The future of America and China. Is the CIA and FBI paying attention?

[Tom Paine 1949]

I also disagree with @Gdjjr ’s view disdaining the importance of international organization, common “standards,” the WTO, etc. In the real world, where states and giant multinational corporations and economic blocs and imperialist pressures exist, trade standards and monetary regulation and treaties of all sorts really are ever more important. Only knowledgeable and serious statesmen can properly work out agreements needed to facilitate trade, encourage maximum “freedom,” and maintain peace.

You can disagree all you want. It will change nothing I said.
BTW, the US is famous for "breaking treaties"- ask anyone who abides by one- except Israel and Saudi Arabia. Wonder why that is?

The only "serious" players in trade are the ones trading. NO "statesman" or political hack has the legal authority or moral authority to presume he can decide what's good for one but not another. The "agreements" are to be between the traders, NOT "statesmen". Period. That is FREE trade at its finest. Fair is to be decided by the traders, not a fucking dictator, no matter where he resides.

Congress was supposed to regulate trade and commerce- not dictate it's desires on the unwilling, no matter where the unwilling resides. They were to "help ensure" one district didn't have a "legal advantage" over another. Period. The constitution, nor its History, says a damn thing about a statesman dictator being free to "treat" (read dictate) private transactions. Period. And your requirement of statesman forgot to mention *honorable* which there hasn't been in the District of Criminals since Davy Crockett left.

As for WTO, like gov't, it is toothless w/o FORCE on it's side- and like gov't it can suggest guidelines all day long- that gives it NO authority, morally, or legally. If something, anything, has to be forced it's not really that good. Is it? That means there was no mutual agreement. So, who wins? Answer: the enFORCEr. Period. The enforcers do NOT have citizens best interest at heart. Period. It has its own best interest at heart and utilizes fear propaganda, effective apparently, to coerce citizens into being stupid, no matter where the force resides or the citizen. Being FORCEd to submit to the will of another is where ALL conflict begins. There are no ifs ands or buts about it. And behind those FORCEs is a power greedy gov't statesman pretending he has an esoteric knowledge that grants him a presumed authority to make a decision in which he hasn't the slightest clue about.

I don’t think this is an appropriate thread for a full discussion of international trade or treaty law under our Constitution. I see you have vehement views concerning these. I dIdn’t mean to imply trade matters should be determined by “statesmen dictators.” I certainly agree the U.S. record is not spotless in regard to treaties and international law.

By the way, Davy Crockett was one of my childhood heroes. I recall singing the Davy Crockett song and wearing a Coonskin-style hat! Later I learned he opposed Andrew Jackson’s mistreatment of Indian tribes. Nothing I’ve learned since has led me to doubt he was an honorable man. If anybody has any other information, I hope they keep it to themselves! ; )

 

[Gdjjr]

I don’t think this is an appropriate thread for a full discussion of international trade or treaty law under our Constitution.

Then, please, by all means start one. Be sure to touch on Free Trade when you talk about the constitution and it's appropriateness in International Trade- and don't forget Statesman or congress critters or POTUS-

BTW, the best thing about Davy Crockett is that he chose not to return to congress because he saw he couldn't deliver on his promises to his constituents- something today's dictators might make a note of when they toss around the word "honorable".