Paul Craig Roberts, the econmic dispossession of Native Born White Christian Amreicans through post 1965 legal immigration is inseparable from the economic dispossession of Native Born White Christian Americans through post 1965 legal immigration. You are a fraud for suppressing this obvious fact.

Wages were rising in the tech fields precisely because of a shortage of workers. Labor shortages are a wonderfull thing. They drive wages up and transfer power back to American workers. This is why Bill Gates fought tooth and nail to glut the tech labor market with hindu legal immigrant scab workers.

If we concede the labor shortge point-that labor scarcities are a bad thing-to our enmy-Bill Gates- then when there truely is a labor scarcity,the hindus and chinese will be imported -LEGALLY-by the thousands. This will result in the racial dispossession of NATIVE BORN WHITE CHRISTIAN AMERICA street by street,town by town city by city...no end in sight. This is exactly what has been happening since 1972 when the firwst wave of hindu and chinese scab workers were imported.

This is the fundamental issue. Paul Craig Roberts avoids the race replacement side of the labor shortage issue becuase it would offend the LEGAL immigrant transvestite-I'm not making this up-Alexnader Cockburn who allows both both hispanic and asian racialist to wage race war against Native Born White Christian Americans on the Counterpunch website. The atttacks on Native Born White American Christians on Counterpunch are quite vicious.

I condemn Paul Craig Roberts for suppresing this issue in his writings. In doing this ,he forms an alliance with the mortal enemy of Native Born White American Chritians.

Bring back the Chinese Exclusion act.

I post the above quote from 'kmarx' [probably of KMart] because he unwittingly-?-is the quintessential example of why marx's technical mistakes and imbalances 'went over' with people. He doesn't say 'well Marx's imbalance or mistake was an attempt at counter-balancing the social imbalance and mistake of his time,' as I do, almost apologizing for marxian error and its own imbalance.

Instead he points out the irrelevantly obvious, that marx was a humanist (warm and fuzzy and multi-faceted, like human beings, and to some extent panda bears) etc. Rather than exploring wherein his mistake was catastrophic. The central tenent of his own economic theory was that in economics (i.e. not in other areas of his and/or our 'tender' humanism), we need to view ourselves not as the material of or for capital but rather of labor. Then in a sort of reverse anti-capital metaphysics, pretending it wasn't metaphysics but scientific just like his opponents, marx (unwittingly-?-) created another metaphysics to 'believe' in and equally one-sided.

Of course there's nothing especially 'new' in what I posted above in my post #1 - the point I was making 'doh-doh' is that it is NOT yet properly understood; unless it is understood now (at least among the real elite). BECAUSE the hybrid or unholy marriage was made between two monsters marxism + capitalism = State Capitalism (or socialism for the rich), the *establishment especially doesn't want anyone talking about it. That's why the trotskyite christopher hitchens is such a darling of the [trotskyite-in-part] establishment.

You know I'm realizing having said 'doh-doh' and I apologize he's not such a doh-doh he's rather a 'believer' not wanting to lose his belief in marx's metaphysics, or he's a party leader not wanting to lose the party faithful? Whichever it is it is pathetic. OR worse but not so 'pathetic' he's *establishment. He's what you call a 'winner.'

'You know,' elbow-elbow, 'now there's a 'real' winner.' (like w. bush)

Just chat a little bit with the people who survived the practical application of (whether its intent was humanistic or not) marx's *new culture in Cambodia as practiced therein by their khemer rouge. How about russia or chat with the chinese except in all these places most of the ones you also want to speak to are dead. So much for spur of the moment new cultures than aren't slow evolutions.

I'd say to anyone who has read this far - go back up, and read my post #1; someone doesn't want you looking at that too much.

Sure there may be nothing new under the sun, i agree - though how much of it is understood? And to think I was yet trashed in this late day and age by a kmarx wannabe - and on THIS site no less. wow. Who says conservatives aren't tolerant?

8000 Nukes, 16 carrier groups, world's largest air force.

Push come to shove, our elite thinks they can tell the world to "stick it" when it comes to us paying anybody back because of our gigantic military. We think our gigantic military makes nothing binding really applicable to us. We will be finding out otherwise in the next 50 years or so, but the current elite will be dead and gone by the time that these things really come to pass.

Sometimes I think its a shame that post-retirement age cannot last several decades longer than it does, so the Bush'es and the Kennedy's and the Greenspan's, and the Walton's, and the CEO's, and the free trader's can see the hell that they will have wrought by roughly 2035-2040 or so, when we really will start a second-world slide if we dont change things very soon now. They will not be here though.

Now I wonder whether offshoring actually hurts America's balance sheet: Suppose XYZ corporation outsources 1000 jobs, saving $10 million yearly. XYZ makes an additional $10 million in profitwhile XYZ's former workers lose, say, $15 million in wages. Also XYZ's workers now have 1000 man-years of time they didn't have before. Let's suppose they find jobs that pay a total of $10 million less than they were making before - exactly the amount the company saved by laying them off. That is, they are working for foreigner;s wages. So the workers have lost $10 million while the company has gained $10 million in profit. But now suppose the profits are distributed to the shareholders and the government (corporate income tax.) So long as the shareholders are other Americans, the country breaks even. But if the workers are not to suffer a decline in standard of living the government will have to do some redistribution of wealth. (Others are invited to correct this analysis.)

