Thursday, April 03, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Benedict Undermining Peace by Demanding Peace?
The Vatican has strongly opposed the Iraq War from the beginning and the article lists statements and subjects the Pontiff made to broadcast his disgust for the Iraq war. Or is he disgusted with the terrorist murderers?
The Associated Press article says, ...Benedict said Rahho's dedication to the Church and his death compelled him to "raise a strong and sorrowful cry" to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war that he said had destroyed civilian life... The quotations surrounds just a small part of this sentence, so I call into question the end of the thought after the quotations, "to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war..." Who said this? Because it is not in quotations, the Press seems to have taken the liberty to define what the Pontiff meant by his own words.
The Vatican strongly opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In its aftermath, Benedict has frequently criticized attacks against Iraqi Christians by Islamic extremists. Last year, he urged U.S. President George W. Bush to keep the safety of Iraqi Christians in mind.. The previous may lead a reader to believe another untruth. The first sentence highlights the Vatican's opposition to the "U.S. led invasion. The next sentence he finds Islamic extremists attacks on Christians to be horrible, and then ask Pres Bush to protect Christians against extremists. This paragraph suggests the US invasion caused extremists to start attacking Christians and now the US must clean up it's own mess and protect Christians?
Finally the Popes homily was a speech about looking at everything including the war in Iraq through the eyes of a child or like a child. Perhaps the Press again took another quote of the Popes out of context because such idealism is hardly a strategy for peace.
I understand the Pope's position may not allow him to appear in anyway to promote or agree with the taking of lives of anyone, good or evil. Here in again lies the problem. Ideally there are no extremists Ideally all these murderers of Christians, Jews, other Muslims and American Troops could be reasoned with and negotiated. However those willing to blow themselves and 20 innocents are well beyond negotiating. Does he believe after this speech by him or any other, the terrorists will suddently realize they are wrong, the Pope is right and immediately stop killing?
I am glad the Pope is the leader of a church and not a general. Perhaps his position only allows him to speak from a vacuum which is the Vatican. But outside those walls there are people who want to kill even him. Thank you United States for fighting a war in which everyone would have been a target of terrorism and victims. Thank you President Bush for not deciding what is popular and staying with principal. The only ideal President Bush is guilty of, is the one he feels all people are created equal, and is willing to put his Presidency in historical jeopardy for winning a war and winning peace through strength.
The Associated Press article says, ...Benedict said Rahho's dedication to the Church and his death compelled him to "raise a strong and sorrowful cry" to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war that he said had destroyed civilian life... The quotations surrounds just a small part of this sentence, so I call into question the end of the thought after the quotations, "to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war..." Who said this? Because it is not in quotations, the Press seems to have taken the liberty to define what the Pontiff meant by his own words.
The Vatican strongly opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In its aftermath, Benedict has frequently criticized attacks against Iraqi Christians by Islamic extremists. Last year, he urged U.S. President George W. Bush to keep the safety of Iraqi Christians in mind.. The previous may lead a reader to believe another untruth. The first sentence highlights the Vatican's opposition to the "U.S. led invasion. The next sentence he finds Islamic extremists attacks on Christians to be horrible, and then ask Pres Bush to protect Christians against extremists. This paragraph suggests the US invasion caused extremists to start attacking Christians and now the US must clean up it's own mess and protect Christians?
Finally the Popes homily was a speech about looking at everything including the war in Iraq through the eyes of a child or like a child. Perhaps the Press again took another quote of the Popes out of context because such idealism is hardly a strategy for peace.
I understand the Pope's position may not allow him to appear in anyway to promote or agree with the taking of lives of anyone, good or evil. Here in again lies the problem. Ideally there are no extremists Ideally all these murderers of Christians, Jews, other Muslims and American Troops could be reasoned with and negotiated. However those willing to blow themselves and 20 innocents are well beyond negotiating. Does he believe after this speech by him or any other, the terrorists will suddently realize they are wrong, the Pope is right and immediately stop killing?
I am glad the Pope is the leader of a church and not a general. Perhaps his position only allows him to speak from a vacuum which is the Vatican. But outside those walls there are people who want to kill even him. Thank you United States for fighting a war in which everyone would have been a target of terrorism and victims. Thank you President Bush for not deciding what is popular and staying with principal. The only ideal President Bush is guilty of, is the one he feels all people are created equal, and is willing to put his Presidency in historical jeopardy for winning a war and winning peace through strength.
Friday, October 05, 2007
Your Black World, Boyce Watkins wrote...
ed Juan Williams a “Happy Negro” on CNN – And why He and Bill O’Reilly Are Not Happy About it
By Dr. Boyce D. Watkins
A friend (Valencia Roner) called me one night to ask if I watch “The O’Reilly Factor”. I said “No, I don’t watch stupid, racist television programs.” She then informed me that I might want to watch this particular episode.
Why? Because I was the topic of conversation….for the entire show. I set the DVR and went to sleep. I woke up the next morning to watch what had been recorded. Valencia was right. They were showing images of my CNN appearances, and playing my comments repeatedly, like Sports Center Highlights. I’ve never seen so many guests asked to comment about someone else’s comments.
The kicker was watching Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly congratulate each other like brothers for winning the “smear campaign” placed upon them by CNN. I listened to O’Reilly tell the world that CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, Mediamatters.org and other news organizations were all corrupt, but not him. Williams even wrote a piece about me in Time Magazine. During the show, I honestly thought Williams was going to cry. This brought back memories, since I remember making a lot of conservatives cry in college. My mother said I shouldn’t make grown men cry, and I felt bad.
I was asked on CNN (and other shows) about Bill O’Reilly’s racist remarks about Sylvia’s, a black restaurant in Harlem. In his comments, O’Reilly said that he could not get over the fact that the people were civil and well-behaved. He commended black people for finally learning to “think for themselves” and was relieved that there was no one in the restaurant saying “mf-er I want more ice tea.” (Good thing no one was really thirsty!).
O’Reilly tried to argue that his comments were meant to compliment the black community. He said that they were meant to defy stereotypes. As humbly and naive as a school girl, he argued that he was only intending to shed light on how racial stereotypes are bad for our society. Suddenly, Bill O'Reilly was Martin Luther King Jr.
On CNN, I essentially explained that anyone who thought Bill O’Reilly was suddenly a reformed racist who’d seen the light has been getting high with Bobby and Whitney too long. I’ve been on this man’s show before, and he has consistently demeaned, degraded and devalued everything about black culture he could get his hands on. I also mentioned that I was unimpressed with Juan Williams’ agreement and defense of O’Reilly. Seeing Williams sitting there congratulating O’Reilly for his bigotry reminded me of the Negro in the white suit defending “massa” at all costs. His attitudes were consistent with his latest and most terrible book, which does nothing but blast black culture and black people, as if we are the sole causes of socioeconomic inequality.
