Is This The End Of The USA?

[donnay]

It's neither of those. Perhaps I'm obtuse, but not deliberately.

Really though, is more jobs oversees somehow bad for anybody at all? Are there people somewhere who gain by other countries having high unemployment rates? Is the thinking here that there are only so many jobs to go around, so that if they have more jobs over there that leaves fewer jobs for us or something?

If my thinking along these lines makes me obtuse, then every free market proponent, including Ron Paul, is obtuse too.

Did you sleep all 8 years of Obama?

 

[otherone]

It's neither of those. Perhaps I'm obtuse, but not deliberately.

Really though, is more jobs oversees somehow bad for anybody at all? Are there people somewhere who gain by other countries having high unemployment rates? Is the thinking here that there are only so many jobs to go around, so that if they have more jobs over there that leaves fewer jobs for us or something?

If my thinking along these lines makes me obtuse, then every free market proponent, including Ron Paul, is obtuse too.

Yeah. Appeal to Ron Paul.

If we actually had a "free market" here, then jobs would not be lost to overseas interests. No one gives a rat's ass about foreign unemployment.

 

[Invisible Man]

Did you sleep all 8 years of Obama?

No why? Did we suffer some problem resulting from too many people in other countries having jobs?

 

[Invisible Man]

Yeah. Appeal to Ron Paul.

If we actually had a "free market" here, then jobs would not be lost to overseas interests. No one gives a rat's ass about foreign unemployment.

I don't pretend we have a free market here. I just advocate one. Do you?

And if no one cares about foreign unemployment, then what is your point? That's the topic I asked about that you thought meant I was either obtuse or had Aspergers.

Speaking for myself though, I do care at least a little about foreign unemployment. Generally speaking, when their economies are better off, it translates to benefits for ours. Don't you agree?

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

 

[bv3]

Was the creation of the USA really a step in the direction of more perfect human liberty? Or would remaining without a federal government subsequent to secession from Britain, or possibly even remaining as British colonies, have been better?

Yes. An unassailable and immutable bill of rights (American liberty--ostensible as it has proven to be) is none-the-less superior, if merely in aims, to rights that are granted exclusively from tradition and past concessions, as is the case with "English" liberty, that are admittedly mutable. The feasibility of secession is questionable without some level of federation. Did the realization of human liberty in, say, Zimbabwe improve by Rhodesia's status as a colony? South Africa? There is no reason to assume that it would have been any different here.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

No, it's not.

But it is the end of "America First" movement that was funded by a globalist neoconservative who had been funding social liberal politicians for decades and sadly just passed away. "Netanyahu Republicans" for lack of better term will probably never again come back in power,
A new era ahead for GOP, very likely it will revert back to "God, Family, Country" model. Recent "USA, USA, USA" chants by pro MAGA crowd (that entered the Capitol building few days ago and thus greatly angered MAGA leader) do mark end of a consequential era in US political history.

 

[bv3]

I don't pretend we have a free market here. I just advocate one. Do you?

And if no one cares about foreign unemployment, then what is your point? That's the topic I asked about that you thought meant I was either obtuse or had Aspergers.

Speaking for myself though, I do care at least a little about foreign unemployment. Generally speaking, when their economies are better off, it translates to benefits for ours. Don't you agree?

"Socialism in one country." "Free market in one country."
We've seen how a socialist country can scalp even a relatively free market. Seems that free markets, paradoxically, need to exclude the participation of socialist foreign governments.

 

[Invisible Man]

Yes. An unassailable and immutable bill of rights (American liberty--ostensible as it has proven to be) is none-the-less superior, if merely in aims, to rights that are granted exclusively from tradition and past concessions, as is the case with "English" liberty, that are admittedly mutable. The feasibility of secession is questionable without some level of federation. Did the realization of human liberty in, say, Zimbabwe improve by Rhodesia's status as a colony? South Africa? There is no reason to assume that it would have been any different here.

In what sense do you see the Bill of Rights as unassailable and immutable, unless just a theoretical sense?

