Buying American, is it over?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I don't get the infatuation with "self-sufficiency." The last self-sufficient individuals were cavemen. I depend on others to do essentially EVERYTHING for me. It's called civilization when you have the division of labor. If you just take the concept of inter-dependence to a greater scale you have globalization.

There is nothing wrong with depending on your neighbors. You don't have to like them and they don't have to like you. All you need is for them to have something you want and for you to have something they want. No fighting, just mutual benefit.

The concept is self-sufficiency on a NATIONAL level, not an individual one, JLG. Nobody expects an individual to be able to do everything for themselves. What I would like to see however, is a system where the citizens of this nation build a NATIONAL, isolationist economy. One that accepts the idea that we will not be involved in commerce with the immoral and value-less societies that exist outside our borders.

[ACW]

The concept is self-sufficiency on a NATIONAL level, not an individual one, JLG. Nobody expects an individual to be able to do everything for themselves. What I would like to see however, is a system where the citizens of this nation build a NATIONAL, isolationist economy. One that accepts the idea that we will not be involved in commerce with the immoral and value-less societies that exist outside our borders.

Every other nation? Right. Anyway abd national, isolationist economy is unfeasible.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Mass, out of curiosity, why do you see EVERY other country as an enemy?

There are only two classifications of people in the world so far as I'm concerned... Friends and Enemies. To me Friends are those people who believe the same things I do and attempt to live by the same morals and values that I do. Everyone else falls on the Enemies list. I also carry this concept to the patriotism and nationalism that I feel for what I believe this country was intended to be, or at least what I believe it should be. Basically it's an extension of the old "If you're not WITH me, you're AGAINST me" philosophy.

This whole concept comes out of my youth where I learned early on in my life that the only person out there who is looking out for my best interests (and therefore can be trusted) is ME.

[JohnLockesGhost]

The concept is self-sufficiency on a NATIONAL level, not an individual one, JLG. Nobody expects an individual to be able to do everything for themselves. What I would like to see however, is a system where the citizens of this nation build a NATIONAL, isolationist economy. One that accepts the idea that we will not be involved in commerce with the immoral and value-less societies that exist outside our borders.

Once again, I'm just taking the concept to its ridiculous (yet logical) conclusion. Reductio ad Absurdum. If self-sufficiency is so great at a national level, why wouldn't it be even better at more local levels. Why not individual, or municipal, or state, or regional?

It's just an arbitrary geographical region. What's the virtue of national self-sufficiency over state self-sufficiency?

Oh that's right, you're not arguing about economics. Nevermind.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Once again, I'm just taking the concept to its ridiculous (yet logical) conclusion. Reductio ad Absurdum. If self-sufficiency is so great at a national level, why wouldn't it be even better at even smaller levels. Why not individual, or municipal, or state, or regional?

(as you already know)At the lower levels, self-sufficiency is not an effective and efficient model. A single person or family cannot provide all the services necessary to subsist in the modern environment like they were largely able to 150 years ago. Even at the state level there are a large number of thing that cannot be provided for. Only at the national level can the system begin to work. Obviously it's not going to be a utopian lifestyle but at that level it is reasonably possible. It would require a fair number of concessions, but I believe it would be feasable at that level.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

(as you already know)At the lower levels, self-sufficiency is not an effective and efficient model. A single person or family cannot provide all the services necessary to subsist in the modern environment like they were largely able to 150 years ago. Even at the state level there are a large number of thing that cannot be provided for. Only at the national level can the system begin to work. Obviously it's not going to be a utopian lifestyle but at that level it is reasonably possible. It would require a fair number of concessions, but I believe it would be feasable at that level.

California and Texas are larger than any European country. What do they need from South Dakota? Frankly, what do any of us need from South Dakota?

I want to live in your fascist paradise, but only if South Dakota and Mississippi are left out.

Why? I have my reasons.....