"We've got better things to do with our human resources" then manufacture "trinkets"? Tell that to the 40-something moms or dads who scour the "help-wanted" ads for ANYTHING to do with THEIR human resources. The problem isn't "over-taxing" corporations. After the loophole dance, many corporations end up paying nothing or next to nothing. Want to address it with tax reform? Shift the tax burden to outsourced labor. Tax the exportation of jobs. Give the loopholes to DOMESTIC manufacturers.
Congress is the enemy, not China, not unemployment, not the national debet. Necessities (food, housing and transportation), must be non-profit, and free to volunteers in necessity fields, in which case the NEED for a job would not be there. A person would work only 2 weeks to have all the necessities covered for the year (per person). Then, if allowed, small bizniz would spring up like dandelions. Capitalism can take over AFTER necessities. IT WOULD BOOM.
tekproxy..she's aussie.south australians tend to speak with a more english inflection than other states due to it being the only colony not to receive convicts from the U.K.Thus there are far fewer people who we're cockneys,irish catholics or english peasants who went there.thus the refined accent.Alexander Downer,our ex forfeign minister spoke with the same accent as Sallie has and was ridiculed for it.victoria,my home state,tend to speak thru their nose a lot.
Sallie James works for the Cato Institute, which is funded by the Koch Brothers. If you want to learn more about the Cato Institute and the other Koch Brothers echo chambers, search youtube for the Koch Brothers exposed.
@robertalvinlewis The Cato institute has some of the finest economists in the planet working for them. Real economists, not Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck, but academics who work hard at what they do and actually produce good things.
@poop2poop2 They produce propaganda. The solutions this so-called academic offers in this video are removing regulations and cutting taxes. Those are exactly the kind of "good things" that caused the financial meltdown and the debt crisis we're currently facing. Nothing good comes from the Cato Institute. It's a propaganda machine. That's it's only function.
It's easy to see why conservatives are going after teachers and trying to dismantle the education system. The more uneducated people there are in America, the more followers they'll have. This lady isn't hot enough to make up for how stupid she is. I love that her solution to the fiscal crisis is "removing regulations and lowering the corporate tax rates" like we haven't been doing that since Reagan and as if that's not exactly what got us where we are today.
Chinese WIN! - mostly because they have no property tax!!! Jobs are NOT the answer, because taxation and RENT and FOOD prices are profit motivated. The more money americans have.. the more the rich will steal from the middle income people with taxation and land collecting. Congress folk should all serve for free, and then a better quality congress would exist. A profit motivated congressman/president is a thief.
@geehuckwow wtf are you talking about there is property tax there, plus millions of people kicked out of their homes regularly, do not envy the Chinese in any aspect. Their debt is even worse than ours! I am afraid if our government worked for free there would be much more rampant corruption.
This lady definitely hasn't read the Constitution, the Constitution says that corporations are to pay all direct taxes, the only taxes citizens are to pay are excise taxes. But what do we expect from this Cato Institute corporate shill. She probably has not problem with a fictitious entity aka a corporation having the same rights as a living breathing human being.
Corporate America doesn't give 2 shits about America, that's why they have been dismantling this country and sending all of our manufacturing equipment over to China and India. Nothing like paying slave wages to the poor in another country and then selling those slave made goods to Americans to make themselves filthy rich.
So Sallie James thinks it's somehow demeaning for us Americans to continue to munufacture certain things in our own country, yet sees no problem in people in third world countries doing so at the beheast of corporate multinationals.
As if an industrialized county making things for its own use is somehow "demeaning" and should instead be done by other less devoloped countries with poorer people while corporations eat the cream.
@MsSexySocialist No! Believe it or not, building bobbleheads is better than living like they used to before "corporate multinationals" moved there, in the fields. They are far richer now than they were a few years ago.
And they'll continue to get richer, if it's government doesn't screw up, which I believe it is with it's housing bubble.
Get down from your high horse and face reality, story and organic market laws.
If I was a slave that ended up getting promoted to being a serf, how on earth could you expect me to feel grateful for it? I'm still being exploited.
The problem is that multinationals rob developing countries of economic self-determination and using their own resources to enrich their own countries. Instead they're all being sucked dry while the likes of Nike and Shell reap the benefits.
Try being an aid worker for a few months and see what these companies really do to people
@MsSexySocialist Aren't people working there voluntarily? Aren't they improving they're standards of living? What was it before companies moved there? Why is Hong Kong much richer than the rest of China?
No, they improve the standards of living of those people who are VOLUNTARILY working there. Unless you're saying that governments sell those people to some managed monopoly 'aka' corporatism, which happens a lot with your Socialism, USA included.
To say people in developing nations are working dirt cheap for multinationals "voluntarily" is like saying you were "voluntarily" raped if someone offered to save your life in exchange for sex.
ie: There's no real choice at all. Just the illusion of choice as without equality of opportunity that theoretical freedom of choice means nothing.
While, they may seem to raise standards of living in the short term, such benefits are outweighed by the rise in inequality.
@MsSexySocialist What I don't think you take into account is that it is governments who creates inequality in the first place through regulation, keeping competition out.
China may only be able to produce cheap products right now, but do you think they won't get richer and more educated by doing that? They are doing it right now. Why do you think they will stop at that?
I prefer being richer and having people much more stupidly richer, than being equally poor to everyone else. I share.
"What I don't think you take into account is that it is governments who creates inequality in the first place through regulation, keeping competition out."
A common misconception. If that was the case, then poverty in Chile in the 1970s should have receded with the vast economic liberalization instigated by Augusto Pinochet.
It didn't. Inequality and poverty soured. And the same polices caused an economic crash in the 1980s which nearly destroyed the economy
@MsSexySocialist Right, because a system can go from a Socialist-Statist form to some sort a freer-market by Government force without having some sort of backfire... Duh. Off course not, and I don't support anything that has to do with governments, because it involves force, therefore invalidating anything to do with freedom of choice.
How about looking at the indexes of economic freedom and seeing it's correlation with people being better off?
"I prefer being richer and having people much more stupidly richer, than being equally poor to everyone else. I share."
That's a common strawman argument against social justice policies. No advocate of these ideas want literal economic equality - just equality of opportunity. So that no-one will have an unfair advantage based on the inherited wealth of their family.
Also, your comments about "socialism" show just how ignorant you must be with regards to political science.
I am an anti-statist socialist who supports the dissolution of all forms of monopoly - whether political with regard to the state, or economic with regard to corporations.
Under Minarchist or Anarchist Capitalism the latter continues to exist and perpetuates a form of economic colonialism via the blockage of economic democracy and self-determination.
@MsSexySocialist "Under Minarchist or Anarchist Capitalism the latter continues to exist and perpetuates a form of economic colonialism via the blockage of economic democracy and self-determination."
No, because no corporation has the states military and police to protect it from competition.
"No, because no corporation has the states military and police to protect it from competition."
They're still economic monopolies which prevent both economic democracy and self-determination. And in a future stateless society, what on earth would stop Corporations from enforcing the polices they want with force and coercion?
They would become states themselves but without any of the democratic accountability to the public.
@MsSexySocialist There are no monopolies in the free market, because you yourself can associate with whoever you want and create competition. However, with government regulations, you do have corporatism, which is very far from what free-markets are.
What corporation has the money to wage wars like States do? They get money from the good will of costumers who choose to buy their products. And you forget, in an anarchist society, we can have AK-47s. It would be pointless on their side.
"What corporation has the money to wage wars like States do? "
Exxon Mobil and many others. And anyway, what I'm trying to say is that in an Anarcho-Capitalist world, where corporations still continue to exist, they would end up becoming the new states that merely replace the old ones - but, as I said, without the democratic accountability to the public a republican state has.
Plus, wage labor still exists, meaning people still have to work for those above.
@MsSexySocialist But you forget that those companies get their money from people. If they wage war against those people, not only will they fight back, but Exxon will have no more funding. They'd go bankrupt in no time.
Also, those kind of companies have semi-monopolistic rights through regulation and other forms of government backup. Those big corporations would be replaced by smaller 1s.
And no, States only have money through taxation and inflation. In Anarchy, you don't have a central bank.
"There are voluntary hierarchies/authorities. Family religion etc"
I would argue that those aren't inherently hierarchical relationships but rather mutualistic ones as each voluntary party gets something of mutual value from the relationship and neither either exploits or profits more than the other as happens with the system of wage labor - at least when applied on a large scale.
