Main Entry: free trade
Function: noun
Date: 1823
: trade based on the unrestricted international exchange of goods with tariffs used only as a source of revenue
I'm talking about free trade. You?
I was talking about the fundamental right of human beings to conduct their own affairs and make their own arrangements. It is no ones legitimate business what I buy from whom and at what price.
I'm glad you see the WOD as anti liberty. Still, the Constitution usurps your emanating, penumbral right to purchase imported goods sans tariff. Sorry.
Freedeom From Tariffs? The Constitution says otherwise.
You debating yourself? I never made any assertion remotely like that.
But that's what I'm advocating as a means of maintaining, higher standards of living. Not as an entitlement, but as a self protective function of our government. Tariffs. So, to clarify, we don't have a right to a high standard of living, but we do have a right to demand that our government put in place Constitutionally enumerated tariffs in our own interest, or else suffer the wrath in '04.
Freedom to take money from me and my business and hand it over to my competitor? That's not in the Constitution.
Huh? Bizarre comment. Unrelated to anything I have said.
Not as bizarre as you saying: "I was talking about the fundamental right of human beings to conduct their own affairs and make their own arrangements. It is no ones legitimate business what I buy from whom and at what price." Which, if it includes imported goods, is not a right you have under our Constitutional Republic. And in light of the IRS, BATF and DEA, it's not a right you have at all.
What fundamental freedom did you lose by Reagans bike tariff?
The one I just mentioned.
You don't have that emanating penumbral Constitutional right to buy Jap bikes sold on the cheap.
I'm glad you see the WOD as anti liberty. Still, the Constitution usurps your emanating, penumbral right to purchase imported goods sans tariff. Sorry.
You have a warped view of rights and where they originate from. See the Declaration of Independance for a brief explanation. (hint; they don't come from the constitution) And I never ever said that tariffs were unconstitutional, even though you continue to imply that I did. The constitution BTW, can't remove my rights anymore than it could remove the rights of negros and other slaves. Governments my usurp rights, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist, only that they are being violated.
But that's what I'm advocating as a means of maintaining, higher standards of living.
And I'm advocating freedom. We disagree. You have no legitimate power to have armed men violate my rights so you may prosper.
Which, if it includes imported goods, is not a right you have under our Constitutional Republic. And in light of the IRS, BATF and DEA, it's not a right you have at all.
As already explained, I don't derive my rights from the constitution. And I might add, I love it when so called conservatives maintain that government police agencies can legitimately give and take my rights. It's freakin sad that you folks think so. Just like liberals and other authoritarian thugs.
You don't have that emanating penumbral Constitutional right to buy Jap bikes sold on the cheap.
I have a God given right to buy anything I like from anyone I like at whatever price we agree upon. The fact that governments use weapons and have the might to usurp that right is irrelevant. They do it to pander to people who want to profit from such force so they can retain power. The power you say you can morally grant them in elections as you pointed out. It's all about power and violating my rights so you can overcharge people for goods and services.
Tariffs are fine by me as taxes, low and flat and uniform. Not as a means for government to pick winners and losers in order to give favors to people. Your idea on that is precisely the same as welfare recipients giving power to politicions in return for stealing from some and giving to them.