Hi Buffy,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffy
Now as I said, support for globalism is limited even among the rich, witness the Farm Bill, which is billed as supporting "family farmers" when 90% of farming in the US is done by gigantic conglomerates who really don't need the subsidies, but if it fattens their bottom line and they can scream down any opponents as "hating god-fearing, hard-working, flag-waving farmers" they'll do it. And don't you dare talk about putting limits on those subsidies to Big-Agra, because that would be "unfair" and "un-American."
|
But the majority of politicians support the minority view, and thats what really counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffy
The problem with this is that other countries see this, see hypocracy and retaliate, which works *against* globalism.
|
Right on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffy
Personally I see a big swing back to good ol' Populism, and while Mr. Gore still walks around like he's got a long pointy object in his posterior, he's still a latter day Upton Sinclair. And take a look at Lou Dobbs, CNN muckraker who's being pinned as an anti-immigrant conservative (his wife is Mexican!), when he's actually a raving-looney populist/internationalist.
|
And protectionism, the pendulum swings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffy
Just a small warning: Doomsayers are usually wrong. Assuming there are no countervailing forces is dangerous, and is kind of offensive when you think about it. Do you really want to assume that everyone is stupider than you and go out and yell it at the top of your lungs?  |
If the alternative 'view' of the countervailing force is to invade Iran then it isn't really an alternative or even countervailing for that matter.
Have your politicians used 'CORE and NON CORE' political promises yet?
