Showing posts with label globalization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label globalization. Show all posts

28 February 2011

wake up, america

[click image]

.

It makes me so crazy because I remember bellowing about this on the airwaves some six years ago. I was screaming about the fortresses that would be surrounded by naked and starving hordes here, and around the world, if this Democratic-Fascist and Republican-Fascist plan for globalization were allowed to go forward. So I almost want to smack the guys bellowing about it now, when it's this close to midnight.
From now on, whenever you hear the term "the global economy" you should immediately equate it with the destruction of the U.S. middle class.  Over the past several decades, the American economy has been slowly but surely merged into the emerging one world economic system.  Unfortunately for the middle class, much of the rest of the world does not have the same minimum wage laws and worker protections that we do.  Therefore, the massive global corporations that now dominate our economy are able to pay workers in other countries slave labor wages and import the products that they make into the United States to compete with products made by "expensive" American workers.  This has resulted in a mass exodus of manufacturing facilities and jobs from the United States.

But without good, high paying jobs the U.S. middle class cannot continue to be the U.S middle class.  The only thing that the vast majority of Americans have to offer in the economic marketplace is their labor.  Sadly, that labor has now been dramatically devalued.  American workers now must directly compete for jobs with millions upon millions of workers on the other side of the world that toil away for 15 hours a day at slave labor wages.  This is causing jobs to leave the United States at an almost unbelievable rate, and it is putting tremendous downward pressure on the wages of millions of jobs that are still in the United States.

So when you hear terms such as "globalization" and "the global economy", it is important to keep in mind that those are code words for the emerging one world economic system that is systematically wiping out the U.S. middle class.

A one world labor pool means that the standard of living for the U.S. middle class will continue falling toward the standard of living in the third world.

We keep hearing about how the U.S. economy is being transformed from a "manufacturing economy" into a "service economy".  But "service jobs" are generally much lower paying than "manufacturing jobs".  The number of good paying "middle class jobs" in the United States is rapidly decreasing.  So how can the U.S. middle class survive in such an environment?

What makes things even worse for manufacturers in the United States is that other nations often impose a "value-added tax" of 20 percent or more on U.S. goods entering their shores and yet most of the time we do not reciprocate with similar taxes.

But whenever someone mentions how incredibly unfair and unbalanced our trade agreements with other nations are, they are immediately labeled as a "protectionist".

Well, someone should be looking out for U.S. interests when it comes to trade, because the current state of the global economy is ripping the U.S. middle class to shreds.

Right now, the United States consumes far more wealth than it produces.  This nation buys much, much more from the rest of the world than they buy from us.  This is called a "trade deficit", and it is one of the most important economic statistics.  The U.S. runs a massive trade deficit every single year, and it is wiping out our national wealth, it is destroying our surviving industries and it is absolutely shredding middle class America.

We cannot allow tens of thousands of factories to continue to leave the United States.  We cannot allow millions of jobs to continue to be "outsourced" and "offshored".  We cannot allow tens of billions of dollars of our national wealth to continue to be transferred into foreign hands every single month.

The truth is that the global economy is bad for America.  The following are 23 facts which prove that globalism is pushing the standard of living of the middle class down to third world levels....

#1 From December 2000 to December 2010, the U.S. ran a total trade deficit of 6.1 trillion dollars.

#2 The U.S. trade deficit was about 33 percent larger in 2010 than it was in 2009.

#3 The U.S. trade deficit with China in 2010 was 27 times larger than it was back in 1990.

#4 The U.S. economy is rapidly trading high wage jobs for low wage jobs.  According to a new report from the National Employment Law Project, higher wage industries accounted for 40 percent of the job losses over the past 12 months but only 14 percent of the job growth.  Lower wage industries accounted for just 23 percent of the job losses over the past 12 months and a whopping 49 percent of the job growth.

#5 Between December 2000 and December 2010, 38 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Ohio were lost, 42 percent of the manufacturing jobs in North Carolina were lost and 48 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Michigan were lost.

#6 In Germany, exports account for approximately 40 percent of GDP.  In China, exports account for approximately 30 percent of GDP.  In the United States, exports account for approximately 13 percent of GDP.

#7 Do you remember when the United States was the dominant manufacturer of automobiles and trucks on the globe?  Well, in 2010 the U.S. ran a trade deficit in automobiles, trucks and parts of $110 billion.

