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 (1361)	7/7/2002 10:21:47 PM
From: craig crawford	Respond to of 1643

like i said, it sounds like your mind is made up. if europeans cry foul over steel tariffs america is provoking a trade war and alienating our trading partners who will surely retaliate. if the europeans comment favorably on steel tariffs they must surely be bad for america. no matter what the outcome there is an argument that tariffs are just plain bad! Bush and World Government theamericancause.org Patrick J. Buchanan July 3 2002 When the U.N. Security Council rejected America's demand for immunity for U.S. soldiers in the Bosnian peace force from arrest and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, the United States vetoed an extension of the force. Either our troops get immunity, or our troops get out. Good for President Bush. Once again, when the demands of globalism clashed with the call of patriotism, he put America first. Because he, not Al Gore, is in the Oval Office, America has rejected both the ICC and the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Even on steel tariffs, where he put his free-trade ideology on the shelf to protect America's steel industry from foreign dumping, Bush exhibited a Reaganite patriotism. And the muted protests suggest that liberals recognize that the patriot card is still the ace of trumps in American politics. While these presidential decisions produced howls from abroad of "unilateralism" and "isolationism," they are signs of U.S. resolve in the struggle between God-and-country people and the globalists who await the messiah of World Government. And just as the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional tipped the hand of judicial activists, this U.N. attempt to force U.S. troops under the ICC is welcome. For now, we no longer see as through a glass darkly who the true enemies of American independence are. Their dream is to limit U.S. sovereignty and transfer control of U.S. wealth and power to a global elite that intends to rule the world in the interests not of nations, but of mankind. The institutions of that global regime are already up and operating. The Security Council is its Senate; the General Assembly its lower house. The Supreme Court is to consist of the World Trade Organization for trade, the ICC for war crimes and the World Court for disputes between nations. The foreign aid dispensers are the African, Asian and Latin American Development banks, and the World Bank. The IMF is its Federal Reserve -- and the model is the European Union. In the last decade, World Government made mammoth strides, with "Third Way" socialists giving up their national currencies in Europe, the creation of the WTO with the backing of Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole, GOP support of new bailout billions for the IMF and Clinton's signing of America on to the ICC. But globalist demands have now begun to clash with U.S. vital interests in ways even Republicans can understand. For the Senate to ratify Kyoto would mean a rollback of U.S. fossil fuel emissions to the level of 1990 -- i.e., a depression. And even Democrats realize that the ICC's prosecution of U.S. soldiers for war crimes means the end of the career of any politician who lets that happen. With immigration, sovereignty is becoming the most explosive issue in Europe, and it is propelling populist parties toward power. So fearful has the European Left become that it now seems hesitant to expand and deepen the EU into an all-powerful regime. Baroness Margaret Thatcher now concedes that Enoch Powell, whose career was destroyed by his "rivers of blood" speech decrying Third World immigration, was right to have opposed Britain's entry into the EU. She seeks a British withdrawal. The vehicle the globalists hope to ride is free trade. As the European Coal and Steel Community led to the European Economic Community to the European Community to the European Union today and Euroland tomorrow, they hope NAFTA will lead to a hemispheric free-trade zone, then a global zone with a single currency. Out of this will arise a regime that will slowly expand its power until national sovereignty is ancient history. The issue may be decided this decade, and we Americans will make the decision. If the price of global trade is a WTO that can impose its will, if the price of the Global Economy is another round of IMF bailouts, if the price of being a world citizen is the surrender of sovereignty and authority to the U.N., will Americans pay it? What exactly is the price of liberty? The globalists have a vision of the future, and they will pursue it instinctively and incessantly. The question is: Will patriots not only block this drive to world government, but will they to roll it back? Are they willing to recognize, as Baroness Thatcher has, that we are far down the road to the loss of national independence? In this struggle, it is an advantage for true conservatives and populists that George W. Bush is not only Andover, Yale, Skull & Bones, Harvard Business and Kennebunkport, he is also Midland-Odessa.

