How long have you been contracting?

[escapeUK]

Well lets think of some real world examples. Apple makes its iPhones in China, which means that Apple can make more profit. It also means that local Americans who might have made those phones are out of a job, therefore the tax payers have to pay for those people to live.

So Apple saves £100 in manufacturing costs which is pure profit, the state loses the taxs that would have been paid by those making those phones, and the tax payer pays £100 in benefits. So who is benefiting from this arrangement? It certainty isnt the economy or people in large, it is big corporations.

So if you had said, economists agree that protectionism harms big corporations profits then I would agree with you. However protectionism is good for the people and good for the country.

[speling bee]

It's not a fallacy of composition. I am saying that if nations acted like a large family protectionism would have the same affect as your family not trading with anyone. I am not suggesting every family within the nation should stop trading with each other and thus the nation as a whole would be worse off (though it would be anyway). It is an analogy not composition.

You make no argument. You compare the macro with the micro, and apply the rules of the micro to the macro. But with no argument. Yes, it's an analogy. It is an analogy based on the fallacy of composition.

Ergo, sas is right about you.

[Robinho]

Americans get cheaper phones so the consumer wins.

China has American dollars in their hands, and buys say... an Aircraft from Boeing with that money which creates jobs for Americans.

The balance is restored and everyone is better off because they focused on producing the things they are good at producing.

[escapeUK]

But in the real world America has a massive trade deficit.



The successful American businessman and investor Warren Buffett was quoted in the Associated Press (January 20, 2006) as saying "The U.S trade deficit is a bigger threat to the domestic economy than either the federal budget deficit or consumer debt and could lead to political turmoil... Right now, the rest of the world owns $3 trillion more of us than we own of them."

[Robinho]

You make no argument. You compare the macro with the micro, and apply the rules of the micro to the macro. But with no argument. Yes, it's an analogy. It is an analogy based on the fallacy of composition.

No, composition implies that i'm saying that the whole has the same properties as the parts it is composed of because it is composed of only those parts. I am saying the nation is the part in this analogy, and the globe is the whole.

[nomadd]

There's thread creep, and there's thread creep. But this thread - wow.

[Robinho]

But in the real world America has a massive trade deficit.



The successful American businessman and investor Warren Buffett was quoted in the Associated Press (January 20, 2006) as saying "The U.S trade deficit is a bigger threat to the domestic economy than either the federal budget deficit or consumer debt and could lead to political turmoil... Right now, the rest of the world owns $3 trillion more of us than we own of them."

That's because central banks have sneakily been printing money which all got either sent abroad or sewn up in housing disguising domestic inflation. Of course that will go wrong sooner or later when the credibility of the dollar is brought into question.

[speling bee]

No, composition implies that i'm saying that the whole has the same properties as the parts it is composed of because it is composed of only those parts.

Wrong again. In your case Google is your friend.

[xoggoth]

Where's the retired - glad to be out of it option?

[eek]

Where's the retired - glad to be out of it option?

Is that attached to the why on earth does Sas still visit here option?