MESSAGE
| DATE | 2017-01-20 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout-NYLXS] Word of the Year for 2016
|
>
> I'm a capitalist, and one who agrees with the basic economist consensus
> that lower tariff barriers and free[r] trade is in almost every case
> better on balance for all participating countries (though obviously not
> for every individual in every country), where by 'better' I mean in a
> material sense. Closing down trade opportunities makes all partners to
> that trade poorer.
Yeah this is the disagreement and not just between us. First, I'm a Jew
and not a Capitalist or Socialist or any other 'ist'. However,
Capitalism requires fair competition and markets, which are regulated
fairly and similarly.
It is not Capitalism to have trade agreements (which is not the same
thing as trade perse, BTW) with organizaitions/nation states/powers to
be use slave labor or strip the environment. it is JUST supporting
slavery and stripping the environment etc etc.
>
> Can this lead to exported pollution, labor exploitation, money to skeevy
> dictatorships? Certainly. It very likely will. However, the
> alernative is everyone being a lot poorer.
I'd rather be poor than face an empowered Chinase military finaced by US
trade that undercuts our labor markets.
> Also, some particulars of
> many trade agreements have stunk to high heaven, as you well know
> (starting with copyright, secret terms, secret negotiation, and going on
> from there).
>
> Point is, no, free[r] world trade doesn't get you the power to make
> distant countries treat their citizens well, or have democratic
> processes, or respect the environment -- but it does help raise the
> entire world out of grinding poverty and make everyone on average better
> off materially. And at least with trade relations with those countries,
> you have hopes of influencing labor laws, environmental regulation, and
> transparent government that you didn't have before.
There is no chance of this.
> You know what most
> of those Chinese workers would have gotten out of life without their
> soul-destroying factory jobs? Soul-destroying rural poverty. And you
> know the single biggest reason we have no influence inside North Korea?
> Because of no trade.
>
no... In fact, it is the opposite. We keep offering them relief and
food, and N Korean responds my shifting its money to its military,
nearly dollar for dollar.
North Korea will continue until it is destroyed in a military attack or
it is overthrown by the Chinese.
>
> > Of course, your well aware that the discssions about the use, upgrade,
> > and purpose of nuclear weapons does not induldge such idiotic rational.
>
> I assume you mean 'rationale'. I nowhere made any moral claim as a
> rationale for either trade agreements or military alliances. The
> rational grounds for trade agreemenys are economic. Those for military
> alliances are military.
>
> > The ICBMs and Nukes are going to need an upgrade, increased mobility,
> > and modern control and tracking, not to mention that tactical weapons
> > also need a large upgrade in order to counter the growing world wide
> > threat... not just from Russia.
>
> See, that's perfectly true, which is why we have existing arrangements
> already in place to do exactly that. However, that has nothing to do
> with what Trump said.
>
> On Dec. 22nd, the president-elect tweeted that the US 'must greatly
> strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the
> world comes to its senses regarding nukes'. Pretty much everyone
> familiar with nuclear policy rose as one to say 'WTF?' To clarify, he
> spoke the next day on television's Morning Joe interview program, and
> rather than walk that remark back, he doubled down, saying he is fine
> with the country taking part in an 'arms race' if it puts the U.S. in a
> stronger position against foreign adversaries.
That is the correct position, IMO. The existing arrangments do not
cover us from a growing multilateral threat. I do think that we will
need yet another demonstration of our nuclear dominance to make these
rogue countries understand what they face. I vote for North Korea,
although Teran is OK as well.
> He then elaborated in an
> off-camera comment to the TV host: 'Let it be an arms race.... We will
> outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.'
>
> So, he is trying to basically throw away fifty years of efforts at
> preventing nuclear escalation -- seemingly just pulling this terrible
> idea out of his toupee.
>
Correct....
He is not alone in that assesement. Even going back to the Regan
administration that has been a question if the Nuclear treaties are
helpful at all in reducing the risk of a full scale nuclear war. What
they do is freeze current military power at a static point in history.
If you are a declining military power, like Russia, and even China when
compared to NATO, you love these packs.
When a huge chunk NYC is vaporized in a nuclear attack, which is likely,
it won't be because of a nuclear arms race with the Russians. It will
be a small bomb smuggled in from Pakastan, Iran or North Korea. Maybe a
Hezbollah operation.
Will you cry for me?
> Earlier in the campaign, candidate Trump out of nowhere suddenly
> suggested that some countries including Japan, South Korea and Saudi
> Arabia, should be allowed and encouraged to develop nuclear weapons.
> http://time.com/4276960/trump-wants-to-free-the-nuclear-genie/
Japan yes. S Korea, maybe. SA.... that would be a mistake.
> But then, showing no sign of seeing any contradiction, he told the NY
> Times in an interview that 'Biggest problem, to me, in the world, is
> nuclear, and proliferation.' It was about this time I started
> suspecting that the man is already lapsing into dementia, thus the
> frequent erratic behavior, lack of focus, total absence of discipline,
> and occasionally very incoherent statements.
>
> During a separate, different Morning Joe appearance, candidate Trump
> last August denied utterly
> (http://time.com/4437089/donald-trump-nuclear-weapons-nukes/) a highly
> credible report that a foreign policy expert had visited to advise
> Trump, and Trump had asked three timed why we don't just use nuclear
> weapons, given that we have them. Host Joe Scarsborough didn't believe
> the denial, and really neither did essentially anyone else.
> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-nukes-msnbcs-joe-scarborough-reports.html
> http://www.politicususa.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-if-nuclear-weapons-them.html
> (In fairness, this was a story that Scarsborough heard after it escaped
> from the Trump campaign as rumor: He certainly was not party to that
> conversation. But he clearly felt he had reason to believe his source.)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hangout mailing list
> hangout-at-nylxs.com
> http://www.nylxs.com/
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com
Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013
_______________________________________________
hangout mailing list
hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://www.nylxs.com/
|
|