#8 In 2010, South Korea exported 12 times as many automobiles, trucks and parts to us as we exported to them.

#9 The U.S. economy now has 10 percent fewer "middle class jobs" than it did just ten years ago.

#10 The United States currently has 7.7 million fewer payroll jobs than it did back in December 2007.

#11 Back in 1970, 25 percent of all jobs in the United States were manufacturing jobs. Today, only 9 percent of the jobs in the United States are manufacturing jobs.

#12 In 2002, the United States had a trade deficit in "advanced technology products" of $16 billion with the rest of the world.  In 2010, that number skyrocketed to $82 billion.

#13 The United States now spends more than 4 dollars on goods and services from China for every one dollar that China spends on goods and services from the United States.

#14 In China, working conditions are so bad that large numbers of "employees" regularly try to commit suicide.  One major employer, Foxconn, has even gone so far as to install "anti-suicide nets" in an attempt to keep their employees from jumping off of their buildings.

#15 Wages for workers in China are incredibly low.  For example, one facility in the city of Longhua that makes iPods employs approximately 200,000 workers.  These workers put in endless 15-hour days but they only make about $50 per month.

#16 In Bangladesh, manufacturing workers toil in absolutely horrific conditions and make an average of about $38 per month.

#17 In Vietnam, teenage workers often work seven days a week for as little as 6 cents an hour making promotional Disney toys for McDonald's.

#18 Since 2001, over 42,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have been closed.

#19 Half of all American workers now earn $505 or less per week.

#20 In the United States today, 6.2 million Americans have been out of work for 6 months of longer.

#21 8.4 million Americans are currently working part-time jobs for "economic reasons".  These jobs are mostly very low paying service jobs.

#22 When you adjust wages for inflation, middle class workers in the United States make less money today than they did back in 1971.

#23 According to Willem Buiter, the chief economist at Citigroup, China will be the largest economy in the world by the year 2020, and India will surpass China by the year 2050.

Those that promote "free trade" can never explain how the U.S. middle class is going to continue to have plenty of jobs in the new global economy.

By merging our labor pool with the rest of the world, we have also merged our standard of living with the rest of the world.  High unemployment is rapidly becoming "the new normal" in America, and wages are going to continue to decline in many, many industries.

Already, there are quite a few formerly great U.S. cities (such as Detroit) that are beginning to resemble third world hellholes.  If something is not done about our massive trade imbalance, even more cities are going to follow Detroit into oblivion.

Unfortunately, most of our politicians continue to insist that globalism is good for our society.  They continue to insist that we should not be worried that jobs formerly done by middle class American workers are now being done by slave laborers on the other side of the globe.  They continue to insist that having 43 million Americans on food stamps is a temporary thing and that soon our economy will be better than ever.

Well, it is time to stop listening to the politicians that are promoting "the global economy".  They are lying to us.

Globalism is great for nations such as China and it is helping multinational corporations make huge profits, but for the U.S. middle class it is an economic death sentence.

If you want an America where there are less jobs, where more Americans are on food stamps and other anti-poverty programs and where our cities continue to be transformed into deindustrialized hellholes, then you should strongly support the emerging global economy.

But if you care about the standard of living of the U.S. middle class and you want for there to be some kind of viable economic future for your children and your grandchildren then you had better start caring about these issues and doing something about them.

Please wake up America.
Globalization would be jake IF there were a plan in place to protect workers, but everybody, INCLUDING workers, just skips over that part.

I'm about ready to start pleading with Agent BB2 to hop in my go cart from the eighth dimension with me and onward to Wisconsin, but this needs to be happening in EVERY government outpost from city all the way up to federal—and the airports, and the bus stations, and and the train stations, and the hotels, and the sports stadiums, and the goddam pits of murderating delusion shopping malls—across the nation.

NOW.

Or, you'll be a half-clad and barefoot beggar who pleads to put on a sterile suit and clean glass for the real people.

.
love, 99
.

22 December 2010

palast arrested in azerBPaijan

[click image]

.

Finding the action....
“Here in Azerbaijan we believe in human rights. PLEASE GIVE US YOUR FILM.”

Oh, no, no, not good.

The enforcers here come in three colors: the military police still wearing their old Russian puke-green uniforms, the MSN (the dictator’s secret police) in windbreakers without ID, and BP’s own corporate police force in black tunics, sashes and full hats who look like toy soldiers from the Nutcracker ballet. They weren’t dancing.