I don't see any issue with having a small restaurant and employing a small staff to run it.
. . . but one based on private ownership would -from my perspective- perpetuate a system of hierarchy but in different hands.
I thought a stateless society was supposed to GET RID of hierarchy, not continue it.
I can also understand the need for large-scale global companies to serve the public, but when based on private ownership (as opposed to democratic cooperative ownership) they operate just like monarchies and oligarchies of the finacial world.
@MsSexySocialist "I thought a stateless society was supposed to GET RID of hierarchy, not continue it." There are voluntary hierarchies/authorities. Family, religion, etc. I accepted to work where I do, because I also accept to be in a certain hierarchy. It's freedom to associate and trade my knowledge and productivity by wages and perks.
I may be misunderstanding Socialism, but I don't think there would be an incentive to create a business if I couldn't own it and get a profit.
"I may be misunderstanding Socialism, but I don't think there would be an incentive to create a business if I couldn't own it and get a profit"
Like any political system, it depends on what KIND of socialism. Just as anarcho-capitalism would be opposed to state-capitalism as it exists now, the type of Libertarian Socialism (not an oxymoron btw) I would advocate is opposed to both the state as well as corporate capitalism. And sees both as unnessesary
Libertarian Socialism (at least in my view) sees the need to provide a fulfilling economic situation for everyone, individualists and collectivists alike.
While such an economy would most likely be made up of a network of non-competitive democratic cooperatives, there could still exist self-employed individuals who could go their own way on their own terms. Just like co-ops exist in the competitive market economy now.
during recessions, people won't be buying earth moving equipment and airliners, but they'll continue to buy cheap 'made in China' underwear, baseball caps and trinkets because they're affordable.So in a recession, which productive nation will go down first?
@warfarealien Boeing does most of its manufacturing in Washington State. Google 'boeing manufacturing', the first hit lists its major manufacturing plants.
@warfarealien From the article in question: "The 787 has more foreign-made content — 30%". the 747 is only 5%. I think the article shows that they generally don't outsource and, after all the 787 problems, they probably are going to continue that trend.
'In fact, top-down attempts to keep Americans in low-level manufacturing jobs is a great way to ruin the economy ...'
This is a quote from the description bar.
I agree that top down micromanagement can be problematic and deserves heavy scrutiny in any respect that touches my life from government to corporations to my own family household. Thing is, this doesn't imply that management is always bad. What is the alternative? If the government doesn't manage, should corporations not manage?
@SBRslacker00 "If the government doesn't manage, should corporations not manage?"
The problem with that is that a corporation can only make money by selling something that consumers want, have to compete, and go under if they fail, whereas the government can only use force to achieve it's goals, has no competition, and demands more of your money to make up for it's mistakes. Corporations have no ability to manage my life, only themselves, the same is not true of the government.
I'm not entirely convinced that government doesn't have competition. Technically, other governments do exist and people may choose one government over another. But I can appreciate how the U.S. has a stranglehold on the world in terms of military and economic coersion. I also understand how government is a type of territorial monopoly.
Corporations do affect my life inasmuch as it affects the culture. Corporations do affect culture. Corporations also have economic coersion.
@SBRslacker00 Corporations don't affect culture, they can only respond to it. They can only meet the demands consumers already have. You might point to marketing, but the difference between effective marketing and ineffective marketing is how well they can convince the consumer that their product or service meets their needs and wants; if there isn't a demand there in the first place, no marketing will be able to change that.
What about TV? That's a culture dispensing machine whose content is corporate owned. The media in general is the same way, if there's a message to be sent it's filtered through more & more corporate influence.
'They can only meet the demands consumers already have.'
I completely disagree. Consumer demand can be manufactured, just look at sugar cereal or soft drinks. Do people really need sugar filler or the image it represents?
@SBRslacker00 "Consumer demand can be manufactured,". No it can't. Consumers can only be made *aware* that they want something that they didn't think of previously -- like sugary cereals, soft drinks, strawberry-scented underarm deoderant, etc. "Do people really need sugar filler or the image it represents?" Where'd you get the silly idea that demand rests on *need*. It rests on WANTS. Besides, no one really *needs* the Internet and YouTube, yet here you are posting on them.
maybe a hat made in usa cost twice as much as a hat made in china because we have 10,000 safety laws and lawyers and SS deductions and so on and so on that china dont
Typical - Cato Institute is part of the structure trying to destroy the US. Note they try to use sex to sell this notion? Because the have nothing to offer.
At its heart, what Mr. Sanders says makes sense, but if he really wants to make a point about this issue, why isn't he taking on someone serious, like Wal-Mart?
And besides that, doesn’t the USA pride itself on being a shining example to the world for the virtues of a true Capitalist / Free Enterprise Society?
@catothewiser That's like saying the Social Security System works for us - this is a prosperous nation in spite of such examples of the government way overstepping its bounds, and Japan, China, India, Brazil and the rest are only growing because of every place they allow any semblance of voluntary interaction - not because they restrict and cut off a world of dynamism, choice and opportunity. You nerdburglar.
@corenothing - you will find that in the Orient, they do not think as individuals. Look at the ones in Japan cleaning up the reactor - would you see that in the US? In those and other nations, they will choose to buy products from their own country regardless, because they aren't gullible enough to believe this idiotic lie of "free trade" (which is just a tool to further implement world government.)
@SBRslacker00 Economics is study of resource allocation. Manufacturing capacity isn't an unlimited resource, especially in the short run. Employees manufacturing trinkets can't also be the employees manufacturing airplanes.
In short, a government demand, like the one Sanders's makes, creates an inefficiency in the allocation of resources.
'Employees manufacturing trinkets can't also be the employees manufacturing airplanes.'
Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes.
I think that's the biggest error in this argument. These are not similar industries by any stretch of the imagination. That's the REASON why China is manufacturing trinkets and the U.S. is manufacturing airplanes, it's all about the level of sophistication of the manufacturing industry itself.
@SBRslacker00 "Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes."
Exactly! The end result of Bernie Sander's mandate is that we'll be developing the trinket industry at the expense of some of other, perhaps a high-value, industry.
Yeah, they're different industries, but everything shares the same resource pool. Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.
@SBRslacker00 "Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes."
Exactly! The end result of Bernie Sander's mandate is that we'll be developing the trinket industry at the expense of some of other, perhaps a high-value, industry.
Yeah, they're different industries, but everything shares the same resource pool. Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.
'Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.'
I seriously doubt the Smithsonian gift shop operates on the same scale as the entire U.S. air manufacturing industry. Even more, there's already investment dollars going into the Chinese manufacture of trinkets, Bernie is simply trying to redirect those investment dollars into the U.S. economy. I don't see the air mfg sector and trinket mfg sector as major competitors.
@SBRslacker00 "I don't see the air mfg sector and trinket mfg sector as major competitors."
They don't have to be. She could have just as easily used "snorkel tester" as an example. Someone working in a trinket factory isn't going to be doing either of those other jobs at the same time. An investment group lending to a trinket venture can't lend those same dollars to another cause. It's called opportunity cost and it's in the opening paragraph of every economics book ever written.
The best irony is that it is Bernie Sanders who is making the argument. He is a left wing ideologue who is part of the reason so many jobs leave America because left wing policies are destroying so many American companies.
As someone commented elsewhere, the trinkets may be made in China, but the machines that make the trinkets often are made in America and must be bought from us.
More people ought to be reading Henry Hazlett's Economics in One Easy Lesson than listening to Bernie Sanders.
No, Sallie James is right. US industries already produce much more stuff than ever in real (inflation adjusted) dollars than the supposed industrial heydays of the 1950s ... more than twice as much to be precise. Specialization has allowed US investors and firms to direct scarce capital to areas with high returns. Self-important politicians such as Mr. Sanders are oblivious to this and the fact that the chief benificiaries of the more efficient allocation of capital are the poor.
@myrelative As foreigners get more and more financial success from trading and technology they stop spending that surplus on themselves and invest some of that surplus in America. Ever hear of the capital account surplus? It matches the current accounts deficit exactly.
The 'trade deficit' is irrelevant. In any case, another way of phrasing a 'trade deficit' is 'capital account surplus'.
