remember when the debate over NAFTA was in process, and the con job on the american people was that we were going to get all those cheap car from Mexico. That never happened, actually cars went up in price, and has gone up every since. The profits went to Goldman Sachs and Wall Street, but the consumer paid more.
A good example of how protectionism involves benefits for a select few at the expense of all Americans is referenced in the NY Times article "Ethanol Subsidies Besieged" from 7 July. The US tax payer provides $6 billion annually to ethanol producers coupled with a protective tariff on Brazilian ethanol. In addition to the direct expense to the tax payer, the price of corn has been forced upward, making feed more expensive. Ranchers lose profits while shoppers pay more for meat.
Additionally, this form of protectionism results in higher fuel prices in the States, the cost of which is felt not only at the pump but in virtually all goods (which must be transported to market.) As is the case in all forms of protectionism, a select few benefit while a much larger group foots the bill. In this example, corn farmers and domestic ethanol producers make out like bandits at the expense of US food producers, consumers, and tax payers.
@craig4252 The last I heard the U.S. does not have tariffs on corn, and I agree with you the giant agribusinesses should not recieve subsidies. I do beleive the small family farmer should be preserved and our food supply should not be in the hands of giant corporatons. On the other hand our food supply should not depend on imported heavily subsidized foreign industries either. Actually the examples you use is not at all what I am talking about, I am a believer in competition.
@craig4252 You believe we have a tariff on Brazilian ethanol? You have that backwards, Brazil has a 20% tariff on American Ethanol. That is pretty much typical of all american products, they tariff our goods while we give them free access to our markets. The reason is simple, the U.S. Congress has thrown it's middleclass under the bus. You should watch the Elizabety Warren Video, called the " The Coming Collapse of the Middleclass" heres the link---- akVL7QY0S8A
@louiethegreater Sorry louie, now you are just lying. I've already provided a direct quote that specifically states that Jefferson was opposed to the Hamilton tariff. You did not explain the car rental thing at all. Tariffs protect some jobs and raise costs for others to cause unemployment. It's very simple; they may protect manufacturing over service, but they don't protect jobs overall
@johnsurs22 I provided you with Jefferson Quote that spicifically states he was a protecitonist. The car rental nurseury rhyme just isn't true, or the 40 or 50 tariffs laws passed through -out US history would not have produced the greatest middleclass in history. Tariffs protect all jobs , inside nationstates. Each nationstate regulates their own economies,----- if they throw their economy open to imports, they will live at the mercy of the suppliers of those imports.
@louiethegreater "Thomas Jefferson and his followers opposed Alexander Hamilton’s tariff policy in part because they believed that high tariffs would cause problems for" You're quote only showed that he liked to buy American. I provided you with two direct quotes in which he addressed tariff policy in addition to the one above. If you understood American history, you would know. Jefferson and Hamilton were polar opposites; they never agreed. Jefferson was purely free market and Hamilton was not
@craig4252 Yeah what's even more is that we could produce ethanol cheaper and more of it if we legalized hemp, but the corn industry lobbies against that, even though hemp has no drug use whatsoever. They absolutely made it up, just like louie is making up stuff now.
@louiethegreater And listen man, I'm not in favor of Corporations lying on their taxes either, but you've proposed no solution to that. You just complain about it. Trade deficits mean that we spend more than we make. But it is possible to and we do export services. In regards to Hong Kong, it has been a service based economy since 1842. Yes, that is when it became a British colony and the service persisted after 1997 when Britain let her go. Read the history; don't make assumptions
@johnsurs22 Yes I have proposed a solution TARIFFS they are the souluton to the American problem. Be honest with Americans and tell them that free trade is only the prelude to globalization. Now be honest you have no personal feeling for the U.S. do you. You are a sold out globalist, you would gladly trade you citizenship for a global one. You have aligned yourself with the Wall Street crowd that is recieving the wealth of the American Middleclass, and driving globalization.
@louiethegreater Tariffs only empower those very corporations that you hate so much- by eliminating their competition. I like your idealistic viewpoint that somehow companies would hire 100,000 workers etc,,, but it just isnt true. The best way to solve the problem is to stop restricting people from operating in the marketplace. As for Globalization, a distinction has to be made between global trade and global government. However, if one tries to regulate global trade you end up with global govt
@hmfmi No, tariffs produce the conditions that if you make it in China you sell it in China. Those peasants working for those multinatinals could actually afford to buy the products, that they now (without tariffs) produce for export. If oursourcing displaces workers, than tariffs that gives domestic industries opportunities to compete. As a result ameicans go to work instead of Asians. That my friend is a no brainer. Tariffs by nationstates regulate global trade, that also is a no brainer.
@louiethegreater I was talking about steel tariffs which would raise the cost for auto companies (and many others!) and so they would have to buy steel at a higher cost in place of hiring new workers. You are talking about an auto tariff now. So now the auto industry is okay, but now any company that uses autos in their business (rent-a-car, taxis, limos) can't hire more workers because they pay for more expensive cars. It goes on and on and on. No matter how you slice it, people lose jobs
@johnsurs22 Why does the cost of cars hender them from hiring people. If the market is there, than why would they not employ the people to obtain their market share. I would love to be these folks competition. Are they short on capital that they cannot hire people, and buy higher priced steel.
@louiethegreater Because the demand doesn't change based on how much they hire. Take a car rental company for example. If they expect no more than 100 cars to be rented at one time, then they will buy 100 cars. If the cars all cost more, they have less money to hire people for maintenance, service, desk, secretary, etc. They only make so much profit to reinvest in the company. Profit= Revenue-Cost. Cost is higher and revenue, which is tied to demand, is the same.
@johnsurs22 If I were advising the car company I would advise them to go into a business they can afford. Their competitor will make the investment and obtain their share of the market. Actually they should not be in business anyway, they are simply not smart enough. Get out of business and work for someone who will make the investment.
@johnsurs22 But your scenario says the demand is already there, filling the demand is the problem. Businesses hire people to meet the demand, not to create the demand. If the business invest in the cars it would not be prudent not to have the capital to change the oil in them. What kind of business person is that? Sounds like the guy who bought a new cadillac and couldn't afford to put gas in it.
@louiethegreater Or think of it in terms of basic supply and demand. Any time cost is higher, supply is lower. But demand hasn't change, so there is a lower quantity demanded. If demand is price elastic like it is with a car rental company, the company makes less profit and can't hire more workers.
