Ron Paul R3volution falls victim to Trump and frustration

[thoughtomator]

Your post doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe next time to can work on being more clear.

Trump isn't my friend at all, but I would like to have billionaire friends.

I am the greatest and always have been!

Just to be clear about my feelings on Trump, I appreciate the many positive things that are happening as a result of him being President. His positives outweigh his negatives as far as I am concerned. I could go on and on about what those positives are for me, but does anyone really care?

Sadly, not everyone is more concerned about outcomes than ego.

 

[specsaregood]

Except that's not how it works. This is the real proposal: You, Mr. Consumer, want to buy a product, commodity or service from a country on the authoritarian's naughty list? You have to pay more because we've put more government in the way.

No matter which way you cut it, it's more government interference in the trade between two individuals.

Some seem to think that this "more government" will eventually lead to less government. I don't think that's ever happened. More likely, it will just be a shift in the favored cronyist industries.

I'm pretty sure that in nearly every instance of the tariffs trump wants, he has said he would drop all tariffs if the other country does the same for the us. in that his real goal is.true free trade. Not one sided free trade.

 

[RJB]

Trump always says everyone is the greatest until he changes his mind. Trump is for it until he is against it. No that Trump is "your best friend."

I notice that Trump has no words for "mediocre," "alright," or "not bad."

Everything falls either under, "greatest," "fantastic," "outstanding," etc. Or "worst ever," "disaster" etc.

 

[CaptUSA]

There is already government involvement in trade and it is used to destroy our economy, Trump is defending America and trying to reduce government involvement in the end.

 

[CaptUSA]

I'm pretty sure that in nearly every instance of the tariffs trump wants, he has said he would drop all tariffs if the other country does the same for the us. in that his real goal is.true free trade. Not one sided free trade.

Funny - all I hear from him is Bernie Sanders style protectionism talk.

(There is no such thing as one-sided free trade, btw. Unless you're talking about governments getting their cut. "Free" trade means both parties are better off by the trade or it doesn't happen. Sad that I have to remind people of this here.)

 

[dannno]

That's not an argument.

 

[phill4paul]

Funny - all I hear from him is Bernie Sanders style protectionism talk.

(There is no such thing as one-sided free trade, btw. Unless you're talking about governments getting their cut. "Free" trade means both parties are better off by the trade or it doesn't happen. Sad that I have to remind people of this here.)

Aherm.

Fair enough. Please tell us your workable plan to get us out of the multilateral trade deals we are currently in.

 

[dannno]

Funny - all I hear from him is Bernie Sanders style protectionism talk.

Uh, no, Bernie would be doing it so we could pay for healthcare or something.

Trump is doing it because our economy is headed off a cliff and he needs to change our trade policies - he has no leverage, so he is instituting tariffs so he has leverage to negotiate trade policies so we end up with more fair trade policies.. and ultimately lower tariffs on both sides.

 

[Swordsmyth]

 

[Swordsmyth]

Funny - all I hear from him is Bernie Sanders style protectionism talk.

This doesn't help:

(There is no such thing as one-sided free trade, btw. Unless you're talking about governments getting their cut. "Free" trade means both parties are better off by the trade or it doesn't happen. Sad that I have to remind people of this here.)

You are right, what we have now is NOT free trade, what DJTvsg wants IS.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Aherm.

He doesn't have one.

 

[CaptUSA]

Aherm.

No central planning. Lower all tariffs to an evenly low level. Regardless of what other countries do. We can do that unilaterally and it doesn’t take a managed deal. Managed economies are bad mkay.

 

[phill4paul]

No central planning. Lower all tariffs to an evenly low level. Regardless of what other countries do. We can do that unilaterally and it doesn’t take a managed deal. Managed economies are bad mkay.

Try again. Pro-tip: The key to this conundrum is the phrase "workable plan."

 

[Swordsmyth]

No central planning. Lower all tariffs to an evenly low level. Regardless of what other countries do. We can do that unilaterally and it doesn’t take a managed deal. Managed economies are bad mkay.

That is like proposing that wars can be ended by burning our arms and taking a national vow of pacifism or that we can have a free country by allowing in millions of socialists and giving them citizenship and the right to vote.

Trade will still suffer from government intervention that way, all of it from hostile foreign governments intent on destroying our economy and reducing us to dependence on foreign trade for our necessities so they can blackmail us into submission to world government.

 

[dannno]

Lower all tariffs to an evenly low level. Regardless of what other countries do.

That's what we had before for decades and it didn't work. The President would say, "Hey, can you guys lower your tariffs on us? Pretty please?" and they would just say, "ehhhh. no thanks.."

Now Trump has leverage.

They will lower tariffs or face the consequences.

 

[CaptUSA]

Trade will still suffer from government intervention that way, all of it from hostile foreign governments intent on destroying our economy and reducing us to dependence on foreign trade for our necessities so they can blackmail us into submission to world government.

Total anti-liberty hogwash. That’s typical neocon fearmongering. Ah yes, freedom is so scary! We need a big government to protect us from our own decisions.

 

[CaptUSA]

That's what we had before for decades and it didn't work. The President would say, "Hey, can you guys lower your tariffs on us? Pretty please?" and they would just say, "ehhhh. no thanks.."

Now Trump has leverage.

They will lower tariffs or face the consequences.

So what?! It’s not our job to govern other countries. If they want our business, they’ll lower their tariffs to a point where it’s beneficila to trade. God damn. You guys want to plan the whole world, now!

Listen to Ron Paul on this subject.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Total anti-liberty hogwash. That’s typical neocon fearmongering. Ah yes, freedom is so scary! We need a big government to protect us from our own decisions.

Total fantasyland delusion, the elite have openly discussed using trade dependency to force countries to submit to world government and the EU is an example of how the tactic is used.

 

[dannno]

So what?! It’s not our job to govern other countries. If they want our business, they’ll lower their tariffs to a point where it’s beneficila to trade. God damn. You guys want to plan the whole world, now!

Listen to Ron Paul on this subject.

There are other policies in place like monetary policy that allow them to get away with it. Trump isn't going to change that, probably couldn't if he wanted to.

 

[CaptUSA]

Try again. Pro-tip: The key to this conundrum is the phrase "workable plan."

This is a workable plan. We would not violate any existing trade agreements except on the governance part. Our tariffs would stay in line or lower. As for the control... We’d have to unwind our entanglements slowly, but we could choose not to enforce. We wouldn’t be in violation.