During the late 19th century the United States became an industrial power,
its manufacturing capacity to become among the world s foremost. During the
late 20th century, the industry has been disappearing at an alarming rate.
Countless mill towns and even some big cities were ruined, a trend naming a
vast region: Rust Belt. Globalism caused this devastation. The British can
tell a similar story.
Like the communists once proclaimed that socialism was inevitable, the
free-trade fanatics insist that globalism is the only possible way. CEO
overpaid join the choir, moaning that American workers are too expensive.
Contrary to what the talking heads think it wasn t always like this. Let's
see what we can learn from history and explore a reasonable compromise.
How he rolled to the Renaissance
It is all about keeping this stuff circulating in your own country.
Commercial doctrine of mercantilism included the following characteristics:
High tariffs
colonies to trade with other nations ban
Monopolizing the market with basic ports (the public can buy goods through
the city)
The ban on the export of gold and silver, even for payments
Trade ban transported in foreign vessels
Subsidies on exports
The promotion of manufacturing by research or direct subsidies
Wage restraint
Optimizing the use of national resources
The restriction of domestic consumption by non-tariff barriers to trade
(such as regulations and quotas)
It wasn t an elaborate doctrine from the theory. This developed nations
doing what is in their economy's interest, and that later he mentioned
theorists. Basically this is trade protectionism and intractable business
practices to keep wealth circulating in their country rather than flowing
out of it. Also note that today the economic policies of the opposite
approach & # 8212; except, of course, to limit wages.
Finally, Adam Smith friendly ideas of free trade prevailed. Recently,
children whiz economic mercantilism give a pretty bad rap. Nations do
what's in their economic best interests? What? Oh hell no, we can t have it!
Mercantilism was criticized for having waged wars. Well, has anything
improved recently? Banksters love wars (both disasters worldwide prolonged
or spit-in-your-wars eye), and the military industrial complex. Individual
companies often benefit too.
globalist hubris
We need to stop sending jobs overseas. It's pretty simple: If you're
paying $ 12, $ 13, $ 14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your
factory south of the border, paying a dollar an hour for work, have no
health care, no environmental controls, no pollution control and no
pension, and you nt care about anything but making money, there will be a
giant sucking south & # 8221. & # 8212; Ross Perot
Item 5 above is of particular interest. It would be difficult to sell to
insist that all container ships are operated Americans. However, it is
rather exasperating the government began allowing Mexican trucks to
transport cargo within the US, to cut US truck drivers on their piece of
the action. To facilitate imports of NAFTA, the federal government spent
taxpayer money to build the Interstate 69 (quite a symbolic number).
more ambitious plans for highways SHAFTA & # 8221; haven t happened. This
will have included a toll road walled mega scale up to four football fields
wide, with its tributaries related to all corners of the United States,
carrying Chinese goods shipped from a Mexican port (cutting US port workers
too), with Mexican customs officials in Kansas City SmartPort & # 8221;.
Interestingly, The Nation magazine Lefty wrote an article beginning with
the way everything was a theory of crazy right wing conspiracy. Next, the
article reverse direction, describing how politicians worked on plans for
just about everything, until the citizens have raised holy hell. In fact,
the Liberals should be just as concerned & # 8212; they aren t supposed to
be all about protecting the people of plutocrats predators? Well, the
theory goes.
Otherwise, we haven t exchanged dollars for & # 8221 ameros; again.
However, ultra-rich globalists certainly the ambition to clear the US's
borders and creating a Union of North America & # 8220; possibly to include
Central and South America. In fact, that's exactly what Leon Trotsky also
wanted. Strange, that.
US pricing policies, past and present
It wasn t always so.
In 2010, customs duties (on average 1.3%) were 1.2% of US sales. Back in
1860, tariffs (average 15%) financed 94.9% of the federal budget. Fifteen
percent? How to punish! Imagine going to a big box store and pay $ 11.50
instead of $ 10.13 to $ 10 of foreign goods & # 8212; zOMG!
There are about a century, the federal government has become addicted to
the income tax, and s never been the same since. I'm not saying that we can
return to the standards of the 1860s and perhaps even abolish the income
tax. This could occur if the government left the fight against the pin in
your eyes wars paid their astronomical debt, the public weaned off the
welfare tit, and waste the government sets. What horror & # 8212; no hell,
we can t have it!
Free trade is ideal for owners of multinational companies, but not so good
for the job. To this free trade zealots often make fun, What you SAY
American workers can t & # 8221 competition ?; Well, of course we could, if
we brought sweatshops, starvation wages, no pollution control, working
12-hour days, goon squads, etc. This looks awesome! Another problem is that
when a huge trade imbalance persists, the wealth is sucked out of a country
and paid to another, at least until the conditions in the two areas meet in
the middle and the trade imbalance starts even because of this invisible
hand Mojo.
General managers niggling globalist swimming in the sauce, but how the
public can really benefit? Jobs in factories and call centers were Moving
abroad steadily for decades. goods slightly cheaper at Wally world isn t
much good for those who can t find work.
The economy was pozzed to varying degrees since 2001. Wall Street rebounded
(and won a little more) of after the banksters and Wall Street crashed the
economy in 2008. Unfortunately, things haven t completely recovered for the
real people, despite improvements in recent times a bit.
Following the disaster of 2008, multitudes of people who work previously
had to obtain public support, no matter how it was seizing. For example, in
2009 the number of disability claimants increased by about a quarter & #
8212; coincidence? Desperation was in the air when the leaders speak spoke
about the economic situation and # 8220; & # 8221 new normal;.
Today, the World Trade Organization is running the international trade
show, surely very grubby fingers in the pie globalist. The countries with
most favored nation status should have the same standards applied, if re
industrialized country like ours, or places where workers toil in
sweatshops horrible for a small fraction of our minimum wage. Well, to hell
with it!
A trade policy to protect jobs here and promote progress abroad
Penalize wages of hunger and exploitation could help the world's oppressed.
Here's a better suggestion:
Baseline 2% tariff, including not only manufactures, but & # 8221
relocated; services
2% higher for countries with a minimum wage of less than 60% of us, the
official exchange rate
Additional 2% more for countries with minimum wages below 30% of our
penalty of 2% for people without protection of the environment due
penalty of 2% for the regressive labor practices (organized labor
prohibited, dangerous factories, etc.)
5% penalty for severe operating (legally mandated child labor social
immobility, exorbitant predatory lending / debt bondage, slavery tolerance,
etc.)
Thus, according to this sliding scale decently managed the industrialized
countries are getting the rate of 2%, and the worst get the & # 8221
punish; 1860 rate of 15%. This would reduce the incentives to move
globalists jobs where they can pay the lowest number of peanuts. There
would be plenty of free trade among countries where wages and standards of
similar work. The goods will also still be obtained, but up 13 cents on the
dollar more.
Could it harm the Third World? In fact, it would provide incentives to
their leaders to stop treating their workers like dirt. (Compliance checks
are required, have enlightened laws on the books that are never applied
doesn t count.) A poorly managed country could hit a third off their rates
simply by eliminating abusive practices.
An additional advantage is that incentivizing livable wages and reduce
exploitation could improve conditions in the Third World. Now the indigent
masses fleeing by the millions in the first world countries. Some apply for
jobs with citizens, but others live in the welfare tit, cause problems, and
outbreed the local population. Indeed, as devastating as free trade
favoring the cheapest of the absolute labor market, immigration population
replacement is globalism s worst crime.
Read more: Global Elites Caught Plotting Islamic invasion of Europe
No comments:
Post a Comment