The first Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton's 11-point plan for "American manufactures" is a primary inspiration for this book. Does this 220-year old document have any relevance to our modern day problems? The author thinks it does.
In the late 18th century when Alexander Hamilton wrote his fiscal plan, nations were building walls between them, more than two hundred years later these walls are coming down in a universe of global economy. The fundamental concepts of "supply and demand" operating at the global level dictate our economic future and shape our political philosophy. How an age-old solution such as this that never really worked before will have any bearing on the world we live in? For example, in chapter 10, "Wal-Mart Is Not a Person," the author tells the story of 1880s corporations that asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant them human rights under the Constitution. Much later, in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled precisely that; corporations are people and have political free-speech rights. The author argues that if this is not fixed soon it will be the complete transformation of this country from a democracy into a corporate plutocracy. Here the author is carried away by unfounded worries. First of all corporations are made of stockholders, bondholders and creditors. These are people who are owners of a business and conducting themselves under law and constitution. What is wrong in the opinion of the Supreme Court? Chapter 6, make similar arguments that asks how we finance political campaigns in this country and chapter 10 takes on the problem of the Court's decision directly. If a company that owns a media outlet such as TV network, newspapers or movie studio, then it can pass along its political philosophy through the media it owns. Then what about companies that do not own media or studios? How do they promote their political and economic ideas? It is through the campaign contribution rights, which gives them an opportunity to speak to the law-makers.
Chapter 9, "Put Lou Dobbs out to Pasture," discusses the "illegal immigration," when, in reality, it is a problem of economics and illegal hiring by American companies. This is true, and illegal immigration must be curbed, but what are the economic consequences? I am not sure if the author has done economic research or even aware of the area of "economics of illegal immigration." Stopping illegal immigration will have serious economic consequences, certainly for states like California, Texas, and Florida. Illegal immigration is an emotional issue but any legislation must consider the economic consequences to the country.
In Chapter 8, "They Will Steal It" the author makes a preposterous and outrageous comment that the detention of Islamic terrorists in Guantanamo Bay and Bagram Air Force base in Afghanistan is no different from the atrocities committed against Jews in Nazi Germany. I wished the author had understood the problems properly before he indulged in bashing President Bush for making this country a little safer. Most Islamic countries and Islamists think that 9/11 was orchestrated by CIA and Israel. They not only believe in that but they also hope to convince the rest of the world. This reflects on the nature of Islamists. In order to deal with Islamists who lie in their teeth, harsher interrogation techniques have to be used, some harsher measures have to be taken to protect this country from further attacks. President Bush made the best decision to deal with Islamic terrorism firmly and decisively. The Afghanistan and Iraq wars are due to Islamic terrorism. If there were no 9/11 attacks, there would not have been these wars. Preserving our values and our way of doing business must not be affected by Islamic terrorism or communism. This is not about protecting American interest; this is about protecting and preserving civilization and sanity in the world where United States is playing major role. If our values and our ways of living are replaced by hijab, niqab, burqa, Sharia law, fatwa, jihad, holy war, honor killings, female genital mutilation, death by stoning, death for apostasy, intolerance to other faiths and other beliefs, and death to infidels, then there is not much to live for. The author continues by making false assumption that we are forcing other countries through military might to adopt our values of democracy and an open society. No one is doing that, but when Islamists are forcing the rest of us to accept Islamic ideals we need to fight back and preserve our values.
In introductory chapter "Back to the future" the author states that Ronald Reagan's policy of ending free admission to the University of California systems made "Europe and Asia to overtake us in everything from patent applications to doctor-patient ratios to excellence in engineering and invention." This got be a wild accusation at best. How does one simple decision in the state of California can affect the entire science and technological competitiveness of Western Europe and Asia? The author bashes Ronald Reagan for everything from his character to his economic policies.
If you are an optimist with liberal leanings in politics you may think the ideas of the author are interesting; but if you are a fiscal conservative, then you will think that this book is good for a laugh!
