The Long Road to Residency

Stringfield, what if there were some sort of military event with china, and they threatened to dump the dollar in retaliation? Doesn't that limit our options in defending ourselves, to give a potential enemy that much leverage?

If they dumped the dollar we would have less buying power in international trade and would be less able to engage in international trade. So you are saying barriers to trade hurt our defensive capabilities. You are right.

If China just dumps its dollars it will hurt China. They cannot possibly dump all their dollars at once and if they indicated their desire to do so they would depreciate the value of their dollar holdings.

If there were some sort of military event, China would be holding virtually worthless pieces of paper. They would not be able to dump them. They would be barred from doing trade with the US and any nation they tried to trade in dollars with would likely be barred from doing trade in the US.

So you have just told us how free trade increases our military abilities and how it discourages war against us.
 
If they dumped the dollar we would have less buying power in international trade and would be less able to engage in international trade. So you are saying barriers to trade hurt our defensive capabilities. You are right.

If China just dumps its dollars it will hurt China. They cannot possibly dump all their dollars at once and if they indicated their desire to do so they would depreciate the value of their dollar holdings.

If there were some sort of military event, China would be holding virtually worthless pieces of paper. They would not be able to dump them. They would be barred from doing trade with the US and any nation they tried to trade in dollars with would likely be barred from doing trade in the US.

So you have just told us how free trade increases our military abilities and how it discourages war against us.

Your head is inverted. It will hurt us if china dumps the dollars. Giving a totalitarian regime this much influence is a bad idea. And they can dump them. It's legal for them to do so. The point is that the value of our dollar is now dependant on the whims of totalitarian enemies. IS that a good position to be in?

Globalization puts your supply lines in the hands of enemies and gives them undue influence in your economy.

And the slavery comes not just from them having dollars, but from the demands they make on us to keep propping up the dollar.

The slavery also comes in the form of wage slavery, as jobs are shipped overeseas and government services are cut, we are all turned into wage slaves, and our native born industry and entepeneurialism are killed so foreign corporation can maximize profit. It will look like the slavery third world nations have been going through.

http://www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/



Stiglitz helped translate one from bureaucratise, a "Country Assistance Strategy." There's an Assistance Strategy for every poorer nation, designed, says the World Bank, after careful in-country investigation. But according to insider Stiglitz, the Bank's staff 'investigation' consists of close inspection of a nation's 5-star hotels. It concludes with the Bank staff meeting some begging, busted finance minister who is handed a 'restructuring agreement' pre-drafted for his 'voluntary' signature (I have a selection of these).

Each nation's economy is individually analyzed, then, says Stiglitz, the Bank hands every minister the same exact four-step program.

Step One is Privatization - which Stiglitz said could more accurately be called, 'Briberization.' Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, he said national leaders - using the World Bank's demands to silence local critics - happily flogged their electricity and water companies. "You could see their eyes widen" at the prospect of 10% commissions paid to Swiss bank accounts for simply shaving a few billion off the sale price of national assets.

And the US government knew it, charges Stiglitz, at least in the case of the biggest 'briberization' of all, the 1995 Russian sell-off. "The US Treasury view was this was great as we wanted Yeltsin re-elected. We don't care if it's a corrupt election. We want the money to go to Yeltzin" via kick-backs for his campaign.

Stiglitz is no conspiracy nutter ranting about Black Helicopters. The man was inside the game, a member of Bill Clinton's cabinet as Chairman of the President's council of economic advisors.

Most ill-making for Stiglitz is that the US-backed oligarchs stripped Russia's industrial assets, with the effect that the corruption scheme cut national output nearly in half causing depression and starvation.

After briberization, Step Two of the IMF/World Bank one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan is 'Capital Market Liberalization.' In theory, capital market deregulation allows investment capital to flow in and out. Unfortunately, as in Indonesia and Brazil, the money simply flowed out and out. Stiglitz calls this the "Hot Money" cycle. Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation's reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation's own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.

"The result was predictable," said Stiglitz of the Hot Money tidal waves in Asia and Latin America. Higher interest rates demolished property values, savaged industrial production and drained national treasuries.

At this point, the IMF drags the gasping nation to Step Three: Market-Based Pricing, a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and cooking gas. This leads, predictably, to Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls, "The IMF riot."

The IMF riot is painfully predictable. When a nation is, "down and out, [the IMF] takes advantage and squeezes the last pound of blood out of them. They turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up," as when the IMF eliminated food and fuel subsidies for the poor in Indonesia in 1998. Indonesia exploded into riots, but there are other examples - the Bolivian riots over water prices last year and this February, the riots in Ecuador over the rise in cooking gas prices imposed by the World Bank. You'd almost get the impression that the riot is written into the plan.

And it is. What Stiglitz did not know is that, while in the States, BBC and The Observer obtained several documents from inside the World Bank, stamped over with those pesky warnings, "confidential," "restricted," "not to be disclosed." Let's get back to one: the "Interim Country Assistance Strategy" for Ecuador, in it the Bank several times states - with cold accuracy - that they expected their plans to spark, "social unrest," to use their bureaucratic term for a nation in flames.

That's not surprising. The secret report notes that the plan to make the US dollar Ecuador's currency has pushed 51% of the population below the poverty line. The World Bank "Assistance" plan simply calls for facing down civil strife and suffering with, "political resolve" - and still higher prices.

The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it's bright side - for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.

Stiglitz notes that the IMF and World Bank are not heartless adherents to market economics. At the same time the IMF stopped Indonesia 'subsidizing' food purchases, "when the banks need a bail-out, intervention (in the market) is welcome." The IMF scrounged up tens of billions of dollars to save Indonesia's financiers and, by extension, the US and European banks from which they had borrowed.

A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers in this system but one clear winner: the Western banks and US Treasury, making the big bucks off this crazy new international capital churn. Stiglitz told me about his unhappy meeting, early in his World Bank tenure, with Ethopia's new president in the nation's first democratic election. The World Bank and IMF had ordered Ethiopia to divert aid money to its reserve account at the US Treasury, which pays a pitiful 4% return, while the nation borrowed US dollars at 12% to feed its population. The new president begged Stiglitz to let him use the aid money to rebuild the nation. But no, the loot went straight off to the US Treasury's vault in Washington.

Now we arrive at Step Four of what the IMF and World Bank call their "poverty reduction strategy": Free Trade. This is free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank, Stiglitz the insider likens free trade WTO-style to the Opium Wars. "That too was about opening markets," he said. As in the 19th century, Europeans and Americans today are kicking down the barriers to sales in Asia, Latin American and Africa, while barricading our own markets against Third World agriculture.

In the Opium Wars, the West used military blockades to force open markets for their unbalanced trade. Today, the World Bank can order a financial blockade just as effective - and sometimes just as deadly.

Stiglitz is particularly emotional over the WTO's intellectual property rights treaty (it goes by the acronym TRIPS, more on that in the next chapters). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has "condemned people to death" by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. "They don't care," said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, "if people live or die."

By the way, don't be confused by the mix in this discussion of the IMF, World Bank and WTO. They are interchangeable masks of a single governance system. They have locked themselves together by what are unpleasantly called, "triggers." Taking a World Bank loan for a school 'triggers' a requirement to accept every 'conditionality' - they average 111 per nation - laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official WTO rules.

Stiglitz greatest concern is that World Bank plans, devised in secrecy and driven by an absolutist ideology, are never open for discourse or dissent. Despite the West's push for elections throughout the developing world, the so-called Poverty Reduction Programs "undermine democracy."

And they don't work. Black Africa's productivity under the guiding hand of IMF structural "assistance" has gone to hell in a handbag. Did any nation avoid this fate? Yes, said Stiglitz, identifying Botswana. Their trick? "They told the IMF to go packing."

So then I turned on Stiglitz. OK, Mr Smart-Guy Professor, how would you help developing nations? Stiglitz proposed radical land reform, an attack at the heart of "landlordism," on the usurious rents charged by the propertied oligarchies worldwide, typically 50% of a tenant's crops. So I had to ask the professor: as you were top economist at the World Bank, why didn't the Bank follow your advice?

"If you challenge [land ownership], that would be a change in the power of the elites. That's not high on their agenda." Apparently not.

Ultimately, what drove him to put his job on the line was the failure of the banks and US Treasury to change course when confronted with the crises - failures and suffering perpetrated by their four-step monetarist mambo. Every time their free market solutions failed, the IMF simply demanded more free market policies.