Therefore, I could only use terms I felt appropriate. I defined Williams as “The Happy Negro”. On CNN, I compared O’Reilly’s use of Williams to Hugh Hefner hiring a stripper to tell him that he’s not a sexist. The “Happy Negro” was no longer happy when he heard what I had to say.
I am not sure how smart or dumb Williams is (I have 3 times more education than him, but I guess he is of at least average intelligence). I hope that he has enough sense to know that he is being used by a man who has consistently and reliably shown himself to be an enemy of black people.
I have, through my books “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about College” and “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” consistently attacked problems in the black community. I have spoken to millions of African-Americans about the value of getting an education and managing their money. I support the black family and even proposed to my future spouse in front of millions of people, in order to give black men the courage to express love for our beautiful black women. I wish I could tell you how many times I argued with CNN producers to cover the Jena 6 story long before it was popular to do so. So, everything that Juan Williams might say about advancing the community has been consistently on my radar screen.
But here is where we differ. I am very hard on the black community about improving our plight. But I am also man enough to challenge the white community for their role in creating racial inequality. Racism is a disease that lies within the fabric of nearly every American institution. So, any conversation about racial inequality that does not include White America’s flaws and roles in the process is ridiculous, misguided and counter productive.
If a young lady is sexually molested by her father and grows up to become a prostitute, any weak man can say “Miss, your life is in shambles because you’re choosing to be a whore.” This might even be an obvious point, but it will also continue to erode her self-esteem and ignore the critical half of the equation. It takes a stronger man to first challenge the young lady and then go inside the home and confront her father for what he has done to create the problem. There is no denying that her father should pay for his daughter’s counseling, apologize, get psychiatric help and face punishment for what he has done. He cannot expect that his family will be peaceful as long as he has not acknowledged his role in the creation of his family’s devastation. At that point, you also teach the daughter personal responsibility.
Why won’t many men do this? Because the daughter is an easy target, and her father might kick you in the ass. That is why many black conservatives won’t challenge white America to have personal responsibility for their role in racism, for this is biting the hand that feeds them (how long would Juan be on the Fox News payroll if he were to tell White America that their institutions and attitudes are a large cause of racial inequality? Contrary to O'Reilly's indication, I am not compensated by CNN or any other networks for what I say). It also feeds directly into white supremacy to say “The black community is in shambles because black people are making bad choices. The 400 years of oppression have nothing to do with the last 30 years of expression.” Hence, we have Bill O’Reilly getting his rear-end rubbed by Juan Williams, as they both agree that the little girl is nothing but a whore.
O’Reilly claimed that Rev. Jesse Jackson (another guest on the show) was appalled by what I said about Williams, but of course he could not validate his claims on camera. I got a call the very next morning from Jackson’s daughter Santita and received no indication of disapproval from the Jackson family. I am sure that if they had disagreed, they would have told me personally.
Williams, for some reason, thinks that he is contributing to the advancement of black people by teaming up with a proven racist who has KKK members and Neo-Nazis watching his show (you should see my hate mail). A man who has a problem with President Bush would not team up with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to go after Bush. No matter how valid his arguments might be, the fact is that such actions amount to TREASON and are ultimately destructive. Having a black face does not mean you care about the black race. Clarence Thomas taught us that.
Hence, at the end of the day, I still call Juan Williams the “Happy Negro”. I stand by my remarks and might even put it on a t-shirt. From the response I've gotten so far, I wouldn't be the only one wearing it.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” He does regular commentary in national media, including CNN, FOX, ESPN, and BET. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.
By Dr. Boyce D. Watkins
A friend (Valencia Roner) called me one night to ask if I watch “The O’Reilly Factor”. I said “No, I don’t watch stupid, racist television programs.” She then informed me that I might want to watch this particular episode.
Why? Because I was the topic of conversation….for the entire show. I set the DVR and went to sleep. I woke up the next morning to watch what had been recorded. Valencia was right. They were showing images of my CNN appearances, and playing my comments repeatedly, like Sports Center Highlights. I’ve never seen so many guests asked to comment about someone else’s comments.
The kicker was watching Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly congratulate each other like brothers for winning the “smear campaign” placed upon them by CNN. I listened to O’Reilly tell the world that CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, Mediamatters.org and other news organizations were all corrupt, but not him. Williams even wrote a piece about me in Time Magazine. During the show, I honestly thought Williams was going to cry. This brought back memories, since I remember making a lot of conservatives cry in college. My mother said I shouldn’t make grown men cry, and I felt bad.
I was asked on CNN (and other shows) about Bill O’Reilly’s racist remarks about Sylvia’s, a black restaurant in Harlem. In his comments, O’Reilly said that he could not get over the fact that the people were civil and well-behaved. He commended black people for finally learning to “think for themselves” and was relieved that there was no one in the restaurant saying “mf-er I want more ice tea.” (Good thing no one was really thirsty!).
O’Reilly tried to argue that his comments were meant to compliment the black community. He said that they were meant to defy stereotypes. As humbly and naive as a school girl, he argued that he was only intending to shed light on how racial stereotypes are bad for our society. Suddenly, Bill O'Reilly was Martin Luther King Jr.
On CNN, I essentially explained that anyone who thought Bill O’Reilly was suddenly a reformed racist who’d seen the light has been getting high with Bobby and Whitney too long. I’ve been on this man’s show before, and he has consistently demeaned, degraded and devalued everything about black culture he could get his hands on. I also mentioned that I was unimpressed with Juan Williams’ agreement and defense of O’Reilly. Seeing Williams sitting there congratulating O’Reilly for his bigotry reminded me of the Negro in the white suit defending “massa” at all costs. His attitudes were consistent with his latest and most terrible book, which does nothing but blast black culture and black people, as if we are the sole causes of socioeconomic inequality.
Therefore, I could only use terms I felt appropriate. I defined Williams as “The Happy Negro”. On CNN, I compared O’Reilly’s use of Williams to Hugh Hefner hiring a stripper to tell him that he’s not a sexist. The “Happy Negro” was no longer happy when he heard what I had to say.
I am not sure how smart or dumb Williams is (I have 3 times more education than him, but I guess he is of at least average intelligence). I hope that he has enough sense to know that he is being used by a man who has consistently and reliably shown himself to be an enemy of black people.
I have, through my books “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about College” and “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” consistently attacked problems in the black community. I have spoken to millions of African-Americans about the value of getting an education and managing their money. I support the black family and even proposed to my future spouse in front of millions of people, in order to give black men the courage to express love for our beautiful black women. I wish I could tell you how many times I argued with CNN producers to cover the Jena 6 story long before it was popular to do so. So, everything that Juan Williams might say about advancing the community has been consistently on my radar screen.