I showed all three flavors of police our press credentials in both English and Azeri, neither of which could be read by the officers. (The dictator had suddenly changed the Azeri alphabet, making most of the nation illiterate overnight.)
The dictator made everyone call him, “Baba,” Grandpa.

I told the dumbest-looking one, “Look here: This paper says your so-called President is a weasel’s rectum,” which our ‘fixer’ translated as, “This letter from Foreign Ministry is authorization to make a documentary for the British Television.”

We’d been surreptitiously filming BP’s cancer-making machine, the giant pipeline terminal near Baku, the capital, that sends the Azeri’s Caspian Sea oil westward to light Europe’s Christmas trees.

Now, it looked like I’d be spending Christmas in Baba’s dungeon licking rats for breakfast. My clown-show antics bought the crew the precious minutes needed to switch the film in the camera to blanks. Our cameraman told a BP cop, with mime: “Hadn’t begun filming yet, Old Bean.”

We would now. I clicked on my hidden micro-cam.

A black SUV arrived on the remote desert track and unloaded its impressive cargo, a colonel sprinkled with medals from the recent war Azerbaijan lost to Armenia. The colonel said, “British Petroleum drives this country,” and as a “British” journalist, he thought I’d be as proud of that fact as he is.

“I know,” I said. “Believe me, I know.”

There is an awful lot of evidence that BP and Britain’s MI6 had their hands in Baba’s 1993 coup d’état which overthrew the nation’s elected president. Within months of taking power, Baba signed “The Contract of the Century” giving BP monopoly control of Azerbaijan’s Caspian reserves.

Baba headed the KGB when this Islamic land was an occupied “republic” of the Soviet Union, the good old days of relative peace, freedom and prosperity.

I was here in the desert to investigate a tip-off I’d had that BP had a near-disaster at its Caspian offshore rig that was extraordinarily similar to the Deepwater Horizon blow-out. But BP covered it up.
There's probably more, but I think his server's getting slammed... or he's just getting us riled....

.
love, 99
.

09 November 2010

remember war, inc.?

[click image]

.

You might have thought it would at least be better if the corporations were paying for them, but you would have been wrong. No matter what, they keep making them and we keep paying for them. The people dying from the propagation of these wars are not just the troops and the locals. Ask anyone you know who's lost their home.

.
love, 99
.

06 November 2010

today in that hopey changey thing

[click image]

.

Obama calls India creator, not poacher, of US jobs
... By the end of the first of his three days in India, he was promoting $10 billion in trade deals — completed in time for his visit — that the White House says will create about 54,000 jobs at home.

That's a modest gain compared with the extent of the enduring jobless crisis in the United States. Economists say it would require on the level of 300,000 new jobs a month to put a real dent in an unemployment rate stuck near 10 [23] percent.

Yet to Obama, the bigger picture was the lucrative potential of an unleashed trading relationship between India and the United States.
The headline is so outrageously bullshit and the piece is so obviously pure mental conditioning, not even pertinent to actuality, I don't deign to link the sucker.

.
love, 99
.

05 November 2010

globalization

[click image]

.

I would think the fact that they're doing it to the whole damn world would be a matter of quite some visible outrage on the streets of every town on earth. I would think it would have started here. I would be wrong.

I fucking can't believe that's wrong.

.
love, 99
.

06 October 2010

globalization involves much more than merely finances

[click image]

.

The police state must accompany it, or it can't be pulled off. It seems cops everywhere are about as avid as ours to show off their prowess with gizmos and special training and authority over worthless pieces of shit. The dumbing down has not been limited to the United States. Oh. Nossirreebob. It's not just here. Here is just where the power to pull it off originates. The lives of everyone, everywhere are being poured into the coffers of a tiny minority who very seldom bother to interface with the public. They have their goons for that.

.
love, 99
.

28 September 2010

not as new world orderly as some might wish

[click image]

.

Blather? Worth contemplating? I can't even tell. See, I don't even think most of the global governance bodies in existence are any part of the plan for global governance. I think that at worst they might be used, like our government is, as the mirage of consent. So my take, here, is that it's already functioning in just that way, taking up all manner of beside the point scenarios to direct us into deliberating the various facets of misdirection itself, keeping us busily deluding ourselves while they rake in trillions and burn down the planet. There might not be a soul at the UN or any other international body who has an inkling this is the case, and it could still be, completely, the case.

