Ten Years After Battle of Seattle: Another World Is Necessary

Tens years to the day after "The Battle of Seattle" opened a new front in the epic struggle over global economic policy, one of the activists who took to the streets with the the forces of civil society (labor, farm, environmental, consumer and human rights groups) to protest the World Trade Organization's bias on behalf of multinational corporations has proposed a radical shift in the approach of the United States to international trade.

There was no tear gas in the air Monday.

But Sherrod Brown was bringing the message of the Seattle activists to Washington.

A relatively junior representative from Ohio when he marched in 1999 with union allies to protest the WTO's plans to reduce the ability of the United States and other countries to protect workers, farmers and the environmnent, Brown is now a U.S. senator who sits on the powerful Banking, Agriculture and Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committees.

Yet, unlike so many who come to Congress and quickly forget their roots in working communities such as Brown's hometown of Mansfield, Ohio, this senator is still battling the WTO and the unbalanced and irresponsible trade policies it promotes.

"The current trade model has not served the interests of a majority of Americans and has led to public demand for change. Americans know that the choices are not limited to free trade or protectionism. They know that trade policies can expand economic opportunity," says Brown, who argues, correctly, that:

Fair Trade is vital to our nation's economic future.

Trade can create new jobs in exporting industries, but trade can destroy jobs when imports replace the output of domestic firms. Because current trade policy has accelerated the trade deficit, eliminated manufacturing jobs, and stagnated wages, more jobs have been displaced by imports than created by exports. The United States has lost more than 3 million manufacturing jobs since 2000 – that's one in six good paying jobs.

Trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA and China PNTR were written and negotiated by multinational corporations and lack protections for workers, the environment, and food and product safety.

To a greater extent than any other Democrat in the Senate, Brown has urged President Obama and his aides to make a clean break with past policies. Brown's message to an Obama administration that continues to send mixed signals with regard to global economic relations that, "Continuing the Bush trade policies would be a mistake."

This is a long-term commitment on Brown's part, as was seen Monday when, to mark the the tenth anniversary of the World Trade Organization (WTO) demonstrations in Seattle and the Nov. 30-Dec 2 WTO ministerial in Geneva, Switzerland, Brown announced plans to ramp up legislative advocacy for the reshaping of U.S. trade policy.

Along with North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan, United Steelworkers union president Leo Gerard and Citizens Trade Campaign director Andy Gussert, Brown described plans to reintroduce Trade Reform, Accountability, Development, and Employment (TRADE) Act.

The TRADE Act seeks to revamp U.S. trade policy by mandating trade pact reviews, establishing higher standards, protecting workers in developing nations, and restoring Congressional oversight of future trade agreements. Among other things, the bill would mandate trade pact reviews, establish standards, protect workers in developing nations, and would help restore Congressional oversight of future trade agreements.

"We want trade and we want more of it. But, we need a new direction," Brown explained on Monday. "Done wrong, trade sends our jobs overseas. Done right, trade can foster new business and job growth at home, and can lift up workers in developing nations. The TRADE ACT will help Congress and the White House craft a trade policy that benefits workers, business owners, and our nation."

With allies in the Senate and the House, Brown is promoting a number of trade reform initiatives, such as the Trade Enforcement Priorities Act and the Reciprocal Market Access Act.

But the (TRADE) Act, which has attracted more than 125 supporters in the House, is central to congressional efforts to restructure trade policy in a manner that benefits rather than harms the U.S. economy.

"The TRADE Act... outlines principles on labor, environment, investment, and food safety that included in future trade agreements, and strengthens the role of Congress in trade policymaking," explains Brown. "When we change the process for writing trade deals, we can make trade deals work for more people."

The December 21, 2009 issue of The Nation that goes to press this week will feature a series of articles on where the fight for fair trade and humane development policies is headed ten years after "The Battle of Seattle" moved these issues to the center of the global debate.

Comments (45)

1. There is a long-term phenomenon unfolding that is beneficial to those sectors of the US economy that competes globally. Of course, the Dems are oblivious to this!

   The US Dollar is on a long-term slide while our main deficit `partners', China & Japan, have currencies that are on the uptick. This is close to being guaranteed!

   What does this mean? IF the US do not start silly trade wars, which is what Sen. Brown is doing, our exporting companies will continue to gain world market share, OR, our competitors will set up more US factories. It's that simple!

   But, like everything the Dems are trying in the Magic Era, they are shitting on America thinking this is the Change their buddies, that's unions and the Protectionist Libs, want!

   Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 10:05am

2. "like everything the Dems are trying in the Magic Era, they are shitting on America thinking this is the Change their buddies, that's unions and the Protectionist Libs, want!"

   ron paul is a protectionist, too. so do you want to include him in your daily ("yawn") rant?

   Posted by darladoon at 11/30/2009 @ 11:07am

3. Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 10:05am

   Happ, you think it's only "Dems" that have a problem with globalization?

   Do the names Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs ring a bell???

   Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 11:10am

4. Do the names Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs ring a bell???

   Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 11:10am

   Repubs have truly BIG tent......

   Your party has a few free traders, or did you NOT know that?

   Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 11:21am

5. China and India are now growing markets, because they are relying more on their internal markets. Western markets are failing because they have become dependent on manufactured goods from China and other countries! The industries and the jobs that have been outsourced for cheap labor have reduced the purchasing power of Western consumers. No consumer and no market! By way of contrast, Japan, whose economy is entirely based on foreign trade, is collapsing. It is rather obvious that reliance on foreign trade is a fools errand! I could care less about foreign trade. I am all for protectionism, and the redevelopment of America behind strong trade barriers! This is how we became a major industrial nation that created jobs and prosperity.

   Posted by pjcasey at 11/30/2009 @ 11:45am

6. But, like everything the Dems are trying in the Magic Era, they are shitting on America thinking this is the Change their buddies, that's unions and the Protectionist Libs, want! Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 10:05a

   What do YOU care?

   If you're making as much money as you say you are off this guy, the rest is all "style points".

   Isn't it?

   Posted by schnellerheinz at 11/30/2009 @ 11:58am

7. The TRADE Act sounds like an Obama veto waiting to happen if it ever passes.

   Posted by nkurland at 11/30/2009 @ 12:01pm

8. "The union" as a threat?

   LOL

   As Jack Lessenberry noted in last week's Detroit local "The Metro Times", Flint in the 1970's employed more union personnel than GM did in the entire balance of the country.

   The unions, now, are pipsqueaks.

   And YOU GUYS, living DEEPLY, DEEPLY, in the past, still ascribe these supernormal powers to them??

   Posted by schnellerheinz at 11/30/2009 @ 12:03pm

9. The unions, now, are pipsqueaks.

   And YOU GUYS, living DEEPLY, DEEPLY, in the past, still ascribe these supernormal powers to them??

   Posted by schnellerheinz at 11/30/2009 @ 12:03pm

   Yet they have an unhealthy influence over Dem politicians for vote fraud, political appointments and favors as pay backs(see "stymulus Pork bill") ...

   they even get exemptions for the Cadillac health care tax the rest of us who pay our health care will have to pony up...

   unions are a death nell for any business today that needs to be sharp for competition, which is why they infest govt workers, schools, and city govts where their is no competition to demand increased improvements....

   yet they received the lions share of GM...and not the stock or bond holders who put up the risk....even as they bear a heavy load responsibility for GMs failure.

   Overall unions have too large an influence compared to their numbers over important systems of govt and act as a pay off system designed after the mob of old.

   Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 12:58pm

10. Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 11:21am

    Yes, I did....but the point was YOUR original post where ALL you talked about was "Dems" and "unions"....

    so again, do Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, etc. "not mean it" and thus you ignore them?

    and if there are "free trade Dems"....why do you not seem to know THAT in your original post????

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:06pm

11. Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 12:58pm

    Until the minimum wage is eliminated and unions are made totally illegal....Maasch will always have an excuse.

    Apparently a return to the 1890s is the only thing that will save our economy.

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:18pm

12. we need to either protect certain industries here lest we outsource so much manufacturing base we find ourselves in a VERY NASTY place should relations with china ever go south.

    the problem with making china the world manufacturing zone and the US the world consuming engine and emporium should be obvious. its a breech of national security.

    furthermore its untenable. jobs that pay well must be created here to replace lost manufacturing jobs in order for the american consumer to continue purchasing consumables or what will happen?

    the fact is that such jobs have not appeared fast enough to support the consumption growth necessary to sustain such a phenomenon.

    one positive step, though not a solution as a result of national security considerations, would be to countenance a little wealth redistribution in the form of social programs like medical care (perhaps the only one really needed right now) which would supplement the income of the consuming class as well as create a sense of security therein that would enable more consuming...

    simply encouraging unsustainable consumption by extending irresponsible lines of credit won't work anymore. not sustainable.

    another possibility is to seriously re-examine trade policy with regard to vital wealth producing industries.

    regardless, both the squeezing of the american middle class and the loss of defense vital manufacturing pose a two pronged threat to our country that needs to be addressed in a meaningful way lest we slip slide away...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 1:33pm

13. Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:18pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    he likes communist china. no unions there...

    hell, the government IS the union there, seems to me...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 1:35pm

14. Apparently a return to the 1890s is the only thing that will save our economy.

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:18pm

    Isn't that the goal of the AGW crowd?

    Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 1:58pm

15. Apparently a return to the 1890s is the only thing that will save our economy. Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:18pm Isn't that the goal of the AGW crowd? Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 1:58pm | ignore this person |

    --fair question, actually. It does seem, in many respects, global warming alarmists want us to be pre-industrialized so that the environment is "saved." However, are you not willing to admit that fossil fuel, which are a finite resource, will run out eventually, and that America has engaged in many armed conflicts/wars (many with false justifications) in order to enforce what we want vis a vis oil interests? If we were able to harness true "green" energy sources (solar, wind, etc) on a massive scale that certainly would put a massive hole in the oil, coal, natural gas profits, no? Why would we not want to use green energy sources and eliminate the need for fossil fuels? Can anyone answer me that?

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 2:20pm

16. the whole china thing became necessary in order to hide inflation.

    imagine how much that 10-pack of tupperware would cost if it were made in des moines.

    it's time to end rubber money and fractional (or how about ZERO) reserve banking.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 11/30/2009 @ 2:22pm

17. Why would we not want to use green energy sources and eliminate the need for fossil fuels? Can anyone answer me that?

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 2:20pm

    it's ANTI-AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 11/30/2009 @ 2:41pm

18. Isn't that the goal of the AGW crowd?----Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 1:58pm

    Oddly, no solar panels, wind turbines, wave generators, plug-in cars, or fusion power in the 1890s, sntauri.

    Maybe the 2090s.....but apparently your "modern" conservative seem to think the William McKinley era was the "good ol' days".

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 2:42pm

19. In the past, members of Congress never have been particularly eager to remind the public that they regularly vote to raise the ceiling on the national debt, which now exceeds $12 trillion.

    That's $12,000,000,000,000.

    The debt has more than doubled since 2002, and in the last two years it's been rising at a clip of more than $3.8 billion a day. Each U.S. citizen now has a share that's estimated at more than $39,000.

    Thinking like Browns and other leftist extremist will all but guarantee that trade imbalances will add to it!

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 3:09pm

20. In the past, members of Congress never have been particularly eager to remind the public that they regularly vote to raise the ceiling on the national debt, which now exceeds $12 trillion. That's $12,000,000,000,000. The debt has more than doubled since 2002, and in the last two years it's been rising at a clip of more than $3.8 billion a day. Each U.S. citizen now has a share that's estimated at more than $39,000. Thinking like Browns and other leftist extremist will all but guarantee that trade imbalances will add to it! Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 3:09pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    --who'd the deficit rise under during this decade? take a stab tough guy! he's from your neighboring state!

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 3:12pm

21. Until the minimum wage is eliminated and unions are made totally illegal....Maasch will always have an excuse.

    Apparently a return to the 1890s is the only thing that will save our economy.

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2009 @ 1:18pm

    You know better than that.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 3:27pm

22. he likes communist china. no unions there...

    hell, the government IS the union there, seems to me...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 1:35pm

    Remember..

    I sell TO China...not buy from them to sell here.. We produce product here.

    And in many ways they are lessening regulations, taxes, fees, and govt hard grip on business and individuals....as we do the opposite...

    so in some cases, growing cases,many areas in China are more capitalistic that the US...and we are more commmunistic than they...

    and you would want to have their govt public health care...

    Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 3:33pm

23. These must be particularily glum days at The Nation.

    President Obama's popularity is spiraling downward.

    Obamacare's chance of becoming law is spiraling downward with the President's popularity. Those chances currently reside at zero.

    The climategate scandal had eliminated any hope of passing cap and trade. A large majority of Americans question whether humans are responsible and that proportion continues to increase.

    The President's stimulus package not only din't prevent unemployment from from topping 9%, it has made it worse (10.2%).

    And for the cherry on top, Honduras held fair elections (recognized by the Obama adinistration) yesterday ending Chavas's hopes of colonizing the tiny country and eliminating their economic freedom.

    On the bright side, you can still write condescending articles about Gov Palin for a couple more years.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 11/30/2009 @ 3:51pm

24. On the bright side, you can still write condescending articles about Gov Palin for a couple more years.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 11/30/2009 @ 3:51pm

    And she's HAPPY to have the loons clinging to her ass......hahahaha!

    Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 4:13pm

25. "President Obama's popularity is spiraling downward"

    if by "spiraling downward" you mean "losing a percentage point every month" then sure....

