MrRodgers
Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote:
ORIGINAL: Sanity quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yes, I am all for that, and they can pay extra for police protection, may not spend any money in the us for political purposes, lobbyists, pay extra for any use of american resources such as roads, and higher property taxes on their buildings and grounds.........register with the state department as foreign agents, and we need some legislative actions that would raise foreign based corporate taxes in the US above those paid by Americans. Trade wars Great idea Why not just build higher walls to keep our people in. With towers, spotlights and sharpshooters OMG. There's a political position on which we actually agree. Strongly even. Well, not about the sharpshooters, but I'm assuming that part's irony. And, it has long been an essential part of my disagreement with Democrats -- global free trade is here to stay, and for good reason. Interestingly, in our bizarre political climate today, it's also among my disagreements with the Tea Party conservative wing. 'Global Free Trade' has been here before and it was soon usurped. The years before WW1 were the golden age of free trade where people were free to travel anywhere without need for identification and goods were exchanged freely around the world. There is an argument to say that war is inevitable somewhere along the line as a result of Free Trade. Either way, Free Trade is a liberal principle, certainly not a conservative principle; no matter how much your Republican Party or our Conservative Party call themselves conservatives. They may be socially conservative, but to all intents and purposes they are liberal parties economically. I personally am a proponent of Free Trade, and a died-in-the-wool liberal, but it's not without its limitations and you can bet your house that it's not here to stay without some sort of break. I would agree but there is little truly free trade in this world today. Plus, back in the day under the British empire there was 'free' trade but only on British terms which meant by their rules, under their currency issued by the Bank of England and mostly if not exclusively to the benefit of the British. As I've been writing here, far too many agreements today are subject to too many varying restrictions, subsidies and tariffs which is hardly free trade. Free trade so-called today, is nothing that is designed to benefit the societies at large that are involved but a codifying of trade in the interests of the most powerful political and economic forces behind [its] negotiations.
|