Choose Your Heresy

Bumped.

A couple of years ago, I read a piece by Ramesh Ponuru, or Reihan Salam, I think. Or both. Yuval Levin may have been in the mix.

Don't quote me on that. Google fails me.

The thrust of the piece was that the GOP was not offering anything to the working class any longer. This was due, partly, to previous GOP tax-cutting successes; the working class had been largely excluded from having to pay federal income tax.

They do pay FICA/payroll taxes, of course -- but those go toward one's own Social Security, theoretically at least, and not to the current operational costs of government. Again -- theoretically. I understand the reality is a bit more complicated.

Point is, what do you offer this group, which has been long suffering and not just during the Great Recession, but maybe since the mid-eighties? You can't offer them income tax cuts; you've cut their income taxes down to very low levels, or to nothing at all.

What you can do is double down on cultural issues, but cultural issues aren't as powerful an attractor as they once were -- and furthermore, many cultural items sought by the working class (like resistance to gay marriage) are actually opposed by the upper-income, college-educated cohort of the GOP, making such gambits of dubious effectiveness.

What you could do, the "reformicons" proposed, is to begin subisidizing the working poor with federal tax credits that would boost their incomes. Or, this:

Let employers pay some workers less than the minimum wage as an inducement to hire them and use the federal tax code to bump up salaries.
...

Mr. Rubio credited reformicons in his new book, "American Dreams," for helping shape his redo of the earned-income tax credit, a payment to the working poor, so it would give more to single workers, not just those with children. "Marginal tax rates do matter," Mr. Rubio said in an interview. “But doing them alone won’t be enough to reinvigorate the economy."

So, some variation of just directly paying people some money out of government funds.

I'm not necessarily against this -- and not necessarily against it just because Marco Rubio has pushed some reformicon ideas -- but I do have to point out it constitutes a heresy, to some extent, a rejection of conservative principle that we should not just pay people off as an inducement to get their votes, that we should not intrude into the free market with government interventions.

Maybe we have to do this, because you don't want the entirety of the working class to vote Democratic. That would simply be the end of the GOP as any kind of equal to the Democrat Party.

So maybe simple electoral reality demands a heresy to be committed -- we have to yield on this one principle, in order to save the others.

Now, as I'm agreeing that this is possibly something we must do, if reluctantly, let me propose a different heresy which could attract working class voters to the GOP, and would not require government payoffs to them.

I'm talking about, as Mickey Kaus has been talking about, as even David Frum has been talking about, restricting immigration so that the labor markets tighten and employers just wind up paying the working class more because there is no longer the downward pressure on wages caused by forever importing more low-skill workers to compete with them in the (shrinking) jobs pool.

My party line, in clip and save form, was:
1) The immigrants we get, including illegal Mexicans, are mainly hard-working potential citizens, like waves of immigrants before them;
2) The problem, as Mark Krikorian argues, is that we've changed, and the world has changed. We don't need unskilled labor like we used to. Our native unskilled workers are having trouble earning a living.
3) The main reason to limit immigration flow, then, is to protect wages of Americans who do basic work. We desperately need a tight labor market. We won't get it as long as millions of people from abroad respond to any tightening by flooding our work force.
4) The most important thing, then, is getting control of that number by securing the border -- stopping illegal immigration. Once that's done we can argue about what the legal number should be (and what should be done about current illegals).

Kaus has other caveats in there; for example, if wages are climbing, he supports opening up immigration rates. I don't want to claim he's simply against immigration.

Another possibility, possibly in tandem with that last one, is engaging in a low level of protectionism, maybe just putting a small but meaningful tax on foreign-made goods, to encourage in-country manufacturing.

Now, I realize, for many, both, or either, of those ideas constitute a heresy.

However, as the Reformicon agenda demonstrates, the GOP is now open to heretical ideas, given the grim reality of the electoral situation -- a working class that the GOP can offer less and less to, the declining power of cultural political initiatives.

If we are willing to consider one heresy, why not the other?

And, let me ask this: Which heresy is actually more heretical? One has to be pretty committed to the free immigration/free trade absolutist positions to claim that direct government subsidization of workers is a lesser heresy than controlling the rate of immigration and maybe slapping an additional 8% tariff on imports.

Which heresy shall we choose-- this heresy over here, or this other heresy over there?

David Frum had a great piece the other day. He wrote:

Donald Trump's response to this dilemma is protectionism, immigration restriction, and a big helping of his own often-claimed superhuman toughness and competence. It's maybe not a very adequate answer, but it's an answer. What's Marco Rubio's answer? What’s Jeb Bush's? What’s Chris Christie's?

He also had a fantastic analogy, recalling an Aesop's fable to describe the Establishment's We Shall Have It All position.

But read that later. For now, just consider: With the working class, and in fact the middle class, taking a world-class beating for this decade, and frankly for several decades, what actual tangible, gee-that-might-actually-work proposals is the GOP offering people?

As Frum says, Trump's answer might not be a very good answer, but it is in fact an answer. What it shows, and I think this is very, very important, is that Trump, in his ill-considered way, "understands your pain."

Cruz made this same point, cleverly, in his famous lawyers-and-journalists crossing the Rio Grande ad.

And that's a big thing. When people express bafflement at how these dullards could possibly support Trump or Cruz, all I can say is: "Hey, he's the guy who's saying 'I'll do something to help you.'" Even if that something is, arguably, counterproductive or simply stupid, he seems to be the one talking about the problem.

Ted Cruz talked about that. So he won Iowa, and he's in second place nationally.

And people continue expressing bafflement that some might favor a candidate who is urging policies that might materially help them.

Who knows? Maybe middle class voters would be more willing to vote GOP if the GOP wasn't promising the business community that they'd bring more foreign replacements in on H1-B visas every five minutes.

Maybe working people would start to think the GOP "cares about people like me" if the GOP actually did care about them.

Now, Rubio has embraced parts of the Reformicon agenda. How much, I don't know. I didn't look into it all that much. But he's not talking about it much -- that much, I know. And he probably can't talk about it much, because many people would cry "heresy" if he were to talk about subsidizing worker's paychecks with government tax revenues.

Heck, I might be one of those crying heresy myself.

But I do think this is a critical part of Trump's apparently unfathomable-to-many appeal, and I think it's a do-or-die part of any conservative (or otherwise) challenge to liberalism: You have to give people some reason to vote for you.

I thought Romney and Ryan were good candidates -- I don't think I've liked a ticket as much as I liked those two, at the end -- but I did notice, when critics pointed out, after the loss, that Romney and Ryan seemed to be promising voters a very good deal indeed if they were entrepreneurs and business owners.

If they were not, they were offering relatively little, except a sort of vague rising-tide-lifts-all-boats thing.

Which has worked -- Reagan made that work, and when Reagan said it, it turned out to be true -- but it hasn't been working for a while.

Most people are not entrepreneurs and business owners. Most people work for wages.

So we are confronted with a difficult situation. We have proposals from two different groups for two different heresies we might choose to get ourselves out of this situation.

But I think we have to pick one. If we're going to simply start boosting people's paychecks with government funds, we need to say so, so at least we'll get their votes.

If we're going to commit this heresy, we damn sure better get the votes out of it.

Or, maybe we should consider the long-forbidden, mustn't-ever-talk about it Heresy X of slowing down immigration to help workers get bigger paychecks from their employees.

But we have to be realistic -- it's going to be one or the other, most likely, or else we'll just lose.

And so we should talk about these things, and stop pretending all this away.

Whether prices for labor go up, or tax dollars are used to subsidize laborer's paychecks, it seems like people are going to have to pay for this one way or the other.

What way would lead to the least government pick-pocketing and intervention, and the least bad political habits like thinking "If I don't like my paycheck I'll just vote myself a federally-subsidized pay raise?"

Leading question I know. Because I think the answer is obvious.*

* As an afterthought, I'll suggest people ponder a regime which features simultaneously more and more low-skilled worker immigration and a regime of supplementing too-low paychecks with taxpayer funding.

That will go well.

Incidentally, liberals love Reformicon ideas. There are lots of articles saying "reformicons show the triumph of liberalism" and urging the various proponents of reformicon thinking to just become Democrats.

I don't really take a position on that -- desperate times require desperate measures.

But let's just note that it's not just conservatives who see this as a heresy. Liberals see it as a conservative heresy, as well.

So those are our choices.

For some reason, others are deciding for us that we can betray basic conservative principles so long as we keep the immigration train going, and we, for some reason, are just going along with this.

Because it would be rude to object, I guess.

Posted by: Ace at 12:31 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Heresy, eh?

I'm not sure where I'm supposed to have signed up for low taxes or no tariffs as my core principles.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:06 PM (uURQL)

2 The point and problem remains: how can we trust Rubio on anything he embraces? How many Gangs of Eight does John Edwards Light get?

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at February 02, 2016 08:07 PM (f3dLV)

3 If'n you give people money (ahem, refundable tax credits, anyone?), they still won't vote GOP.

That solves that little conundrum.

Posted by: West at February 02, 2016 08:07 PM (3FG30)

4 How is limiting immigration a conservative heresy?

Posted by: Wink at February 02, 2016 08:10 PM (As0qa)

5 This! All my LIV friends and family would sign on for this and vote GOP forever. And, honestly, I am illing to pay more for a product if the price goes up because we stopped the stream of illegals.

Posted by: marinemom at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (s5nIM)

6 I'm not sure opposing unfettered immigration is at all heretical.

Posted by: Lauren at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (Covpc)

7 Cruz FTW

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (QPdNE)

8 I have no problem at all restricting immigration. The point of legal immigration is to be a benefit to society not for us to just be a destination for the world.

I'm a lot less excited about tariffs, just bad economic policy. But what I do agree with Trump about is we could use some better people negotiating on our behalf.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (/tuJf)

9 GW tried givng goodies.Medicare part B for instance.The people loved him for it.

Posted by: steevy at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (8HTq1)

10 My heresy: no representation without taxation.

If taxes paid are less than government benefits, you can't vote.

(I know it isn't a politically feasible heresy, but keep it in mind for when we have to pick up the pieces and start over.)

Posted by: ZBBMcFate at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (k7D+q)

11 El final esta cerca.

Posted by: wth - wearing a cardboard sign at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (HgMAr)

12 Excellent post.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (TZYqp)

13 >>>6 I'm not sure opposing unfettered immigration is at all heretical.

It's heretical among the establishments of both parties.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (dciA+)

14 Just get the damn government out of the way of business. If this is what it takes we are doomed doomed doomed anyway.

Posted by: freaked at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (BO/km)

15 I have a better idea. End all federal programs that 'take care' of people.

Get rid of the artificial demand placed on goods the working class uses and their incomes will cover more stuff. Fair, moral, and conservative all at once.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (ZbV+0)

16 I am pretty sure that this whole post is racist.

Posted by: Myiq2xu at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (5fSr7)

17 People don't listen to me

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (6Ll1u)

18 IMO the real issue is that the Government types won't give us what we really want and need...

Which is just less government.

They do not understand that THEY are the problem... not the solution.

BOTH parties just want to be in control of the ever expanding Governmental Power... they just want the Government to expand in different ways.

And they cannot admit that THEY are the problem...

They may pay a bit of lip service to that idea... but when the votes are cast... when the Kabuki theatre is done... the Government continues to grow, and Freedom continues to diminish.

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (f7rv6)

19 Wow! I have never even been in the top 100 comments before and here I was at 5!

Posted by: marinemom at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (s5nIM)

20 I have an incredibly heretical proposition.

Why don't we try enforcing the immigration laws we have on the books right now for, say, five years?

Note I said that laws. Not regulations. Not executive orders. Not interpretations.

Enforce the actual laws we actually have enacted over the last 30 years (dear God, 1986 was 30 years ago) and let's start there.

You see, the fact that this is heresy is why I don't believe anyone, yes, including Cruz, on this point.

If the laws won't be enforced now, why should I believe they'll be enforced when the new shiny gets enacted?

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (IrByp)

21 >>>I have no problem at all restricting immigration. The point of legal immigration is to be a benefit to society not for us to just be a destination for the world.

yes we seem to have a regime of "What's best for the foreign person seeking citizenship?" rather than "What's best for the current American population?"

It seems to be forbidden -- NATIONALIST, you know -- to suggest that American policy should favor Americans.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (dciA+)

22 4
How is limiting immigration a conservative heresy?

Posted by: Wink at February 02, 2016 08:10 PM (As0qa)

It's a "conservative" heresy. The conservative label is claimed by many groups with many differing agendas, and as I keep saying, we should let the Ryans and Boehners of the world keep it and the dishonor they've brought to it. Any corporation with such a negative brand image would have re-branded long ago.

It's far past time for us to be something else, and I'm just an independent, a rebel without a party, until we figure out what that thing is.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (HalrA)

23 Another possibility, possibly in tandem with that last one, is engaging in a low level of protectionism, maybe just putting a small but meaningful tax on foreign-made goods, to encourage in-country manufacturing.

Now, I realize, for many, both, or either, of those ideas constitute a heresy.

The idea of tariffs is not a heresy. There is nothing in intelligent conservative policy that demands all goods be allowed in tariff-free, from anywhere, no matter how they treat goods exported from here, no matter how they treat our citizens' ability to own property there ...

Free trade is only meant to be with countries that are on an equal footing with us and that extend to our citizens the same opportunities in their countries that we extend to theirs in ours.

The fact that so many have run amok with the notion of totally free trade with everyone over everything is sort of a mental disease, not any sound application of conservative ideas.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (zc3Db)

24 3
If'n you give people money (ahem, refundable tax credits, anyone?), they still won't vote GOP.

The GOP says they'll give you X. Well, they hate you, and we'll give you 3X. And a lollipop. Made of crack.

Posted by: The Dems at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (LAe3v)

25 Unless it's a suicide note I'm not interested in anything David Frum writes.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (MNgU2)

26 See a recent Megan McArdle column. There was recent paper, a big heavy weight economics study that concludes that "free trade" with China has hurt the American middle class. She almost admits she was wrong.

And then there was that article that found some seminal study on the effects of the Mariel boat lift on the low-skilled labor market was fudged. They used this study to tout that low-skilled immigration was an economic boom, and they do "the jobs Americans won't do". It was bullshit.

So, two big tenets of economic conservatism and libertarianism (CATO and WSJ style) look to be wrong.

So, it may be "heresy" to true believers, but it may be empirically true.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (dvuhZ)

27 David Frum had a great piece the other day....

He also had a fantastic analogy, recalling an Aesop's fable to describe the Establishment's We Shall Have It All position.

But read that later.
Posted by: Ace at 08:03 PM
-------
Fucking lol. "Hey David Frum wrote something that didn't resemble him pissing down his leg! Fuck him though, read it later."

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (ubByS)

28 If we are choosing a heresy I choose clamping down on immigration for a while.

Protectionism hurts the protectionist party.

I went to a really expensive school with lots of lines and curves on graphs to prove it. Also, it's true.

So no protectionism.

And yes, "free trade" is part of the conservative canon, or is supposed to be.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (1xUj/)

29 This all boils down to not doing negative to things to them rather than adding new things to incent them. If they simply got the regulatory boot off the necks of businesses and enforced immigration laws on the books, this would be enough to lift all the boats.

The GOP has shown no appetite to relax regulations or even slow the illegals. This is why they need to be a party no more, rather than discussing what they can give away as bribes for forgiveness for their utter and complete sellout.

Posted by: Tim in GA at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (ORsjy)

30 18 IMO the real issue is that the Government types won't give us what we really want and need...

Which is just less government.

They do not understand that THEY are the problem... not the solution.

BOTH parties just want to be in control of the ever expanding Governmental Power... they just want the Government to expand in different ways.

And they cannot admit that THEY are the problem...

They may pay a bit of lip service to that idea... but when the votes are cast... when the Kabuki theatre is done... the Government continues to grow, and Freedom continues to diminish.
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (f7rv6)

Shorter: conservatism has failed to actually conserve anything.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (TZYqp)

31
"It's heretical among the establishments of both parties"

Can't argue with that.

Posted by: Lauren at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (Covpc)

32 The fact that so many have run amok with the notion
of totally free trade with everyone over everything is sort of a mental
disease, not any sound application of conservative ideas.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (zc3Db)

It's a mental disease that's widely shared among the establishment.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (HalrA)

33 So, it may be "heresy" to true believers, but it may be empirically true.
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (dvuhZ)

Truth is not a heresy. Lies are the heresy.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (uURQL)

34 Anyone who would say that opposition to unbounded immigration is conservative heresy is ... just wrong. In fact, it is the feral government's RESPONSIBILITY to regulate immigration and to insure that the rights and property of citizens are not being injured by whatever level of immigration from wherever is being allowed. Immigration is supposed to be controlled and that means, at times, turning it off.

America does not belong to the world. It belongs to Americans.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (zc3Db)

35 @18
I agree with you entirely BUT the interesting point raised is how do you sell that? The benefits of small and less government are real, but amorphous, hard to define. A newer culture that does not viscerally respond to "freedom" is as likely to cast freedom a la FDR as "freedom from _____" or just as free sh*t.

I am totally against naked income support as a bridge too far in loss of principle (I think that this, in the long run, sells an antithetical philosophy only further). And so, like the guy who loses money on every sale you can't make it up in volume

But I like the idea of making the self interested economic reality of protectionism Lite (TM) an overt selling point. Its nationalism really. We just never had an international environment before that threatened to bring the US to the economic international mean, ie. a festering Third World crap hole.

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (3Rr8K)

36 22
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (HalrA)
***
This - as the young folks say - with a side-serving of "It is not heresy, and I will not recant."

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (/33sy)

37 The problem with government intervention is it creates other problems that require more government intervention. It also creates special interest groups that benefit and want those benefits to continue, and it creates other parties who want some of that magically created government benefit.

Eventually, everyone is dependent on government but government will never have enough to satisfy everyone, someone gets the short shift, and it all goes kablooie.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 08:17 PM (P3GWR)

38 Once upon a time, a politician by name of Peisistratos wanted to take over Athens. He failed at politics a few times and then succeeded- by championing the hillmen of Attica who didn't even live in Athenai-ho-polis.

We're the hillmen. Well, not "we" - I am a public school boy from England, which is how I got my head filled up with all this Greek stuff in the first place.

But a lot of *you* are the hillmen. You are the target audience for this tyrant in waiting.

The interesting part is, Peisistratos actually kept his promises . . .

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at February 02, 2016 08:17 PM (6FqZa)

39 Shorter: conservatism has failed to actually conserve anything.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (TZYqp)

What calls itself conservatism has failed. We need a new label. We are not the same assholes who have worn the label for the past decade, and we should be proudly proclaiming the fact that we are not.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:17 PM (HalrA)

40 With regard to "subsidizing the working poor via tax credits", that laudable idea in abstract theory has turned into a horrible idea in actual practice.

The EITC is one of the most massively gamed pieces of the federal tax code, and that's saying something. Hundreds of billions of dollars worth of fraud.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 08:17 PM (noWW6)

41 And yes, "free trade" is part of the conservative canon, or is supposed to be.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (1xUj/)

Unrestricted free trade with anyone over anything? No, it isn't.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (zc3Db)

42 yes we seem to have a regime of "What's best for the foreign person seeking citizenship?" rather than "What's best for the current American population?"

It seems to be forbidden -- NATIONALIST, you know -- to suggest that American policy should favor Americans.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (dciA+)

As best I can tell, the Left in toto and many on the Right appear to believe that everyone in the world is a US citizen and deserve US Constitutional protections.

Everyone, that is, except those who are actual US citizens who live in the United States. Those people? Yeah, they don't count and, frankly, do not deserve to have any type of voice in the government.

I don't think I'm overstating that.

Also, ace, this is very thoughtful and well put. I would like to know your thoughts on how it appears that the thinking class no longer has respect for the notion of having to work with your hands and not only by typing with them. Assuming that's a proposition with which you agree.

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (IrByp)

43 "conservatism has failed to actually conserve anything"

Well, actually it's done wonders for the wealth & power of the ruling class elites.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (Z8DIA)

44 The illegal immigrant influx could strike a cord if you were able to get the message out. As a for instance, the building trades unions used to have an apprenticeship program for framers, interior trim, roofing, concrete workers etc. But after the huge influx of illegal workers willing to work for half the wages under the table where the contractor didn't have to withhold fica, payroll taxes, unemployment insurance taxes, it killed the apprenticeship programs. The apprentices couldn't compete with the cheap labor.
The only apprenticeship program that I can think about right now are the electricians because they have to licensed at the state level.

Posted by: Old Blue at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (9iR5/)

45 I went to a really expensive school with lots of lines and curves on graphs to prove it.

Ah, but were there glossy photographs, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one was?

Posted by: pep at February 02, 2016 08:19 PM (LAe3v)

46 I'm a lot less excited about tariffs, just bad economic policy. But what I do agree with Trump about is we could use some better people negotiating on our behalf.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (/tuJf)

Art of the Deal...

You HAVE to be able to threaten Tariffs, if you want to be able to GET that better deal... it HAS to be on the table as a threat.

Lets take.... oh.... Viet F'n Nam for instance.

40 years ago, they broke the treaty they made with us, and invaded South Vietnam again...

Yet now they are part of the Trans Pacific Trade crap... which gives them input onto US Policy, AND may allow them Free Labor Migration (ie, auto Green Cards)...

There was no CONSEQUENCE for them breaking said treaty... which is why Iran does not give a crap about any agreement they sign.

Other countries constantly break the Free Trade agreements we have with them... they constantly game the system... yet we don't do crap... because 'FREE TRADE!"....

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 02, 2016 08:19 PM (f7rv6)

47 You see, the fact that this is heresy is why I don't believe anyone, yes, including Cruz, on this point.

If the laws won't be enforced now, why should I believe they'll be enforced when the new shiny gets enacted?

Same question I ask about an Art V Convention. If the current Constitution isn't being followed, what make people automagically think an Art V would be?

And before anyone says, "We'll write it in concise language with no wiggle room, we have a government that argued what the definition of "is" is.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 02, 2016 08:19 PM (jqZ8a)

48 It would be far better to have a bloody civil war and split the country into separate sections than to support another redistributionist tyranny.

What we should do is: Seal the borders; arrest, try, and execute traitors (Snowden, John Fcking Kerry, et.al); outlaw seditionist movements (CPUSA, Earth First, et cetera); and dare the rest of the Left to make themselves obvious targets.

It won't happen, though. We'll die as slaves with a government check in our hands, a receipt for our confiscated guns in our safe deposit box, surrounded by informants, Leftist bootlickers, and apparatchiks.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at February 02, 2016 08:19 PM (zp13i)

49 >>>. I would like to know your thoughts on how it appears that the thinking class no longer has respect for the notion of having to work with your hands and not only by typing with them. Assuming that's a proposition with which you agree.

well i've agreed with that for years, i've written a lot of posts about it.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (dciA+)

50 Yeah, got no issue or conflict with immigration limitations. The "heresy" I've been coming around on is taxes. Always thought "fewer and lowser" is better for everything and everyone. I'm no sure about that anymore.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (gnB5x)

51 Ah, but were there glossy photographs, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one was?
Posted by: pep

It was a typical case of American blind justice, Obie!

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (1xUj/)

52
People don't listen to me
Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (6Ll1u)
..................

Me neither.
*goes back to yelling The End Is Near! on the street corner*

Posted by: wth - wearing a cardboard sign at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (HgMAr)

53 Well, so long as we're talking heretically, I propose the confiscation of Mark Zuckerberg's wealth. All of it.

Posted by: Cloyd Freud, Unemployed at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (fYFz4)

54 34 Anyone who would say that opposition to unbounded immigration is conservative heresy is ... just wrong. In fact, it is the feral government's RESPONSIBILITY to regulate immigration and to insure that the rights and property of citizens are not being injured by whatever level of immigration from wherever is being allowed. Immigration is supposed to be controlled and that means, at times, turning it off.

America does not belong to the world. It belongs to Americans.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:16 PM (zc3Db)

Say that stuff now, and the smart set calls you a nativist and a nationalist.

Which has led folks like me to reply "By George, you're right. I sure am. How 'bout that."

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (TZYqp)

55 We are ready but we are on a leash.
Turn us loose, set us free from the bureaucrats and regulators. There will be productivity and abundant growth.

Posted by: Ralph at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (idjhO)

56 "And then there was that article that found some seminal study on the
effects of the Mariel boat lift on the low-skilled labor market was
fudged. They used this study to tout that low-skilled immigration was an
economic boom, and they do 'the jobs Americans won't do'. It was
bullshit."

As needs to be pointed out regularly, these influxes of foreigners not only damage the labor market prospects for citizens, who then end up more reliant upon the state, but the advent of the immigrants also often ends up imposing an array of large indirect costs due to crime.

And the Marielitos sure as hell did that.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (noWW6)

57 Link at Drudge. Trump live in NH and on fire. He isn't going anywhere

Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (2x3L+)

58 48 It would be far better to have a bloody civil war and split the country into separate sections than to support another redistributionist tyranny.

What we should do is: Seal the borders; arrest, try, and execute traitors (Snowden, John Fcking Kerry, et.al); outlaw seditionist movements (CPUSA, Earth First, et cetera); and dare the rest of the Left to make themselves obvious targets.

It won't happen, though. We'll die as slaves with a government check in our hands, a receipt for our confiscated guns in our safe deposit box, surrounded by informants, Leftist bootlickers, and apparatchiks.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at February 02, 2016 08:19 PM (zp13i)
***
And the sooner we accept this and adjust our individual life-plans accordingly, the better.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (/33sy)

59 How about creating opportunities for the working class to advance beyond the 'working class' instead of subsidizing them to stay there. I was taught the American Dream was that each generation had the opportunity to work hard to make it better for their kids who in turn would do the same. I don't want to create a class of untouchables , never to advance, only to serve. Socialism at its worse.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (MNgU2)

60 It's not like this shit won't self correct.

Our kids are all going to get poor and pick up our guns. Unless we do first.

That's why some are getting shrill.

That's it.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (qmMG2)

61 Well, actually it's done wonders for the wealth power of the ruling class elites.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (Z8DIA)

And the ruling elites of both parties, now that we have ruling elites, have judged us as the greater threat to their power than each other, and have begun merging into a single aristocracy. This is why we are all disenfranchised, and all is made to serve a singular hateful agenda. Our plan of sabotaging their ambitions from within what was once our party is not working, has not been working, and gives no appearance that it will work. We need another plan.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (HalrA)

62 Well written ace.

My heresy? I just as soon increase the minimum wage & cut all immigration. We (taxpayers) don't need to be laying low income people thru EIC.

Coulter had a similar column a few months ago

I have a feeling Rubio is also just kicking the debt can down the road. He oozes of heresy

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (voOPb)

63 "conservatism has failed to actually conserve anything"
--------------------
Well, actually it's done wonders for the wealth & power of the ruling class elites.
Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (Z8DIA)

It's successfully conserved leftist power and the "Progress" that leftism pushes.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (uURQL)

64 The biggest problem is that the immigration argument is all disingenuous B.S.

Our elite "betters" are trying to permanently alter our demographics by intentionally flooding the nation with anyone who doesn't look like the left's sworn enemies Ward and June Cleaver.

It's just like the old busing crap from the '70s, just times a million. Slam the different cultures together and then watch the fun that ensues.

But we're supposed to talk about "jobs" and "labor" blah, blah, blah.

Hiding the real issue is what the left is all about.

Posted by: RKae at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (xiHNC)

65 As best I can tell, the Left in toto and many on the Right appear to believe that everyone in the world is a US citizen and deserve US Constitutional protections.

Everyone, that is, except those who are actual US citizens who live in the United States. Those people? Yeah, they don't count and, frankly, do not deserve to have any type of voice in the government.
Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (IrByp)

Yep!

I pissed off my (former) community organizer girlfriend over the holidays by insisting to her, insisting repeatedly, that we do not have any obligation to any number of Syrians. We simply are not obligated to provide them with shelter, food, and economic opportunity.

Why Syrians? Why now? Why not Nigerians? Why not South Vietnamese? Why not Druze or Yazidis? Why not Australian Aborigines? Why not an unlimited number of Western European and Scandinavian ethnicities?

Where did this insane idea come from? That national sovereignty is not just nonexistent but wrong?

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (ubByS)

66 >>It seems to be forbidden -- NATIONALIST, you know -- to suggest that American policy should favor Americans.

Like so many of our problems, it's cultural. It wasn't that long ago that Americans were unapologetically chanting USA! USA! at the Olympics and now it's considered jingoistic and gauche.

Michelle Obama wasn't all that proud of America until a few years ago. She never seemed to find it ironic that the country she hated was the overwhelming first choice of people the world over.

Here's a fun fact I heard in a report about the UN. The average percentage of foreign born people living in countries around the world is 3%. The US leads the world at 14%.

Where closed. Moose out front shoulda told you.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (/tuJf)

67 And some days I feel I've been way too optimistic. And yeah, things are probably going to be much, much worse.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at February 02, 2016 08:23 PM (zp13i)

68 10 My heresy: no representation without taxation.

If taxes paid are less than government benefits, you can't vote.

(I know it isn't a politically feasible heresy, but keep it in mind for when we have to pick up the pieces and start over.)
Posted by: ZBBMcFate at February 02, 2016 08:11 PM (k7D+q)

Yes, I agree with that. The Founders specifically rejected democracy, understanding that the universal franchise was not a stable form of government. But the republic they created has been steadily whittled away, and today we have a nearly pure democracy, for all intents and purposes.

This will not end well, because it can't end well. You can't have a system where nonproductive people can vote themselves shares of the wealth created by productive people.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 08:23 PM (sdi6R)

69 The best way to see what's going on is the following. A standard of economic theory is that opening markets increases trade and thus increases the economic pie, GDP total and all that.

And that's true. But what they don't tell you is this. Imagine opening up trade between two countries with vastly different standards of living. You've got dirt poor people in one country making nothing in real terms compared to the other country.

Now, open it up and let 'em flow. They equalize. The total pie will increase, but the the rich country looses a lot of it's wealth. It gets transferred to the poor country in the equalization process.

