Brewer condemns report to UN mentioning Ariz. law

[Boo Radley]

You're right.

The UN should be saved from corruption by the US. The US should immediately withdraw from the UN and the UN should be immediately relocated to a place more appropriate for it's members, like Mogadishu.

I just love your efforts at moral equivalency.

I have come to believe many don't understand what equivalency means, so when they don't like something, they just throw up the word. The fact is corruption is wrong across the board. When you are selective with your criticism of corruption, you're practicing equvalancy more than I am.

However, you're still side stepping the point.

 

[Boo Radley]

As I understand it any treaty that puts a law into effect within the US MUST be ratified by congress. The president can't do it alone.

There have been cases in the past where a president has signed a treaty but congress does not ratify it. This pretty much nullifies the treaty.

But you would agree, where ratified, it is the law? Right?

 

[BmanMcfly]

Sorry Bman, that just sounds way too defeatist to me. I am not willing to give up on the greatest nation ever to be on this earth.

I'll be going down with the ship as well....

Well, that's what I think that Obama, Pelosi, Reed and the criminal party in power are banking on right now, but trust me, there is a tipping point, history always provides one.

Understand, I know that there's a tipping point... what my big concern is that we'll reach that point too late to make a difference.

Well, probably so. But that to me if I were in that position would just signify that maybe the stances I take are too apathetic? You can't say you have no position then get mad because people don't understand where you are coming from....

Oh no, I do have a position... I hold strongly to the (reasonable) rules of law, and freedom theory.

More I would probably side with liberals on some issues, but republican on others... but I usually vote for third parties because they'll typically be less like 'politicians' that can't answer a question.

So who said that a Bush like candidate is what we as conservatives want again? Bush screwed up on quite a few things, illegal immigration being one of them.

I would wager that if the primaries were held today, you'd see a petraeus, romney, Palin, maybe one more and / or Ron Paul... 3 of those 4 are most certainly sold out neo-con hacks.... so, it's not like whether you WANT a 'bush-like' president, that's what's on the road so far... but then again, that's alot of speculation.

But what would you propose for the US?

j-mac

Find a way to hit a bit of a reset button. Seriously, as a country the US did amazingly well when the government stayed off the backs of the people. How far back we would have to go to not make the same mistakes again, I don't know.

A few key things would be to create incentives for companies to start producing things again, instead of this service economy we live in... Honestly, at a certain point, I could see a return of an old crop that would still be valued competitively on the open market.... you won't like it though.... COTTON.

Shut down the border, take that line of tanks that ran through bagdhad and have them patrol the border. I bet once they did that, everyone would have to accept that it's pretty much a border war going on there... not just mexicans looking for a better life.

Add a backing to the currency of either silver and or gold to at least SOME extent,

NO GOVERNMENT DEBT. 0$ debt allowed. Then we'd have to deal with the reality of money and taxing... maybe even getting surpluses...

I could go on...

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

A few key things would be to create incentives for companies to start producing things again, instead of this service economy we live in... Honestly, at a certain point, I could see a return of an old crop that would still be valued competitively on the open market.... you won't like it though.... COTTON.

We're not going to get back on top by having an automation-versus-cheap-labor competition, especially with an industry as space-consuming as agriculture. The ratio of jobs per square-whatever is going to be abysmal.

Your best bet is high technology. China is about 5-10 years behind our bleeding-edge stuff, and it's not because they're stupid -- they stick to the things that can be mass-produced with lower-cost equipment and less-skilled labor, because their whole model involves minimal up-front investment for maximum profit. It is for that reason we're able to produce all kinds of stuff that is extremely advanced and way beyond their ability to clone and sell for cheap.

Shut down the border, take that line of tanks that ran through bagdhad and have them patrol the border. I bet once they did that, everyone would have to accept that it's pretty much a border war going on there... not just mexicans looking for a better life.

Right up until the first actual shots are fired, and when the targets turn out to be desperate civilians it won't look so much like a border war as something completely different.

That's assuming, of course, that we decide to throw out posse comitatus, which in and of itself would change this nation in a fundamental sort of way.

Add a backing to the currency of either silver and or gold to at least SOME extent,

NO GOVERNMENT DEBT. 0$ debt allowed. Then we'd have to deal with the reality of money and taxing... maybe even getting surpluses...

I could go on...

I could get behind that, but it would be a lot rockier at the start than you may think.

 

[BmanMcfly]

We're not going to get back on top by having an automation-versus-cheap-labor competition, especially with an industry as space-consuming as agriculture. The ratio of jobs per square-whatever is going to be abysmal.

No, what it would take for us to get back on top would be some sort of drastic innovation that can be produced and sold, but the reality of the matter is that chinese products are SOOO cheap that they fall apart damn near instantly. So, there's no real reason why there couldn't be american made alternatives that are not bargain basement cheap, but the quality reflects...

There was a book on this topic... I think it was 'wal-mart: the high cost of low wages'

Your best bet is high technology. China is about 5-10 years behind our bleeding-edge stuff, and it's not because they're stupid -- they stick to the things that can be mass-produced with lower-cost equipment and less-skilled labor, because their whole model involves minimal up-front investment for maximum profit. It is for that reason we're able to produce all kinds of stuff that is extremely advanced and way beyond their ability to clone and sell for cheap.

Ya, that's a good idea as well... I would also point out that when it comes to consumeables, the chinese model is detrimentally cheap... like 'you won't believe it's not spam'

Right up until the first actual shots are fired, and when the targets turn out to be desperate civilians it won't look so much like a border war as something completely different.

If the border was militarized, it's just a matter of ensuring that the ROE is to only shoot when shot at.. when you're talking about shutting down drug smuggling corridors, you're gonna make some people VERY UNHAPPY. The Mexican drug war has casualty rates that near the casualties suffered in vietnam every year or two, and that's without enforcement... you cut off the flow of money, and people will get desperate really quickly.

That's assuming, of course, that we decide to throw out posse comitatus, which in and of itself would change this nation in a fundamental sort of way.

Wrong. Border control is not 'policing'. It's legitimate national security... just like you have a militarized presence in most every airport. Also, why they concern for posse comatatis only AFTER it's been all but rendered a shell of itself. They are called 'homeland brigades'.... there's somewhere in the area of half a million of them on 'homeland tours',

I could get behind that, but it would be a lot rockier at the start than you may think.

Especially with gold... silver backing would initially be preferable simply because there's a much larger abundance of silver... also, all the wealthiest people already horde the vast majority of gold, so there simply may not be enough in circulation to make that shift.

(Unless fort knox actually does still have any substantial amount of gold left)

The fact of the matter is, that it's better in the long haul to take the shots and get it over with, instead of bailouts and bailouts, untill we end up like zimbabwe where a 50trillion dollar note can buy a small meal.

 

[ludahai]

Yeah, I suppose. I just always wondered about people that bear no true allegiance to a country. But hey, whatever works I suppose.

j-mac

And how about people who are born with U.S. citizenship and citizenship in a second country that DOES NOT ALLOW citizens to surrender the nationality? Are you going to force them to give up US nationality because the second country won't even give them the choice?

Also, I think you can tell from my posts that I do have a deep loyalty to the U.S. However, I do not see loyalty to Taiwan conflicting with that in anyway except in the rare instance they meet in the sporting arena...