Now the divine law of justice itself, on which the principles behind the Bill of Rights are based, is unassailable and immutable. But this would be so regardless of how the boundaries around tax jurisdictions are drawn on the globe. The Bill of Rights themselves, on the other hand, are manmade laws that are no less susceptible to manipulations of politicians and judges than manmade English laws were. And if anything, I would posit that the very concept of common law we inherited from our British pedigree has a better philosophical underpinning in the unassailable and immutable divine law of justice than the constitutional amendments that were written and ratified by politicians we call the Bill of Rights do.

Also, the colonies did have "some level of federation" when they broke from from Britain. They were joined together under the Articles of Confederation. And they didn't ratify the Constitution until well after their independence from Britain was already complete. Theoretically, they could have gone on existing without the creation of a powerful centralized federal government to rule over them, such as they created when they become the *United* States of America.

However, I think British colonies in fact often had a great deal of liberty and independence. Consider Hong Kong. I think the American colonies, especially given the culture of their population, had potential to be relatively free as well, had they remained colonies, perhaps more free than what they very rapidly degraded into after they had replaced that one tyrant 3,000 miles away for the 3,000 tyrants one mile away. The enlightenment ideas that are enshrined in the founding documents didn't depend on those documents for their strength or validity.

 

[Invisible Man]

We've seen how a socialist country can scalp even a relatively free market. Seems that free markets, paradoxically, need to exclude the participation of socialist foreign governments.

When have we seen that?

And even to the extent that that does happen, I don't think it follows that we would benefit from keeping that socialist country poor, such that improvements in their economy would make the situation worse.

 

[donnay]

No why? Did we suffer some problem resulting from too many people in other countries having jobs?

Umm yeah, with off-shoring American jobs with draconian regulations--i.e.; coal, oil exploration and refineries, fishing, farming and manufacturing.

 

[donnay]

In what sense do you see the Bill of Rights as unassailable and immutable, unless just a theoretical sense?

Now the divine law of justice itself, on which the principles behind the Bill of Rights are based, is unassailable and immutable. But this would be so regardless of how the boundaries around tax jurisdictions are drawn on the globe. The Bill of Rights themselves, on the other hand, are manmade laws that are no less susceptible to manipulations of politicians and judges than manmade English laws were. And if anything, I would posit that the very concept of common law we inherited from our British pedigree has a better philosophical underpinning in the unassailable and immutable divine law of justice than the constitutional amendments that were written and ratified by politicians we call the Bill of Rights do.

In fact I think British colonies often had a great deal of liberty and independence. Consider Hong Kong. I think the American colonies, especially given the culture of their population, had potential to be relatively free as well, had they remained colonies, perhaps more free than what they very rapidly degraded into after they had replaced that one tyrant 3,000 miles away for the 3,000 tyrants one mile away. The enlightenment ideas that are enshrined in the founding documents didn't depend on those documents for their strength or validity.

"None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrong looks like right in their eyes."
-Johann von Goethe

 

[Invisible Man]

Umm yeah, with off-shoring American jobs with draconian regulations--i.e.; coal, oil exploration and refineries, fishing, farming and manufacturing.

It seems to me that the regulations you mention are the real problem, and not the doing of that work by others. If regulations in the USA make it harder and more expensive for that work to be done here, then isn't it a good thing when it still gets done more easily and cheaply elsewhere?

But I'm still not sure you're talking about something real. You were ostensibly answering my question about us suffering a problem that resulted from too many people in other countries having jobs. But you didn't mention anything that supports the conclusion that we did.

 

[Ender]

The US has been fundamentally dead as least since Lincoln and his Civil War.

Exactly.

Lincoln was the final seal on the Hamiltonian coup- the CONstitution- to take over the federation & create a strong central ruling government.

The Anti-Federalists were right & the Federation was really the only true vestige of freedom that happened to the colonies.

 

[Ender]

It seems to me that the regulations you mention are the real problem, and not the doing of that work by others.

Yep.