In the late 18th century when Alexander Hamilton wrote his fiscal plan, nations were building walls between them, more than two hundred years later these walls are coming down in a universe of global economy. The fundamental concepts of "supply and demand" operating at the global level dictate our economic future and shape our political philosophy. How an age-old solution such as this that never really worked before will have any bearing on the world we live in? For example, in chapter 10, "Wal-Mart Is Not a Person," the author tells the story of 1880s corporations that asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant them human rights under the Constitution. Much later, in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled precisely that; corporations are people and have political free-speech rights. The author argues that if this is not fixed soon it will be the complete transformation of this country from a democracy into a corporate plutocracy. Here the author is carried away by unfounded worries. First of all corporations are made of stockholders, bondholders and creditors. These are people who are owners of a business and conducting themselves under law and constitution. What is wrong in the opinion of the Supreme Court? Chapter 6, make similar arguments that asks how we finance political campaigns in this country and chapter 10 takes on the problem of the Court's decision directly. If a company that owns a media outlet such as TV network, newspapers or movie studio, then it can pass along its political philosophy through the media it owns. Then what about companies that do not own media or studios? How do they promote their political and economic ideas? It is through the campaign contribution rights, which gives them an opportunity to speak to the law-makers.
Chapter 9, "Put Lou Dobbs out to Pasture," discusses the "illegal immigration," when, in reality, it is a problem of economics and illegal hiring by American companies. This is true, and illegal immigration must be curbed, but what are the economic consequences? I am not sure if the author has done economic research or even aware of the area of "economics of illegal immigration." Stopping illegal immigration will have serious economic consequences, certainly for states like California, Texas, and Florida. Illegal immigration is an emotional issue but any legislation must consider the economic consequences to the country.
In Chapter 8, "They Will Steal It" the author makes a preposterous and outrageous comment that the detention of Islamic terrorists in Guantanamo Bay and Bagram Air Force base in Afghanistan is no different from the atrocities committed against Jews in Nazi Germany. I wished the author had understood the problems properly before he indulged in bashing President Bush for making this country a little safer. Most Islamic countries and Islamists think that 9/11 was orchestrated by CIA and Israel. They not only believe in that but they also hope to convince the rest of the world. This reflects on the nature of Islamists. In order to deal with Islamists who lie in their teeth, harsher interrogation techniques have to be used, some harsher measures have to be taken to protect this country from further attacks. President Bush made the best decision to deal with Islamic terrorism firmly and decisively. The Afghanistan and Iraq wars are due to Islamic terrorism. If there were no 9/11 attacks, there would not have been these wars. Preserving our values and our way of doing business must not be affected by Islamic terrorism or communism. This is not about protecting American interest; this is about protecting and preserving civilization and sanity in the world where United States is playing major role. If our values and our ways of living are replaced by hijab, niqab, burqa, Sharia law, fatwa, jihad, holy war, honor killings, female genital mutilation, death by stoning, death for apostasy, intolerance to other faiths and other beliefs, and death to infidels, then there is not much to live for. The author continues by making false assumption that we are forcing other countries through military might to adopt our values of democracy and an open society. No one is doing that, but when Islamists are forcing the rest of us to accept Islamic ideals we need to fight back and preserve our values.
In introductory chapter "Back to the future" the author states that Ronald Reagan's policy of ending free admission to the University of California systems made "Europe and Asia to overtake us in everything from patent applications to doctor-patient ratios to excellence in engineering and invention." This got be a wild accusation at best. How does one simple decision in the state of California can affect the entire science and technological competitiveness of Western Europe and Asia? The author bashes Ronald Reagan for everything from his character to his economic policies.
If you are an optimist with liberal leanings in politics you may think the ideas of the author are interesting; but if you are a fiscal conservative, then you will think that this book is good for a laugh!
No comments:
Post a Comment