I am no expert on that particular distro but I have always kinda assumed it was worthless.
For those switching from Windows to Linux, Linspire is pretty good. I'm switching myself from Windows, to both Linux and OSX, and got a PC with Linspire preinstalled. Windows users will be comfortable with it, bootup and it looks resembles and acts like Windows. It's easy to install software after registering, just go to the CNR warehouse to select what software you want, then click one button to install the software. To uninstall click another button. If the warehouse doesn't have what you want Linspire can install.deb packages. If it only comes in an.rpm package Linspire has a download that converts then to.deb packages. Linspire also has legal codecs to play dvds as well as some proprietary software such as Crossover you can buy. I can't verify the quality of them but there are thousands of programs in the warehouse.
at the moment I am very happy with arch and intend to keep using it for quite a while.
While I have Linspire installed on one of my PCs, Redhat and Windows are on the others, I plan to install and try out Ubuntu on it also. Right now though I'm looking for a dvd drive for it.
Yep. But at least they have high mountains separating them from outside countries. If they're in danger of a siege, they just have to blow the tunnels and prepare the anti-aircraft guns.
And Corsica also has mountains, as well as the Med surrounding it. However Switzerland hasn't invaded whereas the French invaded and now controls Corsica as part of France. Corsicans are more closely related to Genoans.
how many people new to Linux will be able to install it without giving up?
Download the Automatix.deb file.
Double click the.deb file.
Yes, I can see how that might stump MS shills. The rest of us will be ok though.
ah, so all Linux distros can install.deb files? And here I thought that like.rpm installs the distro had to have a utility installed that opens and install.deb files. I didn't know Linux didn't need any utility for.debs. Ah, according to the debian site the utility dpkg is needed to unpack and install.deb files. Looks like you're a Linux shill.
On the understanding that they sign an agreement which essentially destroys their current business model?
On the understanding that those in control of the business would be cashing out soon.?
It won't work in this case, Linspire unlike SCO is a privately held business so the only way to cashout is to sale the business to somebody else. However if said person, or business, doesn't exercise due diligence they deserve what they get.
Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.
This agreement doesn't make Linspire useless. People who use Linspire gets some legal use out of it. Last year I bought a new PCs with Linspire preinstalled. After booting up it almost seems like Windows, it looks like it and acts like it. Except for not crashing or freezing. It's easy for people to connect to the net and if they have broadband access it's easy to install software. And until software patents are abolished, Linspire offers legal software and plugins so users can watch dvds, rip mpgs, and other things.
For those who just want their computer to work and doesn't want to be a Linux geek, Linspire makes it happen.
I bought a PC with Linspire preinstalled less than a year ago, now I'm thinking it was a bad idea. The company that built the PC no longer installs any Linux distro on PCs. Now Linspire is screwing around too. I'm glad I decided to get a Macbook Pro for a laptop.
Sounds good to me. I think Switzerland has the best model for running a nation: make the citizens the defense force, stay neutral in conflicts, and concentrate on having a strong economy and trade.
Yeap, about the only thing I don't like about Switzerland is that it's landlocked. Now if it were Corsica it'd be excellent.
The fact that/. likes the terms Google is trying to impose does nothing to change the fact that they're buying government regulation.
Google's plans for access to the airwaves is less of a regulation than regulating who can determine who and what can access the airwaves. These telcom insiders only want to prevent competition, whereas Google wants to introduce competition.
Yep, and they could start by downsizing the bloated military, and stopping getting involved in foreign wars of aggression.
I'd shrink the military in some ways, but I'd do more than just that. What I'd do see have a small core of military professionals then a large citizen's army, well military, like in Switzerland. Have almost all heads of household, both male and female, own and keep a rifle in the home and have them practice a few tymes a year as a unit with others. Civilian airline and helicopter pilots can fly military aircraft. And so on.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how we need to start wars in order to keep our economy in good shape; if it is true, then our civilization deserves to collapse.
What many don't consider is that bad economies actually increase the chance of war. Countries start fighting to get what other's have, but with a strong economy and trade nations won't want to upset the applecart.
