Let the Protectionism Rise, With 18 Percent Unemployment Rate

[The Rabbi]

Well, the European economies are improving. Even the US economy is improving. Up until 18 months ago we seemed to be doing quite well.
This is called cyclical. During the 8 years of expansion thanks to the Bush tax cuts and other policies we imported more jobs than we exported.
So, no the evidence is not "all around us." On the contrary the evidence is that protectionism is a dead end. You cannot defend someone's job by gov't action without hurting someone else's job.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ah, the old quote one facet of one example and claim victory tactic, eh?

Um, there are a lot of reasons you may not be able to get a Peugeot part, one being the idea that any auto parts store would be unwise to stock up on parts of a car that there aren't too many of in the US. I suspect you could get them more easily in France.

Also, there is the quality of engineering. Japan, and to some extent us, in the last few years make good cars because of good engineering. Whether we make them here or not, is entirely separate from whether you can get parts or not. But it would give jobs to people, here, during a time when there is an 18 percent unemployment rate, good jobs, jobs that would allow them to actually buy a car.

Except that one example can be magnified many hundreds of times. Skodas, Ladas, British motorcycles and cars from the 1970s, any manufactured item you can think of is less competitive when made behind protectionist walls.

 

[Shogun]

If you had the first clue as to what free markets were really about, you might be a tad amusing.

But you don't, so you're appallingly pathetic.

yea, we heard that same kind of shit back in the 90s from Greenspan too.

How did that work out for ya?

 

[Shogun]

Probably because you have no counter-argument and yet cannot accept that I am correct.
Sad, really. A closed mind is a great thing to get wasted.

Yea, appealing to authority sure is convincing!




clearly, you are a master of spotting logical fallacy. Please, tell me more about how to form a coherent argument!







Go tell it to Greenspan's laughable (were it not directly kicking America in the balls) free market policy all about it.

Where did I appeal to authority? WHich authority did I appeal to?
You haven't formed a coherent argument. You haven't formed any argument. You made a statement of personal opinion. You dismissd my argument without a counter of any kind.

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.
3. Therefore, C is true.

Fallacy: Appeal to Authority


sorry, guy. I am just not impressed with all the "ya, well I KNOW econ and YOU are wrong" silliness that perpetuates your kind into thinking anyone gives a damn about your OPINION on econ. Clearly, you are such a intellectual dazzler that you comprehend why it's fun for me to slap you about the head and neck with Greenspan testimony.


Work on it, tyke. And drink a lot of milk.

 

[Shogun]

Where did I appeal to authority? WHich authority did I appeal to?
You haven't formed a coherent argument. You haven't formed any argument. You made a statement of personal opinion. You dismissd my argument without a counter of any kind.

That's our Blowgun.

He's our resident Buchananite populist know-nothing who believes that he's a sage.

...it's easy to facilitate when your economic opinions just never seem to gel with reality.


go ask a former production worker all about it.

 

[Oddball]

Lord knows asking you will get one nowhere useful.

 

[Shogun]

Where did I appeal to authority? WHich authority did I appeal to?
You haven't formed a coherent argument. You haven't formed any argument. You made a statement of personal opinion. You dismissd my argument without a counter of any kind.

That's our Blowgun.

He's our resident Buchananite populist know-nothing who believes that he's a sage.

I dont care that he dismissed my argument out of hand. His loss.
But don't claim something that didnt happen. You have no believability at that point. At the very least talk about starving unionized steel workers or something.

WOW. did you miss the entire reason I quoted whom your kind once hailed as a beacon of free market capitalism? I guess I just don't feel the need to type out cliff notes for noobs on subjects they seem to want to be an expert in. Hint: google Alan Greenspan.




funny what a difference a DECADE makes.

 

[Shogun]

Seriously. It never fails to bring joy to my day when i log on to USMB and see the outright shotput toss of free market fans throwing such an iconic, for YEARS the poster boy of free market gov. policies, herald of free market capitalism under the proverbial bus.....



