woiyo wrote:
Than Canada and Mexico would be "guilty" of "racism" in your opinion.
I'm not sure what you're babbling about this time.
Mexica wrote:woiyo wrote:
Than Canada and Mexico would be "guilty" of "racism" in your opinion.
I'm not sure what you're babbling about this time.
Well, that is the same question you are asking us. Is protectionism like racism. You consider a company hiring their own native workers as a form of racism.
I think that is nuts, but you are entitled to your own opinion.
You consider a company hiring their own native workers as a form of racism.
No I don't. Are you really this obtuse?!
Protectionism is a form of discrimination on the basis of a happenstance. In this case, it is on the basis of nationality. In that sense, it is very much like racism. But protectionism is not necessarily racist, and I haven't said or implied that it is in this discussion.
Mexica
We of the United States pay taxes for our governance and for our protection. When our U.S. corporations move their manufacturing factories too foreign countries but still demand protection by the U. S. from those countries from the U.S. it is much less than fair. If they want to move than they should lose that protection. In many countries that have nationalized U.S industries, we, the citizens of the U.S. have had to reimburse those companies for those losses. Call it whatever you want too but I don't think its fair. If they want too move it should be their problem no matter what happens to them. Many move to avoid paying taxes.
We of the United States pay taxes for our governance and for our protection. When our U.S. corporations move their manufacturing factories too foreign countries but still demand protection by the U. S. from those countries from the U.S. it is much less than fair. If they want to move than they should lose that protection.
While none of this addresses the topic of how protectionism is akin to racism, I totally agree. Why should government resources (monies or the lives of soldiers) be used to help private industries who move to foreign lands? It was wrong for he US to try to overthrow Cuba in favor of US based corporate interests. If corporations make the move, they should expect to deal with any repercussions without aide from the public "tit."
In many countries that have nationalized U.S industries, we, the citizens of the U.S. have had to reimburse those companies for those losses. Call it whatever you want too but I don't think its fair.
I call it immoral.
Many move to avoid paying taxes.
Sure, and to take advantage of lower labor costs. A few years ago, people in the U.S. were getting paid a lot to turn screws on an assembly-line. I can understand why a company would rather pay someone to turn screws for a fraction of what the so-called American auto-worker was asking.
Mexica ella dijo:
Of course protectionism is like racism. To value someone more simply because they happen to be American is fundamentally no different than value someone more because they happen to be white. Both conditions are (as far as the individual in question is concerned) matters of chance.
This is specious. Sounds correct, but is not. Protectionism is like nationalism. Nationalism is not like racism in the U.S.A., since its citizens are from all backgrounds.
Mexico, as I've been told, does not specify on their census forms whether anyone is white, Aztec, etc. (just Mexican or not), yet there are two Mexicos. The Mexico of the European looking people (watch a novella) and the Mexico of the Aztec Indian in southern Mexico. In my opinion there is an economic racism in Mexico that is like the fable The King's New Suit of Clothes, in that no one wants to tell the King the truth.
Perhaps, you don't see the audacity, from an American's perspective, in your postings, since, as I type, more Mexicans are coming to the U.S. illegally, and will likely get jobs here paying more than they can get in Mexico. And, some of that pay gets Western Unioned back to Mexico. And, on top of that you think it ethical that American factories move to Mexico to take advantage of the hard working and low paid labor? In the U.S. this attitude is called brass pelotas! And, I notice that the children of these Mexican illegals look well fed, got vaccinations to go to free schooling, free breakfasts and lunches. As the song went in the movie/musical, West Side Story: Todo es gratis en America.
Lastly, how come in Southern California a Mexican politically oriented group is known as La Raza? Now tell me who is oriented to race?
Of course protectionism is like racism. To value someone more simply because they happen to be American is fundamentally no different than value someone more because they happen to be white. Both conditions are (as far as the individual in question is concerned) matters of chance.
This is specious. Sounds correct, but is not. Protectionism is like nationalism. Nationalism is not like racism in the U.S.A., since its citizens are from all backgrounds.
It sounds correct, because it is correct. Simply saying it isn't and then failing to say why it isn't correct does not prove or even make a point.