The total of both countries together is greater than before, but the rich country is worse off.

Imagine you and someone else. You make $100 and the other guy makes $1 for the same thing basically. After the equilibrium, you both make $55.

The sum is greater, $110 vs $101. But you are fucked.

That's "free trade" with shit countries. And the elites make a pile of money skimming off the equalization flow between countries.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:23 PM (dvuhZ)

70 well i've agreed with that for years, i've written a lot of posts about it.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:20 PM (dciA+)

Well, yes, and I know that. But you haven't done it, like, today.

I was more trying to get you to stop cheating on us with twitter and yelling about it over there and yell about it over here.

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:23 PM (IrByp)

71 Ricardo,

Well having a system where people who pay nothing in can demand more out doesn't work so well. As we've seen.

Posted by: Lauren at February 02, 2016 08:23 PM (Covpc)

72 @55
You aren't listening. A guy who works on the line or as part of a landscaping crew isn't interested in "bureaucrats" or "regulation" --his boss interacts with them.
If you're going to sell someone you need to tell them how they will be better off, not how someone else, at some future point, will be able to make them better off.
I'm not advocating income support (I do support limiting legal and illegal immigration for many, many reasons). Just making an observation on sales.

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:24 PM (3Rr8K)

73 The GOPe are meatheads.....dead from the neck up.

Here is a short list as if they cared:

1) Secure the border.
2) Eliminate the income tax.
3) Put a time limit on all benefit programs and means test social security.
4) Anyone working for the federal government cannot vote in federal elections.
5) Shoot Hillary.

Any questions?

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 02, 2016 08:24 PM (ej1L0)

74 There are other things the GOP could explore to help the middle class. How about credentialing any BS grad as a qualified homeschool teacher for up to 4 children? Offer a tax credit for each child taught. This would allow one parent to go work for the bulk of the household income, while the stay-at-home parent can teach their own kids AND neighborhood kids. This would also put unemployed college grads to work immediately. In addition, it would reduce the influence of the left-leaning school boards, since more parents would opt to send their kids to their friend's home school. The devil's in the details, but there could be something attractive in the idea.

Posted by: scrood at February 02, 2016 08:24 PM (3b9U4)

75 The administration is using unbridled immigration to drive/herd the public into government subsidy.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/jksd3gz

Posted by: Ralph at February 02, 2016 08:24 PM (idjhO)

76 63 "conservatism has failed to actually conserve anything"
--------------------
Well, actually it's done wonders for the wealth & power of the ruling class elites.
Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:18 PM (Z8DIA)

It's successfully conserved leftist power and the "Progress" that leftism pushes.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (uURQL)

True.

And the smart set wonders why the 20 point purity tests are less and less concerning nowadays.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (TZYqp)

77 Ace. I have a suggestion for a heresy.

Liberals are all about reparations. This is serious stuff. It's been getting play across the liberal blogosphere (meaning established newspapers) for years now.

Well, that actually doesn't sound like such an awful idea.

We just need to find a fair way of apportioning blame for our current economic predicament to the appropriate liberal actors. Then we seize their estates and money.

Mexico doesn't have to pay for the wall after all.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (ubByS)

78 Need revenue?

Want to support jobs?

Tax all foreign oil. $20/bbl this year, $30 next year

Suddenly fracking is profitable again.
Hell, I'd offer Canada andMexico a discount on their tax rate.

Posted by: Fed up with the establishment at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (v0YLX)

79 67 And some days I feel I've been way too optimistic. And yeah, things are probably going to be much, much worse.

Certain companies make excellent solutions for your concerns. Ball makes fine canning products. Sawyer makes a good water filter. Ruger makes a good gun.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (qmMG2)

80 We're at war, and war often means choosing the least worst option.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (7qAYi)

81 >>> Ah, but were there glossy photographs, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one was?

We don't like your kind, Kid.

Posted by: fluffy at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (AfsKp)

82 >>>I was more trying to get you to stop cheating on us with twitter and yelling about it over there and yell about it over here.

anyone who saw my twitter feed can tell you i wasn't cheating on you. I was, as I told someone, "Fighting with all of Twitter."

If there's a primary of the people in my twitter feed -- an assortment of the GOP's poorly-named smart set -- man, he'd win with North Korea like margins.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (dciA+)

83 48 ...has it going on. Because it's more true then you can believe right now, but you will come to see. Oh, how you will see.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (6Ll1u)

84 A rational approach to protectionism always seemed reasonable to me, because you can't have an viable economy based on the consumption of cheap imported goods when most of the populace can't find a decent job.

Selling shoes made in China to Starbucks baristas so you'll make enough money to buy coffee at Starbucks doesn't seem like a good long term economic plan!

Posted by: Hrothgar at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (wYnyS)

85 Jeb can fix it!

Posted by: Jeb! at February 02, 2016 08:27 PM (sOhww)

86 Awesome article, with a lot of great points.

Another forgotten group are those wage earners with moderately high wages who get no benefit from the government but pay higher taxes mostly out of their disposable income.

These folk earn more (and for the sake of argument work more to earn it) and yet they come out only slightly ahead of someone who earns half as much and the government makes up the difference.

Posted by: Ring at February 02, 2016 08:27 PM (1wa0z)

87 US Secretary of State John Kerry will announce "significant new contributions to support relief efforts" for Syrian refugees on Thursday at an international donor conference in London, the White House said on Tuesday.

Why of course?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:27 PM (DUoqb)

88 If that Trans Pacific Partnership treaty includes the 'right' of labor to cross international borders freely, then we are well and truly dead.

Someone in some third world disaster working for $30 a month will kill to get here and take a minimum wage job flipping hamburgers.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 08:28 PM (P3GWR)

89 I avoid Twitter to maintain my sanity.

Posted by: steevy at February 02, 2016 08:28 PM (8HTq1)

90 Do I think a Hispanic president would limit immigration on other Hispanics? Uh, no I don't. Do I think a Hispanic president would deport millions of other Hispanics. Um, no I don't.

This ^^ is why I'm supporting Trump. It's really that simple.

Posted by: Stay out da Bushes at February 02, 2016 08:28 PM (rZJS9)

91 24 3
If'n you give people money (ahem, refundable tax credits, anyone?), they still won't vote GOP.

The GOP says they'll give you X. Well, they hate you, and we'll give you 3X. And a lollipop. Made of crack.
Posted by: The Dems at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (LAe3v)

Exactly

Posted by: West at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (3FG30)

92 Heresy is not healthy or inevitable... I will not choose from a list of bads because politicians would rather take shortcuts that involve bribery than do the hard work of persuasion with ideas. We are trying to save this country NOT have "our guys" oversee its destruction.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (NPofj)

93 IMO the real issue is that the Government types won't give us what we really want and need...

Which is just less government.

The majority of people do NOT want less government.
If they did, the Dems would not get elected.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (FkBIv)

94 Tax all remittances sent to a foreign country unless you are a US citizen sending it to a US citizen.

Use the tax to build the wall and maintain it.

Posted by: Fed up with the establishment at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (v0YLX)

95 Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:21 PM (MNgU2)

A robust, healthy working class actually working creates the opportunities for advancement that make all of the other classes possible. Without a healthy working class, all you have is a ruling elite and starving masses. The falling standard of living has to be addressed. We can't all be middle class at the same time, the laws of economics and scarcity can not abide such wishful thinking.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (HalrA)

96 Twitter scares me ever since Roseanne Barr called me a nazi.

Posted by: Lauren at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (Covpc)

97 The middle and working classes are actually growing and doing pretty well in red states like TX (and this is aside from the shale boom--we were doing quite well before that), so my suggestion has always been: just do what Texas is doing.

Use those fifty states as labs and show that Texas and similar states have policies that enable working class folks to do better.

Posted by: stace at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (CoX6k)

98 A rational approach to protectionism always seemed reasonable to me, because you can't have an viable economy based on the consumption of cheap imported goods when most of the populace can't find a decent job.

Selling shoes made in China to Starbucks baristas so you'll make enough money to buy coffee at Starbucks doesn't seem like a good long term economic plan!
Posted by: Hrothgar at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (wYnyS)

Self-sufficiency is not a bad thing. People who get obsessed with efficiency via trade need to realize - efficiency means fragile.

Highly efficient means low redundancy means vulnerability to disruption.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (uURQL)

99 Britain said on Tuesday Russia could be trying to carve out an Alawite mini-state in Syria for its ally President Bashar Assad by bombing his opponents instead of fighting Islamic State militants.

Could be?
Might be?

What the fuck other reason does Russia have to be there?

LMAO

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (DUoqb)

100 Sounds like everything trump is arguing for but he is a phony loudmouth

Posted by: Gary young at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (OEMgg)

101 Awesome article, with a lot of great points.

Awesome article my ass.

Somebody just acknowledged that shit's going downhill - and he doesn't have a ticket to a bunker.

Welcome to the party pal.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (qmMG2)

102 Restricting immigration so that low skill workers face less competition is certainly a popular idea with the American people, although considerably less so with the Ruling Class. Similarly not dramatically expanding H1B visas would be popular with the more skilled workers. Back when Democrats cared about their constituents, they were in favor of those measures.

Here are a few other ideas that I believe are consistent with basic GOP philosophies and that would be politically popular:

Those ranchers who went to prison because the government owns all the land around them would benefit enormously if all that land were in private hands. The most politically feasible way to get that government land into private hands is to give it away as slavery reparations. This has the additional benefit of making two key constituencies of the Democratic Party fight in a death match.

End the exceptions for student loans and child support from bankruptcy. You can only declare bankruptcy every ten years so that alone will restrict the level of abuse and besides it will give those bankers who contributed to Obama a good ass fucking which they richly deserve. It will also make banks more circumspect about lending money in the future and free up a lot of people from excessive obligations that they took on when they were stupid teenagers.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (QHgTq)

103 So, it may be "heresy" to true believers, but it may be empirically true.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (dvuhZ)

I've always held it as axiomatic that if the truth is not on your side, you are on the wrong side. One man and truth are a majority.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:31 PM (HalrA)

104 I know, we need to raise minimum wage!

Posted by: Fritz, your local automation expert at February 02, 2016 08:31 PM (BngQR)

105 You want a heresy? Those Mexican and Central Americans are not especially hard workers. They can be and used to be. What we are getting are a lot of city people that don't want to work any harder than they have to.

And I don't consider allowing more H1-Bs helpful. We have all sorts of industries that now qualify for H1-B workers (witness Disney). I want a candidate that wants to halt immigration for now and give those here that are keepers a chance to assimilate. And I want someone to fix the legal immigration process, so those folks go to the front of the line to become legal. In fact, no one here illegally should get legal status until all those that obeyed the law have been processed.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 08:31 PM (5HBd1)

106 Don't worry. QuEen Janet will save us with those negative rates they're considering we were talking about.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:31 PM (dvuhZ)

107 The problem is the premise. The premise is that the government is *responsible* for doing something about working class income.

If the government did less, less regulation, less taxation, less subsidizing, less cronyism, the working class and all of us would do a lot better. Less of our income would be wasted by fraud and inefficiency.

Posted by: San Franpsycho at February 02, 2016 08:31 PM (EZebt)

108 Now, open it up and let 'em flow. They equalize. The total pie will increase, but the the rich country looses a lot of it's wealth. It gets transferred to the poor country in the equalization process.

This is exactly what Barack Obama wants to happen.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (P3GWR)

109 Before the much-maligned Smoot-Hawley, Republican President Harding signed this in 1922:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordney%E2%80%93McCumber_Tariff

Didn't seem to have hurt the American economy much at the time. A better argument could be made that it overheated it.

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (6FqZa)

110 Nothing like having a gov that rakes in all our money, and passes the responsibility on to business owners.

All of this talk about protectionism is bullshit. Obamacare broke this and getting rid of it is the only solution.

Posted by: cajun caret at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (++b9A)

111 Looks like we have a lot of Libertarians trying to define conservatism as a failed political philosophy.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (MNgU2)

112 What the Uniparty calls "free trade" is a lie.

Genuinely free trade doesn't require armies of internationalist technocrats to maintain it. It's maintained by individuals acting freely in their best interest.

That's why genuinely free trade is anathema to the Uniparty.

Posted by: Cloyd Freud, Unemployed at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (fYFz4)

113 A related point is how do you sell local government/federalism/Constitutional restraint of the Federal behemoth.

Like immigration, you have to identify the personal stake.

I've given pause to some libs (who have kids) when I bring up Common Core. The example is if you don't like what's in your kids' classroom, and you have a local School Board setting curriculum, you can actually have a say (or get a couple of neighbors to have a real say). If the curriculum is set in Washington, good freakin luck.

Not that it worked (large scale) but I was very impressed by an old British ad for the Tories that had a bunch of nosy "inspectors" looking in your windows, with a caption something like: "Socialism would mean inspectors all around..."

Make it personal.

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:33 PM (3Rr8K)

114 "Twitter scares me ever since Roseanne Barr called me a nazi."

I think you can wear that on arm with pride, Lauren.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:33 PM (gnB5x)

115 The problem with the conservative base is it's full of conservatives.

If we can't buy them off, we'll breed them off.

Posted by: Mitch Longshanks at February 02, 2016 08:33 PM (H9MG5)

116 Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (IrByp)

I don't believe him because he's on video talking about bringing them out of the shadows and he looks like Count Chocula as you so helpfully pointed out. I'm a Boo Berry conservative.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at February 02, 2016 08:34 PM (4ErVI)

117 Mexico doesn't have to pay for the wall after all.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (ubByS)

My Heresy?

Tell the Supreme Court to shut the hell up and stop MAKING Law.

its the Supremes who said a State can't stop illegals from getting State largesse.

Its the Supremes who said Dual Citizenship is legal.

Its the Supremes who said the State can take your property and give it someone else (Kelo)

Its the Supremes who have muddied up political speech ...

Its the Supremes who have allowed Gun Control laws to 'infringe your right to bear arms'....

Hell... its the Supremes who legalized Gay Marriage, and the RIGHT to kill your own unborn child... instead of letting WE the F"N PEOPLE decide those issues.

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 02, 2016 08:34 PM (f7rv6)

118 What's coming across the border now is a mixture of FSA and Cartel.

Posted by: Ralph at February 02, 2016 08:34 PM (idjhO)

119 I've always held it as axiomatic that if the truth is not on your side, you are on the wrong side. One man and truth are a majority.

One man and the truth flanked by two men is ...

... well, he's fucking dead. Truth - like the Constitution - doesn't defend itself.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (qmMG2)

120 Where did this insane idea come from? That national sovereignty is not just nonexistent but wrong?

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:22 PM (ubByS)

It is an invention of the globalists, who have deliberately demonized the Nationalism of national socialism while ignoring the fact that the Socialism of it got the same results as every other form - Stalinist, Maoist, Khmer, Cuban, Bolivarian, etc. If you oppose their global socialism, they hold out that you're just a crypto-Nazi. Like everything else, they got it exactly wrong. It was the Socialism that was the monstrous component of that ideology all along.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (HalrA)

121 Really thoughtful post, ace.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (t5zYU)

122 Looks like we have a lot of Libertarians trying to define conservatism as a failed political philosophy.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (MNgU2)

Never been a Libertarian. What has conservatism conserved?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (uURQL)

123 "Haeresis" just means "choice".

In a religious sense "heresy" means dissent from the accepted text; which implies that we live under an established religion, albeit one that claims not to be a religion.

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo, making a 3rd heretical post, done for now at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (6FqZa)

124 If there's a primary of the people in my twitter feed -- an assortment of the GOP's poorly-named smart set -- man, he'd win with North Korea like margins.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (dciA+)

This is wildly, wildly, wildly unfair but I will admit it. The Rubiotwats on Twitter make me loathe Rubio.

Now, luckily, I have substantive reasons to oppose him as well but yeah. Yeah.

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (IrByp)

125
Do I think a Hispanic president would limit immigration on other
Hispanics? Uh, no I don't. Do I think a Hispanic president would deport
millions of other Hispanics. Um, no I don't.

This ^^ is why I'm supporting Trump. It's really that simple.

Posted by: Stay out da Bushes at February 02, 2016 08:28 PM (rZJS9)

Wow... that is some world class idiocy there.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (NPofj)

126 Use those fifty states as labs and show that Texas and similar states have policies that enable working class folks to do better.
Posted by: stace at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM

Problem is that the Failure States don't try to change their ways, the people who schlonged-up those states move to successful states & turn them into failures. Call them Locust Liberals.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (7qAYi)

127 90
I'm hispanic and I'd nuke TJ if given three whistles for the Mexican government's violation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo by advocating 'reconquista' of California in government run schools. According to international law, their doing so is a repudiation of the peace treaty that ended the 1848 war. Thus a State of War exists between our two countries. My skin ain't got nothing to do with it.

I'm American first. The color of my grandparents' skin is irrelevant to my desire to safeguard my country and fellow citizens.

Sounds like you think people who have lived in the US for over 120 years aren't yet Americans. That's irrational and unwise.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at February 02, 2016 08:36 PM (zp13i)

128 Has someone mentioned that we do already have the Earned Income Tax Credit? It goes up to around $8000 per taxpayer, if I remember right, a substantial sum.

Posted by: Emily at February 02, 2016 08:37 PM (7Rn+/)

129 124 If there's a primary of the people in my twitter feed -- an assortment of the GOP's poorly-named smart set -- man, he'd win with North Korea like margins.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:26 PM (dciA+)

This is wildly, wildly, wildly unfair but I will admit it. The Rubiotwats on Twitter make me loathe Rubio.

Now, luckily, I have substantive reasons to oppose him as well but yeah. Yeah.
Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (IrByp)

Trumpkins are worse

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 08:37 PM (voOPb)

130 It is taken as an article of faith that Smoot-Hawley was bad, bad, 666 evil. That's canon to the current high priests. However, I was reading something pointing out that if that were true always, then we should have a lot more Depression back in the old days before.

So, sometimes tariffs are bad. And sometimes they aren't.

We of the First World cannot merge with the Third World. You've got 100s of millions with a high standard of living vs billions at a dirt eating level.

Now, you want to improve those billions? Well have at it, but not at our expense. Let them rise up themselves, independently, and not by trying to cross pollinate with our markets.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (dvuhZ)

131 Oh c'mon, let's at least try to represent the argument fairly.

No one of any consequence has suggested "unfettered" or "unbounded" immigration a la 19th century USA. Not Jeb, not Rubio, not anyone. That is a hardcore Libertarian position, not a conservative one.

The argument isn't "should we just throw open the borders and admit everyone"? No one except the Reason crowd agrees with that. The argument is about how immigration should be regulated.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (lVU49)

132 ... well, he's fucking dead. Truth - like the Constitution - doesn't defend itself.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:35 PM (qmMG2)

No. But the courage to fight comes from knowing that you stand for what is true. It's a force multiplier.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (HalrA)

133 "just do what Texas is doing."

And Texas has a state sales tax and no state income tax. Everybody is a taxpayer.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (gnB5x)

134

Give people the choice of self worth.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (qCMvj)

135 My ass hurts from this conference call

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (DUoqb)

136 Here is my offer to the working class and all classes: freedom.

No more income taxes.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 08:39 PM (MQEz6)

137 I know something Republicans could do for me. Our income is rather anemic. Democrats keep finding ways to increase our financial pressure (health insurance, electric bill, etc.) and reduce our income (reduced hours due to ObamaCare). I think Democrats are trying to force as many low-income earners like us into a state of government dependence as possible. They need a dependent class to stay in power.

I would like Republicans to remove the obstacles that impede our ability to take care of ourselves. Stop fiddling with the free market. Allow competition. Don't burden us with ridiculous plans to "save the planet" that amount to no more than making financially comfortable people feel good about caring.

Posted by: Emmie at February 02, 2016 08:39 PM (ezXrF)

138 >>>h c'mon, let's at least try to represent the argument fairly.

No one of any consequence has suggested "unfettered" or "unbounded" immigration a la 19th century USA. Not Jeb, not Rubio, not anyone. That is a hardcore Libertarian position, not a conservative one.

The argument isn't "should we just throw open the borders and admit everyone"? No one except the Reason crowd agrees with that. The argument is about how immigration should be regulated.

...

one million plus new workers per year, plus a lot of H1-Bs, when half the work force is not working, AND wages have been more or less stagnant for 20 years....?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:39 PM (dciA+)

139 "Self-sufficiency is not a bad thing. People who
get obsessed with efficiency via trade need to realize - efficiency
means fragile.

Highly efficient means low redundancy means vulnerability to disruption.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:30 PM (uURQL)"

In furtherance of the idea that resilience is a good thing, I propose that right now would be a good time to impose an oil import tax. Aside from the revenue it would raise, the primary benefit would be to insulate the US oil industry from the Saudi government policy which is specifically to make investment in the oil industry too risky by making long term planning too difficult. The Saudis are trying to drive the companies that do horizontal drilling and fracking out of business and disperse the skilled teams of workers who do that demanding and specialized work, making it difficult or impossible to recreate that oil production capability again in less than a few years.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 08:40 PM (QHgTq)

140 >>>Twitter scares me ever since Roseanne Barr called me a nazi.

Posted by: Lauren at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (Covpc)<<<

Maybe she had you confused with The Real Lauren?

Posted by: Laurence of Laurabia at February 02, 2016 08:40 PM (H9MG5)

141 Never been a Libertarian. What has conservatism conserved?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely

----

First you gotta ask: Are we talking about conservatives or about slime-ball globalists who infiltrated the idea and put on the name?

Posted by: RKae at February 02, 2016 08:40 PM (xiHNC)

142 The majority of people do NOT want less government.

If they did, the Dems would not get elected.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 08:29 PM (FkBIv)
I think this bears repeating.
If you look at the Pew polls on the spending that rank-and-file Republicans want to see cut, a majority favors cutting (a) foreign aid, and (b) welfare spending. There is no majority in favor of cutting any other spending, *including* health care spending.
We libertarian-minded people who truly want smaller government really are in a minority.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:40 PM (lVU49)

143 The argument is about how immigration should be regulated.

Despite the oceans of inks spilled on the topic, it is not.

Or rather, the only regulation is that those who are law abiding and have the potential to be net-contributors are restricted and wait-listed.

Everyone else? Rapist, illiterate, drunk-driving, law-ignoring, id-stealing, terrorist? Come on in.

Selling American citizenship to high bidders in auction is a better system than this.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (uURQL)

144 @134
And give people a choice: do you want to live as grown men and women or as children?

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (3Rr8K)

145 "My Heresy? Tell the Supreme Court to shut the hell up and stop MAKING Law."

And _that_ is a central point.

Liberals who hear about Mark Levin's proposal for an Article V convention get extremely unnerved. What, these crazy right-wingers are actually proposing _sweeping changes to the Constitution_? Nothing good can come of this!

Whereas in reality, it's hard to find a year in the last century which has not seen sweeping changes to the Constitution being imposed. Actually and forcibly imposed, rather than merely proposed.

With those impositions coming via the federal bench, which has come to regard itself as the government, rather than merely a constituent component thereof.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (noWW6)

146 "What's coming across the border now is a mixture of FSA and Cartel. "

LOTS of cartel coming in, moving across at random, back and forth.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (gnB5x)

147 >>>Really thoughtful post, ace.

thank you. i've had this post in my head for a months, finally just started writing it.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (dciA+)

148 I would like Republicans to remove the obstacles
that impede our ability to take care of ourselves. Stop fiddling with
the free market. Allow competition. Don't burden us with ridiculous
plans to "save the planet" that amount to no more than making
financially comfortable people feel good about caring.

Posted by: Emmie at February 02, 2016 08:39 PM (ezXrF)

Fiddling with the free market is entirely the problem. Both parties are in love with the idea of a centrally planned economy.

State ownership + planned economy = Communism
Private ownership + self-organizing economy = Capitalism
Private ownership + planned economy = Fascism

This should say all that needs to be said.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (HalrA)

149
I'm in full agreement with the heresy of rigorously enforcing ALL immigration laws,with strict border control accompanying that.

Also the heresy of eliminating the strangling regulations that put such a burden on businesses.

Plus all those that impact US on our lives as everyday citizens.

For a start.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 02, 2016 08:41 PM (P/8aq)

150 ace, a restriction on immigration PLUS a repeal of many labor laws and government restrictions on employing people would make a huge difference.

I've often pointed out -- I used to work as a carpenter and a GC. People in the industry didn't hire illegals because they "worked harder" or "worked cheaper" it was because they worked in the grey market.

It was easy to say "hey, Juan, do you have 4 or 5 buddies who I can hire for some unskilled labor for a week, and pay them in cash at the end of the day? I need some guys to gut this house for me real quickly because my skilled labor is about done with the last job and I dont want to pay some guy $40 an hour to break plaster and wheel barrow it outside."

Compared to, say, filling out all kinds of forms, worrying about government hiring laws, worrying about workers comp, FICA deductions, overtime laws, W2s, 1099s, etc. etc.

Because in THAT situation, I need to hire an accountant or pay a temp agency a big cut just to deal with the govt forms.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (AkOaV)

151 Chemjeff, that flow of humanity coming across our southern border is "unbounded" and "unfettered".

Posted by: Ralph at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (idjhO)

152 I have a better idea. End all federal programs that 'take care' of people.

Get rid of the artificial demand placed on goods the working class uses and their incomes will cover more stuff. Fair, moral, and conservative all at once.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at February 02, 2016 08:12 PM (ZbV+0)

The problem is it's no longer 47% but 52%.

And both halves of the bipartisan Party-In-Government have been engineering that since 1986.

Posted by: steveegg at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (cL79m)

153 First you gotta ask: Are we talking about
conservatives or about slime-ball globalists who infiltrated the idea
and put on the name?

Posted by: RKae at February 02, 2016 08:40 PM (xiHNC)

Once again, let them keep the name. We'll never wash their slime off it. We need a new label.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (HalrA)

154 with so many americans out of work, and wages stagnant for 20 years, can anyone claim our current immigration system is for the benefit of Americans?

Anyone want to make that claim?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (dciA+)

155 Has someone mentioned that we do already have the Earned Income Tax Credit? It goes up to around $8000 per taxpayer, if I remember right, a substantial sum.
Posted by: Emily at February 02, 2016 08:37 PM (7Rn+/)

I got my first offer to "rent" some extra children's Social Security numbers today!

Needless to say, I said no. And felt like a sucker for not doing it.

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (IrByp)

156 I propose that right now would be a good time to impose an oil import tax. Aside from the revenue it would raise, the primary benefit would be to insulate the US oil industry from the Saudi government policy which is specifically to make investment in the oil industry too risky by making long term planning too difficult.

So there's too much government meddling in our lives and businesses except for the one or two areas that concern me and it would be smarter if we did it my way?

Cheap petrol makes manufacturing and transport cheaper. That's good for a lot of people. Expensive petrol makes drilling and fracking good for other people.

Are we in the let government choose winners and losers business?

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (1xUj/)

157 131 Oh c'mon, let's at least try to represent the argument fairly.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (lVU49)

HA!

Posted by: buzzion at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (z/Ubi)

158 "135
My ass hurts from this conference call

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:38 PM (DUoqb)"

From sitting or from getting bent over the desk?

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (QHgTq)

159 Liberals are all about reparations. This is serious
stuff. It's been getting play across the liberal blogosphere (meaning
established newspapers) for years now.

...

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 02, 2016 08:25 PM (ubByS)

Obamao stated before his first election that reparations do not go far enough.

If every dollar you have isn't enough then what do they want?

Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (T78UI)

160 For once I'd like someone in the "Marketplace of Ideas" admit that we don't need any immigration at all anymore, and we would be just fine shutting it all off for the next 40 years.

We are under no Constitutional obligation to allow anyone into our nation. We can and should turn the spigot off and concentrate on assimilation for everyone here legally.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (zp13i)

161 146 "What's coming across the border now is a mixture of FSA and Cartel. "
-----
LOTS of cartel coming in, moving across at random, back and forth.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill
------------------
Not to mention the occasional ME terrorist...

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (ENe42)

162 >>The majority of people do NOT want less government.

>>If they did, the Dems would not get elected.

The only thing wrong about Romney's 47% comment was he got caught.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (/tuJf)

163 @150
You are absolutely right.
This is the response to the "doing the jobs Americans don't want to do."
Its really Americans hiring people willing to break the law to do the jobs the government won't let them do.

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (3Rr8K)

164 I always thought that the many thousands of dead blue coats were reparations paid in full with blood.

Was I wrong?

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (ej1L0)

165 OK, I'll say this before I read the comment thread: we don't have a government that'll get out of our way and let us be free. We have a government and bureaucracy that nickel and dimes real productive businesses in general, and manufacturing and extraction in particular, into the death of a million papercuts.

Things like tax credits for working folk, and/or tarriffs, are what I'm willing to settle for, because I'm tired of seeing the Endless Argument About Why We Don't Need A Manufacturing Sector on places like slashdot and arstechnica. (And don't get me started about Global Worming).

I mean, if it's physically impossible to win the argument about whether one should be allowed to make a living because it's going to Destroy The Planet, then all that's left to do is to have the Big Arguement about which of us gets what part of Your Retirement Plan.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (kCfMX)

166 I have come to the realization that my relationship with the Republican Party is a toxic relationship. I keep telling them what I need, they keep telling me what I will get. I keep sending them money, because they promised to use that money to fight for the things I care about. Instead, they stole my money and spent it on themselves. They keep telling me they are sorry - next time it will be different. Next time it will be better. Then they do it worse, and spit in my face. Rinse, Repeat.

I don't have to live like this. I can extract myself from this toxic relationship. I can enter into a better relationship, one with humble integrity, that uses money sparingly so as to make it go farther and wider. One that aligns itself with my core beliefs, and does not mock me.

This is a no-brainer.

Posted by: grammie winger, sign of The Time at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (dFi94)

167 111 Looks like we have a lot of Libertarians trying to define conservatism as a failed political philosophy.
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (MNgU2)

Not a Libertarian.

If even the party that makes pretense to conservatism fails to implement it, how effectual is it in practicality?

