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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (236703)	3/12/2002 11:44:04 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

>> It is not enough to show that protectionism existed during America's rise << fair enough. i'll amend my statement. "in 50 years america just happened to bumble and stumble its way to become the largest most powerful industrial superpower on earth despite a period of heavy protectionism which every good utopian, fantasy-world, paper scribbling, dreamer economist knows is inefficient, causes inflation, and hurts consumers" is that better? >> The glaring difference between us and the rest of the world over these last 200 years << i was specifically talking about the 50 year time period from the end of the civil war right up until WWI. that is when we went from half of britain's industrial output to twice their output. of course our workers enjoyed 50% higher wages than britain during that span and the economy grew over 4% on average. there was no problem with inflation, in fact prices fell steadily during that period. >> has been that we've had MORE freedom, and MORE free trade here, than anywhere else << we didn't have more free trade you bozo. britain was the free trader back then. (they originally built their empire with protectionism) thanks to free trade by 1870 britain couldn't even feed itself. thanks to free trade britain lost not only its empire, but its standing in the world. we pursued a policy of protectionism and shortly after the turn of the century we were the global superpower that not only fed them, but sent arms and young men overseas to bail them out of their quagmire. if you're going to continue debating me you're going to have to learn some more history and you're going to need to start telling the truth. the british empire rose to prominence under protectionism. so did germany before and after the world wars. same for the united states, same for japan, korea, and now china. these are historical facts that are not disputable. now if you want to argue that they all rose to prominence despite protectionism so be it. but to say that our country became a superpower under free trade is factually incorrect. >> Improvements in China have resulted from the recent advent of MORE free trade than it has allowed itself for a long long time, if ever << i don't think there is much hope for you. you obviously misunderstand what is meant by free trade. you seem to have this strange notion that if you are a country and you engage in a lot of trade, that means you are a free trader. maybe this is why you are having such a hard time grasping these concepts. free trade doesn't mean exporting like what china does. yeah, china does a lot of trade with us. one way trade. that is not free trade. we buy their stuff and they don't buy much of ours. hello?? have you looked at the trade deficit with china recently? the largest of all our trading partners. $84 billion in 2001. we buy seven times as much from them as they buy from us. that is protectionism on china's part not free trade you dope. >> Certainly, it is foolhardy to suggest China has improved because of newly instituted protectionist policies! << it helps if you understand what it means to be protectionist. apparently you think protectionist means little trade with others. whoops!