Globalists Unite Behind Hillary

Free trade being in the interest of the overall economy is so basic to the field of economics that you literally would learn that and why in your first econ class. So you concede that maybe, just maybe, economists know more about that then the lawyers you worship? Here's a hint. Lawyers lie. Shocking, isn't it?
There is something that you are probably familiar with as well........teachers indoctrinate.

What a stupid argument. It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.

You ignore the big gains of lower prices. They benefit all consumers and they help American companies compete both domestically and internationally with foreign competition
It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.
BS, that's why there is only one school of economics and everyone is in agreement on the correct policies to follow right?

This is econ 101, it's way below where different theories come into play. It's like arguing algebra is wrong in math.

Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.
Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.

Yes, they are indoctrinated. We have experienced the affects of free trade and it is good only to the corporations who benefit from cheap labor. Are you familiar with Sir James Goldsmith? He predicted the outcome of these free trade agreements, he was particularly disturbed by GATT/WTO.



It's the problem with schools, they indoctrinate people with free markets and conservatism ...

:lmao:

Yeah ...
 
There is something that you are probably familiar with as well........teachers indoctrinate.

What a stupid argument. It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.

You ignore the big gains of lower prices. They benefit all consumers and they help American companies compete both domestically and internationally with foreign competition
It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.
BS, that's why there is only one school of economics and everyone is in agreement on the correct policies to follow right?

This is econ 101, it's way below where different theories come into play. It's like arguing algebra is wrong in math.

Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.
Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.

Yes, they are indoctrinated. We have experienced the affects of free trade and it is good only to the corporations who benefit from cheap labor. Are you familiar with Sir James Goldsmith? He predicted the outcome of these free trade agreements, he was particularly disturbed by GATT/WTO.



It's the problem with schools, they indoctrinate people with free markets and conservatism ...

:lmao:

Yeah ...

Greg Mankiw is the author of introductory economics textbooks. In the preface to his textbook "Principles of Microeconomics" he flat out admits that he is indoctrinating the student with economic dogma.
Economics is a subject in which a little knowledge goes a long way. (The same cannot be said, for instance, of the study of physics or the Japanese language.) Economists have a unique way of viewing the world, much of which can be taught in one or two semesters. My goal in this book is to transmit this way of thinking to the widest possible audience and to convince readers that it illuminates much about the world around them.
Amazon.com: Principles of Microeconomics eBook: N. Gregory Mankiw: Kindle Store

You cannot possibly hold the position that schools indoctrinate leftist principles while pretending that economics courses are immune to indoctrination. It's a stupid argument.
 
What a stupid argument. It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.

You ignore the big gains of lower prices. They benefit all consumers and they help American companies compete both domestically and internationally with foreign competition
It's the field of economics itself, it's not commentary by the teachers.
BS, that's why there is only one school of economics and everyone is in agreement on the correct policies to follow right?

This is econ 101, it's way below where different theories come into play. It's like arguing algebra is wrong in math.

Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.
Yes, the most liberal economist would agree that free trade is good for the economy.

Yes, they are indoctrinated. We have experienced the affects of free trade and it is good only to the corporations who benefit from cheap labor. Are you familiar with Sir James Goldsmith? He predicted the outcome of these free trade agreements, he was particularly disturbed by GATT/WTO.



It's the problem with schools, they indoctrinate people with free markets and conservatism ...

:lmao:

Yeah ...

Greg Mankiw is the author of introductory economics textbooks. In the preface to his textbook "Principles of Microeconomics" he flat out admits that he is indoctrinating the student with economic dogma.
Economics is a subject in which a little knowledge goes a long way. (The same cannot be said, for instance, of the study of physics or the Japanese language.) Economists have a unique way of viewing the world, much of which can be taught in one or two semesters. My goal in this book is to transmit this way of thinking to the widest possible audience and to convince readers that it illuminates much about the world around them.
Amazon.com: Principles of Microeconomics eBook: N. Gregory Mankiw: Kindle Store

You cannot possibly hold the position that schools indoctrinate leftist principles while pretending that economics courses are immune to indoctrination. It's a stupid argument.


Strawman.

It's funny you leftists always call Republicans "black and white," then when I say trade is a basic economic principle, you come back with that I said "economics ... are immune to indoctrination."

That isn't what I said, dumb ass.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top