Don't forget using the poor peoples food for ethanol instead of feeding them;-)
Food crops aren't needed to produce ethanol. Instead Switchgrass can b used. Using Switchgrass instead of corn will produce more ethanol than corn will also. Or hemp can be used to make biofuels, it can also be eaten though. Hemp seed oil can be used either for food, there's a salad dressing made with the oil, Hempola, or it can be useds to make diesel fuel. Small farmers can grow either, switchgrass for ethanol production and hemp for food or ethanol. This will create an income for these farmers, so it's not either food or fuel.
I think more taxes should be like this: on your honor. For instance, instead of taking money out of my paycheck, the IRS should just trust me to send in my income tax, without checking for correctness (audits).
I'd get rid of federal personal income tax AND the IRS period. States may have an income tax but not the feds. The federal government can instead tax corporations as well as shrink in size.
3% of the electricity used in the US is produced by burning petroleum products. Build a few new nuclear plants, and you've reduced the amount of oil being used. It's not nearly as the amount used by automobiles, trains, or ships. But's it's an effect, albiet a small one.
Erect some wind generator farms, installing PVs, or in coastal areas wave generators can do the same, reduce oil used. Well natural gas really, not oil. Nuclear power on the other hand creates other problems.
Ok I'll bite. Why exactly? What makes a farmer any different than a butcher, doctor, or mutual fund investor? I don't know who made my computer, who made my car, or who picked my tomatoes. I don't really see why I should, the information is not relevant to the quality of the good.
Food is compeatly different than the other things you list, in order to live you have to eat some, you don't need all of the others to live. Because I depend on it I want to know how if not who grew my food. Actually I'd prefer to grow most of my own food. And I want to know my doc, I'm not just going to walk into any doc's office, I'll meet one and talk with them before I decide if I want to see them again. I want to know if they are knowledgable, open, and supportive. Unfortunately medicine today is more like a factory. Go in through one door, process through different stages, and exist another door.
Seriously, WTF? Committing suicide because you can't make a profit as a farmer? Sorry, that's just stupid. Get another job!
Asking someone to get another job when they only know farming is stupid. Two problems with this. First what type of job are they supposed to get? If it's not something they know more than likely they wil need training. Who's going to pay for the training? And what are they going to train as? Secondly is food security. All nations should be able to grow enough food to feed it's own population. This way they aren't dependent on others for food.
Remember, American consumers also suffer from the "OMG I *must* be a farmer" mentality: it got us the blight known as HFCS and ethanol subsidies.
I disagree with most if not all agricultural subsidies. They distort the economy, a lot of the money goes to big agribusinesses, and people never really know how much food costs.
How many of you have to constantly retrain to remain relevant to your job?
Unfortunately I am not in any such situation. I am on disability and don't work.
Think about prices falling and farmers closing up shop and then there is only a few large commercial farms working.
First, the size of farms and agribusiness. Don't you think the US already has large commercial farms? What is ADM, Archr Daniels Midland, if not a large agribusiness? Cargill is another one. Actually Cargill is the largest privately held corporation in the US.
Next, dropping prices and farmers closing shop. As is the case with supply and demand and prices, if farmers close shop reducing supply but demand remains the same prices will rise not fall. While many young people are being driven off farms many urban professionals, especially older ones, are leaving the city life and starting small farms of their own, mostly organic and or specialty craft farms. As it is government gives farmers hugh subsidies, which usually go to big agribusinesses like ADM and Cargill, which distort the market. It's one thing to give small farmers money it's totally different to give money to hugh businesses. I'd rather not have the governemnt give either any taxpayer money. If taxes weren't as high as they are I could show my support for small local farmers by buy more from them.
India should be doing the exact same things. Especially with Pakistan and the border problems they have off an on. The India government could also buy all the imported food, determine the in country fare market value or price and then sell the imports for that price in order to pay for it. Dumping rules should allow this.
India walked out of the WTO meetings in Geneva during the summer of 2006 because they couldn't prevent the importation of cheap European food into India. Because of the distorted market subsidized European food has in India many farmers there are committing suicide. Indian farmer simply can't compeat with subsidized European farmers.
those African countries have expressed all sorts of eagerness to supply the EU with inexpensive produce in exchange for lots of shiny, new euros.
Yes, but it would mean outsourcing our food production entirely to other nations
No it doesn't. Not all food stuff grows in Europe, at least not without massive energy requirements and or subsidies. For instance bananas aren't traditionally grown in Europe.
