Free traders and housing bubble nuts

[Rt.66]

Are you referring to your statement:

“In the long run, we’re all better off buying the thing we want most at the best price, regardless of who produced it.”

The same statement I engaged at length, including this question which you failed to “engage”:

“What if that means high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services? Are we all better off?”

So you are gonna stand by that statement? To me it seems the only part of your brain involved in that statement is your self-serving side or is it the side that does not extrapolate to consequences?

I think I’ve thought it through to the end and you’ve only thought it through to the point that your immediate benefit is served.

If you have no answer to my responses don’t act like I’m not engaging you, just admit you don’t have a response. I “engaged” your doozy of a declaration and you choose to respond by saying I don’t engage? Doesn’t make sense. Nice attempt at diversion though.

[patientrenter]

All right, I’ll give it one more try.

Why does free trade beyond our own country’s borders lead to “high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services?”?

I have my own ideas, and I am sure you do too, but as background you should know that almost all modern economists think free trade increases wealth.

[patientrenter]

All right, I’ll give it one more try.

Why does free trade beyond our own country’s borders lead to “high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services?”?

I have my own ideas, and I am sure you do too, but as background you should know that almost all modern economists think free trade increases wealth.

[patientrenter]

All right, I’ll give it one more try.

Why does free trade beyond our own country’s borders lead to “high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services?”?

I have my own ideas, and I am sure you do too, but as background you should know that almost all modern economists think free trade increases wealth.

[patientrenter]

All right, I’ll give it one more try.

Why does free trade beyond our own country’s borders lead to “high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services?”?

I have my own ideas, and I am sure you do too, but as background you should know that almost all modern economists think free trade increases wealth.

[patientrenter]

All right, I’ll give it one more try.

Why does free trade beyond our own country’s borders lead to “high unemployment and mind numbing deficits? Less money for schools, hospitals, roads and social services?”?

I have my own ideas, and I am sure you do too, but as background you should know that almost all modern economists think free trade increases wealth.

[no_such_reality]

.

[no_such_reality]

.

[no_such_reality]

.

[no_such_reality]

.

[no_such_reality]

.

[Rt.66]

Because our brand of “free trade” has led to unfair trade.

That unfair trade has lead to very, very, very high unemployment and mind numbing deficits, or haven’t you heard?

Those deficits are so huge that just the interest payments on our deficits takes massive funding, funding that could have been used for the good things mentioned above.

For an example of the destruction wrought by people thinking things like:
“In the long run, we’re all better off buying the thing we want most at the best price, regardless of who produced it”
The Gov. spent $412 billion of our tax dollars last year just to service interest on our debt. Again, that’s just interest! California needs $20 odd billion to meet its budget. So, just 5% of what we paid in interest could have been used to keep CA from needing to make drastic cuts in the good stuff I mentioned.

Give us some recent examples of economist saying that free trade has increased our wealth. Sure economists say all sorts of things. Most argued against the presence of a housing bubble for years.

As of now, what I see is them admitting NAFTA was a huge negative blow to American workers. I also read every week more saying that the good jobs we’ve lost recently, especially in manufacturing, won’t be coming back.

[Rt.66]

Because our brand of “free trade” has led to unfair trade.

That unfair trade has lead to very, very, very high unemployment and mind numbing deficits, or haven’t you heard?

Those deficits are so huge that just the interest payments on our deficits takes massive funding, funding that could have been used for the good things mentioned above.

For an example of the destruction wrought by people thinking things like:
“In the long run, we’re all better off buying the thing we want most at the best price, regardless of who produced it”
The Gov. spent $412 billion of our tax dollars last year just to service interest on our debt. Again, that’s just interest! California needs $20 odd billion to meet its budget. So, just 5% of what we paid in interest could have been used to keep CA from needing to make drastic cuts in the good stuff I mentioned.

Give us some recent examples of economist saying that free trade has increased our wealth. Sure economists say all sorts of things. Most argued against the presence of a housing bubble for years.

As of now, what I see is them admitting NAFTA was a huge negative blow to American workers. I also read every week more saying that the good jobs we’ve lost recently, especially in manufacturing, won’t be coming back.

[Rt.66]

Because our brand of “free trade” has led to unfair trade.

That unfair trade has lead to very, very, very high unemployment and mind numbing deficits, or haven’t you heard?

Those deficits are so huge that just the interest payments on our deficits takes massive funding, funding that could have been used for the good things mentioned above.

For an example of the destruction wrought by people thinking things like:
“In the long run, we’re all better off buying the thing we want most at the best price, regardless of who produced it”
The Gov. spent $412 billion of our tax dollars last year just to service interest on our debt. Again, that’s just interest! California needs $20 odd billion to meet its budget. So, just 5% of what we paid in interest could have been used to keep CA from needing to make drastic cuts in the good stuff I mentioned.

Give us some recent examples of economist saying that free trade has increased our wealth. Sure economists say all sorts of things. Most argued against the presence of a housing bubble for years.

As of now, what I see is them admitting NAFTA was a huge negative blow to American workers. I also read every week more saying that the good jobs we’ve lost recently, especially in manufacturing, won’t be coming back.

[Rt.66]

Because our brand of “free trade” has led to unfair trade.

That unfair trade has lead to very, very, very high unemployment and mind numbing deficits, or haven’t you heard?

Those deficits are so huge that just the interest payments on our deficits takes massive funding, funding that could have been used for the good things mentioned above.

For an example of the destruction wrought by people thinking things like:
“In the long run, we’re all better off buying the thing we want most at the best price, regardless of who produced it”
The Gov. spent $412 billion of our tax dollars last year just to service interest on our debt. Again, that’s just interest! California needs $20 odd billion to meet its budget. So, just 5% of what we paid in interest could have been used to keep CA from needing to make drastic cuts in the good stuff I mentioned.

Give us some recent examples of economist saying that free trade has increased our wealth. Sure economists say all sorts of things. Most argued against the presence of a housing bubble for years.

As of now, what I see is them admitting NAFTA was a huge negative blow to American workers. I also read every week more saying that the good jobs we’ve lost recently, especially in manufacturing, won’t be coming back.

[Author]

Posts