Posted on 08/30/2015 6:00:11 AM PDT by GeronL
Here's a historical fact that Donald Trump, and many voters attracted to him, may not know: The last American president who was a trade protectionist was Republican Herbert Hoover.
Obviously that economic strategy didn't turn out so well — either for the nation or the GOP.
Does Trump aspire to be a 21st century Hoover with a modernized platform of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff that helped send the U.S. and world economy into a decade-long depression and a collapse of the banking system?
We can't help wondering whether the panic in world financial markets is in part a result of the Trump assault on free trade.
Trump is also now running full throttle on an anti-immigration platform that could hurt growth as well and alienate Republicans from ethnic voters that the GOP needs if it is going to win in 2016.
We call this the Trump Fortress America platform. He clearly sees international trade and immigration as a negative sum game for American workers.
He recently announced that as president he would prohibit American companies like Ford from building plants in Mexico. He moans pessimistically that "China is eating our lunch" and is "sucking the blood out of the U.S.?"
But strategic tax cuts and regulatory relief after the anti-business rule-making assault by Obama, not trade and immigration barriers, are the solution to America's competitiveness deficit.
A draft of Trump's 14-point economic manifesto promises that, as president, he would "modify or cancel any business, or trade agreement that hinders American business development, or is shown to create an unfair trading relationship with a foreign entity."
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/LarryKudlow/Donald-Trump-21st-Century-Protectionist-Herbert-Hoover/2015/08/28/id/672495/#ixzz3kIqVddzd Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
‘Trump is also now running full throttle on an anti-immigration platform that could hurt growth as well and alienate Republicans from ethnic voters that the GOP needs if it is going to win in 2016.’
Since curtailing the foreign invasion would have such a negative impact on the economy and the GOPe, here’s an alternative plan. Let’s all go down to the border and give out teddy bears and soccer balls.
It’s a ‘terrific’ idea, don’t you think?
Trump parallels in one point I like:
“In 1929 he authorized the Mexican Repatriation program to help unemployed Mexican citizens return home. The program was largely a forced migration of approximately 500,000 people to Mexico, and continued until 1937.”
Incidentally, Trump is now leading all other candidates among Republican Hispanics. But don’t tell Kudlow. Might fry his brain.
Kudlow: globalist blood sucker.
I can see that the age of posters here is getting younger and younger. It’s to be expected I suppose. I watched “That Seventies Show” too, but usually don’t reference it’s slang in my posts.
I’ll agree that Reaganomics worked well; then. At this point, there are dynamics such as the huge Welfare State, the aging population and the illegal immigrant population that would complicate the model.
Unless.......Oh yes..!the Liberal idea of giving all the illegals citizenship and adding them to the tax rolls! I think I see what you mean!
The Smoot-Hawley scare tactic again. I think it's generally agreed by knowledgeable folks now that the Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression by following policies that reduced the money supply by 30% within two or three years of the stock market crash of 1929.
The great depression and its offspring, the New Deal, could both have been avoided if the Federal Reserve had performed the task assigned to it. All the Federal Reserve had to do to avoid the Depression and the subversion of the American constitutional order was to purchase $1 billion in government securities during the 10-month period from December 1929 to October 1930. The result would have been an increase, instead of decrease, in high-powered money, and the banking crisis that began in the autumn of 1930 would not have occurred.
The Fed's "Depression" and the Birth of the New Deal
Anyone who buys into Kudlow's drivel, and the many others show still parrot the Smoot-Hawley scare tactic about the Great Depression, can find numerous articles that debunk that old nonsense.
“If we do not stop the illegal alien inundation we will lose our country.”
This is really the only relevant issue we face. It’s close to being over right now, so IF there is still a chance (at least without bloodshed), this is our last one.
Sure, other issues are important, even critical, but if we totally lose our country, none of it matters.
And Trump is one of the few, of not the only one, who has both the will and the ability to get it done and not just give lip service until election day.
“If we do not stop the illegal alien inundation we will lose our country.”
This is really the only relevant issue we face. It’s close to being over right now, so IF there is still a chance (at least without bloodshed), this is our last one.
Sure, other issues are important, even critical, but if we totally lose our country, none of it matters.
And Trump is one of the few, of not the only one, who has both the will and the ability to get it done and not just give lip service until election day.
So, Kudjaw thinks exporting jobs to Mexico is a “win win”.....genius. /s
“As the leader of the West ...”
Thanks for posting that. I like a lot of what I hear from Trump but he needs a strong dose of Milton Friedman when it comes to economics and trade.
I always thought I was a conservative but apparently not...Apparently the conservative position is to destroy the middle class, make the rich people even richer and eliminate all gov't funded healthcare and benefits while they watch the slugs die in the streets...
Stop Social Security in its tracks...Require people to work til they die...Support all unfair trade as long as the people in the unfair trade business get to make as much money as they possibly can, at any cost...
Guess I'm not a conservative...And don't want to be...
We can not manufacture a singe defensive weapon system entirely in house, makes me feel good all over. </s>
I do if those "individual business decisions" have to do with individual countries.
That bothers you??? Well you are not a conservative then...
Well it’s a little worse than that. Kudlow thinks that staunching the flood of foreign invaders would both harm the economy and hurt the GOPe’s chances with Hispanics.
Don’t you just love being held hostage in your own country by the ‘feelings’ of the foreign invading horde? Musn’t try to limit the Reconquista; the invaders might not like it.
So, one can only surmise that Kudjaw thinks that exporting jobs to Mexico and allowing illegal imigration is a win win win.
For one thing it was a different economy back then...
...but today in the real world of the here and now, unchecked ‘perfect voter’ immigrants will destroy this country before any protectionist trade agreement...the author has to get real.
What I like about this billionaire is that he’s not impressed by payoff of sand negro petro dollars to influence legislation.
It doesn't make a damned bit of difference whether I support Kudlow's position on the chamber and illegals, or even what his position is. The crux of the matter is, if Kudlow says the sky is blue, is it blue, or is it pink? Think! That's what the brains are for!
Free trade works only when everyone is playing by the same rules.
Right now the United States pays Tariffs to everyone, but countries like China and Mexico do not. How is that good?
How do you think Reagan was able to get Japan and European car companies to build their plants here?
Reagan told them you can avoid tariffs if you build your car plants here. Thus, creating more American jobs.
So Reagan used Tariffs as a weapon like every other President of the United States since it’s founding.
Edmund uses the Obama, Hillary and Bush tactic of invoking the name Ronald Reagan was for free trade in order to sell you a lie.
If you are still not certain, then ask your self this question.
Was the United States a stronger nation from 1945 to 1996 (50 plus years after World War II) when we had tariffs or is it stronger today, on the right path post NAFTA, GATT, etc.... Which United States is stronger? The one WITH tariffs or the one where the United States STILL PAYS tariffs while China and Mexico free loads off of us?
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.