A Usenet persona calling itself Michael Daly wrote:

On 12-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

If you twits would quit letting terrorists in, we might not have to.

None of the Sept 11 terrorists came from Canada. The claim that
Canada lets in terrorists is absurd.

Hardly. It's one of our major concerns. Your lefty-liberal "open border" and
"political refugee" policies are very scary, and it's been proven several
times that terrorists and other criminals have entered North America via
Canada. The 9-11 terrorists are hardly the only concerns here.


We may not have utterly unguarded borders with Canada or
Mexico, but not only CAN you travel freely from state to state in the US,
you have an absolute constitutional right to do so, regardless of what any
particular state may say.

You don't seem to know the difference between countries and states. Bizarre.

Well, let's see...the "countries" in the EU are now pretty much "states"
like those in the US, aren't they? You do know that an alternative term for
an independent nation is "state," don't you? Where do you think the EU got
the idea? From us.


Which is fine, except that socialized medicine has been proven to be a death
sentence for the seriously ill because underpaid, overworked doctors have no
reason to extend themselves and because health care is free, people with
minor complaints feel free to clog the system with petty complaints.

Total bull****, seen from my position as a person living in a country with
government provided health care.

Uh huh. Do you have heart disease? Diabetes? Cancer?



fund public transit.

So do we.

What Americans call public transit is a joke in the rest of the world.

It's a big country, and we like cars. Big deal.


When you give subsidies to companies to help them succeed, excel and become
larger, the immediate return is more jobs that the poor can take, thus
becoming productive and self-sufficient members of society rather than
leeches.

But the inevitable outcome is actually a transfer of wealth from the poor
to the rich.

True. So what? If the poor want to buy consumer products, why shouldn't the
producer of those products make a profit? That's why he produces the
products.


Corporate subsidies prop up ineffective and obsolete companies.

Sometimes. It's true that the programs have to be carefully assessed and
monitored, but the occasional abuse of the programs doesn't impeach the
overall benefits.

US steel
companies are a perfect example. They saw the competition as the offshore
companies and got government support.

Steel is a strategic resource. It's what caused Japan to go to war with us.

Instead of modernizing and competing,
the share holders got rich from the subsidies and the companies wallowed in
inefficiency.

Yup, many old-school steel mills did just that, then went out of business.
Some steel producers, however, adopted the efficiencies of automated
steel-making and excelled, becoming great companies.


Now it turns out that those American steel companies that
were not subsidized are the real threat to the subsidized ones.

Indeed. Capitalistic innovation triumphs.

BUt the
old companies still can't compete because they are more obsolete than
ever. Full analysis in The Economist (www.economist.com) 'coupla years ago.

Very true. And many of the old-line steel companies no longer exist because
the subsidies were not enough to compensate for the technical innovation of
companies like Nucor.

Still, the fact that subsidies could not overcome the burden of inefficient
technology (and bad management-- read "Good to Great by Jim Collins" for a
discussion of the steel mill issue.) does not mean that protectionist
subsidies are not necessary or useful. Fortunately, Nucor decided that by
adopting Japanese steel-mill technology, and then improving it (they
pioneered continuous thin slab casting) they could undercut imports because
of the costs of transportation.

What government should be doing is paying subsidies to US steel companies
for the purposes of upgrading their technology to the current Nucor model.
Once accomplished, the companies would be extremely competitive and the
subsidies could be eliminated, while building a necessary strategic resource
capacity.
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser