The Central America Free Trade Agreement passed in the House 217 to 215 with many Democrats voting against.

Speaking to the House before the vote, Bush said that if it passed, it would make so many new jobs in Central America that the number of people trying to enter the U.S. illegally will greatly drop.


Heck, we may see Americans trying to go south to get a job.

It will also lower wages enough here that there will be no point in people there coming here. The race to the bottom is renewed.

Originally posted by Imagineer
The race to the bottom is renewed.

Exactly so.

The race to the bottom --for wages-- is exactly what the Corporate State wants.

Less for the peons = More for the ruling elite.

Period.

When will this flow of utter crap end?
http://www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/19116.exclude.html

BTW heres some family values for you:
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/002261.html#002261

CAFTA Passes by 1 Vote in Midnight Session
In a midnight vote Congress narrowly approved the Central American Free Trade Agreement or CAFTA. The final vote was 217 to 215. But last night's vote came with a major twist. When official voting had ended at 11:17 pm, as the 15 minute voting period had expired, legislators had actually voted to defeat CAFTA 180-175. But Republican leaders took the unusual move of holding the vote open for another 47 minutes, furiously rounding up holdouts in their own party until they had secured just enough to ensure approval. To win, the White House and GOP congressional leaders had to overcome resistance from dozens of Republican members who opposed CAFTA because of issues ranging from the threat to the U.S. sugar industry to more general worries about the impact of global trade on U.S. jobs. President Bush made a rare visit to Capitol Hill yesterday to lobby Republican dissenters. Only 15 of the 202 House Democrats backed the measure, while 27 Republicans voted against CAFTA.

Walter Jones, (R - North Carolina):
CAFTA is not going to help the people of Central America, and it certainly won't help those American workers who will lose their jobs...If CAFTA becomes the law of the land, this country is setting itself up to become a second-rate manufacturing country.

The House vote was effectively the last hurdle facing CAFTA. The Senate has already approved the agreement.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/28/149232
+++++++++++++++

Rammed down the throats of the American people. This vote resembles the same anti-democratic strong arming that happened on the medicare bill.

It is a sad day when our elected officials do something so obviously harmfull to the American people. Those politicians backing this law should be stood in front of a wall and executed.

Originally posted by Echo2
It is a sad day when our elected officials do something so obviously harmful to the American people.

?!?!?!?!

It should be NO surprise to anyone.

They've BEEN doing just that for the past 60 years.

Rule # 1 in the American System of Government; Protect the interests of the Corporate Elites and ignore the detrimental effect it will have on the People

i agree freethinker,very much so, but i believe even longer than 60

The railroad barons did it in the 1800s. Politicians and wealthy investors got together and made millions. President Lincoln was actually involved in a couple of creativly financed railroad dealings.

Originally posted by Echo2
The railroad barons did it in the 1800s.

Yes.......the predation of the People and the resources of this country and others by US Corproations HAS been going on for far longer than 60 years..........but it really began to accelerate (and to lay the foundations for this country's eventual demise) in 1947.

With the National Security Act of 1947, which established the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency, Congress (and by proxy, the People of America) ceded all military and national security control to the Executive Branch via the National Security Council. This means that since 1947, America has been a "National Security State", which is just a reformatted version of a form of passive Martial Law, a state under a constant state of emergency, in a perpetual wartime economy. Since 1947 we have evolved into a bloated military behemoth driven by unfathomably wealthy global Industrialists who veil nothing but the most blatant Imperial ambitions under the auspices of reluctant nobility and world security."_____Gore Vidal

Freethinker,

I constantly hear you making the absurd assumption that we are all somehow ruled by coorporations, do you have any proof? Any evidence? Any reason to believe so?

And personally I greatly support CAFTA, it can only aid the US Economy. The highest US Tarriff against Latin America is 8.7% on textiles. US Sugar Tarriffs keep US prices 2X above the world norm! Meanwhile the ultra high tarrifs against US goods in Latin America will be eliminated (the average tarriff is around 50%). This can only help the US manufacturing industry and does not pose any threat to US jobs.