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (TZYqp)

168 I am a proud heretic on both immigration and trade. Also, the thing about immigration is that it is both an economic and cultural issue. Not only do open borders depress wage, but we are changing the demographics of this country. Are most Americans in favor of that. Are even most Republicans?

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (R+30W)

169 154
with so many americans out of work, and wages stagnant for 20 years, can
anyone claim our current immigration system is for the benefit of
Americans?

Anyone want to make that claim?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (dciA+)

I couldn't have put it any better than that.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (HalrA)

170 >>My ass hurts from this conference call

You're doing it wrong.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (/tuJf)

171 The economic commentary on this site has more in common with Teamsters than it does Heritage Institute or Cato.

An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled , educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get mocked for being a denier.

To be blunt, anyone who is a conservative can't even think about voting for Trump. He is not for free market capitalism, he is for cronyism. He and Hillary are the best examples of people leveraging their political connections to gain a business advantage.
So go ahead and nominate Trump . I won't vote for him and many other free market Republicans won't either. I have similar doubts about Cruz, who I also think would embrace protectionism in a heart beat.

Posted by: Thucydides at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (6IqhF)

172 No. But the courage to fight comes from knowing that you stand for what is true. It's a force multiplier.

Cato ... they believe too.

Seriously - they believe. They believe enough to wave bye as the trains go to the camps.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (qmMG2)

173 And based on an initial skim: Don Quixote's right, Alexthechick's right.... hmm... skimming more...

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (kCfMX)

174 Controlling the borders a conservative heresy? Maybe it is a libertarian heresy but I for one feel like that is one area of government that serves a real purpose and not just to keep a labor class employed. There is also the drugs, alien culture overwhelming native culture, and now terrorists.

Posted by: PaleRider at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (chkUd)

175 You are absolutely right.
This is the response to the "doing the jobs Americans don't want to do."
Its really Americans hiring people willing to break the law to do the jobs the government won't let them do.
Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (3Rr8K)

Right. Said better then I did.

I need to organize my thoughts on this better, because I think it's a big point that is totally ignored by politicians who have no... idea... how any of this works.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (AkOaV)

176 one million plus new workers per year, plus a lot of
H1-Bs, when half the work force is not working, AND wages have been
more or less stagnant for 20 years....?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:39 PM (dciA+)
Yes, and? We have quotas and restrictions on how many can immigrate from where. I agree that the quotas are too high and they ought to be lowered. But no one is suggesting getting rid of all the quotas.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (lVU49)

177 Whether prices for labor go up, or tax dollars are used to subsidize laborer's paychecks, it seems like people are going to have to pay for this one way or the other.
***
Yeah but then the governing elite would have to pay American workers American wages out of *their* pockets.

Importing illegals lets them pay half the wages. Sure, the government then ends up paying much more then the difference, but that isn't coming out of the elites' pockets is it?

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (5LOno)

178 Do you want to destroy the middle class just for cheap TVs and iShit?

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (dvuhZ)

179 My ass hurts from this conference call

You're doing it wrong.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (/tuJf)

I sit on the floor in front of my bed watching TV on mute listening for my name

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (DUoqb)

180 I keep sending them money, because they promised to use that money to fight for the things I care about.

I am resolved to never put any money towards political causes.

I may be willing to donate time, but that's it.

Church and charity are the only ones that can lay a monetary claim.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (uURQL)

181 169 154
with so many americans out of work, and wages stagnant for 20 years, can
anyone claim our current immigration system is for the benefit of
Americans?

Anyone want to make that claim?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (dciA+)

It appears NRO is going to have to do another special cover issue so we will "understand".

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:47 PM (TZYqp)

182 The only thing wrong about Romney's 47% comment was he got caught.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (/tuJf)

I'd submit that the only thing wrong with that was he said it a decade too late and thus was fatally low on the percentage.

Posted by: steveegg at February 02, 2016 08:47 PM (cL79m)

183 The only thing wrong about Romney's 47% comment was he got caught.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (/tuJf)

I think his problem was that he tried to apologize for it instead of turning around and explaining it very carefully and thoroughly. People should be ashamed to be leeching off of someone else - and moreso off of government - but we have created a class that is actually proud of being leeches. Someone has to address that for it to ever change.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 08:47 PM (zc3Db)

184 ...restricting immigration so that the labor markets tighten and employers just wind up paying the working class more...

Wow, what a novel concept. Never fly though. My donors wouldn't stand for it.

Posted by: Mitch at February 02, 2016 08:47 PM (gClMK)

185 with so many americans out of work, and wages stagnant for 20 years, can
anyone claim our current immigration system is for the benefit of
Americans?

Anyone want to make that claim?

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:42 PM (dciA+)

Fredo Pelosi Kerry and Reed do all the time

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:47 PM (DUoqb)

186 But no one is suggesting getting rid of all the quotas.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (lVU49)

Stop all immigration until America gets its shit together.

There's one.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (uURQL)

187 Come to think of it, the Long Term Moderate Establishment Republican Strategy is to slowly do nothing but kick the can down the road while the Democrats destroy our abilities to make a living and leave us in the position where we're blackmailed into voting Democrat before _all_ the potential loot is gone to offshore tax havens.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (kCfMX)

188 112 What the Uniparty calls "free trade" is a lie.

Genuinely free trade doesn't require armies of internationalist technocrats to maintain it. It's maintained by individuals acting freely in their best interest.

That's why genuinely free trade is anathema to the Uniparty.

Posted by: Cloyd Freud, Unemployed at February 02, 2016 08:32 PM (fYFz4)

Exactly. You don't get "free trade" by passing 1000 page bills.

In the U.S., we have all kinds of laws and regulations about environmental protection, land use, minimum wages, worker safety, child labor, and so on. These have evolved over the past century, often for good reasons. All these increase the cost of doing business, and ultimately the price of the product.

Then you have a country like China, where none of those things exist for the most part. They treat their workers like slaves and dump their pollution willy-nilly. It's a lot like American industry in 1900.

But under so-called "free trade" treaties, American manufacturers have every incentive to shut down their domestic factories and move their production to China. So American consumers get to buy cheap consumer products, at least the ones who still have jobs.

There is nothing wrong with levying tariffs on Chinese products to make up the difference, and bring them into line with the price of products made domestically under U.S. regulations. Consumer products would cost more, but at least Americans would still be employed manufacturing them.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (sdi6R)

189 Do I think a Hispanic president would limit
immigration on other Hispanics? Uh, no I don't. Do I think a Hispanic
president would deport millions of other Hispanics. Um, no I don't.

This ^^ is why I'm supporting Trump. It's really that simple.

Posted by: Stay out da Bushes at February 02, 2016 08:28 PM (rZJS9)

That is rather bigoted.
Now, if you said a 1st gen or a non-native of ex-pat parentage as president...

Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (T78UI)

190 Whereas in reality, it's hard to find a year in the last century which has not seen sweeping changes to the Constitution being imposed. Actually and forcibly imposed, rather than merely proposed.

With those impositions coming via the federal bench, which has come to regard itself as the government, rather than merely a constituent component thereof.

Every time the Supreme Court meets, it's a de facto Constitutional convention.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (7qAYi)

191 171 The economic commentary on this site has more in common with Teamsters than it does Heritage Institute or Cato.

An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled , educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get mocked for being a denier.

To be blunt, anyone who is a conservative can't even think about voting for Trump. He is not for free market capitalism, he is for cronyism. He and Hillary are the best examples of people leveraging their political connections to gain a business advantage.
So go ahead and nominate Trump . I won't vote for him and many other free market Republicans won't either. I have similar doubts about Cruz, who I also think would embrace protectionism in a heart beat.
Posted by: Thucydides at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (6IqhF)

By this definition, by all means. I am no conservative.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (TZYqp)

192 I always thought that the many thousands of dead blue coats were reparations paid in full with blood.
Was I wrong?
Posted by: Hairyback Guy

They want more blood. Lots more.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (FkBIv)

193 Are we in the let government choose winners and losers business?

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (1xUj/)
At this point? For most on the right, I think the answer is 'yes'. The winners should be themselves. The losers should be everyone else.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (lVU49)

194 Do you want to destroy the middle class just for cheap TVs and iShit?
___
Why yes, yes we do.

Posted by: Obama, Bush, and the rest at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (5LOno)

195 Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

At some point, the political left, is going to go too far.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (P3GWR)

196 I sit on the floor in front of my bed watching TV on mute listening for my name
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (DUoqb)

Nailed. It.

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:49 PM (IrByp)

197 Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (qmMG2)

But they don't believe enough to do their own heavy lifting. They have small groups of violent thugs at their beck and call that they manipulate for that purpose, and those groups are composed of cravens who are only comfortable intimidating the weak and attacking from overwhelming numbers.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:49 PM (HalrA)

198 @192
Blue and gray, but that's being scrubbed from history as we speak.

Posted by: xnycparent at February 02, 2016 08:49 PM (3Rr8K)

199 Well, stopping illegal immigration should be the GOP's 'shatter the Dem coalition' wedge issue, so of course the Stupid Party would rather try to out-donk the donks with free money because of course they would.

Posted by: mugiwara at February 02, 2016 08:49 PM (hqQOv)

200

before I turn out the light, wanted to toss Levin's rant

http://bit.ly/1o4lFYn

so good

First Hispanic to win a Primary caucus among other things. He can be so right. Not a peep from the media on this.

nightie night

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 02, 2016 08:49 PM (qCMvj)

201 After Romney's 2012 ORCA debacle, I haven't given a dime to the Repubs. Not a single dime. That was an outright fraud and I realized all my donations and all the others (the stereotypical "little old lady" giving $20 to save the country based on the scare mailers) were doing to nothing but enriching the consultant class.

All that money went for nothing but for their largesse. They milk the campaigns for nothing but their own jet-set life.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (dvuhZ)

202 Stop all immigration until America gets its shit together.

There's one.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (uURQL)
umm, getting rid of quotas really would mean "unrestricted immigration", like it was in the 19th century

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (lVU49)

203 There is nothing wrong with levying tariffs on
Chinese products to make up the difference, and bring them into line
with the price of products made domestically under U.S. regulations.
Consumer products would cost more, but at least Americans would still be
employed manufacturing them.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (sdi6R)

Exactly, and I'd go as far as to say that unlimited free trade with those who have a structural advantage in manufacturing (thanks to our differences in laws) is nothing short of an economic suicide pact.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (HalrA)

204 "This is a no-brainer."

Grammie, it's a growing club. There are a handful of Republicans I give any damn about whatsoever. The rest can go blow themselves.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (gnB5x)

205 Cheap crap from China is not destroying the middle class. No jobs and high cost is destroying the middle class.

Let my people go, set us free from regulation that we may prosper.

Posted by: Ralph at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (idjhO)

206 After Romney's 2012 ORCA debacle, . . . .

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (dvuhZ)

ARRRRGGGHHHH

*ragetwitches on ground*

Posted by: alexthechick - Love and despair bitches at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (IrByp)

207 By this definition, by all means. I am no conservative.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (TZYqp)

Welcome to the Rebellion.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (HalrA)

208 178 Do you want to destroy the middle class just for cheap TVs and iShit?
Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:46 PM (dvuhZ)
***
I was in manufacturing for a few years, and may yet return to the industry.
My old company had factories in Germany, China, Mexico, etc., etc., etc., but for critical products, it was only ever made in the USA.

And there was a reason for that - the American plants, for all their problems, built a quality product at a competitive price.

There's not much that can match what American industry was, and may become again.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (/33sy)

209 umm, getting rid of quotas really would mean "unrestricted immigration", like it was in the 19th century
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (lVU49)

Hrm, read that too quick.

Is it a quota if you don't let anyone in?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 08:51 PM (uURQL)

210 After Romney's 2012 ORCA debacle

Bit in the butt by Shamu.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 08:52 PM (FkBIv)

211 Apropos of nothing, but this seems very reminiscent of what the so-called "alt-right" (read: nationalist, protectionist, comfortable with playing the tribal politics game) has been saying during the last year or two. The change in immigration policy doesn't seem like a heresy at all to me, but even the other thing--the subsidizing of the middle and working class--seems to be finding more and more favor.

If at all possible, I'd like to avoid that, because it ends up pitting different sections of the country against one another, if the history of the European Right is any indication. However, I could be wrong; we may already be at that point of a direct clash between Red and Blue America, in which case I could maybe see my way to accepting it as a necessary form of cultural warfare.

Posted by: T at February 02, 2016 08:52 PM (NctcF)

212 An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of free trade in the early 19th century.
***
The problem isn't that your alternatives are free trade or protectionism.

The left developed a new trade model - you implement taxes, regulations, and government fiats on your own people to specifically make foreign goods cheaper, putting pressure on your own industrial base.

Then the individual companies in your country have to pay protection money to the political class, or businesses domestically close shop and suddenly foreign interests will pay the political class instead...but either way the political class gets paid.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 08:52 PM (5LOno)

213 But they don't believe enough to do their own heavy lifting. They have small groups of violent thugs at their beck and call that they manipulate for that purpose, and those groups are composed of cravens who are only comfortable intimidating the weak and attacking from overwhelming numbers.

Lon Horiuchi - and those like him - disagree.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (qmMG2)

214 Sorry if this has been mentioned. Scott Adams talked about doing something bad - like obamacare - as a starting point is better than doing nothing. Especially because we as Americans are pretty good at making bad things better. The

Posted by: Beth M at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (kiy9d)

215 Fuck I can't believe my CO is talking about Diversity and nominating Female Sailors for some bullshit award. Fuck me

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (DUoqb)

216 I'm hispanic and I'd nuke TJ if given three whistles for the Mexican government's violation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo by advocating 'reconquista' of California in government run schools.

Ray? Issdat you?

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (kCfMX)

217 comfortable with playing the tribal politics game

aka Stormfronters

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (lVU49)

218 Excellent post Ace. This comment:

yes we seem to have a regime of "What's best for the foreign person seeking citizenship?" rather than "What's best for the current American population?"

It seems to be forbidden -- NATIONALIST, you know -- to suggest that American policy should favor Americans.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (dciA+)

Reminded me of something I've been considering for a while, though I haven't been able to pull everything together into a cogent argument. I think this disdain of patriotism and love of country and fellow citizens has led directly to the economic damage we're seeing among the lower and middle classes.

If America is just another place, if Americans are just another group of people (if not a bit worse as their educations at 'elite' schools taught them), why NOT offshore jobs? Why NOT hire undocumented dreamers to do the jobs fat, lazy Americans won't do? I mean, it helps those people over there (or here, as the case may be) recover from centuries of imperialism and one person is just as good as another after all. To think otherwise would be racist. And it helps the bottom line. And bonuses are on the line. Doing well by doing good, so to speak.

Now I'm not really saying all of this is actually part of the decision making process, but I have to wonder if this worldview absorbed by way of education and social group outlook hasn't informed these decisions.

I've got no evidence of course, but I can't help but think that there's something to it. Also, despite being uncomfortably agnostic, think the denigration of religion in general and Christianity in particular has had similar effects. When the cultural worldview changes from the personal responsibility type of charity to the 'I gave at the office and ballot box' sort, it becomes easier to think of your ex-employees-to-be as the governments problem and not yours.

Anyway that's as far as I've gotten. I'm a scattershot thinker and not much of a writer.

Posted by: J. Random Dude at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (C9lNt)

219 Why not get a penny out of every dime sent back to Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and Panama, out of all those Western Union shops?

Posted by: the littl shyning man at February 02, 2016 08:54 PM (U6f54)

220 191: That's the current elite view. Nationalism and protectionism are curse words. When they use those terms, they are calling you the lowest thing they can in their world view.

You are a denier.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 08:54 PM (dvuhZ)

221 Is there a pet store around there?

Posted by: Dr. Varno at February 02, 2016 08:54 PM (GdFQh)

222 I agree that legal immigration should be reduced but immigrants don't all have the effect of taking jobs from Americans. A good number have created business and jobs themselves.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:54 PM (MNgU2)

223 I don't have to live like this. I can extract myself
from this toxic relationship. I can enter into a better relationship,
one with humble integrity, that uses money sparingly so as to make it go
farther and wider. One that aligns itself with my core beliefs, and
does not mock me.

This is a no-brainer.

Posted by: grammie winger, sign of The Time at February 02, 2016 08:44 PM (dFi94)

Amen. Goes for what's going on all around us now too. None of this has to be this way.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (4ErVI)

224 I'll take curtain two please. For the federal government to pay people money that they did not earn is flatly counter free-market and not allowed in the constitution. Choices on who we let in and when is within the aegis of the executive branch. Limiting immigration until wages rise or we figure out what is going on is entirely kosher. Go Cruz!

Posted by: TxDan at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (nbOdF)

225 The "Give out more tax credits from the government to get people to vote for us" sounds a whole lot like "If we're the ones that give the illegals citizenship then they'll vote for us" fantasy.

Posted by: buzzion at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (z/Ubi)

226 "156
I propose that right now would be a good time to impose an oil
import tax. Aside from the revenue it would raise, the primary benefit
would be to insulate the US oil industry from the Saudi government
policy which is specifically to make investment in the oil industry too
risky by making long term planning too difficult.

So there's too much government meddling in our lives and businesses
except for the one or two areas that concern me and it would be smarter
if we did it my way?

Cheap petrol makes manufacturing and transport cheaper. That's good
for a lot of people. Expensive petrol makes drilling and fracking good
for other people.

Are we in the let government choose winners and losers business?

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:43 PM (1xUj/)"

Right now it is the government of Saudi Arabia that is picking the winners and losers in the global oil market and, not surprisingly, their plan is that they win and we lose. An oil import tax means that their power to destroy an American industry (again) is moderated. It does not mean that American oil producers can get fat and lazy. It means that they can compete among themselves and that when everything goes to shit in the Middle East, which Obama's second term has made inevitable, the United States will have a viable oil industry and not have to rebuild it again over a period of several years.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (QHgTq)

227 Tariffs are anathema to free markets sure but where the hell are free markets? We have none.

What have and will have more of as this deflationary depression engulfs the world is protectionism which includes tariffs as its blunt weapon.

Tariffs in this economic environment, like concertina at borders, will kill globalism. And that is a good thing.

Posted by: 7Mike at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (pxwEr)

228 Numbers, its all about numbers. The greatest generation is almost done. The baby boomers are retiring every day, and will break medi-care. Our genius on this is Paul Ryan, and he will fix it màybe in 2035 or so being the fiscal wonk he is.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 08:56 PM (6Ll1u)

229 Shitcan 25-30 years worth of regulations (including Obamacare) and go back to the '65 immigration rules. Complete with enforcement.

Economy takes off like a fucking transwarp engine at emergency speed.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 08:56 PM (m9V0o)

230 Well, stopping illegal immigration should be the GOP's 'shatter the Dem coalition' wedge issue
***
If you presume the primary goal of Republican office holders is to gain political power by shattering the democrat coalition, they you are of course right. You will note that they aren't doing that.

If you instead presume the primary goal of Republican office holders is personal enrichment, then their reticence to do *anything* about the unrestricted immigration we are experiencing makes a lot more sense...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (5LOno)

231 aka Stormfronters

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (lVU49)

Oh look, it's the old "you're a Nazi for wanting to vote your economic interests" card. Same thing that the globalists have been playing against us for years now.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (HalrA)

232 210 After Romney's 2012 ORCA debacle

Bit in the butt by Shamu.

Better than what I did to Leo.

Posted by: The Bear at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (7qAYi)

233 An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled , educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get mocked for being a denier.

Posted by: Thucydides at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (6IqhF)

If you think that Ricardo's work holds up, then you are the one who is going to be mocked. Or have you never heard of what Schumpeter called the "Ricardian vice"? - the habit of oversimplifying an economic problem to the point of triviality.

And how, exactly, do we have over two centuries of evidence? We've only had GATT for a couple of decades. Writings by economists are not "evidence". Not if economics is to be taken seriously as an empirical science.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (nFdGS)

234 Scale is the problem.

The millions of invaders and the millions of their helpers have the rest of us in a nice bind.

They know trying to fix the problem gradually is not going to work because it is too late for that. They also know the problem is still sufficiently dilute such that most folks don't have the stomach to quickly secure the border and force out the invaders.

So, we stumble along, year after year, and the herd of leeches grows and grows.

Do it now and do it fast and hard or just grab your ankles and pray for plenty of lube.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (MQEz6)

235 229 Shitcan 25-30 years worth of regulations (including Obamacare) and go back to the '65
------
Also transform the stupid tax codes.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (voOPb)

236 Biggest problem with trying to get manufacturing back in this country is this: no infrastructure.
By which I mean: mining, refining, materials processing, machine tools, and on and on ....
Closed up 20 years ago, scrapped out ....
We barely have the infrastructure to build the infrastructure any more.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:58 PM (Z8DIA)

237 "Fuck I can't believe my CO is talking about Diversity and nominating Female Sailors for some bullshit award. Fuck me"

Sounds like the pressure is making it's way down the chain of command.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 08:58 PM (gnB5x)

238 Basing political arguments on price is a fool's game, really, because price is malleable and currency is designed to fluctuate.

I got a haircut today and the price had gone down from my last one.

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 08:58 PM (8QGte)

239 Fuck I can't believe my CO is talking about Diversity and nominating Female Sailors for some bullshit award. Fuck me
Posted by: Nevergiveup

Army and Marine Corps chiefs: It’s time for women to register for the draft

http://tinyurl.com/zaqnq4a

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 08:58 PM (FkBIv)

240 Oh and let's discuss one of those things no one is talking about: churches that are getting big government dollars to take care of the dreamers and illegals. It has something to do with churches supporting illegal immigration.

(Sorry to keep just dropping in, but work keeps interfering.)

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (5HBd1)

241 My area really doesn't have a lot of immigrants with jobs, or immigrants at all. And yes yes, save me the "but my area does!" response. The folks without decent jobs in my area are not going to move to yours. I think the "restrict immigration and the jobs problem is solved more than an iota" argument is overblown and likely to bite us in the ass when it doesn't work. About the only consistent message we've delivered on this topic is fuck Hispanics. Given that they are the fastest growing ethnicity in America, maybe we shouldn't piss on people who hold religion dear and value hard work.

But maybe you're right, if we cut out the immigrants with our values, Pajama Boy will probably get a job, and Mike Brown's Second Cumming will most certainly stop robbing stores and pick up a career.

Posted by: The Governor at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (ODqY5)

242 Gloomy vibe here tonight.

Posted by: Weasel at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (e3bId)

243 231 aka Stormfronters

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 08:53 PM (lVU49)

Oh look, it's the old "you're a Nazi for wanting to vote your economic interests" card. Same thing that the globalists have been playing against us for years now.
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (HalrA)
***
Yes. Our 'betters' have been very successful in transforming the healthy and natural desire for self-preservation into evidence of a black soul and dark intentions.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (/33sy)

244 Oh look, it's the old "you're a Nazi for wanting to
vote your economic interests" card. Same thing that the globalists have
been playing against us for years now.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (HalrA)
Nowhere did I say anything remotely like this.
Just pointing out that when the "alt-right" says things like they are "comfortable with tribal politics", that is code for "white power nationalism".

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (lVU49)

245 240 Oh and let's discuss one of those things no one is talking about: churches that are getting big government dollars to take care of the dreamers and illegals. It has something to do with churches supporting illegal immigration.

(Sorry to keep just dropping in, but work keeps interfering.) Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (5HBd1)

The phrase "Separation of Church and State" suddenly comes to mind...

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (HalrA)

246 Shitcan 25-30 years worth of regulations (including Obamacare) and go back to the '65 immigration rules. Complete with enforcement
***
I tend to think something like this should be on the platform of the Republican candidate for president - just an across the board legislation repealing everything since 98, 88, 65, whatever.

The government and the culture have been on a solid path of degradation for decades.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (5LOno)

247 >>There is nothing wrong with levying tariffs on
Chinese products to make up the difference, and bring them into line
with the price of products made domestically under U.S. regulations.
Consumer products would cost more, but at least Americans would still be
employed manufacturing them.

There are better ways to do this than tariffs. Trump is correct about this, some people get paid a shit ton of money to negotiate complex, multi-national trade deals. These people do not work for the US government, the are in private industry.

I do like the idea of business people running government. We get paid to produce profits, not just overspend our budgets.

Tariffs are really the same thing as subsidies, just in reverse. You put the government in charge of creating artificial means for a market to exist, that's a subsidy. And subsidies never go away, hello ethanol, and they never get smaller.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (/tuJf)

248 Numbers, its all about numbers. The greatest generation is almost done. The baby boomers are retiring every day, and will break medi-care. Our genius on this is Paul Ryan, and he will fix it maybe in 2035 or so being the fiscal wonk he is.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 08:56 PM (6Ll1u)

The time to have fixed it was 2005, and even that would have been a 50-50 proposition. Now there's going to be a lot of pain to go along with the terminal bonage.

Posted by: steveegg at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (cL79m)

249 "aka Stormfronters"

Dude.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (gnB5x)

250 Oh and let's discuss one of those things no one is talking about: churches that are getting big government dollars to take care of the dreamers and illegals. It has something to do with churches supporting illegal immigration.

I believe a "Thanks W" is in order.

But it was a Great Fucking Idea when he pushed it. Many Republicans told me so.

People. They're mostly stupid.

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 09:01 PM (qmMG2)

251 A buddy of mine, runs an auto parts store, was bitching about the pastor at his church. He was pushing the refugees. Saying it was the Christian thing to do to let them in and all that shit.

That is going on all over. These guys can be nice useful idiots.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:02 PM (dvuhZ)

252 244 Oh look, it's the old "you're a Nazi for wanting to
vote your economic interests" card. Same thing that the globalists have
been playing against us for years now.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:57 PM (HalrA)
Nowhere did I say anything remotely like this.
Just pointing out that when the "alt-right" says things like they are "comfortable with tribal politics", that is code for "white power nationalism".
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:00 PM (lVU49)
***
I wasn't aware that was the decrypted version of the cipher text.

You sure you haven't got your keys mixed up?

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:02 PM (/33sy)

253 I believe a "Thanks W" is in order.

But it was a Great Fucking Idea when he pushed it. Many Republicans told me so.

Actually there were a lot of people on the right concerned about his whole "faith based initiatives" thing, that it would lead to churches being yoked into service to the state.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:03 PM (lVU49)

254 Just pointing out that when the "alt-right" says things like they are "comfortable with tribal politics", that is code for "white power nationalism".

Humans are tribal.

China is filled with Chinese. UK is filled with Brits (and Scotts/Irish). France is filled with French.

What we are seeing in Europe right now is what happens when you try to ignore nationalities and tribes - you get war.

What blood cost do you want to pay for diversity?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:03 PM (uURQL)

255 The most politically feasible way to get that government land into private hands is to give it away as slavery reparations
-------
Heh. I like this. Give all those reparation seekers 40 acres out in the middle of Bumf*ck, Wyoming and tell them it's yours to work or sell and that's it. And maybe a mule. Could you see all those inner city Chicago yutes running out there and going WTF? Some could might be smart and rent the land to the cattle ranchers out there, but most of them would sell thinking they were going to get rich. And a smart rancher would wait them out long enough to get pennies on the dollar for the land because they would have no idea of the value of the property. They would get tired of paying property taxes on land the they weren't getting any tangible value from because they wouldn't know what to do with it and they aren't very interested in actually working it. Some would, most wouldn't.
And then they would cry about how they were ripped off.

Posted by: Old Blue at February 02, 2016 09:03 PM (9iR5/)

256 Saying it was the Christian thing to do to let them in and all that shit.
***
Christian Rome let plenty of German "refugees" in. It led to the end of Christian Rome.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:03 PM (5LOno)

257 "Protectionism hurts the protectionist party.

I went to a really expensive school with lots of lines and curves on graphs to prove it. Also, it's true."

A false absolutism from one of those schools teaching Marxist theory perhaps, or some other globalist garbage.

Lies
Damn Lies
Statistics

We could do WW2 again and destroy the world's industry, then that would give us the comparative advantage we had for 30 years like before, but let's try something else. Protection is not just an economic theory, it is the whole lifestyle, belief system, everything we built ... inside our borders. Liberty has a price/cost.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 09:03 PM (5Gpe2)

258 Yes. Our 'betters' have been very successful in
transforming the healthy and natural desire for self-preservation into
evidence of a black soul and dark intentions.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (/33sy)

Of course they have. Because everything that opposes their totalitarian utopian scheme must be demonized if it can't be made to serve the agenda.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:04 PM (HalrA)

259 Trump has demonstrated his intent to defend the United States and the reaction was to make the defense of the country a despicable act.

That is where we are now, defense of the US is a disgusting idea to Trump's political opponents, making Trump a despicable person.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 09:04 PM (P3GWR)

260
How about offering to get meddling busybodies out of the education system?

How about offering to get meddling busybodies out of telling you what you can and cannot do on your property?

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars (TM) at February 02, 2016 09:04 PM (BK3ZS)

261 " just an across the board legislation repealing everything since 98, 88, 65, whatever.

The government and the culture have been on a solid path of degradation for decades. "

Cut. Jib. Newsletter.

There's a platform that would have me volunteering for 12 hour days of campaigning from now until the day after the election

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 09:04 PM (Z8DIA)

262 Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 09:05 PM (idjhO)

263 Humans are tribal.

China is filled with Chinese. UK is filled with Brits (and Scotts/Irish). France is filled with French.

What we are seeing in Europe right now is what happens when you try to ignore nationalities and tribes - you get war.

So America is....?

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 09:05 PM (1xUj/)

264 >>>> about: churches that are getting big government dollars to take care of the dreamers and illegals. It has something to do with churches supporting illegal immigration.
----
Oh yeah, thankfully, my high priest is a Nazi and isn't having any of that. Plus, we really don't have many illegals here so he might not be so brave.

Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 09:05 PM (2x3L+)

265 So America is....?

Fucked ?

Posted by: Irony at February 02, 2016 09:05 PM (qmMG2)

266 I just got here, read the post, not the comments.

Now that the usual disclaimer is out of the way....
Controlling immigration for ANY reason is not a heresy to conservative ideas. Securing the border is one of the federal governments' most important jobs. No border, no nation!
What ever we decide, as long as it is codified as law and enforced justly, is fine.