But here is where we differ. I am very hard on the black community about improving our plight. But I am also man enough to challenge the white community for their role in creating racial inequality. Racism is a disease that lies within the fabric of nearly every American institution. So, any conversation about racial inequality that does not include White America’s flaws and roles in the process is ridiculous, misguided and counter productive.
If a young lady is sexually molested by her father and grows up to become a prostitute, any weak man can say “Miss, your life is in shambles because you’re choosing to be a whore.” This might even be an obvious point, but it will also continue to erode her self-esteem and ignore the critical half of the equation. It takes a stronger man to first challenge the young lady and then go inside the home and confront her father for what he has done to create the problem. There is no denying that her father should pay for his daughter’s counseling, apologize, get psychiatric help and face punishment for what he has done. He cannot expect that his family will be peaceful as long as he has not acknowledged his role in the creation of his family’s devastation. At that point, you also teach the daughter personal responsibility.
Why won’t many men do this? Because the daughter is an easy target, and her father might kick you in the ass. That is why many black conservatives won’t challenge white America to have personal responsibility for their role in racism, for this is biting the hand that feeds them (how long would Juan be on the Fox News payroll if he were to tell White America that their institutions and attitudes are a large cause of racial inequality? Contrary to O'Reilly's indication, I am not compensated by CNN or any other networks for what I say). It also feeds directly into white supremacy to say “The black community is in shambles because black people are making bad choices. The 400 years of oppression have nothing to do with the last 30 years of expression.” Hence, we have Bill O’Reilly getting his rear-end rubbed by Juan Williams, as they both agree that the little girl is nothing but a whore.
O’Reilly claimed that Rev. Jesse Jackson (another guest on the show) was appalled by what I said about Williams, but of course he could not validate his claims on camera. I got a call the very next morning from Jackson’s daughter Santita and received no indication of disapproval from the Jackson family. I am sure that if they had disagreed, they would have told me personally.
Williams, for some reason, thinks that he is contributing to the advancement of black people by teaming up with a proven racist who has KKK members and Neo-Nazis watching his show (you should see my hate mail). A man who has a problem with President Bush would not team up with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to go after Bush. No matter how valid his arguments might be, the fact is that such actions amount to TREASON and are ultimately destructive. Having a black face does not mean you care about the black race. Clarence Thomas taught us that.
Hence, at the end of the day, I still call Juan Williams the “Happy Negro”. I stand by my remarks and might even put it on a t-shirt. From the response I've gotten so far, I wouldn't be the only one wearing it.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” He does regular commentary in national media, including CNN, FOX, ESPN, and BET. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.
Monday, September 03, 2007
US Most Productive in World
Can not remember when I last read a good news article from CNN about this country.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Country Music in Love With the Manifesto
"Oh, everybody's dreamin big
Oh, everybody's just gettin by
That's how it goes in everyday america
A little town with a great big life"
These are the chorus lyrics of the song by country music band Sugarland. It is hard not to like Sugarland, a beautiful lead singer, Jennifer Nettle's Atlanta twang, everything she sings sounds great.
Read the lyrics of another favorite country singer of mine, Phil Vasser:
"Fat cats just getting fatter
Lining their pockets
What does it matter?
All I want is an honest wage
A piece of ground where my kids are safe
80 bucks to fill my truck
Old man telling me times are tough
Sticking it to the middle class
Well, they can kiss my price of gas...
Gonna get the attention of the man on top
Make it louder, shake and rock
It might just come tumbling down
Spread all that wealth around..."
I saw Phil Vasser in concert in Virginia at George Mason University in 2000. He had only been performing in front of large audiences for a handful of months and you could see he was a little nervous, but it made him more likable. He is likeable as Bruce Springstein, especially to the average folks. I am not sure if he necessarily appeals to the blue collar type of audience as Springsteen, but no doubt to average people.
Do the lyrics above of Sugarland and Phil Vasser inspire Americans? How ab out people who start businesses or run companies? The people who start companies are the ones who employ the rest of us.
Emotional charges are what I see in these songs. There is little doubt many Americans hear these songs and then pound there fist on there chest and it probably raises their blood pressure. They feel they are being taken advantage of or cheated.
Shame on wealthy business owners and CEOs? Should the lucky few who risk everything be apologetic for their success? I have written before class envy is only jealousy. Now I add a second source. It comes from a few who feel wealth of a few should be artificially "spread around". These same people may feel Castro and Hugo Chavez are more than trendy leaders, but actually have a workable formula to create a prosperous and healthy country. They believe the government is the answer to everything. Ronald Reagan once said the government "is the problem."
I am no historian, yet I have read in plain English, even Stalin rolled back the hand of a heavily controlled economy in the 1930's. He watched as bread lines in the Soviet Union disappeared after allowing small farms and some businesses employing 20 or less to trade on an open market. It is hard to understand how he still defended policies keeping larger firms under a Communist schedule.
It is not over simplifying a subject to say if everyone looked out for their own best interests, the greater good would be served. Those who would take this philosophy and become too self-serving or destructive will eventually be weeded out of business or they will self-destruct. Anecdotal examples of corporate greed are not the norm.
The US, Hong Kong, South Korea are examples of free-markets working. Cuba and the Soviet Union are examples of the miserable failures of Communism. Were these two countries run how Marx and Engels invisioned? I don't know, but probably real close. I have heard many educated people say to me two paraphrased ideas, "Communism is great in theory," and "If Communism had just been altered a little it would have worked." Anyone who says this knows little about capitalism and have read less about Communism. Whatever credentials they do have, I will guess they cannot include economist or historian. Maybe just looney-website believer.
If you have a Communist success story to tell, I would like to hear from you.
While he is not a country music songwriter or singer, he appears to have some communist tendencies. Regarding the current sub-prime mortgage problem in the economy a very wealthy man has some choice words. Read the lyrics of Bill Gross of PIMCO bonds. "If we can bail out Chrysler, why can’t we support the American homeowner?" His desire is to have the Federal Government absorb the bad debt of 2 million homeowners. Marx could not have said this better himself. It is amazing a man who became wealthy in this country would suggest such intervention. He must have something to gain from such a policy.
Communism was the first step toward organizing the everyday person into a union of class envyists. Pitting Bourgeois against proletarians. The worker against the owner. The less motivated against the type A go-getters. Poor against wealthy. How pathetic. Everyone owes their job to a rich person. We should be thanking them.
Oh, everybody's just gettin by
That's how it goes in everyday america
A little town with a great big life"
These are the chorus lyrics of the song by country music band Sugarland. It is hard not to like Sugarland, a beautiful lead singer, Jennifer Nettle's Atlanta twang, everything she sings sounds great.