"It's a little like the Middle Ages," the insider told me, "When the patient died they would say, "well, he stopped the bloodletting too soon, he still had a little blood in him."

I took away from my talks with the professor that the solution to world poverty and crisis is simple: remove the bloodsuckers.

The new world orderers are doing to america now what they have been doing all along to to others. Destroying it.
 
Last edited:
Your head is inverted. It will hurt us if china dumps the dollars. Giving a totalitarian regime this much influence is a bad idea. And they can dump them. It's legal for them to do so. The point is that the value of our dollar is now dependant on the whims of totalitarian enemies. IS that a good position to be in?

I said it would hurt us, because it will damage our purchasing power in international trade. You want to do that through trade barriers. But a dollar of lower value would help with exporters, where as your trade barriers would destroy exports entirely.

With the war angle I am not so sure it would devalue the dollar that much, as demand for the dollar would be reduced but so would the supply of dollars. Nearly all of China's dollars would virtually vanish from the market.

Even without a war, there is no way China can dump all their dollars at once. It has nothing to do with legality. It has to do with market factors. You cannot move that many units at once. A signal that they intended to rid themselves of the dollar would devalue the dollars before they sold them and the value of their dollar holdings would greatly depreciate.

Globalization puts your supply lines in the hands of enemies and gives them undue influence in your economy.

It creates interdependence, yes. But you are failing to understand that it goes both ways. Our economy is influenced by our trading partners and their economy is influenced by us. Anything that affects them, affects us and vice-versa, making war between us very unattractive for both sides.

I don't see China as an enemy. They are not the ideal state, but they have remained relatively peaceful since the WW 2, where they were on our side. Meanwhile, we have engaged in war frequently. The only real military concerns with them have to do with their claims on lands that are arguably part of their sovereign state.

Our influence as a trading partner only strengthens our ability to influence them. We can threaten trade barriers, which while they would hurt us, probably hurt less than a war. I'd much rather give up some buying power than our soldiers in war.

And the slavery comes not just from them having dollars, but from the demands they make on us to keep propping up the dollar.

While we demand that they quit devaluing their currency. It's ridiculous, first you claim they will devalue the dollar and hurt us, then you claim they hurt us by keeping the dollar strong. I would rather they let legitimate market forces determine the true value of the dollar. But your desire for fortress America would make the dollars value meaningless, except in domestic markets, where the government and the banks could inflate the dollar with less negative effects on themselves.

The slavery also comes in the form of wage slavery, as jobs are shipped overeseas and government services are cut, we are all turned into wage slaves, and our native born industry and entepeneurialism are killed so foreign corporation can maximize profit. It will look like the slavery third world nations have been going through.

Yeah, wage slavery, taken straight from Marxist bullshit.

England is not a third world country and they have been running trade deficits for centuries. Like the US, their economic crises have been accompanied with a lowering of trade deficits.

You can't point to one single nation that has gone from first world to third world as you claim will happen to the US. Meanwhile, there are numerous examples of nations growing wealthier from trade, e.g., China and India are obvious examples but you could include the US and nearly all industrialized nations.
 
I said it would hurt us, because it will damage our purchasing power in international trade.
Should we therefore, be relying on totalitarian despots to prop up our purchasing power. I think not. And a person has zero purchasing power when their job is sent overseas in your acts of creative destruction..