When did it become "heresy" to protect American citizens from unfettered immigration, or unfair trading situations.

When did this nation become "free trade" only? Not in the founding documents, and I know of no SCOTUS cases to back up that notion.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 09:06 PM (kKHcp)

267 >>>"...I propose that right now would be a good time to impose an oil import tax. Aside from the revenue it would raise, the primary benefit would be to insulate the US oil industry from the Saudi government policy which is specifically to make investment in the oil industry too risky by making long term planning too difficult."

Problem with this is driving up the price of gas during a depression. It makes it worse, (on the people) not better.

For the long term viability of US domestic oil production capacity, gov't must be throttled back. Using the FedGov's taxing authority as a blunt weapon against the import of foreign oil is a Big Gov solution to a Big Gov caused problem.

Posted by: 7Mike at February 02, 2016 09:06 PM (pxwEr)

268 Protectionism is stupid economically, because all it means is that the tariffs wind up being paid by the consumers, not the companies.

Protectionism is also stupid politically, because it allows domestic corporations another avenue of corruption with the government. They will spend big bucks on campaign donations to keep those tariffs high even when they don't make any economic sense.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:06 PM (lVU49)

269 Late to the thread since I read the post, but did anybody ask how exactly slowing down immigration and conserving the job market for American citizens is heretical to conservatism?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at February 02, 2016 09:07 PM (Wckf4)

270 227 Tariffs are anathema to free markets sure but where the hell are free markets? We have none.

What have and will have more of as this deflationary depression engulfs the world is protectionism which includes tariffs as its blunt weapon.

Tariffs in this economic environment, like concertina at borders, will kill globalism. And that is a good thing.
Posted by: 7Mike at February 02, 2016 08:55 PM (pxwEr)

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Constitution did allow tariffs.

In a global economy, the alternative is a "race to the bottom" where the U.S. must become a Third World country in order to be economically competitive with other Third World countries. I'm sure the elites will be happy to buy the cheap goods and services the rest of us will have to produce under conditions just this side of slavery.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 09:07 PM (sdi6R)

271 >>>Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?
Posted by: Ralph<<<

Microwaves. And the Higgs Boson.

Posted by: Fritz at February 02, 2016 09:07 PM (BngQR)

272 A false absolutism from one of those schools teaching Marxist theory perhaps, or some other globalist garbage.

Posted by: Illiniwek

Ummmm. No.

I could make the case that it's the most purely capitalist B-School there is.

We weren't taught good/bad. Markets are like weather, when moist warm air meets cool dry air this is what happens.

Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 09:08 PM (1xUj/)

273 Late to the thread since I read the post, but did anybody ask how exactly slowing down immigration and conserving the job market for American citizens is heretical to conservatism?
***
The GOPe told us so. Also, its apparently anti-Christian, as I'm sure Mr Kaisch could tell us, to not let rapists and the like into your house.

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:08 PM (5LOno)

274 In a global economy, the alternative is a "race to the bottom" where the
U.S. must become a Third World country in order to be economically
competitive with other Third World countries.

Only if America tries to compete with Third World countries in performing Third World tasks.

The whole idea of free trade is that crappy places with cheap labor get the crappy jobs, and the better places with expensive labor get the better jobs.

Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (lVU49)

275 >>> I'm sure the elites will be happy to buy the cheap goods and services
the rest of us will have to produce under conditions just this side of
slavery.<<<

This is their goal.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (idjhO)

276 Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:06 PM (lVU49)

But free trade and globalism works, and there's decades of experience to prove it. Oh, wait...

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (HalrA)

277 Given that they are the fastest growing ethnicity in America, maybe we shouldn't piss on people who hold religion dear and value hard work.

Ah yes, the "natural" conservatives.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (FkBIv)

278 Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?
***
Arguably the various pharmaceutical drugs that the governing class is hooked on.

Seriously, if you took a look at what your average pajama boy or Amanda Marcotte are on, you'd be amazed that they can get out of bed in the morning...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (5LOno)

279 "Every time the Supreme Court meets, it's a de facto Constitutional convention.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (7qAYi)"

People of the Supreme Court seldom meet together,
even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a
conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (QHgTq)

280 >>> The GOPe told us so. Also, its apparently anti-Christian, as I'm sure Mr Kaisch could tell us, to not let rapists and the like into your house.
Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:08 PM (5LOno)
-----
My Commie pope said the same thing. It's true. It's true.

Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (2x3L+)

281 Why do I bother? So many of youse guys said much the same thing better, many times.
One more Jameson, coming up.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (kKHcp)

282 Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (lVU49)

You can't outsource the plumber jobs.

Some of those other "crappy jobs" may not be outsourcable in the long run, either.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (uURQL)

283 276
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:06 PM (lVU49)

But free trade and globalism works, and there's decades of experience to prove it. Oh, wait...

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (HalrA)
Look, we know exactly what will happen when we have a protectionist market, all we have to do is look to the 1950's-1970's domestic auto market. The car makers got away with making crappy cars because they were protected from competition. They had no incentive to make decent cars. With high tariffs, they still wouldn't have any incentive to make decent cars.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (lVU49)

284 "Microwaves. And the Higgs Boson."

Silicon and cell phone signals....?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (gnB5x)

285 It's not the free trade. We don't have free trade because Americans are not free to produce.

We are not free to compete because we are regulated out of the competition.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (idjhO)

286 Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Constitution did allow tariffs.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 09:07 PM (sdi6R)

Tariffs were a primary funding mechanism of the federal government at the beginning. We have used tariffs all throughout our history, and even today still have some tariffs in place. So, yes, they are okay Constitutionally.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (nFdGS)

287 >>>Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.
-------

Supply &'demand chemjeff.

Plus the USA has set itself up,to fail. I mean by this we are set up to be a consumer nation with rules, regs & laws.

Why mfg here at 35% tax rate whe Ireland is at 13%?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (voOPb)

288 You can't outsource the plumber jobs.

Some of those other "crappy jobs" may not be outsourcable in the long run, either.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (uURQL)
I am talking about some of the industrial manufacturing jobs

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (lVU49)

289 Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (lVU49)

There is no such thing as a third world task. There is no such thing as a crappy job. There is no such thing as a job an American won't do. We can't all be lawyers and graphic designers. There has to be an engine of wealth creation, and without manufacturing, we don't have one.

The service economy is a lie, it's an ouroborus - a snake eating its own tail. It produces nothing, and according to even the most basic understanding of Say's Law, wealth is created when you make something worth more than the sum of its parts and the labor that went into creating it.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (HalrA)

290 Here's a thought, how about a massive anti- lawyer movement, and used car salesman one too. Would solve some problems.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (6Ll1u)

291 Given that they are the fastest growing ethnicity in America, maybe we shouldn't piss on people who hold religion dear and value hard work.
-----------------
Ah yes, the "natural" conservatives.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (FkBIv)

Look how well they've conserved poverty and elitism in the countries they're from!

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:12 PM (uURQL)

292 And on the list of interesting things to do: Let's declare that, when the Federal government owns more that 50% of a state, that state is no longer sovereign. Maybe they can be territories. It's totally ridiculous for the Feds to lock up lands like this in the West and there's hardly anything they own in the East.

I don't think y'all really understand what the Departments of Natural Resources are like on the West Coast. And, given the one party rule in most of these states, citizens don't have redress from it. When we ask our liberal friends how much Federally owned land is enough, they can't put a limit on it. Someone needs to.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 09:12 PM (5HBd1)

293 OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM

Go ahead and vent. You'll feel better for it.
cheap therapy.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 09:12 PM (P3GWR)

294 I'm sure the elites will be happy to buy the cheap goods and services
the rest of us will have to produce under conditions just this side of
slavery.
***
The intent of government, always and forever, is to enrich those that control the government. The only question is how much power you give them to do so.

As an amusing aside, the whole idea of modern governments possibly stems from the ancient Romans figuring out it was more profitable to "tax" the merchants going through their lands rather then robbing and murdering them...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:12 PM (5LOno)

295 *wanders in/nods at banders b school comment/ wanders out*

Posted by: Lea at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (vmMMi)

296 278 Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?
***
Arguably the various pharmaceutical drugs that the governing class is hooked on.

Seriously, if you took a look at what your average pajama boy or Amanda Marcotte are on, you'd be amazed that they can get out of bed in the morning...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:10 PM (5LOno)

fluoride, in the water.... stealing our Manly Essence...

Posted by: Gen. Jack D. Ripper at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (f7rv6)

297 Biggest problem with trying to get manufacturing back in this country is this: no infrastructure.
By which I mean: mining, refining, materials processing, machine tools, and on and on ....
Closed up 20 years ago, scrapped out ....
We barely have the infrastructure to build the infrastructure any more.

The countries that didn't have that infrastructure didn't let it stop them from taking what they could one little bit at a time.

The Chinese didn't start out saying "woe is me, we can't make X, Y, and Z.." they said "neat, we can make W" and went on from there.

I wonder if private ownership actually puts us at a disavantage when it comes time for the bureaucrats to creatively interpret the law; the bureaucrats who do the regulations enforcement here think they're putting The Other Guy out of business when they shut down a plant, but the ones in China know they're either putting out of business a plant owned by their EMPLOYER, or even if it's private, it's owned by the in-law of one of their bosses...

they're free to concentrate on sticking it to the roundeye overseas, while the bureaucrats here are more concentrated on their own class warfare.

What I want: the US to stop turning into a Mandarinate.

What I'm willing to settle for: Mandarins that actually take the interest of the entire country into account.

What I'm likely to get: a choice between Grampa Lenin and Huge! Luxurious! but Classy! Trump!

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (kCfMX)

298 Here is a heresy to the GOPe:

Hillary doesn't have any accomplishments.

Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (1ijHg)

299 "Only if America tries to compete with Third World countries in performing Third World tasks.

The
whole idea of free trade is that crappy places with cheap labor get the
crappy jobs, and the better places with expensive labor get the better
jobs.

Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (lVU49)"

The current rate of unemployment and underemployment in the United States suggests that there may be a problem with that particular theory.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (QHgTq)

300 Some of those other "crappy jobs" may not be outsourcable in the long run, either.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (uURQL)

I am talking about some of the industrial manufacturing jobs
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (lVU49)

How is the business of making the valuable things Americans want a "crappy job"?

Making computers is crappy? Making smartphones is crappy? Making cars is crappy?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (uURQL)

301 How about "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"? The governement cannot give anything they didn't take from someone else

Posted by: Minuteman at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (r3rgu)

302 Control and restrict immigration? Absofuckinglutely. I like the Australian model; you cannot immigrate there until you can prove you have a job waiting. Once upon a time, we had a similar set of rules.

Incidentally, VDH's piece today at NRO (yeah yeah, I know) touches a bit on the topic of 'heresy' as he explains the attraction of what Trump is saying while bitching about the delivery system (Trump):

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430642/trump-why-do-voters-care

Posted by: GnuBreed at February 02, 2016 09:14 PM (gyKtp)

303 "You can't outsource the plumber jobs."

Not to China, no. But to cheap immigrant labor? Yes.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:14 PM (gnB5x)

304 The other side of the coin is crushing regulations on businesses, and a tax and regulatory scheme that favors and manipulates large businesses that can afford to hire armies of lawyers.

Now, if we eliminate regulation-by-agency-fiat-and-Congressional-set-asides, the execs will just vote themselves bigger compensation packages. So that has to be accompanied by a truly fair and tight labor market.

BTW as an underemployed worker trying to change industries, it just frosts me when I see an ad with a job that I can do, but requires 10 years experience in "(fill in the blank) industry. Like, yeah your business is so special it takes more than a Ph.D's worth of OJT to learn it.

Bullshit. They specify that because they can and still get 100 applicants. What a crock.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:14 PM (gClMK)

305 No Lea!! Come back!!!

Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 09:14 PM (2x3L+)

306 "When we ask our liberal friends how much Federally owned land is enough, they can't put a limit on it."

All of it, to be held in trust for the people.
Under the management of the best and brightest who know what is best for us all.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (P3GWR)

307
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (voOPb)
I agree to an extent that we've set ourselves up to fail by not promoting vigorously enough new job creation in industries that can take advantage of expensive labor
For heaven's sake literally anyone beyond the age of 12 can stand at an assembly line for 15 hours a day and make iPhone cases, why should we try to bring these types of lousy jobs to America? It's a waste. Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

308 Hmm, the way globalism is going, the end result with be the vast majority of the population living under subsistence conditions with a very few living like kings at the top.

Sort of like all of human history up until the explosion brought on by the ideas expressed in the Constitution.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (dvuhZ)

309 I'm not sure what meaningful debate can really be had here. The answer is clear: immigration restrictionism. You get more Working Class Whites and also avoid importing more Democrat voters. Two birds. One stone.

I have not heard any compelling arguments as to how the other heresy avoids the problem of importing new Democrats. The only arguments I've heard boil down to: "Well, let's just cross our fingers, invoke American exceptionalism, and hope for the best." But this is no argument at all.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (RPsRI)

310 289 Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:09 PM (lVU49)

There is no such thing as a third world task. There is no such thing as a crappy job. There is no such thing as a job an American won't do. We can't all be lawyers and graphic designers. There has to be an engine of wealth creation, and without manufacturing, we don't have one.

The service economy is a lie, it's an ouroborus - a snake eating its own tail. It produces nothing, and according to even the most basic understanding of Say's Law, wealth is created when you make something worth more than the sum of its parts and the labor that went into creating it.
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (HalrA)
***
Bingo!

Aspirational artists driving each other around for Uber is no basis for an economy.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (/33sy)

311 Oh yeah, the idea of crappy jobs. My mother picked cotton as a girl and worked at the Armour packing plant when I was a child. I've personally picked apples and worked in a packing shed. (and had more time to think than I do now and the money these days isn't a whole lot better.) The reason we have people that think Americans won't do these jobs is because our precious snowflakes have been told not to do those dirty jobs. Cut all the government money and give folks the option to work or go hungry. That's the way it has been throughout history and it's a great motivator.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (5HBd1)

312 Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy. Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?

"Welcome to Flint, Michigan".

Posted by: rickb223 at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (jqZ8a)

313 The current rate of unemployment and
underemployment in the United States suggests that there may be a
problem with that particular theory.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (QHgTq)

A hypothesis that fails its experiments is to be rejected. But if there's one thing socialists and globalists have in common, it's a common belief that reality itself must be wrong, not their precious philosophy.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:16 PM (HalrA)

314 >>>305 No Lea!! Come back!!!
Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 09:14 PM (2x3L+)

hi l,Elle!!! Too much drama for me right now sorry : )

Posted by: Lea at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (vmMMi)

315 You can't outsource the plumber jobs.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (uURQL)

That's why the dems are all atingle about making pissing and shitting in public legal. No need for plumbers, at all. Everything is .... natural!

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (zc3Db)

316 For heaven's sake literally anyone beyond the age of 12 can stand at an assembly line for 15 hours a day and make iPhone cases, why should we try to bring these types of lousy jobs to America? It's a waste. Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

IIRC, you're a chem professor. What personal experience do you have with the jobs that you think America as a nation should not want?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (uURQL)

317 Okay,Lea, I understand. I'm bailing too

Posted by: L, Elle at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (2x3L+)

318 Money is fungible, even if currencies are manipulated and taken off the gold standard. But peoples are not to be treated as fungible, not in this country at least.

So economics compares labor, but Americans are more valuable, aren't we, to America and our government at least, aren't we the people the ultimate in value? Any economic valuation has to include all the American virtues of citizens, which is why new citizens must learn them all, as we must, in civics classes for example.

So when we give a job to a foreign slave, we take a job from an American, and take his pride, his liberty, his ability to build community, have children ... Those are expensive things to give to a foreigner, just so a corporate exec can get a bonus.

The world is not nice, not free, not even good much of the time. America First is so simple, it took great effort to tear it apart with globalist propaganda.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (5Gpe2)

319 The whole idea of free trade is that crappy places with cheap labor get the crappy jobs, and the better places with expensive labor get the better jobs.

Why would we want to compete with crappy places for crappy jobs? Let's instead make better jobs here.

Can you at least let a couple of us have the option of jobs you think are crappy before we're all blackmailed into working for the Bernie Campaign?

I only have two months of Funemployment Benefits left.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (kCfMX)

320 That's why the dems are all atingle about making pissing and shitting in public legal. No need for plumbers, at all. Everything is .... natural!

The Black Death is 100% natural and organic.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (uURQL)

321 Aspirational artists driving each other around for Uber is no basis for an economy.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (/33sy)

LOL!

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (zc3Db)

322
The current rate of unemployment and
underemployment in the United States suggests that there may be a
problem with that particular theory.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (QHgTq)
So then what you are really arguing for is a government jobs program disguised as a tariff. Government artificially makes it difficult to use foreign cheap labor for crappy jobs, thereby (theoretically) employing domestic workers to do those crappy jobs at inflated wages. If we're going to do that, then why not just have government make-work jobs? It would be about as effective.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (lVU49)

323 After talking to my father in law last night , I realized I'm still and always will be a Reagan Democrat. Screw Wall Street, screw Washington. I was (blush, blush) a Wallace Democrat, and I'm not proud of part of that. However, I don't want my life ruled by bankers, politicians, Boehner, McConnell, Ryan, or anyone with the last name Bush.

If either Trump or Cruz kill today's GOP, then power to them.

Posted by: Furious George, late to arrive and easily offended at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (RIzwy)

324 262 Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?

Geiko commercials.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (HMt16)

325 Allow me to introduce the 8,000 elephant in the room - the minimum wage. I'll just leave the job-killing/illegal-alien-attracting carcass over here.

Posted by: steveegg at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (cL79m)

326 >>In a global economy, the alternative is a "race to the bottom" where the U.S. must become a Third World country in order to be economically competitive with other Third World countries. I'm sure the elites will be happy to buy the cheap goods and services the rest of us will have to produce under conditions just this side of slavery.

The US manufacturing economy has slipped all the way from number 1 to number 2. And number 1 is of course China which is in the process of going tits up. On the other hand we are now making BMWs and Mercedes in the US. Shit loads of them.

The problem is really two fold. One, we do a shitty job negotiating these multi-national deals. We have all sorts of mutual interests with countries around the world. They covet our market for their goods but they also want to come to our schools, travel on vacation, immigrate, etc.. Make better deals.

Get regulations off US manufacturers. I don't know how many of you fit in this category but if you make stuff in the US and try to export then you know how much red tape we go through compared to the rest of the world. Get rid of that shit.

We've got the worst of both worlds, a centrally planned sorta free market. China doesn't have an EPA or an ATF

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (/tuJf)

327 "So maybe simple electoral reality demands a heresy to be committed -- we have to yield on this one principle, in order to save the others." -- Ace

"I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." -- G.W. Bush

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmi8cJG0BJo

Posted by: Patterico at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (x2kpr)

328 307
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:11 PM (voOPb)
.......Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

People, partnerships, corporations creation of jobs is a by product of trying to make bucks. Ford, GM were created to sell cars jobs were a by product. If I go in business, I go in business to make money.

If you want to create jobs let people create wealth. That means get the fucking government out of the way.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (voOPb)

329 316 For heaven's sake literally anyone beyond the age of 12 can stand at an assembly line for 15 hours a day and make iPhone cases, why should we try to bring these types of lousy jobs to America? It's a waste. Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

IIRC, you're a chem professor. What personal experience do you have with the jobs that you think America as a nation should not want?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (uURQL)
***
Indeed, when I was in manufacturing, we built engine control modules - those computers that go into your cars - and I assure you, you DO NOT WANT some illiterate peasant working on the line.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (/33sy)

330 Aspirational artists driving each other around for Uber is no basis for an economy.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (/33sy)

Nailed it.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (HalrA)

331 OK, here's another heresy: Abolish affirmative action in all its forms.

American business is hamstringed by being required to hire substandard employees solely because of their melanin content and/or the shape of their genitalia. And those employees are often notoriously difficult to discipline or fire.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 09:20 PM (sdi6R)

332 Don't know if this will work:

Posted by: Patterico at February 02, 2016 09:20 PM (x2kpr)

333 BTW as an underemployed worker trying to change industries, it just frosts me when I see an ad with a job that I can do, but requires 10 years experience in "(fill in the blank) industry. Like, yeah your business is so special it takes more than a Ph.D's worth of OJT to learn it.
***
That is one of the H1B tricks. Publish a very specific list of requirements that it is unlikely anyone will have at that level.

Then claim that you can't find an American that has the skills you need...and then hire someone from abroad who *nominally* does have the skills you, falsely claimed you needed at half the cost...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:20 PM (5LOno)

334 284 "Microwaves. And the Higgs Boson."

Silicon and cell phone signals....?

Kim Kardashian's selfies.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 09:21 PM (7qAYi)

335 Millions of American would gladly take a "crappy job."

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:22 PM (MQEz6)

336 There is nothing wrong with levying tariffs on

Chinese products to make up the difference, and bring them into line

with the price of products made domestically under U.S. regulations.

Consumer products would cost more, but at least Americans would still be

employed manufacturing them.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 08:48 PM (sdi6R)

Exactly,
and I'd go as far as to say that unlimited free trade with those who
have a structural advantage in manufacturing (thanks to our differences
in laws) is nothing short of an economic suicide pact.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 08:50 PM (HalrA)

Cato (and rickl) you guys are just fundamentally wrong about free trade and tariffs. The creative destruction of the market place, when left unfettered, will lead to our resources being used for more efficient purposes than recreating what we can buy cheaper from other sources.

Yes our laws need to be changed so that our government is not chaining our markets but tariffs are so NOT the answer as they will lead to less efficiency, higher prices and a population that is far less well off in real terms.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 09:22 PM (NPofj)

337 I'm getting awfully tired of this "We can't do X because reasons!"

BULLSHIT.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at February 02, 2016 09:22 PM (4ErVI)

338

No heat and no food tends to produce motivated workers... of course if you are a precious winner guaranteed success with soft hands and softer brain, 'work' is hate...

Posted by: The Donald in a Banana Hammock at February 02, 2016 09:23 PM (qul7b)

339 Indeed, when I was in manufacturing, we built engine
control modules - those computers that go into your cars - and I assure
you, you DO NOT WANT some illiterate peasant working on the line.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (/33sy)
EXACTLY. THESE are the types of jobs that we should be creating more of in the US. We should not be demanding that we bring back the iPhone case manufacturing jobs. We should be creating more high-end manufacturing jobs.
I never said that we should have "no manufacturing" or that we should have only an entirely service-based economy.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:23 PM (lVU49)

340 316 For heaven's sake literally anyone beyond the age of 12 can stand at an assembly line for 15 hours a day and make iPhone cases, why should we try to bring these types of lousy jobs to America? It's a waste. Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

IIRC, you're a chem professor. What personal experience do you have with the jobs that you think America as a nation should not want?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:17 PM (uURQL)
***
Indeed, when I was in manufacturing, we built engine control modules - those computers that go into your cars - and I assure you, you DO NOT WANT some illiterate peasant working on the line.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (/33sy)

There are tens of millions of Americans who are not capable of doing anything but the most routine manual labor. What are we to do with them? I would suggest that the combination of making them compete against slave labor conditions overseas and then against tens of millions of imported laborers is not the most humane policy.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 02, 2016 09:23 PM (nFdGS)

341 How about we keep immigration, but use a points system, like Canada and Australia, so we get the PhDs, the doctors, the scientists, and the businesspeople?

That would seem to be a smart compromise between no immigration and open borders.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:24 PM (dZQh7)

342 Posted by: Patterico at February 02, 2016 09:20 PM (x2kpr)

"...the lamentably stupid Sally Kohn..."

Now, that there is some fine phraseology!

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:24 PM (gClMK)

343 If you want to create jobs let people create wealth. That means get the fucking government out of the way.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:19 PM (voOPb)

I AGREE. That is why I DON'T want a government jobs program disguised as a tariff. That is why I want LESS government which means MORE creative entrepreneurship in the marketplace.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (lVU49)

344 will lead to our resources being used for more efficient purposes than recreating what we can buy cheaper from other sources.

Efficient is fragile.

We live in a chaotic, violent, and lawless world.

Don't be so eager to be fragile.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (uURQL)

345 "292
And on the list of interesting things to do: Let's declare that, when
the Federal government owns more that 50% of a state, that state is no
longer sovereign. Maybe they can be territories. It's totally ridiculous
for the Feds to lock up lands like this in the West and there's hardly
anything they own in the East.

I don't think y'all really understand what the Departments of
Natural Resources are like on the West Coast. And, given the one party
rule in most of these states, citizens don't have redress from it. When
we ask our liberal friends how much Federally owned land is enough, they
can't put a limit on it. Someone needs to.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 09:12 PM (5HBd1)"

That land is the rightful inheritance of the descendants of slaves. It is currently being hoarded by bureaucrats just to feather their own nests and to provide below cost resources to rapacious corporations. We must act to end this atrocity. Every black family (one man and one woman and their children legally married in a religious ceremony) should be entered in a lottery to receive clear title to 40 acres of land. The federal government has dragged their feet for far too long.

Forty acres and mule! It is time! We have waited long enough!

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (QHgTq)

346 In terms of work, let me add that my current 'career' is nothing more or less than a cost to the business of the school.

If it weren't for our Byzantine immigration and visa system, there'd be little to no need for my services.

The only satisfying work I've ever really had was in repairing antiques, reconditioning old cameras, and in manufacturing. Each day, I left knowing I'd added or created value.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (/33sy)

347 There are tens of millions of Americans who are not capable of doing anything but the most routine manual labor. What are we to do with them?
___
Give them enough money to be bored and resentful, but not enough to come to our tony vacation haunts?

Posted by: The Governing Elites at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (5LOno)

348 The Black Death is 100% natural and organic.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM

"Black Death" is... problematic. The preferred term is "Death of Color."

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (7qAYi)

349 A company in Japan has announced they are building a factory to grow and process 30,000 heads of lettuce a day, all done robotically. Once they work the bugs out, they want to expand production to 500,000 heads per day. And if that works out...

It's coming, y'all. Our way of thinking about labor is about to be radically transformed, and we ain't going to be able to blame the gubmint for this one. When the productivity of a single worker reaches a billion dollars per year, what are the vast mass of idled workers going to do?

There's a heresy for ya.

Posted by: GnuBreed at February 02, 2016 09:26 PM (gyKtp)

350 323 After talking to my father in law last night , I realized I'm still and always will be a Reagan Democrat.

I was a Reagan Democrat too, circa ages 16-24. Then I became a Reagan Republican. Quit the Repub party several years back when Boehner was infamously caught on tape childishly mocking conservatives over immigration.

Don't know what I am anymore. Conservative/Libertarian hybrid these days, I guess. Fiscal conservative, massively pro-2A, but center-left on social issues. I'm a Christian but I tend to take a live and let live stance on most social issues. Abortion is different since I can't take a live and let live position when the babies don't get to live. But abortion is lost both in the culture and the courts so I don't see losing elections over it.

I'm pro-legalization because I'm pro states rights, and I believe in consistency. You can't say you're pro states rights only when the states do what you want them to do. Doesn't work that way.

I don't know. I give up anymore.

All I know is I hate the Uniparty with the fire of a thousand suns.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (HMt16)

351 That would seem to be a smart compromise between no immigration and open borders.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:24 PM (dZQh7)

I'd be OK with that if 25% of my state wasn't foreign born and willing to be grossly underpaid.

But at this point we need a pause to assimilate the ones we've got.

How about a minimum wage to hire a foreign worker at? Say, $90K a year?

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (gClMK)

352 Tarriffs by the way get paid by the consumer, not by the foreign companies.

And US companies will just enjoy their 7% increase in profits.

If you think tarrifs will bring domestic production to world class levels, check out Argentina or Brazil.

They followed the ISI model for a long time. Are they better off? Not really.

Its not fun to compete with cheap foreigners but it makes you lean, and makes you compete where you are strong.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (dZQh7)

353 "what are the vast mass of idled workers going to do?"

Ummm... make green crackers in special factories?

Posted by: The Donald in a Banana Hammock at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (qul7b)

354 It's coming, y'all. Our way of thinking about labor is about to be radically transformed, and we ain't going to be able to blame the gubmint for this one. When the productivity of a single worker reaches a billion dollars per year, what are the vast mass of idled workers going to do?

Humans are a lot cheaper than robots, and there's no reason why we can't revert back to stone age technology.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (uURQL)

355 The one left standing after promising the most free shit wins. That will be me, if Uncle Bernie backs off of the Panera.

Posted by: Ready For Hillary!!11!! at February 02, 2016 09:28 PM (Dwehj)

356 @Hurricane

I agree about a pause. My city is getting a bit ridiculous.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:28 PM (dZQh7)

357
Wicket no likey the movie. Good to know.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (o98Jz)

358 "I AGREE. That is why I DON'T want a government jobs
program disguised as a tariff. That is why I want LESS government which
means MORE creative entrepreneurship in the marketplace.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:25 PM (lVU49)"

What you actually have is a choice as to which government is going to be doing the manipulating, a foreign government acting in its own interest or our government, theoretically acting in our interest.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (QHgTq)

359 There are tens of millions of Americans who are not capable of doing anything but the most routine manual labor. What are we to do with them? I would suggest that the combination of making them compete against slave labor conditions overseas and then against tens of millions of imported laborers is not the most humane policy.

Think it's bad now? Just wait until the robotic revolution swings into full gear.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (7qAYi)

360 Ach. Come on people. I gave you the key, plain sight.

Thirty years of useless and spurious regulations are the equivalent of a truly massive tariff on domestic goods and services.

Shitcan the regs, fire the regulators. Unleash the economy and restore a big chunk of freedom in one. Fell. Swoop.

Plain as day, people. Plain as fucking day.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (m9V0o)

361 341
How about we keep immigration, but use a points system, like Canada and
Australia, so we get the PhDs, the doctors, the scientists, and the
businesspeople?