This is a milestone in history, a victory for the world and mankind.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 00Elf
Freethinker,

I constantly hear you making the absurd assumption that we are all somehow ruled by coorporations, do you have any proof? Any evidence? Any reason to believe so?
[/QUOTE-----------------------------------------------------------------

You might start by researching the amount of corporate money that supports political candidates and political parties.

Originally posted by 00Elf
I constantly hear you making the absurd assumption that we are all somehow ruled by coorporations, do you have any proof? Any evidence? Any reason to believe so?

Are you being facetious??!?!

Surely you are.

I hope you are not so clueless as to believe that the huge donations [read; bribes] each year by the major Corporations in this country to the political whores have no influence on the legislation coming out of Washington.

http://www.political-reform.net/entiresite_text.htm

The Power Elite------by Tan Nguyen

Both Thomas Dye and William Dumhoff argue that in the United States, power is no longer vested in the people, but rather, in a select group of upper class individuals, or, the "power elite".

We like to think of the United State as a democracy, where power is vested in the people. But does power truly belong to the general population? Or does it belong to an elite group of individuals, namely, leaders of large corporations. Both Thomas Dye in Who's Running America? The Clinton Years (1995) and William Domhoff in Who Rules America: Power and Politics in the Year 2000 (2000) present evidence supporting the latter hypothesis. As Domhoff puts it, "the owners and top-level managers in large income-producing properties are far and away the dominant power figures in the United States". It is this arrangement that most severely undermines democracy in the United States.

In Domhoff's view, a power elite exists in the United States. This group is made up of the nation's corporate community - along with those who have vested corporate ties - and their policy formation organizations (such as chambers of commerce). Domhoff points out that both the corporate community and policy formation organizations are predominantly made up of members of the upper class. This occurs because "(1) members of the upper class own almost half of all privately held stock, (2)many large stockholding families in the upper class continue to be involved in the direction of major corporations through family offices, investment partnerships, and holding companies, (3)members of the upper class are disproportionately represented on the boards of large corporations, (4) the professional managers of middle-level origins are assimilated into the upper class both socially and economically and share the values of upper-class owners."

The power elite is bound together by their common upper class values. Domhoff argues that this "social cohesion" is important from a class-dominance perspective because the most socially cohesive groups are the ones that do best in arriving at a consensus when dealing with a problem. Attending the nation's exclusive prep schools and universities, and becoming members of the country's most exclusive social clubs and resorts serves to solidify this cohesion. Dye concurs with Domhoff's idea of the upper class's social cohesion, stating that "agreement among elites to abide by the rule of law and to minimize violence has a strong utilitarian motive, namely, to preserve stable working arrangements among elite groups."

The power elite adheres to upper class values, which they seek to perpetuate in order to maintain their class position, i.e. the status quo. "Elites in all sectors of American society share a consensus about the fundamental values of private enterprise, limit! ed government, and due process of law. " According to Dye, "6,000 individuals in 7,000 positions exercise formal authority over institutions that control roughly half of the nation's resources in industry, finance, utilities, insurance, mass media, foundation, education, law, and civic and cultural affairs." A relatively small number of people actually direct the activities in these areas or institutions, giving each member of the elite a great deal of power, and further adds to the group's cohesion.

Originally posted by 00Elf
And personally I greatly support CAFTA, it can only aid the US Economy.

I've heard of drinking the rightwing Kool-Aid, but THIS is fucking ridiculous.

You seem truly uninformed about CAFTA.

As well as out of step with the vast majority of working people in this country.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/756/1/81

MOST AMERICANS AGAINST CAFTA--A new national poll shows a majority of Americans across ALL political parties, including a majority of Latinos, oppose the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). The survey, released March 1 by AmericansForFairTrade.org, shows 74 percent oppose CAFTA when asked if they would favor or oppose the agreement if it reduced consumer prices but caused job losses. Overall, 51 percent of Americans opposed the deal and only 32 percent supported it. The Bush administration is expected to send the trade deal to Congress later this year. CAFTA lacks protections for workers' right to form unions and safe work conditions. If approved, CAFTA would drop tariffs between the United States, six Central American countries and the Dominican Republic. The agreement will leave workers, family farmers, the environment and communities more vulnerable, while enriching and empowering corporate elites. For more information, visit: http://www.aflcio.org/issuespolitics/globaleconomy/caftamain.cfm.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's meet back here on this forum in one year, and see if your CAFTA agreement has been "good" for the US economy.

It will likely be "good" for the wealthy, and a disaster for poor and working people.

IOW, a typical RepubliFascist policy initiative.

MOST AMERICANS AGAINST CAFTA--A new national poll shows a majority of Americans across ALL political parties, including a majority of Latinos, oppose the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). The survey, released March 1 by AmericansForFairTrade.org, shows 74 percent oppose CAFTA when asked if they would favor or oppose the agreement if it reduced consumer prices but caused job losses. Overall, 51 percent of Americans opposed the deal and only 32 percent supported it. The Bush administration is expected to send the trade deal to Congress later this year. CAFTA lacks protections for workers' right to form unions and safe work conditions. If approved, CAFTA would drop tariffs between the United States, six Central American countries and the Dominican Republic. The agreement will leave workers, family farmers, the environment and communities more vulnerable, while enriching and empowering corporate elites. For more information, visit:

Oh yes, a poll by a protectionist institute, that has to be fair and balanced.

Anyway, the question presupposed that CAFTA would cause job losses. The highest tarriff lowered by CAFTA is a mere 8.3% on textiles, 50% tarriffs are lowered against all US goods to Latin America. How can this loose jobs? Our products may see a slight price reduction but the major winners will be the Latin Americans. It's the Latin Americans that get a 50% price reduction in US goods, that can only help US Jobs as there is more incentive to export to latin america. I reccommend you do your homework before drinking AFL-CIO cool-aide.

@Elite Evidence.

Oh yes, it's a HUGE surprise that the rich have power. They own the coorporations, they're the CEO's, CFO's, Stockholders, ect. A business is that which sells availiable rescources to gain more. That is the way that economics has worked since the dawn of mankind.

If coorporations run the government, why are 3,000 new regulations published yearly according to the Federal Register?

If coorporations run the government, why is the War on Drugs still in progress?

If coorporations run the government, why wasn't Iraq money spent on tax breaks, in fact, what benefits do any companies gain from the Iraq war?

The fact that large companies control vast business concerns is a far cry from saying that we are a coorprate oligarchy.

If coorporations run the government, why are 3,000 new regulations published yearly according to the Federal Register? To keep them from killing too many Americans because the resulting backlash would effectively end the power of corporations in government.
If coorporations run the government, why is the War on Drugs still in progress? Private Prisons and Slave Labor. In fact the private prison industry is largely responsible for many of the new mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent crimes.
If coorporations run the government, why wasn't Iraq money spent on tax breaks, in fact, what benefits do any companies gain from the Iraq war?
Because it was far easier to steal $9 billion+ in a war zone. Its also more of a give away to favored buddies rather than corporations as a whole.

You didn't even really think about any of those, except the first one, as you were typing did you?

If corporations don't own our government then why did Congress just hide and pass 1.5 billion dollar give away to the oil/gas companies who have just recorded record profits due to the Iraq war and price gouging?

+++++++
$1.5 Billion Boondoggle for Oil Industry Was Sneaked into Energy Conference Report

TO:
The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert
Speaker, US House of Representatives
H232 Capitol
Washington, DC 20515-6501

FROM:
Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member
US House of Representatives

http://www.baltimorechronicle.com/072805Waxman.html
++++++++++++++++++++++

In a midnight vote, Congress narrowly approved the Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA. The final vote was 217 - 215 in the House, the closest margin possible as a tie vote would have blocked approval. Democratic Congressperson Marcy Kaptur said yesterday, "Compared to the vote a decade ago on NAFTA, which carried by a margin of only thirty-four votes, this vote was even more razor-thin. It barely crawled across the finish line."

To pass the agreement, the White House and GOP leaders had to overcome resistance from dozens of Republican members who opposed CAFTA because of issues ranging from the threat to the US sugar industry to more general worries about the impact of global trade on U.S. jobs. To lobby wavering Republicans, President Bush made a rare visit to Capitol Hill and Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly spent hours personally lobbying Congress members.

Publicly, the Bush Administration has been selling CAFTA as a national security issue, rather than an economic issue.

Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary:
"It helps to strengthen democracy in our own hemisphere. This goes right to our own national security. This is an agreement that will help extend peace and prosperity throughout the Western hemisphere. While we're working to advance freedom abroad we also need to be looking at our own hemisphere and make sure that we're supporting the democratic efforts that continue to advance in our own hemisphere."

Meanwhile, critics of the trade pact have been blasting the last-minute maneuvering by GOP leaders determined to pass the agreement.

When official voting had ended in the House at 11:17 pm, as the fifteen minute voting period had expired, legislators had actually voted to defeat CAFTA 180 (one hundred eighty) -175 (one hundred seventy five). But in an unusual move the final House vote was held open for an extra forty seven minutes, giving Republican leaders time to furiously round up holdouts in their own party until they had secured just enough to ensure approval.

Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader:
"The Republicans turned the floor of the House of the Representatives into a "Let's Make a Deal" set that was reminiscent of what happened at the time of the medicare prescription drug legislation that evening and again this time they kept the vote open a long time. But many of the overtures that were made to members was made before even going to the floor. So this is about again an abuse of power, an unethical way of passing legislation and depending on what members decide to do, may require further attention."

Meanwhile, Republican Rep. Charles Taylor of North Carolina said he voted against the bill, but that a problem with the electronic voting system failed to record the vote.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/29/1420251
+++++++++++++++++++

This peice of shite was forced through congress with threats to congressmen from the white house. Democracy has long been dead, this is just further evidence.

Originally posted by 00Elf
Oh yes, a poll by a protectionist institute, that has to be fair and balanced.

If you have any evidence that the poll was biased, by all means share it here.

Unless, of course, you're just out to kill the messenger.



Originally posted by 00Elf
@Elite Evidence.

Oh yes, it's a HUGE surprise that the rich have power. They own the coorporations, they're the CEO's, CFO's, Stockholders, ect. A business is that which sells availiable rescources to gain more. That is the way that economics has worked since the dawn of mankind.

I have no clue what you mean by -- ""Oh yes, it's a HUGE surprise that the rich have power"", or what you think it has to do with what I was talking about.

No one has suggested that it is *surprising* that busineses exist to make money.

I am simply criticizing the methods that US Corporations use in order to secure massive profits.

A Major General in the US Marine Corps --Smedley Butler-- knew of those methods intimately. He noted......

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes. "

Originally posted by 00Elf
If coorporations run the government, why are 3,000 new regulations published yearly according to the Federal Register?

Do you think that the passage of regulations --which the Corporations are masters at foiling and ignoring and avoiding-- refutes the fact that Corporate influence over the government is immense?!?!

Originally posted by 00Elf
If coorporations run the government, why is the War on Drugs still in progress?

I would say that the Big Pharmaceutical industry is quite content to see the government keep certain herbal medicines and remedies off the market. Other than that, I fail to see the connection.

Originally posted by 00Elf
If coorporations run the government, why wasn't Iraq money spent on tax breaks, in fact, what benefits do any companies gain from the Iraq war?

You are truly clueless.

Have you ever heard of companies like General Electric....or Raytheon....or Northrup.....or Halliburton......or Bechtel......or General Dynamics.....or Boeing.......or any of a thousand OTHER companies that rake in IMMENSE profits from war?!?!!?!?!?!

Do you have ANY concept whatsoever how many millions upon millions of dollars from those corporations listed above find their way into the POCKETS of the political whores in Washington?!?!

Read a liitle more from Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, and maybe ----just MAYBE--- the light will begin to come on for you as regards WHO in the business arena is making a killing from war--------

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven't paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children's children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits -- ah! that is another matter -- twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent -- the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let's get it.

Of course, it isn't put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and "we must all put our shoulders to the wheel," but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket -- and are safely pocketed. Let's just take a few examples:

Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people -- didn't one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn't much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let's look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump -- or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!

Or, let's take United States Steel. The normal earnings during the five-year period prior to the war were $105,000,000 a year. Not bad. Then along came the war and up went the profits. The average yearly profit for the period 1914-1918 was $240,000,000.00 Not bad.

There you have some of the steel and powder earnings. Let's look at something else. A little copper, perhaps. That always does well in war times.

Anaconda, for instance. Average yearly earnings during the pre-war years 1910-1914 of $10,000,000. During the war years 1914-1918 profits leaped to $34,000,000 per year.

Or Utah Copper. Average of $5,000,000 per year during the 1910-1914 period. Jumped to an average of $21,000,000 yearly profits for the war period.

Let's group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000.

A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.

Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren't the only ones. There are still others. Let's take leather.

For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were $3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That's all. The General Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over $800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per cent.

International Nickel Company -- and you can't have a war without nickel -- showed an increase in profits from a mere average of $4,000,000 a year to $73,000,000 yearly. Not bad? An increase of more than 1,700 per cent.

American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.

Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war. Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between 100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers doubled and tripled their earnings.

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public -- even before a Senate investigatory body.

But here's how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.

Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought -- and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.

There was still lots of leather left. So the leather people sold your Uncle Sam hundreds of thousands of McClellan saddles for the cavalry. But there wasn't any American cavalry overseas! Somebody had to get rid of this leather, however. Somebody had to make a profit in it -- so we had a lot of McClellan saddles. And we probably have those yet.

Also somebody had a lot of mosquito netting. They sold your Uncle Sam 20,000,000 mosquito nets for the use of the soldiers overseas. I suppose the boys were expected to put it over them as they tried to sleep in muddy trenches -- one hand scratching cooties on their backs and the other making passes at scurrying rats. Well, not one of these mosquito nets ever got to France!

Anyhow, these thoughtful manufacturers wanted to make sure that no soldier would be without his mosquito net, so 40,000,000 additional yards of mosquito netting were sold to Uncle Sam.

There were pretty good profits in mosquito netting in those days, even if there were no mosquitoes in France. I suppose, if the war had lasted just a little longer, the enterprising mosquito netting manufacturers would have sold your Uncle Sam a couple of consignments of mosquitoes to plant in France so that more mosquito netting would be in order.

Airplane and engine manufacturers felt they, too, should get their just profits out of this war. Why not? Everybody else was getting theirs. So $1,000,000,000 -- count them if you live long enough -- was spent by Uncle Sam in building airplane engines that never left the ground! Not one plane, or motor, out of the billion dollars worth ordered, ever got into a battle in France. Just the same the manufacturers made their little profit of 30, 100, or perhaps 300 per cent.

Undershirts for soldiers cost 14 cents to make and uncle Sam paid 30 to 40 cents each for them -- a nice little profit for the undershirt manufacturer. And the stocking manufacturer and the uniform manufacturers and the cap manufacturers and the steel helmet manufacturers -- all got theirs.

Why, when the war was over some 4,000,000 sets of equipment -- knapsacks and the things that go to fill them -- crammed warehouses on this side. Now they are being scrapped because the regulations have changed the contents. But the manufacturers collected their wartime profits on them -- and they will do it all over again the next time.

There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.

One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls. Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.

Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn't ride in automobiles, nor should they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels! Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.

The shipbuilders felt they should come in on some of it, too. They built a lot of ships that made a lot of profit. More than $3,000,000,000 worth. Some of the ships were all right. But $635,000,000 worth of them were made of wood and wouldn't float! The seams opened up -- and they sank. We paid for them, though. And somebody pocketed the profits.

It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 millionaires and billionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.

The Senate (Nye) committee probe of the munitions industry and its wartime profits, despite its sensational disclosures, hardly has scratched the surface.

Even so, it has had some effect. The State Department has been studying "for some time" methods of keeping out of war. The War Department suddenly decides it has a wonderful plan to spring. The Administration names a committee -- with the War and Navy Departments ably represented under the chairmanship of a Wall Street speculator -- to limit profits in war time. To what extent isn't suggested. Hmmm. Possibly the profits of 300 and 600 and 1,600 per cent of those who turned blood into gold in the World War would be limited to some smaller figure. ""