Posted on 03/21/2016 3:10:17 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Howdy-Doody trade policy invites corruption.
If we don’t negotiate tooth-and-nail to cut other countries’ tariffs and to keep US manufacturing from moving overseas, we flag in foreign lobbyists to bring in walking around money to bribe our elected officials.
Such as ...
The Clintons
Hillary’s emails reveal that they’ve been cutting the same kind of sleezy deals [even with terrorists] that were documented by the book, “Year of the Rat” [Chinagate] during Bill Clinton’s administration.
“If Americans buy goods made in other countries because they are cheaper or made better ... how does that foster growth in our country?”
If Americans buy goods from other countries that must mean that Americans have the money to buy those goods. Where did they get that money?
And if Americans buy more foreign goods each year where do they get that additional money?
I wonder how many JOBS these to have created to improve the US economy?
“Open your eyes.”
Sorry, just don’t see it.
Cruz is a conservative. Bush is not. Trump is not.
I like Trump but I’m not going to lie to myself about
him or Cruz. I’ll will support and vote for either or
both and I’m not about to change my mind over someones
silly opinion.
And what about the others. They are not ignorant? Wake-up.
Yes, Trump is ignorant of economics.
That’s how he becamme a BILLIONAIRE!!!
National Review declines rapidly from uselessness to silliness.
Why do you think that just because someone has money they know anything about economics?
There’s a lot of wealthy sports figures, actor and actressess, media people, etc. that know nothing about economics and I certainly wouldn’t want any of them running the country.
George Soros has a lot of money but I sure wouldn’t trust him with our economy.
Pardon me, but Trump accumulating $10 BILLION sort of negates anything you folks at The National reSpew have to say about understanding economics.
Yet another post from the “National Disgrace Magazine”.
WHO CARES what these traitors to the Republican party have to say?
The PEOPLE are deciding (with their VOTES), who they want THEIR nominee to be. Who the hell do these stuffed shirts and blouses think they are? They are trying to use their ever diminishing power to select for “US”, our candidate.
They are as much our enemy as the leftists. Let’s put these rags out of business. Vote with your checkbook and debit card and don’t buy these traitorous magazines.
I'm guessing the author is going to put some pablum about the budget and taxes....
There’s a lot of wealthy sports figures, actor and actressess, media people, etc. that know nothing about economics and I certainly wouldn’t want any of them running the country.You mean like the economic experts that wrote this piece you seem to agree with?
Who said anything about overpaid people working for wages?
Another of your many threads not going the way you hoped for.
“If Trump gets the nomination, I will post in favor of GOP congressional and gubernatorial candidates I support.”
SO; what you are saying is that you are satisfied with the status quo.
The gop HAS control of gov’ships and congress as we speak....
THEREis NOTHING wrong with being a NATIONALIST
What do you call ‘food stamps’ now?
19trillion pieces of paper are in circulation.
The ‘additional money’ comes from the printing press
Sports figures and Hollywood types make money with their faces; George Soros is an unashamed Leftist.
People who spend their days in the business world have a better grasp of the nuts and bolts of economics than Harvard Ph.D. eggheads.
I stand by my post.
I notice that these two worthies from National Review fail to mention a contemporary of Adam Smith named Alexander Hamilton.
Of course, why would they, since Treasury Secretary Hamilton proposed a tariff that protected American manufacturing and it was passed by the First Congress and signed into law by President Washington.
Jon Hartley and Glenn Hubbard would have been informing that First Congress and Alexander Hamilton that they were hopelessly ignorant of economics, and that America should just remain in its role as a raw materials source for Britain, since that is what it would be without that tariff they had just passed.
It’s a pity that Hartley and Hubbard weren’t around to set them straight. Imagine what a powerhouse America could have grown into if the founding Congress wasn’t so economically ignorant.
Hamilton’s tariff, combined with the brilliant “sinking fund,” allowed Thomas Jefferson to pay off almost all of the national debt by the end of his second term, or just 18 years from inception without any taxes on the American public.
In fact, Hamilton’s revenue plans were so good that the US never implemented the infamous “3/5s” compromise when it came to the part of the compromise that taxed states-—because the tax wasn’t needed. Now, admittedly, the government used land sales as well-—something we should be doing today.
“So, I guess getting us in $19 trillion dollars of debt, having a $500 billion trade deficit, and fractional growth is “smart economics”?”
Now what are you going to believe, your lyin’ eyes or the words of our intellectual betters over at National Review?
That means the Chinese are giving us their goods in exchange for pieces of paper. Sounds like a good deal to me!
It’s simply a great mystery how the United States ever grew at all during its first 150 years when it constantly employed tariffs, most of them explicitly protectionist.
I guess we must have been in the Twilight Zone.
Perhaps some of the economic wizards at National Review can explain it to us.
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.