Editor's Note: Dr. James M. Lindsay is a Senior Vice President at the Council on Foreign Relations and co-author of America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy. Visit his blog here and follow him on Twitter. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Jim Lindsay.
By James M. Lindsay
Tuesday night’s GOP presidential debate was primarily about the domestic economy. But it started off on a foreign policy note when lead moderator Maria Bartiromo asked what the United States should do to ensure that Italy’s mounting economic woes “do not take down the U.S. financial system.” The responses were dismaying. Herman Cain said “we must grow the economy,” Mitt Romney said Europeans should “take care of their own problems,” Ron Paul talked about the need to “liquidate” debt, and Jon Huntsman worried that the United States has six banks that are “too big to fail.”
Why are these answers dismaying? Because they suggest that the GOP candidates are either hankering for a past that no longer exists, don’t understand the severity of the eurozone crisis, or don’t have any answers (at least ones they would share with voters) for addressing the crisis. There once was a day when things over there didn’t matter to life over here. But that day is long gone.
Globalization, a process that both Republicans and Democrats have championed, means that financial markets are interconnected. If the eurozone collapses, the effects would ripple across the Atlantic, potentially becoming an economic tsunami. The losers wouldn’t just be bankers on Wall Street, but everyone on Main Street who has a 401(k) or an IRA. It’s not too much to hope that presidential candidates would have a clear idea on how to respond to a threat that could stop the American economy in its tracks.
Foreign policy came up again toward the end of the debate. A question about the wisdom of having a Chinese company build part of the Bay Bridge connecting Oakland and San Francisco eventually led to Mitt Romney blasting Chinese trade policy:
China is playing by different rules. One, they are stealing intellectual property. Number two, they’re hacking into our computer systems, both government and corporate. And they are stealing, by virtue of that as well, from us.
And finally, they are manipulating their currency, and by doing so, holding down the price of Chinese goods, and making sure their products are artificially low-priced. It’s predatory pricing, it’s killing jobs in America.
If I’m president of the United States, I’m making it very clear, I love free trade. I want to open markets to free trade. But I will crack down on cheaters like China. They simply cannot continue to steal our jobs.
A President Romney would “crack down” on Beijing by labeling “China a currency manipulator” and applying tariffs “to make sure that they understand we are willing to play at a level playing field.” Romney, of course, has been hitting this theme for a while. It’s not one typically heard at Republican presidential debates; it would have been unthinkable for a GOP presidential candidate to make this argument just four years ago.
The more traditional Republican argument was made by Jon Huntsman who said that Romney’s anti-China rhetoric was “pandering” to the voters and that Romney’s proposed actions would trigger a “trade war” that would hurt Americans. Huntsman admitted, though, that the U.S. relationship with China has been “troublesome and problematic” for forty years. His preferred solution was hardly inspiring, or even clear:
We’re just going to have to keep doing business the way we’ve always done, is sit down, you find solutions to the problems, and you move forward. It isn’t easy. It isn’t glamorous. It’s grinding it out the way we’ve done for 40 years. And for 40 more years, we’re going to have to do it the same way.
Don’t be surprised if Romney and Huntsman revisit this issue at Saturday night’s debate. The fact is both candidates are right. Many Chinese trade and currency policies are predatory, and trying to punish those practices could hurt an already fragile U.S. recovery. So you are left with a tough policy question: how do you get China to end its predatory practices without triggering retaliation that imposes significant costs on the U.S. economy?
Romney has an op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal on Iran. He accuses Obama of a “shameful abdication of moral authority” by failing to side with the protesters during Iran’s 2009 Green Revolution. Romney says he will offer a “different policy”:
Si vis pacem, para bellum. That is a Latin phrase, but the ayatollahs will have no trouble understanding its meaning from a Romney administration: If you want peace, prepare for war.
I want peace. And if I am president, I will begin by imposing a new round of far tougher economic sanctions on Iran. I will do this together with the world if we can, unilaterally if we must. I will speak out forcefully on behalf of Iranian dissidents. I will back up American diplomacy with a very real and very credible military option. I will restore the regular presence of aircraft carrier groups in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf region simultaneously. I will increase military assistance to Israel and coordination with all of our allies in the region. These actions will send an unequivocal signal to Iran that the United States, acting in concert with allies, will never permit Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Only when the ayatollahs no longer have doubts about America’s resolve will they abandon their nuclear ambitions.