That would seem to be a smart compromise between no immigration and open borders.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:24 PM (dZQh7)

And no points to be awarded on the base of race or national origin. It's all about what you can do, not what you look like. I'd be for a system like this.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (HalrA)

362 I hope Ace got offered a decent book contract for this post.

Veering dangerously close to "zombietime-length territory," which attracts only the most dedicated devotees. Trust me, I know. My great struggle over the last 7 years has been to reign in writing length so I don't get slapped with the "TLDR" label.

Posted by: zombie at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (jBuUi)

363 Then throw in workfare not welfare so those not inclined to work will say "If I gotta do something, might as well make more". No more slackers. If you get, you give.

Posted by: oddnot not liking these times at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (g1MTt)

364

Plan A: Feed the homeless to the hungry.

Plan B: Feed the hungry to the prisoners.

Plan C: Feed the prisoners to the pets.

Posted by: The Donald in a Banana Hammock at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (qul7b)

365 354 It's coming, y'all. Our way of thinking about labor is about to be radically transformed, and we ain't going to be able to blame the gubmint for this one. When the productivity of a single worker reaches a billion dollars per year, what are the vast mass of idled workers going to do?

Humans are a lot cheaper than robots, and there's no reason why we can't revert back to stone age technology.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:27 PM (uURQL)
***
Fucking robots were the bane of our existence in the plant.... they were very good at performing high-speed, repetitive tasks, true, but when something got a bit wonky with even a single bearing, we'd have to quarantine and sometimes scrap out the entire run.....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:30 PM (/33sy)

366 @352 cash under the table? Sub contractors rather than employees.

We need to stop basically all immigration for a time. Assimilate what we have & get 90 million + people back to work

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:30 PM (voOPb)

367 Plan A: Feed the homeless to the hungry.

Plan B: Feed the hungry to the prisoners.

Plan C: Feed the prisoners to the pets.

Hey! Where'd you get that copy of my Burning Times Handbook?!?

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 09:30 PM (m9V0o)

368 Verdammt, there is a gopher ass staring at me from my Desktop. Thanks Bing.

Back to phone.

PS Excellent movie length post

Posted by: Man from Wazzustan at February 02, 2016 09:30 PM (FtrY1)

369 I'm not so worried about upsetting any conservative heresy as I am the simple survival of the conservative movement. It's high time for some slash and burn attacks on the vile and flaccid excreta that passes for "progressive" thought. Trump is really good at attacking and I hope he stays around long enough to frame some of the issues in phosphor-burn technicolor for us.

Posted by: 7Mike at February 02, 2016 09:30 PM (pxwEr)

370 What you actually have is a choice as to which
government is going to be doing the manipulating, a foreign government
acting in its own interest or our government, theoretically acting in
our interest.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:29 PM (QHgTq)
So this goes back to what I said earlier.
We are now beyond the idea of "the government shouldn't pick winners and losers".
We are now at the idea of "the government should pick me as a winner, and everyone else as losers".

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:31 PM (lVU49)

371 O/T:

This is pretty damn awesome. Massive talent from the days before auto-tune.

Freddie Mercury and David Bowie, "Under Pressure" ISOLATED VOCAL TRACK:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/hqfxra6

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at February 02, 2016 09:31 PM (HMt16)

372 "We weren't taught good/bad. Markets are like weather, when moist warm air meets cool dry air this is what happens."
But there is good/bad, so that is already fatally flawed theory, even if it worked. And despite theory that treats economics like physics, that too is nonsense.

I mean sure, one can compare those Apple slave workers to American workers and marvel at their efficiency, their literal hunger to jump up at 3am and slave away 18 hours a day for a week, but what is the cost of funding slavery? Do you put a price on that? Nope ...

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 09:31 PM (5Gpe2)

373 When the productivity of a single worker reaches a billion dollars per year, what are the vast mass of idled workers going to do?

There's a heresy for ya.
Posted by: GnuBreed at February 02, 2016 09:26 PM (gyKtp)

This is a good point. We're still educating kids to be drones. Too long in school and not practical enough. And Lord knows we don't need any more Queer Studies majors.

13-14 year olds need to be apprenticed out to the "trades" of their aptitude, like robotics control operator, or sou chef, for example.

And the moral components of education--ethics, citizenship, and self-discipline--need to be fed back into the schools.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:31 PM (gClMK)

374 g'early evenin', 'rons

Posted by: AltonJackson at February 02, 2016 09:31 PM (KCxzN)

375 Thirty years of useless and spurious regulations are the equivalent of a truly massive tariff on domestic goods and services.

^^^^ That is what truly has to change.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:32 PM (lVU49)

376 Posted by: The Governor at February 02, 2016 08:59 PM (ODqY5)

Sure. Well, depends where you live.

Where I live currently? Not too many illegals.

Where I lived most of my life? Every "blue collar" job was done by illegals and/or recent immigrants. Nearly every McDonalds employee, grocer, landscaper, anyone in the trades, etc. etc. was not born in the US.

That meant teenagers of all races had no jobs. And people who didn't get white collar jobs (of all races) were mostly relegated to welfare or semi-part time-employment.

I've traveled the country extensively. I'd say most people in population centers see what I have seen with immigrants, especially illegal immigrants.

In rural areas? Ehh... maybe not as much. But all of the farm hand jobs that used to go to 18 year olds (and were the first step up the ladder of employment as it were) are now done by illegal immigrants.

Yes, you will find native English speakers working at McDonalds in some of these rural areas. But that is unheard of in most of the parts of this country where most people live.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 09:32 PM (AkOaV)

377 335 Millions of American would gladly take a "crappy job."

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:22 PM (MQEz6)

And different people have different ideas of what constitutes a "crappy job".

I've worked at the same job for 26 years. I don't make a whole lot of money, but I'm doing OK. It seems to be a good match for my level of skill and ambition, both of which are fair to middling.

I have no doubt that some people would consider my job "crappy". But I don't, and that's all that really matters.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 09:32 PM (sdi6R)

378 Shitcan the regs, fire the regulators. Unleash the economy and restore a big chunk of freedom in one. Fell. Swoop.

The corporations will make billions and the workers will all die in industrial accidents.

Posted by: Bernie the dinosaur at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (FkBIv)

379 >>>360 Ach. Come on people. I gave you the key, plain sight.

Thirty years of useless and spurious regulations are the equivalent of a truly massive tariff on domestic goods and services.

Shitcan the regs, fire the regulators. Unleash the economy and restore a big chunk of freedom in one. Fell. Swoop.

AMEN Brother Cavil!

Posted by: 7Mike at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (pxwEr)

380 375 Thirty years of useless and spurious regulations are the equivalent of a truly massive tariff on domestic goods and services.

^^^^ That is what truly has to change.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:32 PM (lVU49)

I agree. That would ease many of our pains over night.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (AkOaV)

381 It is a price/wage dilution wave travelling around the world.

It is like two solutions of different concentration turbulantly mixing as they work their way toward equilibrium.

The equilibrium condition is a few very rich folks, a thin layer of middle class, and vast herds of the poor.

Nothing can stop it.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (MQEz6)

382 "Once they work the bugs out, they want to expand production to 500,000 heads per day. And if that works out..."

Well, they'll need humans to maintain the robots. Well, until they develop robots for that.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:34 PM (gnB5x)

383 Gutfeld said the ticket will be a Menudo reunion. Juan didn't even call him on it -- Menudo were Puerto Rican.

Posted by: bestie21 at February 02, 2016 09:34 PM (HUeC4)

384 biggest heresy is probably to listen to the working class, trust that they'll vote in their self interest and that it'll work out for the best.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 09:34 PM (Cq0oW)

385 What this country needs is sustainable development and food security. When people are no longer fearful of losing their jobs, their homes, or of going hungry they are more accepting of other cultures and new ideas.

We here at Bamboozle, Schoomzle, and Con'm have developed a program that will help citizens to understand the bountiful opportunities available to them that will free them from fear.

For only a few hundred million dollars in start up costs, we can begin, almost immediately, a demonstration that will leverage our synergies via the internet and other high tech tools to help restore the community identities that so many citizens feel is being threatened.

We have years of experience, at all levels, and are ready to begin immediately.

Send your donations, even small amounts will help, to Bamboozle, Schoomzle and Con'm today.

Click the nic to visit our web site where we can tell you about our success explaining our program to Congress, and the benefits that will come to your community when Congress passes the next budget appropriations bill.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 09:35 PM (P3GWR)

386 Yeah, let's try LESS GOVERNMENT for a change, not MORE GOVERNMENT in the form of a government jobs program disguised as a tariff.

Free the American entrepreneur by releasing him from the chains of government regulations. The entrepreneurs can find plenty of useful things for American workers to do.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:35 PM (lVU49)

387 336: How do you define "better off in real terms"?

The answer is the sum total, the aggregate in real terms.

Consider a monopoly. They are free to price on what's the best for them. As they raise the price, demand goes down. Their price is the solution to an optimization problem. What price results in the greatest profit for us? They don't care how much they sell.

Now, that is inefficient. Allow competition. The competitors will come in and the free market will determine the price based on supply and demand equilibrium. The "deadwood" is the difference between the total after the competition vs the new total.

Everyone is better off, per the definition. But the monopoly guys are worse off. The whole is better off. The "deadwood" is eliminated.

But the monopoly owners are worse off.

Now, let 100 million AMericans equilibriate with billions of subsistence dirty eating peasants.

Those 100 million Americans are like the monopoly owners. You eliminated deadwood.

"Everyone is better off" does not mean every individual is better off, individually.

I'm for choosing policy that optimizes the economic benefits of Americans as a whole, not the whole world.

There will be winners and losers inside, of course, and let that fall as it may. But externally, I'm going to make America the better off, the rest of the world be damned.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:35 PM (dvuhZ)

388 Lea & L, Elle -
Don't leave. It's important that you stay. Don't you realize that some very smart people, important are solving the world's problems here?

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 09:36 PM (ENe42)

389 That is one of the H1B tricks. Publish a very specific list of requirements that it is unlikely anyone will have at that level.

There's a local company advertising a job opening for running a HELP DESK that requires a Bachelor's degree in computer science and ten years' industry experience.

I don't qualify, and if I did, I'd get a job _programming_ somewhere.

That's a position for an Indian they can't check on to lie about having a degree and get.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 02, 2016 09:36 PM (kCfMX)

390 Just watched the Cruz video w/Cruz and the farmer re subsidies. Damn. He used common sense to sell water to an Eskimo.

Posted by: Infidel at February 02, 2016 09:37 PM (XYlFy)

391 Why would a business open a new factory in the place with the highest taxes and wage scales?

The business will find the cheapest place.

The work done in the cheapest place changes the cheapest place so that it is no longer the cheapest place. The business seeks a new cheapest place.

On and on it goes.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:37 PM (MQEz6)

392 "And no points to be awarded on the base of race or national origin. It's all about what you can do, not what you look like. I'd be for a system like this."

Have always liked as well. Bring in the skilled, ambitious, rather than low-skilled, potential welfare cases.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:37 PM (gnB5x)

393 "Efficient is fragile. We live in a chaotic, violent, and lawless world. Don't be so eager to be fragile."

I remember in northern Europe seeing tiny backyard vegetable plots, tended with obvious and intense care, with plenty of labor hours invested in them. And saying to a local friend how inefficient that is and what a waste of time it is, that people should work at things with a higher economic return, and buy vegetables elsewhere from someone who grows them professionally and efficiently.

He said, "That generation remember wartime starvation. Remember it very keenly. You will _not_ get them to give up their little gardens."

See also: Just-in-time delivery systems.

These work a wonder when everything else is working.

They are not at all robust against failure, and in situations of mass failure, their inability to respond, and their lack of local buffers, makes the bad situation even worse.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 09:37 PM (noWW6)

394 373

^^^THIS.

Our country needs vocational training, more than any other educational program I can think of.

Posted by: T at February 02, 2016 09:38 PM (NctcF)

395 The corporations will make billions and the workers will all die in industrial accidents.

Posted by: Bernie the dinosaur at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (FkBIv)

It's not the safety regulations. Most workplaces have a pretty good safety culture. It's the stupid paperwork and reporting requirements. And a dumb tax code that favors armies of attorneys.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:38 PM (gClMK)

396 You have nothing to fear from Menudo, my friendsh.

Posted by: Senor Juan McCain at February 02, 2016 09:38 PM (Dwehj)

397 There are tens of millions of Americans who are not
capable of doing anything but the most routine manual labor. What are we
to do with them? I would suggest that the combination of making them
compete against slave labor conditions overseas and then against tens of
millions of imported laborers is not the most humane policy.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 02, 2016 09:23 PM (nFdGS)

Paying them welfare to sit home on their ass seems to be working pretty good.

Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (T78UI)

398 How about we keep immigration, but use a points
system, like Canada and Australia, so we get the PhDs, the doctors, the
scientists, and the businesspeople?

That would seem to be a smart compromise between no immigration and open borders.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 09:24 PM (dZQh7)

Immigration should absolutely be handled to the benefit of Americans. Nobody has the right to come here and we should ONLY let in those who are not a detriment to the American people.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (NPofj)

399 "Don't you realize that some very smart people, important are solving the world's problems here?"

Where...?

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (gnB5x)

400 "That is one of the H1B tricks. Publish a very specific list of requirements that it is unlikely anyone will have at that level."

I swear I once saw in the jobs section of the San Jose Murky News an ad looking for a Ph.D level electrical engineer and offering $12.50 an hour.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (noWW6)

401 'Aspirational artists driving each other around for Uber is no basis for an economy.'

I'll play a song for you on my guitar if you will drive me to Kroger.

Posted by: A smelly hippie at February 02, 2016 09:40 PM (BO/km)

402 Just get Uncle Sam outta my back pocket (and the front one too, please) and offa my land and then we can talk about government by the people, for the people, etc.

Until then, I'm paying Uncle Sam to take my cash and give it to illegal aliens, and that's a pretty damned nasty thing to do. If he isn't stealing it for that, he's propping up abortuaries or running guns over the border.

Run on THAT platform and let me know if things don't take a turn for the better.

Posted by: tcn in AK at February 02, 2016 09:40 PM (+YMhA)

403 Bingo!

Aspirational artists driving each other around for Uber is no basis for an economy.
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (/33sy)
--------

There are three types of economic activity:

1. Develop knowledge (science, etc.) - to allow people to make, mine, and grow things
2. Make, mine, and grow things - creates wealth
3. Everything else - distributes wealth

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 09:40 PM (NUqwG)

404 but, since that's never going to happen...

the list of things I'd want is short but fundamental. I'd like to truly own my house, no property taxes. I'd like for the schools to be safe and good. then jobs.

i can't tell you how many people i know that move regularly to find decent schools for their kids.

I'd support vouchers if it were an opening play. break the slavemasters but rapidly follow it up with subsidies or whatever for homeschoolers, anything. toss the troublemakers out while you're at it.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 09:41 PM (Cq0oW)

405 And the moral components of education--ethics, citizenship, and self-discipline--need to be fed back into the schools.
***
I'd be interested in seeing something like Heinlein's notion of History and Moral Philosophy classes introduced - teachers could *only* be combat veterans - and they'd cover the same sort of subject matter as they did in Starship Troopers...

Posted by: 18-1 at February 02, 2016 09:41 PM (5LOno)

406 Ace rocked the house today. Democrats almost elected a self avowed socialist in freakin corn farm Iowa. And the Repubs have not even mentioned that fact today. Pathetic

Posted by: ajlfour at February 02, 2016 09:42 PM (S4Qwt)

407 399 "Don't you realize that some very smart people, important are solving the world's problems here?"

Where...?
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (gnB5x)

A local,newscast has a segment called, "good question". In this case good fucking question

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:42 PM (voOPb)

408 So, what is the average tariff curently on imports anyway, 70% of retail?

Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 02, 2016 09:42 PM (T78UI)

409 Immigration should absolutely be handled to the benefit of Americans. Nobody has the right to come here and we should ONLY let in those who are not a detriment to the American people.
Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (NPofj)

My son was an immigrant. We adopted him and brought him here on a specific Visa, whereupon he became a citizen. I have no problem with immigration, but for the love of Pete, when did we decide we needed to import the entire third world along with its diseases both infectious and social?

We didn't work this hard to get a first world economy just to give it away to a bunch of ignorant and economically worthless dregs of humanity. That's what foreign aide is for, after all.

Posted by: tcn in AK at February 02, 2016 09:43 PM (+YMhA)

410 "Well, they'll need humans to maintain the robots. Well, until they develop robots for that."

They'll need humans to design the robots. Well, until they develop robot-designing robots to take over the role.

_Westworld_.

Where one of the key plot points forseen by Michael Crichton was the idea that machines would design machines. But that humans might not necessarily perceive all of what was going on in the complex automated design process, nor be able to parse all of the potential outcomes.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 09:43 PM (noWW6)

411
It's not the safety regulations. Most workplaces have a pretty good safety culture. It's the stupid paperwork and reporting requirements. And a dumb tax code that favors armies of attorneys

=====

monkeys on your back

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (Cq0oW)

412 I'd be interested in seeing something like Heinlein's notion of History and Moral Philosophy classes introduced - teachers could *only* be combat veterans - and they'd cover the same sort of subject matter as they did in Starship Troopers...

Killing giant space grasshoppers? I'm not sure there's a big market for that.

Posted by: Josephistan at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (7qAYi)

413 406 Ace rocked the house today. Democrats almost elected a self avowed socialist in freakin corn farm Iowa. And the Repubs have not even mentioned that fact today. Pathetic
Posted by: ajlfour at February 02, 2016 09:42 PM (S4Qwt)

...because democrats have been electing socialists for 100 years, and the worst we can say about Bernie is "well, at least he's honest about who and what he is."

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (AkOaV)

414 The biggest winners of the Iowa cockasses was my ammo supplier.

Because let's face it, a communist or worse is going to be our nest preezy. Berrie or Hillary. Stock up on TP and ammo...bust mostly TP.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (AhyHb)

415
406 Ace rocked the house today. Democrats almost elected a self avowed socialist in freakin corn farm Iowa. And the Repubs have not even mentioned that fact today. Pathetic
Posted by: ajlfour at February 02, 2016 09:42 PM (S4Qwt)

The Republicans do not oppose the Democrats. They play a substitution game with them.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (MQEz6)

416 Let's start with a flat tax. Then eliminate the Commerce Department. After that, the Department of Education. Not to mention the Energy Department. Looking forward, the US should start auctioning off some public lands. Not all of them, by any means, but maybe just a quarter of the federal property in Alaska, Wyoming, and generous portions of Idaho.

Now, I'd be stingy with increased public spending, but I think it would be helpful for the private sector if we returned the USS Missouri and the USS Wisconsin to active service, then sell ad space on the hulls. Signs that say something like "Brought to you by Raytheon." or "Proudly made in the USA for a better, cleaner world!" sponsored by Waste Industries. Because that's how things roll in the United States of America.

After the rest of the world gets the message, I think the immigration thing will solve itself.

Posted by: mrp at February 02, 2016 09:44 PM (JBggj)

417
Where...?
Posted by: Ricardo Kill
-----------
Just ask them - they'll tell you!
Hell, i learned earlier today that I'm an idiot (seeing as I consider myself part of the horde, but most of the horde are idiots...)

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 09:45 PM (ENe42)

418 Any government that gives preference to foreigners over its own citizens has declared war on them

Posted by: The Political Hat at February 02, 2016 09:45 PM (vBeA5)

419 391 Why would a business open a new factory in the place with the highest taxes and wage scales?

The business will find the cheapest place.

The work done in the cheapest place changes the cheapest place so that it is no longer the cheapest place. The business seeks a new cheapest place.

On and on it goes.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:37 PM (MQEz6)
***
See "Chinese Companies Opening Plants in Laos and Cambodia"

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:45 PM (/33sy)

420 400+ comments in...

Ace, I love you like a mother from another brother, but good grief, I got to this line and stopped reading further: "I'm talking about, as Mickey Kaus has been talking about, as even David Frum has been talking about,..."

I stopped reading because duh. Isn't that what the whole damn Trumpalution has been about??

Aren't we, you know, trying to do that one very thing??? Some people may come at it for different purposes, but frankly, at this point I don't even care if people are coming at it because they hate dirty brown mexican people.

We have to restrict immigration, illegal and probably, otherwise. HAVE. TO.

Your stuff (and I can only assume you explain it in great detail beyond the above quote) is... to be kind, not new.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 02, 2016 09:45 PM (TOk1P)

421 1. Develop knowledge (science, etc.) - to allow people to make, mine, and grow things

2. Make, mine, and grow things - creates wealth

3. Everything else - distributes wealth

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 09:40 PM (NUqwG)

Exactly. And when you're not creating wealth, all you're doing is continually redistributing a smaller and smaller pool of wealth (which is subject to shrinkage due to accidents and normal wear and tear) among more people (as population growth and immigration continue).

This is why the middle class is collapsing - the abundance of wealth it was built on is not being replaced, and is being shared over a larger number.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:46 PM (HalrA)

422 Paying them welfare to sit home on their ass seems to be working pretty good.
Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (T78UI)

Don't forget paying them to have fatherless kids! Sustainable and organic!

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 02, 2016 09:46 PM (uURQL)

423 Megyn is doing a Frank Luntz focus group inspired , "Third is the new first" segment.

Rubiogasms all around.

Posted by: Ktgreat at February 02, 2016 09:46 PM (Bl4dy)

424 381
The equilibrium condition is a few very rich folks, a thin layer of middle class, and vast herds of the poor.

Nothing can stop it.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 09:33 PM (MQEz6)

That sounds like the vast majority of societies throughout human history.

Yet America produced a large, relatively well-off, and politically powerful middle class. Why was that?

Meanwhile, the tiny ultra-rich elite are doing their damnedest to destroy us.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 09:47 PM (sdi6R)

425 Any government that gives preference to foreigners over its own citizens has declared war on them
___
Yeah, what are you going to do about it?

Posted by: The Uniparty at February 02, 2016 09:47 PM (5LOno)

426 I tell you, that Frank Luntz is into something very weird. Something disgusting and unspeakable. There's no telling what his browser history would reveal.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:47 PM (dvuhZ)

427 "That is one of the H1B tricks. Publish a very specific list of requirements that it is unlikely anyone will have at that level."

I swear I once saw in the jobs section of the San Jose Murky News an ad looking for a Ph.D level electrical engineer and offering $12.50 an hour.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 02, 2016 09:39 PM (noWW6)

Yep. Trash the H1B system and jack the "foreigner minimum wage" up to 15% above what an equivalent U.S. citizen would ask for and you've solved the H1B abuse problem.

Shortage? Of course there's a shortage. At the crappy wage you're willing to pay, Mr. Exec.

You'd also see defined benefit retirement programs reinstituted.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:49 PM (gClMK)

428 I tell you, that Frank Luntz is into something very weird. Something disgusting and unspeakable. There's no telling what his browser history would reveal.
___
Gentlemen don't read each other's browsing history.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 02, 2016 09:49 PM (5LOno)

429 Civilizations, much like water, will always seek the lowest equilibrium.

Bringing in third worlders to a high level civilization will produce the same result.

Look at blacks that have been in the first world for centuries. They gain control of a city and it dies. Give whites bricks they build a city. Give third worlders or blacks a city, they build bricks.

Don't deny the empirical evidence of this. Genetics is the key.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 09:51 PM (AhyHb)

430 I look at the ruined industrial infrastructure of this nation, and weep.

My grandfather - WWII vet - told me about the insane abundance of food and gear they had in Europe when he landed there..... A jeep broke down? They'd destroy it in place and catch a ride to the supply depot to pick up a new one.

Could we ever begin to rebuild?

And think, too, of this - with just-in-time (which assumes perfect communications and logistics at all levels, all the time) and all the rest of it, could we ever again be 'the arsenal of democracy'?

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:53 PM (/33sy)

431 And get rid of that f'n Ad Council.

Posted by: freaked at February 02, 2016 09:53 PM (BO/km)

432 I tell you, that Frank Luntz is into something very
weird. Something disgusting and unspeakable. There's no telling what his
browser history would reveal.

___

Gentlemen don't read each other's browsing history.

Posted by: Barack Obama at February 02, 2016 09:49 PM (5LOno)

Ignoring the Scoamfy sock... I always thought a good business idea would be to devise a way to create a means of having your browsing history/hard drive contents destroyed upon your death by a remote site.

That way one's loved ones need not discover your pron tastes, which, if you are an old dude, would be doubly disturbing. And if you happen to die in a fiery plane crash, poof! Gone. And maybe for a little extra, we preserve your will, your photos of your kids, your tax returns from the last few years. Otherwise, the hard drive is killed just as dead as you are.

I think I would make millions.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 02, 2016 09:53 PM (TOk1P)

433 : How do you define "better off in real terms"?

The answer is the sum total, the aggregate in real terms.

Consider a monopoly. They are free to price on what's the best for
them. As they raise the price, demand goes down. Their price is the
solution to an optimization problem. What price results in the greatest
profit for us? They don't care how much they sell.

Now, that is
inefficient. Allow competition. The competitors will come in and the
free market will determine the price based on supply and demand
equilibrium. The "deadwood" is the difference between the total after
the competition vs the new total.

Everyone is better off, per
the definition. But the monopoly guys are worse off. The whole is better
off. The "deadwood" is eliminated.

But the monopoly owners are worse off.

Now, let 100 million AMericans equilibriate with billions of subsistence dirty eating peasants.

Those 100 million Americans are like the monopoly owners. You eliminated deadwood.

"Everyone is better off" does not mean every individual is better off, individually.

I'm for choosing policy that optimizes the economic benefits of Americans as a whole, not the whole world.

There will be winners and losers inside, of course, and let that fall
as it may. But externally, I'm going to make America the better off, the
rest of the world be damned.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:35 PM (dvuhZ)

We are not the monopoly owners and we CANNOT control markets like a theoretical monopolist (hell even "monopolists" in the real world cannot control markets without the force of a government that exerts complete control over ALL market actors and has enough guns to enforce that control). Look up Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage to see why this is the case.

What you are proposing would only bring misery on working class people.

What we can usefully do is enforce our borders, remove trespassers and ALSO remove all the laws and regulations that make the US uncompetitive in markets where that would not be the case absent costs piled on by the government.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 09:53 PM (NPofj)

434 Paying them welfare to sit home on their ass seems to be working pretty good.

Don't think of it as warehousing useless people. Think of it as our Strategic Long Pig Reserve.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (m9V0o)

435 Did I just see a "moby"?

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (dvuhZ)

436 "Hell, i learned earlier today that I'm an idiot (seeing as I consider myself part of the horde, but most of the horde are idiots...)"

Hell, we are all idiots of one form or another.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (gnB5x)

437 another suggestion I heard for those temporary H-1Bs ... require most pay be put in escrow till they actually go back home, so they don't just stay forever.

I dropped out of differential equations when the TA was speaking Chinese ... or it sure sounded like it. We sure have schooled a lot of our competition, and are far behind now, and still not encouraging Americans because they see a market flooded with Indian H-1B workers.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 09:55 PM (5Gpe2)

438 "There are tens of millions of Americans who are not capable of doing anything but the most routine manual labor. What are we to do with them? "

So, you've met my brother in law?

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 09:55 PM (8QGte)

439 436 "Hell, i learned earlier today that I'm an idiot (seeing as I consider myself part of the horde, but most of the horde are idiots...)"

Hell, we are all idiots of one form or another.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (gnB5x)
***
"Everybody is somebody's fool." Michael O'Hara, The Lady from Shanghai.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:55 PM (/33sy)

440 Hell, i learned earlier today that I'm an idiot (seeing as I consider
myself part of the horde, but most of the horde are idiots...)

Yes, wasn't that quaint.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 02, 2016 09:56 PM (oVJmc)

441 Look at blacks that have been in the first world for centuries. They gain control of a city and it dies. Give whites bricks they build a city. Give third worlders or blacks a city, they build bricks.

====

wasn't always so. and, for that, if it's just a city you want even the 3rd world has those. the problem is their families were shattered and they've gone feral. whites will go that way soon enough.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 09:56 PM (Cq0oW)

442 "Hell, i learned earlier today that I'm an idiot
(seeing as I consider myself part of the horde, but most of the horde
are idiots...)"

----------------------

Hell, we are all idiots of one form or another.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (gnB5x)

Maybe, but the comment didn't sit terribly well with me either. I'll ignore it... for now.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (TOk1P)

443 Look at blacks that have been in the first world for centuries. They gain control of a city and it dies. Give whites bricks they build a city. Give third worlders or blacks a city, they build bricks.

Don't deny the empirical evidence of this. Genetics is the key.
Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican
-------------------
Really?
Wait - you're the guy that likes to call basketball "jungleball," aren't you?
Now your comment makes a little more sense.

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (ENe42)

444 436
Hell, we are all idiots of one form or another.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (gnB5x)

We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Posted by: Oscar Wilde at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (sdi6R)

445 Look up Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage to see why this is the case.
-------------
Oh that one.

Britain will make cloth; Portugal will make wine.

Britain will become greater; Portugal will become lesser.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (NUqwG)

446 When we get rid of all the useless regulations and government agencies we can begin the work of building perpetual motion machines and curing cancer.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (FkBIv)

447 Just an FYI, Nevada is over 75% Federally owned. Oregon is about 58%. There was a pretty good map floating around the Net last week showing the totals. It is very bad and they are continuing to lock up more land.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 09:58 PM (5HBd1)

448 "Consider a monopoly. They are free to price on what's the best for

them. As they raise the price, demand goes down. Their price is the

solution to an optimization problem. What price results in the greatest

profit for us? They don't care how much they sell."

-------------

The greatest leaps in man kinds standards of living happened under the evil monopolists. This is a fact. If government had been in charge after the civil war we would still be on horseback for basic transportation and no electrical power...or pipelines for oil.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 09:58 PM (AhyHb)

449 >>they'll tell you!
Hell, i learned earlier

-----

Chi you're a moron not an idiot

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at February 02, 2016 09:58 PM (voOPb)

450 As an afterthought, I'll suggest people ponder a regime which features
simultaneously more and more low-skilled worker immigration and a regime of supplementing too-low paychecks with taxpayer funding.

