Do we prefer Isolationism or Cosmopolitanism?

Pythagoras

Senior Member
Dec 24, 2020
133
41
46
Samos, Greece
Over the course of the pass decade I have noticed a debate that occurs behind the curtain of present policy. Throughout history there has been benefits to both pathways of economic encouragement. For a major part of the western expansion of the U.S. the nation had a isolationist attitude. There are of course exceptions as with anything else specifically within the labor department. What I mean to target this question at specifically is trade and economic focus (internal or external).

As with my standard form I wish not to discuss my personal takes but encourage those to speak with their expertise, experience, or position. This is not the who is the loudest club. Both ideas have their benefits and drawbacks. The questions I ask to better focus my inquiry are as follows...

1. When we look at local industry both on the regional and national level: What is your stance on imported labor? (work visas, research positions, labor based immigration).

2. Equally, How do you feel about exporting U.S. labor? Would you want the U.S. to set up programs where people leave the country to work for periods of time in another country? (This can vary from high skill to lower skill labors.)

3. For the transfer of goods and services: Do you find it more beneficial for U.S. citizen to be the majority of consumption or would exporting our products to other countries be a better use of the economy?

4. Despite purchasing goods from outside the United States being Cheaper: Do you think the United States should incentivize purchasing products from the U.S. or outside the U.S. )In either case there is incentive in place.)

5. If you were to have trade outside the U.S. (this is a mandatory section of the prompt even if you wish there were no outside trade) what do you see to be the outliers for "good" trading partners? Is it local like one would see in NAFTA or hemispherical, continent based, or region based? Other options of course may be included.

This is to exercise thought and discuss position and theory not a den for political strife. I encourage all readers to answer one or as many prompts as desired and please feel free to be as detailed in your analysis or propositions as possible. Life is in the details and discussions are too.

Thank you for taking the time to read. I look forward to the responses.
 

Do we prefer Isolationism or Cosmopolitanism?​


I always say:

Screen Shot 2024-12-08 at 1.00.38 AM.png
 
Based upon the original question, we have multi-trade and defense treaties and thus cannot be isolationist. It's a moot question.
 
Ask your neighbours Plato and Aristotle for their opinions .

Which countries apart from America , Russia and China largely practise Isolationism ? Deliberate or otherwise?

Whom sensibly can you compare them with, given that Cosmopolitanism probably is imaginary ,( not a real thing) , and nobody tries to practise it ? Unsurprisingly .

Simples .
 
Over the course of the pass decade I have noticed a debate that occurs behind the curtain of present policy. Throughout history there has been benefits to both pathways of economic encouragement. For a major part of the western expansion of the U.S. the nation had a isolationist attitude. There are of course exceptions as with anything else specifically within the labor department. What I mean to target this question at specifically is trade and economic focus (internal or external).

As with my standard form I wish not to discuss my personal takes but encourage those to speak with their expertise, experience, or position. This is not the who is the loudest club. Both ideas have their benefits and drawbacks. The questions I ask to better focus my inquiry are as follows...

1. When we look at local industry both on the regional and national level: What is your stance on imported labor? (work visas, research positions, labor based immigration).

2. Equally, How do you feel about exporting U.S. labor? Would you want the U.S. to set up programs where people leave the country to work for periods of time in another country? (This can vary from high skill to lower skill labors.)

3. For the transfer of goods and services: Do you find it more beneficial for U.S. citizen to be the majority of consumption or would exporting our products to other countries be a better use of the economy?

4. Despite purchasing goods from outside the United States being Cheaper: Do you think the United States should incentivize purchasing products from the U.S. or outside the U.S. )In either case there is incentive in place.)

5. If you were to have trade outside the U.S. (this is a mandatory section of the prompt even if you wish there were no outside trade) what do you see to be the outliers for "good" trading partners? Is it local like one would see in NAFTA or hemispherical, continent based, or region based? Other options of course may be included.

This is to exercise thought and discuss position and theory not a den for political strife. I encourage all readers to answer one or as many prompts as desired and please feel free to be as detailed in your analysis or propositions as possible. Life is in the details and discussions are too.

Thank you for taking the time to read. I look forward to the responses.
Our Diploma Dumbo Businessmen Can Only Make Their Wealth Through Cheap Labor

The outsourcers should be confined to opening factories and only selling within those countries at prices the workers there can afford?
 
Isolationism and Nationalism for me, please. It’s really the only way to keep from catchingvehstvthecredtvofctgecworkd gas (woke progressive/socialist leftism); which is extremely toxic and most often terminal for the Soul.
 
The Top-Heavy Must Be Toppled

Who gets the treat and who gets tricked?
And lower income people look at what the rich has and is envious, jealous and hates the uber rich.
But, because of Capitalism and the Free Market Economy, we have "innovation" and a "middle-class."
Leftist like to claim that the Scandinavian nations are Socialist and doing well, but according to their foreign ministers, they are NOT Socialist. They are Free Market Economies with some "social" programs and do not heavily tax the very rich so as to NOT stifle innovation.
If one looks to Communism/Marxism, they like to claim that they end classes of peoples. The problem is, yes, they do eliminate most of the uber rich, except for the very inner-circle in the Politburo and everyone else is just poor.
I would be considered lower middle class. I realize that the uber rich got rich through ambition, innovation and drive. So, they've earned the riches they have. As to their sons/daughters inheriting the riches, I have no problem with that. If I was rich, I would make sure my daughter leads a comfortable life. To just tell your kids to go out and make your own life without helping them, shows you don't care much about them.
 
But, because of Capitalism and the Free Market Economy, we have "innovation" and a "middle-class."
rich got rich through ambition, innovation and drive. So, they've earned the riches they have. As to their sons/daughters inheriting the riches, I have no problem with that. If I was rich, I would make sure my daughter leads a comfortable life. To just tell your kids to go out and make your own life without helping them, shows you don't care much about them.
Bribing for Your Brat

American wealth didn't come from Capitalism; it came from practical science. Inventors, not investors, built that. The plutocratic parasites just throw money at an activity and hope that it pushes it along. Their ignorant guesses go wrong as often as government ideas do; that's why they demand so much of the take.
The employee inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction got one penny for every hundred dollars his owners got.

No one has a right to set his spoiled brats up way ahead of others with the same talent. You're just imagining what you'd do, whereas in reality it cheats you blind. The hypocrisy and the imaginary self-identity in supporting this is so irrational and antisocial that it can only be prevalent because of totalitarian thought control on this vital issue, mostly by not mentioning it at all.

If you'd rather tax the living (including the rich who earned their own money) than the dead, you must believe in ghosts.
 

Forum List

Back
Top