|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Kent-
What do the Libertarians believe about an open border policy?
chas
----- Original Message -----
From: Kent Rollins <kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
> Libertarians all believe strongly in the rule of law. They just disagree
> with the Republicrats and Demopublicans on which laws should exist and
which
> laws need to be repealed or modified. And not all Libertarians are
> Libertarians because they want to smoke pot. Some of us are Libertarians
> because we realize where this country is headed if the institutionalized
> ruling class isn't turned over.
>
> Kent
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Meyer" <chaze@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 6:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
>
>
> Norm-
>
> If you are referring to classical liberalism ala Von Mises; I
wholeheartedly
> agree. I also want
> to stand up and shout in agreement for your great comments; along with
those
> of Ira and Earl. Now; if we could just get the dope smoking Libertarians
to
> recognize the basis and substance for the rule of law.<g> I've gotta
agree
> though; I have been profoundly disappointed by Bush's
> domestic policy along with some of the people he has chosen to surround
> himself with.
>
> chas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Norman Winski <nwinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
>
>
> > Jim J,
> >
> > Speaking of free markets, did you happen to catch Milton Friedman on
> Louis
> > Ruykeyser? He told how the Bush administration likes to talk free
markets
> > but does the opposite. How about those steel and ag subsidies and
tariffs
> > being implemented by the Bush administration? So much for conservative
> vs.
> > liberal.
> > I propose we go back to the 19th century definition of liberal which
means
> > freedom ala Von Meis and the Austrian school of Economics. I am tired of
> > socialist wolves disguised as free market sheep. If you look at the
> current
> > crop in that light, there are no liberals, only conservative socialists
> > fighting to make the govt. bigger and rob your rights.
> > Bring on the Libertarians.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Norman
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jim Johnson" <jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "BobsKC" <bobskc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 11:53 PM
> > Subject: Re[2]: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
> >
> >
> > > Hello BobsKC,
> > >
> > > you can't hold teachers accountable--they're unionized AND they have
> > > tenure. what's that all about?
> > >
> > > about money--PAC money mainly. the largest contributors to Democrats
> > > are unions, teachers associations and trial lawyers.
> > >
> > > the liberal philosophy continues to eat away at our way of life. even
> > > last night on the WSJ editorial board roundtable--when asked about
> > > Welsh's retirements perks, not one of those presumably free market
> > > conservative writers observed that what he got was given to him
> > > freely. Even they seemed to be tacitly buying into the implication
> > > that somebody (government I assume) should get involved in this. the
> > > title of van Hayek's book is chilling--The Road to Serfdom.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > --
> > > Saturday, September 21, 2002, 10:29:59 PM, you wrote:
> > >
> > > B> Unions. I watched the UAW refuse to give back a dime to Cat when
> > things
> > > B> got tough in the early 80's even in the face of warnings they would
> > move
> > > B> their Iowa plants. Well, they moved them. To France! My company
> > provided
> > > B> two way radio and closed circuit tv services to those plants and it
> was
> > a
> > > B> tough loss for us.
> > >
> > > B> There was a time for labor unions. That time was 80 years ago.
Most
> > of
> > > B> the money they pull in goes to organized crime and they have caused
> > > B> manufacturing to depart wholesale. Besides, I am suspicious of
> anyone
> > who
> > > B> wants to work at a job where they tell you how much you can make.
> > >
> > > B> So, greed has driven out the manufacturing jobs. Our education
> system
> > has
> > > B> lowered the bar for the few until the majority are getting a second
> > rate
> > > B> education and can not compete in the world market place. Education
> is
> > not
> > > B> the same as corporate earnings. You can't just lower the
estimates.
> I
> > > B> worry a lot about our youth .. kids coming out of high school today
> are
> > > B> less informed that kids coming out of 8th grade 30 years ago. The
> > damn
> > > B> bar better get put back up where it belongs and teachers held
> > accountable
> > > B> and tested.
> > >
> > > B> Bob
> > >
> > >
> > > B> At 05:57 PM 9/21/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> > > >>Did the US have a choice in its conversion? It was convert or die.
> The
> > > >>manufacturing went elsewhere because they could do it just as good
and
> a
> > lot
> > > >>cheaper. The only other alternative we had was to become
isolationists
> > again
> > > >>and ban imports. Our agriculture is going the same way right now.
> > Garlic
> > > >>is coming in from China at 1/2 the price it can be produced for in
the
> > US.
> > > >>The same with oranges, grapefruit and other citrus from Australia
and
> > South
> > > >>America. Are the grain markets in the same shape? Brazil,
Australia,
> > and
> > > >>other countries are producing product for less. How long can a
> subsidy
> > > >>last? Where is our vaunted fishing fleet. Are there any American
> flag
> > > >>vessels left afloat, outside of the Navy and coast guard. Do we
> produce
> > > >>shoes or clothing any more? We still have a thriving wine industry.
> > > >>
> > > >>I have a question. Who does the service industry service? We have
> > banks
> > > >>that lend money to foreign countries that don't repay the loans. We
> > have
> > > >>computer companies that import all of the parts they assemble here.
> So
> > we
> > > >>did save those high paying assembly line jobs. The fast food
> > restaurants
> > > >>are expanding overseas instead of in the US so those high paying
> service
> > > >>jobs at Wendy's and McD aren't going to shrink the unemployment
rolls.
> > The
> > > >>banks can now lose money in insurance, brokerage and other non
banking
> > > >>endeavors. Even the federal government is sending our armaments for
> > > >>production overseas.
> > > >>
> > > >>Were is the talent coming from to operate the high tech companies?
> That
> > > >>talent is coming from oversees. We can't even produce an
intelligent
> > work
> > > >>force. There is one ever expanding area of the economy. Tattoo
> parlors
> > and
> > > >>body piercing salons are popping up all over. Now there is a real
> > future
> > > >>for your kids. Am I missing something here? Ira
> > > >>
> > > >>----- Original Message -----
> > > >>From: "Earl Adamy" <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:54 PM
> > > >>Subject: Re: [RT] Service vs Manufacturing economy
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> > Gary, do you have a URL for that article, sure would like to read
> the
> > > >>whole
> > > >> > thing?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have long believed that true economic strength is built upon a
> > strong
> > > >>and
> > > >> > resilient manufacturing base. I have also been saying for many
> years
> > that
> > > >> > the US would suffer deeply in the next recession/depression for
> > having
> > > >> > converted to a service based economy.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Earl
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> > From: "Gary Funck" <gary@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >> > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >> > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 3:23 PM
> > > >> > Subject: RE: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >> > > > From: Daniel Goncharoff [mailto:thegonch@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > > >> > > > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 9:37 AM
> > > >> > > > To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >> > > > Subject: Re: [RT] 10 year note near 40 year highs ?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I think there are two sides to this point. Isn't a
> service-based
> > > >>economy
> > > >> > > > more flexible than one based on large factories? It may mean
> that
> > > >> > > > changes come more easily, and that new industries can develop
> > using
> > > >>the
> > > >> > > > excess information-based labor from weaker sectors.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > In this respect, telecoms will be a good real-life example.
It
> > will be
> > > >> > > > interesting to see what happens to all the people getting
laid
> > off by
> > > >> > > > the telecoms firms that won't be growing for several years.
If
> > they
> > > >>end
> > > >> > > > up having no place to go, that would indicate your believe is
> > > >>validated.
> > > >> > > > If they find new jobs in a similar field, I think the
economic
> > hit
> > > >>will
> > > >> > > > not be very big at all.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In this week's Business Week, there's a rather disturbing
article
> > that
> > > >> > refutes
> > > >> > > the theory that a service based economy should be more
resilient.
> > > >>Excerpts
> > > >> > > below:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > SEPTEMBER 30, 2002
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > NEWS: ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The Educated Unemployed
> > > >> > > The jobless rate for managers and professionals is likely to
rise
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > [...]
> > > >> > > Here's why joblessness is likely to rise: Across the board,
> > companies
> > > >>are
> > > >> > > facing an unholy trio of low profits, weak demand, and falling
> > > >> > prices--with no
> > > >> > > relief in sight. Revenues for the companies in the Standard &
> > Poor's
> > > >> > 500-stock
> > > >> > > index are down 2% over the past year, adding to the pressure on
> > > >>businesses
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > cut costs by cutting workforces. At the same time, productivity
> is
> > > >>soaring
> > > >> > at a
> > > >> > > rapid clip--a 6% gain over last year at nonfinancial
> corporations.
> > > >>That's
> > > >> > > allowing businesses to meet flat demand with fewer workers.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Even more distressing, some of the sectors where the job market
> has
> > > >>stayed
> > > >> > > relatively strong--including health, education, finance, and
> > retailing,
> > > >> > which
> > > >> > > together make up about 40% of the total workforce--are showing
> > signs of
> > > >> > > cracking. And the already grim labor picture in the airline,
> > energy,
> > > >> > > technology, telecom, and media sectors--some 7% of the
> > workforce--keeps
> > > >> > > deteriorating.
> > > >> > > [...]
> > > >> > > This is the dark side of the productivity boom. During the
second
> > half
> > > >>of
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > 1990s, output per worker rose, but soaring demand and revenues,
> > driven
> > > >>in
> > > >> > part
> > > >> > > by the technology and telecom boom, helped boost hiring and
push
> > down
> > > >>the
> > > >> > > unemployment rate below 4%. Wages and bonuses soared, and it
> seemed
> > like
> > > >>a
> > > >> > > golden age for workers.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > But rising productivity without rising demand is a recipe for
> > > >>disappearing
> > > >> > > jobs. If companies can't raise prices, the only way they can
> boost
> > > >>profits
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > to cut workers--and higher productivity makes that possible.
> > > >> > > [...]
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > >> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > >>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > >> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > >>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > B> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > B> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > B> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sell a Home with Ease!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/SrPZMC/kTmEAA/ySSFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|