View Single Post
  #37   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
J i m J i m is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 79
Default Palin, you should have been in Chicago

Calif Bill wrote:
"NotNow" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:00:41 -0400, NotNow wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:32:34 -0400, NotNow wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:05:42 -0400, NotNow wrote:

More about China's labor laws:

"Foreign executives said that they are especially worried about new
labor regulations because their companies tend to comply with
existing
laws more rigorously than some of their Chinese competitors do. Their
competitive disadvantage could increase sharply, they said, if the
new
rules put fresh burdens on foreign companies that their local
counterparts ignore."

Thanks for the link.

Like I said "fair trade"
So you are FOR "fair trade", but against "free trade"?
I never said anything different. "Free trade" was your term
So you ARE against free trade?
I don't know, I have never seen free trade. As long as the government
puts burdens on corporations that are not
put on in other countries trade is not "free".
I understand why we do it but I am also not confused that it puts a
thumb on the scale.
The only question is if our attempts to put safety nets under workers
and saving the planet will end up bankrupting the country. If the dollar
collapses we will lose all of that protection along with
life as we know it. Socialism and environmentalism are rich man's
games.

Yeah, we shouldn't want a toxic free place for our kids to grow up, huh?
We should have just let the chemical factories in Niagara Falls spew
crap into the Love Canal where the cancer rates and birth deformities
were much higher than usual.


Nobody is saying we should kill our kids, the problem is the rules we
enforce on our companies and do not require the same for exports to the US.
And Love Canal is a very bad example to use. It was a toxic waste dump,
that had been sealed over, etc. The City Fathers had taken over the land
and against the advice of the chemical company, sold it to developers. Was
the politicians making money that cause the disaster in the end.


Aren't most man made disasters caused by politicians?