China Steals Charlotte Pipe and Foundry's Identity

Identity theft is a nightmare. Victims can expect a long and difficult process in restoring their reputation and finances. The good news is we have laws and once the perpetrators are caught, they’ll face long prison sentences. But what if you’re an American company and the offender is a totalitarian country that acts like the mafia? What do you do then?


Charlotte Pipe and Foundry was established in North Carolina in 1901. A company that’s been around that long has established a good name by producing a superior product. Unfortunately for them, they’ve had their identity stolen by a Chinese company that produces cheap, crappy products and dumps it on the world’s market. Here is an excerpt from an op-ed written by Frank Dowd, the chairman of Charlotte Pipe and Foundry:

Free trade is supposed to be a two-way street. But if you want access to China’s market of 1.4 billion people, you will have to transfer your company’s intellectual property to the Chinese government as a cost of doing business there – that is, if they are not outright stealing your intellectual property.



We’ve experienced that firsthand as well. Last year we discovered that a Chinese company, Yitai, had stolen our company’s logo and registered it in China. They put a Charlotte Pipe and Foundry sign on their building and the general manager is passing around Charlotte Pipe and Foundry business cards. Yitai manufactures competing products and uses the stolen Charlotte brand to sell across Asia. Do you consider this fair trade?



During the later stages of the Cold War, free and open access to U.S. markets was used as a foreign policy tool to prop up our allies and promote democracy. America led the liberalization of global free trade throughout the 1980s and 90s, culminating in the passage of NAFTA and the creation of the World Trade Organization, lifting billions of people out of poverty.

This approach was premised on the assumption that the extension of free markets would lead to global convergence to Western-style capitalism. The U.S. supported China’s entry into the WTO in 2001 hoping China would eventually embrace a market-oriented trade regime. But as Mr. Trump said recently, “it is now clear that the WTO rules are not sufficient to constrain China’s market-distorting behavior.”

I listened to a panel on NPR discussing this very subject and was astonished at how brazen the Chinese can be. Apparently, they’ll attend trade shows and set up a booth right next to Charlotte Pipe and Foundry flouting their illegality. It was shocking.


The problem with gangster regimes like China is they have no respect for property rights which is essential for success. Their success is dependent on forcing companies to divulge trade secrets, or they’ll just outright steal it. This is a dilemma the Trump administration has to deal with and I don’t believe raising tariffs are going to do the trick. As of now, China has issued retaliatory measures that could possibly trigger a trade war.


The best course of action is to challenge China’s status in the World Trade Organization. As a member, China is required to follow the bylaws of the WTO which mandates protection of trademarks and intellectual property rights. If a member is a habitual offender, they must either be sanctioned or removed. A threat of this magnitude could keep an outlaw regime like China in check. Even mafia bosses crave a semblance of respectability.


Source:

http://www.wbtv.com/story/37838917/charlotte-company-falls-victim-to-chinese-trade-theft

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article203564879.html


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/china-imposes-tariffs-128-imports-12288162


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/20/world-trade-rules-too-weak-to-stop-china-distorting-market-us


https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm7_e.htm

Redskins Should Change Name to Thin Skins or D.C. Tyrants

One of the foundations of economic prosperity is property rights.  Talk to any libtard and you’ll notice they have no respect for this concept.  They believe the collective has a say in what you can and can’t own.  The Washington Redskins saga is a testament to progressive ideology.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office ruled that one of the oldest franchises in NFL history is denied trademark protection because they find the name “Redskins” offensive.  Since when did this government agency become the PC police?   This is another example of bureaucratic despotism.

If the “owner” of this storied football team decides to succumb to political correctness and federal government abuse, may I suggest the following names that would best reflect the community in which it resides.  I would first consider the Washington Thin Skins.  But more appropriately, I believe the D.C. Tyrants would best fit that cesspool.  Their logo should be an arrogant government bureaucrat with a phone and pen; or, maybe just an angry pencil, since no one in that town is held accountable for anything.

   

 Source:  http://msn.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/washington-redskins-lose-trademark-protection-what-now-061814

U.S. on the Road to Argentinian Crying Game

What are the consequences of a $16 trillion dollar debt; a president who can’t get a single legislator to vote yea for one of his budgets in 4 years; and a Senate that has also refused to pass the same during the tenure of aforementioned president?  Argentina is the answer to that question.  Last week, a U.S. federal court ruled in favor of a plaintiff over a debt:

Argentina is refusing to budge in its billion-dollar debt showdown in New York federal court, preparing an appeal Monday that it hopes will stave off another devastating default.