The problem with this formulation–besides the fact that unilateral American sanctions won’t do much of anything - is that the United States could do all the things that Romney suggests and still not dissuade Iran from going nuclear. Tehran might believe that all of Romney’s proposed measures are just huffing and puffing, or that a U.S. military strike will set its program back only temporarily. That may be a misguided conclusion, but history is rich with examples of countries misperceiving their opponents.
Besides contributing to the Journal, Romney issued a statement criticizing Obama for his open mic comments about Benjamin Netanyahu:
President Obama’s derisive remarks about Israel’s prime minister confirm what any observer would have gleaned from his public statements and actions toward our longstanding ally, Israel. At a moment when the Jewish state is isolated and under threat, we cannot have an American president who is disdainful of our special relationship with Israel. We have here yet another reason why we need new leadership in the White House.
HarperCollins has announced that it will release a new Romney biography entitled “The Real Romney” in January 2012—just as campaign season hits full speed. The authors are Michael Kranish and Scott Helman, two investigative reporters for the Boston Globe.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Jim Lindsay.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
I can rewrite this entire opinion piece with just a few words:
I am a democrat and I hate republicans!
I am OK with that.
The GOP candidates make a lively bunch, parroting about domestic and foreign politics. Mitt Romney has a larger beak and made more noise.
Or maybe this is a guy that knows a thing or two (it is his job after all)... and the candidates offer no real solutions but only soundbytes that would ultimately hurt the country. Stop taking the easy way out and crying foul when people criticize bad policy. Doesn't mean he hates republicans, just hates stupid ideas. Just because they happen to come from Republican mouths (surprise surprise)....
You are so right on the mark !!!!
Yet he discredits the Republican answers while offering no opinion on what the right way to handle Italy would be. It's a worthless opinion article since it makes no attempt to say why their views on things such as Italy are "dismaying." What are we supposed to do? We've got a mountain of debt too and I agree with Ron Paul that if we continue to prop up this debt it's going to be bad for years to come.
Actually this experienced journalist hasn't got a clue...... or any solutions....... or anything of value to offer. I can't be bothered to deconstruct everything this guy says because it would be a waste of my time. I'm not a republican by the way just someone with two brain cells to rub together and who knows a fair bit about politics and economics.
He's useless at analysis and his opinions are worthless. That about sums it up
If there was a trade war between the US and China, the US worker would see jobs return to the US. Romney is on the money. Is this just campaign rhetoric, maybe.
In a trade war, we'll only be selling to ourselves since China can undercut us in world markets. Then, what happens to all the US debt currently owned by China? While it's not in their national interest to do anything now, in a trade war they could destabilize our currency.
very doubtful, these us companies would just go elsewhere where they can get more profits, they are not interested in the american workers but profits. Jane
@ "the dude": the author was a policy ad visor to Bush and a well known conservative. So you're thinking he is a democrat speaks to your ignorance and head in the sand views. You belong to the "know nothing" ilk -simple blurting answers and name calling. The fact is REPUBLICAN foreign policy people are aghast at the current Republican field and their ignorance.
Uhm no I agree the Dude is a MORON. People who don't grasp the jist of a story should refrain from commenting. Unfortunately they are too ignorant to realize they don't understznd what they are reading or not reading. Most likely the DUDE is a Glenn Beck Follower who hasn't had an original thought in his entire life.
Please... And this would be Obamas anwser... I would hit the reset button... I would sit down with the Chinese and come to an understanding that benefits everyone and bring about a peaceful solution... And you liberals would be like o my g od... thank you... you are the best....
How did that work out with Russia and Iran??
Why waste the energy to HATE these people just because you disagree with them? Then you'll be no better than the Limbaughs or Hannity's or Coulter's of this world that have nothing good to say about those that they disagree with.
ITS not china's fault we are in this MESS, we owe china lots of money, they take it and spend it on their own country. like education and infrastructure. and we blame them. Its not china that got us into 2 unpaid wars. and the bush tax cuts. put the blame on where it belongs ,in our own country. Jane
Watch the Fall of the Republic on you tube. It's not about party.
