Only President Trump could get the Canadians to vote for an exit to the USMCA, and he did it brilliantly

[nikcers]

So you're advocating for revolution?

Always.

We have a never ending revolution.

A never ending tea party. One that is evergreen.

Revolution is necessary otherwise you die.

Revolution used to be a good thing until the "they" people started to call it progressivism and tried to combine government with religion.

Revolution: a dramatic and wide-reaching change in the way something works or is organized or in people's ideas about it.

 

[nikcers]

.

Even the concept of “treason” has no place in a free country.

My loyalty isn’t to a government, or to dirt, it’s to people, and even then ONLY to people who respect my liberty. Anyone or anything else can fuck off.

I owe them no allegiance whatsoever, and have no intention if showing them any.

The concept of betrayal has been around in our country since the revolution.

We have even a name for it. We call them a benedict arnold.

 

[acptulsa]

A never ending tea party.

Bot, it's not just that you're talking to humans. You're talking to humans who saw Ron Paul robbed in Iowa. Who saw all the other candidates combined into an anti-Ron Paul "fusion ticket" just to deny him the Louisiana caucus. Some of us took the long ride on the short bus in Tampa. All of us saw the steal in '20. All of us just saw them cancel the primaries and ratfuck the third largest political party.

Your rainbow-and-unicorn Cliché-O-Matic bullshit is lame. You're talking about reforms that can obviously only be effected by an armed uprising. Ergo, that's what you're advocating. But don't worry about it. You're a bot, and they can't put you in prison. You're already locked in a box.

 

[Occam's Banana]

The concept of betrayal has been around in our country since the revolution.

We have even a name for it. We call them a benedict arnold.

I'mma just put this here ...

Snowden IS Like Benedict Arnold, Thank God!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/snowden-is-like-benedict-arnold-thank-god/
Becky Akers (06 August 2013)

Tom, thanks for directing us to USAToday’s smear of a fine patriot, Benedict Arnold. It’s about what I’d expect from a newspaper that absolutely worships the State.

Most of what we “know” about General Arnold turns out not to be true. He was actually a huge hero who defended liberty’s principles no matter who was abusing them: the British king and Ministry (equivalent to our modern bureaucratic regime) or people who called themselves Patriots but were, in fact, even more tyrannical than London’s government. I discovered the real story of Arnold and his “treason” while researching my second novel (due for publication this fall). I began writing the book determined to show Arnold for a traitor and a fool; within a few months, based on the facts, I had entirely changed my opinion.

Benedict Arnold defied American dictators, just as Heroic Ed has done. Those dictators naturally and vengefully vilified him at the time; textbooks and professors have repeated their slanders ever since as the truth (imagine the lies statist “historians” will one day write about Ed Snowden). I invite LRC’s readers to suspend judgment of a courageous anarcho-capitalist until my novel, M Genl B Arnold, debuts in another couple months.

(Arnold also makes a cameo appearance — and not a flattering one, since I didn’t yet understand his incredible devotion to freedom — in my first novel, Halestorm.)

 

[nikcers]

I'mma just put this here ...

Snowden IS Like Benedict Arnold, Thank God!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/snowden-is-like-benedict-arnold-thank-god/
Becky Akers (06 August 2013)

Tom, thanks for directing us to USAToday’s smear of a fine patriot, Benedict Arnold. It’s about what I’d expect from a newspaper that absolutely worships the State.

Most of what we “know” about General Arnold turns out not to be true. He was actually a huge hero who defended liberty’s principles no matter who was abusing them: the British king and Ministry (equivalent to our modern bureaucratic regime) or people who called themselves Patriots but were, in fact, even more tyrannical than London’s government. I discovered the real story of Arnold and his “treason” while researching my second novel (due for publication this fall). I began writing the book determined to show Arnold for a traitor and a fool; within a few months, based on the facts, I had entirely changed my opinion.

Benedict Arnold defied American dictators, just as Heroic Ed has done. Those dictators naturally and vengefully vilified him at the time; textbooks and professors have repeated their slanders ever since as the truth (imagine the lies statist “historians” will one day write about Ed Snowden). I invite LRC’s readers to suspend judgment of a courageous anarcho-capitalist until my novel, M Genl B Arnold, debuts in another couple months.

(Arnold also makes a cameo appearance — and not a flattering one, since I didn’t yet understand his incredible devotion to freedom — in my first novel, Halestorm.)

Edward Snowden isn't someone that compromised any special information that anyone in the IT industry at the time wasn't already talking about.

I know its fun to worship him as some sort of religion but that information didnt spread to the world on its own he didnt do it on his own.

It has every hallmark of a government sponsored psyop or limited hangout but I just cant prove that it is or isn't and you know you can't either.

 

[acptulsa]

Well, @Swordsmyth, your Crow About Trump Thread #42,749 is going so badly that this bot is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at it in order to derail it. How's that working for ya?

 

[nikcers]

Well, @Swordsmyth, your Crow About Trump Thread #42,749 is going so badly that this bot is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at it in order to derail it. How's that working for ya?

Et tu, Brute?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Notice the backwards presuppositions in the OP.

There's this NAFTA loophole that allows us to enjoy the benefits of cheap imports from China via Canada. And in the OP, this is seen as a bad thing for America and something that provides one-way benefits to Canada. For the OP, the selling point for getting out of NAFTA and the USMCA is that it will result in us having to pay higher tariffs.

Of course, there's another way to close the same loophole, which would be for the regime in DC to lower the tariffs it charges us on imports from China. Then we could just import them from China without needing them to go through Canada first. But that's not even up for consideration.

LOL

Of course you support Communist China taking over the world, stealing all the jobs and wealth of the Average American, and holding us hostage through dependency.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Well, @Swordsmyth, your Crow About Trump Thread #42,749 is going so badly that this bot is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at it in order to derail it. How's that working for ya?

It's going quite well, the CCP hugging traitors are exposing themselves, and opposing Trump while he gets rid of the NAFTA/USMCA stepping stone to the NAU and world government.

 

[acptulsa]

...and opposing Trump while he gets rid of the NAFTA/USMCA stepping stone to the NAU and world government.

In your opinion. You've been wrong about what he would do before...

 

[Invisible Man]

LOL

Of course you support Communist China taking over the world, stealing all the jobs and wealth of the Average American, and holding us hostage through dependency.

There's no such thing as stealing jobs.

 

[TheTexan]

There's no such thing as stealing jobs.

There's such thing as stealing the means of production, which provides the jobs

 

[Invisible Man]

There's such thing as stealing the means of production, which provides the jobs

First, actual stealing of any means of production (i.e. physically burglarizing factories) is not what we're talking about.

Second, jobs are a cost, not a benefit. Getting something for less work is better than having to do more work to get it.

 

[TheTexan]

First, actual stealing of any means of production (i.e. physically burglarizing factories) is not what we're talking about.

Market manipulation can be considered stealing.

Some libertarians argue that market manipulation only hurts the perpetrator... or the market "corrects itself". China basically proves both of those wrong. It used market manipulation to succeed in its goals of capturing global manufacturing share, and China is doing better than ever.

Second, jobs are a cost, not a benefit. Getting something for less work is better than having to do more work to get it.

Correct, the main benefit is the means of production, not the job. Means of production is the only way that resources are created.

Getting something for less work is not always better. It might be cheaper to just buy something, but if you build the tools and skills needed to build it yourself, you get the thing you wanted, and can easily produce more to sell.

On an individual level, it's usually better to buy than to build, because ain't nobody got time to learn every trade. But on a national level? It's foolish to outsource the most critical and fundamental elements of your economy, because it's temporarily "cheaper".

 

[Invisible Man]

Market manipulation can be considered stealing.

It can be, and sometimes is, considered that. But only by people who are wrong.

If China wants to subsidize the cost of something I buy that was built in China so that I pay less for it, then fine. The only victims of a crime there are the Chinese taxpayers.

 

[TheTexan]

If China wants to subsidize the cost of something I buy that was built in China so that I pay less for it, then fine. The only victims of a crime there are the Chinese taxpayers.

I'm not gonna call market manipulation a crime and I'm not gonna say you or anyone else is a victim of it.

Just because something isn't a crime, doesn't mean it isn't prudent, to take actions as a response to it.

On an individual level, your actions make total sense - do what is in your best interests.

But on a national level, is it in the nation's best interests, to sell off our means of production, and use the proceeds to buy billions of buckets of plastic dildos? Because that's exactly what we've done.

 

[Invisible Man]

I'm not gonna call market manipulation a crime and I'm not gonna say you or anyone else is a victim of it.

Just because something isn't a crime, doesn't mean it isn't prudent, to take actions as a response to it.

OK, but you did call it stealing.

I prefer to reserve that word for something that's a crime.

E.g. Stupid people occasionally claim that the University of Michigan football team engaged in "sign stealing" in 2022-23. But when that is explained by those few people out of that crowd who have the verbal skills to articulate what they mean, it turns out that their allegations only amount to sign observing, made possible due to opposing schools putting their signs on display in full view of the public in front of crowds of tens of thousands of people. The way you're using the word stealing is similarly misleading.

 

[TheTexan]

The way you're using the word stealing is similarly misleading.

Misleading for you perhaps.

Your original objection was to the phrase that China was "stealing jobs".

Most people understand that to mean that China isn't kidnapping workers and bringing them over there

It's a figure of speech.

 

[Invisible Man]

Most people understand that to mean that China isn't kidnapping workers and bringing them over there

Which is why it's misleading. It's shear propaganda. Jobs are not things that can be stolen. Nor can they be shipped overseas. Those expressions are nonsense, gibberish, gobbledygoop, and deceptive cant. People only say them so that they can avoid having to explain what's wrong with something they don't like because they don't have an explanation.

 

[nikcers]

Which is why it's misleading. It's shear propaganda. Jobs are not things that can be stolen. Nor can they be shipped overseas. Those expressions are nonsense, gibberish, gobbledygoop, and deceptive cant. People only say them so that they can avoid having to explain what's wrong with something they don't like because they don't have an explanation.

Thats like saying its propaganda to say beating a dead horse unless someone is literally beating a dead horse.