Globalization is inherently corporatist.

Neoclitorus

Neoclitorus

Best
Globalization is inherently corporatist.


Open borders and no tariffs or protectionist measures means corporations can do whatever they want, regardless of its broader impact on society.

Immigrants can be brought in and are brought in to drive down wages at all levels of society.

The only ones who benefit are the ones who have international corporate stocks in their portfolio.
Trump loves Americans enough to set aside his identity as a member of the investment class, and actually care about working Americans harmed by globalization zealotry.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Globalization is inherently corporatist.


Open borders and no tariffs or protectionist measures means corporations can do whatever they want, regardless of its broader impact on society.

Immigrants can be brought in and are brought in to drive down wages at all levels of society.

The only ones who benefit are the ones who have international corporate stocks in their portfolio.
Trump loves Americans enough to set aside his identity as a member of the investment class, and actually care about working Americans harmed by globalization zealotry.
Click to expand...

Thank capitalism.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Globalization is inherently corporatist.


Open borders and no tariffs or protectionist measures means corporations can do whatever they want, regardless of its broader impact on society.

Immigrants can be brought in and are brought in to drive down wages at all levels of society.

The only ones who benefit are the ones who have international corporate stocks in their portfolio.
Trump loves Americans enough to set aside his identity as a member of the investment class, and actually care about working Americans harmed by globalization zealotry.
Click to expand...

Like Trump Tower and Trump's other office buildings are occupied by "working Americans"
 
archives said:
I believe he is implying that Globalization is nothing more than capitalism extending worldwide, which is true
Click to expand...

It's more than just extending world wide, it's achieving state capture, and eliminating the national sovereigny necessary to keep business inside a framework of other national concerns.
 
And let's get clear, capitalism is not synonymous with working and trading and profiting.

I actually think corporate personhood needs to be destroyed as notion, along with the corporate veil.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's more than just extending world wide, it's achieving state capture, and eliminating the national sovereigny necessary to keep business inside a framework of other national concerns.
Click to expand...

Yeah, exactly, there is no daylight between your "representative" government and the Wall Street/donor/"job creator" class. The empire is colonizing its own people economically for empirical expansionism. There will come a serious contraction of the empire at some point, and it will be ugly and violent.

Go back and read The Powell Memorandum.
 
Fentoine Lum said:
Yeah, exactly, there is no daylight between your "representative" government and the Wall Street/donor/"job creator" class. The empire is colonizing its own people economically for empirical expansionism. There will come a serious contraction of the empire at some point, and it will be ugly and violent.

Go back and read The Powell Memorandum.
Click to expand...

I hope can be managed better than all this.

Wall street specializes in bubblecrafting to hide the holes.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It doesn't matter who lives in two spots, ya yanker. His policies of rejecting bad trade deals are good for workers.
Click to expand...

He hasn't rejected any trade deals, the new NAFTA closely resembles the old NAFTA, and the majority of the alterations were items the previous Administration had already worked out with Canada and Mexico in preparation for TPP. The deal he heralded as huge with South Korea was the same, a rewording of what already existed.

The only deal he rejected was TPP, which to date has cost the US billions and allowed has China to assume the leadership of economic activity in South Asia
 
archives said:
He hasn't rejected any trade deals, the new NAFTA closely resembles the old NAFTA, and the majority of the alterations were items the previous Administration had already worked out with Canada and Mexico in preparation for TPP. The deal he heralded as huge with South Korea was the same, a rewording of what already existed.

The only deal he rejected was TPP, which to date has cost the US billions and allowed has China to assume the leadership of economic activity in South Asia
Click to expand...

It was bad mojo. Bernie was also against it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top