What answer did you want to see on the Euro crisis? Have American taxpayers bail out Europeans, after we just bailed out our own banks? Maybe globalization should be revisited if it means Americans are responsible for other countries' massive financial mistakes.
Our economy has tanked because of the two wars. No. It was boosted in an unsustainable way by a runaway housing bubble that let people re-fi their house and buy SUVs and TV sets. It only "tanked" because we compare it to the boost.
I would gladly pay extra taxes to bail out Europe, if it prevented an actual economic collapse in the United States.
It may not be our fault, but I am not concerned with that. All I am concerned about, frankly, is damage control. If this will actually hurt us significantly, either economically or in terms of global stability, then I prefer the lesser harm of an extra tax load.
What I hoped for was an analysis, not a diatribe against Romney (plus a plug for a couple of journalists about to do a character assassination in an approaching book). Where have such writers been, waiting for an elections?
If the liberal press talks America into Obama again you better start stocking up on canned food now just in case
I love how the GOP think the media is the only reason Obama got elected. It could never be that the GOP policies suck or that McCain\Palin was a horrible ticket. Given this cycle's crop of GOP idiots, McCain\Palin llok like Rhodes Scholars. The media doesn't have to tell anybody that, they already know it.
Well said.
A truly clueless comment. Should we expect any less from someone who has surrendered his democracy.
The root of the GOP problem is that most people know that Obama has a very high change of being re-elected. It is nearly certain especially if the economy continues to recover. So what's happened is the "serious GOP candidates" simply did not run this time. Only these wanta-be clowns. I predict that next time we will see a much stronger GOP field. Basically the GOP is saving their non-clowns for later. I mean they are not seriouis - Cain is the "leader" is that all they can do? Certainly not. Wait four years and see.
@cja: You may be correct, but then who are the non-clowns? Christie, Daniels, Jindal? Obama (like Clinton) is occupying the center vacated by the Republicans. It may be difficult for them to reclaim it in five years. Not impossible, but difficult.
No problem, we've already decided which of the neighbors to slaughter and eat first. The people across the street who had the "Another Family for McCain" sign in their front yard is obese, the children are undoubtedly nicely marbled. Of course the rule is "let nothing escape but the squeal".
The liberal press won't , it will be the american people who vote and decide. or are you one who thinks we should limit minority and student voters so they won't vote. if Obama wins its because the gop has no candidates with brains. Jane
To put it bluntly, these Tea/Republican candidates are amateurs–one and all–not ready for the big leagues. Not surprising they represent some 40~50% of Americans about whom much the same can be said politically.
Really? Wasn't Obama an amateur and didn't have enough leadership experience? These candidates all have the same if for the most part more experience than the one term senator from Illinois.
Exactly. They don't have any answers and often don't even understand the questions being asked. The sad part is, like you pointed out, that half of the country actually believes that these morons have something to offer.
I guess you didn't read the comment above yours before responding??
The fact that the world has become a global economy means that none of these Repub candidates can win the presidency or we're all doomed.
Michele, you are the one who can save us and the rest of the world. Bachmann/Palin 2012 !!
Oh dear Odin, you must be kidding. Bachman is one of the more horrifying among the current batch of GoP idiots presenting themselves. She's not playing with a full deck and has as much chance of getting the nomination as my cat does.
You are really joking arn't you ? Really you just said that to mess with us right ? Are you her husband or something ?
Hilton-Lohan 2013 – Let's get this party started!
But hey, if the Tea Party proved anything, it's that you don't need any actual answers. You just need emotion. After all, it's not like everything won't work out for the best, right?... Right?
Exactly. Why think? It just clouds those knee-jerk emotional reactions that the Right has to everything. if it comes down to those who trust their hearts (repubs) and those who trust their brains (dems) I choose those who take a look at both and try to reconcile them (mods).
Tea Party proved that this country's government can't keep writing blank checks without answering to Americans who actually care about our kid's future. Maybe you like increasing the amount our government can waste annually, but I feel good knowing there are a few politicians out there who care more about our future than their own political careers. Fiscal responsibility is a tough lesson. America shouldn't have a deficit that doubles every 2 years. To hell with what the media, both the liberal and conservative media, say about our credit rating.
