[Video] Rand Paul: I agree with Milton Friedman; can't have open borders in welfare state

[Confederate]

Rand Paul: "I do agree with Milton Friedman. You can't have open borders in a welfare state."


http://youtu.be/UdKHEH80INg

 

[itshappening]

Someone tell the Judge

 

[Carson]

Open borders and medical care for everyone.

BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

*takes breath*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[dannno]

So, conversely, does Rand agree that one COULD have open borders if we didn't have a welfare state? I'm not going to push that one on him, but if asked I would recommend he gives an answer that talks about Constitutional authority to control the border so he can keep appeasing the right wing media and talking heads.

 

[dannno]

Someone tell the Judge

The Judge would agree and then probably say that individual rights supersede government stupidity.

 

[Brett85]

So, conversely, does Rand agree that one COULD have open borders if we didn't have a welfare state?

I wouldn't necessarily say that. He's also said that we should secure the borders to prevent terrorists from sneaking across the southern border.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Someone tell the Judge

Two separate issues. I'm pretty sure the Judge is against the welfare state.

 

[Brett85]

He wouldn't really say where he stands on DOMA even though Ron has said that he supports it.

 

[green73]

So because of one unlibertarian situation we need another.

 

[green73]

Does he ever mention the Fed anymore?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

This is about the dumbest set of logic I've ever seen. I guess we should restrict birth, because of the Welfare-State right? Just because there is an ongoing violation of liberty does not make the case that reversing such action is wrong given there are other violations of liberty. If such was the case, then nothing would ever get done because there is ALWAYS violations occurring. Just because there is something terrible going on does not mean we should restrict liberty. I'm sure he would never agree that people who have done no injustice should be disarmed because there are criminals who use guns. But, of course, it is travel, and god forbid it be up to the property owners who shall and shall not be able to come on their property, rent their property, or work for them.

The only lines that matter are property lines, and the USG has no legitimate property. Ergo, it has no jurisdiction.

 

[cero]

This is about the dumbest set of logic I've ever seen. I guess we should restrict birth, because of the Welfare-State right? Just because there is an ongoing violation of liberty does not make the case that reversing such action is wrong given there are other violations of liberty. If such was the case, then nothing would ever get done because there is ALWAYS violations occurring. Just because there is something terrible going on does not mean we should restrict liberty. I'm sure he would never agree that people who have done no injustice should be disarmed because there are criminals who use guns. But, of course, it is travel, and god forbid it be up to the property owners who shall and shall not be able to come on their property, rent their property, or work for them.

The only lines that matter are property lines, and the USG has no legitimate property. Ergo, it has no jurisdiction.

what are you referring to?

 

[dinosaur]

You can't have open borders and keep a constitution. But I'm fine with him not agreeing with me 100%. Go Rand.

 

[loveableteddybear]

Crass opportunism. After 'bama was reelected he was spouting a Rubio plan. Now that's on the shelf I suppose.

 

[Confederate]

Crass opportunism. After 'bama was reelected he was spouting a Rubio plan. Now that's on the shelf I suppose.

I'm pretty sure he'll reveal his own plan as a conservative counterproposal to Rubio/McCain/Lindsay

 

[loveableteddybear]

I'm pretty sure he'll reveal his own plan as a conservative counterproposal to Rubio/McCain/Lindsay

I like Rand, but after the election the plan he was "floating" essentially was the Rubio plan. Now, his plan will likely be the same thing with stiff fines, which will be considered "to extreme."

 

[Rudeman]

Isn't this basically Ron Paul's position? But when Rand takes the same position he must be an opportunist or he's not for liberties? Did you guys also say this about Ron?

 

[green73]

 

[Confederate]

Isn't this basically Ron Paul's position? But when Rand takes the same position he must be an opportunist or he's not for liberties? Did you guys also say this about Ron?

+rep

 

[Brett85]

Isn't this basically Ron Paul's position? But when Rand takes the same position he must be an opportunist or he's not for liberties? Did you guys also say this about Ron?

Yeah, Ron wasn't for open borders and was opposed to amnesty for illegals. On the amnesty issue he was a lot more hardcore and more conservative than Rand is.