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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig crawford who wrote (132726)	10/9/2001 7:06:17 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164687

>>i don't think that's true. don't some laws preserve and protect sovereignty?<< it depends on your perspective. laws limit. limit what a person can do and personal sovereignty is reduced for everyone under that law. >>so you are now agreeing that the united states is ceding sovereignty to international bodies? because before i couldn't even get you to admit that we have surrendered sovereignty--now you are saying it's ok if we cede some sovereignty.<< craig, the answer is yes and no. everything isn't black and white. anytime this nation agrees to do anything it limits its sovereignty. from that angle, there NEVER has been a time that this nation was totally sovereign. in this sense, yes. in the sense that foreign governments are running our government, no. sure, they present us with choices - some tough ones, some we don't like. but we ultimately our government decides the outcome. in this sense, no. >>you think we should give up the sovereign right to use nuclear weapons to defend ourselves on whoever and whenever we choose?<< craig, i don't make decisions based on half the necessary information like you do. under certain circumstances it would make a lot of sense. under others, it wouldn't. sorry your simplistic view isn't accurate. >>i think i have been pretty clear. do not enter into global trade agreements that lead to the surrender of our national sovereignty. use our economic leadership to negotiate trade deals that put america first--not the transnational elites. do you realize that Ford & IBM have more employees outside the US than here at home? is it any surprise they don't have america's best interests in mind? is it any surprise companies like this lobby for trade deals to further enhance their bottom line? we need to retain our freedom of independence in the future to unilaterally negotiate trade deals. joining international trade agreements undermines that freedom to act unilaterally, and forces us to act multilaterally.<< there is no reason to believe this would've led to a different ge/hon outcome. wrt your expose on politicians looking out for the common person... all i can say is good luck. we have the best man made govt but it still has gaping holes. >>now you want to throw technicalities out the window and imply that i suggest we FORCE something upon people in violation of their freedom.<< not exactly. you complained about the ge/hon deal and the ONLY way to guarantee a different outcome (ie, solution to what you deem a problem) is to FORCE somebody to do something. you made it clear you had no solution to the ge/hon deal so it is a nonstarter at this point. btw, i agree with you that congress should take a more active leadership role defining what is legitimate trade from our stand point. no doubt they can improve a lot. i just don't agree that europeans have the keys to congress. sure, they have bargaining power - as they should. we have bargaining power - as we should. in the end, the big kid always wins in these cases. one would have to argue that american leaders actively desire to geive up control of the US, imho, for it be credible. why? we have the weapons. we are the big kid. we can rescind anything we want to and nobody can reasonably stop us. they can hurt us, but they can't stop us. realistically, life is about give and take. it isn't just take, take, take. that applies to everyone - including nations (ok, except the irs!).