Dr. Lindsay is correct. None of the Republican candidates understand the political and economic environment of the rest of the world. It is unsettling that none of them has learnt the lessons from last two military adventures. Invasions of another nation, no matter how much we dislike its leadership, will not solve the problems. Our economy has tanked because of the two wars and we can not resolve our internal ideological conflicts to get the economy back on track. These ideology driven candidates are already beating the drum for an other war.
I will not see it in my lifetime but our troubles in the world could be very quickly over once we delineate our Mid East policy from that of Israel. This was reminded by General Petreous in his Congressional hearing about our wars. Our pronouncements about commitment to justice and law and order and democracy are presently ringing hollow in the rest of the world except the EU countries.
Ron Paul understands economics more than Dr Lindsey ever will...
RON Paul is a disaster in economics, Leave education up to states, do away with EPA, FDA, and Civil rights. yeh, he's a real smartie all right, like States would EVER educate kids equally. you'd have the rich in rich schools and the poor in substandard schools. And the same would be in HEALTHCARE too, just let the rich buy their own and the rest of us could lay iin the street and die. Jane
At most up to about the 19th century. I'm surprised he doesn't advocate a return to the cowry shell currency of his youth.
The Pauls are a touching visage, a family with Asperger's Syndrome attracting so many like themselves. We live in a great country rich in witless goobers who can be led anywhere.
The whinings of insecure psuedo-intellectuals relishing the teet of bloated central government. If you hallucinate that we are no longer a republic of states, or somehow find levity in a sound currency, I would suggest halving your anti-psychotics. What part of "this country is bankrupt" do you not seem able to comprehend?
Jane, what makes you think so? I don't see why the federal government can do those things better than the states. The states would certainly have the money to do it, since under a Paul presidency most taxes would be going to state government instead of the federal government. Would people in each state not vote for good schools? I would vote for them in my state. Even under our federal government, has not the state of Massacussetts already set up a universal healthcare system? Surely they would continue that system if the federal government was smaller. If the people of a state think something is important, let them pay for it in their own state with their own money, as responsible states such as Massacussets have done.
Jane, Ron Paul just wants to Liberate you. That means the Government shouldn't be telling you what to do, regulating your life, giving you housing, and providing your education. You are a smart, strong American who is perfectly capable of making your way through life. Don't be afraid, rejoice!
Regardless of what I think of the substance of your comment, thanks for a thoughtful, courteous and well-written opinion. It's refreshing compared to the hate-filled, ignorant, and grade-school dropout writing that is most commonly foisted on us.
Who cares? None of them will be President.
Agreed. There's not a one of them that stands a chance against Obama.
P.S. – before anyone starts spouting the libtard insults, I'm non-partisan and I pretty much hate all politicians. I just happen to despise the current GoP crop more than I do the current dem administration.
I'm a non-partisan as well Dave. People just need to live with the fact that Obama will be President till 2016, I completely agree, this crop of candidates they have is joke.
They didn't have an answer for the eurozone because there is none. You don't have the answer no one does. We could not bail out europe while we are being bailed out every minute of the day. Every day USA can not pay their own bills, that's why the debt clock doesn't stop. Out debt is now larger than our GDP. Two other countries with debt greater than GDP happen to be Italy and Greece. Ron Paul had the answer closest to the truth, eliminate the debt here. Otherwise we will just have debtors giving money to debtors and that is an impossible situation.
Charlie: Where do you get your data? As for liquidating debt, that is exactly what the Eurozone is trying to do with Greece. In the abstract Ron Paul has a good idea, you just can't say "debt be gone" without running into serious problems with creditors. So liquidating debt is much easier said than done.
I think Dr. Paul, in reducing the Federal Government by 2/3 or so and eliminating foreign military involvement, will save enough money in 4 years to pay off the debt. America has already started "austerity measures", and it will only get worse with the crazy "more of the same" people making Government monetary policy.
"Romney has an op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal on Iran. He accuses Obama of a “shameful abdication of moral authority” by failing to side with the protesters during Iran’s 2009 Green Revolution. Romney says he will offer a “different policy”:"
And yet they were so quick to jump on Obama's case when he lent military support to the Lybian rebels. Go figure.