Mexico, as I've been told, does not specify on their census forms whether anyone is white, Aztec, etc. (just Mexican or not), yet there are two Mexicos. The Mexico of the European looking people (watch a novella) and the Mexico of the Aztec Indian in southern Mexico. In my opinion there is an economic racism in Mexico that is like the fable The King's New Suit of Clothes, in that no one wants to tell the King the truth.
What does any of this have to do with what I wrote or how protectionism is like racism?
Perhaps, you don't see the audacity, from an American's perspective, in your postings, since, as I type, more Mexicans are coming to the U.S. illegally, and will likely get jobs here paying more than they can get in Mexico.
Again, what does your rant have to to with the topic?
you think it ethical that American factories move to Mexico to take advantage of the hard working and low paid labor? In the U.S. this attitude is called brass pelotas! And, I notice that the children of these Mexican illegals look well fed, got vaccinations to go to free schooling, free breakfasts and lunches. As the song went in the movie/musical, West Side Story: Todo es gratis en America.
Lastly, how come in Southern California a Mexican politically oriented group is known as La Raza? Now tell me who is oriented to race?
Again, what does this drivel have to do with the topic? In what way does it counter what you wrote "sounds correct"?
Mexica wrote:We should be afraid of the empty and mindless slogans that people, who often wrap themselves in the U.S. flag, use when they champion the "public good" over the individual's right to freedom.
You decry xenophobia and "mindless" jingoism and flag waving then..... proceed to use an avatar that's waving the Mexican flag?
Pot.. Kettle. Kettle... Pot.
Mexica wrote:You consider a company hiring their own native workers as a form of racism.
No I don't. Are you really this obtuse?!
Protectionism is a form of discrimination on the basis of a happenstance. In this case, it is on the basis of nationality. In that sense, it is very much like racism. But protectionism is not necessarily racist, and I haven't said or implied that it is in this discussion.
This form of discrimination is good.
You decry xenophobia and "mindless" jingoism and flag waving then..... proceed to use an avatar that's waving the Mexican flag?
-Robert Gentel
Actually, I'd like you to point out where I complained about ""mindless" jingoism and flag waving ." If anything, I would have wrote or decried the "mindless" wrapping of one's self in the flag, and it would not be meant in the literal sense. Of course, since many here cannot seem to grasp the topic put up for discussion, it's of little wonder why you'd foolishly try to equate an avatar of smiley waving a flag with the idiom "wrap yourself in the flag."
But seeing you guys grasp (figuratively, of course) at straws while avoiding the topic is pretty entertaining. Keep it up. I know it must be difficult for some xenophobes to intellectualize their beliefs.
This form of discrimination is good.
-woiyowoiyo
Good for a small segment of society (the workers who stand to lose their over-paid jobs), but not good for consumers in general.
Mexica wrote:Of course, since many here cannot seem to grasp the topic put up for discussion, it's of little wonder why you'd foolishly try to equate an avatar of smiley waving a flag with the idiom "wrap yourself in the flag."
Ok, how is your flag-waving not "mindless"? What's the difference between your flag exhibition and that of others? :-)
I think people "grasp the topic" just fine. They merely disagree with you or think it's silly/poorly argued. I'm merely pointing out how I think it's funny that you wrap yourself in your flag, but also criticize others for the same.
It's silly. But it's much more silly to pretend people don't understand you when they merely disagree with you. It's a transparent dismissal of dissent, trying to portray it as a deficiency on the part of everyone but yourself. It'd be convenient if it weren't so darn obvious.
I think people "grasp the topic" just fine. They merely disagree with you or think it's silly/poorly argued. I'm merely pointing out how I think it's funny that you wrap yourself in your flag, but also criticize others for the same.
--Robert Gentel
You saying they do, doesn't make it so. Either they are incredibly simple-minded and cannot get that this is not about racism but behavior that is like racism, or like they are feigning misunderstanding and babbling on about military service, "illegals," or feeding at public tits - things that have nothing to do with the topic. If I had to guess, I'd pick the ladder.
