Posted on 03/16/2009 3:54:30 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Your liberty was subject to Federal government regulation of trade between nations, as mentioned before. Just as you cannot unilaterally declare war on a nation, neither can you unilaterally make foreign trade policy.
National security limitations are always necessary. The history of the world and our nation tells us that we will be at war whether we invite it or not on many occasions to come. The paramount duty of our federal government is to provide for the common defense.
After defense considerations, then it is an open question as to what products we protect or not, what constitutes the best and least restrictive or most sensible policy with a given nation. It is a delicate balance. But it is one that is the purview of we the people, as represented by our elected officials. It should never be the purview of anyone else.
To me the American public is being groomed for socialism in the same way a pedophile grooms his victim.
They really don’t know any better. They are bombarded by a school system and media that are ignorantly Leftist.
The truth is the Left hates people and always has. If you judge them by their works they are the mass murderers of history.
I not opposed to free trade. I was honestly surprised that Mexican trucks will have to pass US inspections.
We lost the carrot and stick approach to China trade long ago. Now the commie bastards have grabbed the steering wheel. That is why we needed to elect Hunter. He would have shot the bastard in the head and taken back the wheel.
LOL Sure wish he would take the GOP chair away from Steele.
Fine and mostly agreed.
Shouldn’t the defense issue be narrowly defined though?
What we’ve had is an enormous expansion of government by broadly defining the Commerce Clause, no? It has interrupted state’s rights and in the end the rights of the people.
If the defense issue is broad and interpreted by those ignorant of the benefits of freest trade, then you get sugar tariffs or subsidies to ADM for “national security” reasons.
You could even imagine an America in which our politicians made it impossible to industrialize or for the population to move to cities because our agricultural base was a “national security” issue, no?
In the end they were wrong, although many argued that you cannot have a nation without a massive agricultural population. Today we have the lowest farm population ever and grow the most ever.
I am glad we had the conversation then. I was not certain as to how much compliance they had to meet.
I am delighted with the outcome of our “talk” and hope you are too.
Have a great evening.
Best regards...
Seems pretty simple, doesn't it? I've wasted my breath here for years trying to explain the current account, the capital account and the balance of payments. The protectionists run and hide when you show them that our manufacturing, employment and GDP historically increase the most when the so called trade deficit is expanding the fastest. We experience "trade surpluses" when we're in recessions.
But really, the bottom line rests with the morality of free trade. Free people should be allowed to trade freely with whom they choose as long as no laws are broken. If they didn't both benefit they wouldn't execute the trade. If you don't believe in an individual's right to trade then you must believe that government bureaucrats are better equipped to determine what's in the individual's best interest; and that when it comes to trade, all of a sudden the fedgov becomes responsible, capable and reliable. Protectionists believe bigger government is the answer. Just like Reagan, right?
If schools would simply require everyone take and pass basic economics we wouldn't have to keep 'splaining it to them. But I'll keep trying.
WORD!
If folks truly wanted "free trade" they would be calling for abolishment of free trade agreements and the WTO.
FMCSA Regulations (concerning Mexican trucks).Essentially, the Mexican long-haul trucks have to pass the same safety tests as U.S. trucks, have to have a U.S.-approved insurance carrier, a USDOT registration number, etc.
But keep in mind the short-haul trucks (the ones that enter, and have been entering all along, the 20-mile buffer zone). My understanding is that the regulations for them are relaxed.
Very interesting and on the money and written in a cute way.
It’s quite wordy, so I skimmed some of it.
I know several people that live or have condos in Mexico, and they aren’t aware that they can own land there, because they know that the laws prohibit it.
Heck, one of them has a good Mexican friend who runs a restaurant and she wanted to work there just to pass the time when her husband was in the states.
She could not work for her friend, it’s Mexico.
You say the opposite, I don’t know why.
That's already the situation that exists with the economic powerhouses of Yemen and Belarus, to name two.
the Defense issue should not necessarily be narrowly defined, but it should be clearly defined.
Yes, the commerce clause has been abused terribly, particularly with regards to supposed interstate commerce. I would hazard a guess that 75% of what the feds do regarding interstate commerce is utter BS.