@johnsurs22 People loose jobs ---- so if you outsource the steel production to a cheaper market, than jobs do not go with it: right. So what does the steel workers do? Does the company pay them for staying home, or is that not considered job loss, in your world.
@louiethegreater Okay let at it in terms of the whole car rental industry. There is a pretty solid and steady demand for rental cars as a whole. If all rental cars are more expensive, that's less money that the rental car industry can re-invest into hiring more workers. If you've ever run or seen a small business, you'll know that the business owners will carry the burden until they have sufficient profit to make life easier for them. Lower costs and static revenue means more profit.
@louiethegreater Should the US trade with anyone? If so, how do you deal with the exchange rates knowing the US products will still be more expensive and, to take your example, China and the US will both have "isolated" economies from one another since they'd both be buying and selling their own goods in their own countries, right? Lastly, Tariffs are usually just passed on to the consumer anyway, shipping and production costs and tariffs add to the price, plus, consumers would have less choice
@hmfmi First of all the U.S. does not need China. Tax China's exports to the U.S. and force them to re-value their currency. We simply give them their cake and allow them to eat it too. What problem is it that China and the U.S. would have seperate economies, that would mean that the Chinese laborers could actually buy some of those big screen TVs the now produce for the West. The U.S. manufacturer would actually produce some of those big screen T.V. presently produced by next to slave labor.
If you're interested, please check out Helen Wang's blog from 6 Feb titled "Times Have Changed: No More 'China Produces and American Consumes'" at Forbes. There are a number of interesting stats and projections. Among these, the Credit Suisse prediction that by 2020 China will be the largest consumer market in the world. She also states: "U.S. exports to China are growing almost two times as fast as overall U.S. exports, supporting half a million jobs." Interesting perspective.
@craig4252 You could not possibly believe that exports to China is supporting half a million jobs. I would estimate that imports from China has cost the country 12 million jobs. If you remember the conn job on the american people during the NAFTA debates were --- we will build a viable sustainable middleclass in Mexico, with ameican jobs, they will become a export market. IF you believe the U.S. will become anything but third world, I have a bridge I world like to sell you.
You see what I did there was I read a China-watcher's blog. I looked at her references. Then, I thought about it and it was interesting to me. I did not dismiss her writing immediately because I do not know everything, I'm open to considering credible information, and my mind is not enslaved by your dogma of Rust Belt populism. Outside of your little part of the country, or maybe outside of a UAW meeting, you won't find many supporters for your unfounded ideas.
@craig4252 You are wrong, there is many, many, many more ameicans that beleive my take on the economy than yours. The proof of that will materialize in the near future. When government checks quit going out. When the economy completely collapses under the weight of government support of the masses. The outsorced jobs, would normally have destroyed the economy long ago, but the government stepped in and offered support to the unemployed masses. Now the debt of that support cannot continue.
If you believe China is going to become a consumer of ameican made products you have been hoodwinked. The only way that could possibly happen is, for the US to become as poor as China. I must admit we are well on our way. Do some research on the rhetoric that came out during the NAFTA debates. It is identical to your post. I will agree your mind is not enslaved, it is just subject to the bureacratic BS of free traders and neo liberals. You are not open minded you are totally brainwashed.
"Let me explain to you how this works You see, the corporations finance Team America, and then Team America goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporation-y... and they make money."
Thanks. I started reading some of your other comments and realized there's no point engaging you at any level higher than funny movie quotes. It's no match for Col. Sanders references, but it'll have to do. Your presenting yourself as the one man who knows what's going on made me think of something I read about gurus and narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). I don't know that there are enough characters allowed, but I'll try to address you in a more serious manner later.
@craig4252 Well so far your comments have been in the order of one who talks alot and says nothing, but when you do speak one waits to hear some of that profound wisdom you must surely possess, but fail to get beyond the analization phase of some well thought out wisdom. Why don't you embrace the forum with just a few well spoken words of that Freudism you must possess, after your read. Some, some how, some time, even if it is in the abstract la, la land.
Sure. You wrote Hong Kong became what it is today through protectionist economic policies which it later abandoned. It didn't. You made that up. If I'm wrong (I'm not), please point to some example. I'd also bring up Singapore, a very nice and prosperous place, that has done very little to interfere in free trade/markets in its history. How is Singapore so successful without protective tariffs? Your point that protectionism makes a country prosperous is unfounded.
@craig4252 I'll tell you what, I really don't like you weasels who sit back a take pop shots at someone who has an openion. Why don't you tell me what you know about Singapore and Hong Kong, and I will shoot a you for a while. I will just sit here analize your every word and make snyde remarks at your comments.
@louiethegreater Not pop shots but if you could respond to the fact that Hong Kong has been a successful service based free trade industry from the beginning, it would further the conversation. After all, you are the one that asked to name a country that has succeeded and grown from a free trade policy. What about the car rental industry? You didn't respond to that either. I have been to Hong Kong, not Singapore though. HK is a nice place, albeit a little crowded, and people there are successful
Thomas Sowell is quite simply the man! He is one of my few "go to" guys, like Charles Krauthammer. Dr Sowell used to be a Marxist BTW. That tells you that he has come to his current position through much thought. Most conservatives are former liberals. It's called maturity. Can anybody tell me if Oprah has ever had Dr Sowell on? If Oprah truly cared about black people, she would have had a panel consisting of black men like Dr Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elder etc on discussing welfare etc.
gcxred4kat9 20 hours ago
@merciless15ify
Because his race is unimportant to the fact that he's an intellectual. I wouldn't want to be known as a great "white" intellectual. The addition of my race is superfluous, as it is in that poster's statement.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
I generally agree with Sowell's views, the problem a lot of whites are racist and moronic, even if they don't know it, and they use ideas like libertarianism and conservatism to hide their racism. It's not about affirmative action it's about people not wanting or believing that blacks should be in college at all. This is why this guy says "what a great black intellectual" it's like he's saying "I approve of this black" very sick. Blacks should never rely on or trust whites!
mxzysptlik 1 day ago
@mxzysptlik You're reading too far into it.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
@PuuMastaFunk My experiences have taught me otherwise.
mxzysptlik 1 day ago
@mxzysptlik
What has experience taught you? That certain white men are racist bigots? Duh. But my experiences have taught me that there are black racist bigots, too. You're thinking that, because he used the adjective "black", he must be racist. I agree that it's unnecessary, but not racist, and people like you who play the race card keep racism from dissolving itself. You're a racist, yourself, by claiming blacks can't trust whites, as if we're our own segregated cults.