Read the lyrics of another favorite country singer of mine, Phil Vasser:
"Fat cats just getting fatter
Lining their pockets
What does it matter?
All I want is an honest wage
A piece of ground where my kids are safe
80 bucks to fill my truck
Old man telling me times are tough
Sticking it to the middle class
Well, they can kiss my price of gas...
Gonna get the attention of the man on top
Make it louder, shake and rock
It might just come tumbling down
Spread all that wealth around..."
I saw Phil Vasser in concert in Virginia at George Mason University in 2000. He had only been performing in front of large audiences for a handful of months and you could see he was a little nervous, but it made him more likable. He is likeable as Bruce Springstein, especially to the average folks. I am not sure if he necessarily appeals to the blue collar type of audience as Springsteen, but no doubt to average people.
Do the lyrics above of Sugarland and Phil Vasser inspire Americans? How ab out people who start businesses or run companies? The people who start companies are the ones who employ the rest of us.
Emotional charges are what I see in these songs. There is little doubt many Americans hear these songs and then pound there fist on there chest and it probably raises their blood pressure. They feel they are being taken advantage of or cheated.
Shame on wealthy business owners and CEOs? Should the lucky few who risk everything be apologetic for their success? I have written before class envy is only jealousy. Now I add a second source. It comes from a few who feel wealth of a few should be artificially "spread around". These same people may feel Castro and Hugo Chavez are more than trendy leaders, but actually have a workable formula to create a prosperous and healthy country. They believe the government is the answer to everything. Ronald Reagan once said the government "is the problem."
I am no historian, yet I have read in plain English, even Stalin rolled back the hand of a heavily controlled economy in the 1930's. He watched as bread lines in the Soviet Union disappeared after allowing small farms and some businesses employing 20 or less to trade on an open market. It is hard to understand how he still defended policies keeping larger firms under a Communist schedule.
It is not over simplifying a subject to say if everyone looked out for their own best interests, the greater good would be served. Those who would take this philosophy and become too self-serving or destructive will eventually be weeded out of business or they will self-destruct. Anecdotal examples of corporate greed are not the norm.
The US, Hong Kong, South Korea are examples of free-markets working. Cuba and the Soviet Union are examples of the miserable failures of Communism. Were these two countries run how Marx and Engels invisioned? I don't know, but probably real close. I have heard many educated people say to me two paraphrased ideas, "Communism is great in theory," and "If Communism had just been altered a little it would have worked." Anyone who says this knows little about capitalism and have read less about Communism. Whatever credentials they do have, I will guess they cannot include economist or historian. Maybe just looney-website believer.
If you have a Communist success story to tell, I would like to hear from you.
While he is not a country music songwriter or singer, he appears to have some communist tendencies. Regarding the current sub-prime mortgage problem in the economy a very wealthy man has some choice words. Read the lyrics of Bill Gross of PIMCO bonds. "If we can bail out Chrysler, why can’t we support the American homeowner?" His desire is to have the Federal Government absorb the bad debt of 2 million homeowners. Marx could not have said this better himself. It is amazing a man who became wealthy in this country would suggest such intervention. He must have something to gain from such a policy.
Communism was the first step toward organizing the everyday person into a union of class envyists. Pitting Bourgeois against proletarians. The worker against the owner. The less motivated against the type A go-getters. Poor against wealthy. How pathetic. Everyone owes their job to a rich person. We should be thanking them.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Ultimate Global Warming Challenge
The number of people publicly challenging and criticizing Al Gore's opinion on Global Warming is still increasing. Very little media coverage yet... Bret Baier from Fox News made mention of it. The ultimateblogalwarmingchallenge, a contest for $100,000 to the winner of who can prove global warming is caused by humans.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
President Bush' 9/11 Speeches
If you ever want to remember what it felt like just after September 11, 01. Read the following speeches by President Bush in the 30 days following 9/11. Courtesy of IndyStar.com, a newspaper from Indianapolis, IN.
Wind and War
Forewarning of change with weather’s arrival
Signal approach for lands wet revival
Potential for destruction in life and home
Allows us to anticipate while outcome unknown
A movement in mass from place of beginning
Battle with ground, wind often is winning
High pressure to low is a tempests desire
Latitude with land’s flow will conspire
Environment directs and shows change to wind
Or trees prostrate and the force will rescind
Outside force encourages a new path
Mountains will accelerate or shape winds wrath
One can anticipate the water will reach
Destruction of hill, down stream a new beach
From torrential rains and winds of destruction
The land will heal, new life under construction
Analagous to Weather and Wind, War can make misery
But if evil is punished innocent will reach victory
From origin is begun a march in direction
The end is the goal of evil’s suppression
Honest conclusions followed by an action
A tyrant’s grip would come under traction
Some facts retrospective were convaluded
What is best for a country self-interest included
Claims the war was poor presupposition
Low on the list were eventual peace, liberation
Ill-intentions accused of greed at the top
The tyrant a marked man we already planned to stop
Imperial war neither is honorable or righteous
Conquest will end when evil is not an axis
Each battle is one by dark army or white
With God’s invocation we may win this gun fight
But war fought by noble man with high power
Who have learned lessons of past failure of desire
Self-righteous it appears, believing God found favor
The moral compass we follow sheds first our anger
Victory can not be declared when terrorist is dead
Many family and child indoctrined with unclear head
The war is not only battlefield and street
Ideology can make minds deep poored concrete
We enter a nation where men had lowered knee
Their past oppression and treatment all could see
Thankful are people for years in the past
America’s mercy built on pity is vast
A doctrine we adopted promoting democracy
America is this ideal’s working foundry
The modern first, many inspired to plant seed
One hundred nations and counting of men freed
Men will die for the slaved and to no surprise
Liberation and freedom our safety relies
A war chest is filled because of a need
Soldiers will be shot, on foreign soil will bleed
Our fighting men die, another’s border protect
Sunni, Kurd, Shiite many Arabic in dialect
If we save these people from death by sword
A friend we may have and trust in our word
A country of their own, syncretist and sustaining
Our promotion of Sharansky, democracy attaining
Hope and faith is helping me to see
America does believe, “Let us die to make men free.*”
Signal approach for lands wet revival
Potential for destruction in life and home
Allows us to anticipate while outcome unknown
A movement in mass from place of beginning
Battle with ground, wind often is winning
High pressure to low is a tempests desire
Latitude with land’s flow will conspire
Environment directs and shows change to wind
Or trees prostrate and the force will rescind
Outside force encourages a new path
Mountains will accelerate or shape winds wrath
One can anticipate the water will reach
Destruction of hill, down stream a new beach
From torrential rains and winds of destruction
The land will heal, new life under construction
Analagous to Weather and Wind, War can make misery
But if evil is punished innocent will reach victory
From origin is begun a march in direction
The end is the goal of evil’s suppression
Honest conclusions followed by an action
A tyrant’s grip would come under traction
Some facts retrospective were convaluded
What is best for a country self-interest included
Claims the war was poor presupposition
Low on the list were eventual peace, liberation
Ill-intentions accused of greed at the top
The tyrant a marked man we already planned to stop
Imperial war neither is honorable or righteous
Conquest will end when evil is not an axis
Each battle is one by dark army or white
With God’s invocation we may win this gun fight
But war fought by noble man with high power
Who have learned lessons of past failure of desire
Self-righteous it appears, believing God found favor
The moral compass we follow sheds first our anger
Victory can not be declared when terrorist is dead
Many family and child indoctrined with unclear head
The war is not only battlefield and street
Ideology can make minds deep poored concrete
We enter a nation where men had lowered knee
Their past oppression and treatment all could see
Thankful are people for years in the past
America’s mercy built on pity is vast
A doctrine we adopted promoting democracy
America is this ideal’s working foundry
The modern first, many inspired to plant seed
One hundred nations and counting of men freed
Men will die for the slaved and to no surprise
Liberation and freedom our safety relies
A war chest is filled because of a need
Soldiers will be shot, on foreign soil will bleed
Our fighting men die, another’s border protect
Sunni, Kurd, Shiite many Arabic in dialect
If we save these people from death by sword
A friend we may have and trust in our word
A country of their own, syncretist and sustaining
Our promotion of Sharansky, democracy attaining
Hope and faith is helping me to see
America does believe, “Let us die to make men free.*”
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Anecdote of Canada's Health Care
Here is an article to follow up "Canada in Crisis". While this could be anecdotal and inaccurate, it may appear Canada has stifling tax rates. It is difficult to understand why Are you kidding me? defends this system?