.
love, 99
.

13 September 2010

wasn't it bubba clinton who started this 'globalization' meme?

[click image]

.

I know Hitler was using "New World Order" back in his crowd-mesmerizing days, and Pappy Bush was fond of that term, used it with his thousand points of light thing, as though he were viewing us from a space pod, but I think the term "globalization" started getting heavy rotation in Bubba's administration. To me, it all just spelled "outsourcing" jobs to the Third World and "insourcing" profits. Global immiseration. Then he started his Clinton Global Initiative, where billionaires collide annually, under the guise of philanthropy.

I'm telling you, what they've got in mind for the globe isn't my idea of a good time.

.
love, 99
.

24 August 2010

. . .


[click image]

.

And it has GLOBAL effects... well, and if you don't like it, you can lump it.

.

31 March 2010

you say neocon; i say neolib

[click image, video playlist, under twenty minutes]

.
Capitalism, love it or leave it....

I have been screaming for a number of years now that I would have no problem with globalization, that there could be some really wonderful aspects to it, SO LONG AS PROTECTION FOR THE PEOPLE, THE WORKERS, IS INSURED FIRST, but, well, no-fucking-body listens to this VITAL bit. They just keep scrabbling to survive, ignoring that it is becoming ever more difficult, on its way to impossible, to survive... UNTIL we stand up and FORCE this to stop... but nooooooo.....

So. Here. There is at LEAST one French economist who is ON my wavelength. You may think I'm just a maniacal old harridan, but I know what I'm talking about. Yes, yes, I don't make it so easy to follow it, but this guy's a professor, someone who gets paid to make himself clear....
.

06 December 2009

the reason too many are bucking a green revolution

[click image]
Yvo de Boer, the U.N.'s top climate official, said on the eve of the 192-nation conference that despite unprecedented unity and concessions, industrial countries and emerging nations need to dig deeper.

"Time is up," de Boer said. "Over the next two weeks governments have to deliver."

Finance — billions of dollars immediately and hundreds of billions of dollars annually within a decade — was emerging as the key to unblocking an agreement that would bind the global community to a sweeping plan to combat climate change.
They don't want the globalizing finance oligarchs to make another bubble out of this to drive us further into slavery. This means is particularly dreaded because they wouldn't have to even make us want to have something we don't need. They can sit back and watch us enrich them out of desperation not to spoil our whole planet.

THIS DOESN'T MEAN WE DON'T HAVE TO CLEAN IT UP RIGHT THIS VERY NOW.

It doesn't mean we have to let the plutocrats have their way either.

IT ISN'T EITHER OR....

24 November 2009

while you're obsessed with piglips' book and teabaggers

[click image]

The man behind the curtain is very, very busy ending America. Just click his duplicitous mug to "enjoy" his "quiet" support for instituting permanently even the worst provisions of the filthy PATRIOT Act.

Then, turn your attention to Mr. Nuclear Arms Reduction Nobel Peace Laureate's agreements with India:
US-India commit to nuclear deal
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2009
22:40 MECCA TIME, 19:40 GMT

The US president and Indian prime minister have pledged to fully implement a nuclear accord after talks in Washington, in addition to reaching agreements on issues as diverse as international security, job creation and climate change.

In a White House news conference on Tuesday, Barack Obama said that he and Manmohan Singh had reaffirmed both their administrations' desire to push ahead with the civilian nuclear deal.

The deal allows Washington to authorise selling advanced nuclear related technology to India, reversing more than 30 years of US policy banning the export of nuclear material.

"My administration is committed to fully implementing the US-India civil nuclear agreement which increases American exports and creates jobs in both countries," Obama said.

Singh said he was also confident Obama would "operationalise the nuclear deal as early as possible".

"There are a few 'i's and 't's that have to be crossed, but I am confident and I have the assurance that that process can be completed without much further loss of time."

Asian security

The two men also addressed regional security as they spoke before a state banquet in Singh's honour.

Obama would not reveal whether he intended to increase US troop levels in Afghanistan, saying his intention was to "finish the job", but that the Afghan people would "ultimately have to provide for their own security".

