How is protectionism racism? I have to live with the people in my community and they are the ones who are going to cry on my shoulder when they lose their homes. It has nothing to do with their race.

refusing to allow immigrants into my community might be racism, but that is NOT what an import tariff is about. Import tariffs only refer to products and services, not people.

refusing to allow cheap imports is just a method of helping my neighbors have a competetive advantage (even if unfair) so they can continue to do something productive rather than sit around being unemployed.

when they have money in their pockets they are more likely to buy stuff from me. far more likely than somebody on the opposite side of the planet.

This keeps us both busy and feeling happy about our lives. We feel like we are working together with out immediate neighbors. this is the source of much happiness in the world.

More over - there are certain labour and environmental practices that I consider to be immoral and should be banned regardless of the cost. Doing business with my neighbors allows me to ensure for myself that they are behaving in a way I consider to be ethical. If products come from mystery factories overseas then I have no clue who is being exploited or how much pollution is being created.

strange because I use my PS3 to play off a my Netgear router/media server almost every day. I even used it to play off my Acer tablet. And MP3s are no problem at all.

not at the expense of "everyone else". That is an over simplification.

For instance, If the price of imported electronics goes up (via an import tariff), this creates an opportunity for local electronics producers to benefit. The local cost of electronics increases, and the profit margins of local electronics producers increase. But the only people who have any increased expense are those who buy electronics.

If you don't buy electronics then your costs are unaffected. And if you buy electronics your costs are affected only in proportion to that specific item.

However the local manufacturing of electronics creates jobs, and creates demand in many sectors, not only electronics (for instance a factory requires construction and machines which are not necessarily made exclusively of microchips). the people with those jobs are now going to spend their money throughout the entire local economy, which in turn benefits everybody locally. In turn this creates more incentive for local investment and even greater local prosperity.

Protectionism has a proven history of working. And every wealthy powerful nation started off as very protectionist. There is not 1 single example of a country becoming wealthy and powerful by starting as a completely open free trade zone.

yes. just like being able to play a musical instrument is irrelevant for composers.

( that was sarcasm)

So tax the kids. makes sense.

You forgot the 4th class. The permanently underemployed.

the twinkie is the deadliest innovation. 1 selfish uncoordinated person with a twinkie can defeat an any finite number of co-ordinated selfish people armed with radios, even if they use the right tactics, assuming that twinkies always win every battle.

How is it "mob rule" when democratically elected representatives ban something years in advance, then an independant law enforcement agency takes someone to be tried before an independant judiciary for violating it?

Your argument can be equally applied to the enforcement of any law whatsoever as being "mob rule".

the law might be an infringement of the Charter of Rights and could even be overturned by the Supreme Court, but it isn't going to be influenced by the size of mob that shows up at anybody's doorstep, or what any politician wants to say about it.

The UK will be compensated - one way or the other - for this. There is no treaty obligation on the UK authorities to go to such extreme efforts to block Assange from leaving and this is very irregular, so the simplest explanation is that there is a keen interest in this.

The company knew or should have known its legal obligation before spending a single penny on anything. Whatever they found AFTER they started work, could have been found prior to starting work.

An obligation to obey the law, is not a punishment. It is a responsibility and if you don't like it then all you need to do is get the law changed or work in a different industry with different risks. Perhaps selling used cars rather than excavation.

You only need to shield sleeping quarters and living quarters. not the entire ship. and you don't need to use dead weight. the shielding need not be 6 feet of homogenous lead. How about 20 feet of supplies, machinery, computers, drinking water, oxygen, rocket fuel etc etc. most of that stuff is perfectly happy being exposed to that degree of cosmic radiation.

Don't worry. We spend far far far more attention to what is happening in football than we do on space travel.

Yes. but your analogy is terrible.

At what age do you think a woman is mature enough to choose to have her genitals mutilated in order to make herself look pretty? How about having her face mutilated? Would you EVER consider such consent to be valid?

In Canada the definition of child porn also includes actresses who appear to be or are depicted as being under 18 regardless of their actual age.

If the government is spending money, then that money is circulating and doing our economy good. If the government is sitting on a pile of cash in the bank and not spending it (or investing, or anything else to keep it moving) then that is when it actually hurts the economy. Having it spend metric buttloads of cash on crazy inventions is not only good for the economy and the lower-class folks in it, but it's also good for society because, heaven forbid, the government might actually discover something useful -- even if it's not quite what it was trying to do.

if I have a choice between letting rich guys waste money and letting the government tax the rich guys and waste the money. I have more reason to support the system that actually lets me vote and participate and is at least officially supposed to be looking out for the publics best interests and not merely itself. That system is a democratic government - not private ownership.

Hell... with enough courage the government might even figure out how to put a man on the moon someday. oh wait.. it did that already!