The thing about creative destruction is that one's attitude change when one is the one being destroyed.
You want to do that through trade barriers. But a dollar of lower value would help with exporters, where as your trade barriers would destroy exports entirely.
We would see massive job growth just ramping up to produce for our own economy. The point is not exporting or importing, it;s getting americans back into the supply chain.
With the war angle I am not so sure it would devalue the dollar that much, as demand for the dollar would be reduced but so would the supply of dollars. Nearly all of China's dollars would virtually vanish from the market.
You're not sure if china dumping the dollar would devalue it? now you're just fucking moronic.
Even without a war, there is no way China can dump all their dollars at once. It has nothing to do with legality. It has to do with market factors. You cannot move that many units at once. A signal that they intended to rid themselves of the dollar would devalue the dollars before they sold them and the value of their dollar holdings would greatly depreciate.
that's fine too. The point is destroying the dollar.
It creates interdependence, yes. But you are failing to understand that it goes both ways. Our economy is influenced by our trading partners and their economy is influenced by us. Anything that affects them, affects us and vice-versa, making war between us very unattractive for both sides.
What you don';t understand is your bullshit recipe for world peace is just intertnationalist fascism and oppression, and the wars will continue, against the people.
I don't see China as an enemy. They are not the ideal state, but they have remained relatively peaceful since the WW 2, where they were on our side. Meanwhile, we have engaged in war frequently. The only real military concerns with them have to do with their claims on lands that are arguably part of their sovereign state.
Is that your formal fucked in the head military assessment?
Our influence as a trading partner only strengthens our ability to influence them. We can threaten trade barriers, which while they would hurt us, probably hurt less than a war. I'd much rather give up some buying power than our soldiers in war.
Influencing china is not the point. The point is your race to the bottom condition that you favor for laborers around the world which you say will guarantee world peace, but is actually just the elitists fascists of all nations selling their people into a fascist new world order.
While we demand that they quit devaluing their currency. It's ridiculous, first you claim they will devalue the dollar and hurt us, then you claim they hurt us by keeping the dollar strong. I would rather they let legitimate market forces determine the true value of the dollar. But your desire for fortress America would make the dollars value meaningless, except in domestic markets, where the government and the banks could inflate the dollar with less negative effects on themselves.
there are no legitimate market forces in the context of fiat currency backed with death. Domestic markets are all that matter. that's where people work.
Yeah, wage slavery, taken straight from Marxist bullshit.

England is not a third world country and they have been running trade deficits for centuries. Like the US, their economic crises have been accompanied with a lowering of trade deficits.

You can't point to one single nation that has gone from first world to third world as you claim will happen to the US. Meanwhile, there are numerous examples of nations growing wealthier from trade, e.g., China and India are obvious examples but you could include the US and nearly all industrialized nations.

Wage slavery relies on force, just like the old slavery. It's not marxism. It's just not using modern techniques to create de facto slavery where a nation is forced to accept dollars, to allow corporations to rape the land, to allow people to be starved into wage slavery conditions where one or two corporations form a monopsonistic slavish labor market.

They will just do the same thing to u.s. citizens too, in the new model of global governance.

The people will reject internationalist fascism. They already have. You're not aruging with me, you're arguing with a critical mass of humanity that has awakened to the scam of globalist fraud.
 
are we growing from trade right now stringfield? In the midst of massive jobs losses? and stocks in the shit?
 
Should we therefore, be relying on totalitarian despots to prop up our purchasing power. I think not. And a person has zero purchasing power when their job is sent overseas in your acts of creative destruction..

The thing about creative destruction is that one's attitude change when one is the one being destroyed.

Exactly, what about the buggy whip makers. They can go on unemployment until they transition to a new job, if necessary. We can't support their unproductive labor indefinitely.

We would see massive job growth just ramping up to produce for our own economy. The point is not exporting or importing, it;s getting americans back into the supply chain.

We would see job growth in the things we import, production of cheap shit. We would see job losses in the things we export, high dollar value services. Also, we would see a decline in capital inflows from external nations, decreasing our productive capacity.

We would prop up the areas where we are uncompetitive and relatively unproductive at the cost of those areas where we are competitive and highly productive.

Wages would decline sharply as jobs in high tech industries would be replaced with jobs in textile mills.

You're not sure if china dumping the dollar would devalue it? now you're just fucking moronic.

Obvious straw man. War would disable them from ridding themselves of dollars. They would be holding worthless paper.

that's fine too. The point is destroying the dollar.

Fine for who, dumbfuck? It would not be fine for China as it would destroy their economy. Such action would signal that they are not a safe trading partner to the rest of the world, while our reputation would remain intact. They would lose nearly all exports and imports. While other trading partners would soften the blow for us.

And the rest of your post is just more bullshit, where you fail to tell us what nation has gone from first to third world due to trade, while there are numerous examples of the reverse, including our own nation.

You are a fucking retard that does not know the first thing about economics and does nothing but contradict yourself while placing your ignorant bogeymen on both sides. Trade deficit or surplus, you are armed with an irrational tale of terror, while ignoring the balancing effects of the market.
 