.....just because he finally admitted what reality has shown for years....


Have a Great day!

So you have no evidence that Alan Greenspan's policies as Fed chairman in any way resembled a free market approach?

We both know that I can post article after article from the 90s on which convey that Greenspan was, in fact, the flag your kind waved for a decade. Weather or not you want to disavow yourself NOW, like peter and crowing roosters, is up to you.

 

[Shogun]

Well, the European economies are improving. Even the US economy is improving. Up until 18 months ago we seemed to be doing quite well.
This is called cyclical. During the 8 years of expansion thanks to the Bush tax cuts and other policies we imported more jobs than we exported.
So, no the evidence is not "all around us." On the contrary the evidence is that protectionism is a dead end. You cannot defend someone's job by gov't action without hurting someone else's job.

HAHAHA!

yea... THAT SURE IS what the bush years are noted for: the massive INFLUX of fucking domestic jobs!



See, this is the kind of delusion your kind dazzle yourself with which never even remotely reflects reality.

 

[Shogun]

Ah, the old quote one facet of one example and claim victory tactic, eh?

Um, there are a lot of reasons you may not be able to get a Peugeot part, one being the idea that any auto parts store would be unwise to stock up on parts of a car that there aren't too many of in the US. I suspect you could get them more easily in France.

Also, there is the quality of engineering. Japan, and to some extent us, in the last few years make good cars because of good engineering. Whether we make them here or not, is entirely separate from whether you can get parts or not. But it would give jobs to people, here, during a time when there is an 18 percent unemployment rate, good jobs, jobs that would allow them to actually buy a car.

Except that one example can be magnified many hundreds of times. Skodas, Ladas, British motorcycles and cars from the 1970s, any manufactured item you can think of is less competitive when made behind protectionist walls.

being competitive is not the sole necessity of an economy. Hate to break it to you, tex, but 1950 american autos did quite well without having to compete with foreign autos. and, CONSEQUENTLY, happened to be the strongest cultural period in American standards of living.


but hey.. who needs a solid factory job when one can work as a cashier at wal mart, right buddy? Who needs insurance and the kind of wage that supports a family when there are some asians who are just happy to get a bowl of rice after their 15 hour day?

 

[skookerasbil]

It is incredible to me that some people still believe that protectionism is a valid and helpful policy. The evidence against it is enormous. If it were wrong, E.Germany would have been an economic powerhouse.
But when the wall fell E.Germany's factories were smoking ruins of outmoded production tools producing obsolete products at uncompetitive prices.
That's what protectionism leads to.
No one wants to see jobs go away (although the U.S. is the largest beneficiary of outsourcing by foreign companies). But that is far preferable to seeing us protect inefficient industries that can't compete.

indeed........not at all understood by the k00ks!!!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Seriously. It never fails to bring joy to my day when i log on to USMB and see the outright shotput toss of free market fans throwing such an iconic, for YEARS the poster boy of free market gov. policies, herald of free market capitalism under the proverbial bus.....



.....just because he finally admitted what reality has shown for years....


Have a Great day!

So you have no evidence that Alan Greenspan's policies as Fed chairman in any way resembled a free market approach?

We both know that I can post article after article from the 90s on which convey that Greenspan was, in fact, the flag your kind waved for a decade. Weather or not you want to disavow yourself NOW, like peter and crowing roosters, is up to you.

I have no doubt you can link me to a myriad of articles where Greenspan talks about supporting the free market. However, can you prove that any of his policies while Fed chairman were in support of a truly free market? I've given examples to the contrary, such as Greenspan setting interest rates at 1% during the dot-com bust, but I've yet to see you back up your assertion in any tangible way.

 

[Oddball]

He doesn't work that way, dude.

Populist mental midgets work off of emotional responses from the equally ignorant, not relevant facts and figures.