Is the New World Order already here?

Question

For those that don't know my politics, the number one issue that I will put all other issues aside for, is Globalization. I am completely opposed to irresponsible globalization for I believe out politicians are selling us out.

Logic dictates that you can not have free trade with a country that pays their workers less than yours. It is pure common sense that to balance that out, our wages will either have to go down or we will continue to see jobs go overseas.

Both sides of the aisle are doing this and nowadays they don't even seem to care about how those countries treat their workers.

Last week, it was free trade with N. Vietnam irregardless of many humanitarian protests.

Now, it's Panama.

"U.S., Panama reach free-trade agreement: U.S. official"
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-12-19T161038Z_01_WAT006766_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-PANAMA-TRADE.xml&src=rss

Is the end goal going to be one world government?

irregardless is slang

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/irregardless

"Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."

Answer 1

Finally, I agree with you on something. It always makes me happy whenever I find common ground with someone diametrically opposed to me politically.

This has always been the danger with globalization. It happened to the auto workers in the 1970 and 1980, and the tech workers in the 1990s and 2000s.

However, a free trade agreement with Panama is not unexpected. This has always been a part of Bush's agenda. He wants to extend NAFTA to first include Central America and the Caribbean; then all of South America, eventually creating a united Americas trading block. We have already seen what a stunning success NAFTA has been, so much for it stopping the flow of illegal workers by improving the economy in Mexico. Because of the systemic corruption, only the top 2% of Mexicans have benefited from NAFTA, the rest are streaming across the border to seek better jobs.


BTW, in writing, irregardless is not a "real" word. You should use either regardless or irrespective (see link below)

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/irregardless

Answer 2

That is obviously the goal.

And although I agree with your concerns over free trade.

The economist theories state that as their standard of living increases the countries will be able to buy more of our goods and services.

Their wages will then increase and some other country will begin to steal jobs from them.

A small country like Panama does not worry me though. Large countries like India and China are the major threat to jobs.

But the benefits are these countries are no linked to us financially and become our allies whether they like it or not for if we fall so do thier economies.

The wealth that they generate for their own population tends to Americanize them and they become closer aligned to us culturally.

This will not be a painless process. There will be many people such as yourself who will fight globalization. But as our weapons become more and more powerful and easier to obtain we need to become more globally aligned to prevent nuclear or bio armageddon.

One world government and one world religion may be a long way off but just may be the only Illuminated path we have.

Answer 3

Free trade and one world government are two different things.

Under the economic laws of comparative advantage, both countries can have higher paid workers if trade allows them to concentrate on producing the things they are best at, instead of producing the things they are not relatively efficient at doing.

One world government is a different issue, and one I oppose as it is a backdoor to gutting our Constitution.

Answer 4

The problem I see with globalization, is more taxes, one more government to pay taxes to.

We pay city, county, state and federal taxes, shall we also pay global taxes.

FYI: Irregardless is a real word, not just slang. It is a proper noun. It is a really good restaurant/cafe in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Answer 5

free trade is bad why should a guy that only needs $1 a day to live get paid $5 an hour he would get too greedy and the price of goods would increace. if they are that desperate for money sell themselves

Answer 6

You don't have to wait for an 'end goal', the NWO is here already.
See United Nations, NAFTA, Trans-Texas Corridor, Patriot Act, RealID, Euro, Amero (yes, that's the new one. It will be here soon),

Answer 7

no, the end result wont come to that. it will be a majority world order, with a few nations holding out because of cultural and religious differences...it will always be a battle for something that will always elude the world

Answer 8

I don't know about one world government but it seems like we're headed toward one world economics since all the industrialized countries are so intertwined economically.

Answer 9

Of course.
One world government is only inevitable as we move into an age of globalization.

Who will run this government is the big question.

Answer 10

Yes, look at the history of our World Bank and where we are heading, what do you think the war is all about? YES!