PuuMastaFunk 22 hours ago
@PuuMastaFunk The race card? Sowell is playing the race card, you're playing the race card. You're just disappointed that i don't agree with your views. Truth is black and whites are already segregated. Talking about the way society is does not make me a racist. I used to believe we're all the same and race is something stupid to talk about but here we are watching a video about race. If it race didn't matter this video would not exist.
mxzysptlik 19 hours ago
i wouldn't care if Harvard considered my ethnicity, i would want them to considered it. anything that gives me an edge in achieving my goals is good
merciless15ify 4 days ago
@merciless15ify for the short term but sacrificing your morals has long term damages to your self-esteem and happiness.
r29 4 days ago
@r29 how i'm i sacrificing my morals?
merciless15ify 3 days ago
@merciless15ify And I'd love for Harvard to only consider race and require applicants to be white. That way, a moderately intelligent white man, like myself, wouldn't have to compete against minorities or even those who are smarter and more qualified than I am. That doesn't mean they should do it, though.
mazerrackham001 1 day ago
@mazerrackham001 Harvard only considering 1 race and not the other is segregation, and thats against the law, so your statement doesnt make any sense. Are you trying to say only your rigor of secondary school record should be the only factor in your admission or what
merciless15ify 19 hours ago
@merciless15ify I was purposefully suggesting something that shouldn't ever be actually done, which if you read my whole comment you'd know. It's irrelevant what the laws of the land or the laws of physics are, when using such a device.
The point was that you want Harvard to consider race because it would help you and I countered that I'd like it if they did everything to help me instead of you, even if you're more academically qualified, but that doesn't mean they should do it.
mazerrackham001 17 hours ago
@merciless15ify Yes, because you being a minority is more important than another student's actual hard work and merit.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
@PuuMastaFunk i didn't say my ethnicity should be an important admission factor i just said i would not mind them considering it. What is your main point, is it that them considering race as an admission factor is unfair or what?
merciless15ify 19 hours ago
Charlie Rose is such a wuss here.
igystrvigy 2 weeks ago
THERE IS nothing stranger than watching a black person argue against blacks on welfare and whites defend it...bizarre....but true. So many Whites are such idiots.
cirosuperiore 2 weeks ago
CR is the WORSE interviewer on the planet...I wish he would ask the question and just SHUT UP.
cirosuperiore 2 weeks ago
"because... diversity" hahahaha -says it all.
WhereHawksFly 1 month ago
I was just gonna ask how long it would take someone to call Sowell an Uncle Tom, then I read three quotes down. Just like Pavlovs dogs, people are trained to call an intellectual black conservative an Uncle Tom. I say Kudos to him for being so damned smart!
garbonzonspat 1 month ago 2
What a Great Black Intellectual
AmRonPaulian 1 month ago 9
@AmRonPaulian Why add the "black" part? How about, "What a great intellectual, period"?
PuuMastaFunk 5 days ago
@PuuMastaFunk whats the problem if he says black, he is describing him. I am black, and i dont care if someone calls me that.
merciless15ify 4 days ago
After 9/11, this POS equated pacifists with terrorist sympathizers, a classic fascist move.
oehlda2000 1 month ago
@oehlda2000 They are. A pacifist who will not stand up for their own right to life and liberty forfeits both. A pacifist who furthers a terrorists' propaganda agenda by offering aid to the enemy in the form of comfort to said enemy, is in fact a sympathizer.
The classic Liberal fascist move is to label people you disagree with rather than attack their argument. It's called Ad Hominem, and you are egregiously guilty of it. It's usually a reaction to cognitive dissonance, a liberal disease.
WhereHawksFly 1 month ago
@WhereHawksFly kinda like the republican war on drugs? that can't be an instance of cognative dissonance can it?
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc Who says all liberals are democrats?
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly i dunno. who?
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc So then what's your point about a Republican war on drugs? Why don't you put the joint down, and read the conversation you are having again, from the beginning.
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly You mentioned how liberals have cognative dissonance. I stated how the republicans claim to be in favor of personal responsibility yet started the war on drugs aka the war on americans. In other words the party of personal responsibility wants to control which substances you are allowed to put into your own body. You don't think this is an example of the dissonance you claim is only displayed by liberals? Im at work so I dont have any "joints" to put down. Thats for later:)
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc No, I'm trying to point you square at your incorrect assumption that Republican and Conservative are synonymous. I said Liberals, I never said Democrats. A Conservative doesn't think it's the place of the federal government to dictate what any individual puts in their own body. I'm sure some Liberal Republicans do. See what I'm saying now?
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly Ok so what you are saying is that a vast majority of the people at cpac are actually republicans and not conservative? I can agree with that but it still doesnt change the fact that these self appointed conservatives preach the values of personal responsibility yet support policies that promote the opposite? To take it even further how can you say liberals have cognative dissonance? How do you know they are not just democrats claiming to be liberals?
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc Romney was at CPAC too, it wasn't just Conservatives there.
It's a spectrum thing, at one end you have a Republic of Law, at the other you have a totalitarian Socialist regime. Everyone falls along that spectrum to varying degrees. If a person does 90% of the Conservative thing, they are still more or less Conservative. That's not Cognitive Dissonance. That's pragmatism, as no one candidate is going to be 100%.
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly preaching personal responsibility then supported the war on drugs is an example of cognitive dissonane whether you want to admit it or not. Nothing in your rant contained any evidence refuting that fact. I heard a sad attempt at an excuse. And I disagree bc ron paul is conservative 100% of the time. If you disagree, name an instance. I work with facts here dude so you gotta keep up. You need to give real life examples to back your assertions.
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc I'm not a 'dude', child. Nor have I ever made a single comment about Paul, so now you sound like a raving lunatic. Like most Paulbots.
Your problem is you think your candidate is infallible, when he isn't. You are suffering from the same messianic delusion that Obamabots suffered in 2008.
Would I take Paul over Obama? Absolutely.
You make the presumption that deficit spending is a non-conservative action, when in of itself it isn't, as long as it's CONSTITUTIONAL.
