Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In March 2025, in the thread "Re: OT, out", Umm asked the members: "Do you think it is because America is made up of magical soil that makes businesses based in America magically profitable?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (37) |
Author: onepoorguy ⎊✺🐝  😊 😞
Number: of 86257 
Subject: Re: 9-11
Date: 09/12/26 1:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 3
Read the DSA website. Some of what the DSA are proposing is not at all like Sweden and Denmark.

I may sometime. That they have positions I don't agree with is no surprise. Every party does.

Government ownership of critical companies?

Not sure what you're talking about. I do favor government ownership of some things. For example, resource extraction. Why is it that we "lease" land to companies for a pittance, and let them reap all the rewards from our resources? Oil, copper, coal, or whatever. They are in the ground, usually on public lands. Government should be extracting it, and rewarding us little people (even if it's just deficit reduction). Alaska sort of does this (they get bonus checks every year).

They probably shouldn't be owning car companies, if that's what you meant. However, to my rant about the Saudi pipeline, if private industry is insisting on moving operations overseas for some critical items (e.g. electronics, healthcare materials, etc), the argument can be made that government should be running some operations here to prevent the interdiction I spoke of in that thread.

Unfettered migration?

Agree with you there (assuming you mean immigration...internal migration should be fine). It should be fettered. But not gestapo-like. None of that "your papers please" BS, or detaining citizens or valid visa holders (or those otherwise doing what they should through the system).

Sort of tangential, but I'd be OK with a "North America Zone". We already share the longest unguarded border in the world with Canada. Free movement back and forth would be fine with me if we can hammer out some of the details to the satisfaction of both nations.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to onepoorguy here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 86,214 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (37) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community