echotango

Could you explain what services, primary and secondary income mean in this context and why they matter? Im sorry I don't read German.

>investing in your country

>foreign direct investment

>sheiks owning the sports teams and chineese businessman owning all the prime housing

We're saying the same thing

A trade deficit means that, on net, your trade partners end up with your currency and no goods to buy with it. So they start buying up assets in your country. Factories, companies, land, housing, bonds, etc. so by maintaining a trade deficit for so long, we have legally sold a large fraction of the assets in our country to foreign investors. (Foreign direct investment) How do you think Trump made his billions?

Having Saudi Oil Sheiks own all the Soccer teams in England is the result of the UK trade deficit.

Having chineese bussinessmen buy up all the valuable real estate in our biggest cities is a result of the trade deficit.

Massive underemployment (more baristas fewer mechanics) is a result of the trade deficit.

Because an earlier post misunderstood Rand's position and I wanted to clarify it. I guess I should have been more clear. My appologies.

Yup. Heavily protectionist. Thats exactly how an unbiased economist would characterize US trade policy. Stop watching msnbc dude.

The USA became the world's largest evonomy with massive tariffs on basically all imports. Smoot Hawley Act anyone? Those were removed gradualy starting in the 1970's and lo and behold the trade deficit sky rocketted while the manufacturing economy plummeted.

Lol people won't actually address your point they just downvote your post. Hn is very classy when people bring up politics

The inability to devalue currency is why greece cant recover. The Euro is idiotic.

>In a cross-country analysis of over 125 countries, this study finds that corruption is lower in countries where a greater share of parliamentarians are women.

Can people please use their critical thinking skills here? Why would countries like Saudi Arabia have more corruption than countries like Sweeden? If you seriously think it's because Sweeden allows women in government you need your head checked.

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

I totally agree. I was pointing out that church isn't really modern architechture as Rand saw it.

Agreed. It's pretty questionable to tell a Frenchman he shouldn't be proud of the Eiffel Tower because he didnt personally design it.

I agree with you, but only because you seem to have missed the crux (no irony intended) of Ayn Rand's ideology. She hated how even the style of the buildings around her embodied a people and culture she saw as a threat to her vision of the world and wanted to tear down. She would have no "homage" to it at all.

I agree, it is beautiful. But Ayn Rand would have hated it. That design is steeped in European and Christian traditions and symbolism. Those things are all anathema to her ideology.

There are 5 billion impoverished people who would move to a first world country and depress natives' wages to nil if given a chance. Those who haven't done so yet shouldn't be discounted either.

This is the only comment that gets at the heart of the matter. I would add that culpability is not zero sum. The shooter was 100% responsible, and the others were also partially responsible.

That's not what the article is about. Its about whole cities becoming unemployed as a result of factories moving overseas, and unfair trade deals signed in the early 1990's. The people in that figue moved because they found work somewhere else, not because their entire community was terminated overnight.

Great point about the complexity of the real world. I would add that people who favor simple explanations are more likely to be centrist (supports status quo) because they are less likely to question the simple explanations handed to them.

George W Bush in so many words said "We must invade Iraq or they will nuke us." Compared to that, any arguement against the war would have seemed like a lot of logical jumps, but the simple argument was a lie.

So you're saying if fox news set up a 'private' website to host trump's posts and only allowed pro-trump people to comment that wouldnt violate free speech because it is a private website and the government itself isn't banning people who criticize it.

>Twitter does not magically become a Public Forum, just because the President uses it.

If twitter isnt a public forum, then trump should be able to block whoever he wants.

Do you think federal courts would ban President Hillary from twitter because twitter has a policy of banning right-wing speech Hillary wouldnt be allowed to ban herself?

If this article had been published in 1992 when NAFTA, free trade and immigration were actually being debated, it would have been ridiculed by the establishment as backwards and probably racist anti-globalization propaganda. Even now, questioning the govenment economic policies that directly resulted in this mess lands you on a professional blacklist at 'respected' publications.

He is saying that race is correlated with almost everything, not racism. You seem to be claiming all statistical differences between racial groups are a result of racism. But black people for instance aren't more likey to listen to rap music because of racism.

If the Republicans dont have a monopoly on anti-science ideas, what is just one anti-science position held by Democrats?