Exactly, what about the buggy whip makers. They can go on unemployment until they transition to a new job, if necessary. We can't support their unproductive labor indefinitely.
Overseas wage slavery labor where people make two cents a day is not an innovation moving us towards the future, as was the automobile. It's the profitization of human slavery. Human slavery is not a legitimate comparative just like ivory exportation.
We would see job growth in the things we import, production of cheap shit. We would see job losses in the things we export, high dollar value services. Also, we would see a decline in capital inflows from external nations, decreasing our productive capacity.
We don't need foreign capital to be productive. That's a fascist myth. And who are you to choose america's comparative advanage. We can succeed in all endeavors, from making cheap shit to exporting high value service (imported indians do those anyway).
We would prop up the areas where we are uncompetitive and relatively unproductive at the cost of those areas where we are competitive and highly productive.
'prop up' means keeping americans employed. And we're only "uncompetitive" because our country is not a corporatist shithole run by corrupt dictators selling out their people to overseas interest. So it's not really like propping up horse and buggy makers. It's just rejecting slave labor in the international workforce.
Wages would decline sharply as jobs in high tech industries would be replaced with jobs in textile mills.
Jobs in high tech are already given to the H1b indentured servants. And a textile job is better than no job.
Obvious straw man. War would disable them from ridding themselves of dollars. They would be holding worthless paper.
But their goal was just to destroy the dollar. They are rich in hard assets they;ve been purchasing with our dollars.
Fine for who, dumbfuck? It would not be fine for China as it would destroy their economy. Such action would signal that they are not a safe trading partner to the rest of the world, while our reputation would remain intact. They would lose nearly all exports and imports. While other trading partners would soften the blow for us.
Fine for them. because they could just glide over the globe with their new military bought with our dollars. They don't need a strong dollar at this point. Think tactucally. not like a buffon.
And the rest of your post is just more bullshit, where you fail to tell us what nation has gone from first to third world due to trade, while there are numerous examples of the reverse, including our own nation.

You are a fucking retard that does not know the first thing about economics and does nothing but contradict yourself while placing your ignorant bogeymen on both sides. Trade deficit or surplus, you are armed with an irrational tale of terror, while ignoring the balancing effects of the market.

We may be the first to do so. Of course you can';t see it because all you see is "massive growth from trade" even though the reality is that we're fucked. You cannot stop lying even in the face of complete and utter wrongness.
 
are we growing from trade right now stringfield? In the midst of massive jobs losses? and stocks in the shit?

And a declining trade deficit, at least, during the period of losses. Growth will return with the trade deficits and capital surpluses. Or it's possible, though very unlikely, that it will find a new equilibrium, and we would benefit from greater exports.

Your socialist belief that the government may effectively ignore market forces through central planning, has been proven wrong over and over and over again. All it does is obscure the rot.
 
And a declining trade deficit, at least, during the period of losses. Growth will return with the trade deficits and capital surpluses. Or it's possible, though very unlikely, that it will find a new equilibrium, and we would benefit from greater exports.

Your socialist belief that the government may effectively ignore market forces through central planning, has been proven wrong over and over and over again. All it does is obscure the rot.

Citizens being employed is not rot.

And it's not socialism to not outsource all your jobs to slaves. It's just sensible long term planning for the well being of a majority of americans, not just managers paid to outsource americans.

Everyone does central planning. your central priority is just short term profit maximization and that's short sighted, and very disruptive and destructive. But you like destruction. YOu want to destroy the american economy, creatively.

Well fuck you too then.
 
Overseas wage slavery labor where people make two cents a day is not an innovation moving us towards the future, as was the automobile. It's the profitization of human slavery. Human slavery is not a legitimate comparative just like ivory exportation.

Wage slavery is bullshit. Slaves are not offered and do not accept wages. They are forced to work against their will. Your premise is faulty and so is your conclusion.

We don't need foreign capital to be productive. That's a fascist myth. And who are you to choose america's comparative advanage. We can succeed in all endeavors, from making cheap shit to exporting high value service (imported indians do those anyway).

It makes us more productive. We need capital.

How are we going to export anything, you fucking retard. Trade barriers are never one way. As usual for a socialist, you ignore the fact that policy influences behavior in ways that are not under the full control of the policymaker.

'prop up' means keeping americans employed. And we're only "uncompetitive" because our country is not a corporatist shithole run by corrupt dictators selling out their people to overseas interest. So it's not really like propping up horse and buggy makers. It's just rejecting slave labor in the international workforce.

