<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [Vision2020] Essay on Globalism by Ron
Paul</title></head><body>
<div>Thanks for the frank answer, Roger. So would you support
eliminating price supports for wheat in the Farm Bill now being
drafted in Congress?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Mark</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>At 11:11 AM -0700 7/25/07, lfalen wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Mark<br>
In most cases I do not favor agricultural subsidies. The beef
industry has never wanted them. Some however have taken
advantage of hay subsidies. A lot of dairymen think that they would be
better off without milk price supports. I think that paying farmers to
not grow something is ridiculous. I don't think much of corporate
subsidies (welfare) either. In some isolated cases they may be
warranted, but usually not.<br>
Roger<br>
-----Original message-----<br>
From: Mark Solomon msolomon@moscow.com<br>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:06:40 -0700<br>
To: lfalen lfalen@turbonet.com, "Ted Moffett"
starbliss@gmail.com<br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Essay on Globalism by Ron Paul<br>
<br>
> Roger,<br>
><br>
> One person's subsidy is another person's good<br>
> national policy. How about agricultural price<br>
> supports, specifically, U.S. wheat?<br>
><br>
> Mark<br>
><br>
> At 10:13 AM -0700 7/24/07, lfalen wrote:<br>
> >You are right about The UN Security Council. I<br>
> >am on the fence about NAFTA. I favor<br>
> >international trade with sufficient safe guards<br>
> >as to health and safety. In general I do not<br>
> >like tariffs and subsidies. If however some<br>
> >foreign products are subsidized by the country<br>
> >that produces them, it is only fair that a<br>
> >tariff be placed on their entry into the US.<br>
> >Tariffs or subsidies should only be used to keep<br>
> >things in balance.<br>
> >Roger<br>
> >-----Original message-----<br>
> >From: "Ted Moffett" starbliss@gmail.com<br>
> >Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 02:30:27 -0700<br>
> >To: lfalen lfalen@turbonet.com<br>
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Essay on Globalism by Ron Paul<br>
> ><br>
> >> Roger et. al.<br>
> >><br>
> >> If you think giving the UN more authority is a
mistake, then what do you<br>
> >> think about the WTO and NAFTA? The WTO as an
organization and NAFTA as a<br>
> >> trade agreement are both criticized by
anti-globalization critics as<br>
> >> lessening national sovereignty, but serving the
interests of the<br>
> >> multinational corporations and the class of super
rich. Even Ross Perot<br>
> >> during his presidential run mentioned the
"sucking sound" of jobs lost to<br>
> >> Mexico under NAFTA. The promises that NAFTA
would open up a big market for<br>
> >> US products in Mexico has proven so far to be
false. It was thought that<br>
> >> NAFTA would help solve the illegal immigration
problem by furthering good<br>
> >> paying jobs in Mexico, but we know this is so far
not greatly true. Now they<br>
> >> are planning a super highway from Mexico into the
USA, potentially with<br>
> >> Mexican trucks and drivers taking over some of the
US trucking industry!<br>
> >> Read about it at the link below:<br>
> >><br>
> >>
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497<br>
> >><br>
> >> WTO rules and agreements that do not protect food
safety in reality (maybe<br>
> >> on paper) are one reason we have unsafe imports
coming into the US, if I<br>
> >> have my facts straight.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Anyway, it has been hoped the UN would help to
stop war, genocide and<br>
> >> improve human rights, but the Security Council is
one road block to this<br>
> >> goal. I understand that China's Security
Council vote has blocked efforts<br>
> >> to address the genocide in Darfur China has
oil interests in the Sudan.<br>
> >> Read about this at this link:<br>
> >><br>
> >>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21143-2004Dec22.html<br
>
> >><br>
> >> A stronger UN might help to stop war and
genocide...But the potential for<br>
> >> abuse of this power is a matter of concern.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Ted Moffett<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> On 7/23/07, lfalen <lfalen@turbonet.com>
wrote:<br>
> >> ><br>
> >> > Ted<br>
> >> > I think that much of what you say is correct.
But giving more authority to<br>
> >> > a world body like the United Nations would
make matters worse not better.<br>
> >> > Other than for The Security Council third
world nations have an equal to</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>> >> > that of the US.
This would not improve health or environmental problems.<br>
> >> > The FDA and EPA should be strengthened The
safety of all products coming<br>
> >> > into the US should be assured. I believe
business should be based on the<br>
> >> > profit motive, with adequate government
restrictions to insure safety and<br>
> >> > environmental concerns .<br>
> >> > Roger<br>
> >> > -----Original message-----<br>
> >> > From: "Ted Moffett"
starbliss@gmail.com<br>
> >> > Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 20:33:07 -0700<br>
> >> > To: lfalen lfalen@turbonet.com<br>
> >> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Essay on Globalism
by Ron Paul<br>
> >> ><br>
> >> > > On 7/21/07, lfalen
<lfalen@turbonet.com> wrote:<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > > Having said that it is
important to realize we live in a global<br>
> >> > society<br>
> >> > > > and market place. We have to be
willing to compete in the global<br>
> >> > market.<br>
> >> > > > Just do not place our laws second
to anything else.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > There are very problematic and
apparently mutually exclusive rules<br>
> >> > governing<br>
> >> > > competing for profit in a global
marketplace and not placing our laws<br>
> >> > second<br>
> > > > > to anything else. Getting rid of
trade barriers and government<br>
> >> > regulation<br>
> >> > > of business has been promoted as a
benefit to most all in an open<br>
> >> > worldwide<br>
> >> > > economy.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > But the profit motive as a overriding
rasion d'etre in the<br>
> >> > > global economy with multinational
corporations, will inexorably result<br>
> >> > in a<br>
> >> > > disregard for some fundamental US
domestic interests, US workers' wages<br>
> >> > and<br>
> >> > > jobs, safety and environmental law
(Bush's "Clear Skies Act." Orwell<br>
> >> > would<br>
> >> > > love it!), if not the US Constitution,
etc.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > How can US domestic businesses compete
with businesses in nations with<br>
> >> > few<br>
> >> > > if any environmental or safety laws,
without pressure to lower our<br>
> >> > standards<br>
> >> > > that add costs to business? The
EPA has lost power under the Bush<br>
> >> > > administration:<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Objections to Bush's "Clear Skies
Act" from the National Council of<br>
> >> > > Churches:<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > >
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/04bushonair.html<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Protection of the global climate is an
essential requirement for<br>
> >> > faithful<br>
> >> > > human stewardship of God's creation on
Earth. Our own National Academy<br>
> >> > of<br>
> >> > > Sciences --- joining an overwhelming
scientific consensus --- concluded<br>
> >> > in<br>
> >> > > 2001 that carbon emissions from power
plants are significantly<br>
> >> > contributing<br>
> >> > > to the increase in global warming. Yet,
your initiative pointedly does<br>
> >> > not<br>
> >> > > set mandatory standards of reduction for
these emissions. A<br>
> >> > multi-pollutant<br>
> >> > > approach must address all significant
emissions from power plants,<br>
> >> > including<br>
> >> > > carbon emissions.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Clean air is as essential to life as a
stable climate. Yet the<br>
> >> > Environmental<br>
> >> > > Protection Agency reports that millions
of Americans live in areas that<br>
> >> > have<br>
> >> > > been deemed unhealthy to breathe. Power
plants are the single greatest<br>
> >> > > source of industrial air pollution in
the nation. The American Lung<br>
> >> > > Association asserts that the attainment
of reductions of sulfur dioxide,<br>
> >> > > nitrogen oxides, and mercury that would
take effect under the existing<br>
> >> > Clean<br>
> >> > > Air Act will be delayed for years if
"Clear Skies" is adopted by<br>
> >> > Congress.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > ---------------------<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > It is becoming increasing hard to
separate what is an exclusively<br>
> >> > domestic<br>
> >> > > interest from an international one.<br>
> >> > > For example, are US citizens expendable
as warriors to protect the<br>
> >> > > multinational economic system under the
guise that they are protecting<br>
> >> > US<br>
> >> > > citizens from attacks on our soil?
The oil in the Middle East is not<br>
> >> > being<br>
> >> > > protected by our military just for US
current or future</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>> >> > consumption.
