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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (122297)	12/27/2003 11:04:43 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Be so kind as to point out where I made this claim. Quite frankly, I see that as a significant distortion. The issue isn't globalization, it's the economic policies that surround globalization. When the US subsidizes the cotton industry to the tune of $4B/year, that is an anti-globalization economic policy. Steel tariffs, lumber tariffs are anti-globalization policies. I will when you point out where I said that. I showed you my tables; you show me your tables. Or is this like you "innovation" claim? HEY! Why don't you establish your measure is better than mine.

To: jttmab who wrote (122297)	12/27/2003 11:53:28 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I showed you my tables; you show me your tables. Evasion again? Remember the Marshall Plan? All the aid given to rebuild Europe? You think Europe was giving aid to other countries then? And there was Japan too. And the US has continued foreign aid steadily since WW2. As I remember, Europe started foreign aid in ;60s on a small scale. Japan started later. You think they've caught and passed us? Particularly if you take inflation into account. Your favorite trick: Dream up a Ph. D. thesis and use it as a counterattack. You want the numbers? You dig them up.