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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MacCoy who wrote (33935)	2/13/1999 5:57:00 AM
From: MacCoy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Neocon-PART B--Mercantilism--I surely extrapolated flesh onto the skeleton of the historical, accurate word. Still, merchantilism, an <artificial version of specialization>, rather than <allowing investment to pursue the maximum of economic efficiency>, the natural version of specialization, do have much in common. Both use low wages, poor education, political instability/repression as leverage to keep most investments and benefits in the advanced countries , especially in the business groups. Our direct aid to Central America [and other 3rd world] countries remains of the military and police kind. 2nd most aid comes government to government, typically public works. Aid as government insured corporate investment, is also of this magnitude. Last comes direct aid to the people, the Peace Corp. and Missionaries. Battle-destroyed W. Europe didn't much need the latter--aid to the people--and so could start with the Marshall Plan. The 3 direct aids, similar to Marshall, are worthless without in place the 'infrastructure of people' that the 'people aid' addresses. [This was also the "hearts and minds" policy neglected in V.] <Economic development has to start somewhere.> These 2 aids are the start. Without them, the 3 aids are a waste, and exploitation of poverty, ignorance, and powerlessness is natural and inevitable. The treatys' immediate payoff to American business, low labor, is only geographic efficiency. Such efficiency has negligible effect on long-term, overall value. Raising nations from backward to modern would allow competition in the arena of efficiency through technique, a true overall efficiency rise. The immediate loss to American labor, through peasant labor, only is compensated with true efficiency rises. Whether to swap gains, or to prevent loss, LBJ and Clinton sold out to their opponents. Perhaps, a good trade, perhaps not. One winner was short term, geographical efficiency. Kennedy showed the natural Democratic extension of foreign policy, a way to bring the 'Marshal Plan" to the 3rd world. What a different place ending the Cold War would have shown! I know nothing of South America, but how does China grow? Political stability with repression and freedom clearly defined. Secure national boundaries. Vast reduction of plague and famine--food and medicine as never before. Education unprecedented. All the infrastructure, micro and macro. [What 3rd and 4th worlds lack, the aid we don't do.] Now begins the market and freedom expansion. Wonder and Beware the Middle Kingdom. What would Cuba have accomplished had the US not been punitive?

To: MacCoy who wrote (33935)	2/14/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

1.)Truman fought the Korean War. How did the Vietnam War differ in the minds of the Johnson Administration? Why should we judge it as aberrant? 2.)The strength of the union movement is very low, and it no longer has the kind of clout it had in the Democratic Party. Both parties depend upon the support of business interests. There has been a great deal of anxiety about the European Union being used to create a protectionist wall against the United States, and therefore a sense of urgency to commit the constituent nations to a freer trade regimen. Further, the North American trade zone was seen as a way to bolster the faltering Mexican economy, and undercut the flow of illegals. In any event, there is no good reason for sinister attributions.