Friday, August 03, 2007
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Canada in Crisis
Found another blogger who has a lot of credentials but economy-killing ideas, Are you kidding me? It appears he has a laundry list of credentials including two degrees, an executive at a company and he teaches a business class as an instructor at the Univ. of Windsor. With all this stock, it appears he has not cracked a book with respect to free markets in his lifetime. And I quote from his post of February 13, 2007, titled "Industry In Crisis: Part II"
"...government needs to become more involved in helping the manufacturing sector."
"Likewise, the Ontario Liberal government has done its part in promoting and investing in growth, and in my opinion, has done it well."
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
It has always seemed to me our neighbors to the North believe in a more socialized economy. Their taxes are high, medicine is government paid (duh, taxes), but they have been a good neighbor and our economies benefit tremendously from each other.
However the mutual benefits will decrease steadily if more well-educated, but wrongly educated folks such as this run the companies of the maple leaf.
What would Adam Smith or Milton Friedman say? "Read our books." And the students of our well-educated and well-placed blogger are learning rubbish.
What the Canadian economy needs is a little less government to save the manufacturing industry, the economy and the 1st world lifestyles of our friends to the North. They also need a lot less teachers who stopped learning when they left college.
"...government needs to become more involved in helping the manufacturing sector."
"Likewise, the Ontario Liberal government has done its part in promoting and investing in growth, and in my opinion, has done it well."
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
It has always seemed to me our neighbors to the North believe in a more socialized economy. Their taxes are high, medicine is government paid (duh, taxes), but they have been a good neighbor and our economies benefit tremendously from each other.
However the mutual benefits will decrease steadily if more well-educated, but wrongly educated folks such as this run the companies of the maple leaf.
What would Adam Smith or Milton Friedman say? "Read our books." And the students of our well-educated and well-placed blogger are learning rubbish.
What the Canadian economy needs is a little less government to save the manufacturing industry, the economy and the 1st world lifestyles of our friends to the North. They also need a lot less teachers who stopped learning when they left college.
Jon Voigt thinks like me.
Jon Voigt believes the the left is hurting our fight on terrorism. The left believes the republicans have created terroristm as it is today. How could we be any different in our opinion? Read the posting by Newsbusters.org.
Sunday, July 08, 2007
What Middle East Needs is Another Martin
When religious extremism is the enemy, war is not the only answer, however gaining “understanding” of our enemy misdirects intended results, and negotiating may resolve nothing.
A western nation desiring negotiations with terrorist organizations will find their efforts fruitless. Picture a western representative sitting across a table from a jihadist. One side of the table is a reasonable person who would rather see nations live side by side in peace. While, the jihadist would take any presented opportunity to reach across the table and cut the westerner's throat. The West desires life and liberty, the jihadist desires death and theocracy. There is no room for negotiating and I propose there is no more to be learned about terrorists. What we know is all we need to know. They see all of us as the devil's soldiers and want nothing less than to kill who than can kill and intimidate the rest.
My second cousin, Carl Reasner, was a soldier in the Nazi Army during World War II. He was captured by the Americans and shipped to a POW camp in Ohio for two years. While in the POW camp he learned English. He moved back to Germany after the war, living there until his death in 2004. His wife Eleanor still lives in their family’s 5th generation farm house in a small town near Hanover.
When my family visited Carl and Eleanor in 1994, Carl told us many soldiers in the Nazi Army were well aware they were on the wrong side of the war. They knew the Americans, French and English were not being aggressive, but defending themselves through offense. The German soldiers and civilians had also heard reports of the atrocities the Nazis inflicted upon the Jews. He admitted they probably did not know the extent of the Jewish deaths, however a picture of enough detail had been painted even amongst the citizenry . Carl and his comrades in the German unit allowed themselves to be captured by the Americans. He did not fire a single bullet against “enemy” troops.
This white flag waving, benefitted the allies, lessening the German forces by about two dozen competent soldiers. But I will argue this may have been two dozen missed opportunities. Ideological moderates in Germany were likely against Naziism and is what many of these soldiers were or had become. They may have represented the views of hundreds of thousands more soldiers in Germany and many millions of their countrymen. The same may have held true for Italian and Japanese soldiers. I believe it was likely true.
The Nazi party led in part by installation of fear among the Germans. Carl said “many” German soldiers were against the Nazi party. I believe this “many” was actually a “majority”. Germans who spoke of their dissent of the party were sometimes killed or imprisoned along with their families. The desire to disagree was prevalent while overwhelming fear quietted the most dissenters. It is well documented the Nazi party was expert at war time propaganda. It is not unrealistic to think many if not the majority of Germans could have believed Germany was going to win the war, even if they knew the party was lying to them about the Jews, Pols and Gypsies. The news of impending victory of the Fatherland would further quiet the population. Everyone desires being on the side of an eventual winner, so the “band wagon” grows. While it is still hard to choke down the immorality of soldiering for an evil empire, it makes the choice easier when the lives of your family are part of the equation.
