7.28.2005

CAFTA: MORE DEMOCRATIC INSANITY

Last night our blessed Republican gov't passed CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement). The Democrats of course did the abjectly insane thing: they voted against it, and by a huge margin. Republicans believe in freedom, especially as it relates to trade, while Democrats believe in some combination of insanity, communism, and buying votes to get reelected.

Republicans know that if you could not trade you would have to make all the goods and services you consume by yourself. This would leave all of us totally impoverished because none of us, individually, have the skill nor the economies of scale with which to make the goods and services we individually consume. Each time you are freed to trade with one additional person anywhere on earth your standard of living rises because that additional person will undoubtedly have the skill, resources, and motivation to make something different than what you are able to make yourself, and he will probably be willing to trade it to you for what you make. If you are freed to trade continuously with every human being on earth, then everyone will specialize in what they can make best and cheapest. Free trade frees every human being on earth to make the one product that he can make better and cheaper than anyone else anywhere on earth. Without free trade you'd have to make everything yourself. You'd make very few things; you'd make them very badly, very expensively, and probably you'd die very soon. It seems very simple, but it is in fact beyond the intelligence and decency of Democrats.

Here's what a leading Democrat said in opposition to CAFTA:

"I don't see any benefits for workers, for sugar people," said Democratic Rep. Charlie Melancon, who said his family owed everything to 225 years of sugar production in his home state of Louisiana.

"We've given away textiles. We've given away steel. We've given away fruits and vegetables," Melancon said. "Now let's just go ahead and give away everything and be dependent on every other country for our food and our defense."

The Democrat, Melancon forgot his kindergarten economics. If each American were free to trade with Central America for sugar, instead of being forced to buy high priced American sugar, each American would be richer by the amount saved on sugar. The extra money that had been spent on sugar, could then be spent on other things to raise their standard of living. Yes, American sugar workers would lose their jobs but employment would be stimulated in others industries where the extra money was being spent. This is the exact nature of economic progress. There is no net loss in jobs.

We have had growing free trade, despite Democratic insanity, for 200 years. And, unemployment is now at 4.9%, a 30 year low; half what it is in France and Germany where they try to protect jobs with compassionate gov't regulation. American homeownership is at an all time peak, average home size is bigger than ever, $3000 TV sets are now common, there are now more cars than drivers, more expensive and wasteful cell phones than land line phones, and more computers (almost unknown 10 years ago) than TV's. The Republicans have blessed us as beyond the dreams of all humanity while the insanely compassionate Democrats are little more than a public enemy.

But, is there a lingering Communist connection? Sure, Melancon was merely trying to save jobs for his sugar constituency but when you put all the Democrats together, most of whom who had no constituency at risk through CAFTA, they still voted against it. Why on earth? They harbor an insane Soviet dream that if we'll just let them regulate the entire economy no one will ever have to lose their jobs, living standards and life expectancy will still rise somehow, and everyone will then vote for them. It is pure insanity, especially after Communism has failed in 5698 countries. But God bless the Democrats, they keep trying.

7 comments:

Ted said...

If you are an anonymous, vulgar, obscene, Democrat who can't comment on blog content why embarrass yourself and your Party by commenting here?

Anonymous said...

just a question...how in hell are the sugar workers supposed to live while they learn a new trade?

I ask that assuming you are against social security, since this is a main point of the republican agenda.

Ted said...

french student said... just a question...how in hell are the sugar workers supposed to live while they learn a new trade?
********same why all Americans have done since the 17th Century as their industries gave way to progress. Isn't thinking fun.

I ask that assuming you are against social security, since this is a main point of the republican agenda.
**********Republicans are against gov't stealing and wasting SS funds. If privatised SS funds could not be stolen and wasted and all Americans could retire with far more money.



11:03 PM

Anonymous said...

first, progress has become faster in the last two decades or so. Youcannt say the old ways, taken off the shelf, will apply.

second, you are dodging the question, again.

Ted said...

first, progress has become faster in the last two decades or so.
******perhaps but so what????

Youcannt say the old ways, taken off the shelf, will apply.
*******so???? you forgot to say what your point is???

second, you are dodging the question, again.
*********you forgot to say what the question is????

Anonymous said...

awwww...this is truly lovely shit.

ted said,"**********Republicans are against gov't stealing and wasting SS funds. If privatised SS funds could not be stolen and wasted and all Americans could retire with far more money."

To which the question might be, "what republicans is he referring to?"

obviously he can't be referring to any smaller government Jeffersonian republicans because there aren't any of those alive and in politics anymore. The current face of the republican party has an extreme Federalist agenda, with Cafta being only one example of. We could also look at the higway bill, the terri schiavo bills and other useless federalization of what should have been states rights. More Ron Paul for ted and less Shawn "Prof"hannity.

Ted said...

awwww...this is truly lovely shit.
*******why do Democrats need to be so obscene??

ted said,"**********Republicans are against gov't stealing and wasting SS funds. If privatized SS funds could not be stolen and wasted and all Americans could retire with far more money."

To which the question might be, "what republicans is he referring to?"
*******Republicans want to privatize SS so Gov't won't steal and waste the money.

Obviously he can't be referring to any smaller government Jeffersonian republicans because there aren't any of those alive and in politics anymore.
******Republicans wanted smaller proscription drug bill than Democrats. They want Fair Tax etc etc. True, Bush is very little help

The current face of the republican party has an extreme Federalist agenda, with Cafta being only one example of.
*******Republicnas have always supported free trade and capitalism while Democrats have not.

We could also look at the highway bill, the Terri schiavo bills and other useless federalization of what should have been states rights. More Ron Paul for Ted and less Shawn "Prof"hannity.
********Hannity is for small gov't too but is main job is to be a cheer leader for Republicans
so he has to swallow a lot to keep Democrats out of gov't as much as possible. Politics is not pure. It is an easy concept to grasp.