Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (8358)	9/6/2001 9:52:47 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

>>scary . . . . protectionist . . . . delinked from how economics works . . . . stopping international trade . . . . protectionist bandwagons . . . . big warning signal . . . . the biggest losers will be the 'protected' country<< "Economic man" is a construct, someone who acts purely selfishly without any altruism nor thought for future generations. In the real world, the cheapest pair of shoes may be made by slave labor. The cheapest rug may be made by little children who are stolen from their parents and forced to work in workshops by men who beat them and don't feed them and call them names. The cheapest cotton may come from a country that uses DDT. If we have laws in this country that prohibit slave labor, child labor, sweatshops, water pollution and air pollution, why should our manufacturers be penalized by allowing uninhibited importation from those who do those things? Why should our companies have to compete with companies whose governments subsidize their goods?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (8358)	9/6/2001 10:06:14 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 74559

LOL, I here you... I think a lot of scenario's could unfold however, only some of them include the continued 'golden years' we've been enjoying [increased profits for capital holders at the expense of labor and govt. as well as increased capital available from all over the freakin place]. <The USA economy is just part of the global economy. > I never understood why anyone thought an American guy/gal deserved to make a product any more than a Mexican guy/gal... [pollution and other factors equal] makes no sense to me. <It's not strange. But the scary part of her comments was the protectionist flavour delinked from how economics works and the effect of stopping international trade. Politicians will not be long climbing on protectionist bandwagons. > Unfortunately for the 'international corperation' concept there is a political structure here in the U.S. to deal with... if 2/3 of Americans are flipping burgers the government still has to provide them with retirement and other benefits out of someones pocket. If the "Rich" can't pay for it all then companies 'doing business' [ie. selling this the biggest market] here will... one way or another. I can imagine all sorts of interesting scenario's on the front page of all the financial publications at the time of the next bottom. Just as the sky seems to be the limit now, things will look terrible then... BTW, just heard about this... another [expected I'm sure] win for your QCOM? news.ft.com DAK