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.
Or Jean Monnet, perhaps?
Smoot Hawley did not cause the Great Depression, the federak reserve did, so why even mention it? Oh, I forgot, Alinsky is why you mention it.
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards a super state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” —Adrian Hilton’s characterization of Jean Monnet’s plan
It's just one the many ways his ilk smears Ronald Reagan.
Here is a summary from the John Kerry archives -- his daddy was a buddy of Jean Monnet: John Kerry’s Red Roots: Richard Kerry’s Left-Wing Legacy
Jean MonnetBusinessman representing French interests in US; financial advisor to Allies on war mobilization, 1940-1945; promoted European unification after 1945 through means such as the European Coal and Steel Community, European Defense Community, and Bilderberg Group
Worked with Frankfurter, McCloy, and Acheson during World War II; joined Acheson and George Ball in promoting “Atlantic Partnership” model of US-European relations after war
Met Richard Kerry and influenced his foreign policy views on NATO and European unification
Yes.
Before Naafta we had an auto industry, Now we don’t. Nuf said.
You notice how protectionists won't acknowledge that NAFTA was Reagan's idea, or that he kick-started the talks that led to the creation of the WTO?
Well, that's what set Mojave off, certainly. And he thinks neither are true becuase Reagan set tariffs on motorcycles and import quotas on Japanese autos. I wish I could aspire to such a low rhetorical standard.
It's like someone trying to argue Hank Aaron didn't hit all those home runs because he struck out.
Again, someone pointed out to yesterday (or was it the day before?), we are not "smearing" Reagan. We are lauding him.
You claimed that Ronald Reagan was a "protectionist" and that "protectionists" are "hypocrites." Now you're trying to hide from your smear.
That makes YOU the hypocrite. And a cowardly one to boot.
If protectionism was the guiding principle of his Administration, what are we to make of the free trade agreement that he signed with Canada? What are we to make of his stated intention to negotiate the same agreement with Mexico? Was there a rogue element in his Administration (including his own Vice President) working to undermine him? Was Reagan "asleep at the switch" when the Uruguay Round of negotiations began?
If we apply the loose standard argued here, what of his stated beliefs regarding tax cuts? Are we to argue that he was merely paying lip service to the idea because he raised taxes on Japanese motorcycles? Just how many of Reagan's statements regarding economic liberty and getting the government out of our lives are we to discard as merely being "inconvienient?"
Nope.
I didn't ask what percentage of imported goods were protected by special tariffs, quotas, or other types of restraints.
Try again?
Socialist. Yes. What is socialism except Government control of society? It’s not strong socialist, but a weaker form, yes.
In the case of tariffs, yes. Apparently you place Ronald Reagan as infallible and all-perfect; I acknowledge he was mortal and sometimes made errors. He was a strong proponent of free trade (as his speeches bear witness); sometimes however, he needed to compromise. Oh, you do realize that Reagan was also a strong proponent of compromise, too. Something which you do not seem to achieve.
Ronald Reagan developed intelligent and informed solutions to trade issues that served the best interests of the American people and were politically feasible.
Fixed that for you...
He wasn't a dogmatic simpleton like you. That's why you hate him. And that's why you couldn't help outing yourself. Your kind always does.
Wow, weren't you the one complaining that others were putting words in your mouth? Now you ascribe feelings and motive to me without reason. And apparently I'm some member of a different 'kind' as well.
You get along fine with that hatred and self-loathing? Better get checked for ulcers!
I don't know any free trade proponents who espouse such a position. On the contrary, I'm sure they would be the first to remind you that the current economic fiasco is a direct result of Government interference in the economy.
And with the apparent bailout of Chrysler and GM, that will only get worse, further compounding the damage already done by the Government in the name of "protecting our industries".
In a free market, bad companies die, regardless of their size. They are inevitably replaced by new, more efficient, better responding companies. It's a business cycle that works when it's allowed to work.
Government keeping companies that should die from dying, or artificially stimulating markets (such as the sub-prime mess) skews the operation of the market, and causes things to build to much higher levels before they explode.
I'd say free market proponents would be the first to say we're in a deep hole. And they'd also be the first to point out the hole went from a pot hole to a sink hole because Government tried to "fix the problem" itself.
As Reagan said,
What were they?
[crickets]
What were they what?
Acknowledge? What a euphemistic RINO.
Your accusations against him were without merit. The errors are yours.
Oh,yeah, Here's the answer:
“Of the $387 billion in goods the U.S. imported in 1986, more than 20% was protected by special tariffs, quotas, or other types of restraints, according to Gary C. Hufbauer, a Georgetown University professor. When Reagan took office, the figure was 12%.”I guess you just deliberately forgot. You certainly have never been able to work up any kind of response.
Also, what were the average tariffs when Reagan entered office and when he left office? You've repeatedly tried to insinuate that those numbers support you, but you won't produce them. Maybe because you're blowing smoke.
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.