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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (232617)	5/13/2005 3:39:41 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574179

Globalization was supposed to be great for everyone. Nafta was supposed to be a boon. Increased productivity was supposed to be the ultimate tool - the sine qua non - for raising the standard of living for all. Instead, wealth and power in the United States has become ever more dangerously concentrated, leaving an entire generation of essentially powerless workers largely at the mercy of employers. I think you can see where this is going. Socialist protectionism, a union (pardon the pun) of two liberal ideas which to me is very anti-immigrant. Anti immigration has little to do with liberalism. Most liberals in CA were for immigration because it helps the poor from other countries have a better life. In addition, they along with the GOPers more than loved the cheap labor of the illegals. For me, it never made much sense. I was never inured to the hidden costs to the infrastructure. There is no free ride in this world. You pay for everything one way or the other. After a few years in CA, I thought that illegals were what was happening everywhere in all the states. When I got here, there was no one more surprised than I to see Anglos doing manual labor. Of course, that means that you can't do things as cheaply here as you can in CA. However, I contend that CA's is a false economy and if the current minutemen are successful and the borders are better guarded......which is a big 'if'.......then CA's economy is in for a world of hurt when it goes through the necessary withdrawal pains. Nonetheless, its strange how you tried to paint anti immigrationism as a liberal plank. In the past, that has always been the milieu of the GOP. One has to wonder what is happening to the Grand Ole Party these days. ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (232617)	5/13/2005 4:19:06 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574179

re: I think you can see where this is going. Socialist protectionism, a union (pardon the pun) of two liberal ideas which to me is very anti-immigrant. Liberals are traditionally pro-immigration (their voting base and all that, most conservatives would say), while the conservatives were anti-immigration. Frankly I never gave mush of a damn, but the article makes a point; that supply of low wage workers is larger than the demand, and the obvious result is that wages fall. As for "socialist protectionism" (never heard that term), I think protectionism cuts across a portion of both parties. Remember Clinton drove NAFTA, it was his baby. John