Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Meet the Kronies: A Team of Politically Inspired Big Government Action Figures
Townhall.com ^ | January 26, 2014 | Doug Giles

Posted on 01/26/2014 11:26:16 AM PST by Kaslin

One of the biggest lies in politics is the idea that big government is force to constrain big corporate power. It’s the big lie at the heart of well-intentioned liberal calls for more government intervention into the economy. It takes a certain amount of ignorance, willful or not, to maintain this big lie in the face of actual reality. Crony deals have always been the norm for government intervention from Obamacare, to “green” energy subsidies, to no-bid military boondoggles, union-machine politicking and Wall Street back room bailouts.

Now, there’s an insane new web series that shines a hilarious spotlight on the left’s big lie while putting up a mirror to crony hypocrisy on the right as well. Meet The Kronies! A team of politically inspired action figures: Kaptain Korn, Parts & Labor, Ariel Stryker, Bankor the Prophet and their leader Big G.

We don’t know who’s behind this thing, but there also appears to be a crony “company”, Chimera Global Holdings, which alleges to be the manufacturers of the toys. Check it out and share it with everyone you know who whines about the need for big government to keep corporations at bay.

Get Konnected with The Kronies Action Figures


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: kronies
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2014 11:26:16 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot; Mase; expat_panama
I can think of a few protectionists who would be well-served to see this . . . maybe the budget deficit, unemployment, China's meddling, etc., cannot be solved that easily by our government, after all.
2 posted on 01/26/2014 11:32:47 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Their LinkedIn site is rabbit hole DEEP with links:

http://www.linkedin.com/directory/companies

The Youtube cartoons, the action figures, the faux commercials, the web sites all took tremendous effort and huge resources.

Who are these people? Their ‘ about us’ reveals nothing.


3 posted on 01/26/2014 11:45:26 AM PST by Para-Ord.45 ( Americans, happy in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own dictators.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Enough of this “crony” stuff. Call it what it really is: fascism.


4 posted on 01/26/2014 12:22:15 PM PST by Doug Loss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

25% of our workforce sitting idle.

25% of our workforce making about half what they were five years ago.

And your snot-nosed focus remains the big bad protectionists?

Can you tell me what protectionist policies have over-ridden the Free Trade group’s policies in the last 20 years? I’d be curious to hear how Protectionists have been the biggest threat to our nation during that period.

If you think we blocked China’s influence on our manufacturing just say so.

If you think we forced large tariffs just say so.

If you think we over-powered cheap labor from Mexico, just say so.

If you think massive raises in the private sector have really screwed us in the last decade, just say so.

If you think our workers are being paid to much, because they have demanded too much in the last twenty years, just say so. And if you do, please explain the carnage on 50% of our workforce while you’re at it.

If you think Protectionists caused us to lose a lot of national security secrets, just say so.

If you think Protectionists caused us to lose a lot of technology secrets, just say so.

Failing any of this, please refrain from opening that yap of yours and proving what a complete idiot you are over and over and over and over again.


5 posted on 01/26/2014 1:06:30 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
25% of our workforce sitting idle.

25% of our workforce making about half what they were five years ago.

Nothing that higher taxes and bigger government can't fix.

6 posted on 01/26/2014 1:22:55 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Alrighty then. So, just to be sure, the protectionist position on this is that all of these terrible things you cite can be solved if we will just give government more control over the economy and our personal liberty?

It is truly a wonder when people demand that we create even bigger government to resolve the messes made by government in the first place. And make no mistake, the fault of the problems on your list fall squarely at the feet of government. To blame these things on too much freedom is laughable.

7 posted on 01/26/2014 1:24:49 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mase

Then please respond to that post as if it was written to you.

I’d like to hear the brilliant analysis from a supporter of Free Trade, despite the outcome of Free Trade policies on our economy.

The Free Traders had their way, and the government did it’s best to facilitate the whole damned thing.

Now the response is to trash people who didn’t think selling our souls to China was a good thing to do in the first place.

Do you folks ever take ownership of ANYTHING?


8 posted on 01/26/2014 1:52:34 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Another person heard from who can’t take ownership of his failed policies. (the policies he supported)

Just for laughs, what would it take for you to admit our (near complete) patent database, our military technology, 25% of our jobs, and another 25% of our citizens salaries were stripped by 50%, were gifted to China or lost due to our Free Trade policies?

And yet here you are demagoguing the issue of government control, as if the lack of any government intervention at all, had brought us exactly what you promised.

I detest government intervention in these things. I also detest unions. If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you. And frankly, there has been government intervention in all this.

For one thing, our leaders have simply refused to protect our states from invasion, and a flooding of the work-pool with poor immigrants that will work for dirt wages, thus deflating what citizens can expect to earn, even with 50% of our workforce out of work or earning less than half what they did five years ago.

I can’t help but notice your selective amnesia when it comes to ‘all’ government involvement.


9 posted on 01/26/2014 2:00:32 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Another person heard from who can’t take ownership of his failed policies. (the policies he supported)

Why wouldn't I take ownership of reduced government interference with trade? If we reduced government interference with more of our economy, we wouldn't be in our current mess.

Just for laughs, what would it take for you to admit our (near complete) patent database, our military technology, 25% of our jobs, and another 25% of our citizens salaries were stripped by 50%, were gifted to China or lost due to our Free Trade policies?

We don't have free trade with China.

What would it take for you to admit that our highest in the world corporate tax rate, ever higher regulatory compliance costs and gems like Obamacare cost jobs? Or that importing 20 million low skill illegals reduces the salaries of our own low skilled workers.

And yet here you are demagoguing the issue of government control, as if the lack of any government intervention at all, had brought us exactly what you promised.

Yes, I'm against more government control. Why are you in favor?

Lack of any government intervention? Where?

I detest government intervention in these things.

Sure.

I also detest unions.

Excellent!

If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

10 posted on 01/26/2014 2:11:18 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

It was done by Emergent Order, the same guys who did the Keynes vs Hayek Rap videos (aka “Fear the Boom and the Bust”. . )

http://emergentorder.com/


11 posted on 01/26/2014 2:17:32 PM PST by Salgak (http://catalogoftehburningstoopid.blogspot.com 100% all-natural snark !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

RE: “25% of our workforce sitting idle. 25% of our workforce making about half what they were five years ago.”

The two problems you mention above are also caused by our immigration policy, not just by Free Trade policy.

In 2013:

1 million new USA citizens were imported - most of them with limited skills and limited education.

500,000 new Green Cards were issued - most of them for people who will earn below the median income.

750,000 work visas were issued or renewed - many of them for jobs that will compete directly against new American college grads, and against middle aged American technology workers.


12 posted on 01/26/2014 2:35:04 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Another person heard from who can’t take ownership of his failed policies. (the policies he supported)

Why wouldn't I take ownership of reduced government interference with trade? If we reduced government interference with more of our economy, we wouldn't be in our current mess.

Just as I thought, you morph the question to one of government intervention.  You avoid the 25% of our workforce out of work, and another 25% of our workforce working for less than half what they were earning five years go like the plague.  So no, you won't take ownership.  When it comes to our patent database (essentially) being turned over to China, to China getting many of our military secrets, it's all a big yawn to you.  None of this is admitted to as a massive down-side.  You don't take ownership.  You make avoidence job one.

Just for laughs, what would it take for you to admit our (near complete) patent database, our military technology, 25% of our jobs, and another 25% of our citizens salaries were stripped by 50%, were gifted to China or lost due to our Free Trade policies?

We don't have free trade with China.  No we don't, because China manipulates it's currency so that there is a pseudo 30-40% import tax on U. S. goods headed into China.  And yet, the Free Traders NEVER bring it up.

What would it take for you to admit that our highest in the world corporate tax rate, ever higher regulatory compliance costs and gems like Obamacare cost jobs? Or that importing 20 million low skill illegals reduces the salaries of our own low skilled workers.

Well, since I mentioned it in my post to you (at least the illegal immigrant part of it), what would be the point of me revealing my thoughts on it once more?

As for highest in the world corporate tax rates, what does that encourage Corporations to do?  Shall I play the Jeopardy music here for you, while you suck up the courage to admit there is government intervention that spurs on the offshore madness?  Duh!

And yet here you are demagoguing the issue of government control, as if the lack of any government intervention at all, had brought us exactly what you promised.

Yes, I'm against more government control. Why are you in favor?  No, you're not bothered by government control at all.  Please link me to the prior post on this thread where you blasted the goverment for motivating corporations to move off-shore.  All you did is push for Free Trade.  You did not mention the down sides to it.  You don't take any ownership.  It's all someone else's fault.  $0.25 cent an hour wages in China vs $15.00 an hour wages in the U. S. is not a problem to you.  If it results in job displacement in the U. S. you view that as a great thing.  I don't.  If it results in fifty years worth of technology transfers to a rogue state like China, no problem.  If military grade secrets are in the mix, no problem.  My gosh, we don't want government involvement...  That was Bill Clinton's argument too.

Lack of any government intervention? Where?

I detest government intervention in these things.

Sure.  If that's a sarcastic sure, I don't mind.  Due to the outcome of trade with China, I do favor more government intervention.  I would like to see corporate rates eliminated.  I would also like to see the government protect our technology, and national security technology in particular, better than it does.

I also detest unions. 

Excellent!

If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

If high corporate tax rates exist as you claim they do, what kind of tax impact is there if the jobs are moved off-shore?  Doen't that amount to a tax break for moving jobs off-shore?


13 posted on 01/26/2014 2:40:00 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

I agree, but it’s not all immigration related.

Right now it’s immigration, economic crash, and Free Trade related.