He said that he would announce his strategy for Afghanistan after the Thanksgiving holiday has ended at the weekend.
Referring to the Mumbai attacks in India last year, the president said: "It is in our strategic interests, in our national security interest, to make sure that al-Qaeda and its extremist allies cannot operate effectively.

"We are going to dismantle and degrade their capabilities and ultimately dismantle and destroy their networks."

His comments came just hours after Singh urged Washington to stop "premature talks of exit from Afghanistan" that would "only embolden the terrorist elements who are out to destabilise ... the civilised world".

But while Obama said the US would continue to pressure Pakistan to "use all its influence to curb the power of the terrorist groups" within the country, he acknowleded Washington needed to provide support to civilians and civil society, and not just the Pakistani military.

New Delhi has blamed a Pakistan-based group for last year's attack on Mumbai, which left more than 160 people dead.

Climate change

Singh also said the two countries were planning new agreements on the development and sharing of renewable energy technology.

Obama confirmed the initiative, announcing a greater number of scientific exchange programmes for agricultural, medicinal and environmental studies, saying the two countries had moved closer to a "strong operational agreement" on climate change at next month's Copenhagen summit.

"It's essential that countries do what is necessary to reach a strong operational agreement."

Though both leaders stuck to issues on which both sides shared the same views, analysts said the tone struck before and during the talks suggests a much closer relationship than ever before.

The Indian prime minister had already told the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington of a new partnership that would contribute to "an orderly transition to the new order and be an important factor for global peace and stability".

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Tuesday, Robert Wirsing, a professor of international relations at Georgetown University, said the state visit marked a new era in relations between the world's largest democracies.

"The fact is that India is playing an increasingly important role in the international economy. The changes that have come over in India are simply phenomenal ... in economic and military terms, it is a formidable power.

"American investment opportunities are huge ... India is talking about spending $150 billion in its nuclear industy ... and of course India is the largest importer of weapons in the world ... it was these issues that dominated the talks."
And, even yet we can be thankful he's not Hillary... which, excuse me, is cold comfort....

I mean, oh, good, I only lost four toes to frost bite....

15 August 2009

whoa, how'd i miss this?

[click image]

It's really hard, blogging without my bookmarks!
12:40 August 13th, 2009
Who is funding the Afghan Taliban? You don’t want to know
REUTERS/Ahmad Masood

The article by Jean MacKenzie originally appeared in GlobalPost. This is part of a special series by GlobalPost called Life, Death and The Taliban.

KABUL — It is the open secret no one wants to talk about, the unwelcome truth that most prefer to hide. In Afghanistan, one of the richest sources of Taliban funding is the foreign assistance coming into the country.

Virtually every major project includes a healthy cut for the insurgents. Call it protection money, call it extortion, or, as the Taliban themselves prefer to term it, “spoils of war,” the fact remains that international donors, primarily the United States, are to a large extent financing their own enemy.

“Everyone knows this is going on,” said one U.S. Embassy official, speaking privately.

It is almost impossible to determine how much the insurgents are spending, making it difficult to pinpoint the sources of the funds.

Mullah Abdul Salaam Zaeef, former Taliban minister to Pakistan, was perhaps more than a bit disingenuous when he told GlobalPost that the militants were operating mostly on air.

“The Taliban does not have many expenses,” he said, smiling slightly. “They are barefoot and hungry, with no roof over their heads and a stone for their pillow.” As for weapons, he just shrugged. “Afghanistan is full of guns,” he said. “We have enough guns for years.”

The reality is quite different, of course. The militants recruit local fighters by paying for their services. They move about in their traditional 4×4s, they have to feed their troops, pay for transportation and medical treatment for the wounded, and, of course, they have to buy rockets, grenades and their beloved Kalashnikovs.

Up until quite recently, most experts thought that drug money accounted for the bulk of Taliban funding. But even here opinion was divided on actual amounts. Some reports gauged the total annual income at about $100 million, while others placed the figure as high as $300 million — still a small fraction of the $4 billion poppy industry.

Now administration officials have launched a search for Taliban sponsors. Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, told a press conference in Islamabad last month that drugs accounted for less of a share of Taliban coffers than was previously thought.

“In the past there was a kind of feeling that the money all came from drugs in Afghanistan,” said Holbrooke, according to media reports. “That is simply not true.”