    Posted by darladoon at 11/30/2009 @ 4:38pm

26. ATTENTION LARRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fAGzY9rnaA

    Posted by frosty zoom at 11/30/2009 @ 4:47pm

27. darla,

    which is better, coke or pepsi?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 11/30/2009 @ 4:49pm

28. Hot phrase of the day: spiraling downward. Quick get yours before it is all used up.

    Posted by srjenkins at 11/30/2009 @ 6:07pm

29. Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 3:33pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    by the way, apologies if my demon may have offended a few days ago. it was thanksgiving and i was giving him some air...

    two points/questions/counterpoints...

    1. ARE we really adding THAT many new obstacles? i mean really...i'm trying to figure it out...something needs to be done to establish a confidence in stability and the principles upon which business is based, and i've no problem with the posting of a few sheep/guard dogs around the around the flock or watching the financial henhouse...beyond the politics, how many new obstacles are REALLY being erected under the detestable socialist mulatto? LOL

    2. china is transitioning STILL from one of the most ambitious attempts to regulate every aspect of its population's lives and economic activity...i BET there is a reduction of "red" tape, but is it not because there was so much more red tape there to be ripped off? remember mao?

    u sell to them - nice. are they good customers? do you sell goods or services?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 6:11pm

30. --who'd the deficit rise under during this decade? take a stab tough guy! he's from your neighboring state!

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 3:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Better yet try who controled congressional spending for the last THREE years "not pot to piss in guy"? If you'll note it took off into the stratosphere once Demoncrats got control!!!

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 6:15pm

31. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 11/30/2009 @ 3:51pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    "President Obama's popularity is spiraling downward. "

    last time i checked it was comparable to reagan's and clinton's at this time.

    "Obamacare's chance of becoming law is spiraling downward with the President's popularity. Those chances currently reside at zero."

    really? perhaps, but sounds like wishful thinking is involved in this statement.

    "The climategate scandal had eliminated any hope of passing cap and trade. A large majority of Americans question whether humans are responsible and that proportion continues to increase."

    "climategate" did that? it did? "a large majority" feel that way? really?

    "The President's stimulus package not only din't prevent unemployment from from topping 9%, it has made it worse (10.2%). "

    the result is not automatically attributable to the cause you posit. i could say something like "but for the stimulus package unemployment would have been x% worse as a result of the economic policies of Xxxxxx Xxxx over x number of years..." but you understand how that works.

    "And for the cherry on top, Honduras held fair elections (recognized by the Obama adinistration) yesterday ending Chavas's hopes of colonizing the tiny country and eliminating their economic freedom. "

    wow! it gets better. chaves is doing that? when's he gonna be on the rio grande, you think? invasion america...domino after domino in the sinister lefty spic plot to topple the colosus to the north!!!!

    "On the bright side, you can still write condescending articles about Gov Palin for a couple more years."

    and the cherry on the top of the righty misinterpretation of current events reality, the defense of the mushmouthed milf who's wrecking whats left of the right!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 6:31pm

32. if the republican party did not have its head crammed so thoroughly up its ideological ass perhaps it would be able to at least swallow a little pride and lurch forward enough to begin to reconstitute itself...

    at some point the dems did this in regard to gun control. sure most lefty ideologues ate the guns and sure i find the constitutional objections to moderate gun control absurd and based upon the thinnest of logical threads, but...

    there's gun toting bubbas out there who should be voting democrat and, well...we need them...

    there is a growing crescendo of people in this country now who want a health care system a lot more similar to germany's and england's and canada's...and perhaps its time for the repubs to jump on the bandwagon and oppose all change in other areas...

    cut losses...lose battle in order to fight another day...

    abandon the crazy teabagger second revolution fantasy buffs...re-interpret the concept of "conservatism"...

    just suggestions...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 7:10pm

33. Better yet try who controled congressional spending for the last THREE years "not pot to piss in guy"?

    --what the fuck are you talking about? your grammar makes at least 1/2 your shit unreadable. i'm not asking for every "i" to be dotted or "t" to be crossed--but clean your shit up so it makes some sense.

    If you'll note it took off into the stratosphere once Demoncrats got control!!!

    --bush the patsy!

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 6:15pm

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 7:12pm

34. Again it is the unions fault,there is a change because of currency exchange rates,and Democrats caused the huge deficit.How much debt was caused by war on terror?What is our trade in balance with China?Who is modernizing their manufacturing base the U.S. or China?Which party caused the deficit mess?We had better quit the petty back biting between philosophies and get back to caring about "our" country.The Chinese people have money in their pockets,they are the world's fastest growing economy.Why,they make things.We on the other hand trade and buy things.Happy brags about his gold,how does that enter into the currency equation?Santi says the Constitution doesn't mention health care.I wonder how we as a country tolerates 16% of our economy being tied up in health care and 10% of our population isn't even covered.That is what makes health care reform a moral issue.We need to re-discover manufacturing or we will be the next"Dubai World".What would we have done if GWB's idea to sell our ports management to Dubai World went through?

    Posted by whatozz at 11/30/2009 @ 8:03pm

35. Posted by whatozz at 11/30/2009 @ 8:03pm

    Text book example of jibberish.....better off not posting.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 8:20pm

36. "Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense."

    From the Voluntary Human Extinction Group website.

    Extreme redistribution?

    Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 8:46pm

37. From the Voluntary Human Extinction Group

    Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 8:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    i'm selling tickets for rocket ships to venus...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2009 @ 8:59pm

38. " I will also structure trades with my Universa friends to bet on the next mistake by Bernanke, Summers, and Geithner."

    n.n. taleb.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 11/30/2009 @ 9:54pm

39. From the Voluntary Human Extinction Group website.

    Extreme redistribution?

    Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 8:46pm

    I've not heard of this group so I looked it up. I got some chuckles.....it seems to me, folks too self-centered to want to take on the burden of rearing children, have formed the perfect `Group' with lots of tongue-in-cheek bullshit. Pretty funny!

    Anyone interested, check it out at:

    http://www.vhemt.org/

    Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 10:05pm

40. Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 6:15pm

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 7:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Spelling is the only substance your points ever have! But that is obvious!

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 10:35pm

41. Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 7:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person Spelling is the only substance your points ever have! But that is obvious!

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 10:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    --excellent retort gunga din!

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/30/2009 @ 10:59pm

42. Anyone interested, check it out at:

    http://www.vhemt.org/

    Posted by Happy at 11/30/2009 @ 10:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Is this related to Margret Sanger and her eugenics crusade, you know the baby killing misnomer planned parenthood she founded? Do they have a link to the site? (chuckle)

    Posted by BigPasture at 11/30/2009 @ 11:04pm

43. You know better than that.----Posted by YourJomamma at 11/30/2009 @ 3:27pm

    Do I, John? Give us your "perfect world" of capitalism, labor, and governmental "intrusion" in the "free market"...

    and tell me how it would differ from the pre-Teddy Roosevelt Era?

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2009 @ 07:19am

44. Posted by sntauri at 11/30/2009 @ 8:46pm

    If the "Voluntary Human Extinction" folks are significant elements of the environmental movement....

    does that mean we now accept that Scott Roeder and Eric Rudolph are significant elements of the "pro-life" movement?

    Just to be fair???

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2009 @ 07:21am

45. To 'Happy' and all the other 'Free Traders': US exports have NEVER, I repeat, NEVER accounted for more than 4% of GDP. NEVER EVER. Even during the boom years of the 50s, 60s, exports were never more than 4%. So, we open up the largest, most developed consumer market in the world to communists, slave labor, monetary manipulation, etc just so a few fat cats can exploit the third world human 'resources' (yeah, they've raped them for all of their other resources, might as well let them enslave the people as well!). Well, thanks but, no thanks. Wanna know the reason China, India & Brazil are developing so rapidly? It's called PROTECTIONISM. Wanna know why it's called PROTECTIONism? Because it's about PROTECTING your nation's producers. NOT THE MONEY CHANGERS! I've got more news for you Mr. 'Happy': China's currency is PEGGED to the dollar! Get that, smartass? PEGGED. Meaning, no matter how low our dollar goes, their yuan goes LOWER! Meaning, our goods NEVER get any cheaper in COMMUNIST CHINA! And, China, India, Japan, Korea, et al ALL have heafty IMPORT TARRIFF's on FINISHED MANUFACTURED US GOODS! Just because you claim to be involved in an export driven business, doesn't mean the other 96% of us should have to LOSE OUR JOBS so you can make an extra buck off SLAVE FUCKING LABOR! FAct is, making something half-way around the world, then transporting it to a port, then shipping it HALFWAY AROUND THE WORLD, unloading it, sending it by truck/rail to a warehouse, then trucking to an outlet store is only more profitable when you are EXPLOITING OTHER HUMAN BEINGS for your greed! In the end, it's a FAILED economic model as it is TOTALLY WASTEFUL when the same product can be produced LOCALLY by the very people who will be the end user/consumer. GET IT!? WISE UP AMERICA, NOW!

    Posted by fattkidd at 12/01/2009 @ 12:23pm