In response to:

Liberals Pine for China's Top-Down Society

Jerome41 Wrote: Dec 19, 2012 2:36 AM
Fletch The working conditions and pay is awful. ALso, if workers get more barganing power, they just ship the jobs somehwere else, such as Cambodia. The cost of a Nike pair of shoes, is about 1% labor. So, for a Nike shoe that costs $100, it cost $1 for some exploited worker overseas to make. Hardly fair. By the way, protectionism built our nation as the industrial power it is today.
True Conservative! Wrote: Dec 19, 2012 2:14 PM
And still, they take those jobs willingly ... could it be because they are far better off then they were when they didn't have a job at all? Of course, you leftists would rather they be jobless and starving but you could preen about yourselves and your "caring"! That's what leftist "caring" always produces ... starving masses!
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 19, 2012 9:26 AM
The Marxian notion of "exploitation" having been long debunked, i can only wonder if your glaring ignorance of history stems from the morons who incorrectly believe that the (massively reduced, minimally enforced and not applical to the several states) Hamiltonian tariff "built" anything or if you are an adherent to that discredited pseudio-Marxist Ha Joon Chang who has a following among dimwits but has never been taken seriously be economists or historians.
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 19, 2012 8:28 AM
Again, the working conditions and pay have been awful (and were rapidly falling in comparison to the rest of the world) under decades of socialism. These things do not (and cannot) change magically overnight. However, the greater adoption of market principles has improved the living standards of more people more rapidly than at nearly any other time in history.

btw, no competent economist or historian argues that protectionism built this country because only a buffoon believes such an utter disconnect from reality.

Kenneth416 wrote: While I will not be affected by the increase in the marginal rate of taxation of salaries and wages from the current 35% to 39.6% (as under the Clinton-era), I doubt that it will have a serious effect on the behavior of the highest earners. Note that, for a high earner who earns $1M, the additional income tax will be only $46,000, less than the cost of the luxury Mercedes or Lexus he or she drives (and which is probably provided by his/her employer, anyway). The real bite comes in the tax on Dividends and Cap Gains, where the...