The problem is, the Free Trade end of it is far more corrosive to re-employment and the full economy running on all cylinders, than the other problems mentioned.

Manufacturing used to be the real kick starter to a down economy. Now we’ve moved a massive amount of it off-shore.


14 posted on 01/26/2014 2:51:07 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mase
You must admit, it's kind of embarrassing for our side when the most pro-business, free-market, non-interventionist, laissez faire Administration the Republic has ever seen can't fix these terrible problems. /s
15 posted on 01/26/2014 2:59:35 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
You avoid the 25% of our workforce out of work, and another 25% of our workforce working for less than half what they were earning five years go like the plague.

You have any backup for this claim?

So no, you won't take ownership.

I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

When it comes to our patent database (essentially) being turned over to China, to China getting many of our military secrets, it's all a big yawn to you.

I'm against that.

None of this is admitted to as a massive down-side.

Those things are bad. Do you feel they'd be better with higher tariffs?

We don't have free trade with China.

No we don't, because China manipulates it's currency

We never signed a free trade agreement with China.

As for highest in the world corporate tax rates, what does that encourage Corporations to do? Shall I play the Jeopardy music here for you, while you suck up the courage to admit there is government intervention that spurs on the offshore madness?

Since I've already said we should cut our taxes, not raise them, do you feel you've made a point here?

No, you're not bothered by government control at all.

Yes I am.

Please link me to the prior post on this thread where you blasted the goverment for motivating corporations to move off-shore.

Every thread on trade, where I mock big government conservative calls for higher taxes (tariffs) and suggest we make the US more friendly to corporations, by reducing taxes and regs, the opposite of your ideas.

$0.25 cent an hour wages in China vs $15.00 an hour wages in the U. S. is not a problem to you. If it results in job displacement in the U. S. you view that as a great thing.

Link to a thread where I claimed any such thing.

16 posted on 01/26/2014 3:13:17 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

If high corporate tax rates exist as you claim they do, what kind of tax impact is there if the jobs are moved off-shore? Doen't that amount to a tax break for moving jobs off-shore?

Wow, put down the crack pipe.

I'm in favor of less government interference (that means I'm in favor of lower taxes) and you're admitting that government interference (highest in the world tax rates) gives companies an incentive to move offshore, but that somehow means I "don’t mind government intervention at all do you"?

I'll try again, with smaller words just for you.

I want US companies to have lower taxes here, so they don't have lower taxes there. That means more jobs here.

17 posted on 01/26/2014 3:31:42 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
U.S. Drops from Top Ten Freest Countries in 2014 Index of Economic Freedom

Look on the bright side. If this trend continues, the U.S. will be at full employment in no time at all.

18 posted on 01/26/2014 3:41:44 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
You avoid the 25% of our workforce out of work, and another 25% of our workforce working for less than half what they were earning five years go like the plague.

You have any backup for this claim?

Around the spring of 2013, I did work up some numbers myself.  By traditional growth we should have had around 176.085 million people employed.  Instead we had 134.839 million employed.  That works out to 23% underemployment.  LINK  I beleive it is reasoned to address this as one quarter of our work-force outy of work.  You and others may disagree.  I do think it would be fair game to quibble about the 2%.  I do not have a study to vindicate my comment about people making half the money they were five years ago.  What I did stumble across was an article that claims over 40% of Americans are making less than the 1968 minimum wage.  LINK  Is this the United States you championed your whole life? It sure isn't the one I championed.

So no, you won't take ownership.

I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

Well that sounds good, but when it comes to these threads, the first things out of the mouths of folks like you is "Protectionists".  Those of us who lament what has taken place resent that.  There have been massive downsides.  None of that is mentioned in favor of saying things that are intended to marginalize us for speaking out.  Where is your indignation that missile gyro technology was transferred to China?  Where is your indignation at the fact that missle vibration damper technology was transferred to China?  Where is your indignation at the fact that technology going back to the 1950s, was gifted to China over a period of a couple of decades?  Where is your indignation at the fact China was gifted with 50 to 70 years of technology, just so this economic nightmare could be facilitated?  Today we and our allies, and folks not traditionally affiliated with us, face a growing military threat from China simply because the Free Traders prevailed?

When it comes to our patent database (essentially) being turned over to China, to China getting many of our military secrets, it's all a big yawn to you.

I'm against that.

Oh yes, I'm sure you are.  None the less, that is never the emphasis of folks like you.  "Protectionist" is always the first word put of your mouth.  It's a pajorative that has been used to nullify any rational debate.

None of this is admitted to as a massive down-side.

Those things are bad. Do you feel they'd be better with higher tariffs?

Did I mention tariffs?  No.  Funny thing is though, a group of people we're supposed to respect did.  Our Founding Fathers set tariffs up as the way to finance our government.  They reasoned that a few percentage points of tariffs would fund the government, and limit it's size.  That along with sane financial practices would keep the size of our government in check.  Now that they have been proven brilliant beyond several centuries into our existence as a nation, you folks still show up to hump the leg of the Leftist professors who sold you on tariffs bad, anything done under the name of Free Trade, absolute God-like. 

