Justin Amash is the anti-Ron Paul

[Swordsmyth]

libertarians were losing long before Amash, and they'll be losing long after he's gone.

I think they invented losing .

They are certainly devoted to it.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Actually, RPF, as of late, has become everything other than “Ron Paul” Forums, and in favor of the very restrictionist policies that have caused our liberties to deteriorate over time.

Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Walter Block, etc... the very people who stand on principle seem to have little impact, or place here anymore.

No, it is policies like wide open borders, excessive immigration and collaborationist "free" trade with communists intent on destroying our economy that have caused our liberties to deteriorate over time.

 

[kahless]

China is a tough case. I do think China should be retaliated against. They steal secrets and American intellectual property.

But let's be in reality this isn't about China. The litmus is about tariffs against countries like Canada or even Mexico? Do you think auto makers should be penalized for making things in Mexico? There is no justification for protectionist tariffs ever.

America and Americans first. There will be no libertarian society because too many libertarians have been trained to believe exactly what you said in that last sentence. This results in destruction within our borders and ensures people seek government intervention, worse civil strife as a means of intervention and/or advocate for opposing political systems.

A libertarian society is only workable within a bordered protected region or if the entire planet was without borders, countries and the adhered to libertarian form of society (obviously silly and not possible)

 

[chudrockz]

No, it is policies like wide open borders, excessive immigration and collaborationist "free" trade with communists intent on destroying our economy that have caused our liberties to deteriorate over time.

Right. And thus, in order to increase freedom, we must first restrict and regulate it. Said every tyrant ever.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Right. And thus, in order to increase freedom, we must first restrict and regulate it. Said every tyrant ever.

Restrictions on those who would violate our rights is the definition of freedom.
Rolling over and letting tyrants tyrannize you isn't liberty.

 

[Swordsmyth]

America and Americans first. There will be no libertarian society because too many libertarians have been trained to believe exactly what you said in that last sentence. This results in destruction within our borders and ensures people seek government intervention, worse civil strife as a means of intervention and/or advocate for opposing political systems.

A libertarian society is only workable within a bordered protected region or if the entire planet was without borders, countries and the adhered to libertarian form of society (obviously silly and not possible)

Cash register libertarians LOVE foreign government intervention in the marketplace until it takes their job.

 

[chudrockz]

Restrictions on those who would violate our rights is the definition of freedom.
Rolling over and letting tyrants tyrannize you isn't liberty.

We recently had our roof redone. The work was done entirely by Mexicans. Some of them (gasp) might have been here illegally! I don't give a rat's behind. I have a nice new roof at a decent price, and none of them infringed on my freedom one bit.

 

[Swordsmyth]

We recently had our roof redone. The work was done entirely by Mexicans. Some of them (gasp) might have been here illegally! I don't give a rat's behind. I have a nice new roof at a decent price, and none of them infringed on my freedom one bit.

I can guarantee you that some of them most certainly have.

Thank you for putting money above liberty, the founding fathers would be so proud.

 

[chudrockz]

 

[UWDude]

open borders seemed to work put fine for the natives. Look at all the wasteland they have now!

 

[Swordsmyth]

How'd it work out for them?

We can't even ask many of the tribes that were simply erased from existence.

 

[UWDude]

How'd it work out for them?

We can't even ask many of the tribes that were simply erased from existence.

cheap cigarettes and cheap roofing = freedom

 

[Swordsmyth]

cheap cigarettes and cheap roofing = freedom

And the leftarians think they are so different from their leftist brethren who think free stuff = freedom.

 

[chudrockz]

How'd it work out for them?

We can't even ask many of the tribes that were simply erased from existence.

So you're all packed and ready to go?

 

[Krugminator2]

America and Americans first. There will be no libertarian society because too many libertarians have been trained to believe exactly what you said in that last sentence. This results in destruction within our borders and ensures people seek government intervention, worse civil strife as a means of intervention and/or advocate for opposing political systems.

A libertarian society is only workable within a bordered protected region or if the entire planet was without borders, countries and the adhered to libertarian form of society (obviously silly and not possible)

It is indisputably true tariffs make the country poorer?

How does making the country poorer benefit the country and make it more libertarian?

Think about how crazy protectionism is. How would an isolated country like New Zealand thrive if they had to make all their own stuff?

 

[Swordsmyth]

It is indisputably true tariffs make the country poorer?

No, it is not.

How does making the country poorer benefit the country and make it more libertarian?

If it makes us poorer (not clear) but it keeps foreign governments from manipulating our economy and politics to destroy liberty it is a net benefit to liberty.

Think about how crazy protectionism is. How would an isolated country like New Zealand thrive if they had to make all their own stuff?

Nobody said we shouldn't trade with anyone for anything, you are doing the same thing as all the people who accused Ron of being "ISOLATIONIST" or the pacifists that accuse people who defend themselves of being "VIOLENT".

 

[Krugminator2]

Who cares about deep state secrets? Intellectual property? Is this a libertarian forum or what?

I am a libertarian/classical liberal. I do not think it should be easy for a totalitarian nuclear power to access US secrets. See. The United States is a fundamentally good country. China is a fundamentally bad country. I don't want to see fundamentally bad countries, especially ones who are surpassing the US in GDP and confiscate a lot of that GDP for the government's coffers, gain more power. A world where China has more influence is a less free world. A world where the US has more power is a more free world. See the past 250 years of world history.

I am a libertarian/classical liberal. I do not think hacking US tech companies who do business in China is a legitimate function of government. I don't think forcing US tech to hand over proprietary technology as a precondition to doing business is a legitimate function of government. I do think protecting companies from that theft is a legitimate function. Not to mention, I support intellectual property, which is also libertarian. It is only a small sect of Rothtards who oppose it.

 

[Krugminator2]

No, it is not.

Trade is win-win. It only happens if both side benefit. So anything that reduces win-win situations makes people poorer. If China makes something cheaper and the US consumer chooses it, then that is what should happen. It logically has to make the US wealthier. It can't be any other way.

Nobody said we shouldn't trade with anyone for anything, you are doing the same thing as all the people who accused Ron of being "ISOLATIONIST" or the pacifists that accuse people who defend themselves of being "VIOLENT".

You come pretty close and I am not going to spend ten hours looking for the post but you actually did say something to the effect. Your whole thing is about how important it is for the US to manufacture more stuff. Pat Buchanan certainly says that garbage and I see people praising him in this thread. Regardless, using tariffs to prop up uncompetitive industries is welfare and reduces US productivity.

 

[PAF]

cheap cigarettes and cheap roofing = freedom

Exactly. Freedom of choice, if I decide to buy a fine cigar, or a better roof if it is actually needed. Though typically, I do my own roofing.

You and government do not know what is best for me. Even if you think or actually believe that you do.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Trade is win-win. It only happens if both side benefit. So anything that reduces win-win situations makes people poorer. If China makes something cheaper and the US consumer chooses it, then that is what should happen. It logically has to make the US wealthier. It can't be any other way.

That's not absolutely true, if one side reduces the other to a welfare dependent the dependent loses wealth and liberty.

You come pretty close and I am not going to spend ten hours looking for the post but you actually did say something to the effect. Your whole thing is about how important it is for the US to manufacture more stuff. Pat Buchanan certainly says that garbage and I see people praising him in this thread. Regardless, using tariffs to prop up uncompetitive industries is welfare and reduces US productivity.

Allowing foreign governments to prop up uncompetitve industries and put our competitive industries out of business reduces US productivity and independence while reducing our people to welfare trash that look to government for their needs.