Posted on 05/09/2009 12:47:21 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
Yesterday I happened upon a post by a fellow FReeper. In retrospect, I am sorry for responding rudely to their post - and I hope they happen upon this apology.
The post was presenting their heartfelt opinion that American industry and our system itself must be allowed to come apart so that something better can replace it.
It was a Rand-ian position. The system is becoming oppressive, therefore we must weaken it.
No, I don’t see “inability to form a cogent response” as much of an insult, but only because you didn’t.
And you would prove that it wasn't.
This is where your faulty memory will come back to bite you, my intellectually-challenged friend. We discussed this yesterday.
That one went over your head, I see. I’ll keep it more simple.
Coming from you, that's funny!
What did you and the voices in your head say?
"Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive."
Thank you for your answer. You position is that you have no position because it can be used to make you think and question your own little comfortable existence. So you choose no position except to attack others as being wrong.
Thank you for your contributions to this thread!
PS: I’m not really an insulting little cuss; arrogant and abrasive perhaps, but not insulting...
Oh well, I see you refuse to even answer. That is the position, after all, that allows you to claim “I was right!” because you never took a position. Such a firm foundation, such conviction of principles you exhibit!
For what it’s worth, President Reagan’s own words supported open and free trade. However, President Reagan also was a realist and understood that compromise was required. I have very little doubt that most of his use of tariffs were simply compromises for political expediency, rather than a fundamental indication of his core beliefs. His increasing the number of products with tariffs but reduction in total tariffs assessed, for example.
Enjoy your always-shifting position and revel in the fact that you have managed to equivocate your beliefs for days and malign all who do not agree with whatever they may or may not be (for they have never been provided).
Absolutely. And if I was rude, I apologize. But as my tag goes:
Indignation over the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible.
Perhaps, my lady, you felt a bit of a sting yourself?
That is what you got from this?
My "position" is that those are pretty simplistic definitions given what we see characterized today as "free trade." I largely believe in the theory of free trade for non-essential items or non-critical industries (which would exclude basic food items, items/material required for national defense, etc.). But I don't believe that what we see today in FTAs represents "free trade" in the slightest.Please "state what your position is on free trade as defined by the free dictionary" so I can understand the type of response you might find adequate.
I wonder if you might be answering a question I didn't ask? And not answering the one I did ask?
Yes, I did.
I see someone who says they are opposed to tariffs except when it is important to have tariffs. So we shouldn’t have them unless we need them and when we need them is kind of hard to explain. So managed trade is what should be.
Did I get that right?
What would be an example of a non-critical industry?
Please "state what your position is on free trade as defined by the free dictionary" so I can understand the type of response you might find adequate.
OK, I’ll choose the latter: international trade that is free of such government interference as protective tariffs and import quotas.
Stupidity taken to the professional level. Don't forget imagining a strawman, and beating that strawman into submission.
Please consider this: if you cannot make them see eye-to-eye with you regarding the definition of a term (and they are unwilling to provide their own), then we’re all just here shooting the breeze . . . .
Reagan was a protectionist? Reagan wanted bigger government? His tap dancing has clouded his original point, if he even had one.
I didn't ask you to choose one of two free dictionary definitions. I asked you the same question you asked of me.
What is your position on free trade?
"please state what your position is on free trade as defined by the free dictionary"Can you answer that, please.
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.