Judge Thomas Griesa left Argentina without any wiggle room, ordering the government of President Cristina Fernandez to pay $1.3 billion into an escrow account for the so-called "vulture funds" by Dec. 15, even as it pursues its final appeals.

If Argentina pays the plaintiffs, then lawyers representing other holders of defaulted debt, totaling more than $11 billion, are expected to demand immediate payment as well.

If it refuses, the judge said the Bank of New York Mellon must stop payment on the quotas Argentina has religiously honored to a much bigger group of bondholders who agreed to provide the country with debt relief in 2005 and 2010. That group together holds more than $20 billion in restructured debt, and some of them announced they too would appeal.

The ruling in favor of NML Capital Ltd., a fund run by billionaire Paul Singer, was issued just before the long Thanksgiving holiday weekend, and the consequences for Argentina were severe. The value of Argentina's restructured bonds slipped in Monday trading, and the cost of insuring this debt against default jumped 51 percent on Friday alone, according to data from Factset.

This is where we are heading.  If the United States can’t get a handle on its debt we will become Argentina.  We can expect the same kind of treatment from our creditors.  I can foresee this country become a defendant in a Chinese court.  We can expect confiscation of our assets.  A plaintiff had an Argentine naval training ship seized in the port of Ghana as collateral.

And since Argentina is strapped for cash, the government began to seize private property.  Anyone who had a pension fund in 2008 kissed that goodbye.  Oil companies were forced into buyouts which handed controlling interest over to the government; reminiscent of Venezuelan’s Hugo Chavez and his expropriation madness.  Now foreign investment has come to a halt.  But that’s just the beginning. 

BUENOS AIRES—Argentina plans to seize and auction off both the broadcast licenses and the cable TV and fiber-optic Internet networks owned by any media company that flouts a controversial media law.

The country's top court looks likely to rule on the constitutionality of the law, which opponents say not only violates constitutionally protected private-property rights, but threatens free speech as well.

The auction plans were confirmed Wednesday by Martin Sabbatella, who heads the federal agency created to enforce the law which critics say targets top media conglomerate Grupo Clarín SA and its most profitable business unit, Cablevisión.

Later Wednesday, Congress passed a law that allows the government to bypass federal appeals courts and take its case against directly to the Supreme Court.

The companies have until Dec. 7 to present plans to sell off all broadcast licenses and related assets that exceed a quota established by the media law. If they don't, the government will begin the process of auctioning off the assets after the deadline, Mr. Sabbatella said at a news conference.
 
Another media group, Uno Medios, which also provides cable TV and Internet services around the country, will be similarly forced to sell its broadcast licenses, cable TV and Internet infrastructure or see them forcibly auctioned off.

I’m sure Argentina won’t cry for the United States when we have our financial collapse.           

Source: http://billingsgazette.com/business/argentina-hopes-to-reverse-ny-debt-ruling/article_bc2c91bb-873b-5acd-8cfb-beefd890a17f.html#ixzz2DfWr5xuD

http://www.sbsun.com/ci_22048317/ny-judge-argentina-court-will-be-obeyed

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/5504137/Argentina_seizes_pension_funds_to_pay_debts_Whos_next/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/10/21/argentina-pensions-idUSN2128838220081021

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/business/global/argentine-president-to-nationalize-oil-company.html?pagewanted=all

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323551004578119653502110768.html

Supreme Court Ruling Smacks Down EPA in Epic Property Rights Battle

One of the fundamental tenets of our founding principles is the right to property. The Environmental Protection Agency is the antithesis of that principle. I will go even further and state that the EPA is the embodiment of the arrogance and disdain that all central planners have for a free people who value liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness. This agency has run roughshod over our federalist system; and the Sackett Saga is proof in point:

Four years ago the Sacketts were filling in their lot with dirt and rock, preparing to build a simple three-bedroom home in a neighborhood where other houses have stood for years. Then three federal officials showed up and demanded they stop construction. The agency claimed the .63-acre lot was a wetland, protected under the Clean Water Act.

The Sacketts say they were stunned. The owners of an excavation company, they had secured all the necessary local permits. And Chantell Sackett says that before work began, she drove two hours to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, to consult with an Army Corps of Engineers official. She says the official told her orally, though not in writing, that she didn’t need a federal permit. “We did all the right things,” she says.

The EPA issued an order requiring the Sacketts to put the land back the way it was, removing the piles of fill material and replanting the vegetation they had cleared away. The property was to be fenced off and the Sacketts would be required to submit annual reports about its condition to the EPA. The agency threatened to fine them up to $32,500 a day until they complied.

