Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do realize that trade restrictions, which an 'America-only' approach would essentially be, are actually economically inefficient and result in less growth than would otherwise occur, right? Again, it really makes no sense that so many conservatives who like to preach about the greatness of the 'market' and about how the government needs to let the market operate unobstructed will go on and call for restrictions on trade...
Yup. For years it was "free market" and "global trade".
Well folks, you have it now so you better learn to live with it and adjust.
No more protectionism; this is a global man-eat-man world and the low cost bidder will usually always win out.
If we want to compete on a global scale then we better start changing our ways.
Yup. For years it was "free market" and "global trade".
Well folks, you have it now so you better learn to live with it and adjust.
No more protectionism; this is a global man-eat-man world and the low cost bidder will usually always win out.
If we want to compete on a global scale then we better start changing our ways.
Competition in the new globalized economy requires less protectionism, it requires a better educated and more flexible workforce. Instead of trying to stop outsourcing and trade we should be providing workers who lose jobs to such things better training. We need to invest in infrastructure, green technologies, high-value added technologies and much more R&D.
Not allowing foreign companies, such as the Chinese one we've been discussing, to operate in the US, to win government contracts, is not how we are going to compete globally. It only hurts us economically to ban such companies from taking contracts like this; it creates a net economic loss.
Um, what about holding out bids for U.S companies only? U.S. dollars for U.S. companies...now there's a concept.
Wouldn't that be a better idea in this economy?
I see nothing in that article that says there will be, or must include, a certain percentage of American workers.
If the U.S. doesn't have the expertise for this kind of work, then we're in much worse shape than anyone can imagine.
you wingnuts are seriously delusional.
this is called CAPITALISM
Contract goes to the low bidder. Sorry, maybe you should've voted for a socialist or communist if you wanted state control over construction contracts.
You seem to be so bent out of shape becasue it wasn't an american company. there's a word for that, too: FACISM!
A side effect of illegal immigration... illegal aliens will become employed by the chinese to build the ventilation system... they will always have the lowest bid when using illegal workers and probably cheap chinese made products from overseas...
You seem to be so bent out of shape becasue it wasn't an american company. there's a word for that, too: FACISM!
If you're going to claim something, there's two things you should keep in mind:
1. Spell the word correctly.
2. Use the right word.
Quote:
fascism
–noun
1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.
Now that you have the definition in front of you, would you care to explain exactly how awarding major infrastructure projects to US based companies fits that definition?
I don't know the details of this deal, and really, I don't care to. I'd like to see the profits go to an American company, but the actual construction jobs are almost certainly going to go to American workers, and right now, we need the jobs, so whatever..
What got me to reply in this thread is the above example of someone throwing the word "fascism" without having a clue what it means. It's a favorite word of the left, yet they almost always use it incorrectly.
I'm not an English teacher or anything, but geez, people, if you're going to add a word to your every day vocabulary, at least try to use it right!
This may be Capitalism but it is also sheer stupidity on a huge scale. This "low bidder" obviously did not include the economic multiplier of having the profits reinvested in the US as part of his bid. Or of paying his Chinese engineers one tenth of the US counterparts.
Capitalism may have religious significance to the Mammonites among us but investing your own money in your own house or business makes more sense than calling in a competitor to work in your shop. This is why we need countervailing tariffs to eliminate the wage and environmental cost of foreign products.
This should have been and US only open bid process. I suspect a huge amount of fraud will accompany this travesty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