Consider medical care. As it gets harder and harder for workers to find salaried jobs with medical benefits, they will be ever more tempted to support socialized medicine in one form or another. Despite the BS you hear on NPR, socialized medicine is only good if you need a band-aid and a pamphlet. If you have heart trouble or cancer you're better off in the USA than in Canada, Britain, or Sweden.

Some libertarians and some leftists, for their separate reasons, have no problem with American workers losing their cars, TVs, stereos, air conditioning, and baseball tickets. The libertarians believe in no free lunches for the ungifted, while the leftists believe it's okay to lift impoverished foreign workers at the expense of better off American workers. But the rest of us need to consider that to a great extent we're all in it together, and, at any rate, social peace and Christian charity require that American workers not be forced to live in 3rd world shanty towns because that's all their labor is 'objectively' worth. Finally, remember that we're a democracy and, like it or not, those workers can vote in socialism if they choose to.

And yes to call the USA a superpower is absurd especially when corporate America is having a going-out-of-business sale and Wall Street is concerned more about where it makes its profits than about where it lives.

Marx made such a mistake in his wanting to believe that a derivative of truth either was or could be truth in its fuller sense, when for example he believed we are only the material of labor. Conversely the social forces he was responding to or perhaps attempting to counter-balance believed another derivative of truth, namely that we are only the material of capital (or money). Basically what both these derivative notions are attempting to explain is what are we human beings 'like' and not addressing what ARE we human beings.

So socialism vanished as PCR points out in the above article leaving wide-open the doors (for a while) of offshoring. After all the imbalance tipped again in the direction of capital (or money.) But money itself is in its fullness a symbol/Fact. If it becomes worthless or isn't worth much anymore or anything at all it becomes clear that it too was a derivative of the truth mistaken for truth. What nonetheless remains is you & me or us human beings and the more germane question again, what ARE we? And remains no longer merely the derivative of truth, what are we 'like'?

We're individual and communal and we're also all of the things that we are 'like' and not any one of them as if that were some 'key' or answer in knowing us. Even if we ourselves become convinced or brainwashed that money is everything, or work is everything, or humor is everything etc. etc. Since it is not the truth in its fuller sense but only some derivative of truth, good old *reality will catch up and show us the error of our ways vis a vis reminding us that we're of course more than just that.

Since the misperception or imbalance toward money seems to have 'won' over the misperception or imbalnce toward labor in this see-saw match of misperceptions we MUST stabalize and secure the value of our symbol/FACT (with little or NO inflation) by returning it to the gold and precious metals standard.

As for our politics we can no longer afford the fantasy or illusion that all we need to do is PRETEND to be a nation while frankly speaking BEHAVING 'as if' we do not even exist in this world. ... We are NOT virtual in reality, we are actual/real. The truth, to be true and not a derivative of itself is both true & ACUTAL, both potential & FACTS.

If we are too big to be a country or nation and NO LONGER even can secure our own borders, we're real not virtual, and so in Fact we are no longer a nation. If we owe everyone else in the world money and have to borrow to put the parts in the rifles of our soldiers in some remote part of the world rather than even being able to secure our own borders then we are NOT a 'superpower,' any longer.

We exist. We can't just keep *imagining what it is we can do, or want to do and simply by flapping our lips i.e. 'oh, we're a superpower. we're the richest nation in the world. we're this or that.' and make it so. It's NOT possible. Imagination is good, but again it's only another derivative of truth not the fuller or 'whole' truth in the arena of thinking.

The biggest TAX is inflation. Every 10 years (some say really every 5) you need 2 dollars to buy what 1 did 10 (or 5) years earlier.

We must secure the currency and the only Actual way to do it is putting it back again on a gold and precious metals standard.

After that in EVERYTHING we do we MUST remember not to be fooled by derivative aspects of the truth 'as if' they were the 'whole' or fuller truth itself.

Here's an example using a metaphor. If the fuller or whole truth were a bicycle wheel the round steel frame, all the spokes leading from the hub of the wheel back and forth from the center to where the rubber around the steel frame filled with air meets the road and so forth [even though we know even the wheel isn't the whole truth, this is just an example]. So if that was the truth, a derivative of the truth would be like 'saying' you know without that hub at the center this wheel wouldn't work. So that hub is the truth, let's pretend that and act on it. Or, you see those six spokes where they're situated - there's no wheel without those, they're the truth, let's pretend that and act on it. Or God knows, it's rubber and where the rubber meets the road is REALLY what's important, that is the truth so let's pretend that and act on it.

The point I'm making is that our misperceptions are fundamental. But as long as we are using the symbol/Fact of money, we can no longer afford to think 'capital' is everything so lets just prints ourselfs up a whole bunch of it boss?! After all that's the mostest'important spoke in the wheel and everyone says so...