Before anyone takes what this guy has to says seriously I suggest you research the Council on Foreign Relations and what kind of things they promote. They are for world government and an end to national sovereignty. They do not have the United States best interests at heart.
So, am I mistaken to think that the author of this article thinks we should keep spending money we don't have? Keep propping up failed countries, corporations and banks? Ron Paul did give the right answer...unfortunately Americans can't handle the truth. I will ask the author...who's gonna bail out the USA 5 years from now? and..What is "wrong" with liquidating the debt?
@mac qurashi- I hear this two wars have killed the economy comment get thrown around for 3 years and it still baffles me. The same people who favor Keynesian government stimulus blame wars for the economy. How do brush fire wars hurt our economy? They are expensive...but that is spending that puts tax dollars back into the economy (similiar to Obama's infrastructure plan). No one has raised taxes in response to the wars . They have only taken on a large but overall marginal amount of additional debt, so it doesn't really have that much impact on our bond rating and interest cost. I haven't taken macroeconomics in 15 years, but I think you're wrong.
i understand the concept but i dont think it applies anymore. wars are much more expensive than they used to be. more of the money is spent in the region rather than back in the US, and we dont manufacture as much as we used to.
Mac roeconomics You are quite misinformed if not just totally ignorant about the cost of the two wars. At the height it was costing the USA 1 Billion dollars a day thanks in part to Dick Cheney and Halaburton ripping off the American tax payers. The total estimate to date is well over a trillion dollars. If you call that a brush fire you clearly do not understand economics. You should get your facts straight before you comment fool.
Fool is a poor way of ending an argument. The public debt has increased by $1 trillion in FY2008, $1.9 trillion in FY2009, and $1.7 trillion in FY2010. 1 Billion is a drop in the bucket in comparison to the amount our government is losing in interest to public debt. The spending continues to increase on a annual basis. The government is not slowing down the amount of spending. On the contrary, it continues to spend and borrow at an exponential rate. Wars are wrong, regardless of the impact on the economy. The point of this article is the economic impacts of globalization on America's economy. Thanks for reading.
Offer to back a portion of the italian debt if the banks reliquish first position and the italians secure the debt with assets, maybe... im not a politician so i dont have to solve the issue but it seems better than stuttering...
I wouldn't get involved in backing Italian debt, as it eventually leaves us in a more vulnerable position, provided the Italians do not "right the ship" and adjust their fiscal policy. Laissez-faire.
So big deal, Obama is no better. When Obama thinks the US has 53 states then who is the dummy?
people that think one party is actually better than another?
people that think any politician is trustworthy?
people who think obama is 100% wrong?
people who think obama is 100% right?
you?
China is not forcing any American to do business with it, but the way American politicians and pundits talk (like Paul Krugman in the NYT), China's cheap currency is a gun to the head of American businessmen and consumers. "Buy our cheap stuff. Our cheap currency forces you to lose all free will!" This is a ridiculous belief.
The fact is, Americans themselves usually prefer to buy the low-cost labor and goods of foreigners than the more costly products and services of their fellow Americans who live right next door. But the politicians refuse to criticize the public. They saw what happened to Carter when he did that. Americans want to be told they are always in the right, so now the politicians are trying to curb American behavior through currency trading instead of directly confronting American behavior head on.
As for Romney's stance on Israel... it seems pretty clear to me that he is using the Bible as his primary reason to support Israel. PLEASE, my fellow Americans, stop using the Bible's prophecy of Israel as a Jewish state as ANY kind of motivation for real world foreign policy. And don't let people like Romney become President when they believe this too.
Many Americans are NOT Christian, we do NOT believe in the Bible's prophecy that Israel MUST exist as a Jewish state. So WHY are we forced to support Israel through the use of our collectively funded military??
US aircraft carriers and battle fleets are for the defense of America and its people. Not Israel. If you as a private citizen think Israel must be defended, then do so with your own private money. Renounce your American citizenship if you must. Join the Israeli military, or join a Private Military Corporation. Don't put American civilians and soldiers' lives at risk for your privately held religious beliefs!
BTW, Lindsay is no expert on economics related to foreign policy or running an inflated incompentent government. Does he have real world experience in management? Lets just keep in mind that he has one opinion within a world of many.