To: maceng2 who wrote (1361)	7/30/2002 12:29:04 AM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1643

Is protectionism America's future? worldnetdaily.com "For the first time in more than two decades, trade barriers are moving in the wrong direction. This isn't the 1930s ... but Pat Buchanan is one happy camper these days." So writes Steve Moore in a long and anguished column in the Washington Times titled, "A Comeback for Protectionism." A free-trade purist at Cato Institute, Moore is right to be alarmed. Americans, souring on what global free trade has done to them, are again turning to the philosophy that converted America from 13 rural colonies into the mightiest industrial power the world had ever seen – in a single century. The economic patriotism of Hamilton and all four of the presidents on Mount Rushmore is getting a rehearing for the best of reasons. Free-trade globalism has failed America. The numbers do not lie. After throwing open U.S. markets, we are now running a $500-billion-a-year merchandise trade deficit, largest in human history, equal to 5 percent of our $10 trillion gross domestic product. And what has a decade of these soaring trade deficits produced? First, a farm crisis. American farmers are the most efficient on earth, but they cannot produce food for less than in foreign lands where the environmental rules are lax, and the labor is plentiful and cheap. While America still runs a modest surplus in farm goods, it has been shrinking under free trade. That $200 billion farm bill Moore bewails is simply a bailout of U.S. farmers whom free traders sacrificed on the altar of their Moloch, the Global Economy. Second, a crisis in manufacturing. U.S. companies have been closing factories, shedding workers and building plants in Mexico and Asia. As goods produced by $2-an-hour foreign labor poured into the United States, they have killed off many remaining U.S. factories. America has been de-industrializing as rapidly as the British, before German submarines finally awakened the Brits to the truth that free trade is not free. Third, a growing U.S. dependency on foreign producers, not only for oil but the necessities of our national life and national security. Fourth, these mammoth trade deficits have poured hundreds of billions of dollars into overseas coffers, that foreigners have used to buy up U.S. assets. According to Bridgewater Associates, foreign-owned U.S. assets rose from 33 percent of U.S. GDP in 1990 to 78 percent today. Foreigners now own 22 percent of U.S. corporations, 24 percent of U.S. corporate bonds and 48 percent of our liquid Treasury market. But trade deficits of 5 percent of GDP cannot continue indefinitely. Eventually, a currency begins to fall, as has been happening to the dollar, and the price of the foreign goods on which America now depends rises. And as prices rise, Americans buy less from abroad. The problem? The world has become dependent on the American consumer. But, if Americans can no longer afford all those foreign goods, and they begin buying less, these nations will go into recession and be unable to service their foreign debts. In 1997-1998, the United States, with a bull market and a roaring economy, bailed out the bankrupt regimes of Asia and Latin America. By buying their exports, giving them IMF loans and running a huge trade deficit, we pulled them out of the ditch and onto their feet. But America's economy is no longer booming. With the dollar falling, we cannot afford to forever buy up foreign goods. And with the U.S. budget now in deficit, the willingness of Americans to bail out foreign bankrupts is going to disappear. We may just be headed for the terminal crisis of the Global Economy. Yet, the president is now being bashed for the most sensible decision he has taken to put America first: the imposition of tariffs on foreign steel being dumped into the United States, which had put 30 U.S. steel companies in bankruptcy. "You will start a trade war!" they screamed. What happened? The EU, its huge trade surplus with America at risk in any trans-Atlantic trade war, chickened out and backed down. The president prevailed. The EU will not impose retaliatory tariffs. Smart fellows. As for the U.S. steel mills Bush sought to protect, consider this item buried inside the free-trade Wall Street Journal. Under a headline, "Steelmakers Post Improved Results for 2nd Quarter," a reporter writes: "Buoyed by import tariffs, the country's two largest steelmakers reported vastly improved second-quarter results, as mills operate at nearly full capacity and prices rise. "The outlook for the rest of the year looks solid ..." Well done, Mr. President.