This is about balances of power. You might think that foreign trade with African countries will work, but it has to go both ways: if we are dependent on their food, they need to be dependent on something we produce... Otherwise the "peace producing foreign trade" doesn't work.
Where do you think a lot of diamonds, gold, and oil come from? How about coltan? Coltan is used in electronic equipment, especially cellphones. A lot of coltan comes from Congo, and the mining of coltan fuels war there as warlords fight one another as well as civilians for control of mining areas. Then there are the blood diamonds. Botswana evicts Bushmen from their ancesteral land so diamonds can be mined. Fact is is a lot of natural resources come from Africa, and not all of it helps those who live there.
we need to keep our food production locally. Dependence for food on other nations is a big no-no.
For food staples I totally agree. I can't think of a single place that shouldn't be food self sufficient. Now this doens't mean all food just food that's culturally appropriate, like casava, corn, potatos, rice, wheat, and whatever should be grown locally on farm owned and opperated by people living in the area. Some things that won't grow locally, as least not without a lot of inputs like energy and labor, should be traded. For instance a study I read about in the Economist magazine concluded it takes more energy and emits more CO2 by raising sheep in England than it takes in raising sheep in New Zealand then shipping them to England.
That said, I don't agree that they export the heavily subsidized stuff.
Wrong, corn is heavily subsidized yet it exported all around the world. Because US agribusinesses can grow corn then export it to Mexico where it's sold for less than Mexican farmers can grow corn, Mexican farmers are being driven off thier farms. This is one reason there are so many "illegal immigrants" or aliens in and trying to get in the US. Allow Mexican farmers to make a living on their farms and they will stay there.
They should just produce less, and that's often what happens: farmers are paid not to plant stuff.
Yeap, paying farmers not to plant some fields is another subsidy. While I don't agree with many subsidies, I approve of paying farmers to not plant, or ranch, in some places, such as along the banks of lakes and rivers. Instead pay farmers to use them as buffer zones to prevent these bodies of water from being polluted. That's what New York City does, NYC pays farmers in the Catskill Mountains, Catskills, to prevent farm runoffs from polluting rivers that run through the mountains where NYC gets most of it's freshwater. This isn't really a subsidy, the only other way to get the farmers to use buffers is to have a law mandating buffer zones, however such laws are a form of taking without compensating the owners.
A tax intended to slant the playing field in such a manner that any potential EU camera producer has an immediate advantage when selling within the EU.
However any company trying to manufacture cameras in Europe has a distinct disadvantage, high taxes to support all the social welfare programs. Also there's the high cost of labor. That's why many European companies are moving thier manufacturing over seas.
I know that most online purchases here in the US aren't taxed, but how about the good old EU?
Actually taxes are supposed to be paid for online purchases, it's the buyer's responsibility to report the purchase to the state and pay the tax. These taxes go back to catalogue mail orders, however many people don't know this and even if they do not many will report it.
Zeiss and Leica among them, were decimated. Ask any seasoned photographer who made the better products, and you'll likely hear testaments to the quality of Leica and Zeiss products produced over half a century ago.
Yeap, Zeiss made some of the best optics, lenses. Hasselblad made, and continues to make, quality medium format cameras.
Imposing import tariffs in order to penalize countries that oppress their laborers, that deny them basic human rights, that deny them democratic participation and representation in their government, in my opinion are exactly the sort of cases when countries should impose tariffs.
Not all tariffs and other trade barriers are to penalise countries. Some are simply to protect inefficient national businesses. For instance the US has barriers on Brazilian sugarcane to protect US sugarcane and sugar beet farmers.
I have been a strong supporter of Ron Paul; he's my candidate. That's my general philosophy toward government
Same here, I voted for Ron Paul in 1988 and if he's on the ballot in 2008 I'll vote for him again.
Slashdot Mirror
I am no expert on that particular distro but I have always kinda assumed it was worthless.
For those switching from Windows to Linux, Linspire is pretty good. I'm switching myself from Windows, to both Linux and OSX, and got a PC with Linspire preinstalled. Windows users will be comfortable with it, bootup and it looks resembles and acts like Windows. It's easy to install software after registering, just go to the CNR warehouse to select what software you want, then click one button to install the software. To uninstall click another button. If the warehouse doesn't have what you want Linspire can install .deb packages. If it only comes in an .rpm package Linspire has a download that converts then to .deb packages. Linspire also has legal codecs to play dvds as well as some proprietary software such as Crossover you can buy. I can't verify the quality of them but there are thousands of programs in the warehouse.
at the moment I am very happy with arch and intend to keep using it for quite a while.
