| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Yep, you made it Ya-ta Boy ... we disagree! |
Whew! The universe is in synch again. A relief if ever there was one. (Not really. If I ever agreed with Rapier, that would signal the end of civilization as we know it.)
What I said before does SEEM to be the case because governments and a segment of the population (as reflected in the media) say, "Get involved!" in one case and then when we do, the other part of society/political parties chime in with, "Imperialist dogs, go home!" rhetoric. It gets very confusing. Much like what happens here in Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wangja wrote: |
No, that's not the reason.
Even if Korea and Japan opened their markets to US cars, there would be almost no buyers. If they were going to buy an imported car, they would not choose a Chevrolet or Ford form USA they would choose a BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar from Europe or Lexus from Japan.
Seriously, and I not mean to offend, but who in their right mind would buy an American car when they could have something - anything - else?
Where else in the world does petrol cost less than 3 USD a gallon for one thing?
When US manufacturers start making cars that people want they will sell more cars. 75% of Americans do not want a GM car.
Edit: I don't have figures to hand, but I do believe that most Japanese and Korean-badged cars sold in USA are in fact made in USA by US citizens now. |
Until earlier this year, al Korean cars were made outside America. Hyundai opened up a new factory in Alabama sometime this year, so Hyundai at least is being produced in America, although perhaps not every car sold here.
Daewoo is still manufactured outside the States, but is owned by GM. It is one of the few profitable arms of GM as well.
Don't know if they make Kia at the Hyundai plant.
As for Japanese cars, yup, they're pretty much all made in the States now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lastat06513
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Location: Sensus amo Caesar , etiamnunc victus amo uni plebian
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The problem is that the sticking point in my argument is that economics IS connected to military and foreign policy (they all go hand-in hand with one another).
But most ordinary Americans don't see it that way.
Alot of them think that it is ok to trade with anyone as long as money is involved and politics is not.
a nation's military is intended on only one goal; to protect the nation.
nothing more, nothing less.
What alot of Americans are now seeing as well as the majority of the world, is that GW Bush is trying to project a world dominating image of the US, which is what alot of Americans don't want or don't care about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lastat06513 wrote: |
The problem is that the sticking point in my argument is that economics IS connected to military and foreign policy (they all go hand-in hand with one another).
But most ordinary Americans don't see it that way.
Alot of them think that it is ok to trade with anyone as long as money is involved and politics is not.
a nation's military is intended on only one goal; to protect the nation.
nothing more, nothing less.
What alot of Americans are now seeing as well as the majority of the world, is that GW Bush is trying to project a world dominating image of the US, which is what alot of Americans don't want or don't care about. |
There's a lot I'd agree with there.
But "a nation's military is intended on only one goal; to protect the nation" raises the question, what would happen to US overseas interests (and people) threatened in the pursuit of trade? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That's protecting the nation isn't it? You're a bit too literal there Wangja. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, if "the Nation" means continental USA (and territories), and a Coca-Cola plant in, say, Botswana is attacked, that would not be an attack on the nation, but might goad an isolationist government into foreign activity.
If on the other hand "the Nation" includes any US asset outside the US, then the US is not isolationist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i'd believe it is any american assests myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Then we are saying the same thing BB. To be isolationist, all those assets outside US must be closed. It is nigh impossible to be isolationist politically and yet maintain commercial links outside that isolation.
As soon as there are assets - trading bases if you like - outside the "mother country", and the mother country feels they are to be protected, foreign policy has become non-isolationist.
Empires have been founded on such policies - Rome, France, Britain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well then you have the venecians, genose (sp?), dutch, et. al who didn't have empires nor engage in too many wars overseas (yes, the dutch did have a couple colonies, i admit), plus modern-day japanese. Yes, the Americans protect the Japanese, but you don't see the Japanese losing any economic interests abroad and having the US go in and helping out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| the venecians, genose (sp?), dutch, |
Actually, the Venetians and Dutch did have empires and I think the Genoese did (or at least tried to). Venice controlled a lot of the Adriatic coast, south Greece, Crete and the other Aegean islands. Holland had what is now Sri Lanka, Indonesia, part of Malaya, Surinam and New York. The Dutch fought a series (3?) wars with the English over trade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
No nation can become an isolationist by choice anymore. The world is too interconnected.
As for economics, the US business and economics is set in gung-ho motion for full steam ahead and will continue that way for a long time to come.
As for as military.. I don't see that become isolationist either - much to the dismay of most of the world and even half or possibly more than half of Americans themselves. I think everyone would like to see a drastic shift in keeping the troops at home for awhile.
Peace-keeping forces will be the first to stay at home I'm sure.. as far as bases in far-off places.. seems like thats going to stay like that for awhile into the future - even if the restructuring of it and being in Korea where less will soon be doesn't seem like it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChimpumCallao
Joined: 17 May 2005
Location: your mom
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moldy Rutabaga wrote: |
But in total, I wouldn't be surprised if a possibly Democrat president told the world, "if we're such baaad people, why don't you take care of your own f--ing problems?" and turned the country isolationist. Look at the falling levels of foreign tourism.
Ken:> |
dude, one can hope. that would be fantastic.
the US may turn isolationist as far as military goes, but with it's (RELATIVELY) free-ish market companies will never be dense enough to give up 5.7 billion potential customers lurking outside the good ol' US of A. And as much as everyone hates to admit it...a big chunk of those 5.7 are ready and willing to gobble up their fashion, food, culture, and entertainment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