Who cares if China can target our cities with advanced accuracy?  Who cares if their missle failures were reduced by 90% with our technology transfers?  Who cares if we have 23% of our workforce idle?  Who cares if 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage of 1968?  Trade!  Trade!  Trade!  Trade!  Trade!  Trade!

We don't have free trade with China.

No we don't, because China manipulates it's currency

We never signed a free trade agreement with China.

And yet here you are taking me to task instead of our Federal Government's and Communist China's policies.  Never-mind that nuclear war with China is that much more thinkable, because their missile reliability has been nearly perfected and their accurace is such that they can pinpoint a strike to within 50 feet.  No, that damned Preotectionist is doing it again.  Do you folks have any idea how bombasticly stupid you come off in these debates?

You and I should be on the same side.  Intead you'll forgive the Free Trade enabled chicanery no matter what, and trash those who you claim to agree with when it comes to the effects of what has taken place.

As for highest in the world corporate tax rates, what does that encourage Corporations to do? Shall I play the Jeopardy music here for you, while you suck up the courage to admit there is government intervention that spurs on the offshore madness?

Since I've already said we should cut our taxes, not raise them, do you feel you've made a point here?

Did you or did you not infer that government had not helped corporations move jobs off shore due to tax breaks?  I believe you did.

No, you're not bothered by government control at all.

Yes I am.

And yet, as concerned as you say you are over issues like this, your target is the "Protectionists", not the federal government or our trade practices.  So no, I don't believe you.

Please link me to the prior post on this thread where you blasted the goverment for motivating corporations to move off-shore.

Every thread on trade, where I mock big government conservative calls for higher taxes (tariffs) and suggest we make the US more friendly to corporations, by reducing taxes and regs, the opposite of your ideas.

Please link me to one place where I advocated for higher taxation or more regulations.  I have touched on what our Founders did, but I made no values judgment related to that.  So basically, this is pure fantasy on your part.

$0.25 cent an hour wages in China vs $15.00 an hour wages in the U. S. is not a problem to you. If it results in job displacement in the U. S. you view that as a great thing.

Link to a thread where I claimed any such thing.

It's what is taking place, and you continue to advocate for Free Trade despite that fact.  Am I now to believe you don't advocate for what you have been advocating for?.


19 posted on 01/26/2014 4:25:12 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

If our government has the highest corporate tax rates, and the taxation is less if corporations manufacture off-shore, wouldn't you agree the corporations get a tax break if they manufacture off-shore?

If high corporate tax rates exist as you claim they do, what kind of tax impact is there if the jobs are moved off-shore? Doen't that amount to a tax break for moving jobs off-shore?

Wow, put down the crack pipe.

LOL, don't you see what a conumdrum you've created for yourself here?  I mention tax breaks, and you ask me what the hell I'm talking about.  And then in your next offering (just below), you admit that government interference gives companies a(n) (what must be a tax) incentive to move off-shore...  So which is it?  Do you agree corporations get tax breaks to move off-shore or not?  See red text above.  See the following offereing from you.

I'm in favor of less government interference (that means I'm in favor of lower taxes) and you're admitting that government interference (highest in the world tax rates) gives companies an incentive to move offshore, but that somehow means I "don’t mind government intervention at all do you"?

I just asked you above, if you thought corporations got tax-breaks to manufacture off shore.  You said no.  See red text above.  Corporation's tax exposure is less if the corporation does manufacture off shore.  When we can agree on that, perhaps we'll move on.

I'll try again, with smaller words just for you.

Well I appreciate it, but perhaps you should try smaller words just for you.

I want US companies to have lower taxes here, so they don't have lower taxes there. That means more jobs here.

I agree.  It sure is stange why it takes a number of posts for you to agree that government does compel corporations to manufacture off-shore via tax incentives, whether intentional or not.

What's even stranger is watching you claim both in the same response.


20 posted on 01/26/2014 4:49:22 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Never-mind that nuclear war with China is that much more thinkable, because their missile reliability has been nearly perfected and their accurace is such that they can pinpoint a strike to within 50 feet. No, that damned Preotectionist is doing it again. Do you folks have any idea how bombasticly stupid you come off in these debates?

This precisely is where BS protectionist rhetoric needs to be called for what it is. What tax would you have imposed upon ourselves to keep the above from happening? Bombastically stupid, indeed.

If I had paid 50 cents for that ping-pong ball, instead of 10 cents, China would not have developed an accurate bomb. LOL

21 posted on 01/26/2014 5:22:50 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

You didn’t answer one single question.


22 posted on 01/26/2014 5:26:03 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Not feeling it today, snot-nose.


23 posted on 01/26/2014 5:28:09 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
LINK

I asked you only one question in my post to you. I gave you plenty of suggestions to focus on when answering.

You chose not to respond to my post to you.

Instead you decided to take a pot-shot based on my post to another person.

Why is that?

24 posted on 01/26/2014 5:30:23 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Yeah..., you are. I don’t mind you not admitting to it, but the post in 5 hit you so close to home you couldn’t even muster a response to it.

It’s obvious to those of us who have watched the antics of a snot nosed agitator for years.


25 posted on 01/26/2014 5:32:03 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Here’s the deal, sweetie. I welcome comments on any econ thread I post. But if you want to get personal, then deal with it. I don’t like Socialists.


26 posted on 01/26/2014 5:38:22 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Here, let me help. You've fallen and you can't get up.

Read the post. Answer the question.

It's only one question Mr. Brilliance.

I guess our Founding Fathers were some avowed Socialists according to you then.

Thanks Mr. Patriot...

LINK

27 posted on 01/26/2014 5:41:29 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

It’s probably explained to you countless times before, but the Founding Fathers saw tariffs as a means to generate revenue for the federal government. So you need to ask yourself, when did you leave the reservation? When did tariffs become about “creating jobs?”


28 posted on 01/26/2014 5:45:48 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You know, when you think about it, the government policies that put 23% of our workforce out of work, and caused as many to earn far less than they used to, amounts to 100% taxes, and in some cases up to 50% taxes.

Okay it’s not taxes, but it works out to no income and severely lessened income. Why is that of no concern to you?

I bring up the issue of lopsided trade and illegal immigration raving our workforce, and you actually have the gall to take me on rather than admit we have a massive problem on our hands.


29 posted on 01/26/2014 5:48:46 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

And yet you come here and get furious if anyone suggests raising tariffs. LOL What a joke you are.

Our Founders supported tariffs, and if anyone else mentions them, they’re socialists and worse.

You can’t have it both ways snot nose.

BTW: Please link me to where I advocated for raising tariffs on this thread.


30 posted on 01/26/2014 5:51:30 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Whew, I can rest easy, now. You believe in free markets. Maybe it was all just a misunderstanding.


31 posted on 01/26/2014 5:53:55 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Lol. Yeah, Marx was a free trader after all, right?

Seriously though, how does the average conservative protectionist not realize that their prescription for a better economy begins and ends with a bigger, more intrusive government? I've never been able to understand this.

32 posted on 01/26/2014 5:54:24 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Where’s your response to post five snot nose?


33 posted on 01/26/2014 5:55:07 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
RE: “Manufacturing used to be the real kick starter to a down economy. Now we’ve moved a massive amount of it off-shore.”

I have two problems with that idea.

First, in the next few decades, automation and computer software will be the biggest enemy of employment in manufacturing, not outsourcing.

Second, in 2012, the latest figures available, the USA exported $2.2 trillion of goods and services, which was equal to 14% of our GDP.

If we decide to become Protectionist, other countries will do exactly the same thing.

Not only will we lose millions of export jobs, but, in the short term, we will have no comparable home grown products to replace the products we block from foreign countries.

It doesn't get better in the long term.

If you own an USA company, and you are completely protected from foreign competition, you will immediately raise your prices, and, most likely, you will be less concerned about the quality and innovation of your products since American consumers will have fewer companies to buy from.

34 posted on 01/26/2014 5:57:38 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mase

My guess is that they are retired, or on disability. Just waiting for that check from Uncle Sugar to come.


35 posted on 01/26/2014 5:58:17 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I asked you only one question in my post to you. I gave you plenty of suggestions to focus on when answering.

Good grief, your post wasn't nearly as impressive as you want it to be. All you did was type off a well known laundry list of problems that have been caused by government. But what is truly mind-boggling about your posts is that your solution to each and every one of those problems is to expand the size and influence of government. Yup, that's right......any answer you might be able to offer for any of those problems is going to require more government control of the economy and the individual. Doesn't sound like much of a solution to me, but then I'm a small government conservative.

36 posted on 01/26/2014 6:04:01 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Uncle Sugar. I like that.

The "give me mine, to hell with the rest of ya" attitude must have something to do with it. They probably blame free trade for bank CD's yielding less than 1%.

It's hard to tell where it comes from when you're dealing with people who believe we're experiencing the same rate of unemployment as we had in the great depression.

37 posted on 01/26/2014 6:09:14 PM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If our government has the highest corporate tax rates, and the taxation is less if corporations manufacture off-shore, wouldn't you agree the corporations get a tax break if they manufacture off-shore?

I agree, government interference, in the form of highest in the world corporate tax rates, pushes corporations out.

I'd prefer less taxes, to keep corporations and jobs here.

LOL, don't you see what a conumdrum you've created for yourself here? I mention tax breaks, and you ask me what the hell I'm talking about.

The only conundrum is how you think our government is giving tax cuts and that somehow drives corps offshore.

Do you agree corporations get tax breaks to move off-shore or not?

Our government does not give tax breaks to move offshore.

