GeoLane at PTD dot NET wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 22:07:39 -0700 (PDT), Millwright Ron
wrote:

labor is the cheapest. It comes about by lobbying for "free trade"
such as the NAFTA and CAFTA legislation.

Yay. Way to go Ron. Bring back the Smoot-Hawley tarriffs of the
1930s. We can repeat history. The financial leg of our economy is
already weakened by the mortgage mess. Lets impose punitive tariffs
and take out another leg.

RWL

The Asians impose punitive tariffs on our goods and it doesn't seem to
have
hurt them at all. In fact, they are kicking our asses. Maybe if we had
brains we'd copy them. We would say we're all for free trade but then
have
protectionist policies just like Japan and China. We're not smart
enough
to
do that though and will continue having our asses kicked. And we'll
complain
a lot.

Hawke

The fact is that most Asian countries import very little from the U.S.
But you are correct that there are high import duties in most asian
countries, with the exception of Singapore, where duties are so low
that it is effectively a duty free port.

The reason that they are "kicking our asses" is simply that they
manufacture goods at an attractive cost and thus "sell" more goods
then they need to "buy".

In Thailand for example, nearly all the imported goods are either raw
materials or luxury goods while they are the main manufacturer (world
wide) for Toyota and Isuzu pickups.

The real answer is that the U.S. has priced themselves out of the
world market.

Let me give you one simple example: I buy Zestril, a medicine for
hypertension, in Thailand, for the equivalent of US$ 12.90/30 tabs. I
saw it advertized on the Internet, for sale in the U.S. for $48.00/30
tabs. The same medicine, made by the same people, in the same factory.
Does that give you a hint why the U.S. is losing business?

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What you are seeing there is the drug companies taking advantage of
the American consumers with the blessing of George Bush.

Someone has to pay for his kickbacks.

TMT

----------

I'll answer your questions for you.

So, you are saying that the Democrat-majority Congress is refusing to
pass
any consumer protection bills in order to allow Bush to swing in the
wind.

No, because that's wrong. Simple majorities in Congress don't mean one has
control over which bills get passed and which ones don't. Unless a party has
a super majority where it can pass anything it likes even when the other
party opposes it, like the republicans had for 8 years, it has to reach
compromises with the opposition to pass anything. So the Democrats can't
simply pass any bill they want. They must have republican support.
Republicans don't support anything Pelosi wants to pass. That means the
Congress isn't refusing to pass any consumer protection bills. It means the
republican opposition is rufusing to let any Democratic bill to pass. So
it's your guys who are obstructing the passage of any bill. That means the
Democrats aren't doing anything, except trying to pass laws that benefit the
public.



Or are you suggesting that Bush, somehow, holds a magic spell over Pelosi
and her posse?

Not a magic spell but a veto and a big enough republican minority to prevent
her from accomplishing anything. With those in hand he has enough political
power to stop her from passing bills or forces her to compromise in ways she
doesn't want to do. So it's not magic it's a matter of having political
power. Republicans use that power on a daily basis to stop Democrats and to
stop anything that will help regular people. Like you.


Surely, you understand that the President alone cannot arbitrarily and
unilaterally pass laws.

We all know that, even you, I think. But the ability to stop laws from
passing is almost as good a power as being able to pass laws. He can veto
and Democratic legislation and with his party backing him up it sticks. But
not only can he veto he can pass signing statements saying what part of the
laws he will follow, and he can enact what amounts to law with executive
orders. He also can send the military anywhere he wants without
congressional approval for 90 days. All in all, that gives him beaucoup
power. But the power to pass laws by himself, no. But we all knew that so
why ask such a dumb question?

That's grade-school civics.

Which is why even you can understand it, but barely.

Hawke