No doubt there were German soldiers and civilians working to topple the Nazis from within. However it is apparent the masses of “reasonable” and “morally awake” Germans were unable or chose not to rise up in numbers to voice disagreement, a coupe or revolution. No one dared allow the zeitgeist to be heard.
There were similarly minded people in America prior to the 1960’s. Voices of change were getting louder, however it took a leader from the masses to pull up the moderate majority by the boot straps. Prior to Dr. Martin Luther King’s leading of civil rights there were reasonable and moral people no doubt. I believe they were the majority. However for so many years, like cousin Carl and the Germans of the mid-1940’s, civil rights minded people were either intimidated to speak or they did not have the one person needed.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease and hateful people are by nature louder and more activist than loving and accepting people. These hatefilled people grabbed media attention and may have gave the perception of the entire nation did not support civil rights. This may have been yet another factor in delaying civil rights until the 1960's. It was not until the civil rights leaders set the example for gaining the attention of the microphone and camera and preaching their piece did the movement gain popularity. Dr. King nor his fellow leaders would never have succeeded if it were not for the inspiration of the morally awake yet quiet majority of America.
Five hundred years ago another Dr. Martin Luther came from the masses and demanded change. In this case, the citizenry of peasants were uneducated and could not read scripture as it was not in their language. When Martin Luther translated the Bible into German it allowed common people to begin reading for themselves what the Roman Catholic Church of the day had been teaching. Possibly many people of the day, educated or not, did not believe salvation of your soul would come through good works and the purchasing of indulgences, but the masses were either not able to read the truth for themselves or maybe those who were literate were afraid of being labeled a heretic, maybe they just had no platform where to voice their disagreement. Luther became their voice.
The 16th Century Europe, WWII Germans and American Civil Rights history may each share a parallel within the modern war against terrorism. As the American military defends by going on the offense, this may be America's only choice. But it is possible, changing of hearts and minds or even just the raising of moderate voices must come from Muslims only. The only people who may be successful at confronting terrorism peacefully are the moderate-majority in muslims living quietly out of fear or intimidation.
The jihadist is willing to kill and be killed. Many Americans, soldiers and police officers are also willing to kill and be killed. Of the Muslim population, the moderate majority could save lives and fight this war by their voice alone. They could bring an end to the preaching of hate and indoctrination by making it the popular movement to argue against jihad.
This idea will not lead to overnight victory against terrorism. The extreme evil which is our foe, will take decades to erase. Both a fist and a voice are needed. Martin Luther's Reformation is still at work, Martin Luther King Jr's civil rights are still on the march. The next Martin will come. History shows it must be a Muslim.
It may require being patient for many new generations as the older generations of indoctrined extremists grow old and die. Their hate will hopefully be buried with their bodies.
A western nation desiring negotiations with terrorist organizations will find their efforts fruitless. Picture a western representative sitting across a table from a jihadist. One side of the table is a reasonable person who would rather see nations live side by side in peace. While, the jihadist would take any presented opportunity to reach across the table and cut the westerner's throat. The West desires life and liberty, the jihadist desires death and theocracy. There is no room for negotiating and I propose there is no more to be learned about terrorists. What we know is all we need to know. They see all of us as the devil's soldiers and want nothing less than to kill who than can kill and intimidate the rest.
My second cousin, Carl Reasner, was a soldier in the Nazi Army during World War II. He was captured by the Americans and shipped to a POW camp in Ohio for two years. While in the POW camp he learned English. He moved back to Germany after the war, living there until his death in 2004. His wife Eleanor still lives in their family’s 5th generation farm house in a small town near Hanover.
When my family visited Carl and Eleanor in 1994, Carl told us many soldiers in the Nazi Army were well aware they were on the wrong side of the war. They knew the Americans, French and English were not being aggressive, but defending themselves through offense. The German soldiers and civilians had also heard reports of the atrocities the Nazis inflicted upon the Jews. He admitted they probably did not know the extent of the Jewish deaths, however a picture of enough detail had been painted even amongst the citizenry . Carl and his comrades in the German unit allowed themselves to be captured by the Americans. He did not fire a single bullet against “enemy” troops.
This white flag waving, benefitted the allies, lessening the German forces by about two dozen competent soldiers. But I will argue this may have been two dozen missed opportunities. Ideological moderates in Germany were likely against Naziism and is what many of these soldiers were or had become. They may have represented the views of hundreds of thousands more soldiers in Germany and many millions of their countrymen. The same may have held true for Italian and Japanese soldiers. I believe it was likely true.
The Nazi party led in part by installation of fear among the Germans. Carl said “many” German soldiers were against the Nazi party. I believe this “many” was actually a “majority”. Germans who spoke of their dissent of the party were sometimes killed or imprisoned along with their families. The desire to disagree was prevalent while overwhelming fear quietted the most dissenters. It is well documented the Nazi party was expert at war time propaganda. It is not unrealistic to think many if not the majority of Germans could have believed Germany was going to win the war, even if they knew the party was lying to them about the Jews, Pols and Gypsies. The news of impending victory of the Fatherland would further quiet the population. Everyone desires being on the side of an eventual winner, so the “band wagon” grows. While it is still hard to choke down the immorality of soldiering for an evil empire, it makes the choice easier when the lives of your family are part of the equation.
No doubt there were German soldiers and civilians working to topple the Nazis from within. However it is apparent the masses of “reasonable” and “morally awake” Germans were unable or chose not to rise up in numbers to voice disagreement, a coupe or revolution. No one dared allow the zeitgeist to be heard.
There were similarly minded people in America prior to the 1960’s. Voices of change were getting louder, however it took a leader from the masses to pull up the moderate majority by the boot straps. Prior to Dr. Martin Luther King’s leading of civil rights there were reasonable and moral people no doubt. I believe they were the majority. However for so many years, like cousin Carl and the Germans of the mid-1940’s, civil rights minded people were either intimidated to speak or they did not have the one person needed.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease and hateful people are by nature louder and more activist than loving and accepting people. These hatefilled people grabbed media attention and may have gave the perception of the entire nation did not support civil rights. This may have been yet another factor in delaying civil rights until the 1960's. It was not until the civil rights leaders set the example for gaining the attention of the microphone and camera and preaching their piece did the movement gain popularity. Dr. King nor his fellow leaders would never have succeeded if it were not for the inspiration of the morally awake yet quiet majority of America.