Thinking of this in another way, you carry on countless microeconomic 'trade deficits' in your lifetime. In buying food from a grocer, you have a trade deficit; likewise, whenever you pay bills or buy gas, a phone, a computer, a car, a drink, or a residence, you have major trade deficits.
nopw, if you think you can run an economy based on exported services, go ahead. but that`s not what the US does right now, and services are hard to export.
@AnonymousPundit She's wrong about this. She dishonestly labels consumer goods as "trinkets" and asserts that essentially it doesn't matter that we are borrowing money from China to buy goods they produce!
Every "heavy industry" in this country is not an example of a free market at work! They are all subsidized by the government!
@VictoryCough "We" aren't borrowing any money to buy things from China. Our government does it by rampant overspending. When individuals are allowed to buy where they see fit, they will make decisions that are best for themselves, but the cumulative effect of everyone doing so means goods get bought from where they are produced most efficiently, leading to more prosperity for everyone. For every dollar saved in buying a consumer good from China, we have a dollar to pay a tech worker, etc. here.
@Megabyxos You have no idea how monetary policy between central banks works. Unfortunately this seems to be the case with most libertarians.
I'd consider reading Gary North or Peter Schiff. They'd vehemently disagree with James.
I'm not demonizing anyone for buying or selling Chinese goods. However ignoring trade deficits like say John Stossel or Walter E Williams is a serious mistake that goes back to Wealth of Nations.
@VictoryCough I've read Peter Schiff before, but not Walter Williams, and I do understand how monetary policy works. When someone buys something from a Chinese business the Chinese have two options with those dollars. They can invest them in the U.S. or they can exchange them for Yuan. In a free exchange market, equilibrium will be reached, but China keeps their Yuan artificially devalued to make their exports more attractive. This is a problem, but not one that would be made better by buying US
@myrelative Sallie James is totally wrong. Producing those "trinkets" that we all consume on credit but don't produce has turned our economy into one big service sector. We are no longer a productive economy.
None of the industries she mentioned are examples of free-markets! These are niche industries where the government or government propped up businesses (ILFC) are their only customers!
She thinks it ok to be a debt driven consumer economy that produces nothing it consumes!
@VictoryCough There's so much wrong with what you're saying.
First of all, we have the largest manufacturing sector in the world, and the manufacturing sector has INCREASED over the last three decades.
Your second paragraph is absurdly convoluted. You do realize that throughout this entire video she's explaining why it is irresponsible for the state to dictate domestic production, don't you? You apparently didn't watch the video or you need to watch it again.
@Pinyl We don't produce cell phones, tv's, computers, clothing, iPods, etc. There is no doubt that we are debtor nation with a consumer driven economy! We manufacture McMansions and the all the supplies that goes into building homes! The government created all of our manufacturing through low interest rates!
The state is dictating/subsidizing "heavy industries" production and discouraging production. JAMES IS A MONETARIST, not a free-market advocate.
@VictoryCough So by your logic we should just go back to making wagons, yoke for oxen, etc. Get with it man, economies evolve. It's called SPECIALIZATION. Adam Smith. Not exactly new stuff. It's what markets do best.
I think you're ultimately confused about the trade deficit. There's nothing wrong with imports exceeding exports. $1000 of wealth created, consumed either domestically or exported, is still $1000 of wealth created.
Watch the vid again, James is anti-state-dictated-production.
@Pinyl I think if you really want to be a true libertarian you have to follow Austrian economics.
Smith's "Nations" was filled with errors and downright distortions. This is what started the Austrian school.
You ultimately don't understand under what conditions a trade deficit can be neutral. The US deficit comes from importing consumer goods we can't afford to pay for w/ exports or foreign earnings! 1/2 of workers are government employees, most everyone else is in retail or a professional!
@VictoryCough Speaking of errors and distortions, I should remind you that neither you nor I have a monopoly on absolute truth. That said, I seek the truth, not a label.
I can afford everything I buy, and nearly all of it are imports. My labor is consumed as a service, so I'm a net producer. Unfortunately this is not the case in the aggregate. Nevertheless, trade deficits are not of the evil nature you seem to suggest.
I agree with you that our government is bloated. THAT is a danger.
@VictoryCough In my disputation of your argument I should add this simple example:
If imports are SOOOO bad and domestic production is SOOOO good then it follows that forbidding the import of goods across state borders would be a good thing. Better yet, let's suspend the importation of goods across county lines. Surely that will have a tremendously positive impact on the local economies! This is what you seem to be advocating. Am I right?
@Pinyl I've already explained this the best I can. I am advocating market set interest rates to curb our out of control debt funded consumerism and a totally unregulated market.
I suggest the following, perhaps these authors can explain it better.
Gary North "Selling Off Our Economic Future"
Peter Schiff "Mortgage Banker Speech" (video)
Pat Buchanan "Free Trade and Funny Math"
Anthony Mueller "Hidden Dangers of Trade Deficits"
Do you use Google? Bing? Who developed the software your iPhone and Blackberry run on? You're posting at YouTube. Facebook. MySpace. Shopping on Amazon. Consuming news on network television. Your car is serviced by an American mechanic. You buy groceries at WholeFoods. The examples are endless.
Your exactly the sort of person she was talking about. Let's just dig ditches with spoons.
@Pinyl This is what I am talking about; completely dishonestly measuring production.
Google doesn't produce anything, they are a service! Who do you think produces iPhones? Grocers don't manufacture! This is not production, those are service sector jobs! You and the rest of the Friedmanites don't understand the difference!
My suggestion is to stop listening to monetarists and start reading Austrians.
@VictoryCough I'm not sure what your point is here. Google "US Manufacturing Myth". The data is VERY clear, we are by far the world's largest manufacturer and our manufacturing base has expanded significantly over the last six decades.
Now, why don't you enlighten us as to what your point is. I mean, what do you suggest?
You come across as a protectionist and a luddite. The system you seem to be advocating is nearly 500 years old and has been thoroughly discredited by history.
Bernie Sanders opposes reforms to US schools, so they will continue to produce graduates fit only to make bobbleheads, while China will continue rising and eventually produce airplanes and high-tech electronics. Way to go, Bernie!
I could confuse Bernie Sanders & liberals' need to hate businesses and then beg for businesses to stay as them having Borderline Personality Disorder. I am not joking. Although Borderline Personality Disorder is different from economics & politics, the disorder's behavior is the same. My sister has it and I will not joke about this disorder. I just see parallels.
"I Hate You, Don't Leave Me: Understanding the Borderline Personality" by Jerold J. Kreisman & Hal Strauss
I don't see it. This isn't WalMart, museums sell intentionally overproced merchandise. And it's more-or-less part of the government. It's like going into Microsoft and seeing them using Apple computers.
BTW, when I was young I used to collect banners. We went to the 1967 World's Fair (Expo 67) in Montreal, Canada. We bought a banner; it said on it - made in U.S.A.
We should draft the Sally James' of the world to replace all the dinosaurs like Bernie Sanders!
Getting government off the backs of American manufacturers might help to make them more competitive in the market place, and perhaps we'd begin seeing more 'Made in America' labels once again. Our government, driven by Liberal principles and social programs, has been forcing American manufacturers 'offshore' for decades. So that's where we are today!
We should draft the Sally James' of the world to replace all the dinosaurs like Bernie Sanders!
Getting government off the backs of American manufacturers might help to make them more competitive in the market place, and perhaps we'd begin seeing more 'Made in America' labels once again. Our government, driven by Liberal principles and social programs, has been forcing American manufacturers 'offshore' for decades. So that's where we are today!
Please.................Bernie is too easy a target. I have to say, he is at the very least, honest about his socialism. More than I can say about any on the left that deny their communist leanings. We know what we get with Bernie. How about you unveil those commies hiding behind the veil of "Liberalism?"
Sorry but businesses still will not manufacture stuff here even with her suggestions. the labor cost is still to high to get corporations to move back to the states...
I don't think that our American Senators should be able to wear English suits or Italian shoes. I mean, it's embarrassing, isn't it? We make suits and shoes in this country - and they are representing this country?! Don't we pay their salaries? I'd also be curious to see what kind of car Sanders owns. If it's not American, I think we should hand him the golden hypocrate award...
@3:02 'Does he really want to regress us to the days where American manufacturing sector no longer makes aircraft ...'
