Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus
UnderseaLcpl, last i checked this is the United States, not F'ing China or India. You've used that part in the bold before, and what it seems to me your really saying is, "Your not living in huts, so STFU". What you are arguing for, IS a redesitribution of wealth, in and of itself. Your arguing that it is ok to redistribute American wealth, across the globe, because we aren't living in huts.
|
That's not what I'm saying at all, Deuce, sorry if I gave you that impression. I don't know if you read the rest of the post (can't blame you if you didn't) but what I'm arguing for is limitation of government because government is so counterproductive. It inadvertently ends up sedning our jobs overseas or destroying them entirely or making it so that nobody creates them in the first place.
I don't much care for the current world distribution of wealth, but I'm not out to fix it. Actually, if we adopted my consistent stance that we should restrict government and lower corporate and capital gains taxes to a fraction of what they are now, or better yet, to zero, we'd end up making a lot of the world poorer as firms (and especially financial firms) flocked to the US.
Quote:
|
In order to ensure that, and to preserve the American way of life, we need to look after our own people.. You know.. looking out for your own? Didn't they teach you that in the Marine Corp?
|
And that's precisely what I'm doing, as best I know how. Granted, my preferred method is not going to save the family farm or the old mill. In fact, a lot of jobs like that would be lost for lack of subsidies. However, there would be so many new and better jobs created that we come out out. Even the little guy wins because employers will be forced to pay more and provide training just to attract workers because there won't be enough to go around. The wealth generated by such a business environment would also provide jobs in other countries since we buy everything from everybody else. Everybody wins in the end.