Posted on 05/05/2016 9:30:43 AM PDT by reaganaut1
...
Trump promises a return to tariffs. He also promises a wall with Mexico, penalties against profitable American companies, skimming foreign remittances, and more. Trump does not mince words, and you have to respect his forthrightness. What each of these solutions has in common is a heavy-handed government that imposes its will at the price of consumer freedom.
What right does a White House staffer have to tell you what you can buy and the extra price you have to pay if you choose the wrong product? Your freedom to trade — to buy what you want — is what’s at stake when anti-traders get rolling. They say it’s about protecting producers, but that is not how trade barriers work. Hugo Chavez and Joseph Stalin put up huge trade barriers and guess how many jobs that helped Venezuela and the Soviets create? Ni odnogo, as they say in Russian. Not a single one.
Yesterday, I asked Michael Boskin, former chief economist under President Bush in the early 1990s and the godfather of lowered trade barriers in North America, how he feels when NAFTA is used by politicians as the scapegoat for economic anxiety. He reminded me that faith in free trade waxes and wanes. The failure of tariffs is a constant in history, one that each generation demands to relearn. He asked: Remember the Corn Laws in 19th-century Britain? Remember the trade barriers among the states after the 1776 revolution that inspired our free-trade Constitution in 1789? The American Revolution in 1776 was inspired by the British Tea Act of 1773. It was the ultimate trade war: for freedom and against tariffs. How many young Sanders or Trump voters realize that?
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
NAFTA was not a bad deal - it was really, really a TERRIBLE deal. One-sided, nothing extracted in exchange for the artificial lowering of barriers on our part, and NOTHING, especially from Mexico, on the freedom of crossing the international borders.
In some ways, the deal with Canada was not nearly as bad, as the Canadians sort of recognize the rule of law, and we speak a more or less common language, but still, Quebec came along in the deal with Canada, and they are among the most xenophobic people in the world, not good neighbors at all.
Talk about a complete ignoramus writing about something he knows nothing about, this article is an example.
The Boston Tea Party was about paying taxes to Britain without representation. “Taxation Without Representation”was the issue.
What was one of the driving reasons for the Civil War? Lincoln did not want to give up the TARIFFS the south took
in.
This is just more typical Anti-Trump National Review hogwash.
This joker would have you believe NAFTA was a Godsend to America. In FACT, it was the beginning of the end. Stop it now, before it is too late!
“Yeah, it was. It was a deal designed to screw working Americans, enrich the GOPe and their pundits who write lies like this National Review bs article.”
100%
One effect on Mexico was to put tens of thousands of small farmers out of business.
They had been growing corn for the tortilla trade until NAFTA put them in direct competition with American agribusiness.
The newly jobless Mexican farmers headed north in a tidal wave, adding to our already huge illegal immigrant population.
The Clintons and Bushes didn’t care. Like the scribblers at National Review it didn’t impact their daily life.
"Profitable companies" because they save BILLIONS with illegal alien labor...while sticking US with the social, crime, education, welfare and healthcare costs for them.
"Foreign remittances" = export of the ill-gotten gains of those illegal laborers, as well as drug cartel billions -- all of it evading U.S. tax laws
"Consumer freedom". Where is that written in the Constitution? I must have missed it. What I did NOT miss was Article IV, Section 4, mandating the Federal government to secure the borders.
If Bill Buckley came back, would he even recognize the nest of viperous traitors that run his once-vaunted publication?
Tell that to the people at Carrier.
Formerly a magazine, now (essentially) a blog for liberals who enjoy the occasional tax cut. ;)
“National Review? Wasn’t there once an influential news magazine known as National Review? That sure seems like a long time ago.”
A very long time ago. Buckley turned the place over to neocons and GOPe hacks in the 1990s.
Yes, and it is something countries all over the world do. Including some of our largest trade partners like Japan.
I can’t believe anyone would write what this a hole wrote.
NAFTA DESTROYED hundreds of thousands of jobs near some small towns where I lived. Add to that the towns were left with no revenue/tax money flowing, buildings left to rot, homes foreclosed on, cars repossessed, nothing to replace them. Immediate poverty for many women.
This is how out of touch these people are. They have no idea what they are talking about.
What’s amazing is that NR always ran on a shoestring budget back when it was worth reading.
Now that they are a GOPe propaganda machine they don’t seem to be struggling. You’d almost think that some big GOPe donors are keeping the shills alive...
Salem Media is as bad, if not worse.
Oh, National Review again....
Didn’t you hear? Trump told people in Indiana that Carrier was not going to Mexico. Of course that was before the Indiana primary? I’m just wondering how he plans to do this?
“This is how out of touch these people are. They have no idea what they are talking about.”
Little people in small towns don’t count. They didn’t attend Ivy League colleges and the scribblers of NR don’t know anyone like them. And they certainly don’t want to rub shoulders with losers like that.
No one cares what the progressives at NRO think.
Vote Trump 2016
This is an example of how National Review has been distorting the issues in order to mask what is really happening. The problem is that macro economic analysis hides what really happens in the economy of American communities. Here is how Trump can turn the tables on them:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3422096/posts
Dogs bark, caravan rolls, and Superpac money still flows to "conservative" media I guess.
And TPP is “NAFTA on Steroids” (oh, and thanks to TPA, YOU have zero say in the matter.)
Skimming? Confiscating ALL income made illegally, a fine, jail sentence, followed by deportation and never allowed back in the country.
Until we enforce our laws, fine any company heavily for hiring illegals, force reverse immigration and build the wall, I suggested this on 4/19:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3422617/posts?page=7#7
Me foolishly thinking they didn’t know when the reality is they just didn’t care.
It’s writers like this that don’t get why Trump IS confusing to them.
Reap Sow, you know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.