While I have Linspire installed on one of my PCs, Redhat and Windows are on the others, I plan to install and try out Ubuntu on it also. Right now though I'm looking for a dvd drive for it.
FalconYep. But at least they have high mountains separating them from outside countries. If they're in danger of a siege, they just have to blow the tunnels and prepare the anti-aircraft guns.
And Corsica also has mountains, as well as the Med surrounding it. However Switzerland hasn't invaded whereas the French invaded and now controls Corsica as part of France. Corsicans are more closely related to Genoans.
Falconhow many people new to Linux will be able to install it without giving up?
Yes, I can see how that might stump MS shills. The rest of us will be ok though.
ah, so all Linux distros can install .deb files? And here I thought that like .rpm installs the distro had to have a utility installed that opens and install .deb files. I didn't know Linux didn't need any utility for .debs. Ah, according to the debian site the utility dpkg is needed to unpack and install .deb files. Looks like you're a Linux shill.
FalconUsing MS Windows for so many years is *why* I switched to Linux.
Same here, with one change: "is *why* I am switching to Linux and Macs."
FalconOn the understanding that they sign an agreement which essentially destroys their current business model?
On the understanding that those in control of the business would be cashing out soon.?
It won't work in this case, Linspire unlike SCO is a privately held business so the only way to cashout is to sale the business to somebody else. However if said person, or business, doesn't exercise due diligence they deserve what they get.
FalconIsn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.
This agreement doesn't make Linspire useless. People who use Linspire gets some legal use out of it. Last year I bought a new PCs with Linspire preinstalled. After booting up it almost seems like Windows, it looks like it and acts like it. Except for not crashing or freezing. It's easy for people to connect to the net and if they have broadband access it's easy to install software. And until software patents are abolished, Linspire offers legal software and plugins so users can watch dvds, rip mpgs, and other things.
For those who just want their computer to work and doesn't want to be a Linux geek, Linspire makes it happen.
FalconIt is if you use Automatix.
Ah but you still have to install Automatix and how many people new to Linux will be able to install it without giving up?
FalconI bought a PC with Linspire preinstalled less than a year ago, now I'm thinking it was a bad idea. The company that built the PC no longer installs any Linux distro on PCs. Now Linspire is screwing around too. I'm glad I decided to get a Macbook Pro for a laptop.
FalconSounds good to me. I think Switzerland has the best model for running a nation: make the citizens the defense force, stay neutral in conflicts, and concentrate on having a strong economy and trade.
Yeap, about the only thing I don't like about Switzerland is that it's landlocked. Now if it were Corsica it'd be excellent.
FalconThe fact that /. likes the terms Google is trying to impose does nothing to change the fact that they're buying government regulation.
Google's plans for access to the airwaves is less of a regulation than regulating who can determine who and what can access the airwaves. These telcom insiders only want to prevent competition, whereas Google wants to introduce competition.
FalconYep, and they could start by downsizing the bloated military, and stopping getting involved in foreign wars of aggression.
I'd shrink the military in some ways, but I'd do more than just that. What I'd do see have a small core of military professionals then a large citizen's army, well military, like in Switzerland. Have almost all heads of household, both male and female, own and keep a rifle in the home and have them practice a few tymes a year as a unit with others. Civilian airline and helicopter pilots can fly military aircraft. And so on.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how we need to start wars in order to keep our economy in good shape; if it is true, then our civilization deserves to collapse.
What many don't consider is that bad economies actually increase the chance of war. Countries start fighting to get what other's have, but with a strong economy and trade nations won't want to upset the applecart.
FalconDon't forget using the poor peoples food for ethanol instead of feeding them ;-)
Food crops aren't needed to produce ethanol. Instead Switchgrass can b used. Using Switchgrass instead of corn will produce more ethanol than corn will also. Or hemp can be used to make biofuels, it can also be eaten though. Hemp seed oil can be used either for food, there's a salad dressing made with the oil, Hempola, or it can be useds to make diesel fuel. Small farmers can grow either, switchgrass for ethanol production and hemp for food or ethanol. This will create an income for these farmers, so it's not either food or fuel.