Wage slavery = bullshit. Just like your internationalist nationalist.


Jobs in high tech are already given to the H1b indentured servants. And a textile job is better than no job.

Thanks to the barriers to immigration that you support, which create second class citizens. Let them come with the full bargaining power of any other laborer and they will seek the highest wage possible.

Also, you neglect the fact that those immigrants decrease our trade deficit. They provide exports. They then send money home, some of which will decrease our capital surplus and the rest will be used to finance importing our goods and services.

But I am sure you will tell us how that is bad too. Around every corner you see a scarecrow and proceed to piss yourself in response.

But their goal was just to destroy the dollar. They are rich in hard assets they;ve been purchasing with our dollars.

Again, they would be disabled from unloading their dollars in the event of war.

They would poorer in every way, as they would have been exporting their hard assets all these years in exchange for worthless pieces of paper.

Fine for them. because they could just glide over the globe with their new military bought with our dollars. They don't need a strong dollar at this point. Think tactucally. not like a buffon.

HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BUY WEAPONS WITH PAPER? Who are they going to buy them from?

You just don't fucking get it. The value of the dollars they hold is dependent on us. While the value of all the "cheap shit" we have bought from them is not dependent on them. They could could go to hell tomorrow and we would still have their "cheap shit" at it's full value, while they would be left holding worthless pieces of paper if we go down.

We may be the first to do so. Of course you can';t see it because all you see is "massive growth from trade" even though the reality is that we're fucked. You cannot stop lying even in the face of complete and utter wrongness.

In other words, all you have is your bullshit theories, which have been around for a long time and have NEVER proven true. There are many examples of trade increasing wealth and standards of living in developing nations. We don't need to create fictions as you do.
 
Citizens being employed is not rot.

It is when they are employed in unproductive fields. We could put everyone to work tomorrow digging holes and filling them back up and we would soon starve.

And it's not socialism to not outsource all your jobs to slaves. It's just sensible long term planning for the well being of a majority of americans, not just managers paid to outsource americans.

They are not slaves, not most of them anyway. We have slaves in this country largely due to your inhumane barriers to immigration.

Everyone does central planning. your central priority is just short term profit maximization and that's short sighted, and very disruptive and destructive. But you like destruction. YOu want to destroy the american economy, creatively.

Well fuck you too then.

The lack of central planning is not central planning. You're just pulling up more stupidity from your endless reservoir.

The market works by allowing a diversity of planning by the numerous individuals that act within it. It is not centrally planned. You just don't like the fact that you are a loser who plans poorly.
 
It is when they are employed in unproductive fields. We could put everyone to work tomorrow digging holes and filling them back up and we would soon starve.
A field is not rendered unproductive just because a slave working in IMF slave camp can do it cheaper. The upside of paying for free workers is you don't incentivzie slavery abroad.
They are not slaves, not most of them anyway. We have slaves in this country largely due to your inhumane barriers to immigration.
they are wage slaves, who had this "globalist" exploitation machine heaped on to them by the free trade nazis, unlike the illegal immirants who come willingly to the usa to drive down wages.
The lack of central planning is not central planning. You're just pulling up more stupidity from your endless reservoir.
I didn't say a lack of a central plan is central planning (it could be). I said we all centrally plan. You plan from a globalist perspective, meaning the only metric meaningful to you is the bottom line of multinational corporations. the lives of actual people matter little to you. In your globalist worldview, national governments only exist to reinforce the preferences of multinational corporations. You feel corporations deserve to glut the labor market and drive down the standard of living. Protectionism means protecting. Protecting is good.
The market works by allowing a diversity of planning by the numerous individuals that act within it. It is not centrally planned. You just don't like the fact that you are a loser who plans poorly.

It is centrally planned. At the federal reserve and bankers. WHo they lend to, and what criteria they put in place on the dl, to get the devil money.

it's obvious the economy is centrally planned when bankers destroy the economy with HOUSING MANIPULATION and then get a bailout for their trouble. Why are they too big to fail and must be paid millions but american workers are just buggy whips to be thrown away?
 
Last edited:
They are not slaves. Wage slaves, internationalist nationalist (fascist) and centrally planned free markets are all just examples of you bullshit propaganda.

