From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Death of America
Keywords: Niche-Out  (Non-Institutional-Community)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:46:26 GMT

In article <14DEC199215173220@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.154053.17594@athena.mit.edu>, 
>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes...
>>i still don't know about free trade. i have seen what it has done
>>to canada, but then that was going to happen anyway due to all the
>>things i talked about in that thread. one of the main reasons that
>>i think NAFTA has been put into place is that if we make the mexicans
>>richer, they will form a bigger market for us to sell to, and they
>>will stop trying to illegally immigrate.
>
>I agree. Exactly. I'm working on my Spanish. Most mexicans won't
>benefit though. Why would you as a producer give up profit margin 
>to take their wages up? Simple fact, robotic manufacturing will be
>cheaper to implement down there. It's an open door for the Japanese
>as well, since it's still old-world bizness.

their wages *will* go up, as producers compete for labor.
or, they could form a socialist government to do it for them.

>
>>>Even though NAFTA is such an obvious illusion. Such as the free-market
>>>inside of Amerika. The one that liscenses broadcast companies, and
>>>restricts cable and telephone companies, and such (food, drugs, health..
>> 
>>waxing rhetorical again, general? ah yes. are you sure your first name
>>isn't "ragnar"?
>
>Hey, cut that out. The General's image is protected by copyright.

my apologies. besides, i meant "francisco" anyway.
have you not met?

>>>And even if the government just hands out checks left and right 
>>>(why print money, checks will do) why would "monetized" dollars
>>>buy what's produced abroad? Trash is trash after all.
>> 
>>but you're wrong. it's *not* trash. that's what they said here
>>in the 50's about japanese electronics. now look at them. they
>>said that in the 60's about japanese cars. now look at them!
>> 
>>tsk, tsk.
>
>Come on CK, not the products -- the money. Granted, barrel-loads
>are easier to transport electronically. Let's just coin a new 
>negotiable now -- the gigadollar. It'll cost 100 GD for a new vcr.

ah. i see now (watch those modifiers!)
sorry for doubting you.

maybe we could put reagan's face on the 100 gigadollar bill!
and bush's on the teradollar!
clinton can go on whatever comes after that!

>>i keep a 1/10th ounce gold coin on my desk to remind me of the ideals
>>that founded this country, and of the true value of excellence.
>>and that it will happen again someday.
>
>Good. I've been thinking about the non-institutional community approach
>regarding a techy-village. Denizens share a common commitment to gadgets
>and gizmos; light-pipes run house to house, etc. Much of our technology
>is really low cost now, and it's just the local licensing that keeps it
>from being implemented. I could have said, eco-village, or academics, or
>health nuts regarding sufficient reasons to "niche-out." The point is
>a commonality of interest recognized a beneficial to society at large
>and thus worth leaving alone for the most part, while they create new
>wares, ways, and wiles. 

works great -- until the mob comes after you.

>>>In so many words CK, I believe we agree. Neither of us see any help
>>>coming from the federal government which doesn't require selling 
>>>your soul and your first born's, and their first born's, and...
>> 
>>it's already been sold. all we have to do now is wait for the holders
>>of the notes to come cash 'em in... but in the meantime, let's
>>sell some more! what the hell? there's still the second born and the third.
>
>What you haven't put out a classified asserting that you've divorced
>yourself from the insanity of the federal government, and that the only
>debts you'll cover will be your own?? Just don't use the New York Times
>or Wash. Post, please.

because i'm not a citizen. i can just move back to canada
where there is no debt. you see? no problem.

>
>>(gee, i am starting to use *your* style... sure is more fun!
>>and no-one is listening anyway, so might as well have some fun, right?
>
>And it's cathartic. But someone is listening, you can be sure. By being
>here you have a remote possibility of being a politico someday.

you say that, just when we were starting to get along so well?

>What
>better way to roast someone than throw their `old correspondence' back
>in their face? Many tons of ink were used to repaint such youthful
>indiscretion by Mr. Bill. This is why bashing the lawyers here is so
>much fun -- they'll only go so far in response.

i hope i won't live to regret it.

--
charles
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc