Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EU attacks "Buy American" clause
ste2000
Member EpicPosts: 6,194
The EU has increased its pressure on the US to reconsider the "Buy American" clause in the $800bn (£567bn) economic recovery package now before Congress.
EU Ambassador to Washington John Bruton said that, if passed, the measure could erode global leadership on free trade.
"We regard this legislation as setting a very dangerous precedent at a time when the world is facing a global economic crisis."
"The United States will lose the moral authority to pressure others not to introduce protectionist policies," Michael Wilson wrote in a letter to the senators.
Now I understand it is a difficult period for everyone, and jobs must be protected somehow, but do you think it will benefit the US economy in the long term to introduce those protectionist policies?
I ask this because America is the land of free trade and capitalism, but behaving this way, although understandable, goes against the same principles America succesfully spread around the world.
I mean, are Americans ready to buy much more expansive shoes produced in US rather than in China?
Is this better for your economy in the long term?
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7866900.stm
Comments
This has been the standard dem solution for everything for a couple centuries now. They are gonna try and repeat the "solution" that seemed to work in the 1930's/40's. Minus the world war.
And Obama is a "party line" dem. He claims to be more willing to reach out more, but then again they all do.
Buy American has been shot down time and time again by the Americans by simply not buying American. Clinton (and other rep/dems) supported it but didnt push to hard for the rep controlled government to enforce it, he lost many "cool" points with his party (not all, but quite a few) which is one reason he is considered a "conservative dem".
Who knows what the completely Dem controlled government will do. Not all dems agree that the US government should force it's people to buy American. But theres more now than ever.
Look on the bright side.
At least he hasn't reestablished FDR's executive order 6102...... yet
Making it illegal for Americans to save more than $100 worth of gold, and that all gold in the US belongs to the government regardless of where it came from.
Brillant really... taking controll of the $ value like that. Forcing people to sell really cheap then once you take it all you reset the price to what you think is right. Gogo Dem's always looking out for us all because we can't on our own.
That clause is nothing but politicking ultimately. Both the republicans and the democrats are more than eager to pay back those who helped put them into office. This clause is largely there to appease labor and certain business groups.
I say it will have no effect because with or without this clause, you will see a large amount of waste and corruption. It's inevitable with this much money flowing. You'd likely see a lot of contracts awarded to non-competitive union-backed bids even without the law forcing it. The scathing recent report of the auditor general of the Iraq reconstruction effort shows a ridiculous amount of waste and graft. That wasn't because of any particular incompetence. It's just impossible to create a massive spending package, whether it's reconstruction or stimulus, and then magically have it be used honestly and efficiently. Relative efficiency in government spending requires you to develop years of auditing and regulatory mechanisms, and even then, corruption and waste still sneak by, requiring vigorous prosecutory mechanisms to punish those who gamed the system. None of those are in place here.
In five years, we'll be saying the same about this package that we are saying about Iraq reconstruction.
Actually, there is no persistent ideology for either party.
It was republicans who really led the charge regarding civil rights during that era of our history. LBJ may have been a dem, but it was the Republicans in the legislature who made it possible. Speaking of wartime policy, there's no set rule. LBJ escalated us, and Nixon got us out. Speaking of immigration, republicans and dems have backed and opposed it at differing moments. Regarding religion, it was democrats who courted Christian conservatives until about 30 years ago.
I could really go down the list of every controversial issue, and you'd find that both parties have changed places not just once but many times. Whatever persistent ideology you have been told exists is a lie. Both parties constantly evolve into what they once reviled, only to later change back again. The game of pandering is the only constant.
Actually, there is no persistent ideology for either party.
It was republicans who really led the charge regarding civil rights during that era of our history. LBJ may have been a dem, but it was the Republicans in the legislature who made it possible. Speaking of wartime policy, there's no set rule. LBJ escalated us, and Nixon got us out. Speaking of immigration, republicans and dems have backed and opposed it at differing moments. Regarding religion, it was democrats who courted Christian conservatives until about 30 years ago.
I could really go down the list of every controversial issue, and you'd find that both parties have changed places not just once but many times. Whatever persistent ideology you have been told exists is a lie. Both parties constantly evolve into what they once reviled, only to later change back again. The game of pandering is the only constant.
Oh I agree completely. Both sides need a massive enima IMO.
It's just that when the Dem's make a move it can be a rather dark one. Not saying all of them are bad, but I put a closer eye on them than I do the other guys. Neigther are saints of course.,
**and before lawl's, reps went to Iraq. Dem's have been threatening to invade all through the 90's. It was a major political issue that clinton and gore brought up many times to the people. How old Bush was ignoring Iraq when they were clearly mass producing WMD's, which helped them win that election.
Protectionism? The steel industry?
Every new president of America tries this.
Bush did exactly the same when he first got in too. It's not just the Dems.
My favorite license plate: YBUY4N
I like YER4IT.
Help support America! Eat at your favorite fast food joint 3 times a day for the rest of your life!
Buy American! Get out there and buy a ton of yellow, pink, blue, etc. ribbons and stick those suckers all over the back of your SUV!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Seems you are trying to be sarcastic or belittle people. Not sure what you are trying to say but McDonalds is one American company flurishing. You should be investing in them instead of making fun of them.
McDonald's posts sizzling 80% profit rise in 2008
It's just the Dems paying back the unions for their support, at the expense of the world economy.
My only comment is on this quote - "America is the land of free trade and capitalism".
FAR from the truth. America instigated a law outlawing it's citizens from gambling on non US internet sites. The law was appealed and deemed unfair by the WTO, yet the US refuses to rescind it.
Definitely NOT free trade.
www.out-law.com/page-7708
Creator of ELTank and Nostalgia
Aye I remember this.
Basically the UK providers were bigger than any US company and they got kicked out.
The excuse was that they wanted to make it illegal entirely to bet online.
In which case it was understandable.
Did they actually got ahead with it, or they just forbidden foreign companies to do business in US?