Wow. Is this really what passes for 'reason' here on reasontv, in the concluding argument no less?
Dial in the accuracy of the bullshit detector, guys. Bernie Sanders is a walking talking strawman, you don't have to manufacture invalid strawman arguments to knock him over. Why this pandering to such a shallow sense of invalid reasoning? Is valid reason too much to ask?
1st. Why are you focusing on the last 10 seconds of the film saying it's BS reasoning, What about the other 3 minutes where she addressed his position and why it's a bad idea. 2nd, I don't think it's a straw man because she didn't say it was his position to "regress us to...." and then proceed to invalidate the false position. Her closing statement was saying we're passed snow globes, not that if he get's his way America will suddenly stop airplane production. It was a statement not an argument.
'1st. Why are you focusing on the last 10 seconds ...'
It's the culmination of the video, the conclusion of the case being made. If there's an error in logic, should I not raise an objection regardless of it's whether it's in the last 10 seconds?
'It was a statement not an argument.'
Actually, it was a rhetorical question. Bottom line, airplane manufacture is a complete non-sequitor (logic fallacy) from the original discussion about the gift shop merchandise.
@SBRslacker00 I think you're misidentifying fallacies again. I fail to see how it's a non-sequitur. A non-sequitur is drawing conclusion X from evidence A when there is no linkage. Tree's are beautiful, therefore God exists is a non-sequitur.
I can see this is going to get out of hand really quickly. We started with a straw-man, now we are moving on to a non-sequitur, and other points that I haven't even stated yet. We should stick with 1 topic at a time. Do you still think she made a strawman?
If you want to stick to one topic, why are you making multiple points?
The straw man is linking Bernie to 'no longer manufacturing airplanes'. It's both a strawman and a non-sequitor. It's a strawman because there is no evidence that Bernie supports such a policy. It's a non-sequitor because the airline manufacturing industry has nothing to do with anything relating to the thesis topic of manufacturing gift shop items. Logical fallacies often span multi-categories.
@SBRslacker00 It's neither a straw man argument, nor a non-sequitur. Sanders doesn't have to support shrinking the manufacture of airplanes any more than a proponent of war has to support civilian casualties or an industrialist pollution: they are bi-products, unintended consequences.
The reasoning behind her argument is opportunity cost; TANSTAFL. Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture
'Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture'
These are two completely different industries. What resources are shared between these two industries? Certainly not the manufacturing end of it. There is a big difference between making airplanes and trinkets.
Also, given the current state of unemployment, why wouldn't opening a new manufacturing sector help the economy?
@Megabyxos "Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture "
I find it so odd that statements like this are made by those working for the globalists to keep Americans sedated about the dismantling of this country. Yet they are NEVER held accountable for them. Why is it that OTHER COUNTRIES CAN DO BOTH???? Are you feigning ignorance about economic warfare, too?
RON PAUL 2012!
Paladin1983PL 1 day ago
"We've got better things to do with our human resources" then manufacture "trinkets"? Tell that to the 40-something moms or dads who scour the "help-wanted" ads for ANYTHING to do with THEIR human resources. The problem isn't "over-taxing" corporations. After the loophole dance, many corporations end up paying nothing or next to nothing. Want to address it with tax reform? Shift the tax burden to outsourced labor. Tax the exportation of jobs. Give the loopholes to DOMESTIC manufacturers.
AdamRainStopper 1 week ago
Or just ease the taxes and regulations to allow more companies to have production in the US?
SarionFetecuse 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
ktchong 1 month ago in playlist Liked videos
Unfortunately, a lot ordinary people don't understand what is "comparative advantage"!
cstcy 2 months ago 3
OUR FOUNDERS WERE ANTI-PROTECTI0NIST
bluesparrowfish 2 months ago in playlist Reason.tv Documentary
Wow, a smart, hot girl! I would love more interviews on her!
BellTollsForThee 3 months ago in playlist Reason.tv Documentary 8
SALLIE JAMES 2012
Birth certificate optional
housewares 4 months ago 2
Congress is the enemy, not China, not unemployment, not the national debet. Necessities (food, housing and transportation), must be non-profit, and free to volunteers in necessity fields, in which case the NEED for a job would not be there. A person would work only 2 weeks to have all the necessities covered for the year (per person). Then, if allowed, small bizniz would spring up like dandelions. Capitalism can take over AFTER necessities. IT WOULD BOOM.
geehuckwow 4 months ago
Her accent doesn't sound American.
GeneralWrath 4 months ago
tekproxy..she's aussie.south australians tend to speak with a more english inflection than other states due to it being the only colony not to receive convicts from the U.K.Thus there are far fewer people who we're cockneys,irish catholics or english peasants who went there.thus the refined accent.Alexander Downer,our ex forfeign minister spoke with the same accent as Sallie has and was ridiculed for it.victoria,my home state,tend to speak thru their nose a lot.
nphanlon1973 7 months ago
Comment removed
TheLegion244 4 months ago
Comment removed
CAJUNNSC 7 months ago
Sallie James works for the Cato Institute, which is funded by the Koch Brothers. If you want to learn more about the Cato Institute and the other Koch Brothers echo chambers, search youtube for the Koch Brothers exposed.
robertalvinlewis 8 months ago
@robertalvinlewis The Cato institute has some of the finest economists in the planet working for them. Real economists, not Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck, but academics who work hard at what they do and actually produce good things.
poop2poop2 7 months ago
@poop2poop2 They produce propaganda. The solutions this so-called academic offers in this video are removing regulations and cutting taxes. Those are exactly the kind of "good things" that caused the financial meltdown and the debt crisis we're currently facing. Nothing good comes from the Cato Institute. It's a propaganda machine. That's it's only function.
robertalvinlewis 7 months ago
It's easy to see why conservatives are going after teachers and trying to dismantle the education system. The more uneducated people there are in America, the more followers they'll have. This lady isn't hot enough to make up for how stupid she is. I love that her solution to the fiscal crisis is "removing regulations and lowering the corporate tax rates" like we haven't been doing that since Reagan and as if that's not exactly what got us where we are today.
robertalvinlewis 8 months ago
Yeah yeah good points very smart video. Whatever. That English chick is hot. Wow.
tekproxy 9 months ago
Chinese WIN! - mostly because they have no property tax!!! Jobs are NOT the answer, because taxation and RENT and FOOD prices are profit motivated. The more money americans have.. the more the rich will steal from the middle income people with taxation and land collecting. Congress folk should all serve for free, and then a better quality congress would exist. A profit motivated congressman/president is a thief.
geehuckwow 9 months ago
@geehuckwow wtf are you talking about there is property tax there, plus millions of people kicked out of their homes regularly, do not envy the Chinese in any aspect. Their debt is even worse than ours! I am afraid if our government worked for free there would be much more rampant corruption.
GeneralWrath 4 months ago
Nice to see an Australian working at Cato! :)
fermista 9 months ago
This lady definitely hasn't read the Constitution, the Constitution says that corporations are to pay all direct taxes, the only taxes citizens are to pay are excise taxes. But what do we expect from this Cato Institute corporate shill. She probably has not problem with a fictitious entity aka a corporation having the same rights as a living breathing human being.
mindmelt13 9 months ago
@mindmelt13
Well said.
MsSexySocialist 9 months ago
Corporate America doesn't give 2 shits about America, that's why they have been dismantling this country and sending all of our manufacturing equipment over to China and India. Nothing like paying slave wages to the poor in another country and then selling those slave made goods to Americans to make themselves filthy rich.
mindmelt13 9 months ago
it takes an aussie to point out how silly an american politican is.not bad for a croweater sallie.lol {I'm a Vic}
nphanlon1973 10 months ago
So Sallie James thinks it's somehow demeaning for us Americans to continue to munufacture certain things in our own country, yet sees no problem in people in third world countries doing so at the beheast of corporate multinationals.
As if an industrialized county making things for its own use is somehow "demeaning" and should instead be done by other less devoloped countries with poorer people while corporations eat the cream.
Horrible human being. Just horrible.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist No! Believe it or not, building bobbleheads is better than living like they used to before "corporate multinationals" moved there, in the fields. They are far richer now than they were a few years ago.
And they'll continue to get richer, if it's government doesn't screw up, which I believe it is with it's housing bubble.
Get down from your high horse and face reality, story and organic market laws.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
If I was a slave that ended up getting promoted to being a serf, how on earth could you expect me to feel grateful for it? I'm still being exploited.
The problem is that multinationals rob developing countries of economic self-determination and using their own resources to enrich their own countries. Instead they're all being sucked dry while the likes of Nike and Shell reap the benefits.
Try being an aid worker for a few months and see what these companies really do to people
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Aren't people working there voluntarily? Aren't they improving they're standards of living? What was it before companies moved there? Why is Hong Kong much richer than the rest of China?
No, they improve the standards of living of those people who are VOLUNTARILY working there. Unless you're saying that governments sell those people to some managed monopoly 'aka' corporatism, which happens a lot with your Socialism, USA included.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
To say people in developing nations are working dirt cheap for multinationals "voluntarily" is like saying you were "voluntarily" raped if someone offered to save your life in exchange for sex.
ie: There's no real choice at all. Just the illusion of choice as without equality of opportunity that theoretical freedom of choice means nothing.
While, they may seem to raise standards of living in the short term, such benefits are outweighed by the rise in inequality.
[cntd]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist What I don't think you take into account is that it is governments who creates inequality in the first place through regulation, keeping competition out.
China may only be able to produce cheap products right now, but do you think they won't get richer and more educated by doing that? They are doing it right now. Why do you think they will stop at that?
I prefer being richer and having people much more stupidly richer, than being equally poor to everyone else. I share.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
[cntd]
"What I don't think you take into account is that it is governments who creates inequality in the first place through regulation, keeping competition out."
A common misconception. If that was the case, then poverty in Chile in the 1970s should have receded with the vast economic liberalization instigated by Augusto Pinochet.
It didn't. Inequality and poverty soured. And the same polices caused an economic crash in the 1980s which nearly destroyed the economy
[cntd]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Right, because a system can go from a Socialist-Statist form to some sort a freer-market by Government force without having some sort of backfire... Duh. Off course not, and I don't support anything that has to do with governments, because it involves force, therefore invalidating anything to do with freedom of choice.
How about looking at the indexes of economic freedom and seeing it's correlation with people being better off?
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@darkr0astedblend
[cntd again]
"I prefer being richer and having people much more stupidly richer, than being equally poor to everyone else. I share."
That's a common strawman argument against social justice policies. No advocate of these ideas want literal economic equality - just equality of opportunity. So that no-one will have an unfair advantage based on the inherited wealth of their family.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist And I apologize for presuming you were a statist.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@darkr0astedblend
"I apologize for presuming you were a statist."
Apology accepted. It's a common misconception given the generally false meaning of the word socialism in many people's minds.
However . . .
[cntd]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
[cntd]
Also, your comments about "socialism" show just how ignorant you must be with regards to political science.
I am an anti-statist socialist who supports the dissolution of all forms of monopoly - whether political with regard to the state, or economic with regard to corporations.
Under Minarchist or Anarchist Capitalism the latter continues to exist and perpetuates a form of economic colonialism via the blockage of economic democracy and self-determination.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist "Under Minarchist or Anarchist Capitalism the latter continues to exist and perpetuates a form of economic colonialism via the blockage of economic democracy and self-determination."
No, because no corporation has the states military and police to protect it from competition.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
(4)
"No, because no corporation has the states military and police to protect it from competition."
They're still economic monopolies which prevent both economic democracy and self-determination. And in a future stateless society, what on earth would stop Corporations from enforcing the polices they want with force and coercion?
They would become states themselves but without any of the democratic accountability to the public.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist There are no monopolies in the free market, because you yourself can associate with whoever you want and create competition. However, with government regulations, you do have corporatism, which is very far from what free-markets are.
What corporation has the money to wage wars like States do? They get money from the good will of costumers who choose to buy their products. And you forget, in an anarchist society, we can have AK-47s. It would be pointless on their side.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
"What corporation has the money to wage wars like States do? "
Exxon Mobil and many others. And anyway, what I'm trying to say is that in an Anarcho-Capitalist world, where corporations still continue to exist, they would end up becoming the new states that merely replace the old ones - but, as I said, without the democratic accountability to the public a republican state has.
Plus, wage labor still exists, meaning people still have to work for those above.
[cntd]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist But you forget that those companies get their money from people. If they wage war against those people, not only will they fight back, but Exxon will have no more funding. They'd go bankrupt in no time.
Also, those kind of companies have semi-monopolistic rights through regulation and other forms of government backup. Those big corporations would be replaced by smaller 1s.
And no, States only have money through taxation and inflation. In Anarchy, you don't have a central bank.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend [cntd]
"There are voluntary hierarchies/authorities. Family religion etc"
I would argue that those aren't inherently hierarchical relationships but rather mutualistic ones as each voluntary party gets something of mutual value from the relationship and neither either exploits or profits more than the other as happens with the system of wage labor - at least when applied on a large scale.
I don't see any issue with having a small restaurant and employing a small staff to run it.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
[cntd]
Not to mention the inevitable degradation and destruction of the environment which would result from primary corporate control.
"And you forget, in an anarchist society, we can have AK-47s. It would be pointless on their side."
Personally, I really don't want to have to hoard any weapons of any kind to defend myself in what should be a free society without any coercion
I can more than sympathize with the desire for a stateless society, but . . .
[cntd]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
[cntd]
. . . but one based on private ownership would -from my perspective- perpetuate a system of hierarchy but in different hands.
I thought a stateless society was supposed to GET RID of hierarchy, not continue it.
I can also understand the need for large-scale global companies to serve the public, but when based on private ownership (as opposed to democratic cooperative ownership) they operate just like monarchies and oligarchies of the finacial world.
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@MsSexySocialist "I thought a stateless society was supposed to GET RID of hierarchy, not continue it." There are voluntary hierarchies/authorities. Family, religion, etc. I accepted to work where I do, because I also accept to be in a certain hierarchy. It's freedom to associate and trade my knowledge and productivity by wages and perks.
I may be misunderstanding Socialism, but I don't think there would be an incentive to create a business if I couldn't own it and get a profit.
darkr0astedblend 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend
"I may be misunderstanding Socialism, but I don't think there would be an incentive to create a business if I couldn't own it and get a profit"
Like any political system, it depends on what KIND of socialism. Just as anarcho-capitalism would be opposed to state-capitalism as it exists now, the type of Libertarian Socialism (not an oxymoron btw) I would advocate is opposed to both the state as well as corporate capitalism. And sees both as unnessesary
(continued in next comment)
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
@darkr0astedblend (continued from last comment)
Libertarian Socialism (at least in my view) sees the need to provide a fulfilling economic situation for everyone, individualists and collectivists alike.
While such an economy would most likely be made up of a network of non-competitive democratic cooperatives, there could still exist self-employed individuals who could go their own way on their own terms. Just like co-ops exist in the competitive market economy now.
[cntd again]
MsSexySocialist 10 months ago
I would like to snow her domes.
poonhounds2 10 months ago
during recessions, people won't be buying earth moving equipment and airliners, but they'll continue to buy cheap 'made in China' underwear, baseball caps and trinkets because they're affordable.So in a recession, which productive nation will go down first?
ClubXrock 10 months ago
shes wonderful!!
seanmartvt09 10 months ago
she so hot. Oh.... need to take a shower now.
ravaneli55 10 months ago
Everytime someone appeals to my emotions, I stop and take a long hard look at what they advocate. (and usually go the opposite way)
SmokeRingsPipeDreams 10 months ago
Smart and Sexy. I love her
Edgehead74 10 months ago
Is it that accent, is it that cute face, is it her superior economic understanding?
i don't know but I love her.
This argument should have been solved a long time ago. Foreign trade benefits both countries. Make congress read Henry Hazlitt for goodness sakes.
ronwandell 10 months ago
boeing outsources to italy, china, south korea, sweden. what aircraft building is she talking about? airbus? the european one?
warfarealien 10 months ago
@warfarealien Boeing does most of its manufacturing in Washington State. Google 'boeing manufacturing', the first hit lists its major manufacturing plants.
kstipek 10 months ago
@kstipek LA times "787 Dreamliner teaches Boeing costly lesson on outsourcing"
warfarealien 10 months ago
@warfarealien From the article in question: "The 787 has more foreign-made content — 30%". the 747 is only 5%. I think the article shows that they generally don't outsource and, after all the 787 problems, they probably are going to continue that trend.
kstipek 10 months ago
Comment removed
warfarealien 10 months ago
Sallie James is hot!
mvanroy 10 months ago
'In fact, top-down attempts to keep Americans in low-level manufacturing jobs is a great way to ruin the economy ...'
This is a quote from the description bar.
I agree that top down micromanagement can be problematic and deserves heavy scrutiny in any respect that touches my life from government to corporations to my own family household. Thing is, this doesn't imply that management is always bad. What is the alternative? If the government doesn't manage, should corporations not manage?
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 "If the government doesn't manage, should corporations not manage?"
The problem with that is that a corporation can only make money by selling something that consumers want, have to compete, and go under if they fail, whereas the government can only use force to achieve it's goals, has no competition, and demands more of your money to make up for it's mistakes. Corporations have no ability to manage my life, only themselves, the same is not true of the government.
Megabyxos 11 months ago
@Megabyxos
I'm not entirely convinced that government doesn't have competition. Technically, other governments do exist and people may choose one government over another. But I can appreciate how the U.S. has a stranglehold on the world in terms of military and economic coersion. I also understand how government is a type of territorial monopoly.
Corporations do affect my life inasmuch as it affects the culture. Corporations do affect culture. Corporations also have economic coersion.
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 Corporations don't affect culture, they can only respond to it. They can only meet the demands consumers already have. You might point to marketing, but the difference between effective marketing and ineffective marketing is how well they can convince the consumer that their product or service meets their needs and wants; if there isn't a demand there in the first place, no marketing will be able to change that.
Megabyxos 10 months ago
@Megabyxos
'Corporations don't affect culture ...'
What about TV? That's a culture dispensing machine whose content is corporate owned. The media in general is the same way, if there's a message to be sent it's filtered through more & more corporate influence.
'They can only meet the demands consumers already have.'
I completely disagree. Consumer demand can be manufactured, just look at sugar cereal or soft drinks. Do people really need sugar filler or the image it represents?
SBRslacker00 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SBRslacker00 "Consumer demand can be manufactured,". No it can't. Consumers can only be made *aware* that they want something that they didn't think of previously -- like sugary cereals, soft drinks, strawberry-scented underarm deoderant, etc. "Do people really need sugar filler or the image it represents?" Where'd you get the silly idea that demand rests on *need*. It rests on WANTS. Besides, no one really *needs* the Internet and YouTube, yet here you are posting on them.
economicfreedom8591 10 months ago
maybe a hat made in usa cost twice as much as a hat made in china because we have 10,000 safety laws and lawyers and SS deductions and so on and so on that china dont
PInk77W1 11 months ago
I don't mean to be umm, base, but this girl is insanely hot. And Libertarian. And hot. OMG she's hot. Sorry, but damn.. Damn almighty. DAMN.
66752063686172 11 months ago
@66752063686172 thats what i was thinkiing
PInk77W1 11 months ago
Typical - Cato Institute is part of the structure trying to destroy the US. Note they try to use sex to sell this notion? Because the have nothing to offer.
catothewiser 11 months ago
Comment removed
kxmas 11 months ago
At its heart, what Mr. Sanders says makes sense, but if he really wants to make a point about this issue, why isn't he taking on someone serious, like Wal-Mart?
And besides that, doesn’t the USA pride itself on being a shining example to the world for the virtues of a true Capitalist / Free Enterprise Society?
PirateFish1 11 months ago
Kudos to the hot chick on that, But we have lost the position of being the largest outputter.
PoliticalWeekly 11 months ago
Protectionism = Full Retard
corenothing 11 months ago
@corenothing - worked for Japan, working for China, India, Brazil, etc....
catothewiser 11 months ago
@catothewiser That's like saying the Social Security System works for us - this is a prosperous nation in spite of such examples of the government way overstepping its bounds, and Japan, China, India, Brazil and the rest are only growing because of every place they allow any semblance of voluntary interaction - not because they restrict and cut off a world of dynamism, choice and opportunity. You nerdburglar.
corenothing 10 months ago
@corenothing - you will find that in the Orient, they do not think as individuals. Look at the ones in Japan cleaning up the reactor - would you see that in the US? In those and other nations, they will choose to buy products from their own country regardless, because they aren't gullible enough to believe this idiotic lie of "free trade" (which is just a tool to further implement world government.)
catothewiser 10 months ago
holy shit
the first hot chick ive ever seen talking some sense!!
i could actually sit and listen to her talk with interest after i banged her like a screen door in a hurricane.
ugotpimp 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 Economics is study of resource allocation. Manufacturing capacity isn't an unlimited resource, especially in the short run. Employees manufacturing trinkets can't also be the employees manufacturing airplanes.
In short, a government demand, like the one Sanders's makes, creates an inefficiency in the allocation of resources.
kxmas 11 months ago
@kxmas
'Employees manufacturing trinkets can't also be the employees manufacturing airplanes.'
Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes.
I think that's the biggest error in this argument. These are not similar industries by any stretch of the imagination. That's the REASON why China is manufacturing trinkets and the U.S. is manufacturing airplanes, it's all about the level of sophistication of the manufacturing industry itself.
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SBRslacker00 "Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes."
Exactly! The end result of Bernie Sander's mandate is that we'll be developing the trinket industry at the expense of some of other, perhaps a high-value, industry.
Yeah, they're different industries, but everything shares the same resource pool. Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.
kxmas 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 "Employees in the trinket manufacturing industry don't have the ABILITY to manufacture airplanes."
Exactly! The end result of Bernie Sander's mandate is that we'll be developing the trinket industry at the expense of some of other, perhaps a high-value, industry.
Yeah, they're different industries, but everything shares the same resource pool. Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.
kxmas 11 months ago
@kxmas
'Investment dollars going into the trinket industry can't, at the same time, go into the aerospace industry.'
I seriously doubt the Smithsonian gift shop operates on the same scale as the entire U.S. air manufacturing industry. Even more, there's already investment dollars going into the Chinese manufacture of trinkets, Bernie is simply trying to redirect those investment dollars into the U.S. economy. I don't see the air mfg sector and trinket mfg sector as major competitors.
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 "I don't see the air mfg sector and trinket mfg sector as major competitors."
They don't have to be. She could have just as easily used "snorkel tester" as an example. Someone working in a trinket factory isn't going to be doing either of those other jobs at the same time. An investment group lending to a trinket venture can't lend those same dollars to another cause. It's called opportunity cost and it's in the opening paragraph of every economics book ever written.
Megabyxos 11 months ago
Yeah, after watching this I looked her up on Cato's website to see what she's about. PhD in agricultural economics. Why isn
2000MattWalker 11 months ago
Is it just me, or does Sallie sound rather Austrian school to be from the CATO institute?
TheTiffanyTrouble 11 months ago
@TheTiffanyTrouble Cato people are not evil statists as some Austrians will have you believe
spamdude1 11 months ago
It's called negative externalities, and when the government gets involved, always out way the positive ones.
asleeperj 11 months ago
Sallie James should get Glenn Becks 5 pm slot!!!!!!
goodatbasebal 11 months ago 12
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN AND WE DAMAND MORE SALLIE JAMES!!!
VirtualInsanity91 11 months ago 8
Is that British chick single? She kicks ass!
Megabyxos 11 months ago
HA!
whippoorwillss 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The road to hell is paved with Bernie Sanders
032125 11 months ago
The best irony is that it is Bernie Sanders who is making the argument. He is a left wing ideologue who is part of the reason so many jobs leave America because left wing policies are destroying so many American companies.
As someone commented elsewhere, the trinkets may be made in China, but the machines that make the trinkets often are made in America and must be bought from us.
More people ought to be reading Henry Hazlett's Economics in One Easy Lesson than listening to Bernie Sanders.
honeyjbc1 11 months ago
Sallie James = awesome!
doctaedwards 11 months ago
why does the British chick keep saying "us?" Thought this was about the US. ;)
gitrguru 11 months ago
@gitrguru I was wondering the same thing, maybe she's a US citizen though.
crazypants88 11 months ago
both sides are wrong here.
"new industries, service industries" won't buy you anything.
you can't just dig holes for each other and expect the chinese to deliver the goods.
myrelative 11 months ago
@myrelative
No, Sallie James is right. US industries already produce much more stuff than ever in real (inflation adjusted) dollars than the supposed industrial heydays of the 1950s ... more than twice as much to be precise. Specialization has allowed US investors and firms to direct scarce capital to areas with high returns. Self-important politicians such as Mr. Sanders are oblivious to this and the fact that the chief benificiaries of the more efficient allocation of capital are the poor.
AnonymousPundit 11 months ago 2
@AnonymousPundit
yeahyeah, the old story about productivity.
explain the trade deficit then.
myrelative 11 months ago
@myrelative As foreigners get more and more financial success from trading and technology they stop spending that surplus on themselves and invest some of that surplus in America. Ever hear of the capital account surplus? It matches the current accounts deficit exactly.
opcn18 11 months ago
@opcn18
also known as: selling your assets for consumption.
of course it matches.
myrelative 11 months ago
@myrelative That is one means of it occurring, yes. But that's not the whole picture.
opcn18 11 months ago
@myrelative
The 'trade deficit' is irrelevant. In any case, another way of phrasing a 'trade deficit' is 'capital account surplus'.
Thinking of this in another way, you carry on countless microeconomic 'trade deficits' in your lifetime. In buying food from a grocer, you have a trade deficit; likewise, whenever you pay bills or buy gas, a phone, a computer, a car, a drink, or a residence, you have major trade deficits.
AnonymousPundit 11 months ago
@AnonymousPundit
no I dont. I sell my workforce and buy food.
my trade account is balanced.
nopw, if you think you can run an economy based on exported services, go ahead. but that`s not what the US does right now, and services are hard to export.
myrelative 11 months ago
@AnonymousPundit She's wrong about this. She dishonestly labels consumer goods as "trinkets" and asserts that essentially it doesn't matter that we are borrowing money from China to buy goods they produce!
Every "heavy industry" in this country is not an example of a free market at work! They are all subsidized by the government!
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough "We" aren't borrowing any money to buy things from China. Our government does it by rampant overspending. When individuals are allowed to buy where they see fit, they will make decisions that are best for themselves, but the cumulative effect of everyone doing so means goods get bought from where they are produced most efficiently, leading to more prosperity for everyone. For every dollar saved in buying a consumer good from China, we have a dollar to pay a tech worker, etc. here.
Megabyxos 11 months ago
@Megabyxos You have no idea how monetary policy between central banks works. Unfortunately this seems to be the case with most libertarians.
I'd consider reading Gary North or Peter Schiff. They'd vehemently disagree with James.
I'm not demonizing anyone for buying or selling Chinese goods. However ignoring trade deficits like say John Stossel or Walter E Williams is a serious mistake that goes back to Wealth of Nations.
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough I've read Peter Schiff before, but not Walter Williams, and I do understand how monetary policy works. When someone buys something from a Chinese business the Chinese have two options with those dollars. They can invest them in the U.S. or they can exchange them for Yuan. In a free exchange market, equilibrium will be reached, but China keeps their Yuan artificially devalued to make their exports more attractive. This is a problem, but not one that would be made better by buying US
Megabyxos 11 months ago
@myrelative Sallie James is totally wrong. Producing those "trinkets" that we all consume on credit but don't produce has turned our economy into one big service sector. We are no longer a productive economy.
None of the industries she mentioned are examples of free-markets! These are niche industries where the government or government propped up businesses (ILFC) are their only customers!
She thinks it ok to be a debt driven consumer economy that produces nothing it consumes!
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough There's so much wrong with what you're saying.
First of all, we have the largest manufacturing sector in the world, and the manufacturing sector has INCREASED over the last three decades.
Your second paragraph is absurdly convoluted. You do realize that throughout this entire video she's explaining why it is irresponsible for the state to dictate domestic production, don't you? You apparently didn't watch the video or you need to watch it again.
Pinyl 11 months ago
@Pinyl We don't produce cell phones, tv's, computers, clothing, iPods, etc. There is no doubt that we are debtor nation with a consumer driven economy! We manufacture McMansions and the all the supplies that goes into building homes! The government created all of our manufacturing through low interest rates!
The state is dictating/subsidizing "heavy industries" production and discouraging production. JAMES IS A MONETARIST, not a free-market advocate.
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough So by your logic we should just go back to making wagons, yoke for oxen, etc. Get with it man, economies evolve. It's called SPECIALIZATION. Adam Smith. Not exactly new stuff. It's what markets do best.
I think you're ultimately confused about the trade deficit. There's nothing wrong with imports exceeding exports. $1000 of wealth created, consumed either domestically or exported, is still $1000 of wealth created.
Watch the vid again, James is anti-state-dictated-production.
Pinyl 11 months ago
@Pinyl I think if you really want to be a true libertarian you have to follow Austrian economics.
Smith's "Nations" was filled with errors and downright distortions. This is what started the Austrian school.
You ultimately don't understand under what conditions a trade deficit can be neutral. The US deficit comes from importing consumer goods we can't afford to pay for w/ exports or foreign earnings! 1/2 of workers are government employees, most everyone else is in retail or a professional!
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough Speaking of errors and distortions, I should remind you that neither you nor I have a monopoly on absolute truth. That said, I seek the truth, not a label.
I can afford everything I buy, and nearly all of it are imports. My labor is consumed as a service, so I'm a net producer. Unfortunately this is not the case in the aggregate. Nevertheless, trade deficits are not of the evil nature you seem to suggest.
I agree with you that our government is bloated. THAT is a danger.
Pinyl 11 months ago
@VictoryCough In my disputation of your argument I should add this simple example:
If imports are SOOOO bad and domestic production is SOOOO good then it follows that forbidding the import of goods across state borders would be a good thing. Better yet, let's suspend the importation of goods across county lines. Surely that will have a tremendously positive impact on the local economies! This is what you seem to be advocating. Am I right?
Pinyl 11 months ago
@Pinyl I've already explained this the best I can. I am advocating market set interest rates to curb our out of control debt funded consumerism and a totally unregulated market.
I suggest the following, perhaps these authors can explain it better.
Gary North "Selling Off Our Economic Future"
Peter Schiff "Mortgage Banker Speech" (video)
Pat Buchanan "Free Trade and Funny Math"
Anthony Mueller "Hidden Dangers of Trade Deficits"
Interview w/ Peter Schiff-Mises economics blog
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough Thanks! This is what I was looking for.
I am absolutely with you on interest rates determined solely by market forces and deregulation.
The Fed should be abolished. Given it's performance, how could anyone suggest free banking might be worse?
The Big Secret is that the bureaucrats who are currently trying to run our economy/running it to ruin don't know what they're doing.
Pinyl 11 months ago
@VictoryCough Facts:
Manufacturing output represents about 11 percent of the U.S. economy in real GDP terms.
The US accounts for one-fifth of global manufacturing output in real terms.
Computer and electronic products output is already 20 percent higher than before the recession.
Output per worker has increased faster on average in manufacturing than in the overall economy.
Its output level is up; output share is steady; employment is down; productivity is up and, therefore, wages are up
-0hedge
Pinyl 11 months ago
@VictoryCough
Your third paragraph is the most ludicrous.
We produce nothing we consume?
Do you use Google? Bing? Who developed the software your iPhone and Blackberry run on? You're posting at YouTube. Facebook. MySpace. Shopping on Amazon. Consuming news on network television. Your car is serviced by an American mechanic. You buy groceries at WholeFoods. The examples are endless.
Your exactly the sort of person she was talking about. Let's just dig ditches with spoons.
Pinyl 11 months ago
@Pinyl This is what I am talking about; completely dishonestly measuring production.
Google doesn't produce anything, they are a service! Who do you think produces iPhones? Grocers don't manufacture! This is not production, those are service sector jobs! You and the rest of the Friedmanites don't understand the difference!
My suggestion is to stop listening to monetarists and start reading Austrians.
VictoryCough 11 months ago
@VictoryCough I'm not sure what your point is here. Google "US Manufacturing Myth". The data is VERY clear, we are by far the world's largest manufacturer and our manufacturing base has expanded significantly over the last six decades.
Now, why don't you enlighten us as to what your point is. I mean, what do you suggest?
You come across as a protectionist and a luddite. The system you seem to be advocating is nearly 500 years old and has been thoroughly discredited by history.
Pinyl 11 months ago
go bernie!
someone ask that aussie bitch for her green card.