Access<br>
> >> > > to this oil is critical to keeping the
multinational economic system<br>
> >> > > functioning. It is argued that
keeping this system functioning and<br>
> >> > > expanding is critical for US economic
benefits, but at a cost to whom?<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Ron Paul comments on the "elites"
hypocritical pandering to the<br>
> >> > "American<br>
> >> > > way" should be at the top of the
list of political ruses for<br>
> >> > politicians.<br>
> >> > >
-----------------------------------------<br>
> >> > > Consider one issue that has been in the
news recently, food safety. How<br>
> >> > can<br>
> >> > > we allow free trade with other nations
who may not follow our food<br>
> >> > safety<br>
> >> > > and testing standards without placing
our laws second? The answer is we<br>
> >> > > can't, not without very creative
legislation that violates the spirit of<br>
> >> > the<br>
> >> > > food safety laws. It's one thing
to have standards in place, but<br>
> >> > without<br>
> >> > > the rigorous testing to enforce the
laws, food safety is in name only:<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > U.S. food imports outrun FDA
resources<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> ><br>
>
>>http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2007-03-18-food<span
></span>-safety-usat_N.htm<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > "The FDA has so few resources, all
it can do is target high-risk things,<br>
> >> > > give a pass to everything else and hope
it is OK," says William<br>
> >> > Hubbard,a<br>
> >> > > former FDA associate commissioner who
retired in 2005."The public<br>
> >> > probably<br>
> >> > > has the perception ä that they're more
protected than they really are."<br>
> > > > > --------------------<br>
> >> > > Regarding another hot button issue that
seems to defy political<br>
> >> > > partisanship, US jobs and wages, both so
called liberals and<br>
> >> > conservatives<br>
> >> > > raise questions about the loss of good
paying jobs to cheap foreign<br>
> >> > labor,<br>
> >> > > replaced by lower paying jobs. Of
course the business and financial<br>
> >> > > "elites" that Ron Paul
references pursue the cheapest labor they can<br>
> >> > find,<br>
> >> > > anywhere in the world. If profit
is their primary goal in competing in<br>
> >> > > business, they'd be a fool not to.
And even if they tried to show<br>
> >> > patriotic<br>
> >> > > loyalty to US workers by maintaining
good paying US jobs, their less<br>
> >> > > scrupulous competitors would force them
out of business.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > This story at the web link below is
about cheap imported labor from<br>
> >> > India<br>
> >> > > into Dubai. And a Dubai company
was going to take over US port<br>
> >> > security? I<br>
> >> > > don't know of any egregious current
examples in the US like this, but<br>
> >> > there<br>
> >> > > is good data regarding lowering of wages
in some professions, or loss of<br>
> >> > the<br>
> >> > > whole manufacturing base in some
sectors, in the USA, from the influx of<br>
> >> > > cheap "illegal immigrant"
labor, and/or the moving of factories and<br>
> >> > > businesses that take advantage of cheap
abundant labor in other nations:<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> ><br>
>
>>http://news.aol.com/story/_a/dubai-skyscraper-becomes-worlds-<span
></span>tallest/20070721134709990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Most of the 4,000 laborers are from
India.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Toiling in slave-like conditions in
Dubai's sizzling summer with no set<br>
> >> > > minimum wage and working in three shifts
around the clock, they are<br>
> >> > building<br>
> >> > > the $1 billion skyscraper in the heart
of Downtown Dubai, a 500-acre<br>
> >> > > development project worth $20
billion.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Protests against labor abuse in Dubai
are regularly recorded by human<br>
> >> > rights<br>
> >> > > groups but are rarely reported in local
press. However, it's a<br>
> >> > prevailing<br>
> >> > > belief the workers are happy with
whatever pitiful salary they get to<br>
> >> > send<br>
> >> > > home to dirt-poor families in India.<br>
> >> > > --------------<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > "...it's a prevailing belief the
workers are happy..."<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Sounds like the old south...Or a certain
local religious leader...<br>
> >> > > -------------------<br>
> >> > > Simulation and hyper reality
indeed!</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Politicians who are bought by the
multinational economic system, wear<br>
> >> > the<br>
> >> > > flag and salute! They simulate
patriotism so well it is taken for<br>
> >> > reality,<br>
> >> > > and the media delivers their patriotic
holograms to float in peoples'<br>
> >> > homes<br>
> >> > > on their high definition wide screen
monitors.<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > It is just as Baudrillard contends, if I
can stretch his thinking onto<br>
> >> > the<br>
> >> > > Procrustean bed of this theme... The
simulation of patriotism for a<br>
> >> > strong<br>
> >> > > and independent nation, via modern media
and tactics of advertising and<br>
> >> > > marketing, public opinion surveying and
focus groups, is projected and<br>
> >> > > respected, while the real empire (the
USA as a separate and sovereign<br>
> >> > > nation) is being undermined...Highly
sophisticated psycho/social<br>
> >> > > psychoanalytic methods are now applied
with full force to the selling of<br>
> >> > > politicians. Image is all.
How else could Bush have won two elections<br>
> >> > for<br>
> >> > > president?<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Globalism will win in the end...And US
patriots will have holograms of<br>
> >> > the<br>
> >> > > once sovereign and proud USA beamed into
their compounds for "correct<br>
> >> > think"<br>
> >> > > sessions...<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > > Ted Moffett<br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> > ><br>
> >> ><br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
><br>
></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>