Don't be so naive. You rely on the military being able to destroy China? How? With nuclear weapons? Just how long do think it will take before there are a sufficient number of Frankfort school graduates among our populace with their "white guilt" and "anti western" indoctrination that such war would simply be unthinkable even it if meant subjugation of the country. I shudder to think of the numbers today of people who are, say, the age that Obama attracts, that probably think Mexico would be justified in reclaiming the Southwest. After all, we ARE guilty of stealing from them. Besides, once the North American Union comes to be, who is going to fight for "North America?" With the death of patriotism and nationalism, there will be no motive to defend a nation and no no nation to defend. Saving ones own skin will be the prevalent mind set...even if such means collaborating with an occupier. This total degradation of our national spirit may take some years, even past my life expectancy, but China has the mind to wait for what it wants.

We are no doubt approaching the time when Beijing will be dictating our policies. A country that still honors the memory of a man who killed tens of millions of his own people (Mao's portrait still hangs in Tianamen Square), a regime that executes members of a harmless spiritualist sect and sometimes harvests their organs for sale in transplants, a nation whose motto is "Life is Cheap", will absolutely own us in the near future. That is truly terrifying.

The treason of our current generation of leaders is just sickening...

It is conjecture on my part, but I do believe Ford demonstrated a good deal more patriotic instinct than his modern counterparts. While he was not perfect, I don't think it is a stretch to have expected better from him than, say, the foreign-born managers of his company today who garner bigger paychecks than Henry ever did and whose motivation is primarily tied to those paychecks and not the well-being of the Michigan community, the "good name" of the company, and the long-term prospects for a company that he may have (rightly) expected his great-grandson to run. It is a somewhat pointless argument, though, to suppose what he would have and would not have done.

You are correct and I wholly agree that it is up to "us" to enforce what we expect of our industry. As workers, share holders, and as consumers we should make it clear that we expect a sort of compact with society (us) or goodbye sales. But, alas, as workers, share holders and consumers "our" sights are short and greedy - as the system expects. Like so much of "what is wrong with the world", this is first and foremost a question of our culture. Dilemma, indeed.

I wonder what Ford would have done had he lived in a time when instantaneous worldwide communications and rapid transport, to say nothing of a capable workforce and means of production outside our boarders, made it feasible and economical to "outsource." I would not bet the farm on Ford being such a patriot or nationalist that he would have acted differently from any modern industrialist. And patriotism/nationalism is the only impetus to override the profit motive, but it must be self imposed unless we accept the notion that it should be imposed by government. Oh, I suppose that some industrialist may take the long term view of things and reason that “outsourcing”, though good in the short term, is ultimately injurious in the longer view. Killing the “golden goose” as it were. But that is also a business decision that I am not sure government should control. So, do we let business do what is meant to do or do we engage in government control and planning. Interesting dilemma.

Of course, part and parcel of having a manufacturing base is having skilled workers to make use of it. The loss of manufacturing jobs overseas (as opposed to job loss due to automation) thus represents not just a dangerous loss of our material ability to produce goods, but also of the knowledge and skill required to run all those goods-producing machines. To that extent, at least, the loss of manufacturing jobs is an evil in itself.

Yes, indeed, manufacturing is what is important. Consider that somewhere between thirty-five to fifty percent of the job loss in manufacturing over the last couple of decades may indded have been through the rise of productivity (via machines and, important to note, also via increased human ingenuity in developing better processes) but what about the other percentage shipped overseas?

Is this a sound practice? Consider that when we underwent the first industrial revolution, we did not ship agriculture overseas; we, as a nation, became capable of producing more with less people. Those people benefitted from the second industrial revolution which created our manufacturing base. In both cases our economic independence as a country and our people's interests were, on the whole, preserved. Yes, there were greedy industrialists and, yes, there have been cultural implications of moving workers from the small town to bigger urban centers, but never before had an oligarchy actively conspired in shipping the livelihoods and economic independence of a nation overseas so that the their small clique at the top could get super-rich! I would venture to say that Henry Ford would have been appalled.

As an important aside, the industrialists of the former days of the nation at least had some impetus to spend a portion of their fortunes on their fellow citizens. We have universities and libraries named after them. Where are today's "industrialists" sending their billions of dollars? Are they busyily worrying about the middle-aged guy in Detroit who has lost his auto job and retraining him so that he can benefit from the "New Economy"? How about helping their civilizational "neighbors" in poor locales such as Moldova that are dirt poor and need, say, new orphanges. No! As is the case, they are mainly preoccupied with "big" and "important" (as defined by geniuses from rock groups and other such uneducated, drug-addicted morons) projects that have to do with wiping out aids, third world debt owed to us, and other problems that ail some far-away, properly designated pc-victim group.

We live in sick times and they will get sicker. The economy is a reflection of the insanity. Wishing for a calamity that will wipe the elites out is just that, wishful thinking, because, as Dr. Wilson and others have pointed out, it is the ordinary folk who will suffer the brunt of the consequences.

Which is fitting for a nation that is increasingly reflecting 3rd world demographics. Mr Miller and Mr Morgan have said it all. The workforce follows the available jobs, but the jobs also follow the available workforce. Change the workforce into one that demands skilled, well paying jobs and those jobs will be supplied.