U.S Debt Solutions are OBVIOUS!

[Thrillology]

Wow was this cringy -- future me does not approve of past self. I was what, 14? Damn.
(removed message)

[DimeBagHo]

Not about a current event. Moved from the Mudpit to the Academy.

[Exarch]

oh this is going to be good; looks like somebody's been accepting everything the cable media/government has been telling them

[Dr Zoidberg]

Your "knowledge" of even the most basic subjects is astounding. I literally don't know where to start...

But this threw me more than most of it:

Demand the Middle East return our oil

Um... What? What oil are you talking about? It's in their ground, it's their oil. They haven't taken anything from you.

[frozenprince]

What is this I don't even...



Please tell me you're just a poor attempt at a troll to exemplify our current media sensationalism... Please.

It makes me feel slightly better about the state of our educational system to think that you are.

[Justice and Mercy]

2. Put a tariff on cheap, harmful Chinese products. U.S and Western European products are always good-excellent quality.
3. Close trade to China

No and no. Just plain terrible ideas. I point you to Adam Smith, just as a primer.

4. Government gives funding and encouragement to U.S enterprise

No. The government shouldn't be in the business of directing resources, nor can it do so effectively.

5. Jobs are given PERMANENTLY to EVERYONE. So once U.S is in production, there will be permanent jobs and our country will go back to being its former prosperity.

That's an incredibly bad idea, for numerous reasons. To begin, who gets what jobs "permanently"?

1. Demand that the Middle Easterns return our oil or military action will be taken from the U.S and its allies.
2. If they refuse (which will happen), U.S and allied forces take the oil wells that we found the oil for and funded.
3. Station troops to protect the oil and demand the Middle Eastern oil nations' sovereignty.

If we wanted to stand up for our property rights in the Middle East we should've done so decades ago.

That ship has sailed.

[Tiberios]

Or, the unpopular way:
1. Demand that the Middle Easterns return our oil or military action will be taken from the U.S and its allies.

Uhm what? I was unaware that Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the Gulf States were ever part of America. How could it possibly belong to the US seeing as the oil is located in these countries. Just because the US invested heavily in the oil industry in htese countries, it doesn't make the oil American.

As for closing trade with China, how on Earth is that going to solve anything?

[Justice and Mercy]

Just because the US invested heavily in the oil industry in htese countries, it doesn't make the oil American.

Yes, it did. Ownership is ownership, wherever it is.

The barbarians in Iran, just for example, stole Western property.

Geographical proximity is not a proper claim to a resource, developing it is.

[Tiberios]

And you base this on what exactly?

[Enemy of the State]

What brilliant and original ideas. I can tell that you've come to these conclusions from years of studying economics.

[Basil II the B.S]

5. Jobs are given PERMANENTLY to EVERYONE. So once U.S is in production, there will be permanent jobs and our country will go back to being its former prosperity.

Wherever they tried this, it didn't work very well. Ask the Soviet Union for further info. Oooops, they are not around anymore.

[Dr Zoidberg]

The US Government didn't develop those oil fields, private companies did - with the agreement of and in cooperation with the Governments of the relevant countries. And they make a handsome profit for having done so. If the OPs suggestion was to take plce, that would first require nationalizing those private countries and then military action to seize the oil fields.

The sheer geo-political fail of that series of events is just staggering.

[muller227]

Still trying to figure out who is going to loan us the money for the war to reclaim the oil fields if we cut off trade with China, or for that matter loan us the money for those magical jobs that we have not been able to find for a few years now.

For that matter where are they going to find the soldiers, most of them have just about had enough of the sand and politics over there. Oh wait I know those Professionals at Blackwater can do it (oh wait they fight for MONEY and lots of it), sending the TSA might not be a bad idea, I am sure TSA would just walk through Iran, honestly it would be hard for the Iranians to fight while they were laughing that hard. 2 year olds and Grannies would be safer at the airport anyway.

[Justice and Mercy]

And you base this on what exactly?

Unlike most people I have a fully developed theory of property.

Where do you get the idea that geographical proximity IS a proper claim to property?

[Justice and Mercy]

The US Government didn't develop those oil fields, private companies did -

...companies of various Western nations, who are properly protected by the governments of those nations.

with the agreement of and in cooperation with the Governments of the relevant countries.

Only by necessity. They shouldn't have to "cooperate" with the governments of those countries, those governments, like Western ones, ought to care that peoples property is protected, foreign or otherwise.

But they're not so civilized.

And whatever so-called cooperation exists between the government gangsters and businessmen disappears when the government is dissolved and replaced by 12th century mystics and their thugs.

[muller227]

Unlike most people I have a fully developed theory of property.

Where do you get the idea that geographical proximity IS a proper claim to property?

Most property are rights are recognized by legal ownership not, not nationality hence a British corporation can own land and mineral rights in the US and enjoy the full protection of the US government.

The Saudi's never relinquished ownership of their oil I know that is why for years Royalty payments were made to the Saudi Government, Saudi is a moot point anyway our rights were long ago negotiated away in the wierd partnership with the National Oil Company of Saudi Arabia . Iran is iffier I am unclear of British Petroleum's actions. Under the Shah it was actually worse, the government simply confiscated land outright and leased the oil rights to the Oil companies. They never relinquished ownership theoretically though.

[Justice and Mercy]

Most property are rights are recognized by legal ownership not, not nationality hence a British corporation can own land and mineral rights in the US and enjoy the full protection of the US government.

Legal ownership is simply a political recognition of property rights.

Property rights, as the name implies, are ethical rights.

[muller227]

Legal ownership is simply a political recognition of property rights.

Property rights, as the name implies, are ethical rights.

I like that had not thought of it those terms myself.

From an ethical standpoint I guarantee that ME oil producers do not think we have an ethical right to the oil in their geographic area though, I would hazard that few of the Oil Companies feel that way themselves. As they did not buy the oil as far as I know they leased the right to produce, those leases have been gone for a long time.

Whatever the case oil is not in that short of supply, the devaluation of the Dollar is driving all commodity prices through the roof.

[Justice and Mercy]

I like that had not thought of it those terms myself.

From an ethical standpoint I guarantee that ME oil producers do not think we have an ethical right to the oil in their geographic area though, I would hazard that few of the Oil Companies feel that way themselves. As they did not buy the oil as far as I know they leased the right to produce, those leases have been gone for a long time.

I'm speaking less of leases and more of flat-out takeovers of Western property.

In cases where leases have simply expired I do not advocate any kind of political intervention. Not that I agree with the practice, but because anyone who trades with a foreign country knowing full well what he's doing is not the victim of any attack. It's the cases in which the businessman IS a victim that I'm concerned with.

That said, I don't believe that governments should be able to control who does or doesn't own the oil fields. If I had my way trade would be free across all borders, and within all borders.

Essentially, I want borders to be useful only in terms of defining legal jurisdiction.

[muller227]

I'm speaking less of leases and more of flat-out takeovers of Western property.

In cases where leases have simply expired I do not advocate any kind of political intervention. Not that I agree with the practice, but because anyone who trades with a foreign country knowing full well what he's doing is not the victim of any attack. It's the cases in which the businessman IS a victim that I'm concerned with.

That said, I don't believe that governments should be able to control who does or doesn't own the oil fields. If I had my way trade would be free across all borders, and within all borders.

Essentially, I want borders to be useful only in terms of defining legal jurisdiction.

I remember something along these lines actually from the formation of the USSR, the communist takeover of Foreign built and owned facilities and property caused a hell of a stir for awhile. It was one of the reasons American troops ended up in Siberia I believe.