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly paul isn't infallible but his ideals of personal responsibility and states rights are. Deficit spending is not conservative in the most literal sense. Spending money you dont have is not conserving money.
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly
Actually, just really quickly, I wanted to point out that the far right isn't Republic of law, it's anarchy (dystopianism), complete and absolute removal of government, and the far right is Communism (utopianism), complete and absolute control of government. Just thought I'd point that out.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
@WhereHawksFly *Far left is Communism. My bad.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
@WhereHawksFly Would you call Reagan a conservative? He started deficit spending. Seems like there is enough cognative dissonance to go around.
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc He didn't start it, it was around a lot longer than him. Not that it matters. More importantly, it was spent largely on defense, one of the few powers enumerated by the Constitution for the federal government to actually do. Deficit spending is stupid, deficit spending on social and domestic programs that overstep the bounds and limits of the US Constitution is stupid AND an assault on the law and our liberty.
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly "He didn't start it, it was around a lot longer than him." Who started deficit spending at the federal level? "Not that it matters." It matters when I am trying to prove a point that cognative dissonance is bipartisan and not just liberals.
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly funny how you have dissapeared... Im not surprised. Its a paradox that is literally impossible to explain away.
qualityrkc 1 week ago
@qualityrkc Disappeared? When? I'm away from computers for days at a time sometimes. It means I have more pressing matters to attend to, not that I've gone anywhere or am ignoring anyone.
WhereHawksFly 1 week ago
@WhereHawksFly
I love you.
PuuMastaFunk 1 day ago
This guy is a hate-monger and a neo-fascist. I've read his columns, and I find him repulsive.
oehlda2000 1 month ago
I get so disgusted when I see blacks on TV behaving like wild beasts on BET and what-not, but geniuses like Sowelle don't get any airtime.
aldoreshgaramok 2 months ago 2
@aldoreshgaramok but it's not because he's black that he doesn't get airtime.
anarki777 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aldoreshgaramok but it's not because he's black that he doesn't get airtime.
anarki777 1 month ago
Sowell speaks for the Hoover Institute doesn't he. Isn't Hoover funded by multinational corporations.
louiethegreater 2 months ago
@louiethegreater
The community college B student taking poli sci courses, living in his parents' basement in his 40s, just doesn't stop. I hope the wisdom will never stop flowing. Just kidding. I think you're a huge douche. Read "a Confederacy of Dunces" right away. It's a famous book but maybe you've never heard of it. You remind me of the main character something awful. Good luck with your revolution, comrade. And leave that boy alone.
craig4252 1 month ago
@craig4252 Well, Well another un-american pig heard form. Hey I believe I told you this a few dozen times before. You are a Chicken Rooting for Colonel Sanders. You are eagerly awaiting the day you can trade in your American citizenship for a global one. Please go back to sleep.
louiethegreater 1 month ago
@craig4252 - I wonder if his 'valve' has closed too? LOL That was a strange book wasn't it?
Lisat1109 1 month ago
@louiethegreater IF you watched this whole video of this debate then you wouldn't of comment on shit they already answered dumfuck.
tehatemachine 1 month ago
@tehatemachine - Would you know where I could find a link to the whole video of either of the debates clipped in this video?
KyMace 1 month ago
@KyMace - I'm not sure but maybe try Free To Choose Network. I see other videos posted here by them.
Lisat1109 1 month ago
@tehatemachine Hey bright child, I never heard a debate, I just heard one uncle tom asking another uncle tom scripted questions, with scripted answers.
louiethegreater 1 month ago
all yall need to get aquainted with ayn rand, we need a laizi fair capital system without gov't interferrence, where the markets take care of itself not obama, bush, clinton or any other political fig, friedman and sowell are right by putting that woman in her place
erijones1ify 2 months ago
Charlie Rose looks much younger. When was this filmed.
housecry 2 months ago
Great clip from Milton Friedman's series Free To Choose.
hmfmi 2 months ago
Someone find this woman a seat closer to the back of the class. Professor Thomas Sowell just reassigned her.
Andarovin 2 months ago
Rock on Thomas Sowell. What a troglodyte that Piven.
That said- my essays are the unified theory, join the movement thesaneparty d com or visit my channel for my latest interview on the Mark Davis show in Dallas and other lectures.
brazenhubris 3 months ago
I actually teared up a bit watching this. Sowell's mind is a thing of exquisite, breathtaking beauty. What a jewel of a human being.
7beers 3 months ago 3
Thomas Sowell drink Charlie Rose's milkshake.
RJordan0220 3 months ago
Why couldn't he have become our president instead?
G0dspelronin 3 months ago
@G0dspelronin Banksters rule America and Europe.
EternalComos 1 month ago
i have never seen an polster ither.
Mrpeace4ualll 4 months ago
8:33 "You want me to answer or you wanna keep going? You want me to answer?" "I'm finished." "GOOD." pwned
supahsekzy 4 months ago 4
I love how white liberals are always telling black Americans what they think and how they feel and what is best for them. How arrogant and condescending of these elitists. Maybe the “progressives” would love to put all the black people in zoos so they can have complete control of them.
bikoeng 4 months ago
Charlie Rose is a chimpanzee compared to Dr. Sowell
pretorious700 4 months ago
people like Frances Fox Piven is whats wrong with the US .... go back to your caves ... Thomas just own'd that bitch
SupaNami 4 months ago 2
WOW - brilliant man...same shit ideas on the other side though
thebamf100 5 months ago
Good Lord He's awesome! WOW
sociomike 5 months ago
The amazing thing is, that bitch Pivens claim to fame is that she advocated a method--a "plot" if you will--TO DESTROY THE UNITED STATES. This is a matter of history. The bitch worked to DESTROY THE US--literally--and she said so openly!
See, this is a prime example of the SUICIDAL nature of our political culture. In past ages a treasonous bitch like this would be PUT BEFORE A FIRING SQUAD.
The fact that this bitch is not DEAD or IN PRISON completely explains how America shall destroy itself.
UncleIrv 5 months ago
I wonder what happened to this illogical bleeding heart bozo O'Bannion ?
jamo387 6 months ago
Sowell is so amazingly incredible. The smile on my face will not leave right now.. it just won't. XD
daPlumber702 6 months ago 26
Learn to sit then get an option. Ignorance is independent of education. NO class
mba2ceo 6 months ago
Sowell is a giant a man amoungst men. May your genius live forever. We love you Tom. We love you!!!!!!!
