Is globalism and "free trade" what's destroying the GOP? (America-first vanity)

[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.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you agree or disagree that Reagan was a protectionist?

[1rudeboy]

You will NOT ask questions!

[1rudeboy]

I ASK THE QUESTION!!!
THEN I TELL YOU HOW YOU ANSWERED!!!

[Mojave]

Do you agree or disagree that Reagan was a protectionist?

I don't use the label. But you do.

[Mojave]

I’m the one arguing on this thread that Reagan was a free-trader.

And you also accused him of being a "protectionist." Tangled web and all that...

[calcowgirl]

All trade is managed, in one form or another, and to one degree or another . . . the greater the degree, the more socialistic the management.

Well, if we go back to some dictionary defintions, I think you're wrong. (Socialism: "general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods. ") Applying a tariff to a foreign import equates to collective or government ownership of the MEANS of production/distribution? I think not.

It sounds to me like folks are throwing around terms that do not apply -- anything to sell the liberalizing of trade as the conservative method.

I'm sorry, but I really feel like I'm explaining the obvious . . .

I appreciate your answers. Even if I disagree with many of them.

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL! Brave Sir Robin.

[calcowgirl]

Oh.... just great. Post 666, LOL.

[Mojave]

You and your comrades have been using "protectionist" as a pejorative term to smear Ronald Reagan. Don't expect me to follow suit.

[Toddsterpatriot]

You and your comrades have been using "protectionist" as a pejorative term to smear Ronald Reagan.

I've done no such thing.

So you're saying Reagan was not a protectionist?

[Mojave]

By their “reasoning”, our Constitution is a socialist document and our Framers were socialists by virtue of the Commerce Clause. That same “reasoning” gives rise to their repeated attacks a great Constitutionalist like Ronald Reagan.

[Mojave]

So you're saying Reagan was not a protectionist?

Again:

Where Ronald Reagan saw trade regulations, restrictions or tariffs that didn't serve the best interests of the American people, he would work to remove or amend them. Where Reagan saw that regulations, restrictions or tariffs that served our national interests, he would retain or create them.

Did ya miss that one?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Got it, Reagan was not a protectionist and not a free trader.

[Mojave]

Got it, Reagan was not a protectionist and not a free trader.

He wasn't a knee jerk reactionary or simpleton. Sets him apart from fellas like you.

[Toddsterpatriot]

There you go, projecting again.

[Mojave]

There you go, lying again.

BTW, what were the average tariffs when Reagan entered office and when he left office?

If you don’t know the answer, just say so.

[crickets]

[hedgetrimmer]

Free trade is certainly not a national policy: it is instead an internationalist one which puts the interests of multinational companies over the interests of the [British] taxpayer and voter.

The effect of "free trade" is the same in every former first world country.

The two vehement "free traders" on this site are rooting for the demise of the American culture. Protection of the American culture and way of life is an anathema to them.

[calcowgirl]

TP... do you know a website that has historical tariff statistics — a database or listing?

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't know the answer.

Why don't you answer another question I didn't ask? LOL!

[Mojave]

Chinese slave labor.