For instance, you are either ignorant of the difference between the idiom "wrap yourself in the flag" and actual flag waving or you're just pretending to be incredibly obtuse.
But like I said, keep grasping at straws and avoiding the topic.
Mexica wrote:you saying they do, doesn't make it so.
Nowhere did I claim my saying so made it so. It just is so and I happen to be your messenger.
Quote:Either they are incredibly simple-minded and cannot get that this is not about racism but behavior that is like racism, or like they are feigning misunderstanding and babbling on about military service, "illegals," or feeding at public tits - things that have nothing to do wuth the topic. If I had to guess, I'd pick the ladder.
That'll teach all those stupid people!
Quote:For instance, you are either ignorant of the difference between the idiom "wrap yourself in the flag" and actual flag waving or you're just pretending to be incredibly obtuse.
No, I just think you making fun of other people's exhibitions of flags while exhibiting one yourself is particularly funny and am asking you to explain all these differences you allude to but can't begin to substantiate.
Quote:But like I said, keep grasping at straws and avoiding the topic.
Your topic is disinteresting to me in comparison to your flag waving. If you want to avoid the question that's fine, I'll leave it here one last time:
What makes
your flag waving not "mindless"?
If you answer it I'll be happy to comment on your arguments about the (loosely-defined) "topic", there is plenty of funny stuff there too.
Nowhere did I claim my saying so made it so.
Oh lord. And nowhere did I write you said it made it so.
No, I just think you making fun of other people's exhibitions of flags
Tell you what, why don't you quote where I "made fun of other people's exhibitions of flags"? but you won't because I didn't. Instead, you just keep making up lies to fit your false charge. Seems like you're ignorant of the saying "wrap yourself in the flag" and its meaning, and just trying to save face.
and am asking you to explain all these differences you allude to but can't begin to substantiate.
Again, but in English.
What makes your flag waving not "mindless"?
Again, tell you what, quote where I said flag waving is mindless, and I'll answer your question.
Mexica wrote:Nowhere did I claim my saying so made it so.
Oh lord. And nowhere did I write you said it made it so.
No but you refuted the notion. That nobody made...
Deft destruction of the unmade argument....
Quote:
What makes your flag waving not "mindless"?
Again, tell you what, quote where I said flag waving is mindless, and I'll answer your question.
You are trying to reduce this to a logomachy.
You said, "we should be afraid of the empty and mindless slogans that people, who often wrap themselves in the U.S. flag."
So if this makes it easier to answer, and harder for you to play word games with, I will rephrase the question as:
What makes their use of their flag different from your use of yours?
You could have just wrote: "you didn't say flag waving is mindless."
Same sentiment, fewer keystrokes.
<----Obligatory smiley.
What makes their use of their flag different from your use of yours?
The literal action of flag waving, nothing. Waving a flag is just as "mindless" or "thoughtful" no matter its symbolic meaning. So "their" flag waving is no different than my own.
Well, I guess it went wrong in here too didn't it?
Well, at least one person was eventually able to understand, I guess.
He just thinks discrimination on the basis of national origin is "good."
Fortunately for many "American" autoworkers, Japanese automakers don't share that sentiment. They have opened up numerous auto-plants in the states employing thousands of laborers.
But yes, it does seem like people tend to regress to mindless and borderline xenophobic rhetoric, and/or act like they cannot differentiate between figurative speech and literal speech when they cannot mount a intelligent counter to a topic or a notion they do not agree with.
On another note, good to see you here.
Do you intend to post here more often?
"Look at my Johnny! Everyone is marching out of step except for he!"
What argument are you forwarding that you think nobody can refute?
lol
OK, first you stupidly try to equate the displaying of a flag with me saying we ought to be afraid of people "who often wrap themselves in the U.S. flag." Either you're just playing dumb or you really do not understand the usage of idioms. Now you're asking me to restate my arguments after you just wrote, "If you answer it I'll be happy to comment on your arguments...there is plenty of funny stuff there too. "
What's funny, entertaining and slightly impressive, is your ability to repeatedly play dumb. Or were you just being funny when you wrote that you'd reply to my arguments?
