Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 62

Thread: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

  1. #31
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,488

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    First appeared on a Fokker. Brits had the first working jet aircraft but the Me-262 hit the skies first.

    So maybe it's their development that is faster, not the invention itself.
    Fokker was Dutch.

    And, the He 178 was the first trully jet propelled aircraft to fly. The He 280 was the first jet fighter and the 262 was the first jet fighter to see combat.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #32
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    But, a schoolhouse? Yeah, I think that needs to be given to an American company, period.
    No problem there, just as long as that American company realizes that all they'll get is the lowest bid made.

  3. #33
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,053

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    No, it doesn't. You Libs and the RINO want to think so, in order to make more flamebeaux, but it doesn't.
    The Capitalist Mainfesto: The Empiricist Fallacy and Straw Man Attacks on Capitalism by Andrew Bernstein -- Capitalism Magazine

    Businessmen frequently violate the principles of capitalism. They often yelp for tariffs and other protectionist restrictions; seek monopolistic governmental franchises; look for subsidies and corporate bailouts; clamor for anti-trust legislation and other legal constraints to be imposed on their competitors. On a regular basis, they call for governmental initiation of force to violate the rights of both their actual and prospective competitors.
    http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5361

    Since there is no moral argument for preventing one person from trading with another, anti-traders shift their argument to a patriotic appeal such as suggesting that we're losing our manufacturing sector. That doesn't square with the facts. According to a report given by Dr. William Strauss, senior economist for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, titled "Is U.S. Losing Its Manufacturing Base?" the answer is no. In each of the past 60 years, U.S. manufacturing output growth has averaged 4 percent and productivity growth has averaged 3 percent. Manufacturing is going through the same process as agriculture. In 1900, 41 percent of American workers were employed in agriculture; today, only 2 percent are and agricultural output is greater. In 1940, 35 percent of workers were employed in manufacturing jobs; today, it's about 10 percent. Again, because of huge productivity gains, manufacturing output is greater.
    We have now officially established that you have no clue what capitalism is.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 02-17-10 at 02:18 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  4. #34
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,488

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    And your source is an objectivist philosopher?...
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #35
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,053

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    And your source is an objectivist philosopher?...
    No. Capitalist Magazine. Where is your source? Oh I know. Your economic illiteracy.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  6. #36
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    I'm not a hard core capitalist, however I am one to generally believe that a majority capitalist system is going to be best. I'm going to try to describe a legitimate reason for this without it being blatant protectionist other than the BS “Common Sense”.

    In any good business you work according to the requirements placed on you by the customers. If Apple went to Intel and said “We want you to make a chip for our new iMac, and you can design it any way you want, but its gotten use our Silicon (parts).” While Apple is “protecting” their own interest, they are not stepping outside of general capitalistic ideas here. Both sides have a choice. Apple to try and demand such a requirement and Intel in choosing if they want to take that limitation on to satisfy the customer.

    Essentially, we in America ARE the customers for the government. They are spending our money, our resources, acting on behalf of us. As such, if one of our requirements (essentially as the customer) is that the money we’re giving the government to spend on various things (military, public works, grants, etc) MUST be reinvested into American interests, and that such a requirement is more important to us than simply “the cheapest” or even “the best”, then the Government is simply doing as their customer is wishing.

    Additionally its hard to truly compare the Government to a company. A company gets money from goods or services it provides and in turn uses that to make more money.

    The Government makes no goods and provides few services that are truly paid for outside of essentially covering cost. The money its using for the most part is not something it earned, but the people’s money that is taxed from them. By that very nature it makes us in part the customers and it takes it out of the purely private business, capitalistic model.

    Indeed, by its very nature, the governments job is to SERVE THE PEOPLE, not make money which separates it completely from any and every other business. So in its cases something like this, while perhaps called protectionism, is not equal to say requiring corporations in general to have to use American products only. If it’s believed to be in the best interests of the citizens of this country, in regards to the economy, that tax dollars spent on American products re-introducing that money into domestic rather than foreign markets than the government SHOULD do that.

    Those that try to equate the government and its spending to private business and immediately throw out the “capitalist” term are ignoring the fact that the two entities are not equal.

  7. #37
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,488

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    No. Capitalist Magazine. Where is your source? Oh I know. Your economic illiteracy.
    Who's your next source? Keith Olberman?...
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,053

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I'm not a hard core capitalist, however I am one to generally believe that a majority capitalist system is going to be best. I'm going to try to describe a legitimate reason for this without it being blatant protectionist other than the BS “Common Sense”.

    In any good business you work according to the requirements placed on you by the customers. If Apple went to Intel and said “We want you to make a chip for our new iMac, and you can design it any way you want, but its gotten use our Silicon (parts).” While Apple is “protecting” their own interest, they are not stepping outside of general capitalistic ideas here. Both sides have a choice. Apple to try and demand such a requirement and Intel in choosing if they want to take that limitation on to satisfy the customer.