If there is one thing that makes me scream and die inside and makes me want to go down and throw rocks at cars on the highway it is this very thing.

Add to it a compulsory "volunteering" regimen for the working class and you wind up with a government Serf class.

What we have now is the government providing "subsistence" help to workers, usually mexican and central american - but seems to be changing with the H2B - which is allows them to work at low-paying jobs and undercuts the workers who are willing to work but don't want to be on subsistence help, can get paid more doing other things like being on disability, or want a job with a future.
In exchange the employer is getting a government subsidized employee.

The OTHER thing that makes me want to throw things is that when it is about raising the minimum wage through legislation, well, "wages are a minimal price element of finished products" per all the lefty unions. But ending employee subsidies and letting the employer shoulder the actual cost of employees?
That is not only a bridge too far, it is also the intersection of the wants and desires of the unions and the employers.

Of course, I now get to rant about my ~~second~~ third favorite subject:
subsidies warp the market. What we have now is so twisted into a pretzel, labor market-wise, it cannot be free enterprise. It is literally a game of "get the most government cheese now"

This subject can be in this election "they stole mah jerb" or it can be a discussion of how the government is putting the thumb on everyone. I am concerned that (golden dumpster trash fire) will turn it into a they- stole- mah- jerb- story and start a scapegoat hunt. I pray someone else will take the intelligent path and get enough coaching to sell it well.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 09:58 PM (q2o38)

451 444 436
Hell, we are all idiots of one form or another.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (gnB5x)

We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
Posted by: Oscar Wilde at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (sdi6R)
***
And The Pretenders:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STy8FWhQPwU

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:59 PM (/33sy)

452 "322

The current rate of unemployment and

underemployment in the United States suggests that there may be a

problem with that particular theory.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 09:13 PM (QHgTq)
So
then what you are really arguing for is a government jobs program
disguised as a tariff. Government artificially makes it difficult to use
foreign cheap labor for crappy jobs, thereby (theoretically) employing
domestic workers to do those crappy jobs at inflated wages. If we're
going to do that, then why not just have government make-work jobs? It
would be about as effective.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (lVU49)"

That is essentially what China is doing. The Chinese government is desperately trying to avoid another Tienemin Square type event by keeping everybody employed, whether or not it makes economic sense for them to do the things that they are doing. For several decades that seemed to be working. We are recently seeing signs that, as Julian Simon said, "If something can't go on forever, it will stop." China is a big country. If the wheels come off, the effects will be felt everywhere. The US is fortunate in that we are also a big country and we have the ability to insulate ourselves somewhat from the coming disruption.

Saudi Arabia is doing what they are doing right now with oil prices in order to destabilize the world energy market and make bankers and investors less willing to put money into energy projects even after they restrict their oil production and world oil prices rise again. If the American oil industry is somewhat insulated from OPEC and Saudi Arabian influence, it will be more difficult for the House of Saud to destroy the American oil industry.

It is not necessary for Americans to pay $100 a barrel oil to protect even the most inefficient US oil producers but say $5 a barrel import tax would give American producers a bit of cushion so that it will take a bit longer to drive even the most innovative and efficient of them out of business. In this game of chicken, the Saudis cannot maintain these low prices forever. They can keep it up for maybe another three to five years before they are going to have to bring in more money to pay off all the people they need to pay off. I would like to see some American oil producers still in business when the oil prices go back up because American oil producers are the ones who prevent OPEC from dictating prices and American invented fracking technology can keep OPEC from regaining the power that they held for the last quarter of the 20th century.

Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at February 02, 2016 10:00 PM (QHgTq)

453 Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (ENe42)
--------------------

No just a realist.

Name me a black run city, state, or country that is run well...or that you would move to.

ONE.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 10:00 PM (AhyHb)

454 Shortage? Of course there's a shortage. At the crappy wage you're willing to pay, Mr. Exec.

You'd also see defined benefit retirement programs reinstituted.
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 09:49 PM (gClMK)

Not "willing" to pay. Desiring to pay. There's a big difference.
Long gone are the days when a line worker could lose their job at one factory in the morning and be hired down the road in the afternoon, but that kind of full employment is NOT desired by the hiring class. Upwards pressure on wages, you know.

As long as they're willing and able to bring in competition fro m the four corners of the earth, our American wages will continue to stagnate or retreat.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 10:00 PM (kKHcp)

455 always thought a good business idea would be to devise a way to create a means of having your browsing history/hard drive contents destroyed upon your death by a remote site.

====

dead man's switch. a free program, no longer maintained, did that. because a librarian died and nobody could access the working accounts.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:01 PM (Cq0oW)

456 I have a BIL, (and love him dearly) and he is a good guy and all, but all he has ever done is hard, dirty work. The kind no one ever wants to do, like clean up and restoration after fires, floods, murders, suicides, etc .
You get the idea.
He is in perfect health, never drinks, has tons of physical activity, no gray hair despite being almost 60, rakish build, handsome man.
I here I am, an educator, lead a mostly sedentary life, probably need to shed 50, OK maybe 70 lbs.
BIL will outlive me by maybe 30 years, so, my hat is off to my BIL, who, maybe not as smart as me, but, then again, maybe is more smart.

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:01 PM (8QGte)

457 441
wasn't always so. and, for that, if it's just a city you want even the 3rd world has those. the problem is their families were shattered and they've gone feral. whites will go that way soon enough.
Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 09:56 PM (Cq0oW)

Great point. Lower-class British whites have been that way for decades. They exhibit every single pathology that American urban blacks do, without exception.

Hmm, what could they possibly have in common? *taps head* Maybe generations on the dole? Thanks, socialism!

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 10:01 PM (sdi6R)

458
California.

Posted by: mrp at February 02, 2016 10:01 PM (JBggj)

459 433: I'm not saying "we're a monopoly". I was using that as a simple example of how what makes the total better off does not make every individual player better off.

We're at the point we're making AMericans worse off. World GDP may increase, but Americans are getting worse off.

I don't care about the world's standard of living, I care about America's standard of living.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:02 PM (dvuhZ)

460 "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."

Never heard that before. I like it.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:02 PM (gnB5x)

461 dead man's switch. a free program, no longer
maintained, did that. because a librarian died and nobody could access
the working accounts.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:01 PM (Cq0oW)

Well I'll be... somebody stole my idea. And then died on it. That wasn't very smart of him/her.

Posted by: BurtTC at February 02, 2016 10:03 PM (TOk1P)

462 "Give whites bricks they build a city."

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 09:51 PM (AhyHb)

In Appalachia, not so much. I think your theory needs a little work.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 10:04 PM (gClMK)

463

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

* What A Foreign Concept *

Becoming internationalists to promote our country,

Restricting the goodies to chase away native voters,

Spreading out dole to seduce people from all countries,

Paying for it all by taxing everything that motors;

Telling ourselves storied ideas of hope and a lot of change,

Jittery with worry about someone we might offend,

Spending billions on dogs to prevent mange,

Tending to veterans where roads end;

Meeting our emotional needs by endlessly talking,

Writing books for the waywardly ignorant,

Never minding the needy who are not walking,

Selling another gimmick because others can't;

Other nations foment demographic attrition by wars,

We do it by gazing at women's navels;

We long for the exploitation of Mars,

And peacefully intervene in others' rebels;

Many a shining armor comes on a knight;

To those who desire conquest,

Please kiss your future kids good night,

Your ideas are vainglorious and a foreign concept

Tuesday, February 02, 2016

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

Posted by: mcguyver at February 02, 2016 10:05 PM (4/7Mv)

464 As long as they're willing and able to bring in competition fro m the four corners of the earth, our American wages will continue to stagnate or retreat.
Posted by: OneEyedJack
----------------

I have a plan to deal with that. When I am President, we will mandate a much higher minimum wage. Wall Street billionaires will pay for it.

Posted by: Bernie at February 02, 2016 10:05 PM (w/iDp)

465 "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."

Then some derelict comes along and pees in your face.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 10:05 PM (FkBIv)

466 "I don't care about the world's standard of living, I care about America's standard of living.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:02 PM (dvuhZ)"
-----
Well you will never get a job in the democrat party or the federal government. Or American NGOs, Hollywood, or most state governments.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 10:06 PM (AhyHb)

467 Incoming.

Posted by: The Barrel at February 02, 2016 10:06 PM (8aOqE)

468 Chi you're a moron not an idiot
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian
-------------
Well, I would've preferred you used an upper case M there, but...
FWIW, he probably considers you an idiot, too. If you consider yourself part of "most of the horde," anyway.

In his defense, he did come back to clarify that (paraphrase):
"Oops. I might've copy & passed that comment and forgot that I left that part in there."
So, he didn't mean to admit that he considers most of us idiots.

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 10:06 PM (ENe42)

469 B-b-b-b-barrel. Big time.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:06 PM (w/iDp)

470 It's time.
No, it's overtime.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 10:07 PM (idjhO)

471 mcguyver - You know what a 'bunghole' is? Asking for a barrel friend...

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:07 PM (w/iDp)

472 I'd live in Africa 12,000 years ago for the space program alone.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 02, 2016 10:07 PM (oVJmc)

473 Wow.....

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (gnB5x)

474 (Sorry for the previous messy script attachments - you may delete that post)

* What A Foreign Concept *

Becoming internationalists to promote our country,

Restricting the goodies to chase away native voters,

Spreading out dole to seduce people from all countries,

Paying for it all by taxing everything that motors;

Telling ourselves storied ideas of hope and a lot of change,

Jittery with worry about someone we might offend,

Spending billions on dogs to prevent mange,

Tending to veterans where roads end;

Meeting our emotional needs by endlessly talking,

Writing books for the waywardly ignorant,

Never minding the needy who are not walking,

Selling another gimmick because others can't;

Other nations foment demographic attrition by wars,

We do it by gazing at women's navels;

We long for the exploitation of Mars,

And peacefully intervene in others' rebels;

Many a shining armor comes on a knight;

To those who desire conquest,

Please kiss your future kids good night,

Your ideas are vainglorious and a foreign concept

Tuesday, February 02, 2016

Posted by: mcguyver at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (4/7Mv)

475 Pray for what you want. Make sure that what you want is good. (Should be just as good for your enemies as your friends.) And realize that Jimmy Carter empowered Ronald Reagan, Reagan gifted Bush and empowered Clinton, 911 and the Clintons empowered W and W empowered Obama. World trade is crashing. The port cities are about to discover a severe downturn. Countries that depend on the US for food are about to get surprised. People are going to find out that yes Obamacare is a wealth tax this year. See new tax form that individuals are required to have. Note SS is an income tax and started out at a very low rate. Giorgio A. Tsoukalos (ancient alien hair guy) will say this is all being directed by ancient aliens so that sci fy hive cities (also see Isaac Asimov's Cave of Steel) will be built.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (kk/oj)

476 By the way, in case any of you feel "Woe is me" about jobs going away, this is already happening in Asia.

Taiwan lost tons of jobs to China.

Now China has started to offshore stuff.

Eventually, there will be no more labor arbitrage. (Wages might differ, but if productivity per unit is the same, there's no gap to exploit.)

The canary will be textiles and shoes in Ethiopia or Rwanda or Ghana.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (dZQh7)

477 Posted by: mcguyver at February 02, 2016 10:05 PM (4/7Mv)

Why, hello there!

Posted by: The Barrel at February 02, 2016 10:09 PM (vBeA5)

478 "In his defense, he did come back to clarify that (paraphrase):
"Oops. I might've copy & passed that comment and forgot that I left that part in there."
So, he didn't mean to admit that he considers most of us idiots. "

Oh, wait, I saw that.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:09 PM (gnB5x)

479 We're at the point we're making AMericans worse off. World GDP may increase, but Americans are getting worse off.

I don't care about the world's standard of living, I care about America's standard of living.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:02 PM (dvuhZ)

You know that phrase a rising tide lifts all boats? Its true. Prosperity is not a pizza where if other countries get too many slices, Americans will be left to lick the grease stains off the box. That is not how markets work (when they are left to work). In a system free of interference. all trade makes all partners to that trade better off. If it didn't, they wouldn't voluntarily engage in it.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:10 PM (NPofj)

480 scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM
------------

You seem to have omitted Perot in the string of events.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:10 PM (w/iDp)

481 That's the way to do it!

Dive into that barrell like a coked-up Stuka pilot.

Pussies slink in in due to a bent italics tag.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 10:10 PM (MQEz6)

482 In this extra special episode of McGuyver, our hero attempts to escape the Barrel by means of his own wits, a bunghole, and a cup of fresh wolverine semen.

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at February 02, 2016 10:11 PM (6FqZa)

483 Posted by: mcguyver at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (4/7Mv)

No. No do-overs. get yer ass in that barrel.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 10:11 PM (kKHcp)

484 Also, the guy who was saying that line workers can't quit in the morning and be working somewhere else by afternoon, well that is what it is like in China.

And yes, they have massive wage increases.

They will struggle moving from cheap labor to expensive labor.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 10:11 PM (dZQh7)

485 481

Dive into that barrell like a coked-up Stuka pilot.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 10:10 PM (MQEz6)
***
Like a War-Boy at the end of his half-life, awaited in Valhalla, shiny and chrome.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (/33sy)

486 You seem to have omitted Perot in the string of events.
Posted by: Mike Hammer

Ancient alien

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (FkBIv)

487 Giorgio A. Tsoukalos (ancient alien hair guy) will say this is all being
directed by ancient aliens so that sci fy hive cities (also see Isaac
Asimov's Cave of Steel) will be built.
==============

Do the sci fy hive cities come before or after the driverless car mandates?

Posted by: mrp at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (JBggj)

488 really the do over sucked too.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (Cq0oW)

489 Look at blacks that have been in the first world for centuries. They gain control of a city and it dies. Give whites bricks they build a city. Give third worlders or blacks a city, they build bricks.

Don't deny the empirical evidence of this. Genetics is the key.

The problem with that idea is it doesn't explain different states of civilization at different times.

In 2,500 BC, Egypt thrived while most of Europe lived in huts. In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead. To argue there was a significant genetic improvement and decline over the course of 1,000 years that explains all of that, in those same areas in the same ethnicities, is ridiculous.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (QWY55)

490 445
Britain will make cloth; Portugal will make wine.

Britain will become greater; Portugal will become lesser.
Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 09:57 PM (NUqwG)

Dunno about that. I buy booze more often than I buy clothes.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 10:13 PM (sdi6R)

491 Immigration can be managed better. we don't want an invasion across the southern border, and we don't want a bunch of muslim extremists. But, America is better off with immigration.

the thought that salaries and jobs are being taken away is incorrect. Most people won't do those jobs.

we'd be better off cutting a lot of the programs that incent people not to work. The earned income tax credit creates incentives for people to work

Posted by: pointsnfigures at February 02, 2016 10:13 PM (hSpC/)

492
283 50'-70's American cars were AWESOME.
Your analysis of the automotive industry and the decline of the domestic brands is absolutely wrong.
American cars really went to shit AFTER the introduction and favorable trade status of the Japanese invasion

Posted by: MAx at February 02, 2016 10:14 PM (LAliD)

493 You guys are silly.
You know very well that it's useless to put mcguyver in the barrel!
He'd probably just make helicopter out of the pocket lint & gum wrappers floating in the bottom, then fly himself out.

Posted by: Chi at February 02, 2016 10:14 PM (ENe42)

494 Posted by: mcguyver at February 02, 2016 10:05 PM (4/7Mv)

fuckin barrel, man. Fuckin' barrel.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 02, 2016 10:14 PM (AkOaV)

495 Unless it's a suicide note I'm not interested in anything David Frum writes.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (MNgU2)

-----------------------------
David Frum wrote the best anti-Heb analysis I've ever seen. He compared Heb's "outsider" view of America to Obama's. It was amazing. He's written a couple of other things lately that I've been paying attention to. He got religion in some way or other.

Posted by: iforgot at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (YOxw1)

496 >>really the do over sucked too.

Truth.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (/tuJf)

497 "A hypothesis that fails its experiments is to be rejected. But if there's one thing socialists and globalists have in common, it's a common belief that reality itself must be wrong, not their precious philosophy.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 02, 2016 09:16 PM (HalrA) "

your words should be written with a needle in the bottom corner of the eye to serve as a lesson to everyone who are capable of educating themselves

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (Z8DIA)

498 "really the do over sucked too."

Yeah. Looks like a rare "double-barreling."

Sorry, dude.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (gnB5x)

499 Years ago, I wrote - and sold - a goodish-sized piece of post-apocalyptic fiction that centered on the re-establishment of trade.

The Sheriff and his boys ran the show (it was set in Texas) and their chief duty was to protect the trade-routes, provide a safe and regulated space for exchanges to take place, and mediate disputes when they arose.

It's a viable model for the Burning Times.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:16 PM (/33sy)

500 Immigration can be managed better. we don't want an invasion across the southern border, and we don't want a bunch of muslim extremists. But, America is better off with immigration.
-------
Assuming it is correct that America is 'better' with immigration (whatever better may mean), immigration will transform America. Perhaps much of America does not want to be transformed.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 10:16 PM (NUqwG)

501 I'm well aware it's not a zero sum game. I want America to get as much pizza as possible. How big the total pie is, I don't care.

A rising tide lifts all boats. Yeah. You've got two lakes. The water level is considerably higher in one small lake than the some big lake. You open up a canal between lakes. It equilibriates.

All the boats in the lower lake rise a bit. The boats in the higher lake go way down.

First world worker makes $100. Third World workers makes $1. Equilibriate them. Both make $55 dollars. THe sum is greater. "Everyone is better off", $110 vs $101. The pizza pie got bigger. But the first guy is worse off individually. He gets less pizza.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:16 PM (dvuhZ)

502 "The canary will be textiles and shoes in Ethiopia or Rwanda or Ghana.

Posted by: sexypig at February 02, 2016 10:08 PM (dZQh7)"
--------------
i worked in the textile industry industry. Automating the lines and companies that had been in the cotton capitol of the world. In 1996 the EPA and California environmental agency told the textile processing industry they had to change their manufacturing methods. The textile industry said they would but could not meet the timeline, 3 years. The California government EPA said FU. You will do what we say. The textile industry moved to Indonesia and South East Asia. Never to come back. That wasn't taxes. That was the fact that leftists that had never produced a damn thing tipped the scales...and the end of california manufacturing unless funded by the taxpayer.

Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at February 02, 2016 10:17 PM (AhyHb)

503 Britain will make cloth; Portugal will make wine.

==============

All I'm going to type about that one is that I'm a proud and happy owner of four LL Bean Portuguese flannel shirts.

Posted by: mrp at February 02, 2016 10:17 PM (JBggj)

504 It was CAFE that killed America's car manufacturers. American little cars were crappy and some foreign had a better shelf life. But it was CAFE that killed Electra 225.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 10:17 PM (idjhO)

505 435
Did I just see a "moby"?

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 09:54 PM (dvuhZ)
5 years ago I would have called it a "moby"
Now, I just call it "alt-right"

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 10:17 PM (lVU49)

506 ...You seem to have omitted Perot in the string of events...

Good point. In my defense my blood pressure climbs when I think of him. Perot by electing Clinton got NAFTA and GATT passed. Something G.H.W. Bush couldn't do. US has been and is being sold out by the international socialist. I'm depending on God to protect me and mine from these misguided people.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:19 PM (kk/oj)

507 Huh. Houston actually won one tonight. Heats choke against the Rockets, news at 11 (EST)

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at February 02, 2016 10:20 PM (6FqZa)

508 comparative advantage is old theory that is proven false, imo. We have been funding the world's production with our growing debt, always running trade deficits since 1980 or so. Reagan briefly reversed the trend but it was still negative. We don't have to police the world, just quit funding massive deficits, for starters. Get a better price for our food.

TPP is partly about uniting with better trade partners we like, to "contain" China the gorilla. But we give away too much, it would seem. And Trump may be correct, why do we spend so much defending Kuwait's oil and they don't pay? Bribes I guess. We must make better deals.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:20 PM (5Gpe2)

509 (/33sy)

500 Immigration can be managed better. we don't want an invasion across the southern border, and we don't want a bunch of muslim extremists. But, America is better off with immigration

=====

theoretically. currently it isn't working well for us, as Americans.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:20 PM (Cq0oW)

510 50'-70's American cars were AWESOME.
Your analysis of the automotive industry and the decline of the domestic brands is absolutely wrong.
American cars really went to shit AFTER the introduction and favorable trade status of the Japanese invasion

Posted by: MAx at February 02, 2016 10:14 PM (LAliD)

It was CAFE standards that did the great American car in.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (NPofj)

511 "The Sheriff and his boys ran the show (it was set in Texas) and their chief duty was to protect the trade-routes, provide a safe and regulated space for exchanges to take place, and mediate disputes when they arose.

It's a viable model for the Burning Times."

Some people just call it the Rio Grande. That shit happens without a post-Apocalyptic event.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (gnB5x)

512 In 2,500 BC, Egypt thrived while most of Europe lived in huts. In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead. To argue there was a significant genetic improvement and decline over the course of 1,000 years that explains all of that, in those same areas in the same ethnicities, is ridiculous.
Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:12 PM (QWY55)

True. So why the huge leap by Europeans? More inquisitive? More daring, as in willing to go to other cultures, and bring back the best of those cultures? Yet by the time of the Italian Renaissance it is clear europeans are rapidly surpassing all previous cultures.

In spite of having to ward off barbarians from the middle east. In spite of plague and pestilence. In spite of a mini ice age.
Perhaps religion?
/puts up riot shield

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (kKHcp)

513 Why don't we try enforcing the immigration laws we have on the books right now for, say, five years?

----------------------------

A-waaay back in 2007 when all the Republicans were campaigning on some complex, much-needed, bipartisan immigration legislation that would take years to craft and hew and polish and produce, I was waiting for someone to jump and yell "You're all lying! ALL OF YOU!" The thing is, not one of them would tell the American people what was wrong with the laws on the books. Not a one. They kept talking about this desperate "need," this neeeeed, for immigration legislation. I kept thinking, "They're all lying."

Posted by: iforgot at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (YOxw1)

514 Posted by: pointsnfigures at February 02, 2016 10:13 PM (hSpC/)
Excellent point.

Posted by: CaliGirl at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (egOGm)

515 Unless it's a suicide note I'm not interested in anything David Frum writes.

Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 02, 2016 08:14 PM (MNgU2)

Never forget his comments on Breitbart's death.

Ace's reaming of Frum for that was one of the high points of this blog.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:22 PM (QWY55)

516 511 "The Sheriff and his boys ran the show (it was set in Texas) and their chief duty was to protect the trade-routes, provide a safe and regulated space for exchanges to take place, and mediate disputes when they arose.

It's a viable model for the Burning Times."

Some people just call it the Rio Grande. That shit happens without a post-Apocalyptic event.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (gnB5x)
***
SHHHH! You'll spill the beans, man.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:22 PM (/33sy)

517 You guys still think what the Party says to get elected has any bearing on what the Party will do in power, which marks you as the FAR RIGHT FRINGE WHICH MUST DIE.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at February 02, 2016 10:22 PM (4zXgv)

518 If McGuyver thinks he can escape the barrel with a tweezer, a condom and a handful of lotion, he's going to be sorely disappointed.

Posted by: Fritz at February 02, 2016 10:23 PM (BngQR)

519 It was CAFE that killed America's car manufacturers. American little cars were crappy and some foreign had a better shelf life. But it was CAFE that killed Electra 225.
-
Posted by: Ralph
==========

*remembers '96 Buick Roadmaster Estate Wagon*
*weeps with nostalgia*

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:24 PM (w/iDp)

520 TPP is partly about uniting with better trade partners we like, to "contain" China the gorilla.

====

as if. the other partners just make deals with China and backdoor everything.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:24 PM (Cq0oW)

521 Posted by: iforgot at February 02, 2016 10:21 PM (YOxw1)
We are in Ag. I don't know what changed but a lot changed here in California.
The INS used to perform raids on the farm fields, they stopped in the 80's. The illegals used to work in the fields and go home in the winter. Not anymore. The illegals are working in roofing, construction, restaraunts, hotels etc.

Posted by: CaliGirl at February 02, 2016 10:24 PM (egOGm)

522 In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.

Why aren't they still light years ahead?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 10:25 PM (FkBIv)

523 If I may offer a modest proposal, there is a way to appeal to the middle class without any of the gov. handout "heresies" above. That would be: enforce the law strictly on the untouchable classes. Nothing gives middle America the warmfuzzies like seeing rich, powerful, well-connected people go to jail. So, 1. enforce laws that are on the books, 2. send law-breaking bureaucrats, Hollywood sex-perverts, and political criminals (like Her Thighnes) to prison, 3. profit.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at February 02, 2016 10:26 PM (Pwh6H)

524 "In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.

Why aren't they still light years ahead? "

They developed entrenched bureaucracy supported by religion. Helluva combination.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 10:27 PM (Z8DIA)

525 451
And The Pretenders:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STy8FWhQPwU
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:59 PM (/33sy)

I don't know how she could see through that hair, but I thought she was teh hawt back in the day.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 10:27 PM (sdi6R)

526 522 In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.

Why aren't they still light years ahead?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 10:25 PM (FkBIv)
***
Counter-revolutionary running-dogs of the people's enemies.....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:28 PM (/33sy)

527 comparative advantage is old theory that is proven
false, imo. We have been funding the world's production with our growing
debt, always running trade deficits since 1980 or so. Reagan briefly
reversed the trend but it was still negative. We don't have to police
the world, just quit funding massive deficits, for starters. Get a
better price for our food.

TPP is partly about uniting with
better trade partners we like, to "contain" China the gorilla. But we
give away too much, it would seem. And Trump may be correct, why do we
spend so much defending Kuwait's oil and they don't pay? Bribes I guess.
We must make better deals.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:20 PM (5Gpe2)

Trade deficits have nothing to do with government created fiat money OR our growing debt (other than our government and every other government in the world bought Keynsianism hook, line and sinker because staying out of the economy is harder and offers insufficient opportunity for graft.
Comparative Advantage is not wrong. It is mathematical. That's like saying the formula for the area of a circle is "wrong" because some idiot state (I can't remember which one... maybe Kansas) passed a law that set pi equal to exactly 3.14.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:28 PM (NPofj)

528 Ace, let me get this straight. You have gone on and on about how you can never vote for Rubio, even though he is like 90% to 95% conservative. But you thought that Romney and Ryan were the best Prez ticket you've ever seen? What? Really? You have just totally blown your credibility with me. Even if you some of you think Rubio is a lot more moderate or establishment or whatever, how can anybody with a straight face possibly think that Romney is a better candidate than Rubio? Makes ZERO sense.

Posted by: rexbatt at February 02, 2016 10:28 PM (woA40)

529 525 451
And The Pretenders:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STy8FWhQPwU
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 09:59 PM (/33sy)

I don't know how she could see through that hair, but I thought she was teh hawt back in the day.
Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 10:27 PM (sdi6R)
***
Absolutely bunk-worthy.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:28 PM (/33sy)

530 Subsidizing a minimum wage would encourage companies to move more employees into this category. It would also discourage promoting employees since would effectively create a huge pay gap.

Posted by: bestie21 at February 02, 2016 10:29 PM (HUeC4)

531
3 kids injured after their Syrian dad dumps them out the window of a German Migrant Center attempting murder

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 02, 2016 10:29 PM (iQIUe)

532 "*remembers '96 Buick Roadmaster Estate Wagon* "

Did it have the faux wood paneling? 305 if I remember.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:29 PM (gnB5x)

533 If I may offer a modest proposal, there is a way to
appeal to the middle class without any of the gov. handout "heresies"
above. That would be: enforce the law strictly on the untouchable
classes. Nothing gives middle America the warmfuzzies like seeing rich,
powerful, well-connected people go to jail. So, 1. enforce laws that
are on the books, 2. send law-breaking bureaucrats, Hollywood
sex-perverts, and political criminals (like Her Thighnes) to prison, 3.
profit.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at February 02, 2016 10:26 PM (Pwh6H)

This would also have the advantage of making us a nation of laws as was intended.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (NPofj)

534 True. So why the huge leap by Europeans? More inquisitive? More daring, as in willing to go to other cultures, and bring back the best of those cultures? Yet by the time of the Italian Renaissance it is clear europeans are rapidly surpassing all previous cultures.

Total speculation, but:

1. (vs. modern China) competition--multiple states led to more innovation.
2. (vs. China) a lack of Confucianism led to more innovation.
3. (vs. the modern Middle East) a separation of Church and State led to more scientific innovation and political reform.
4. (vis a vis a place like Africa) far more accessible ports and rivers.
5. The Protestant work ethic--haven't dug deeply enough to come down firmly on this, but there were some intriguing points.
6. The easy answer--actively adopting capitalism, democracy, and the rule of law.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (QWY55)

535 , how can anybody with a straight face possibly think that Romney is a better candidate than Rubio? Makes ZERO sense.
Posted by: rexbatt
----------------

Candidate or President?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (w/iDp)

536 rexbatt's level of concern

[xxxxxx---]

Must try harder.

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (6FqZa)

537 Assumption #2: Nations trade only goods and services, not debt and assets.

That is one of the reasons comparative advantage has fatal flaws. Obviously if China owns too much of our debt that we must service, or buys controlling interests in American assets, they will not just be trade partners, they will gain control and own US. That's kinda happening, though fortunately China has other issues.

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3076

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:31 PM (5Gpe2)

538 We are in Ag. I don't know what changed but a lot changed here in California.

The INS used to perform raids on the farm fields, they stopped in
the 80's. The illegals used to work in the fields and go home in the
winter. Not anymore. The illegals are working in roofing, construction,
restaraunts, hotels etc.
Posted by: CaliGirl at February 02, 2016 10:24 PM (egOGm)

I think the broadened out the subsidies and ended raids. The overheated housing market also made it attractive to move out of ag and sub-sub-sub-contract to construction. (I can tell you stories that made me insane)
But social welfare for just showing up has pushed a lot of permanent-illegals.

And everyone thinks they are benefiting from cheap, subsidized labor, too, just ask.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 10:31 PM (q2o38)

539 "In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.

