Ron Paul opposes linux - was Re: [OT] Isolationist vs. Non-Interventionist [was: Re: HB 139]

Jason Hall jayce at lug-nut.com
Thu Jan 24 14:23:09 MST 2008


On Jan 24, 2008 1:28 PM, Michael L Torrie <torriem at chem.byu.edu> wrote:

> Sure, but a weak dollar is actually good for exports (in theory) because
> it makes our goods cheaper on the global market.  Until recently the
> Canadian dollar was always lower than the US dollar.  Yet Canada's
> economy has been strong for the last 10 years or so and is remaining
> strong, despite the weakening US economy.  The reasons for this are
> fairly complex.  A very strong US dollar actually puts us at a huge
> disadvantage when trying to sell our goods, despite the fact that it
> makes for a stronger domestic economy.


Absolutely correct, with the recent dollar weakening, exports have risen,
except in places where we over-manage that ability


> It seems to me that part of our problem is we don't innovate on the
> scale that we used to.


Innovation is an issue, but I think a smaller part.  The problem with
innovation is groups are only willing to  do research now, if it's funded by
a government entity.  Very few companies  do research outside of there.
Either by grants, or by federal protection (pharmaceuticals) .  As for
grants, look at stem cell research.  There were a very large number of
companies interested in doing research, but would *not* actually do any
until it was paid from from government checks.  When they couldn't get it
Federally, they went to even more over-indebted places like California to
get the handouts.  This is an exact example of why the French economy has
stunk so bad for the last decades, that's how everything is (now was) done
there.

I think the bigger issue is manufacturing itself.  We just don't do that
much of it anymore.  If it was easy to manufacture, we shipped it off out of
the country years ago.  If it's a little harder, then we have heavy
unionized employees adding massive costs into the system, which doesn't
balance out.

Of course if we introduce tariffs on goods, then other countries are not
> going to be near as quick to buy our goods.  This is the problem.
>

And beyond that, we've entered into agreements binding us, and depending on
who is in power, and doing the tariff, we'd hear a rash of how 'illegal' it
is, and how we are 'lowering the image of America'..    Sound familar?  It's
all the political game.  Nobody can remove it without a base that can take a
massive hit.


> Well I wasn't thinking about the unions--they are slowly losing
> relevance anyway.  But yeah.  This is a distinct possibility (GM is a
> great example)


And yet they still wield power across most of America,   Politicians must
pander to the power of the unions, especially those that espouse socialistic
state benefits.

-- 
Jayce^



More information about the PLUG mailing list