And you don't give a shit about people in foreign nations, which is evidenced by your desire to keep them out while overlooking the real cases of slavery that it creates. I am not talking about immigrants that accept wages for labor, but actual slaves who are faced with the choice of labor or violent force.

True free trade is not centrally planned. Free trade allows individual actors to make their own choices. You just don't like the way it turns out. So you use the propaganda of the Third Reich and talk about conspiracies where evil Jews are pulling all the strings.

I never advocated bailing out the banks and you will not find any true free trader that did. Your answer to government interference into the market is more government interference into the market. Another one of your illogical oxymorons.
 
I am getting bored with kicking your ass, again. It was a little more interesting with GL, who is not on your level of stupid. But you are too easy to knock over. You are a real life straw man and you almost always chase off the people who might have a little better, though still flawed, argument.
 
They are not slaves. Wage slaves, internationalist nationalist (fascist) and centrally planned free markets are all just examples of you bullshit propaganda.

And you don't give a shit about people in foreign nations, which is evidenced by your desire to keep them out while overlooking the real cases of slavery that it creates. I am not talking about immigrants that accept wages for labor, but actual slaves who are faced with the choice of labor or violent force.

True free trade is not centrally planned. Free trade allows individual actors to make their own choices. You just don't like the way it turns out. So you use the propaganda of the Third Reich and talk about conspiracies where evil Jews are pulling all the strings.

I never advocated bailing out the banks and you will not find any true free trader that did. Your answer to government interference into the market is more government interference into the market. Another one of your illogical oxymorons.

Fascist is not a synonym for nationalist. You're just wrong on that one.

All markets are put into a political context first, no markets are truly free.

Nations centrally plan the effects of business on their population, if nothing else than to understand their own political realities. Politicians will find going forward that listening to the "populist rhetoric" will be their ace in the hole. Globalization only benefits the internationlist fascist eugenicists.
 
I am getting bored with kicking your ass, again. It was a little more interesting with GL, who is not on your level of stupid. But you are too easy to knock over. You are a real life straw man and you almost always chase off the people who might have a little better, though still flawed, argument.

I shredded your every argument. You just keep insisting globization is some pure thing despite all evidence to the contrary. Newsflash:outsourcing all your jobs gives you an unemployement problem. And no matter how cheap things get, $0 is not enough to make ends meet. Freaking live with reality, stupidass. If globalization is really just your way of sharing the wealth with the world, then just admit you're a socialist who hates the first world and be done with it. You can't convince us it's a good idea. Just make your move.
 
You have not shredded anything or offered one piece of evidence. Your every argument is based on phantom fears that you cannot even explain coherently. You have no proof of a dollar being repaid, no proof of a nation that went from first world to third world, you have nothing. I have billions of real world transactions that show the dollar can only be returned in a new trade that will likely take place at our profit and numerous nations who have risen out of miserable poverty due to trade.

All fascists are nationalists.
 
You have not shredded anything or offered one piece of evidence. Your every argument is based on phantom fears that you cannot even explain coherently. You have no proof of a dollar being repaid, no proof of a nation that went from first world to third world, you have nothing. I have billions of real world transactions that show the dollar can only be returned in a new trade that will likely take place at our profit and numerous nations who have risen out of miserable poverty due to trade.

All fascists are nationalists.

My fears are not phantom. jobs really are being sent overseas, and globalists really don't care. The middle class is worth sacrificing in an act of creative destruction for deranged globalists like you. You say so yourself.

No proof of a dollar being repaid? It's just a fact that our dollars are created out of debt, as a debt on taxpayers in the case of government spending, or coporate debt in the case of salaries and such. We are slaves to it in that all our wages and contracts are in dollars. And its just questionable policy to allow the value of your dollar to become so dependant on the whims of potentially hostile sovereign government. Your objection to that obvious observation is beyond me.

Some fascists are internationalists like you. You believe that governments should merely serve the agenda of multinational corporations.

And if you reread my post about how the IMF prostitutes a nation on the altar of greed, regardless of the impact on citizens, you can see how a government with no regard for the lives of citizens can be used as a mere corporate prison. that's what you want in the u.s.a. Please stop spreading your filth.
 
Wow. Rstringfield the globalist internationalist fascist stands completely covered in my steaming man goo.

Such epic pownage has never been seen, in this realm or others.
 
Back
Top