 

[DamianTV]

has no effect on me but i'm not looking for a job . High unemployment , slow growth though are no bonus for citizens or tax revenues to apply against the growing debt . The actual decline will be good for my businesses probably but you never know . As long as I can pay my property taxes I'm good and if not i have plenty of ammo. I'm not expecting anyone to bother me .

The trouble is that your property, your Private Property will be decreed "racist" somehow, and taken to be given freely to Invisible Man, fully at your expense. Including your ammo. Since he obviously supports Leftist Ideologies, he is "entitled" to EVERYTHING you own, including your LIFE.

If you expect them to not bother you, you might get your wish. Going along with the idea they "leave you alone" by avoiding direct conflict, they will attack you in other means. Revoke your business license. Prohibit you from working. Prohibit you from buying food, travel, or even paying bills. They will lock you in your home and "leave you alone" and prohibit you have any meaningful interaction with anyone else ever again.

 

[Invisible Man]

The trouble is that your property, your Private Property will be decreed "racist" somehow, and taken to be given freely to Invisible Man, fully at your expense. Including your ammo. Since he obviously supports Leftist Ideologies, he is "entitled" to EVERYTHING you own, including your LIFE.

As far as I know, there are zero leftist policies I support. Can you find any quotes from me that you think indicate support for any?

 

[donnay]

It seems to me that the regulations you mention are the real problem, and not the doing of that work by others. If regulations in the USA make it harder and more expensive for that work to be done here, then isn't it a good thing when it still gets done more easily and cheaply elsewhere?

But I'm still not sure you're talking about something real. You were ostensibly answering my question about us suffering a problem that resulted from too many people in other countries having jobs. But you didn't mention anything that supports the conclusion that we did.

Take China for instance; they do not have to follow any rules about pollution and or inhumane slave labor. Do find it okay, to allow China to get the jobs that Americans were doing because they do not have to follow the rules that the global elites demand we have?

Were you not paying attention to what happen when this insidious Covid-19 hit this country and China was the biggest manufacturer of PPE's? They told President Trump if he continues to blame China for the virus they would stop sending PPE to us.

If we had a level playing field it would be great, but we don't. That is exactly what President Trump was trying to create. Of course the globalists don't want that because they do not want America to be independent, self-sufficient and self-reliant. They want to take out America because we are the last bastion of what resembles a free market.

 

[Invisible Man]

Take China for instance; they do not have to follow any rules about pollution and or inhumane slave labor. Do find it okay, to allow China to get the jobs that Americans were doing because they do not have to follow the rules that the global elites demand we have?

That's better than if they had the same regulations imposed on them. At least now there's somewhere we can go to escape them.

Were you not paying attention to what happen when this insidious Covid-19 hit this country and China was the biggest manufacturer of PPE's?

I fail to see how that's a bad thing.

They told President Trump if he continues to blame China for the virus they would stop sending PPE to us.

Then, if that happened, they'd be manufactured somewhere else to meet the demand. It would be more expensive. But being able to get them cheaply for a little while would be better than not at all, and having to settle for that more expensive option all along.

If we had a level playing field it would be great, but we don't. That is exactly what President Trump was trying to create. Of course the globalists don't want that because they do not want America to be independent, self-sufficient and self-reliant. They want to take out America because we are the last bastion of what resembles a free market.

It doesn't matter if we have a level playing field or not. Trump's trade war with China only hurt us. It didn't help us. The prospect of ending or lessening the impacts of that trade war after Trump's gone is a good thing, not bad.

 

[DamianTV]

As far as I know, there are zero leftist policies I support. Can you find any quotes from me that you think indicate support for any?

Let me try one...

... more jobs overseas ...

In your eyes this is a bad thing?

In response to the question quoted, more jobs overseas is bad when they are YOUR jobs, and / or Slave Labor. Not all overseas jobs are bad. Not all are good either.

Its just the way you come across sounds a LOT like ZippyJuan, and he is Permabanned.

Lets see, since my opinion is not fully established on you. How do you feel about Fiat Currency? Does the USA operate and maintain an Honest Money System? Is interest on Fiat Currency fair or honest? Is there any issue with unlimited currency printing? Please be relatively specific...