If this was the Oval Office of the President's father, he was fond of singing the praises of the "New World Order", which was to arrive. The phrase carried a lot of baggage, especially conservatives, who had long heard the term associated with the one world government little room for individual rights. Some believe that the first George Bush's declaration that the concept of hurting your chances for re-election, and contributed to the movement that brought Ross Perot fray and split the conservative vote.
The current president has steered clear definition of terminology, but only with their ostrich heads in the sand to say that we are moving headlong towards the restructuring of the global system, and it has become clear that individual rights are threatened. The war in Afghanistan was not only inevitable, but was probably desirable. Iraq was not the "friend, and even those of us who questioned the wisdom of the invasion had difficulty opposing the end of an abusive regime. However, the trend is worrying, as we now talk about random invading Syria, Iran or North Korea. Not only did the war posturing us unpopular in the world (and thus can not extol the virtues of free markets), wars mean severe restrictions on freedom at home. We have begun to see some of that.
Laws like the Patriot Act is so broad that most of us have probably violates half a dozen edicts without knowing it. The difference this time is that conservatives have largely supported all of these activities. Oddly, all the things that Bill Clinton could never have gotten past the Republican Congress of flying through a little forethought.
Meanwhile, we have lost the attention of people around the world. We imagine that the communist menace had died based on the philosophies of the Berlin Wall, but now we have a situation where the Socialists won the elections around the world. New Look in "World Order" is not a pretty one, and clearly not one that values freedom. However, we have no voice in the world, where many of the smaller nations are beginning to see the American bully. The fact that we are "right" is not important in this area, since one can not be compelled to accept liberty. This selection is sparse, the state has to own. The approach we have taken recently have limited our ability to offer our wisdom.
In view of these world changes, it might be wise to consider our investment strategy. It is fair to say that investing overseas may meet with some difficulty, but if the trend continues, we may see trouble here as well. Oh, so many American business success is attributed to exports, but we are faced with a number of safeguards to our country. Part of it is justified, because although other nations tend to be much higher barriers, America has recently begun to impose overly restrictive tariffs as well. The idea of a free trade zone, such as oil, in fact, is the enemy of true free trade, free trade, because it actually keeps people outside the limited trading bloc.
All of this may eventually impact on American companies, if they consider international trade opportunities severely limited. Over the past two decades, the time was relatively free international travel, trade and talk. This may change, and if that happens, the impact can be devastating. Recently, we have limited this part of world trade, culminating in the last great depression. We are far from that today, but some smart management, we find ourselves faced with more difficulties. So far, unfortunately, this administration has shown little strength on economic issues.
Changes in the world make our investment strategies critical to our future. More than ever, careful plan is essential to our ability to storms that may come in the economy.
Article Source:- http://ezinearticles.com/?George-Bush--A-New-World-Order&id=38922
