Reply #10: Right on cue.

[Hello_Kitty]

Multinationals, largely led by the US. Death squads in Guatemala, Mexico, Chile, East Timor, Korea, El Salvador, Honduras... should I go on? We PUT Mexicans in worse poverty by voting for politicians who supported NAFTA.

Multinationals. And no, not "led by the U.S.". Led by their CEOs and shareholders, who have no loyalty to anything but quarterly profits. Don't blame voters for NAFTA. The only candidate opposed to it was Ross Perot, who was right on this one issue, but wasn't a legitimate contender otherwise.

There is no "advanced capitalism" AND "protecting American jobs." We will not EVER revert to the golden era of American industrialism, when capital had little ability to set up sweatshops in China and we had good union jobs because the govt was worried about making sure American workers looked well-of compared to communist workers. Once communism fell--bye-bye American worker, hello foreign slave, so long suckers, thanks for killin' them reds.

It's more likely that other countries that know how to rise up against their corrupt kleptocracies will BRING US out of poverty in the future. Foreign labor isn't your enemy.


So tell me, how has that theory worked out so far? Oh yeah, it's produced the greatest global economic catastrophe in human history. See, like the rest of your fellow apologists, you forget one important detail - that the whole thing still depended on the U.S. consumer being able to buy what was being manufactured. Sweatshops in China don't create a consumer base in China that equals our market. So when Americans stopped buying, all trade pretty much came to a screeching halt. The poor countries were, and are, never going to be in a position to "rise up against their corrupt kleptocracies" as long as they take part in the fraud of globalism.