|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Generally, they certainly favor open borders. But that doesn't mean
undefended borders and it doesn't mean not knowing who's coming in.
It just means they favor allowing peaceful, law-abiding people to move
around. Kind of like things as they are now. And not all Libertarians
agree 100% on everything. I, for one, agree with Patty-Patty Buch-Buch
on immigration at present: we need an immigration freeze (or atleast a
raising of the standards) for a while to allow the melting pot to do
it's job. But that's just me.
Not all Democrats agree on everyhting. Not all Republicans agree on
everything. Not all Libertarians agree on everything. You can join
the Libertarian party and not get a frontal lobotomy. Ask for it by
name.
Kent
The World's Smallest Political Quiz
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
Monday, September 23, 2002, 10:46:48 AM, you wrote:
> 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 laws need to be repealed or modified.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/
>>
>>
> 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 for Top $
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/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/
|