Skip to main content

View Diary: THE HILL: Dems Face Revolt Over Free Trade In Advance of Vote (266 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Oh and on Luddism (0+ / 0-)

    Sorry, I didn't mean that opposition to free trade was the same as being against technology.   I do think its similar to Luddism in that they are both ideologies that are doomed by the advances in the means of production.  Manufacturing by artisans was doomed in the face of machines and the assembly line, etc.   Similarly, organizing an economy around the nation state is doomed in the face of advances in transportation, information and communication.

    Inhofe is a wacko with a 46% approval rating: He's vulnerable.

    by tmendoza on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 10:06:53 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Wait a damn minute (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brentmack, Hens Teeth, uscitizenvoter

      organizing an economy around the nation state is doomed in the face of advances in transportation, information and communication.

      I'm not entirely disagreeing with you. The advantages, though, or using nation-states as intermediary vehicles for negotiating trade is that there are representatives calling the shots who are responsive to the needs of people. You have different regional interests which should be protected. I like to protect my local wildlife more than some guy in Peru wants to protect my wildlife, and vice versa. You can insert 'labor protections' for 'wildlife' or 'consumer safety' or whatever. The fact is... people don't give a flying fuck about people they can't see. That's the upside to regionalism. Protectionism isn't a terrible thing in and of itself.

      This ballot is loaded, and I'm not afraid to use it.

      by BlueGenes on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 10:56:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'll grant you that concern (0+ / 0-)

        Its certainly a lot easier for me to care about pollution in a river in my town than pollution in a river in China.  This is true and I'll grant you that this is a drawback of trade, but I think you are missing what I'm saying.  I'm not saying that everything about trade is good.  I'm just saying that overall it increased economic growth, and more to the point, increased trade is inevitable.

        So we need to think of ways to deal with the problems associated with increased trade (including the one you hightlighted), but we railing agrainst free trade is beside the point.  Its here to stay.

        Inhofe is a wacko with a 46% approval rating: He's vulnerable.

        by tmendoza on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 11:42:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How big do you want to grow? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hens Teeth, uscitizenvoter, BlueGenes

          I'm just saying that overall it increased economic growth

          What is enough?

          When the last icecap has melted, when the last drop of oil is gone, when the last glass of potable water is gone, will you then concede that 'growth' should not be the holy grail of all human endeavor?

          <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

          by superscalar on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 12:01:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Oh - And On That Nation-State Thing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      uscitizenvoter, BlueGenes

      If you're really not hip on the idea of the nation-state, I don't know why you'd be wasting your time here - because I'll fight you to the death on that one.  I believe in the concept of being an American citizen, not whatever weak scheme you're peddling.

      And if you think China's going to "fall in line" with that load of crap anytime soon, I've got a couple of bridges that I'd like to sell you.

      Wake up and toughen up - your country's being fleeced!

      •  Ok (0+ / 0-)

        I wouldn't argue that we should get rid of the nation-state.  Far from it.  I would point out that economies are moving away from being organized around nation-states.  This isn't an argument, this is a fact of historical development (you can lament this, but you won't be able to do anything about it), and its essentially driven by technological change.

        Inhofe is a wacko with a 46% approval rating: He's vulnerable.

        by tmendoza on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 11:45:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Youre 'Inevitability' Meme is self refencial (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          uscitizenvoter

          and without a more substantial argument to back it up, is without merit. You have been touting this inevitablity without providing any data to back it up. No wonder you're on the Hillhill bandwagon.

          This ballot is loaded, and I'm not afraid to use it.

          by BlueGenes on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 01:58:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Read Ricardo's Theory Of Comparative Advantage (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      uscitizenvoter, BlueGenes

      I do think its similar to Luddism in that they are both ideologies that are doomed by the advances in the means of production.

      Especially the part where Ricardo contends that for the theory to hold, capital and the factors of production are immobile between countries.

      <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

      by superscalar on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 11:34:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site