Re: Marjorie Taylor Greene "likes" the Mossad-did-it Theory

On Saturday, March 6, 2021 at 12:55:09 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> Having proclaimed the free-market working of capitalism, unencumbered by 
> any government intervention, as being beneficial to the customer namely in 
> your view by permitting the customer to receive low prices, you now say.
> >>>>"Trump's policies were to negotiate fair trade agreements. We were allowing foreigners unfettered access to our markets while their governments were restricting our companies' access to their markets. Trump tried to rectify that and succeeded partially."
> I suggest you are moving the goal posts. The imposition in tariffs are 
> eventually paid by the consumer, raising the retail prices of goods. 
> Walmart's strategy is perfectly legitimate in your opinion yet you fault 
> foreign competitors for giving customers cheap prices. 
> 

The imposition of tariffs was a negotiating ploy. It was short term pain 
for long term gain. While in principle I believe in free trade, I'm OK 
with playing hardball with other countries in order to make free trade a 
two way street. You don't have free trade if only one side is practicing 
it. Maybe the tariffs didn't completely accomplish that goal but it did in 
some cases bring about fairer trade agreements which in the long run will 
help consumers on both ends of the deal.

> >>>"If they can't land a job elsewhere, maybe their job skills aren't 
> >>>worth that much to begin with." 
> 
> How the tune changes when the shoe is on the other foot. The American 
> worker now deserves special consideration and protection. 

Who said that?

> 
> But in defence of those you consider unworthy i note that it is all those 
> humble employees who were classed as "essential workers" under the 
> lockdowns and quarantines. Many who lived high on the hog with their 
> apparent privileged status discovered just how socially unnecessary they 
> were to keep society running smoothly. 
> 
> You may claim that the the pharmaceutical industries deserve the rewards 
> only when you prove they took any entrepreneurship risk. 
> 
> Research subsidized by government awards, provided with a guaranteed 
> market, while denying other companies the knowledge leading to wasteful 
> duplication of effort then with the roll-outs resulting in hold-ups in the 
> supply chain where they are unable to manufacture sufficient quantity of 
> vaccine to satisfy demand is no advert for the efficiency of the 
> pharmaceutical industry.

Many scoffed at the idea that an effective vaccine could be developed and 
made available to the public in less than a year, yet here we are with 
three companies having done so. I also don't have a problem with the 
government subsidizing these efforts. It is perfectly consistent with my 
view of the role of government which is to secure fundamental rights, the 
most precious of which is the right to life. It is is a proper function of 
government to defend its people against foreign invaders, even if those 
invaders are a virus as opposed to a foreign army. To me this is no 
different than WWII when our government used the industrial might of the 
US to churn out weapons of war in mass quantities our enemies could only 
dream of doing.