Patriot751 6 months ago 51
American history is based on Affirmative action for white people, things like the GI Bill, Social security for non-farm workers and "whites only" policies for suburbs created the white middle class and left blacks out of it.
Not surprisingly, Affirmative action has quadrupled the black middle class the same way it helped whites.
AndroidPolitician 7 months ago
@AndroidPolitician not at all, affirmative action has done nothing but keep blacks down. the free market has quadrupled the black middle class, and blacks would be far better off today had we never enacted affirmative action or the other welfare programs that have destroyed the black family. how can you explain that before civil rights legislation most black families were intact, when now 80% of blacks are born to a single mother?
Welsh77 7 months ago
@Welsh77
Well first there's a difference between the black middle class which came out of budding professionals from Affirmative action and that's been documented.
There's also a black underclass of low skilled workers who now face chronic joblessness because of outsourcing and deindustrialization the US.
It's a matter of both government policies reward budding professionals and market/government policies that destroyed low skilled workers.
AndroidPolitician 7 months ago
@Welsh How do you expain that probably about 50% of those are born to white women. The answer to your queston is simple. When young women realize that they can escape mom and pops authority, simply by having a child, that the government will pay their rent, buy their food, and support their lifestyle, and even give them a raise for having another child. These young women white or black, to immature to know the stresses of single parenting buys in. Men, black or white is off the hook financially.
louiethegreater 6 months ago
@AndroidPolitician
The GI Bill is "affirmative action for white people"? No, it's education assistance for vets.
craig4252 6 months ago
@craig4252
Yeah and Black GIs couldn't get it so it's effectively white affirmative action.
AndroidPolitician 5 months ago
@AndroidPolitician
All vets get the GI Bill unless they got out before 2001 AND opted out of the program.
craig4252 5 months ago
@craig4252
Not southern blacks in the 40s and 50s.
AndroidPolitician 5 months ago
@AndroidPolitician yup.
Moionfire 3 months ago
No. I think economic policies that lean toward free trade/markets are good for America. I've never had any interest in "trading in" my citizenship. I'm glad my previous post brought some humor to your morning. Obviously, I tend to subscribe to the economic theories of people like Friedman and Sowell because I think they're correct. Your ideas are more in line with traditional populist politics than any economic theory. Real question: Have you traveled extensively in the US or abroad?
craig4252 7 months ago
@cr Did you ask me if I could remember the 80s. Yes I can, actually it would have been impossible to buy an american made radio or tv in the 80s. The macine tool industry was in Japan, and Taiwan, the textile industry was almost gone by then, i believe Levi's had only one factory left in the US. Rubber was gone, steel was gone, ceramics were gone. Actually our Radio, TV, and Machine Tool Industries had been given to Japan. It was as simple as they had access to our markets, while they tariffed.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@craig4252 Regardless of what you will admit to, you are anti US. and pro globalization. My economic ideology came more from Adam. Jeffierson, Hamilton, Lincoln. and Madison, because they were right when they extablished a economy based on protectionism, which produced the greatest middleclass in the world. While, the Austrian School has completely reversed the gains made by two centeries of protectionism. Sowell and Friedman were little more than paid, pawns of the Hoover Institute.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
The look on Piven's face at the end is priceless! I wish Thomas Sowell would have been our first black president. Sowell would have exposed Obama for who he really is, and he would have blown B.O. away in any debate! Welfare usually keeps people in poverty unless they have enough pride in themselves to get off of it.
sosadforcountry 7 months ago
What a repulsive sight Sowell and Friedman on the same stage. Multinational Corporations's cheerleaders.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater All liberals idiots hate the sight of Sowell and Friedman. They have no facts to argues against them.
Xantheus07 7 months ago
@Xantheus07 Hey look in the mirror and see if you can see a Chicken Rooting for Colonal Sanders. You are not one of the 10% of ameicans who are recieving the wealth created, by these traitors policies.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Yes i am because of THESE capitalistic policies i have a job that allows me to feed and cloth my family. I count myself among the lucky who still have a job despite idiots such as your self trying to create policiesfurther forcing companies to move their business overseas.
Xantheus07 7 months ago
@Xantheus07 You are mixed up, free trade, and neo-liberalism is the policy that created outsourcing. Those are both liberal,and conservative policies. Free trade continues its distruction to our economy regardless of who is in controll of he politics of the county. Outsourcing is the result of the removal of tariffs.When multinationals were assured tariffs would be removed, and there would be no future threat of tariffs, they made a b-line for the cheap thirdworld labor markets.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater So are you for legalizing drugs yet against free trade? Free trade is not harming our country 35% corporate tax is. Even though company's have cheaper labor overseas they pay shipping cost and tariffs which is cheaper then keeping manufacturing here in the states.
Xantheus07 7 months ago
@Xantheus07 Did you know that the 18,000 of he largest corporations are parked offshore in the Cayman Islands, and do not pay taxes. Did you know that multinatonals can employ 47 Chinese for one american. Corporations do not pay tariffs, they have sponsered people like Sowell, Freidman and many other to convince unthinking people that the U.S. should not use the protections that the founders gave by example. Tariffs were fixed on imports as early as The Hamilton Tariff Act of 1789.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater History lesson: Hamilton was a Big government British douche. Thomas Jefferson was a free marketer and a REAL American that was anti-tariff. Tariffs protect American corporations and make products more expensive for the consumer. If corporations hire Chinese for low wage, that means that we get products cheaper. So for the purpose of keeping employment for a few people here, everything should be more expensive for everyone? This is unfair and why prices are so high.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@john Perhaps through your vast knowlege of ameican history. You could explain this Jefferson quote " The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles fo foreign manufacture, which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination fo every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made within ourselves, WITHOUT REGARD TO DIFFERECE IN PRICE secures us against a relapse into foreign dependency"
--- end quote---- You are incorrect on your cheap price assessment.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater First of all, buying products from China has nothing to do with the national debt, but that's not too important right now. As for Jefferson's quote, it has to do with encouraging voluntarily buying domestic products. If you want to know what he thinks about the government regulating it, here are some quotes:
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 What do you mean the national debt is not preportional to China supplying our consumer goods. What about the revenue of those 80,000 manufacturing facilities that have been outsourced. What about the federal income taxes from the millions of displaced workers. What about all those displaced workers, who now look to government for support. GM is now the larges employer in Mexico, who is making the income off that cheap labor, answer----- Wall Street, so they can create jobs in Asia.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 if that is your openion of the Jefferson quote I supplied you, than Jefferson could not be a free trader. You do not agree, that we should manufacture of own consumption, you believe we should buy it from the thirdworld. Jefferson said REGARDLESS OF PRICE, you do not beleive that. It appears that you would terminate every job in the U.S. so you could buy a five dollar t-shirt for three dollars.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Are you going to ignore the quotes that I supplied? Anyway, when did I say that I buy everything from China? I buy American products when I think that they are worth it. If you really wanted to compete with China, you would stop making it so expensive to produce here through so much regulation. Even if the country passes tariffs, it doesn't mean that Jefferson agreed with passing them.Do you run a business? Do you know how much American businesses rip us off?Why not buy Chinese?
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 I didn't ignore the quotes, i just believe they were made in the context of a protected economy. Jefferson was a protectionist. So was all the rest of the founders, so was the country, that is apparant by the many, many tariff laws put in place over two centuries. Ameican was built on tariffs, the middleclass was built on tariffs. I frankly believe you would be hard pressed to find american made consumer goods, even if you wanted to buy them. I buy Chinese because i have no choice.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Regulation has nothing to do with oursourcing, that is just a globaist by-line to move .15/hr jobs to the third world and replace them with .57/hr labor. When corporations would announce their plan to close US operations and move offshore, Wall St. would respond by a serge in stock prices. Of course the investment class would ignore the 30,000 employees left jobless. You don't seem to understand society is not here to serve Wall St. and the corporate structure.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Our national debt has little to do with revenue problems. The government sucks every dollar out of the pockets of Americans. No, the problem is that it spends too much, plain and simple. Economics is a science, very well researched in fact. Why have even protectionist countries worldwide moved towards free trade? They see the benefits. In fact, let me show you how your plan is causing MORE unemployment. If I have to pay higher prices because of tariffs, that means that I can buy
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Every developed economy in the world today was developed by protectionism, central planning, subsidies,and market minipulation, none, not one was built on free trade. Why? because free trade does not work, and will never work as long as there are nationstates. It is apparant the globalization is riding on the vehicle of free trade. Yes protectionist countries did adopt free trade, but that doesn't change the fact their economies were built by protectionism, state planning.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
The U.S was founded on protecitonism, and became the envy of the world through protectionist policies. No honest person could deny that. Only a distortion of facts, produced by the advocates of globalizaton pretends that free trade produced ameican society.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater The quotes explicitly show Jefferson's philosophy on tariffs. He explicitly was against tariffs. Here is a quiz question from an American history book: "Thomas Jefferson and his followers opposed Alexander Hamilton’s tariff policy in part because they believed that high tariffs would cause problems for" I think that means that he was against tariffs. Just because tariffs were passed doesn't mean everyone agreed with them.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@louiethegreater I'm not for the government supporting Wal-Street nor am I for the government supporting any special interest group, which is exactly what tariffs do. Because overpayed steel workers in the East coast want to keep their jobs, we have to pay higher prices for all of our products. US, THE PEOPLE- do you get that? The steel workers wouldn't even lose their jobs; they would simply lower their wages to a reasonable amount given the skill. You act as if Chinese wage is the only factor
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Yes you are: you are for the government supporting free trade,which is just the leading edge of globalization. You don't want american to have access to the products made by their own countrymen. If you have a problem with that walk through the Walmart and check out the courntry of origin labels, 95% will be from the third world. That my friend is lack of freedom, don't even attempt to tell me that the american people concented to that, distruction of our economy. Get serious.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater They still have to pay the expense of shipping the products over here! That means that steel workers would still be payed a reasonable amount without tariffs. It seems like you are just another government special interest man. You want your job; you want your pay; you don't care about what prices people have to pay all around you. BTW, Hong Kong has TOTAL free trade. It has one of the best economies in the world. Explain that, and don't talk about cheap labor either, because
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 No, I am just another ameican who is loyal to his own country. I believe every american should earn a living wage. Did you say steelworkers in the east, you should re-thing that one. The steel industry was given to Japan 40 years ago. Pittsburg, Pa. and Youngstown Ohio were devistated by the action. Japan became so polluted by the coal fired power plants that the royal swans were dieing.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 If you want to understand Hong Kongs economy, you really only have to understand what I have already told you. Hong Kong's economy was developed through protective trade berriers, tariffs, heavily subsidized domestic industries, redistributed the land. When Hong Kong became fat from the rejection of neo-liberal policies, they today are advocates of free trade. Simply because they need third world resources, and need them cheap, to keep their economie afloat. It is as simple as that!
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Sure man- Hong Kong became "fat" off of the government and now it is draining resources from the third world countries... it's a service based economy. They hardly produce anything and hardly need any resources. They rarely have. This is the problem with your understanding of the economy. We are moving towards almost full service economy (meaning better quality of life for everyone) and your notion that jobs mean production only hinders us.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 You are telling me that Hong Kong started her life as a service based economy. I don't think so. The Brits colonized her and decided her economic future for her. After the treaty of Nanking, Hong Kong has no autonomy they were of product of colonization, and yes subject to the manufacturing economy of Britian.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@j You are right about one thing, the US has moved toward a service based economy. That is why we have a giant national debty, a giant trade deficit, that is why we have 20 million unemployed, that is why government spending has gone through the ceilning. Unemployed people who have had their jobs oursourced since the 1960s now depend on government for support. The U.S. gets no tax revenue from crporations, they keep their money off shore, or they front the corporate logo in the Cayman Islands.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Okay there are some things below which I think are factually wrong, but you did make me think of something important, so I'll ignore those and we can move on. You care a lot about US jobs right? Well if you place a tariff on steel, then all the industries that use steel (the car industry for example) have higher costs. That means that they can hire less people. So it's easy to say that you've saved American jobs, but what about the jobs that were never created to begin with?
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Why does higher costs mean they hire less people. Doesn't demand dictate production. Place a $2,000 tariff on Toyota, Honda and Volkswagon and the Ameican Auto industry wii take off like a rocket. I would guess that they would hire 100,000 workers in the next 10 years. Good wages, benefits and retirement. A step further, and place a 100% tariff on auto parts and that would be repeated again. Retalitary tariff are not a problem just. consider the trade deficit with Japan and Mexico.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@john Don't quite know what you mean by : the jobs that were never created ". Sounds like some of that Arthur Anderson creative accounting done for Enron. We don't really consider the jobs that were not created, they are hypothetical. My tariff plan are real job, they are being preformed in Japan and Mexico as we speak. The reason is because we threw our economy open to Japan, and they protected theirs through tariffs, and subidies. The auto parts industry's move Mexico and China the same.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Have you considered that the products we are getting from the third world might not be cheap. How do we know, without American made examples we can compare to. Remember when the debate over NAFTA was in process, and the con job on the american people was that we were going to get all those cheap car from Mexico. That never happened, actually cars went up in price, and has gone up every since. The profits went to Goldman Sachs and Wall Street, but the consumer paid more.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@john
A good example of how protectionism involves benefits for a select few at the expense of all Americans is referenced in the NY Times article "Ethanol Subsidies Besieged" from 7 July. The US tax payer provides $6 billion annually to ethanol producers coupled with a protective tariff on Brazilian ethanol. In addition to the direct expense to the tax payer, the price of corn has been forced upward, making feed more expensive. Ranchers lose profits while shoppers pay more for meat.
craig4252 7 months ago
Additionally, this form of protectionism results in higher fuel prices in the States, the cost of which is felt not only at the pump but in virtually all goods (which must be transported to market.) As is the case in all forms of protectionism, a select few benefit while a much larger group foots the bill. In this example, corn farmers and domestic ethanol producers make out like bandits at the expense of US food producers, consumers, and tax payers.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 The last I heard the U.S. does not have tariffs on corn, and I agree with you the giant agribusinesses should not recieve subsidies. I do beleive the small family farmer should be preserved and our food supply should not be in the hands of giant corporatons. On the other hand our food supply should not depend on imported heavily subsidized foreign industries either. Actually the examples you use is not at all what I am talking about, I am a believer in competition.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater
The protective tariff in this example is placed on Brazilian ethanol. Brazil uses sugar cane to produce ethanol. In the States, we use corn.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 You believe we have a tariff on Brazilian ethanol? You have that backwards, Brazil has a 20% tariff on American Ethanol. That is pretty much typical of all american products, they tariff our goods while we give them free access to our markets. The reason is simple, the U.S. Congress has thrown it's middleclass under the bus. You should watch the Elizabety Warren Video, called the " The Coming Collapse of the Middleclass" heres the link---- akVL7QY0S8A
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Sorry louie, now you are just lying. I've already provided a direct quote that specifically states that Jefferson was opposed to the Hamilton tariff. You did not explain the car rental thing at all. Tariffs protect some jobs and raise costs for others to cause unemployment. It's very simple; they may protect manufacturing over service, but they don't protect jobs overall
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 I provided you with Jefferson Quote that spicifically states he was a protecitonist. The car rental nurseury rhyme just isn't true, or the 40 or 50 tariffs laws passed through -out US history would not have produced the greatest middleclass in history. Tariffs protect all jobs , inside nationstates. Each nationstate regulates their own economies,----- if they throw their economy open to imports, they will live at the mercy of the suppliers of those imports.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater "Thomas Jefferson and his followers opposed Alexander Hamilton’s tariff policy in part because they believed that high tariffs would cause problems for" You're quote only showed that he liked to buy American. I provided you with two direct quotes in which he addressed tariff policy in addition to the one above. If you understood American history, you would know. Jefferson and Hamilton were polar opposites; they never agreed. Jefferson was purely free market and Hamilton was not
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@craig4252 Yeah what's even more is that we could produce ethanol cheaper and more of it if we legalized hemp, but the corn industry lobbies against that, even though hemp has no drug use whatsoever. They absolutely made it up, just like louie is making up stuff now.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22
Interesting. I'll read up on hemp.
craig4252 7 months ago
@louiethegreater And listen man, I'm not in favor of Corporations lying on their taxes either, but you've proposed no solution to that. You just complain about it. Trade deficits mean that we spend more than we make. But it is possible to and we do export services. In regards to Hong Kong, it has been a service based economy since 1842. Yes, that is when it became a British colony and the service persisted after 1997 when Britain let her go. Read the history; don't make assumptions
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Yes I have proposed a solution TARIFFS they are the souluton to the American problem. Be honest with Americans and tell them that free trade is only the prelude to globalization. Now be honest you have no personal feeling for the U.S. do you. You are a sold out globalist, you would gladly trade you citizenship for a global one. You have aligned yourself with the Wall Street crowd that is recieving the wealth of the American Middleclass, and driving globalization.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Tariffs only empower those very corporations that you hate so much- by eliminating their competition. I like your idealistic viewpoint that somehow companies would hire 100,000 workers etc,,, but it just isnt true. The best way to solve the problem is to stop restricting people from operating in the marketplace. As for Globalization, a distinction has to be made between global trade and global government. However, if one tries to regulate global trade you end up with global govt
hmfmi 7 months ago 2
@hmfmi No, tariffs produce the conditions that if you make it in China you sell it in China. Those peasants working for those multinatinals could actually afford to buy the products, that they now (without tariffs) produce for export. If oursourcing displaces workers, than tariffs that gives domestic industries opportunities to compete. As a result ameicans go to work instead of Asians. That my friend is a no brainer. Tariffs by nationstates regulate global trade, that also is a no brainer.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater I was talking about steel tariffs which would raise the cost for auto companies (and many others!) and so they would have to buy steel at a higher cost in place of hiring new workers. You are talking about an auto tariff now. So now the auto industry is okay, but now any company that uses autos in their business (rent-a-car, taxis, limos) can't hire more workers because they pay for more expensive cars. It goes on and on and on. No matter how you slice it, people lose jobs
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 Why does the cost of cars hender them from hiring people. If the market is there, than why would they not employ the people to obtain their market share. I would love to be these folks competition. Are they short on capital that they cannot hire people, and buy higher priced steel.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Because the demand doesn't change based on how much they hire. Take a car rental company for example. If they expect no more than 100 cars to be rented at one time, then they will buy 100 cars. If the cars all cost more, they have less money to hire people for maintenance, service, desk, secretary, etc. They only make so much profit to reinvest in the company. Profit= Revenue-Cost. Cost is higher and revenue, which is tied to demand, is the same.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 If I were advising the car company I would advise them to go into a business they can afford. Their competitor will make the investment and obtain their share of the market. Actually they should not be in business anyway, they are simply not smart enough. Get out of business and work for someone who will make the investment.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
Comment removed
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@louiethegreater And craig is right. You were wrong about Hong Kong- it still stands as an example counter to everything that you say.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 So craig is going to post for a while, and you are going to take pop shots; is that the way it is.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 But your scenario says the demand is already there, filling the demand is the problem. Businesses hire people to meet the demand, not to create the demand. If the business invest in the cars it would not be prudent not to have the capital to change the oil in them. What kind of business person is that? Sounds like the guy who bought a new cadillac and couldn't afford to put gas in it.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Or think of it in terms of basic supply and demand. Any time cost is higher, supply is lower. But demand hasn't change, so there is a lower quantity demanded. If demand is price elastic like it is with a car rental company, the company makes less profit and can't hire more workers.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@johnsurs22 People loose jobs ---- so if you outsource the steel production to a cheaper market, than jobs do not go with it: right. So what does the steel workers do? Does the company pay them for staying home, or is that not considered job loss, in your world.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Okay let at it in terms of the whole car rental industry. There is a pretty solid and steady demand for rental cars as a whole. If all rental cars are more expensive, that's less money that the rental car industry can re-invest into hiring more workers. If you've ever run or seen a small business, you'll know that the business owners will carry the burden until they have sufficient profit to make life easier for them. Lower costs and static revenue means more profit.