Corporation's tax exposure is less if the corporation does manufacture off shore.

Where you're blaming less government interference, in the form of lower tariffs and fewer restrictions, I'm blaming our idiotic tax rates (and structure, taxing world-wide income) and idiotic regulation.

Can we agree on that?

It sure is stange why it takes a number of posts for you to agree that government does compel corporations to manufacture off-shore via tax incentives,

Driving corporations away is not a tax incentive.

38 posted on 01/26/2014 6:14:50 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Friendship is Magic!


39 posted on 01/26/2014 6:15:13 PM PST by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen
RE: “Manufacturing used to be the real kick starter to a down economy. Now we’ve moved a massive amount of it off-shore.

I have two problems with that idea.

First, in the next few decades, automation and computer software will be the biggest enemy of employment in manufacturing, not outsourcing.

While that may be true, it has also been the claim for decades.  It hasn't panned out yet.  Equipment specialists will be required to service the machines.  More jobs will be created to supply the materials for the machines.  As for software, it will have to be developed.  Wages are not what is holding back our software production.  I would suggest it's another off-shoring issue.


Second, in 2012, the latest figures available, the USA exported $2.2 trillion of goods and services, which was equal to 14% of our GDP.

All well and good.  This begs the question, how much more could we have exported if we weren't still supporting the money mainline to China?

If we decide to become Protectionist, other countries will do exactly the same thing.

Other countries do exactly that.  It sure doesn't cause us to change out policies.

Not only will we lose millions of export jobs, but, in the short term, we will have no comparable home grown products to replace the products we block from foreign countries.

Yeah, right.  Our corporations will simply refuse to sell products in the United States.  LOL  I think you know better than that.

It doesn't get better in the long term.

Has our homeland work environment improved or gotten worse over the last twenty years?  What we are doing has not worked either.  None the less, the changes that came about are still championed, even though they did not follow suit with the claims that were made when the decision to gutt our work force was implemented.  China is not more friendly today.  It has risen to be a real tangible threat to it's neighbors.  Isn't this worth considering? Well..., of course not.  We mustn't upset the manufacturing pipeline with China, no matter what it does.  You guys just aren't honest about this.

If you own an USA company, and you are completely protected from foreign competition, you will immediately raise your prices, and, most likely, you will be less concerned about the quality and innovation of your products since American consumers will have fewer companies to buy from.

I believe you would have to raise your prices to an extent.  It remains to be seen exactly how much.  Shipping fees, moving parts to and from China, paying for labor over there, and the problems that go with trade with China, should cause us to at least consider a change.  Frankly you can't buy anything that's worth a damn from China.  None of it lasts.  It's cheap, back-asswards when it comes to controls.  The manuals are a joke.  You get what you pay for, and replace everything in a few years due to corrosion and other considerations.

I've bought several computers out of China that I wound up throwing in the dumpster within a very short time of purchasing them.

As for quality being less in the U. S., surely you jest.  Innovation..., since when?  When the United States was manufacturing products they were equally innovative, and they would last for a good decade or more.

40 posted on 01/26/2014 6:15:33 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mase

Yes, well I take the term Conservative with a grain of salt when folks don’t mind if China gets our technology, specifically military grade technology.

I take it with a grain of salt when they don’t mind that we are funding the rise of China to be a global problem player in international circles.

Oh yes, they don’t like government involvement, but when you mention that corporations get tax incentives today to move jobs off shore, you’d expect them to say, yeah that’s bad. No, instead you get folks telling you there are no such incentives.

Good grief? LMAO, yep, well it takes different things for people to be impressed doesn’t it.

Yes I did list off a number of problems. And since the reaction to any suggestion there is need to change always focuses on “Protectionists”, I think it’s fair to ask questions that will cause folks to confront their own ignorance.

You see, it’s not the fault of protectionists is it. What has been taking place has been taking place over the objections to protectionists. And when China starts a war with it’s neighbors, the protectionists who tried to warn it was going to happen, will once again be the focus if they remind folks of what they warned about.

Look at our employment climate in the U. S. today. Think there’s any problems? Why no, and protectionists would be the ones that caused it if the subject comes up.

Okay smart ass...

Would lowering the corporate tax rate be government intervention to control the economy and individuals more?

Well, evidently so. Mase, buy a clue when you get a chance.


41 posted on 01/26/2014 6:24:05 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
And when China starts a war with its neighbors, the protectionists who tried to warn it was going to happen, will once again be the focus if they remind folks of what they warned about.

Oh, spare us. Seriously. Predicting something that will occur with near 100% certainty is the sign of a very, very weak mind.

42 posted on 01/26/2014 6:33:07 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

Well that sounds good, but when it comes to these threads, the first things out of the mouths of folks like you is "Protectionists".

Yes, I call people who call for higher tariffs, protectionists.

Where is your indignation that missile gyro technology was transferred to China? Where is your indignation at the fact that missle vibration damper technology was transferred to China?