But they are answerable to us. We can sweep the worthless bastards out of office, and I recommend we do so. IOTW, I’m not in favor of creating a unelected international or even interstate supervisory entity that has authority over interstate commerce. I am, however, in favor of electing those who would kill off the executive branch’s Dept of Commerce, and who would devolve the labyrinth of nonsensical restrictions.
You’re right. I always go to the morality issue of free trade/individual liberty.
When you abstract people just don’t get it. Our public school system, copied by private schools, really fails to teach basic logic and solid foundational math. In the end you have to have an argument that pushes aside the emotionalism and makes the experience real for individuals.
I think people are teachable. You have to find that common ground and clarify it to move forward. There is just too much disinformation out there and the interests that benefit have no reason to change it and all the money to expound on it, no?
I don’t think it is wasted breath. These people are solid citizens. They just don’t get economics, but they do get treachery on the part of government and they have the proper distrust of our enemies both within and without.
I think it is worse splitting the hairs with them just to nudge them closer to the reality of the benefits that accrue from free trade, even lopsided free trade in which America just imports.
No, in my little world that would mean more oil is available for everyone but us. Maybe we could buy it from someone else or drill for it ourselves but what does that have to do with denying American individuals and companies the opportunity to sell their goods and services to Mexico?
Or do you like the Algore/Obama/Pelosi production policies.
There you go letting your emotions get the better of you again. What is it about basic freedoms that makes you clench so tightly?
And you can gloss over the “problems” Mexico has
Maybe you could remind where I "glossed" over those problems and then explain how those problems go away if we deny American companies and individuals the right to export to Mexico. You seem to believe that sending Americans to the unemployment office would correct these problems. How would that work exactly?
...but I was specifically referring to the current problems that illegal aliens are causing us today.
Then we're talking about two separate issues. You want a discussion about illegal immigration and this is a thread about trucking and trade. How does stopping American companies from exporting to Mexico end illegal immigration?
So you are saying that a Mexican truck could speed? Straddle both lanes? Drive against traffic?
Which US safety standards could they ignore?
Cute answer.
They could possibly do most of those as they are not required to learn the laws of the states they would be driving through.
But the answer you are avoiding "knowing" is the safety of the trucks themselves mainly.
Their trucks are quite unsafe as a rule, and they want written into the rules that they are immune from having to maintain them up to the quality of American trucks.
Also they would have a difficult time learning to drive on the right side of the road.
It lead, in part, to our Civil War.
As for the clear national security interest how do you argue with ADM that food is not a national security issue? I mean just about anything can be a “national security” issue, no?
Can't you just see Rangle and Frank saying that housing or welfare or national health insurance are “national security” issues. You know it has been abused before, just to cover up embarrassments.
Alexis de Tocqueville said a long time ago, when he was studying what made American great, that American would not be brought to her knees by force. Instead, he believed we would be seduced into our demise. He was a wise man and a visionary.
You must have missed this post:
Let’s speak from facts not emotion or hyperbole:
“While seizing commercial opportunities is important, doing it safely is vital. That is why I traveled to Monterrey, Mexico, yesterday to announce that U.S. inspectors will conduct in-person safety audits to make sure that participating Mexican companies meet every United States safety regulation on the books.
The inspection program is tough, and it is meant to ensure safe operation of trucks crossing our border. Drivers must have a valid commercial driver’s license, carry proof that they are medically fit, and comply with United States hours-of-service rules. And they must be able to understand and respond in English to questions and directions from inspectors.
The trucks must be insured by a U.S.-licensed firm. And from hood to tail-lamps, they must meet United States safety standards, including brakes, turn signals, and cargo-securing equipment.
Companies that satisfy these safety standards and are accepted into the demonstration program will be allowed to operate beyond the border areas to make international deliveries and pick-ups only. Mexican trucks will not be able to pick up goods in one U.S. city for delivery to another. And no trucks hauling hazardous materials or buses carrying passengers will be involved.”
Check it out for yourself:
Cross Border Truck Safety Inspection Program
Those are the facts about the program. You've been misled. Why?
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.