Why aren't they still light years ahead? "

Some historians said that in the 1400s the Chinese ruled the seas, and a Chinese Emperor made a decision to call the fleet back, and they turned 'inward' while Western Europe went exploring.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 10:32 PM (P3GWR)

540 Did it have the faux wood paneling? 305 if I remember.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill
------------

350.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:33 PM (w/iDp)

541 My belief is that the US Government will build a fence in an attempt to keep people from migrating south. That police and fire protection and teaching will go to a volunteer approach. That Russia and China will have internal troubles. Europe will too. That port cities will have to downsize dramatically. Why do I think this? I think this because I know of no company (or country) that will ship stuff if it doesn't think it will get something in return that it desires.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:34 PM (kk/oj)

542 got to get to sleep but I'll leave off by saying a lot of you are very smart but don't know people at all.

talk to your mechanic about his kids. start with that.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at February 02, 2016 10:34 PM (Cq0oW)

543 534.

Confucianism is a very sturdy foundation for a society, but does not promote innovation.

Protestantism promotes anarchy, but is very innovative.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:34 PM (/33sy)

544 Here are things that the Chinese had before anyone else.

Currency (paper fiat money)
Gunpowder
Printing

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:35 PM (8QGte)

545 ....and the rule of law.
Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (QWY55)

Imma go with that one. Of course, that rule of law was informed by the writings of religious men.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 10:35 PM (kKHcp)

546 How about we stop destroying the low end of the labor market with unions, regulations, taxes, and welfare and stop blaming business for the things the government screwed up in the first place with economic interventionism? Tightening immigration to fix a problem government created in the first place is stupid.

Posted by: rfichoke at February 02, 2016 10:36 PM (vLCft)

547 In sum, reform is impossible, collapse is inevitable, people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.

Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 10:36 PM (MQEz6)

548 My SIL is from Tijuana. When her parents were just starting their family (50 years ago?) her Dad visited CA on working visas. The deal was, he'd get 1/2 his pay, but had to go home after the work was done to collect the other 1/2. The pay was wired to the Mexican bank.

Posted by: OldDominionMom at February 02, 2016 10:36 PM (GzDYP)

549 544 Here are things that the Chinese had before anyone else.

Currency (paper fiat money)
Gunpowder
Printing
Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:35 PM (8QGte)
***
But it was Westerners who knew what to do with these things......

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:36 PM (/33sy)

550 Some historians said that in the 1400s the Chinese ruled the seas,
--------
They sent a few Huuge (Trump-sized) fleets of Huuge ships on expeditions (7). They did not do much actual sea ruling beyond the China Seas.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 10:37 PM (NUqwG)

551 547
....people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.
Posted by: eman at February 02, 2016 10:36 PM (MQEz6)
***
And vice versa.....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:38 PM (/33sy)

552 522 In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.
Why aren't they still light years ahead?

Great food, great tea. Why innovate?

Seriously, it's probably something to do with intellectual curiosity vs. China's mix of practicality and aesthetics. Or possibly culture of individuality vs. culture of extended-family tribalism. One of those.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:38 PM (iMxBJ)

553 the only reason i don't pay income taxes is because i can't find a fucking j*b...

and the state of #Failifornia is still trying to collect back taxes on years i didn't file, because i haven't made enough money to file, because i have various required state/city registrations that i keep current in the off hope that someone one day might hire me, because it would take months to get them if i needed them to take a position.

they're taxing me on estimated income based solely on the fact that i have said papers, even though there's no reported income.

apparently i'm supposed to pay for all the free shit from my non-existent income.

FUCK the GOPe, the USCoC, and all the rest of the cabal...

i'll see you in hell, you bastards.

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 02, 2016 10:39 PM (ItRhK)

554 My heresy: no representation without taxation.

If taxes paid are less than government benefits, you can't vote.

----------------------------

Ben Carson hears you. You can make that feasible if you flip it around: I never thought it made sense to tax every adult no matter his/her income level until he made the point in debate. Everyone's got to have skin in the game. Everyone's got to pay a portion. It opened my eyes.

Posted by: iforgot at February 02, 2016 10:39 PM (YOxw1)

555 In sum, reform is impossible, collapse is inevitable, people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.

Pretty much. Fortunately, I've never given a shit what I smell like.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (QWY55)

556 How can anybody with a straight face possibly think that Rubio isn't controlled by the same interests that controlled John Boehner (or any other person in a congressional leadership position). I can't decide if politicians are controlled by demons or are just ignorant, venal and stupid.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (kk/oj)

557 "Trade deficits have nothing to do with government created fiat money OR our growing debt"

of course it does, easy money policy encourages spending ... we buy a lot of cheap foreign stuff. that relates to national debt because indebted Americans don't buy American stuff, layoffs, more government fiat money thrown from helicopters, we go deeper in debt to china and to banks. I guess QE doesn't quite count as real debt, but it is inflationary and punishes savers. It ALL relates.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (5Gpe2)

558 talk to your mechanic about his kids. start with that.

Let me guess. The mechanic doesn't want his kids to be mechanics?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (FkBIv)

559 rfichoke - Now I am curious. Ferrite? Wound? Air core?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (w/iDp)

560 ...people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.
Posted by: eman

You mean they don't already? I was afraid I was going to price myself out of the market, but now I might just raise the price to a full bar.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (Pwh6H)

561 New rule in Bartertown; the soap gets used first.

And after.

Posted by: OldDominionMom at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (GzDYP)

562 552 522 In 1,000 AD Europe was still crawling out of the dark ages while China was light years ahead.
Why aren't they still light years ahead?

Great food, great tea. Why innovate?

Seriously, it's probably something to do with intellectual curiosity vs. China's mix of practicality and aesthetics. Or possibly culture of individuality vs. culture of extended-family tribalism. One of those.
Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:38 PM (iMxBJ)
***
Rice-farming.....

It takes a hell of a lot of infrastructure - canals, barges, labor, etc, etc - to farm rice, and Farmer Li had damned sure better stay right right the fuck where he is if he's ever going to hope to harvest it.

Wheat, by contrast, is far less trouble; same for cattle.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:41 PM (/33sy)

563 "Currency (paper fiat money)
Gunpowder
Printing "

Lot's of fighting between the feudal lords? Chaos from dynasty to dynasty? Internal unrest.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:42 PM (gnB5x)

564 No soap for you!

Posted by: Soap Nazi at February 02, 2016 10:42 PM (8aOqE)

565 Great food, great tea. Why innovate?

Seriously, it's probably something to do with intellectual curiosity vs. China's mix of practicality and aesthetics. Or possibly culture of individuality vs. culture of extended-family tribalism. One of those.
Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:38 PM (iMxBJ)

Yeah, also the fact you were so far ahead of your neighbors. By the time China realized it needed to be worried, it was up shit creek without a paddle.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:42 PM (QWY55)

566 'twas ever thus.

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:42 PM (8QGte)

567 Reform welfare again. Roll ALL spending (including the hundreds of billions of grants to "community grants" into one program and administer it like EITC (but with drug testing so as not to feed habits) regardless of the number of kids the family has and even for single adults. The caveat being it is ONLY available to US citizens. Any children fathered get support out of the father's welfare payment. Do a transition SNAP program for children of immigrants that phases out in a decade, but that is the ONLY program they get to participate in that is federally funded. No section 8, no grants to "interest groups" or "resettlement providers" like Catholic Family Charities. No homebuilding programs with federal grant money (seriously along the border if a illegal buys land and waits a bit, a "community group" will come in and build a house on it for him. They'll even pay other illegals to be the labor on the project)
People who employ illegal immigrants will raise wages for essential workers, and the rest will return home.
No more "retirees" from Cuba who get SSI, Medicaid, housing vouchers funded through grant designated programs. No more worries about "anchor babies" because there is no incentive to farm children for benefits.

Posted by: GGM at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (ENM3D)

568 Assumption #2: Nations trade only goods and services, not debt and assets.

That
is one of the reasons comparative advantage has fatal flaws. Obviously
if China owns too much of our debt that we must service, or buys
controlling interests in American assets, they will not just be trade
partners, they will gain control and own US. That's kinda happening,
though fortunately China has other issues.

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3076

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:31 PM (5Gpe2)

Again... a nation's monetary and fiscal policy is a separate issue from free trade and and comparative advantage (and that article contains mostly gobbledegook).

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (NPofj)

569 I agree totally on restricting immigration to tighten the labor markets, but the basic income idea isn't that much of a heresy. Hayek favored a guaranteed basic income, Milton Friedman favored a negative income tax, and Charles Murray wrote a whole book about his proposal for a basic income. What they had in common though is that it replaces the current welfare system, and is not an addition to it. Tarriffs would be counterproductive though. It would make everything cost more for low income workers.

Posted by: Raul Johnson at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (LCbuZ)

570 Electra 225, - 401 ci V8, 4bbl carb, 10.25 to 1 compression ratio, cruise at 80 mph @ 18mpg w/a coffee cup on the dash and listen to the clock tick.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (idjhO)

571
http://preview.tinyurl.com/kw52z43

afe.easia.columbia.edu
The Ming Voyages - see The Fateful Decision
The Chinese stopped exploring. I wonder if we did the same thing when we stopped exploring space.

One man made the decision, "What has exploring space done for poor people in Ferguson? The oppressed minorities in the inner cities can't get jobs as aerospace engineers. It isn't fair that only white people get all the high paying jobs. The money spent on manned space exploration would be better spent on inner city development and food security by eliminating food deserts in minority neighborhoods."

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (P3GWR)

572 Do I think a Hispanic president would limit immigration on other
Hispanics? Uh, no I don't. Do I think a Hispanic president would deport
millions of other Hispanics. Um, no I don't.
------------------------
It sounds horrible, but I, too, have argued that Rubio is a tribalist pure and simple. There's a lot of evidence for it.

Posted by: iforgot at February 02, 2016 10:44 PM (YOxw1)

573 553 the state of #Failifornia is still trying to collect back taxes on years i didn't file, because i haven't made enough money to file, because i have various required state/city registrations that i keep current in the off hope that someone one day might hire me, because it would take months to get them if i needed them to take a position.

they're taxing me on estimated income based solely on the fact that i have said papers, even though there's no reported income.
Posted by: redc1c4 at February 02, 2016 10:39 PM (ItRhK)

Dude. Get them the right papers. They just need to check their boxes. You do not need money, you just need to feed paper into the right slots. Do not taunt Happy Fun Bureaucracy.

Had a similar issue recently with the Feds. Letter demanding huge sums of money way beyond my means or they would take my spleen. Turns out I missed a form from the bank and they were treating my house sale, at a loss, as ordinary income in the amount of the sale value of my house. I sent them some paper and hope to hear the end of it soon.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:44 PM (iMxBJ)

574 Electra 225, - 401 ci V8, 4bbl carb, 10.25 to 1 compression ratio, cruise at 80 mph @ 18mpg w/a coffee cup on the dash and listen to the clock tick.

Posted by: Ralph
--------------------------

*sighs*

They were good days,weren't they?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (w/iDp)

575 Posted by: Raul Johnson at February 02, 2016 10:43 PM (LCbuZ)

Milton Friedman only favored a negative income tax as a less destructive replacement for welfare... not as a free standing good idea.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (NPofj)

576 Looks like a rare "double-barreling."

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (gnB5x)

That sounds like the rare prothonotary warbler.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (gClMK)

577 ...In sum, reform is impossible, collapse is inevitable, people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.

Pretty much. Fortunately, I've never given a shit what I smell like...

The soap idea came from a fine piece of acting by Charlton Heston in Soylent Green. Birth name was John Carter.

God will bring forth (Biblical) Judges to lead us to the promise society. All we need is good leadership. We have the know how.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (kk/oj)

578 569 I agree totally on restricting immigration to tighten the labor markets, but the basic income idea isn't that much of a heresy. Hayek favored a guaranteed basic income, Milton Friedman favored a negative income tax, and Charles Murray wrote a whole book about his proposal for a basic income.

The way I remember it is, Charles Murray wrote a book describing, in detail, the failure of the Negative Income Tax Experiment, and what it said about the failure of that concept.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (iMxBJ)

579 574 Electra 225, - 401 ci V8, 4bbl carb, 10.25 to 1 compression ratio, cruise at 80 mph @ 18mpg w/a coffee cup on the dash and listen to the clock tick.

Posted by: Ralph
--------------------------

*sighs*

They were good days,weren't they?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (w/iDp)
***
Shiny and chrome.....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:46 PM (/33sy)

580 Just read that article about the assumptions of Comparative Advantage.

It's a standard, If A, then B. Mathematical proof.

Well, in A are the following givens:

1) No externalities (hidden costs or benefits not reflected in price)
2) No debt or assets are traded between nations
3)Production is domestically mobile
4) Production is not internationally mobile.
5) Static analysis holds, efficiency relations do not change over time
6) No economies of scale
7) No cross border investment

That's what must hold for B (free trade benefits both nations) to hold true.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (dvuhZ)

581 The United States political class has taken a page from its European counterparts and now rules against the will of its people. Mass migration, open borders and free trade are used to dilute, terrorize and marginalize citizens.

Now Big Conservatism, Inc., has dropped all pretense and demonizes and ridicules nationalism as much as the left-wing. Exception is made when mouthing calls to wage war on NoOneGivesAFuckAStan. The Trotskyite roots run deep.

Anti-Americanism is their heresy.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (pq97T)

582 >>>Here are things that the Chinese had before anyone else.

Currency (paper fiat money)

Gunpowder

Printing

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:35 PM (8QGte)
<<<

If only they had a carbon tax, they'd have ruled the world!!!

Posted by: Thomass Friedman at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (H9MG5)

583
Not worried about my country in the long run.

Our bedrock is still there, unchanged.

That bedrock is three fold.

It is the Declaration of Independence--the WHY.

The Bill of Rights--that which is inalienable.

The Constitution--the blueprint.

Holding to them has allowed us to flourish to the extent of becoming the most exceptional country and people on the planet.

It will happen again, even though that road back will not be easily traveled.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (P/8aq)

584 576 Looks like a rare "double-barreling."

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:15 PM (gnB5x)

That sounds like the rare prothonotary warbler.
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at February 02, 2016 10:45 PM (gClMK)
***
Izzat you, Alger?

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (/33sy)

585 In sum, reform is impossible, collapse is inevitable, people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.

Note to self - continue to stock up on soap.

Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 10:48 PM (kpqmD)

586 , Charles Murray wrote a book...
--------------

Uh, Charles Murray of 'The Bell Curve'?

Oh, man... he's like, a racist, man.

Posted by: 'Liberal' at February 02, 2016 10:50 PM (w/iDp)

587 Irongrampa, ever the optimist.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 10:50 PM (kKHcp)

588 585 In sum, reform is impossible, collapse is inevitable, people will trade sex for a small piece of soap.

Note to self - continue to stock up on soap.

Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 10:48 PM (kpqmD)
***
Soap stores poorly, and draws rodents, believe it or not.

Learn to make soap, my drughi, and you'll never want for the old in and out....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:50 PM (/33sy)

589 The reduction of the soap ration has been changed from 5 grams to 4 grams. The soap ration has been increased!

Posted by: Winston Smith at February 02, 2016 10:50 PM (8aOqE)

590
1. (vs. modern China) competition--multiple states led to more innovation.

2. (vs. China) a lack of Confucianism led to more innovation.

3. (vs. the modern Middle East) a separation of Church and State led to more scientific innovation and political reform.

4. (vis a vis a place like Africa) far more accessible ports and rivers.

5. The Protestant work ethic--haven't dug deeply enough to come down firmly on this, but there were some intriguing points.

6. The easy answer--actively adopting capitalism, democracy, and the rule of law.
Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 10:30 PM (QWY55)

I will suggest you read (if you can find it) Carlo Cipolla's Guns Sails and Empires (1965)

A lot of the older societies, Egypt, China, India, The Ottomans, were able to become exclusive states. That is because of quirks of environment, location and sometimes because of cultural reasons, the society and its ruling class could become more or less monopolies on the culture.
This causes stifling of innovation and calcification of the ability to learn and react to new situations.

All of this is because when societies get isolated from competition or invasion, they don't have to think and adapt. They can find the script and stick to it.

The European states during the Renaissance and reformation and industrial revolution were always forced to compete, adapt and learn, otherwise they died. The monopolistic states became ossified, and couldn't wrap their heads around the new tech coming from the west, even when it was given to them and they already had the techniques for CENTURIES.

Anyways, it is at odds with Jared Diamonds Big Book of Something Other than Ornithology in its conclusions

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 10:50 PM (q2o38)

591 Note to self - continue to stock up on soap.

Posted by: Insomniac
-------------

So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:51 PM (w/iDp)

592 "That sounds like the rare prothonotary warbler."

I swear to Pete I thought it was "promontory." Don't know now I fooked that one up.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:51 PM (gnB5x)

593 We spend so much money on just the administration of the welfare state. We have Section 8, WIC, SNAP, Medicaid and a thousand other programs. There are tends of thousands of federal workers who process paper work for all these programs.

So let's just get rid of it all and just send everyone a check on Jan 1. Welfare for all. I mean fuck we're spending the money as it is, at least let's make the spending more efficient and fair. You make $10K a year? You get $X. You make $10M a year, you also get $X.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 10:51 PM (0LHZx)

594 Night all. You all are a good bunch and give yourself away. You're quite intelligent and educated and work hard for yourself and family and friends. God bless you all and to all a good night.

Posted by: scorecard at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (kk/oj)

595 544 Here are things that the Chinese had before anyone else.

Currency (paper fiat money)
Gunpowder
Printing
Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 10:35 PM (8QGte)

Rockets, too. They were only made of paper and fueled with gunpowder, but they were the world's first rockets.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (sdi6R)

596 So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?
Posted by: Mike Hammer
-----------
Toilet paper, dammit. Forgot.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (w/iDp)

597 "In the 1950s, when these assumptions were much closer to reality, free trade may have been a winning move for America, but those days are long gone. It is free traders, not protectionists, who are living in the past and sticking their heads in the sand."

This article explains the comparative advantage flaws, most even noted by famed David Ricardo himself, but ignored. "Protectionism" is not heresy. Well, heresy if one was raised drinking the warm milk of Mother Marxism and Daddy Globalist, perhaps. But not for those that want America sovereign.

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3076

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (5Gpe2)

598 593 We spend so much money on just the administration of the welfare state. We have Section 8, WIC, SNAP, Medicaid and a thousand other programs. There are tends of thousands of federal workers who process paper work for all these programs.

You are perilously close to cracking the code. The programs are not enacted into law for the beneficiaries. They are enacted into law to support exactly those workers.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:53 PM (iMxBJ)

599 "So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?"

Throw in gas/fuel. Get a 1000 gallon tank or two and store up.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:54 PM (gnB5x)

600 596 So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?
Posted by: Mike Hammer
-----------
Toilet paper, dammit. Forgot.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (w/iDp)
***
Food - useful for thee and thine...

Ammo - we call it "ballistic wampum" in these parts.

Liquor - learn to make it, and you;ll be a rich man.

Soap - learn to make it and you'll never starve.

TP - why bother when there are thousands of pages in the Federal Register, not to mention dollar bills?

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:55 PM (/33sy)

601
So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:51 PM (w/iDp)

Looks that way. And you already mentioned TP.

Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 10:55 PM (kpqmD)

602 Holy crap! Is this a movie review?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 02, 2016 10:55 PM (UpGcq)

603 "Come back to my place, darlin', I have soap"

"Um, Ok. I haven't seen soap in months! Tee Hee!"

"Now that we have arrived, perhaps you would like to spend some time with this soap first. Take your time. Please be thorough."

"No, more thorough."

"Allow me."

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 10:56 PM (iMxBJ)

604 Soap - learn to make it and you'll never starve.

I heard you can use ashes from the pyres of human sacrifices as an ingredient.

Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 10:56 PM (kpqmD)

605 Fuck this shit with protectionism. Trade is a good thing. You know who was very protectionist? The eastern bloc. And Cuba. And North Korea (still is). See a trend here?

Without trade we'd still all be driving pieces of shit GMs with 1981 quality standards. You can't call yourself a capitalist and then turn around and demand we keep out foreign products.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 10:57 PM (0LHZx)

606 596 So, we're up to food, ammo, liquor, and soap, right?
Posted by: Mike Hammer
-----------
Toilet paper, dammit. Forgot.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:52 PM (w/iDp)
***
Tobacco seeds, and the know-how to process it....

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:57 PM (/33sy)

607 stocking up for ill weather are we?

Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 02, 2016 10:57 PM (on01m)

608 Ace -- it's not so much heresy. Try reading Milton Friedman and his 'guaranteed income' theory/proposal. It's a way to help the 'poor' without so much government bureaucracy and government power/control.

Posted by: Alix at February 02, 2016 10:58 PM (MpfHK)

609 Now, I've got 1k tank and two 500 tanks. I can pay to fill 'em and I'lll share, but I'll need to see a little something.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 10:58 PM (gnB5x)

610 You know who was very protectionist?
-----
The United States

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 10:58 PM (NUqwG)

611 The reformicon idea is that government will subsidize you while immigrants keep your salary low. Then, when you try to make it up to the middle class, they will tax you to pay for the next bottom cohort.

It won't work, for long anyway. Marco thinks this is cute because it keeps everybody happy: big business, racialists, and the working poor. But eventually the money runs out, and people find themselves stuck in the lower class. Not for long, Marco, not for long.

Posted by: pj at February 02, 2016 10:59 PM (cHuNI)

612 Propane stores well.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 10:59 PM (idjhO)

613 I've chosen my Heresy http://www.klipsch.com/products/heresy-iii-floorstanding-speaker

Made in America too!

Recommended to drown-out the idiocy.

Posted by: Brian in BC at February 02, 2016 10:59 PM (cRbvD)

614 "Protectionism" is not heresy. Well, heresy if one was raised drinking
the warm milk of Mother Marxism and Daddy Globalist, perhaps. But not
for those that want America sovereign.

oh for god's sake. I am getting a little bit sick of the protectionists prancing around as if they are the super-patriots or something. Protectionism is BAD for America, because:

1. it inhibits domestic innovation by protecting domestic industries from competition, leading to stagnation (see: American auto makers in the 70s)
2. it just raises everyone's costs, it's the consumers who wind up paying the tariff, those same consumers you are trying to help
3. it's an additional source of corruption for DC as the domestic industries benefitting from said tariffs have one more incentive to grease the palms of certain influential legislators, it's just another form of crony capitalism
4. we don't WANT to fight for the truly crappy awful jobs that 12-year-old Malaysians do
5. but the worst part of it all, is that it MASKS the real problem, which is overregulation of the domestic economy which inhibits domestic entrepreneurialism

Funny how the same people who decry the FSA wanting their bennies from the state are now demanding their own government jobs program disguised as a tariff.

in fact about the only good thing about protectionism is the good feelz that it gives those who favor the tariffs, in the illusion that they are "helping America" by being forced by their own government to buy inferior domestic products that are protected from competition, and raising everyone's costs in the process.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (lVU49)

615 Propane stores well.
Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT
-------------------------
I understand that it virtually stores as long as you need it to.

Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (on01m)

616 612 Propane stores well.
Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 10:59 PM (idjhO)

Don't forget to lay in some fine propane accessories, too.

Posted by: Hank Hill at February 02, 2016 11:01 PM (iMxBJ)

617 All of this is because when societies get isolated from competition or invasion, they don't have to think and adapt. They can find the script and stick to it.

Yep, that's pretty much my theory on China. I'll check it out.

Posted by: AD at February 02, 2016 11:01 PM (QWY55)

618 Propane and propane accessories are a must for every God-fearing, America-loving household!

Posted by: Hank Hill at February 02, 2016 11:01 PM (kpqmD)

619 Without trade we'd still all be driving **** 1981 quality standards. You can't call yourself a
capitalist and then turn around and demand we keep out foreign products.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 10:57 PM (0LHZx)

Let's split the difference and get labor and products without massive subsidies and smothering regulations, instead?

It's what we haven't tried to date.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:01 PM (q2o38)

620 Propane stores well.

I wanted to get enough storage capacity so I could buy at summer spot prices enough for all winter. Then I wouldn't have to plow snow to get the propane truck in.

My local supplier talked me out of it.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 11:01 PM (P3GWR)

621 Goddamn Ace, this post is off the chain! This is why I love this place.

Posted by: Arson Wells at February 02, 2016 11:02 PM (UnJ7w)

622 Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (lVU49)

Oh for gods sake...

some of us are tired of the last 40 years of Watching the American economy in decline, while our Government makes it so we can't produce, while giving foreign competitors an advantage...

Posted by: Gen. Jack D. Ripper at February 02, 2016 11:02 PM (f7rv6)

623 171
The economic commentary on this site has more in common with Teamsters than it does Heritage Institute or Cato.

An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of
free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two
centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled
, educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get
mocked for being a denier.

To be blunt, anyone who is a conservative can't even think about
voting for Trump. He is not for free market capitalism, he is for
cronyism. He and Hillary are the best examples of people leveraging
their political connections to gain a business advantage.

So go ahead and nominate Trump . I won't vote for him and many other
free market Republicans won't either. I have similar doubts about
Cruz, who I also think would embrace protectionism in a heart beat.

Posted by: Thucydides at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (6IqhF)
171
The economic commentary on this site has more in common with Teamsters than it does Heritage Institute or Cato.

An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of
free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two
centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled
, educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get
mocked for being a denier.

To be blunt, anyone who is a conservative can't even think about
voting for Trump. He is not for free market capitalism, he is for
cronyism. He and Hillary are the best examples of people leveraging
their political connections to gain a business advantage.

So go ahead and nominate Trump . I won't vote for him and many other
free market Republicans won't either. I have similar doubts about
Cruz, who I also think would embrace protectionism in a heart beat.

Posted by: Thucydides at February 02, 2016 08:45 PM (6IqhF)

We should set tariffs for: any environmental cleanup for pollution upstream; maintenance of open seaways against bandits hosted in foreign ports; WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and Desert Storm; the Peace Corps; stolen or cozened IP used overseas; the UN; and any regulation we have to deal with here that a foreign worker doesn't have to deal with there (e.g. -- here, we have a guard on the saw, so we cut would 5% slower but hardly ever lose limbs -- why buy lumber cut overseas for 5% less than lumber cut here so that they can just maim their employees?).

Posted by: cthulhu at February 02, 2016 11:02 PM (EzgxV)

624 My big heresy? Culture. Matters.

Cultures that reward independence, initiative, industry, and inquisitiveness rise. Cultures that don't sink. That's the beginning and end of it.

All cultures are most decidedly NOT equal. It's time we stopped pretending otherwise.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 11:03 PM (m9V0o)

625 TP - why bother when there are thousands of pages in the Federal Register, not to mention dollar bills?
Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine, Still Accepting Harem Applicants at February 02, 2016 10:55 PM (/33sy)

CFR pages are too slick, and too thin. I bet the ink would be irritating too.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:03 PM (q2o38)

626 "Propane stores well."

Yes it does. Very stable. Roughly monitors the price of gasoline. Burns pretty long. As it stands, I'l only need one fill through the winter at less than $200 for a hundred gallon top-up.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 11:03 PM (gnB5x)

627 rexbatt...can't speak for ace, but imo, the "romneys/ryans,
etals" have morphed into something very, very bad. rubio was electable back when the establishment hadn't morphed into what it is today.

and i don't want anything to do with them.

Posted by: concrete girl at February 02, 2016 11:03 PM (0KgAM)

628 Protectionism hurts the protectionist party.

I went to a really expensive school with lots of lines and curves on graphs to prove it. Also, it's true.

So no protectionism.

And yes, "free trade" is part of the conservative canon, or is supposed to be.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Opus/Bill the Cat 2016 at February 02, 2016 08:15 PM (1xUj/)

In a strictly economic sense, yes. But a country is more than money and people are more than economic units.

Also, why has Intel been a major chip maker? We protected it from cheap Japanese chip makers in the 80's. Why are there Japanese car plants in the US? Reagan told them to either build plants here or we would shut them down.

Absolute economic efficiency is detrimental to a healthy country.

Posted by: WOPR at February 02, 2016 11:04 PM (LTDSy)

629 some of us are tired of the last 40 years of Watching the American
economy in decline, while our Government makes it so we can't produce,
while giving foreign competitors an advantage...

So the solution to this is, MORE government mucking about with the economy?

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:06 PM (lVU49)

630
Yes, I'm an optimist. I believe in my country.

Years ago I took an oath as many of you here did.

There's no expiration date on it.

I believe in a political solution for our issues, because fulfilling that oath does not ALWAYS mean picking up a weapon.

But it's comforting to know that the check written at the time of the oath taking is still funded.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 02, 2016 11:06 PM (P/8aq)

631 Ace

Very thoughtful. This is an existential issue, so ... something with a little more immediate impact? Omph?

E-Verify for me.

Posted by: mnw (fair and ballast) at February 02, 2016 11:06 PM (NiHAc)

632 Getting gov't regs and unions out of the way of the new "sharing economy" is one possible way that traditional conservative economic ideas could benefit the working class. Of course, it only benefits more industrious people first, but that will eventually add wealth across the bottom third.

The tariff plan will reduce American spending power. As much as I loathe WalMart, I can't deny that the poor and lower-middle class people in my rural area have gotten a sort of Walmart Dividend from the availability of cheap and plentiful imported goods. You could increase wages and still reduce spending power your way -- but maybe people are dumb enough they thank you for the wage increase and blame the higher prices on something else, in which case you gain power, though to no real end.

Posted by: Cjw at February 02, 2016 11:07 PM (H4pHX)

633 Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 10:40 PM (w/iDp)

Ferrite.