Five hundred years ago another Dr. Martin Luther came from the masses and demanded change. In this case, the citizenry of peasants were uneducated and could not read scripture as it was not in their language. When Martin Luther translated the Bible into German it allowed common people to begin reading for themselves what the Roman Catholic Church of the day had been teaching. Possibly many people of the day, educated or not, did not believe salvation of your soul would come through good works and the purchasing of indulgences, but the masses were either not able to read the truth for themselves or maybe those who were literate were afraid of being labeled a heretic, maybe they just had no platform where to voice their disagreement. Luther became their voice.
The 16th Century Europe, WWII Germans and American Civil Rights history may each share a parallel within the modern war against terrorism. As the American military defends by going on the offense, this may be America's only choice. But it is possible, changing of hearts and minds or even just the raising of moderate voices must come from Muslims only. The only people who may be successful at confronting terrorism peacefully are the moderate-majority in muslims living quietly out of fear or intimidation.
The jihadist is willing to kill and be killed. Many Americans, soldiers and police officers are also willing to kill and be killed. Of the Muslim population, the moderate majority could save lives and fight this war by their voice alone. They could bring an end to the preaching of hate and indoctrination by making it the popular movement to argue against jihad.
This idea will not lead to overnight victory against terrorism. The extreme evil which is our foe, will take decades to erase. Both a fist and a voice are needed. Martin Luther's Reformation is still at work, Martin Luther King Jr's civil rights are still on the march. The next Martin will come. History shows it must be a Muslim.
It may require being patient for many new generations as the older generations of indoctrined extremists grow old and die. Their hate will hopefully be buried with their bodies.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
October 2, 2006 issue of of Time magazine contains an article written by Tim Padgett. As I mentioned in a previous post of Time, the picture of Hugo Chavez is one which is favorable to Chavez. It makes him appear strong and real for lack of better adjectives. See the capture below.
This article was written from of the attention garnered by Chavez when he called President Bush "the devil" during his speech to the United Nations General Assembly last week. The calm firestorm which came from the many Americans was one of disgust as Mr. Padgett informs Hugo Chavez in the interview. "He seemed genuinely surprised when I informed him that rebukes were pouring in from liberals in the US Congress over the way he insulted Bush on US soil," writes Padgett. "Bush has called me worse," Chavez said, with a shrug.. continues Padgett.
Chavez then refers to the names he accused Bush of using, "Tyrant, populist dictator, drug trafficker." I don't know whether Chavez are these are not. Regardless of these he has no inhabitions about socializing the economy. The government owns the oil, brings in all the revenue and distributes it somehow. Billions. Per the Time article it may be about $40 Billion this year. This figure has more than tripled in the last 10 years. All this wealth and Chavez has to show, medical clinics in the barrios, 7 Eleven canceling Citgo's contract and an economy which had promise when he took office and is now failing in true 3rd world standards.
This article was written from of the attention garnered by Chavez when he called President Bush "the devil" during his speech to the United Nations General Assembly last week. The calm firestorm which came from the many Americans was one of disgust as Mr. Padgett informs Hugo Chavez in the interview. "He seemed genuinely surprised when I informed him that rebukes were pouring in from liberals in the US Congress over the way he insulted Bush on US soil," writes Padgett. "Bush has called me worse," Chavez said, with a shrug.. continues Padgett.
Chavez then refers to the names he accused Bush of using, "Tyrant, populist dictator, drug trafficker." I don't know whether Chavez are these are not. Regardless of these he has no inhabitions about socializing the economy. The government owns the oil, brings in all the revenue and distributes it somehow. Billions. Per the Time article it may be about $40 Billion this year. This figure has more than tripled in the last 10 years. All this wealth and Chavez has to show, medical clinics in the barrios, 7 Eleven canceling Citgo's contract and an economy which had promise when he took office and is now failing in true 3rd world standards.
7 Eleven, Citgo and Chavez
After watching the speech at the UN General Assembly last week by Hugo Chavez, I was offended and angry. Then when I heard the news 7 Eleven would not be renewing it's contract with Citgo (Venezuelan government owned oil company) it made me proud enough to writ the following to 7 Eleven customer relations;
"I watched the speech at the UN General Assembly and in New York, when Hugo Chavez spoke negatively about the President. Because of the decision of 7Eleven to not renew contracts with CITGO, when needing gas or a gallon of milk I will now search out 7 Eleven stores to make my purchases. There is a store just 1 mile from my residence which I have used before. Now I will always use this station. Thank you for making this decision. You have just won another loyal customer. I will be sure to tell everyone I know what a positive thing your company has done for this country."
"I watched the speech at the UN General Assembly and in New York, when Hugo Chavez spoke negatively about the President. Because of the decision of 7Eleven to not renew contracts with CITGO, when needing gas or a gallon of milk I will now search out 7 Eleven stores to make my purchases. There is a store just 1 mile from my residence which I have used before. Now I will always use this station. Thank you for making this decision. You have just won another loyal customer. I will be sure to tell everyone I know what a positive thing your company has done for this country."
Monday, September 11, 2006
5th Anniversary of 9/11
I have been watching C-Span2 for an hour as family members of those who died in the Towers are reading their loved ones names. The is real. I have respect. I am sad and angry all over again. If I always feel like this on September 11, then I still care.
Friday, August 25, 2006
"CNN.com to replay 9/11 attacks coverage"
Posted on Yahoo News;
NEW YORK - CNN will mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks by replaying on the Internet the cable network's coverage of that day's events.
ADVERTISEMENT
Viewers can watch how events unfolded starting at 8:30 a.m., minutes before the first reports of an airplane hitting the World Trade Center. The feed will run in real time, as the network showed it five years ago, until midnight.
For the day, CNN will make its online video service, CNN Pipeline, available for free. Normally, viewers pay $2.95 a month or $24.95 a year for four separate video feeds.
Online viewers will be able to watch live reports of memorial services through one of the feeds. So that viewers won't accidentally stumble upon graphic footage from 2001, the replay feed will be covered with a notice instructing users to click only if they want to watch.
"Our users may choose to view the stream of coverage from Sept. 11, 2001, or live coverage of memorial services at Ground Zero, or they may click through the numerous interactive elements on the site," said David Payne, senior vice president and general manager of CNN.com. "They have the power to determine the best way for them to remember the anniversary."
CNN is a unit of Time Warner Inc.
NEW YORK - CNN will mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks by replaying on the Internet the cable network's coverage of that day's events.
ADVERTISEMENT
Viewers can watch how events unfolded starting at 8:30 a.m., minutes before the first reports of an airplane hitting the World Trade Center. The feed will run in real time, as the network showed it five years ago, until midnight.
For the day, CNN will make its online video service, CNN Pipeline, available for free. Normally, viewers pay $2.95 a month or $24.95 a year for four separate video feeds.
