Re: Fadal Tool Changing Problem----Can anyone say COOLANT?

Cliff <Clhuprich@xxxxxxx> wrote in
news:uudjg1tbqe24nn4b5hs6scsm9t8jm7q4rc@xxxxxxx:

> On 22 Aug 2005 04:44:07 GMT, D Murphy <spamto154@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Cliff <Clhuprich@xxxxxxx> wrote in
>>news:tjpgg1lkc118spvo9nh6rvpnkb6l4p5ihc@ 4ax.com:
>>
>>> The devaluation of the dollar .....
>>
>>Overall it's a very good thing.
>>
>>In the 90's we allowed the dollar to get too strong. Asian and
>>European governments were manipulating the currency markets in an
>>attemt to export their way out of trouble.
>
> What trouble? Did they have neocons too?

Economic trouble.

>
>>The result for the U.S. was an exploding trade
>>deficit and the collapse of personal savings in 1998.
>
> A winger's dream come true.

Left wingers apparently.

>
>>Look at all the
>>manufacturing that was lost.
>
> Only the next quarter's profits matter and you can make
> more by moving production offshore. Nice tax credits from
> the republicans too I gather.

Interesting. So your position is that the value of the dollar has nothing
to do with it?

>
>>You can't be competitive with a too strong
>>dollar.
>
> Not when you don't make metric prodiucts or anything
> much else anyone wants.
> Lawyers & politicos ... now if we could find an export
> market for them ...

The U.S. doesn't make metric products? Pffft. Still no clues, eh? We also
make plenty of products that the world wants. It's just hard to afford
them when the U.S. dollar is overvalued.

>
>>All of this eventually contributes to the massive goverment debt we
>>have today.
>
> Clinton was paying it off.

With overvalued dollars, a hyperinflated stock market, and everyones
personal savings. Also during Clinton's reign, Net investment ( the
balance of investment between the U.S. and Foreign countries)shifted from
the US being a net investor in foreign countries to the tune of 22
billion dollars, to foreigners being net investors in the U.S. by 22
billion dollars. A swing of 44 billion dollars out of our favor. But it
helped pay our debts right? Kind of like a trucker selling his rig to pay
some bills. It helps a little in the short term, but screws him in the
long run.

Tell me, how did all of that work out for American manufacturers?

We know this, the stock market bubble collapsed and Clinton left us in a
recession. With manufacturing nearly tits up, plus 911, it's been a slow
recovery. You can blame Bush for Iraq, of that there is no doubt. But the
economic policies of the 90's and the selling out of manufacturing during
that period can't be blamed on him.

>
>> At least the current group of idiots understand currency.
>
> Clinton was not running up those deficits.

Really? How much did the trade deficit grow under him? Massive trade
deficits lead to an increase in national debt after a while. How many
billions of U.S. assets were sold?

Here is something you should read:

http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/paper.cfm?ResearchID=353

It was written in 1999. Read the last two paragraphs. They seem rather
prescient today, don't they?

>
>>Too bad
>>they don't know how to reign in spending.
>
> Don't be bad-mouthing republicans & neocons. They are in
> total control now and have your phone number, address,
> church membership, credit info, wife's maiden name ...

Don't worry. Just don't leave the house without your Aluminum foil beanie
and you'll be OK.


--

Dan

.