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

Michael L Torrie torriem at
Thu Jan 24 13:28:51 MST 2008

Bryan Sant wrote:
> Yes, but don't we have a weak dollar in the first place because of our
> trade imbalance?  Too much coming in (hey it's free!), not much going
> out.  Because companies are making product outside of America (because
> it is cheap) and then selling it here (because it is free).  They
> share none of the burden of supporting America, yet they get all of
> the benefits of selling within it.  It would be like you and I paying
> for the mall with our tax dollars and then let all of the vendors can
> come use the store fronts for free -- not help support the burden of
> paying for the construction and maintenance of the mall.

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.

It seems to me that part of our problem is we don't innovate on the
scale that we used to.  For example, if we think about the transistor,
piano, car, electricity etc.  All of these things are largely American
innovations.  Yet right now we think of Asia for almost all of these
things.  Yamaha pianos, cheap Chinese electronics, Korean cars.  We need
to get our butts in gear and offer products that are innovative and
something people in the world want or need.  Easy to say, hard to really
do, though.

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.

>> Protectionism destroys competition and stifles innovation, leading to
>> higher costs and ultimately inflation, all of which affect us here
>> domestically, not globally.
> I can see where you're going with this.  Without a broad base of
> competition, I can see unions applying the death grip to American
> companies and making us completely uncompetitive.  Businesses fail,
> and America's economy takes the dirt nap.

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)

> Yes, if a software product were sold for a profit here in America, I
> would expect a modest tariff against it.  Wait a minute!  Linux is not
> sold for a profit!  Ok, no tariff.  Tariffs aren't arbitrary.  They
> are based on the sale value of the product.

Does Linux have no value?  :)

> -Bryan
> /*
> PLUG:, #utah on
> Unsubscribe:
> Don't fear the penguin.
> */

Michael Torrie
Assistant CSR, System Administrator
Chemistry and Biochemistry Department
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602

More information about the PLUG mailing list