FalconI think more taxes should be like this: on your honor. For instance, instead of taking money out of my paycheck, the IRS should just trust me to send in my income tax, without checking for correctness (audits).
I'd get rid of federal personal income tax AND the IRS period. States may have an income tax but not the feds. The federal government can instead tax corporations as well as shrink in size.
Falcon3% of the electricity used in the US is produced by burning petroleum products. Build a few new nuclear plants, and you've reduced the amount of oil being used. It's not nearly as the amount used by automobiles, trains, or ships. But's it's an effect, albiet a small one.
Erect some wind generator farms, installing PVs, or in coastal areas wave generators can do the same, reduce oil used. Well natural gas really, not oil. Nuclear power on the other hand creates other problems.
FalconAh, I don't recall you saying anything about a secret bid
From this comment by me, which is part of the back-and-forth you and I have been having (emphasis added):
Sorry, I missed where you said anything about a secret bid, I see it now. Boy, I feel like such a fool. My memory is bad. Sorry to waste your tyme.
FalconOk I'll bite. Why exactly? What makes a farmer any different than a butcher, doctor, or mutual fund investor? I don't know who made my computer, who made my car, or who picked my tomatoes. I don't really see why I should, the information is not relevant to the quality of the good.
Food is compeatly different than the other things you list, in order to live you have to eat some, you don't need all of the others to live. Because I depend on it I want to know how if not who grew my food. Actually I'd prefer to grow most of my own food. And I want to know my doc, I'm not just going to walk into any doc's office, I'll meet one and talk with them before I decide if I want to see them again. I want to know if they are knowledgable, open, and supportive. Unfortunately medicine today is more like a factory. Go in through one door, process through different stages, and exist another door.
FalconSeriously, WTF? Committing suicide because you can't make a profit as a farmer? Sorry, that's just stupid. Get another job!
Asking someone to get another job when they only know farming is stupid. Two problems with this. First what type of job are they supposed to get? If it's not something they know more than likely they wil need training. Who's going to pay for the training? And what are they going to train as? Secondly is food security. All nations should be able to grow enough food to feed it's own population. This way they aren't dependent on others for food.
Remember, American consumers also suffer from the "OMG I *must* be a farmer" mentality: it got us the blight known as HFCS and ethanol subsidies.
I disagree with most if not all agricultural subsidies. They distort the economy, a lot of the money goes to big agribusinesses, and people never really know how much food costs.
How many of you have to constantly retrain to remain relevant to your job?
Unfortunately I am not in any such situation. I am on disability and don't work.
FalconThink about prices falling and farmers closing up shop and then there is only a few large commercial farms working.
First, the size of farms and agribusiness. Don't you think the US already has large commercial farms? What is ADM, Archr Daniels Midland, if not a large agribusiness? Cargill is another one. Actually Cargill is the largest privately held corporation in the US.
Next, dropping prices and farmers closing shop. As is the case with supply and demand and prices, if farmers close shop reducing supply but demand remains the same prices will rise not fall. While many young people are being driven off farms many urban professionals, especially older ones, are leaving the city life and starting small farms of their own, mostly organic and or specialty craft farms. As it is government gives farmers hugh subsidies, which usually go to big agribusinesses like ADM and Cargill, which distort the market. It's one thing to give small farmers money it's totally different to give money to hugh businesses. I'd rather not have the governemnt give either any taxpayer money. If taxes weren't as high as they are I could show my support for small local farmers by buy more from them.
India should be doing the exact same things. Especially with Pakistan and the border problems they have off an on. The India government could also buy all the imported food, determine the in country fare market value or price and then sell the imports for that price in order to pay for it. Dumping rules should allow this.
India walked out of the WTO meetings in Geneva during the summer of 2006 because they couldn't prevent the importation of cheap European food into India. Because of the distorted market subsidized European food has in India many farmers there are committing suicide. Indian farmer simply can't compeat with subsidized European farmers.
Falconthose African countries have expressed all sorts of eagerness to supply the EU with inexpensive produce in exchange for lots of shiny, new euros.
Yes, but it would mean outsourcing our food production entirely to other nations
No it doesn't. Not all food stuff grows in Europe, at least not without massive energy requirements and or subsidies. For instance bananas aren't traditionally grown in Europe.