johnsurs22 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Should the US trade with anyone? If so, how do you deal with the exchange rates knowing the US products will still be more expensive and, to take your example, China and the US will both have "isolated" economies from one another since they'd both be buying and selling their own goods in their own countries, right? Lastly, Tariffs are usually just passed on to the consumer anyway, shipping and production costs and tariffs add to the price, plus, consumers would have less choice
hmfmi 7 months ago
@hmfmi First of all the U.S. does not need China. Tax China's exports to the U.S. and force them to re-value their currency. We simply give them their cake and allow them to eat it too. What problem is it that China and the U.S. would have seperate economies, that would mean that the Chinese laborers could actually buy some of those big screen TVs the now produce for the West. The U.S. manufacturer would actually produce some of those big screen T.V. presently produced by next to slave labor.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@hmfmi
If you're interested, please check out Helen Wang's blog from 6 Feb titled "Times Have Changed: No More 'China Produces and American Consumes'" at Forbes. There are a number of interesting stats and projections. Among these, the Credit Suisse prediction that by 2020 China will be the largest consumer market in the world. She also states: "U.S. exports to China are growing almost two times as fast as overall U.S. exports, supporting half a million jobs." Interesting perspective.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 You could not possibly believe that exports to China is supporting half a million jobs. I would estimate that imports from China has cost the country 12 million jobs. If you remember the conn job on the american people during the NAFTA debates were --- we will build a viable sustainable middleclass in Mexico, with ameican jobs, they will become a export market. IF you believe the U.S. will become anything but third world, I have a bridge I world like to sell you.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louie
You see what I did there was I read a China-watcher's blog. I looked at her references. Then, I thought about it and it was interesting to me. I did not dismiss her writing immediately because I do not know everything, I'm open to considering credible information, and my mind is not enslaved by your dogma of Rust Belt populism. Outside of your little part of the country, or maybe outside of a UAW meeting, you won't find many supporters for your unfounded ideas.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 You are wrong, there is many, many, many more ameicans that beleive my take on the economy than yours. The proof of that will materialize in the near future. When government checks quit going out. When the economy completely collapses under the weight of government support of the masses. The outsorced jobs, would normally have destroyed the economy long ago, but the government stepped in and offered support to the unemployed masses. Now the debt of that support cannot continue.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
If you believe China is going to become a consumer of ameican made products you have been hoodwinked. The only way that could possibly happen is, for the US to become as poor as China. I must admit we are well on our way. Do some research on the rhetoric that came out during the NAFTA debates. It is identical to your post. I will agree your mind is not enslaved, it is just subject to the bureacratic BS of free traders and neo liberals. You are not open minded you are totally brainwashed.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater
You are so phenomenally full of shit that, unless you're a high school or college student, I don't think there's much hope for you.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 Well craig I will truely treasure your openion. Are you one of those Chickens Rooting for Colonel Sanders.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater
"Let me explain to you how this works You see, the corporations finance Team America, and then Team America goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporation-y... and they make money."
--Tim Robbins
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 I thought so, your quotes match your intellect
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater
Thanks. I started reading some of your other comments and realized there's no point engaging you at any level higher than funny movie quotes. It's no match for Col. Sanders references, but it'll have to do. Your presenting yourself as the one man who knows what's going on made me think of something I read about gurus and narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). I don't know that there are enough characters allowed, but I'll try to address you in a more serious manner later.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 Well so far your comments have been in the order of one who talks alot and says nothing, but when you do speak one waits to hear some of that profound wisdom you must surely possess, but fail to get beyond the analization phase of some well thought out wisdom. Why don't you embrace the forum with just a few well spoken words of that Freudism you must possess, after your read. Some, some how, some time, even if it is in the abstract la, la land.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater
Sure. You wrote Hong Kong became what it is today through protectionist economic policies which it later abandoned. It didn't. You made that up. If I'm wrong (I'm not), please point to some example. I'd also bring up Singapore, a very nice and prosperous place, that has done very little to interfere in free trade/markets in its history. How is Singapore so successful without protective tariffs? Your point that protectionism makes a country prosperous is unfounded.
craig4252 7 months ago
@craig4252 I'll tell you what, I really don't like you weasels who sit back a take pop shots at someone who has an openion. Why don't you tell me what you know about Singapore and Hong Kong, and I will shoot a you for a while. I will just sit here analize your every word and make snyde remarks at your comments.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
@louiethegreater Not pop shots but if you could respond to the fact that Hong Kong has been a successful service based free trade industry from the beginning, it would further the conversation. After all, you are the one that asked to name a country that has succeeded and grown from a free trade policy. What about the car rental industry? You didn't respond to that either. I have been to Hong Kong, not Singapore though. HK is a nice place, albeit a little crowded, and people there are successful
johnsurs22