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 : Commodities - The Coming Bull Market -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (1109)	3/16/2002 6:01:17 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1643

>> Britains "height" of the Empire was about 1910 imho. << i disagree. i believe that britain thought they were at the height of empire just prior to world war one, but in actuality they had been in decline prior to that. the great war just proved to be the defining moment. perhaps 9/11 was america's defining moment. most americans believe we are currently at the height of our empire. we overrun some two-bit third world country in the desert that's been ravaged and demolished by war for decades and people talk about our unprecedented military supremacy. blah, blah, blah. well our great nation has been in decline ever since the mid sixties. it's unfortunate that everyone is focused on terrorists as if they pose the most serious threat to the security of our country. only we can be the architects of our own destruction. abraham lincoln said it best. "At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide"

To: maceng2 who wrote (1109)	3/16/2002 6:16:43 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1643

>> I not totally against trade barriers. If the USA steel tariff was immediately invested in upgrading the USA steel industry to make it really competitive world wide, then yes that would be good for everyone << i don't believe the failure of almost three dozen steel firms and 350,000 jobs lost has anything to do with a lack of efficiency on our part. i think the problem rests squarely on the shoulders of our trading partners who are dumping steel at below market prices. i believe it is about unfair competition, not a lack of efficiency. >> will also conspire to do bad things because individual nations do not want to form an effective UN and WTO << i should hope not. i don't want an effective UN. i find it interesting that just a sentence or two before that you said, "The bureaucrats take over, politics gets mixed in, and all conspire to make a royal mess of everything" the UN and WTO are just the bureaucracies you spoke of which are seeking to take over. politics will get mixed in, and they will make a mess of everything. the UN and WTO are not the answer, they are part of the problem. we have come to one of the best reasons to be against free trade as it is being pursued today. free trade leads to global governance. the united states government has grown oppressive enough as it is -- the last thing freedom loving people should desire is an even larger authority breathing down our necks.