Wasp16mm 11 months ago
True Story helped me see the whole picture. Thank You
Zooksboardshop 11 months ago
Windbag senator gets "0wn3d" (as the kids do say now) by hot Strine chick; how does it feel VT? Raise your spoons
housewares 11 months ago
"In the midst of a massive fiscal crisis, Sallie James is a total babe spouting a free market message against a certain Socialist Senator.
libertyguerilla 11 months ago
Do more vids of Sallie James please!
aabce11235 11 months ago
Unseen consequences?!?!? But socialism is MAGIC!!!!
Mathewmatic 11 months ago 2
Sarcastic with a British accent. Totally cool!
Sundialonthejob 11 months ago
@Sundialonthejob As a Brit myself she is clearly Australian.
Malthus0 11 months ago 4
Brains are sexy!
opcn18 11 months ago 2
Bernie Sanders opposes reforms to US schools, so they will continue to produce graduates fit only to make bobbleheads, while China will continue rising and eventually produce airplanes and high-tech electronics. Way to go, Bernie!
simplulo 11 months ago
Brilliant ending! :)
Aeschylus 11 months ago
Holly Jumpin Jehoseph! Way to boost ratings ReasonTV, bring us more of Sallie James!
Panpiper 11 months ago
Why isn't Sallie James on a cable news show? Ironically, we have market failure.
spamdude1 11 months ago 27
When I saw the title my first thought was "Why would he be protesting Chinese bobble heads? There must be lead in them."
FatherTime89 11 months ago
I could confuse Bernie Sanders & liberals' need to hate businesses and then beg for businesses to stay as them having Borderline Personality Disorder. I am not joking. Although Borderline Personality Disorder is different from economics & politics, the disorder's behavior is the same. My sister has it and I will not joke about this disorder. I just see parallels.
"I Hate You, Don't Leave Me: Understanding the Borderline Personality" by Jerold J. Kreisman & Hal Strauss
MrConservative608 11 months ago
Why cant we have both? 27 million people out of work might like a job making snow globes. I know I would.
joepglass 11 months ago
We've got to save the snow dome industry in U.S. !!!!! Come on people it's for our children's future.
wetwingnut 11 months ago
I don't see it. This isn't WalMart, museums sell intentionally overproced merchandise. And it's more-or-less part of the government. It's like going into Microsoft and seeing them using Apple computers.
BTW, when I was young I used to collect banners. We went to the 1967 World's Fair (Expo 67) in Montreal, Canada. We bought a banner; it said on it - made in U.S.A.
zvi303 11 months ago
More Sallie James, Please!
snopro54 11 months ago 34
"I WILL TAX YOU TO DEATH!!!!"
"Gee, I cannot figure out why a company would leave and go overseas."
MrConservative608 11 months ago
We should draft the Sally James' of the world to replace all the dinosaurs like Bernie Sanders!
Getting government off the backs of American manufacturers might help to make them more competitive in the market place, and perhaps we'd begin seeing more 'Made in America' labels once again. Our government, driven by Liberal principles and social programs, has been forcing American manufacturers 'offshore' for decades. So that's where we are today!
ppbruno 11 months ago
We should draft the Sally James' of the world to replace all the dinosaurs like Bernie Sanders!
Getting government off the backs of American manufacturers might help to make them more competitive in the market place, and perhaps we'd begin seeing more 'Made in America' labels once again. Our government, driven by Liberal principles and social programs, has been forcing American manufacturers 'offshore' for decades. So that's where we are today!
ppbruno 11 months ago
America is the largest manufacturer in the world anyway. We manufacture more than China does.
strabes88 11 months ago
Please.................Bernie is too easy a target. I have to say, he is at the very least, honest about his socialism. More than I can say about any on the left that deny their communist leanings. We know what we get with Bernie. How about you unveil those commies hiding behind the veil of "Liberalism?"
luke55664 11 months ago
How awesome is it that American industry is _too_busy_ to manufacture trinkets. This is great news, not an embarrassment.
christerryatl 11 months ago
Sorry but businesses still will not manufacture stuff here even with her suggestions. the labor cost is still to high to get corporations to move back to the states...
robm425 11 months ago
I don't think that our American Senators should be able to wear English suits or Italian shoes. I mean, it's embarrassing, isn't it? We make suits and shoes in this country - and they are representing this country?! Don't we pay their salaries? I'd also be curious to see what kind of car Sanders owns. If it's not American, I think we should hand him the golden hypocrate award...
GTRJohnny66 11 months ago
Mexico is paying the price of proteccionism, why you americans don´t see that we are poor because this stupids laws...
ALFTUBE50 11 months ago
For you older folks. Remember when all the trinkets and stuff said "Made in Japan"?
SharkDude1 11 months ago
@SharkDude1 or Mexico, Argentina, Canada, etc.
jhwbyler 11 months ago
<3 Sallie James. The interviews I've seen of her are always amazing
TheRealFallenDemon 11 months ago
Maybe if we repealed some of the regulations and taxes on industry we would see a return of industry.
atchisrj1 11 months ago
@3:02 'Does he really want to regress us to the days where American manufacturing sector no longer makes aircraft ...'
Wow. Is this really what passes for 'reason' here on reasontv, in the concluding argument no less?
Dial in the accuracy of the bullshit detector, guys. Bernie Sanders is a walking talking strawman, you don't have to manufacture invalid strawman arguments to knock him over. Why this pandering to such a shallow sense of invalid reasoning? Is valid reason too much to ask?
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
1st. Why are you focusing on the last 10 seconds of the film saying it's BS reasoning, What about the other 3 minutes where she addressed his position and why it's a bad idea. 2nd, I don't think it's a straw man because she didn't say it was his position to "regress us to...." and then proceed to invalidate the false position. Her closing statement was saying we're passed snow globes, not that if he get's his way America will suddenly stop airplane production. It was a statement not an argument.
TheWhiteRabbit1990 11 months ago
@TheWhiteRabbit1990
'1st. Why are you focusing on the last 10 seconds ...'
It's the culmination of the video, the conclusion of the case being made. If there's an error in logic, should I not raise an objection regardless of it's whether it's in the last 10 seconds?
'It was a statement not an argument.'
Actually, it was a rhetorical question. Bottom line, airplane manufacture is a complete non-sequitor (logic fallacy) from the original discussion about the gift shop merchandise.
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 I think you're misidentifying fallacies again. I fail to see how it's a non-sequitur. A non-sequitur is drawing conclusion X from evidence A when there is no linkage. Tree's are beautiful, therefore God exists is a non-sequitur.
I can see this is going to get out of hand really quickly. We started with a straw-man, now we are moving on to a non-sequitur, and other points that I haven't even stated yet. We should stick with 1 topic at a time. Do you still think she made a strawman?
TheWhiteRabbit1990 11 months ago
@TheWhiteRabbit1990
If you want to stick to one topic, why are you making multiple points?
The straw man is linking Bernie to 'no longer manufacturing airplanes'. It's both a strawman and a non-sequitor. It's a strawman because there is no evidence that Bernie supports such a policy. It's a non-sequitor because the airline manufacturing industry has nothing to do with anything relating to the thesis topic of manufacturing gift shop items. Logical fallacies often span multi-categories.
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@SBRslacker00 It's neither a straw man argument, nor a non-sequitur. Sanders doesn't have to support shrinking the manufacture of airplanes any more than a proponent of war has to support civilian casualties or an industrialist pollution: they are bi-products, unintended consequences.
The reasoning behind her argument is opportunity cost; TANSTAFL. Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture
Megabyxos 11 months ago
@Megabyxos
'Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture'
These are two completely different industries. What resources are shared between these two industries? Certainly not the manufacturing end of it. There is a big difference between making airplanes and trinkets.
Also, given the current state of unemployment, why wouldn't opening a new manufacturing sector help the economy?
SBRslacker00 11 months ago
@Megabyxos "Resources devoted to the manufacturing of snow globes necessarily mean those same resources aren't devoted to other uses, e.g. aircraft manufacture "
I find it so odd that statements like this are made by those working for the globalists to keep Americans sedated about the dismantling of this country. Yet they are NEVER held accountable for them. Why is it that OTHER COUNTRIES CAN DO BOTH???? Are you feigning ignorance about economic warfare, too?
catothewiser 11 months ago