It's better to just sit back and say "the GOP sucks!" As far as I'm concerned all the Republican candidates for President of the USA are dumb as an abandoned shopping cart.
For guy who could not come up with 3 Federal Departments, it was too much to ask about Euro crisis!
China is the new super power. Don't mess with China else we will be paying $15 for a tube of tooth paste!
Wish Palin had been there; "Start more wars." Why? "Start more wars."
The Palins are a white trash sideshow not even deserving of a reality TV series.
Bachmann and Perry will be pushed to the side to give the appearance that bat guano crazy death cultists are being sensibly bypassed. However, the influence of the petulant "My way because Gob said so" children will continue with less visibility.
I too was amazed at the lack of an answer regarding the eurozone. Shocking and irresponsible. I'm starting to think these candidates would love to see the economy collapse again so they be assured the nominee wins the presidency. An economic collapse in the US doesnt affect them; they are all millionaires and recession-proof. Extremely shocking they didnt have an answer to the world's most impacting crisis!!
An honest answer would be that the Euro zone got themselves into this mess and they are responsible for taking measures to get themselves out. They've done this. The question now is whether or not the Italian and Greek people accept the austerity measures included in the deal. Just because we live in a globalized economy, does not mean American policy should shelter or protect free markets worldwide. Stocks and bonds involve risk as well as reward. Americans understand this principle.
In spite of being quite a quality geek show, the possibility that any of the Keystone Kandidates could touch foreign policy should scare the crap out of anyone. There's not a one of them who would keep us out of endless wars of imperial failure, and Romney would make sure that when we fail that way again, we fail big.
Economics? LMFAO! Anything this crew didn't learn playing Monopoly isn't relevant anyway, just ask 'em
It is simply disgusting to hear all of these republican /tea party presidential candidates' lack of knowledge about the serious economic, job creation, foreign policy, health care, environmental and other important issues . It seems that the main requirement to be a republican presidential candidate is that the IQ level should be below average and be able to just say "NO" to whatever president Obama says or proposes. None of these candidates can compete with our brilliant president Obama. At the best they can provide some clownish entertainment. If by fluke any of these candidates is elected president, that will be a serious downfall of our great nation.
I agree with the the_dude. This opinion piece is a POS lib point of view. Much like CNN in general. Viewing CNN's top stories I see three pieces about the debates...all three negative. Heavy coverage for one of a billion debates, but consistantly negative to ensure the sheeples fall in line.
Obama saying a particular Israeli politician (Netanyahu) is not a good partner is not the same thing as being "disdainful of our special relationship with Israel."
Sad as it may be, I'd rather have 4 more years of Obama than 4 years with any of these nuts.
If this is the best the Republican Party can put together to run for President, it doesn't say too much.
@oglethorpe-Yeah I get it, like I said, expensive. Let's just assume that some of that billion a day is really incremental due to the war (some surely is... more fuel, combat pay, artillery). That billion a day is stimulative to the economy...more pay to soldiers, consumption of more goods. These things don't directly hurt the economy they help in the immediate term. What they hurt is the US government's balance sheet which may eventually hurt the economy if it is not improved. Fool.
That worked out really well for the once and former Soviet Union, laboring against the decreased multiplier of military vs. civilian expenditures eventually sucked them dry. Among other factors, of course.
Oh and by brushfire I meant relative to a major war that disrupted global consumption and trade..
I don't think Obama has anything to worry about. These guys are not Presidential Material.
Remember when Sarah Palin identified North Korea as our ally, things have only gone downhill with this group since then. Believe it or not.
Frankly, Ron Paul is the only one out there that has answers that are realistic, and he isn't going to get elected. He is not an isolationist, he wants to bring the military home. Big difference. He's been consistently talking about these issues for over 30 years and many of the events he's been predicting have come to pass. People like to ridicule him, and he DOES look funny, but I'm more inclined to trust someone who's been proven right so many times no matter how "odd" some of his ideas may sound. The rest of the crowd, Republican or Democrat, say things that may sound "normal" but haven't worked yet. More of this same old B.S. isn't going to get us anywhere. Time to acknowledge that and trying something different.
Absolutely right. Not that CNN will ever report anything Ron Paul says or does. Why do you think that is?
