Pres - 30 Economists Endorse Edwards PDF Print E-mail
Written by Stumo   
Wednesday, 02 January 2008

This is interesting.  30 economists endorse Edwards.  It's interesting to me because Edwards is the only top tier candidate of either party to oppose the Peru FTA.  And he's the most populist of the top tier. 

I don't a lot of the economists on the list, but I didn't think academia tended to endorse primary candidates.  Maybe I'm wrong.  They are promoted as the "nation's leading economists." 

[Most economists I see quoted in the business press are whores.  Or part of a leper colony of economic misfits.  Remember, you need no certification to be an economist, and you cannot be disbarred.  You can just pronounce, "I am an economist."]

Iowa votes tomorrow.  The Des Moines Register has Obama ahead, and predicts a record caucus turnout.  Other polls show Clinton just ahead.  Polling for caucuses is really hard, and Iowans are getting a dozen calls a night.

We'll know more tomorrow night.

 
Body of People PDF Print E-mail
Written by Richard R. Oswald   
Wednesday, 02 January 2008

Derived from the Latin word corpus, the word corporation means simply a body of people. But while the Bill of Rights guarantees equal rights for everybody, today’s corporate body may in many cases hold a greater influence over governmental day to day operation than any body with a single human soul could ever hope to.  

Read more...
 
Free association test PDF Print E-mail
Written by Stumo   
Wednesday, 02 January 2008

What word (trade) comes to mind (trade) when you look (trade) at these pictures.  Ignore the subliminal hints please.

 

 

 
Trade - What can you do? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Stumo   
Wednesday, 02 January 2008

The main point:  Get involved in partisan politics and attend candidate forums to push a new trade agenda, and demonstrate support for it during 2008. 

The Peru FTA passed by 77-18 in the Senate, and by 285-132 in the House.  A bad vote.  It was not close. 

The worst statistics: Republican House members voted "yes" on Peru by 176 to 16.  Only one Republican Senator voted no, Jon Kyl of Arizona.

The silver lining: Seven out of nine freshman Senators voted "no", while the majority of House Democrats voted no (109-116).  That House Democratic majority included many freshman members from the 2006 election.  Lesson - the new blood has been good on trade.

We are unlikely to convince enough existing Members of Congress to make a major change in direction.  Without more change in the makeup of Congress (better R's and better D's), we are more likely to only slow down the new agreements and new policy damage, but that is not good enough.  Fast Track expiration in June 2007 was very good, but only slows the acceleration.  It does not slow the absolute level of harm.

The majority of the country wants a new direction in trade.  This Old Trade vs. New Trade is a partisan divide in Washington, but not in America.  Republicans and Democrats are both on the same page on the farms and in the cities.  Unilateral disarmament in trade is killing American prosperity.

SOLUTION:  We need new blood in DC, both R's and D's.  Get involved in partisan politics... any party.  But fight for America rather than your party.  Find out candidate positions, something I will help do on this blog.  Attend candidate forums.  Ask them what they will do about the trade deficit, currency manipulation, VAT tariffs, outsourcing, trade agreements. This is the time the candidates are nervous about getting, or retaining, a job.  Votes matter more than money when the voters are organized.

We have to hold candidates accountable.  2008 is a major election year.  Presidential candidates are asking for your vote.  Each of the 435 House members is asking for your vote.  Thirty five senate seats are contested... 23 held by Republicans and 12 by Democrats.

Let them know the conditions for getting your vote. 

 
Bush Administration helping arm the Chinese PDF Print E-mail
Written by Stumo   
Tuesday, 01 January 2008

Trade trumps all.  We have to be strip searched at the airport, while the TSA personnel grab our toothpaste tubes over 3 ounces and toss them in the garbage.  AT&T helps the National Security Agency listen to our calls.  But some are more equal than others:

Six months ago, the Bush administration quietly eased some restrictions on the export of sensitive technologies to China. The new approach was intended to help American companies increase sales of high-tech equipment to China despite tight curbs on sharing technology that might have military applications. 

Oops.  The reporters got ahold of this.  I don't venture towards the profane much, but listen to this bull*!#%:

“We believe that the system we have set up ensures that we are protecting our national security consistent with our goal of promoting legitimate exports for civilian use,” [Mario Mancuso, Under Secretary of Commerce for industry and security] said in an interview. “We have adopted a consistent, broad-based approach to hedging against helping China’s military modernization.” 

This is really bad.  China is our geopolitical rival.  They have a big army with big rockets and big ships.  We cannot be arming them too. 

Boeing says "don't worry, be happy":

“Boeing is not involved in any defense activities in China,” said Douglas Kennett, a company spokesman. “All our activities in China are in compliance with U.S. export laws and regulations.”

This is getting to be a habit.  We're also helping the Chinese crack down on religious folks and reporters for the Olympics.  

Trade wins.  Multinationals get what they want.  We lose.  Even our Defense Department loses, because they have to spend billions to keep ahead when we transfer the technology to China.  Just dumb.

 

 

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next > End >>

Results 55 - 60 of 60