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Today we and our allies, and folks not traditionally affiliated with us, face a growing military threat from China simply because the Free Traders prevailed?

I'm a Free Trader and I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Did I mention tariffs? No.

Free trade, in the form of lower tariffs is somehow to blame for those things? Please show how.

Who cares if China can target our cities with advanced accuracy? Who cares if their missle failures were reduced by 90% with our technology transfers? Who cares if we have 23% of our workforce idle? Who cares if 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage of 1968? Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade!

What level of tariffs would save us?

It's what is taking place

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where?

and you continue to advocate for Free Trade despite that fact.

I agree, higher taxes and regulations cost jobs. I don't agree that lowered tariffs and fewer trade barriers cost jobs.

Am I now to believe you don't advocate for what you have been advocating for?

I believe you lied.

43 posted on 01/26/2014 6:39:32 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
You know, when you think about it, the government policies that put 23% of our workforce out of work, and caused as many to earn far less than they used to, amounts to 100% taxes, and in some cases up to 50% taxes.

What?

Okay it’s not taxes, but it works out to no income and severely lessened income. Why is that of no concern to you?

I'm concerned that big government is ruining our economy.

I bring up the issue of lopsided trade and illegal immigration raving our workforce, and you actually have the gall to take me on rather than admit we have a massive problem on our hands.

I admit 20 million illegals is a huge problem. Deport them now. Build a wall. And then cut corporate taxes and idiotic regulations, especially Obamacare, and watch jobs grow.

44 posted on 01/26/2014 6:45:21 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
If our government has the highest corporate tax rates, and the taxation is less if corporations manufacture off-shore, wouldn't you agree the corporations get a tax break if they manufacture off-shore?

I agree, government interference, in the form of highest in the world corporate tax rates, pushes corporations out.

I'd prefer less taxes, to keep corporations and jobs here.

Why?  After all, you don't think there's a tax advantage to moving jobs off shore.  If there was, you'd have to admit there is a tax incentive to move jobs off shore.  You can't admit that, because it would end the disruption.

In fact you'd rather argue with yourself about it, than admit you've had your lunch handed to you.  Here, from your last post.

You vehemently disagree there are tax advantages for corporations to move off shore.  Here...If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

Down below in the same post you suddenly agree tax policy does incentivise corporations to corporate manufacturing off shore.  Here...

I'm in favor of less government interference (that means I'm in favor of lower taxes) and you're admitting that government interference (highest in the world tax rates) gives companies an incentive to move offshore...

How could I be agreeing with you, if I admitted high tax rates incentivised corporations to move manufacturing off shore, if you didn't beleive the same thing at this point?
OL, don't you see what a conumdrum you've created for yourself here? I mention tax breaks, and you ask me what the hell I'm talking about.

The only conundrum is how you think our government is giving tax cuts and that somehow drives corps offshore.

I did not say the government gave tax cuts.  I merely agreed with the thought you expressed in the last green sentence above.  The government incentivises corporations to move their manufacturing off-shore. 

And if you look at both exchanges above, your thoughts do reveal a clear-cut conundrum.  You both disagreed with me that government tax policy influences corporations, and agreed with me that tax policy influenced corporations.

Do you agree corporations get tax breaks to move off-shore or not?

Our government does not give tax breaks to move offshore.

Okay, then you're back to disagreeing with yourself again.  You two are really going at it.  LMAO

If our corporations pay one tax rate, a high one to manufacture on U. S. soil, and pay a much smaller tax rate to manufacture off-shore, then I guess you'd have to be a pretty dim bulb not to realize that government tax policy does include a clear tax break for corporations who want to manufacture off-shore.  When you yourself and you settle your argument, get back to me.  You know, I hate to see the two of you disagree like this.  Hopefully you can settle this and become friends again.

Corporation's tax exposure is less if the corporation does manufacture off shore

Where you're blaming less government interference, in the form of lower tariffs and fewer restrictions, I'm blaming our idiotic tax rates (and structure, taxing world-wide income) and idiotic regulation.

Can we agree on that?

Since I didn't mention raising tariffs as a resoluiton to anything, I find your effort to label me as someone who did, to be downright dishonest.  Can we agree on that?

It sure is stange why it takes a number of posts for you to agree that government does compel corporations to manufacture off-shore via tax incentives,

Driving corporations away is not a tax incentive.

God you are dense.  The government sets up tax rates.  The government charges two difference tax rates.  It taxes corporations who manufacture on U. S. soil one rate.  It taxes corporations that manufacture on foreign soil another rate.

If you don't see a tax advantage to manufacturing off shore, you're not really worthy of discussing this issue with.  And above you clearly expressed an agreement with this fundamental concept.  What the hell is going on with you?


45 posted on 01/26/2014 6:57:05 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Yes, well this weak mind proposed a post you haven't had the gumption to attempt to respond to yet. What does that make your mind?

LINK

46 posted on 01/26/2014 6:59:39 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
You haven't figured out yet that I'm ignoring it, on the grounds of your petulance? What does that make your mind?

In any case, this is a great video--that I can't decide whether you neglected to watch, or whether you watched and decided to throw a hissy fit.

47 posted on 01/26/2014 7:10:20 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Why? After all, you don't think there's a tax advantage to moving jobs off shore.

Of course there is an advantage to moving from the highest rate in the world to somewhere lower.

That's why I've always said WE SHOULD CUT OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE. If we make it low enough, we'll even get foreign corporations to expand here.

See, that would be less government interference. That's what I favor.

If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Is English your second language?

Government policies drive jobs out. I want to eliminate those policies. That wouldn't be more government intervention, that would be less.

The government incentivises corporations to move their manufacturing off-shore.

Idiotic US taxes and regs are a disincentive to jobs here.

You know the difference between incentive and disincentive?

God you are dense. The government sets up tax rates. The government charges two difference tax rates. It taxes corporations who manufacture on U. S. soil one rate. It taxes corporations that manufacture on foreign soil another rate.

Really? Please show me the different rates.

Since I didn't mention raising tariffs as a resoluiton to anything,

You blame lower tariffs for our problems, what is your solution if not higher tariffs?

What the hell is going on with you?

Trying to untangle your muddled thinking is exhausting.

48 posted on 01/26/2014 7:10:39 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

Well that sounds good, but when it comes to these threads, the first things out of the mouths of folks like you is "Protectionists".

Yes, I call people who call for higher tariffs, protectionists.

Well Bable-mouth, please link me to where I advocated for higher tariffs.

Where is your indignation that missile gyro technology was transferred to China? Where is your indignation at the fact that missle vibration damper technology was transferred to China?

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Except folks in your camp NEVER address that stuff until you are cornered and forced to deal with it.

Could that have taken place without open trade with Communist China?  No.  And yet you advocate for open trade across the board.  China has been on the table here for quite a while by now, and you've taken a pass on disagreeing with it all along.

Today we and our allies, and folks not traditionally affiliated with us, face a growing military threat from China simply because the Free Traders prevailed?

I'm a Free Trader and I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Well, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but China demands copies of the patents and the complete plans for manufacturing before it will allow our corportations to manufacture on its soil.

Can you see any benefit of this for China?  China now has the fastest computer on planet earth.  How do you think China got that technology?  It got it because people just like you advocated for open trade with it.  None of this mattered to the Free Trade advocates, becuase we declared this to be the eventual outcome if we did go full tilt Free Trade with China.  The Free Traders said it didn't matter.  Here we are.

Did I mention tariffs? No.

Free trade, in the form of lower tariffs is somehow to blame for those things? Please show how.

Did I mention tariffs?  No.  If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know.  You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

Who cares if China can target our cities with advanced accuracy? Who cares if their missle failures were reduced by 90% with our technology transfers? Who cares if we have 23% of our workforce idle? Who cares if 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage of 1968? Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade!

What level of tariffs would save us?

Did I mention tariffs?  No.  If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know.  You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

It's what is taking place

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where?

We have 25% or close to it un-employment.  We have another 25% or so making half what they used to.  I linked you to a study that showed over 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage in 1968.  None the less, I am demeaned as being some sort of sociallist because I think Free Trade has been a massive betrayal of the American public.  And now you act offended because I have called you on the fact you still favor Free Trade, and the devistating impact is has had on our workers and nation.

Where?  Wow, this is all over your head isn't it.

and you continue to advocate for Free Trade despite that fact.

I agree, higher taxes and regulations cost jobs. I don't agree that lowered tariffs and fewer trade barriers cost jobs.

Well that tariff discussion you're having with yourself is certainly interesting to watch.  I haven't made any advocacy related to tariffs, other than to point out that China has manipulated between 30 and 40% tariffs on our goods going in.  This evidently didn't interest you, because you basically ignored the fact to move on to the real important issues...  snicker.

Am I now to believe you don't advocate for what you have been advocating for?

I believe you lied..

We've seen that you believe a lot of things.  None of them all that accurate.  You can't even agree with yourself part of the time.

49 posted on 01/26/2014 7:19:29 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Except folks in your camp NEVER address that stuff until you are cornered and forced to deal with it.

So what?

Could that have taken place without open trade with Communist China?

Yes.

Well, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but China demands copies of the patents and the complete plans for manufacturing before it will allow our corportations to manufacture on its soil.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Did I mention tariffs?

You're whining about free trade, that means low or no tariffs.

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where? If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

Well that tariff discussion you're having with yourself is certainly interesting to watch.

Not as interesting as your poor grasp of English and your confusion between incentive and disincentive.

And now you act offended because I have called you on the fact you still favor Free Trade

I'm not offended by your calling me out because I favor less government interference with trade.

I am offended by your lies about me.

50 posted on 01/26/2014 7:42:03 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson