Progressives are economic retards

[Drake Tungsten]

exploit: use or manipulate to one's advantage

How does this not apply to using cheap labour in foreign countries?

How are they being manipulated? They freely take jobs with the American companies because it's better for them.

[SlowwHand]

I consider many workers in third world countries exploited. What is the correct answer, according to this study?

You're wrong, obviously. The lives of third worlders suck because they live in ****ty countries, not because an American company came along to give them a better job that still sucks by developed world standards.

Bull****. NAFTA sent jobs to Mexico and Mexico can't handle it. Sanitation, housing and water availability screwed them. So the alternative to keeping it in country, where it belongs, or sending to third world is...what? Send to the UK?
You really think that would solve all ills?

[Asher]

exploit: use or manipulate to one's advantage

How does this not apply to using cheap labour in foreign countries?

How are they being manipulated? They freely take jobs with the American companies because it's better for them.

Do you understand the word 'or'?

[Kuciwalker]

"free trade leads to unemployment" is also subjective

No. No it's ****ing not.

Jobs will be lost with free trade. That's a fact.

They may very well be made up elsewhere, but that doesn't stop it from leading to unemployment.

Only if you willfully commit a fallacy of equivocation and misuse the word.

[Asher]

No. No it's ****ing not.

It is.

A single person losing their job -> creating unemployment

Your pedantry fails when you don't understand the subject matter, Kuci.

Do you believe that no one loses their job because of free trade?

[Kuciwalker]

Thanks for the compliment. And I said nothing about difficulty in measurement. Even the measurable outcomes could be completely different. Different countries, different times, different economies, different labor markets, capital:labor ratios, etc. To think that the imposition of the same policy will categorically result in the same outcomes is absurd.

"Gravity makes stuff fall."

"But if there's a ledge under something then it won't fall! Therefore the statement is subjective."

[ramseya]

The Card and Kruger study, although controversial, indicates that other factors are involved

Ceteris paribus, *****.

There is no ceteris paribus in real life policy-making. That's what is the heart of this issue.

[Kuciwalker]

It is.

A single person losing their job -> creating unemployment

Your pedantry fails when you don't understand the subject matter, Kuci.

There are no intelligent people here who agree with this post.

[Fake Boris]

No it doesn't! Subjectivity doesn't mean "different people think this thing is different", it means that the object is actually different for different people!

You would think a filosofer would understand something this basic.

objective: existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality
subjective: existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought

NOT DIFFICULT!

Why do you care so much about philosophy? I know of all this ****.

If no one agrees whether Allah or YHVH is the true God, then in the REAL WORLD it's gonna play out in a way we call subjective. Of course a supercomputer in 200 years might come up with a consistency analysis of religious texts, but what's the point? this isn't what we're discussing.

[Drake Tungsten]

There are no intelligent people here who agree with this post.

QFT

[Kuciwalker]

Why do you care so much about philosophy? I know of all this ****.

If no one agrees whether Allah or YHVH is the true God, then in the REAL WORLD it's gonna play out in a way we call subjective. Of course a supercomputer in 200 years might come up with a consistency analysis of religious texts, but what's the point? this isn't what we're discussing.

No, you mean "controversial", which is something completely different from "subjective".

[Asher]

There are no intelligent people here who agree with this post.

This is another one of your stupid posts, as clearly there are.

Free trade DOES lead to unemployment. This is a basic economic fact. It has been proven.

This is the reasoning behind H1-B quotas in the US, among many other things. True free trade puts American workers out of jobs.

The job numbers may equalize GLOBALLY due to free trade, but that perspective isn't made clear in the survey NOR is it a practical implication for the people being asked. I don't give a **** about the employment rate in Mexico. Free trade enables jobs to leave Canada (unemployment) while getting created in other countries. They cause unemployment.

[Kuciwalker]

This is another one of your stupid posts, as clearly there are.

Free trade DOES lead to unemployment. This is a basic economic fact. It has been proven.

This is the reasoning behind H1-B quotas in the US, among many other things. True free trade puts American workers out of jobs.

There are no intelligent people here who agree with this post, either.

You can't be an effective troll if people actually know you know you're lying.

[Asher]

There are no intelligent people here who agree with this post, either.

You can't be an effective troll if people actually know you know you're lying.

You must be on drugs or something, you're not usually this stupid.

Free trade causes people to lose their jobs as they get exported to other countries. This is a fact. This is causing unemployment.

FWIW, I am a proponent of free trade and a global economy. I just don't pretend there's no ramifications for it like you do.

[Fake Boris]

No, you mean "controversial", which is something completely different from "subjective".

Don't be such a bore. You're trying to have an ontological debate about the "nature of Things". I'm trying to tell you that if we don't have any model, we might as well call the stuff "subjective", because the only object we know is indeed "different to different people".

I didn't know you were a platonist metaphysician.