Give credit to the Sacketts. They didn’t tuck tail and run. They stood up to this authoritarian agency – at great expense, and demanded that they get their day in court. The only problem is they had to go to the Supreme Court to get justice:

The justices unanimously ruled Chantell and Mike Sackett can appeal a compliance order that said wetlands on their residential lot were improperly filled with rocks and dirt. A building permit was then revoked.

"Since the agency's decision was final and since the Sacketts have no other adequate remedy in a court, they may bring their suit" under federal law, said Justice Antonin Scalia

Of course, critics are aghast that citizens should have the right to challenge the EPA. They believe that a non-cowering populace would interrupt their totalitarian ambitions. If property owners are able to defend themselves against the abuses of an overbearing bureaucrat, it would eventually undermine the authority of the EPA; and by extension their “authority.”

Today is a good day for liberty. It will be a better day, when the EPA no longer exists.

Source: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/mike-and-chantell-sackett-vs-the-epa-08112011.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/us/scotus-property-rights/index.html

Barack Obama Gives Pep Talk to EPA Apparatchiks

Barack Obama gave a pep talk to one of his favorite apparatchik organizations: the EPA. The Anointed One wanted to thank this oppressive organization for their work on behalf of the federal government and Democratic Party. He assured them that they are touching the lives of every American.

The president spoke to the EPA employees at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorim in Washington, D.C., to thank them for their work—which he said “touches the lives” of all Americans every day.

“The main reason I’m here is simple: I just want to say thank you,” Obama said. “I want to say thank you to each and every one of you, because the EPA touches on the lives of every single American every single day.”

And the Sackett’s of Idaho can sure as hell testify to that. They currently have a case in the Supreme Court. Fox News reported on how this family was touched by the benevolent EPA:


The Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps. of Engineers show up and accuse you of building on a “wetland”. The EPA issues what is known as a “compliance order”. You must stop all building. You must restore the land to its natural state. You must replace and plant trees. You must place a fence around the land and maintain the property in a pristine condition.

You have no right to a pre-enforcement challenge of the order. You must comply with the order or be sued by the EPA and face fines between 35-75 thousand dollars per day.

“Unlike other regulations and enforcement orders, the EPA under clean air and water laws can issue an order without giving the recipient a chance to challenge it in court before the agency initiates a lawsuit for noncompliance.” (IBT)

You are punished by being forced to spend money to correct an unproven accusation of a violation of the law- no probable cause or preponderance of the evidence. No way for you to prove or argue your case until the EPA decides to sue you.




This environmental hell hound organization is a direct threat to our liberty. If we are to restore natural law and property rights, the Supreme Court has to rule in favor of the Sacketts. Better yet, the America people must demand the abolition of this agency.

Source: http://nation.foxnews.com/epa/2012/01/10/sackett-v-epa-supreme-court-will-decide-property-rights-case#ixzz1jUlEqBC2

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-epa-regulations-create-jobs-epa-touches-lives-every-single-american-every-single

American Legion Veterans Defy Smoking Ban

American veterans in Baraga, Michigan fought tyranny on foreign lands; now they are fighting a different kind of tyranny at home. The American Legion Post #444 has taken a stand for individual freedom and private property rights. They refuse to adhere to a law that bans smoking in their lodge.

State and local governments have taken it upon themselves to determine what citizens can and cannot do on their own property. These petty dictators have decided to outlaw smoking in restaurants and other businesses. A Legion member disagrees:

"Smoking is a legal activity," said Legion member Joseph O'Leary. "Like it or not, tobacco is not heroin. It is allowed as a legal activity and to prohibit it on private property, we think it's unconstitutional."

The Legion members are openly defying the smoking ban. Now the Health Inspector has ordered the Post to stop serving food and beverages. They’re ignoring that command as well. Food, drink and cigarettes are a plenty at Post #444.

"We respect their right to challenge it," said health officer Guy St. Germain. "I do disagree, however, that this particular law is where they want to draw the line. I think this law is clearly appropriate, and it's got positive aspects for everyone."

Of course you do, but it’s not your property and you have no business telling others how to run it. If you want to outlaw cigarettes, and then do so; until that time comes it is still a legal activity.


The health department has referred the civil disobedience of the Baraga veterans to the State Attorney General’s office. A lawsuit is inevitable. Hopefully self-determination and private property rights will win the day; but don’t hold your breath.

Source: http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=491093