The new feeling is that less than half of the Taliban’s war chest comes from poppy, with a variety of sources, including private contributions from Persian Gulf states, accounting for much of the rest. Holbrooke told reporters that he would add a member of the Treasury Department to his staff to pursue the question of Taliban funding.

But perhaps U.S. officials need look no further than their own backyard.

Anecdotal evidence is mounting that the Taliban are taking a hefty portion of assistance money coming into Afghanistan from the outside.

This goes beyond mere protection money or extortion of “taxes” at the local level — very high-level negotiations take place between the Taliban and major contractors, according to sources close to the process.

A shadowy office in Kabul houses the Taliban contracts officer, who examines proposals and negotiates with organizational hierarchies for a percentage. He will not speak to, or even meet with, a journalist, but sources who have spoken with him and who have seen documents say that the process is quite professional.

The manager of an Afghan firm with lucrative construction contracts with the U.S. government builds in a minimum of 20 percent for the Taliban in his cost estimates. The manager, who will not speak openly, has told friends privately that he makes in the neighborhood of $1 million per month. Out of this, $200,000 is siphoned off for the insurgents.

If negotiations fall through, the project will come to harm — road workers may be attacked or killed, bridges may be blown up, engineers may be assassinated.

The degree of cooperation and coordination between the Taliban and aid workers is surprising, and would most likely make funders extremely uncomfortable.

One Afghan contractor, speaking privately, told friends of one project he was overseeing in the volatile south. The province cannot be mentioned, nor the particular project.

“I was building a bridge,” he said, one evening over drinks. “The local Taliban commander called and said ‘don’t build a bridge there, we’ll have to blow it up.’ I asked him to let me finish the bridge, collect the money — then they could blow it up whenever they wanted. We agreed, and I completed my project.”

In the south, no contract can be implemented without the Taliban taking a cut, sometimes at various steps along the way.

One contractor in the southern province of Helmand was negotiating with a local supplier for a large shipment of pipes. The pipes had to be brought in from Pakistan, so the supplier tacked on about 30 percent extra for the Taliban, to ensure that the pipes reached Lashkar Gah safely.

Once the pipes were given over to the contractor, he had to negotiate with the Taliban again to get the pipes out to the project site. This was added to the transportation costs.

“We assume that our people are paying off the Taliban,” said the foreign contractor in charge of the project.

In Farah province, local officials report that the Taliban are taking up to 40 percent of the money coming in for the National Solidarity Program, one of the country’s most successful community reconstruction projects, which has dispensed hundreds of millions of dollars throughout the country over the past six years.

Many Afghans see little wrong in the militants getting their fair share of foreign assistance.

“This is international money,” said one young Kabul resident. “They are not taking it from the people, they are taking it from their enemy.”

But in areas under Taliban control, the insurgents are extorting funds from the people as well.

In war-ravaged Helmand, where much of the province has been under Taliban control for the past two years, residents grumble about the tariffs.

“It’s a disaster,” said a 50-year-old resident of Marja district. “We have to give them two kilos of poppy paste per jerib during the harvest; then we have to give them ushr (an Islamic tax, amounting to one-tenth of the harvest) from our wheat. Then they insisted on zakat (an Islamic tithe). Now they have come up with something else: 12,000 Pakistani rupee (approximately $150) per household. And they won’t take even one rupee less.”

It all adds up, of course. But all things are relative: if the Taliban are able to raise and spend say $1 billion per year — the outside limit of what anyone has been able to predict — that accounts for what the United States is now spending on 10 days of the war to defeat them.

13 July 2009

strike three?

[click image]

Geithner having struck out in China and Obama having struck out in Russia, is this going to be strike three? And how many strikes before we're out?

27 March 2009

against it before they were for it

[click image]

No doubt the excuse is appeasing our number one creditor, because we ARE dead in the water without China, but who else does it serve? Hmmmmmm?

24 March 2009

stupid eloquent glib shill

[click image]

What gripes me the most is that he is supposed to have more real information available to him than anyone and he's being led down the garden path as cluelessly as poor old General Grant, the guy with a heart the size of the moon and no idea about the sharks. Obama doesn't have that excuse. He has every idea about them. They have been the makers of his entire career.

No, no! DON'T resort to selfish protectionism to rise your people out of destitution and put together an economy that works for everyone, because THAT would take your people out of our pool of dirt cheap labor and prevent us from exploiting your resources, treasuries and citizens. Indeed, FIE on that!