    Essentially, we in America ARE the customers for the government. They are spending our money, our resources, acting on behalf of us. As such, if one of our requirements (essentially as the customer) is that the money we’re giving the government to spend on various things (military, public works, grants, etc) MUST be reinvested into American interests, and that such a requirement is more important to us than simply “the cheapest” or even “the best”, then the Government is simply doing as their customer is wishing.

    Additionally its hard to truly compare the Government to a company. A company gets money from goods or services it provides and in turn uses that to make more money.

    The Government makes no goods and provides few services that are truly paid for outside of essentially covering cost. The money its using for the most part is not something it earned, but the people’s money that is taxed from them. By that very nature it makes us in part the customers and it takes it out of the purely private business, capitalistic model.

    Indeed, by its very nature, the governments job is to SERVE THE PEOPLE, not make money which separates it completely from any and every other business. So in its cases something like this, while perhaps called protectionism, is not equal to say requiring corporations in general to have to use American products only. If it’s believed to be in the best interests of the citizens of this country, in regards to the economy, that tax dollars spent on American products re-introducing that money into domestic rather than foreign markets than the government SHOULD do that.

    Those that try to equate the government and its spending to private business and immediately throw out the “capitalist” term are ignoring the fact that the two entities are not equal.
    That is not what protectionism describes though. Protectionism is the action of a government taking active steps to protecting the local economy. Not a company taking active steps to protect itself. If you want to say that the government should protect our economy because you think that using the roads the government builds, VIA rail and medicare somehow makes you a customer of the government. That is fine. But don't try to say that it is not protectionism because it clearly is. Making the government protect our economy violates every rule of free market capitalism.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  9. #39
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I'm not a hard core capitalist, however I am one to generally believe that a majority capitalist system is going to be best. I'm going to try to describe a legitimate reason for this without it being blatant protectionist other than the BS “Common Sense”.

    In any good business you work according to the requirements placed on you by the customers. If Apple went to Intel and said “We want you to make a chip for our new iMac, and you can design it any way you want, but its gotten use our Silicon (parts).” While Apple is “protecting” their own interest, they are not stepping outside of general capitalistic ideas here. Both sides have a choice. Apple to try and demand such a requirement and Intel in choosing if they want to take that limitation on to satisfy the customer.

    Essentially, we in America ARE the customers for the government. They are spending our money, our resources, acting on behalf of us. As such, if one of our requirements (essentially as the customer) is that the money we’re giving the government to spend on various things (military, public works, grants, etc) MUST be reinvested into American interests, and that such a requirement is more important to us than simply “the cheapest” or even “the best”, then the Government is simply doing as their customer is wishing.

    Additionally its hard to truly compare the Government to a company. A company gets money from goods or services it provides and in turn uses that to make more money.

    The Government makes no goods and provides few services that are truly paid for outside of essentially covering cost. The money its using for the most part is not something it earned, but the people’s money that is taxed from them. By that very nature it makes us in part the customers and it takes it out of the purely private business, capitalistic model.

    Indeed, by its very nature, the governments job is to SERVE THE PEOPLE, not make money which separates it completely from any and every other business. So in its cases something like this, while perhaps called protectionism, is not equal to say requiring corporations in general to have to use American products only. If it’s believed to be in the best interests of the citizens of this country, in regards to the economy, that tax dollars spent on American products re-introducing that money into domestic rather than foreign markets than the government SHOULD do that.

    Those that try to equate the government and its spending to private business and immediately throw out the “capitalist” term are ignoring the fact that the two entities are not equal.
    I am only addressing the Italicized portion:

    I believe that comparing the Government to a corporation or a company is completely accurate. I think that the Government presents itself in function and it theory, as a corporation would; with each new Presidency a limited-time brand.

    The Government does, essentially, provide us with a common service or good. We have troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan harvesting national security. The CEO of the Government Corporation makes speeches about defense, to continue with this example, all of which will impact the amount the customer will pay. Obama giving a speech is much like that of a CEO giving a speech as there will be a direct and implicit relationship between what is said and the price the customer will pay for the service.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  10. #40
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,488

    Re: Brick by brick, American business loses edge Army chooses German firm

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    That is not what protectionism describes though. Protectionism is the action of a government taking active steps to protecting the local economy. Not a company taking active steps to protect itself. If you want to say that the government should protect our economy because you think that using the roads the government builds, VIA rail and medicare somehow makes you a customer of the government. That is fine. But don't try to say that it is not protectionism because it clearly is. Making the government protect our economy violates every rule of free market capitalism.
    Insisting that my money be spent in the United States isn't protectionism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •