Iran’s Rouhani warns of greater hardship than war years of 1980s

I cannot agree with that. But for those who actually are anti-American ..... can you blame them? This may be the opening to a deeper discussion but ask yourself how often you have seen disparaging, hostile, and slanderous remarks on these pages by Americans against Russia, China, North Korea, Afghanistan, Irak, Libya, Venezuela, Mexico, Iran, etc. etc. etc. all of them clearly anti-..... Such behaviour by so many Americans (on behalf of the U.S.) is representative of your people and certainly fosters resentment, particularly with regards to nationals of countries that are recipients of American treachery and illegal intervention.

 

That doesn't make enough sense. You produce marijuana too but most of your stash comes from Mexico. If you are importing oil (or anything else) it is an indication that those goods are "needed". Now you can spin that "need" as unnecessary but more likely than not it reflects the economy of the average citizen and if he cannot afford the national product then that is an import DEPENDANCY of one sort or another. Just ask yourself what the consequence would be if a total stop of import were to be implemented.

 

Foreign trade doesn't always mean a higher standard of living for the people in a wealthy country.

However, with Iran that's less clear, because Iran is more like a "Second World" country.
If it really was "First World", it probably would be consuming most of the oil it produced.

Iran actually has a fairly large population. It's not like there is lots of oil and barely any people.
Do some calculations. How much oil would Iran be exporting if it had per capita oil consumption on par with the United States?

 

I did the calculation.
The US consumes 22 barrels of oil annually per capita.
Iran exports 9.6 barrels of oil annually per capita.

What does this tell us?

For the mentally slow, I'll spoon feed it for you.
If Iran actually had a similar standard of living to the US, those oil exports wouldn't be all that important to them.

 

For the mentally slow, I'll speak clearly for you. BULL .......... CRAPPY! This has NOTHING to do with "standard of living"!

 

The point is the US consumes more than twice as much oil per capita than Iran exports per capita.

Next time you fill up your fuel tank, imagine half that money you paid is going to some person in Iran. That's about as much difference as oil exports make for them.

 

Huh? What does that have to do with "standard of living". That is a rhetorical question because the answer is .... NOTHING.

 

My point was just that Iran should learn to live without needing to export that oil.

If they can't, there's something wrong with them.

Don't try to lay all the blame on the United States for their suffering.

Same thing probably goes for Venezuela (though I haven't done the calculations).

 

Mostly due to lower worker wages, lack of workplace protection laws, lack of excessive regulations, lack of ridiculous lawsuits.

You don't think all of that makes prices much higher, if a foreign country were not used to do the job?

 

Are you joking? Look up the term "natural resource".

That is the silliest I have heard so far this year.

But the U.S. is responsible for all of Iran's suffering. I say, you really know absolutely nothing about Iran.

 

Yes. Those who don't like the U.S. can stop doing business with us, visiting us, immigrating, studying every nuance of what our government does. I'm a critic of the U.S. federal government. I consider it to be too big, too corrupt and too incompetent. But that says nothing about America. I consider us the best country in the world despite our federal government. We are certainly the wealthiest and most powerful. Anti-Americans need not apply.

 

I think you ought to itemize your statement. "stop doing business with us, visiting us, immigrating, studying ..." What does any of that to do with being anti-Amerian? Why do you think anti-Americans shouldn't do those things if they want? They have the same rights as everyone else and in addition to that, you still have failed to understand the difference between criticism and being anti-American. You do not understand, do you.

I'd like to see you tell that to your poor, your destitute, your slums, and your black population.

 

I explained it above. Sorry you missed it.

If I ever have a meeting with them, I'll invite you.

 

We produce enough to be self-dependant. We don't NEED imports from China because we can produce our own at greatly higher prices
and that may well be the case if imports were to cease or be too highly priced. But we can do it, and that is why imports at lower prices are important to the well-being of our citizens.

 

The costs are what drive manufacturing out of our country. If our average Joe is making $45 per hour, yes it certainly affects the ability of that company to be competitive in the marketplace. And high tariffs make almost impossible.

 

Workplace protection laws were not as prevalent as today but they are certainly intrusive today and some of them are unnecessary.
European countries also have more workplace protection laws today.

 

B-b-b-but you just proved my point that you are not self-sufficient. What you 'could do' or 'might do' is irrelevant because if you aren't ... you ain't.

 

This is a common fallacy perpetuated by the manufacturers themselves. I know and you know (you ought to anyway) that it's all about exponential profit. Do I really have to tell you that tycoons cut the throats of their employees anytime it saves spending or increases income. They don't give a fiddler's hump about the country. All you have to do is think for a second.

So you agree that the American population should survive on an ever-diminishing minimum wage (or collect food stamps) as long as the boss has his annual gazillion increase in profits.

 

B-b-b-but we could b-b-b-but we don't for the obvious reasons. And if we become an isolationist nation and are not involved in a global economy, we will have to become self-sufficient and pay higher prices. Not all countries have those choices at their disposal.

 

The numbers speak for themselves. All you have to do is think for a second. I have been involved in the Auto industry all my working life,
and I know and understand that neither the workers or the "tycoons" (like your boy Trump) don't give a rat's ass about each other. It is all about the money and to survive the companies owned by the "tycoons" must be competitive.

 

Really! What, are you a constitutional lawyer or something:

"But it’s not an informal “deal;” it’s a formal international agreement, endorsed by the Security Council of the United Nations, full of rigorous safeguards, duties, terms and conditions crafted through sophisticated, smart diplomatic hard work on the part of the international community. It can’t be easily set aside without undermining the UN, the international community, and the U.S. Constitution.
One of the dangers recognized by the drafters of the Constitution was that short-term partisan interests of a populist nature, or an individual state, could encourage overturning complex or unpopular treaties entered into by the government of the United States. This led to the inclusion of the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution, which stats that “all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

One fully ratified treaty the United States is bound by is the United Nations Charter. The so-called “Iran Deal” was formally endorsed by the Security Council of the United Nations, the correct international organ to approve the JCPOA. In throwing it out, not only has the Trump administration disregarded its allies and friends, it has diminished the weight of the UN system, and thus the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, and thus one of the foundations of the United States. This is a serious matter indeed.

By pulling out of the deal, the United States violated an international agreement it solemnly entered into, putting it in a class with nations that pointedly disrespect international cooperation, the rule of law, peace, and nuclear nonproliferation. It’s not just a deal between the U.S. and Iran; by virtue of the UN Security Council resolution the deal is between Iran and the entire world. U.S. withdrawal demonstrates callous disregard for world opinion, and diminishes the world’s trust in America’s word, honor and commitments.

https://thehill.com/opinion/nationa...-the-legal-right-to-violate-iran-nuclear-deal

No international laws except when they are beneficial to the US, huh? Explains why the US is always violating them, I suppose.

Rogue nation!

 

It's not anti-American to argue against the disastrous foreign policy path the US is taking towards Iran.

But of course, those who want to promote that path need paint everyone who disagree in black and white terms of anti-American or good and evil.

What the US does effects the rest of the world especially when it is on a crusade of endless war and economic sanctions that destabilize the entire planet and cause untold suffering.

Then they get hurt feelings when America's bloody track record is pointed out to them.

If they really cared about how America is viewed in the world, they would start political movements to end the war, suffering and injustice the US government projects everywhere it goes.

 

Yes they did. The US has made a big mistake throwing them into the arms of Russia and China

 

The US has been sanctioning them for decades and the biggest irony of it all is that it was the US who got them started on nuclear power. They just got fed up when they decided they did not want the US's puppet any more.