This is about balances of power. You might think that foreign trade with African countries will work, but it has to go both ways: if we are dependent on their food, they need to be dependent on something we produce... Otherwise the "peace producing foreign trade" doesn't work.
Where do you think a lot of diamonds, gold, and oil come from? How about coltan? Coltan is used in electronic equipment, especially cellphones. A lot of coltan comes from Congo, and the mining of coltan fuels war there as warlords fight one another as well as civilians for control of mining areas. Then there are the blood diamonds. Botswana evicts Bushmen from their ancesteral land so diamonds can be mined. Fact is is a lot of natural resources come from Africa, and not all of it helps those who live there.
Falconwe need to keep our food production locally. Dependence for food on other nations is a big no-no.
For food staples I totally agree. I can't think of a single place that shouldn't be food self sufficient. Now this doens't mean all food just food that's culturally appropriate, like casava, corn, potatos, rice, wheat, and whatever should be grown locally on farm owned and opperated by people living in the area. Some things that won't grow locally, as least not without a lot of inputs like energy and labor, should be traded. For instance a study I read about in the Economist magazine concluded it takes more energy and emits more CO2 by raising sheep in England than it takes in raising sheep in New Zealand then shipping them to England.
That said, I don't agree that they export the heavily subsidized stuff.
Wrong, corn is heavily subsidized yet it exported all around the world. Because US agribusinesses can grow corn then export it to Mexico where it's sold for less than Mexican farmers can grow corn, Mexican farmers are being driven off thier farms. This is one reason there are so many "illegal immigrants" or aliens in and trying to get in the US. Allow Mexican farmers to make a living on their farms and they will stay there.
They should just produce less, and that's often what happens: farmers are paid not to plant stuff.
Yeap, paying farmers not to plant some fields is another subsidy. While I don't agree with many subsidies, I approve of paying farmers to not plant, or ranch, in some places, such as along the banks of lakes and rivers. Instead pay farmers to use them as buffer zones to prevent these bodies of water from being polluted. That's what New York City does, NYC pays farmers in the Catskill Mountains, Catskills, to prevent farm runoffs from polluting rivers that run through the mountains where NYC gets most of it's freshwater. This isn't really a subsidy, the only other way to get the farmers to use buffers is to have a law mandating buffer zones, however such laws are a form of taking without compensating the owners.
FalconA tax intended to slant the playing field in such a manner that any potential EU camera producer has an immediate advantage when selling within the EU.
However any company trying to manufacture cameras in Europe has a distinct disadvantage, high taxes to support all the social welfare programs. Also there's the high cost of labor. That's why many European companies are moving thier manufacturing over seas.
FalconI know that most online purchases here in the US aren't taxed, but how about the good old EU?
Actually taxes are supposed to be paid for online purchases, it's the buyer's responsibility to report the purchase to the state and pay the tax. These taxes go back to catalogue mail orders, however many people don't know this and even if they do not many will report it.
FalconZeiss and Leica among them, were decimated. Ask any seasoned photographer who made the better products, and you'll likely hear testaments to the quality of Leica and Zeiss products produced over half a century ago.
Yeap, Zeiss made some of the best optics, lenses. Hasselblad made, and continues to make, quality medium format cameras.
FalconImposing import tariffs in order to penalize countries that oppress their laborers, that deny them basic human rights, that deny them democratic participation and representation in their government, in my opinion are exactly the sort of cases when countries should impose tariffs.
Not all tariffs and other trade barriers are to penalise countries. Some are simply to protect inefficient national businesses. For instance the US has barriers on Brazilian sugarcane to protect US sugarcane and sugar beet farmers.
I have been a strong supporter of Ron Paul; he's my candidate. That's my general philosophy toward government
Same here, I voted for Ron Paul in 1988 and if he's on the ballot in 2008 I'll vote for him again.
FalconAnd funneling your wealth out of the country is *good* economics?
So, we shouldn't export anything?
Extreme anti-protectionism protects only two classes: the multinational corporations and the extremely wealthy
Anti-protectionism allows people to afford more, whereas protectionism protects inefficiency as well as raises prices.
If you are not in either of those two classes, you are arguing against your own best interests.
So, you get to dictate what my best interests are?
Falcon