There is nothing you can do to protect America from Italy and Greece's debt problems. Would the author prefer to be comforted with a reassuring lie that the government can protect America's economy in this globalized environment? The problem is the neoclassical school of thought on economics. Global debt has global impacts on the economy. Depreciating values for stocks and bonds are just a correction to the current inflationary nature of global markets due to the practice of Chicago school of economics worldwide. Debt must be paid eventually. Debt cannot be ignored forever. Every lesson being learned by our Greek and Italian counterparts, apply to America. The only difference is, we have more time before we default. There is no question of if we will. It's only a matter of when we will.
Media will dictate who people pay attention to. Use your own mind and research the candidates policies and positions on the issues. Stop looking for the candidate that looks and seems like "President Material". I wish people would stop categorizing people and look past party ideologies on the important issues.
CNN is afterall also another media, and their directors are probably poltically motivated people too. Let's just read everything inside CNN, like you should have with Newscorp International. With a pinch of salt.
With some notable exceptions, it's nice to read a group of thoughtful comments by people who have some awareness of the issues. Thanks.
testing testing 123
@Rev Hellhorn – I agree investment in military capital has no multiplier effect and is a poor use of resources if it can be avoided. Too bad most of that capital existed prior to the wars. The application of that capital in war is still stimulative. Even if the USSR collapsed and Keynesian democrats dislike the wars and the bad economy.
Sounds like the typical globalist rhetoric we can expect from someone on the Council of Foreign Relations.
America has long been a historic land of intellectuals. Now it's time for intellectuals who merit every attention to take the lead. America should reclaim its glory of being the truly free society, the first democracy and the beacon of hope, and leadership for the world just by putting intellect at the forefront than celebrities.
Hey just think. When the republicans regain power, they will start a war with Iran (totally unfunded of course). Then we can draft all the Poor people to fight (die) in the war (just like republicans want) and we can give "no bid" contracts to the rich people. Killing two birds with one stone!! We can use Iran's oil to pay for the war. And when the war is over, Iran will sell us cheap oil!! Just like Iraq!!!!.........Oh wait......Never mind.
This guy is living in a closet if he thinks we can bury ourselves in more debt to bail out the eu. But this kind of single-mindedness on government having every trick up its sleeve and action supposedly bearing the least consequence is the kind of nonsense that passes for intellectual commentary these days.
Don't be afraid of what the banks tell you to print Lindsay, you can write about Ron Paul's Foreign Policy stance as well. I can sum it up very quickly: NO Bases Overseas....period. Only militarily intervene in a country that is attacking, or about to attack, America. All foreign issues handled diplomatically. US OUT of NATO. Think of the money we can save–heck we can start to pay off the $15 trillion debt. Wait–the banks don't want that, do they?
It's funny how little CNN will cover of Ron Paul, the only honest politician up there. He told it to us straight at the debate (and for the last 30 years), but no one wants to listen, they want to continue to live in the fantasy land that a deficit is alright. It is not alright and will be the downfall of this country.
People people! Please... Economics 101. Organizations that make fatal mistakes fail, eliminating waste and inefficiency and creating opportunity and improvement for others. (Does anyone wish we still had Venture instead of Walmart??) If you bail out banks, Eurozone countries, central banks, investment firms, auto manufacturers, etc.. all you are doing is "building in" waste and inefficiency that will fester and drag down the economy in the long run and possibly end up failing anyway. Unfortunately most sheeple don't understand these fairly simple concepts. Ron Paul does though! Ron Paul would allow investment banks and insurers that made rampant poor decisions fail as a result of their own choices.... and let the business owner that builds an empire keep the fruits of his labor..... and through free markets help the USA become the industrial powerhouse it once was, creating jobs and strengthening the "middle class". Read up on Ron Paul and make your own choice!
CNN is after another media, and the directors are probably poltically motivated people too. Just read everything insidet CNN, like you should have with Newscorp International. With a pinch of salt.
Dont underestimate GOP's oldsters, they are very good at carpet bombing when given the slightest opportunity. I would be badly let down if they become Government and there isnt a Vietnam or Iraq scale war on GOP's horizon. They have to look after their special interet group of billionaires and millinaires, remember?
Hmmm.. where would they bring another war to next time ? Iran? But definitely not China, because China has more friends and allies than US has