Online viewers will be able to watch live reports of memorial services through one of the feeds. So that viewers won't accidentally stumble upon graphic footage from 2001, the replay feed will be covered with a notice instructing users to click only if they want to watch.
"Our users may choose to view the stream of coverage from Sept. 11, 2001, or live coverage of memorial services at Ground Zero, or they may click through the numerous interactive elements on the site," said David Payne, senior vice president and general manager of CNN.com. "They have the power to determine the best way for them to remember the anniversary."
CNN is a unit of Time Warner Inc.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Syria Angry at Plans for International Force
The AP reported Syria is stating an international force on the border between Lebanon and Israel would be an aggressive act.
"Syria warns against deployment of troops
AP - 44 minutes ago
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Israel's foreign minister said Wednesday the situation in Lebanon was "explosive" while Syria's president says the deployment of international troops along the Syria-Lebanon border would be a "hostile" act. The escalating rhetoric came as the 10-day cease-fire was shaken by the deaths of three Lebanese soldiers killed defusing a missile and an Israeli killed by a land mine in south Lebanon."
Syria appears to be in a temper-tantrum because because they are obviously not getting what they wanted. If Syria truly was not involved in Hezbollah, then it would not have made such a statement. Syria has something to gain and lose in the outcome of this conflict and they just showed part of their hand. It is time for the U.N. to "call" and "raise" Hezbollah.
"Syria warns against deployment of troops
AP - 44 minutes ago
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Israel's foreign minister said Wednesday the situation in Lebanon was "explosive" while Syria's president says the deployment of international troops along the Syria-Lebanon border would be a "hostile" act. The escalating rhetoric came as the 10-day cease-fire was shaken by the deaths of three Lebanese soldiers killed defusing a missile and an Israeli killed by a land mine in south Lebanon."
Syria appears to be in a temper-tantrum because because they are obviously not getting what they wanted. If Syria truly was not involved in Hezbollah, then it would not have made such a statement. Syria has something to gain and lose in the outcome of this conflict and they just showed part of their hand. It is time for the U.N. to "call" and "raise" Hezbollah.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Lou Dobbs and his contempt for Adam Smith
He has become so cynical and pessimistic I have stopped reading and watching Lou Dobbs with regularity. While I was reading CNN today I saw Lou had an article linked titled “It’s good to be a Superpower”.
He not only shows again his cynicism, this article he adds a degree of hate capitalism and it appears to me contempt for the US. My assessment of him may not be accurate for I do not know the man personally. I suppose he could also simply be ignorant. He may have never read Wealth of Nations. Remember, he is a journalist, a master of none.
I have linked articles and EU charts which disagree with Lou’s article.
GERMAN IMPORTS RISE FROM CHINA
WORLD EXPORTS AND US IMPORTS
Per this article it appears the US buys roughly 23% of the world clothing output, while we have less than 5% of the world population. If it were not for the US purchasing products from other nations, their clothing industries everywhere would contract painfully or maybe collapse. If a company suffered a 23% loss in sales, what do you think would happen to the company? Mass layoffs, possible closure or sale to a another firm?
According to this article, clothing imports are up in Europe.
The real news is what the Dutch have done to their clothing import trade. The article appears to suggest the Dutch government has applied an import duty on textiles and clothing. The import market has fallen dramtically. This not only raises prices on imports, but it will inevitably raise the price per unit of clothing made in country. Artificially softening competition in a nation will always allow prices to rise.
“Prices go up
This big fall in the Netherlands was due mainly to a big price increase of 203 per cent to an average 15.89 euros per kg paid by Dutch importers in the first quarter.
EU importers on the whole in the first quarter also saw an increase in prices of 21.1 per cent in knitted clothing and 12.7 per cent in woven clothing.
The average cost for knitted clothing was 13.56 euros per kg and 17.21 euros per kg in woven clothing.”
But is not only Lou Dobbs who does not understand the world's market economy. The Washington Post also has a story, "China to Raise Tariffs On Clothing Exports". It is about China's textile exporting. If people are buying China's clothing, they must be satisfied with a) the quality, with relation to b)the price.
Regarding the possibility of China's export tax, The New York Times adds the most meaningful bit of information I have read from the media to date. Yes, the quality. China clothing manufacturers understand this... If all they make is inexpensive and lower quality clothing, they are limited in their market. However if some of China's clothes are of higher quality (and would still be relatively inexpensive versus US or EU produced clothing, then the China textile market will find new and more customers. The market always finds it's own way.
He not only shows again his cynicism, this article he adds a degree of hate capitalism and it appears to me contempt for the US. My assessment of him may not be accurate for I do not know the man personally. I suppose he could also simply be ignorant. He may have never read Wealth of Nations. Remember, he is a journalist, a master of none.
I have linked articles and EU charts which disagree with Lou’s article.
GERMAN IMPORTS RISE FROM CHINA
WORLD EXPORTS AND US IMPORTS
Per this article it appears the US buys roughly 23% of the world clothing output, while we have less than 5% of the world population. If it were not for the US purchasing products from other nations, their clothing industries everywhere would contract painfully or maybe collapse. If a company suffered a 23% loss in sales, what do you think would happen to the company? Mass layoffs, possible closure or sale to a another firm?
According to this article, clothing imports are up in Europe.
The real news is what the Dutch have done to their clothing import trade. The article appears to suggest the Dutch government has applied an import duty on textiles and clothing. The import market has fallen dramtically. This not only raises prices on imports, but it will inevitably raise the price per unit of clothing made in country. Artificially softening competition in a nation will always allow prices to rise.
“Prices go up
This big fall in the Netherlands was due mainly to a big price increase of 203 per cent to an average 15.89 euros per kg paid by Dutch importers in the first quarter.
EU importers on the whole in the first quarter also saw an increase in prices of 21.1 per cent in knitted clothing and 12.7 per cent in woven clothing.
The average cost for knitted clothing was 13.56 euros per kg and 17.21 euros per kg in woven clothing.”
But is not only Lou Dobbs who does not understand the world's market economy. The Washington Post also has a story, "China to Raise Tariffs On Clothing Exports". It is about China's textile exporting. If people are buying China's clothing, they must be satisfied with a) the quality, with relation to b)the price.
Regarding the possibility of China's export tax, The New York Times adds the most meaningful bit of information I have read from the media to date. Yes, the quality. China clothing manufacturers understand this... If all they make is inexpensive and lower quality clothing, they are limited in their market. However if some of China's clothes are of higher quality (and would still be relatively inexpensive versus US or EU produced clothing, then the China textile market will find new and more customers. The market always finds it's own way.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Greenpeace Co-Founder, "Grew Up"
Moore on envrionmental extremism, Nuclear Energy, deforestation, global warming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