Posted by: rfichoke at February 02, 2016 11:07 PM (vLCft)

634
The economic commentary on this site has more in common with Teamsters than it does Heritage Institute or Cato. An economist named David Ricardo wrote a treatise on the benefits of free trade in the early 19th century. If you want to deny over two centuries of evidence, be my guest, but don't be surprised when skilled , educated business people leave the party in mass nor that you get mocked for being a denier. To be blunt, anyone who is a conservative can't even think about voting for Trump. He is not for free market capitalism, he is for cronyism. He and Hillary are the best examples of people leveraging their political connections to gain a business advantage. So go ahead and nominate Trump . I won't vote for him and many other free market Republicans won't either. I have similar doubts about Cruz, who I also think would embrace protectionism in a heart beat.
Posted by: Thucydides

Your concern has been:

[x] Noted
[ ] Not Noted

Especially because it's pretty obviously just cut and paste on the GOPe dime.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 02, 2016 11:07 PM (kdS6q)

635 Why are there Japanese car plants in the US? Reagan told them to either build plants here or we would shut them down.

______

Reagan's protectionism was no better than anyone else's.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1985/02/the-costly-truth-about-auto-import-quotas

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (0LHZx)

636 "
Fuck this shit with protectionism. Trade is a good thing. You know who
was very protectionist? The eastern bloc. And Cuba. And North Korea
(still is). See a trend here?"

"Protection" doesn't mean no trade, it means selective trade. The trend is that even though we have the tech and food everyone needs, we have huge trade deficits and high unemployment. Bad deal.

We also use trade to get enemies to do what we want, but that is another part of the equation. "Reward friends, punish enemies", famous sayings of Obama.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (5Gpe2)

637 621 Goddamn Ace, this post is off the chain! This is why I love this place.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 02, 2016 11:02 PM (UnJ7w)

Yes, it's good. Very good. A little too good. Imagine that the general public catches on to how good "intellectual analysis Ace" is. They flock here. Then one day Ace pulls out something like the epic Kaboom post or the "Blurred Lines oh that brunette" post, and they all turn on him. The spilled Frappucinos alone would represent millions of dollars worth of harm.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (iMxBJ)

638 OH, and about free trade.

Here's a hint: It only works if everyone involves doesn't cheat.

It sure as hell doesn't work when you're the only one not cheating.

We complain when our military is forced to live by insane ROE; why on Earth do we tolerate it on our economy? If you don't intend to go full protectionist (and there are compelling reasons not to) then at least compensate for the disadvantage by (a) not encumbering people with stupid useless regulations and (b) maybe not be as free with aid of various sorts to folks who cheat, with the ultimate (c) if they cheat with both hands and rob you blind, lock their asses out.

I'm looking right at you, People's Republic of ~~Cheaters~~ China.

Free trade with those who reciprocate. But only with them.

Oh yeah. Relearn this world people: Reciprocity. That's where it's at.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (m9V0o)

639
This is too delicious for words -- blue on blue cannibalism

http://tinyurl.com/hcwo2l9

Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars (TM) at February 02, 2016 11:09 PM (BK3ZS)

640 "True. So why the huge leap by Europeans?"

Our Italian history teacher said that it was the bubonic plague that kept Europe in the dark. It stopped trade, stopped communication, stopped everything short of war and basic survival.

Once the plague ended, culture and civilization and trade flowered.

The author of Guns, Germs and Steel said that the third world has revived too, largely because of advances introduced by the first world, like modern medicine, etc. And now it's out exploring and conquering too. And I denounce myself for saying that.

Posted by: pj at February 02, 2016 11:09 PM (cHuNI)

641 614
in fact about the only good thing about protectionism is the good feelz that it gives those who favor the tariffs, in the illusion that they are "helping America" by being forced by their own government to buy inferior domestic products that are protected from competition, and raising everyone's costs in the process.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (lVU49)

All good points, but on the other hand, you have Americans who pride themselves for their social and environmental consciousness, who enjoy their iPhones while blissfully unconcerned that they are manufactured by near-slave labor, and never bother to think of the Chinese villages surrounded by mountains of toxic sludge poisoning the groundwater and threatening to collapse with the next heavy rain.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 11:09 PM (sdi6R)

642 It's funny to see people whine about govt regulation then demand more govt regulation (tarrifs) to solve the problem.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (0LHZx)

643 stocking up for ill weather are we?
Posted by: Tobacco Road
-----------

We're counting on you people east of here to supply tobacco and cotton.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (J3phO)

644 >>>Some historians say it was lead plumbing that drove the Romans crazy.
Wonder what they will say about the 21st century?
Posted by: Ralph

FLUORIDE!!!

Posted by: ChicagoRefugee at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (5VOsO)

645 Yup.

Posted by: Hank Hill at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (7qAYi)

646 Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (lVU49)

First, I'll be nice and say that you should have led with #5, as many ills could be solved with just that one.

Next, I'll be neutral and say that you're knocking down strawmen of your own making by claiming " protectionists prancing around as if they are the super-patriots or something."

I see people offering their opinions and giving their reasons. You're the one who often comes across as holding the high moral ground here. If anyone prances, it is you.

Next, I'll be blunt. You are being willfully ignorant bordering on stupid if you think protectionism is never justified.
You do know that other countries have identified targeted industries in the US for destruction, and set out national policies to do that, do you not?

How to explain Chinese buying American scrap iron, shipping it over to China, making steel with it, and selling it back here, FOR LESS THAN THEY PAID FOR THE SCRAP?

At some point, a nation has to take steps to ensure that they aren't attacked by bad faith "trade partners", no?

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (kKHcp)

647 We also use trade to get enemies to do what we want,
but that is another part of the equation. "Reward friends, punish
enemies", famous sayings of Obama.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (5Gpe2)
No, under a protectionist regime, *the government* uses trade to get other nations, both friends and enemies to do what *the government* wants. And who controls the government? Certainly not the average guy...

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (lVU49)

648 "Yes, I'm an optimist. I believe in my country.

Years ago I took an oath as many of you here did.

There's no expiration date on it.

I believe in a political solution for our issues, because fulfilling that oath does not ALWAYS mean picking up a weapon.

But it's comforting to know that the check written at the time of the oath taking is still funded.
"

Thank you, IG.

No check here.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at February 02, 2016 11:11 PM (gnB5x)

649 645 Yup.
Posted by: Hank Hill at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (7qAYi)

*cracks beer*

Yup.

Posted by: Boomhauer at February 02, 2016 11:12 PM (kpqmD)

650 639 This is too delicious for words -- blue on blue cannibalism
http://tinyurl.com/hcwo2l9
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars (TM) at February 02, 2016 11:09 PM (BK3ZS)

Nice.

"the Democratic Party eating itself like a snake that loves science and Planned Parenthood"

This is a talented woman. Co-blogger-level stuff, this is.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 11:12 PM (iMxBJ)

651 If you are going the free trade route then the US has to stop dumping surplus grains in third world countries at below market prices. Which wouldn't be a bad thing, except for the food riots in some of those countries.

and the refugees fleeing civil war over the price of a loaf of bread.

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 02, 2016 11:12 PM (P3GWR)

652 Yuuuge! This is all about me! Get with the program, losahs!

And the handicapped deserve what they get, too! Also married brawds with menstrual problems, obviously. And maniacs like that so-called "Senator" Cruz!

Posted by: mnw (fair and ballast) at February 02, 2016 11:13 PM (NiHAc)

653 "Protection" doesn't mean no trade, it means selective trade. The trend is that even though we have the tech and food everyone needs, we have huge trade deficits and high unemployment. Bad deal.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (5Gpe2)

______

That's in part because we have a lot of money with which to buy other countries' shit while most of the world is too poor to buy ours. You know who has a trade surplus? Venezuela. About $45B. They must be doing great huh?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 02, 2016 11:13 PM (0LHZx)

654 We're counting on you people east of here to supply tobacco and cotton.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc.
-----------------------------

Mom's granddad was a cotton broker, and dad's great granddad cultivated the first tobacco in Cumberland County.

Then there was that recent unpleasantness.

Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 02, 2016 11:13 PM (on01m)

655 Oh, and the ONT is up! Corgis, roll out! (Unless you want to keep at it here, of course...)

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 02, 2016 11:13 PM (m9V0o)

656 640 Once the plague ended, culture and civilization and trade flowered.

Alternate theory: plague somehow targeted stupid people.

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 11:13 PM (iMxBJ)

657 614
"Protectionism" is not heresy. Well, heresy if one was raised drinking

the warm milk of Mother Marxism and Daddy Globalist, perhaps. But not

for those that want America sovereign.

oh for god's
sake. I am getting a little bit sick of the protectionists prancing
around as if they are the super-patriots or something. Protectionism is
BAD for America, because:

1. it inhibits domestic innovation
by protecting domestic industries from competition, leading to
stagnation (see: American auto makers in the 70s)
2. it just raises
everyone's costs, it's the consumers who wind up paying the tariff,
those same consumers you are trying to help
3. it's an additional
source of corruption for DC as the domestic industries benefitting from
said tariffs have one more incentive to grease the palms of certain
influential legislators, it's just another form of crony capitalism
4. we don't WANT to fight for the truly crappy awful jobs that 12-year-old Malaysians do
5.
but the worst part of it all, is that it MASKS the real problem, which
is overregulation of the domestic economy which inhibits domestic
entrepreneurialism

Funny how the same people who decry the
FSA wanting their bennies from the state are now demanding their own
government jobs program disguised as a tariff.

in fact about
the only good thing about protectionism is the good feelz that it gives
those who favor the tariffs, in the illusion that they are "helping
America" by being forced by their own government to buy inferior
domestic products that are protected from competition, and raising
everyone's costs in the process.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:00 PM (lVU49)

"Protectionism" is necessary because American taxpayers enforce the security of worldwide shipping lanes; if a foreign manufacturer can just assume the Americans will do it for free, then they can price their goods more cheaply than an American manufacturer can -- because the American manufacturer will be taxed to pay for the foreign manufacturer's security.

"Protectionism" is necessary because American taxpayers demand manufacturing processes here that use minimal lead or arsenic. Since there are cheaper processes and the results are the same, foreign companies will have a price advantage for poisoning their workers.

"Protectionism" is necessary because certain countries (*cough* China) use honest-to-God slave labor to make things -- incarcerated people who are paid nothing but daily gruel. It makes boxes and sandals really cheap, but not having a tariff to make other company's goods competitive serves to encourage inhumane conditions.

Posted by: cthulhu at February 02, 2016 11:14 PM (EzgxV)

658
"the Democratic Party eating itself like a snake that loves science and Planned Parenthood"

This is a talented woman. Co-blogger-level stuff, this is.
Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 11:12 PM (iMxBJ)

It's an interesting turn of phrase, but the rest of the post is just unstoppered raving lunacy.

Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 11:14 PM (kpqmD)

659 "Among those who said that "honest and trustworthy" was the candidate quality that mattered to them most, Sanders won 83 percent to 10 percent. "

-
So the Sandman won the Donk honest and trustworthy vote by 83% to 10% and yet Kween Kong Klinton won. Shows you the extent to which Donks care about honest and trustworthy.

Posted by: The Great White Snark at February 02, 2016 11:16 PM (Nwg0u)

660
E-Verify for me.
Posted by: mnw (fair and ballast) at February 02, 2016 11:06 PM (NiHAc)

The main sticking point is that E-verify can be claimed to be releasing protected personal information. As well as being cruel and anti business because it can affect the employablity of otherwise good employees.

Let's try another tack: If your employee's name, DOB and SSN don't match, you can't write the wages off against business expenses.

Illegals can get ITINs to pay taxes in this country by filing less paper than it takes to get a bank account, but they can't work with one, which is why there is such fraud and so many false SSNs floating around. No real skin off the employers' nose if they don't care other than getting cheap workers that work hard and don't cause many waves.
But if it is suddenly a matter of having to pay one minimum wage employee much more than another because the wages can't be deducted as business expenses on the quarterly taxes, guess who gets asked serious questions, like, "why don't you get this straightened out before coming back to work?"

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:16 PM (q2o38)

661 That's in part because we have a lot of money with which to buy other countries' shit
---
We'll eventually run out of assets to sell.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 11:16 PM (NUqwG)

662 Cato is libertarian? Who backs Heritage?

Teamsters are wrong on the whole kneecapping thing, but keeping jobs in America, rather than sending them to be done by slaves, to build the military of our enemies ... that sounds right.

I remember 20 years ago talk of comparative advantage, those trade deficits will balance out, jobs will come back ... $30M/month is unsustainable, but be patient. It was a scam. It went to $60M and is slowing down due to a weak economy probably. But Free Trade is a Orwellian mantra, as if those slaves all become freedom loving global citizens, under President of the World Obama. yeah right

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (5Gpe2)

663 I talked to a former High School History teacher a while back. He was fired for not being sensitive enough to the minority Hispanic students. What he did was tell the Hispanics to assimilate and tell the Anglos to compete with the immigrants, both legal and otherwise, or be left behind. He had been a teacher for many years and said the big problem was the Hispanics no longer believe they have to learn English and they believe that as the soon to be Majority, they don't have to listen to any fucking Anglos about anything.
I told that story to a brand new State representative and I could see him immediately discount me as a racist dumbass. Conversation over.
That is the real immigration problem.

Posted by: Hopped Up on Something at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (ampSV)

664 658 It's an interesting turn of phrase, but the rest of the post is just unstoppered raving lunacy.
Posted by: Insomniac - Pale Horse/Death 2016 at February 02, 2016 11:14 PM (kpqmD)

Oh. Yes. Could barely understand it. Still, with the right medication...

Posted by: Splunge at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (iMxBJ)

665
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (kKHcp)

Really? Do you read these comments? The ones demanding protectionism are the ones who claim to be looking out "for America's interests" and the ones opposing protectionism are labeled as "globalists" or "Marxists" or somehow sinister foes who hate America.

It would have to be a really exceptional case, I think, for which protectionism is justified.

In your scrap iron example - WE are the ones who are the net winners in that transaction, because we get a superior product (finished steel) from an inferior product (scrap iron) for LESS MONEY. The people harmed by this transaction are the people of China. We should want them to do MORE of this.

If I buy a loaf of bread from you for $2, and then sell you a sandwich for $1, you now have something of higher value than your original loaf of bread, PLUS one more additional dollar. YOU WIN.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (lVU49)

666 You're all bringing up the "externalities" part of the assumptions built in Ricardo, actually.

US naval protection of sea lanes that cthulhu mentioned. The wanton pollution of China's factories mentioned further above.

These costs aren't reflected in the price. China doesn't pay us for that naval protection. And that pollution isn't being paid for.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 11:18 PM (dvuhZ)

667 "It sure as hell doesn't work when you're the only one not cheating."

"If you're not cheating, you're not trying."

Posted by: navybrat at February 02, 2016 11:18 PM (8QGte)

668 Yup.
Posted by: Hank Hill at February 02, 2016 11:10 PM (7qAYi)

*cracks beer*

Yup.
Posted by: Boomhauer at February 02, 2016 11:12 PM

Mmm-hmm.

Posted by: Dale Gribble at February 02, 2016 11:19 PM (7qAYi)

669 If I buy a loaf of bread from you for $2, and then sell you a sandwich for $1, you now have something of higher value than your original loaf of bread, PLUS one more additional dollar. YOU WIN.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (lVU49)

------
What am I going to do with the shit sandwich?

A real sandwich costs $4.95.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 11:20 PM (NUqwG)

670 316 For heaven's sake literally anyone beyond the age of 12 can stand at an assembly line for 15 hours a day and make iPhone cases, why should we try to bring these types of lousy jobs to America? It's a waste. Let's instead create jobs that can take advantage of expensive labor in a more cost-effective way.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (lVU49)

What the hell kind of labor do you think we have available in our inner cities? Are you planning on employing them as college professors?

Posted by: ChicagoRefugee at February 02, 2016 11:21 PM (5VOsO)

671 Well, in A are the following givens:

1) No externalities (hidden costs or benefits not reflected in price)
2) No debt or assets are traded between nations
3)Production is domestically mobile
4) Production is not internationally mobile.
5) Static analysis holds, efficiency relations do not change over time
6) No economies of scale
7) No cross border investment

That's what must hold for B (free trade benefits both nations) to hold true.

Posted by: publius (not Breitbart publius) at February 02, 2016 10:47 PM (dvuhZ)

Pub... comparative advantage still works even when the assumptions of the simple, static case are violated by a dynamic world. Comparative advantage works domestically and is seen in the returns to specialization and it works internationally, if more imperfectly, better than all forms of economic protectionism tried thus far.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (NPofj)

672 People keep confusing "free trade" with NAFTA, GATT, etc. Those agreements aren't "free trade." They're "managed trade," which is just a harmonization of economic intervention across state lines. You can't have real free trade without anarchy. (And more people need to learn that anarchy doesn't mean putting on a mask and throwing a brick through a Starbucks window. But that's another issue.)

Posted by: rfichoke at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (vLCft)

673 Posted by: cthulhu at February 02, 2016 11:14 PM (EzgxV)

I'll be honest and say that it is not my place to dictate to China what their environmental policies ought to be.

Applying a tariff for the purposes of global shipping security is about the only sensible argument I've seen thus far for tariffs.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (lVU49)

674 What the hell kind of labor do you think we have available in our inner cities?
------
That would be the same kind of labor we are currently importing!

Posted by: RioBravo at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (NUqwG)

675 Venezuela is selling oil, but they are negative now since they are collapsing. The Saudis and Kuwait too ... so what. We have plenty of resources and tech but still have huge deficits and act as world police, or used to.

Bad deals, or corrupt Clintons ... pay to play.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:24 PM (5Gpe2)

676 GOP's appeal to the working class is: We will find a way to get your kids out of the failed, Democrat-controlled public schools which hate you and your children.

Posted by: Jack Squat Bupkis at February 02, 2016 11:25 PM (MxONJ)

677 "Protectionism" is a racket.
The Mafia provides protection.

Posted by: Ralph, let them eat DDT at February 02, 2016 11:25 PM (idjhO)

678 The author of Guns, Germs and Steel said that the
third world has revived too, largely because of advances introduced by
the first world, like modern medicine, etc. And now it's out exploring
and conquering too. And I denounce myself for saying that.
Posted by: pj at February 02, 2016 11:09 PM (cHuNI)

Diamond also said that the West was "blessed" by good transportation routes (unlike the Ottomans and Egypt) and "ready interchange of ideas" (like being overrun by the Swedes in Northern Germany, or by the Huns, or invaded by the Norse) and the "lesser people" of the third world were handicapped by being able to set up protected enclaves that were stable and long lasting.

Great stresses are also great gifts, they teach us what we can do, both as individuals and as societies.

Don't denounce yourself, read more. Just read someone else other than Diamond. He's an damned good ornithologist.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:32 PM (q2o38)

679 556. It's demons all the way down.

Posted by: simplemind at February 02, 2016 11:32 PM (BTnAK)

680 Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (lVU49)

First point, and I omitted it earlier, is that the Steel was of inferior quality. Bought up in copious amounts by the state of California, to be used for bridge projects, which now have to be repaired at great expense.

Second. The point of that kind of targeting is to KILL an industry in the targeted country. When that domestic industry dies, do you believe that the price will not rise? Don't be naive.

Sometimes protectionism is justified.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 11:32 PM (kKHcp)

681 " it works internationally, if more imperfectly, better than all forms of economic protectionism tried thus far." red banzai

so you are down to ... "works better than protectionism tried so far"

That's a start. But still wrong. We have some $200T in unfunded liabilities promised in keeping our system afloat. We could have built much more here and be on more solid footing to face what is coming. Instead we built China and other places. Did we help the world, or just enrich commie oligarchs?

CA is theory that doesn't hold for all those listed reasons. You just state out of thin air "it works". So QE and ZIRP and all the debt ... shows how well it is working. nah ... It may seem like gobbledegook to you ... but it is simple.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:34 PM (5Gpe2)

682 I remember 20 years ago talk of comparative
advantage, those trade deficits will balance out, jobs will come back
... $30M/month is unsustainable, but be patient. It was a scam. It went
to $60M and is slowing down due to a weak economy probably. But Free
Trade is a Orwellian mantra, as if those slaves all become freedom
loving global citizens, under President of the World Obama. yeah right

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (5Gpe2)

Trade deficits are not nearly the problem that you think they are.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 11:34 PM (NPofj)

683 673
Posted by: cthulhu at February 02, 2016 11:14 PM (EzgxV)

I'll be honest and say that it is not my place to dictate to China what their environmental policies ought to be.

Applying
a tariff for the purposes of global shipping security is about the only
sensible argument I've seen thus far for tariffs.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (lVU49)

Their rivers flow into our sea.

And when the time comes to clean it up, who is the world going to point fingers at to do it?

Posted by: cthulhu at February 02, 2016 11:35 PM (EzgxV)

684 673
I'll be honest and say that it is not my place to dictate to China what their environmental policies ought to be.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:22 PM (lVU49)

Nor I.

But we have environmental protections and China does not.

That makes China a much more attractive place for multinational corporations to locate factories.

So, either we eliminate our environmental protection laws and accept a much higher level of pollution so that Americans may be employed, or else we levy tariffs on Chinese-made goods to bring their prices up to what they would be if manufactured in American factories with our environmental standards.

Or we could go on as we are doing now, and simply enjoy cheap products, no pollution in America (and no employment either), and just put out of our minds the pollution in China, since, hey, that doesn't affect us.

You know, the tariffs might just spur the Chinese to take a good look at their lack of pollution regulations, and perhaps improve them, thus benefiting Chinese people downstream from those factories.

Posted by: rickl at February 02, 2016 11:37 PM (sdi6R)

685 I just bought Guns Sails Empires ... $5.89 on Amazon used, with shipping.

I swear one day I'll read all this stuff I collect, and finally have all the answers. lol
Thanks for the suggestion.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:38 PM (5Gpe2)

686 If I buy a loaf of bread from you for $2, and then
sell you a sandwich for $1, you now have something of higher value than
your original loaf of bread, PLUS one more additional dollar. YOU WIN.
Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:17 PM (lVU49)

Not if I sell unsubsidized sandwiches in competition to you and you drive me out of business. Then you can sell sandwiches for whatever you want, without competition.
Which is what the Chinese do.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:38 PM (q2o38)

687 Chemjeff, perhaps my definition of protectionism and yours differ.
But I don't think a country has to tolerate being economically abused for the ideal of "free trade."
When a bad actor is found out, there should be some repercussions. If that bad actor is a nation, those repercussions can take the form of tariffs, or whatever.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 11:39 PM (kKHcp)

688 I swear one day I'll read all this stuff I collect, and finally have all the answers. lol
Thanks for the suggestion.
Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:38 PM (5Gpe2)

I suggest reading Cipolla instead. He actually makes sense. I am not a a fan of Diamond.

Posted by: Kindltot at February 02, 2016 11:42 PM (q2o38)

689 "Protection" doesn't mean no trade, it means
selective trade. The trend is that even though we have the tech and food
everyone needs, we have huge trade deficits and high unemployment. Bad
deal.

We also use trade to get enemies to do what we want, but
that is another part of the equation. "Reward friends, punish enemies",
famous sayings of Obama.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:08 PM (5Gpe2)

Our current unemployment has nothing to do with trade and everything to do with an overly large and intrusive government.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 02, 2016 11:43 PM (NPofj)

690 oh and by the way, Greenspan admitted under testimony he found a flaw in his theories ...

""I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations,
specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of
protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms," said
Greenspan."

Oh so animal forces and self policing don't just work out like the laws of physics, sometimes humans are greedy crooks that do great harm? Whoda thunk it? But surely we can trust China and Iran, economic forces all work out for the greater good, by magic.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:44 PM (5Gpe2)

691 First point, and I omitted it earlier, is that the
Steel was of inferior quality. Bought up in copious amounts by the
state of California, to be used for bridge projects, which now have to
be repaired at great expense.

Second. The point of that kind of targeting is to KILL an industry
in the targeted country. When that domestic industry dies, do you
believe that the price will not rise? Don't be naive.

Sometimes protectionism is justified.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 02, 2016 11:32 PM (kKHcp)

If the Chinese cannot sell quality steel competitively, then they aren't actually putting the domestic steel industry out of business, are they? They are putting the domestic "crappy steel" industry out of business. That's fine! If California wastes money buying crappy steel, how is that China's problem? Would California have been better off if they had bought crappy domestic steel instead?

And finally I don't have any sort of patriotic loyalty to industries. If we don't have a domestic steel industry because other countries can do it better and cheaper, then I say fine. Having patriotic loyalties to industries is what got us things like the GM bailout.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:47 PM (lVU49)

692 And, once again:

if China loses money by selling subsidized crap to our market, then China is the LOSER in the transaction. Their people are being taxed, and their government is going deeper into debt, to LOSE MONEY on transactions. Erecting protectionist tariffs mean that they *stop losing* as badly.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 11:50 PM (lVU49)

693 "Our current unemployment has nothing to do with trade and everything to do with an overly large and intrusive government."

intrusive government is indeed a burden ... my cousin manages a company from Boulder, they moved production to Mexico. Lowering trade barriers reduced our GDP, that's pretty conclusive, but I'm not looking it up. If they used that income to buy our stuff I guess it would balance, but if they buy our debt we have to service them.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:52 PM (5Gpe2)

694 Obama transformed America by regulating the middle class out of existence. I don't think higher wages of any kind really solve that problem.

I know Rubio has talked about vocational schools and valuing other kinds of education rather than typical universities. That touches on this.

But... I think the real key is that free trade can't be one sided. We can't trade freely while our partners in trade subsidize their industries and bid down our labor.

Trump has a point about that.

But... I'm pretty sure Ace became a RINO or not a conservative even bringing up these issues. Heresy is not conservative! Or it wasn't yesterday. Who knows what it means today?

Posted by: petunia at February 02, 2016 11:55 PM (VoCyE)

695 Pey companies to hire more mimimum wage workers. Meanwhile we pump in millions of immigrants to do jobs "Americans won't".

I'd rather we put people in ovens at this point. I'm almost an anarchist I'm so extreme in my belief in limited government but I'd rather elect Hitler because his solution seems more sane and helpful than the ones from Rubio and the GOP.

SMOD2016... because it only goes downhill from here.

Posted by: Achilles at February 02, 2016 11:55 PM (MiGRM)

696 guns sails empires IS cipolla

good night folks ... it's been fun, we saved the world again, if the right people would just pay attention. ha

America First

Make America Great Again

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 02, 2016 11:58 PM (5Gpe2)

697
If the Chinese cannot sell quality steel competitively, then they aren't actually putting the domestic steel industry out of business, are they? They are putting the domestic "crappy steel" industry out of business. That's fine! If California wastes money buying crappy steel, how is that China's problem? Would California have been better off if they had bought crappy domestic steel instead? -chemjeff-

Sometimes the shit you say makes sense. This is one of them.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 03, 2016 12:01 AM (kKHcp)

698 NO SENSE, dammit! I meant NO sense!

Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 03, 2016 12:02 AM (kKHcp)

699 Well I don't exactly see how it is China's problem that California does not choose its steel carefully.

And how would erecting tariffs help? Tariffs would make domestic steel producers shielded from competition. They would over time become just as crappy as Chinese steel is now.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2016 12:06 AM (lVU49)

700 So let me get this straight...

Someone, from the government will monitor the economy and decide on behalf of the entire country if we should or shouldn't allow labor to meet an increase in demand. Experts, I'm sure. Really smart people. They'll have like, a FIVE YEAR PLAN for this shit.

This is some statist bullshit, and you should be ashamed to entertain the thought.

Posted by: Matt at February 03, 2016 12:35 AM (0/whB)

701 Someone, from the government will monitor the economy and decide on behalf of the entire country if we should or shouldn't allow labor to meet an increase in demand. Experts, I'm sure. Really smart people. They'll have like, a FIVE YEAR PLAN for this shit.

Yeah. The better answer is no immigration, legal or illegal, for 25 years. We don't need it. It's bad for our citizens. It's bad for our culture, such as it is at this point.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 03, 2016 01:16 AM (rwI+c)

702 I have been faced with commentary from various leftist folks who come up with memes about minimum wage. You'll see them quote FDR talking about how a business that won't pay someone a living wage doesn't deserve to be in business. Or, claims that raising the minimum wage really doesn't eliminate jobs, and quote other changes in past history. Finally, there's claims (Sen. Warren likes this one) that it is unjust that the raise in the American workers' productivity over the years has not been matched by an equivalent raise in the minimum wage.

I point out that there's one big difference; technology. Numerous minimum wage and low-wage jobs have now been eliminated not just due to simple machinery but by machinery with intelligence. Consider the store cashier. That was a job that some people supported themselves on. I worked in that job as a union member. Now they are replaced by machines. What you have to consider with the astonishing and not yet ended explosion in communications and artificial intelligence is that as human labor becomes more expensive, it leads to higher profits for business owners to install these machines. If you ask "How are these people to be supported", you will get various schemes to take money from other people to do so. But ask "What these people are to do to be productive?" and you will not get a coherent answer. What you get, instead, is to be condemned for asking the question. For society to require that people be productive is heresy.

Posted by: RonF at February 03, 2016 01:25 AM (A+jSE)

703 "
if China loses money by selling subsidized crap to our market, then China is the LOSER in the transaction. Their people are being taxed, and their government is going deeper into debt, to LOSE MONEY on transactions. Erecting protectionist tariffs mean that they *stop losing* as badly.
Posted by: chemjeff"

Exactly.

And a trade deficit isn't a bad thing.

Imagine you had a trade deficit with your neighbor. You took his tools and lawnmower and car, he took your sandals.

We do need manufacturing. There are good ways to get out of the way of that. We need energy. Probably could do with a culture that doesn't buy so much cheap disposable crap, albeit that's not the role of a government.

But if we just stopped importing welfare recipients and folks to compete with those who can't get a job, I think this country would be pretty damn swell.

Posted by: Dustin at February 03, 2016 01:30 AM (a7sQX)

704 Exactly right again. Some folks like those at National Review want to call some of us heretics, when all we did was read the 2012 election correctly, that is, we are out numbered. We have got to find a way to peel off some voters or we will always lose.

Posted by: Awnree at February 03, 2016 01:33 AM (HLYqz)

705 Free trade helps everyone in general, but hurts some people in particular, sometimes badly.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 03, 2016 01:34 AM (rwI+c)

706 Good post. I think the problem with David Brooks types is that they acknowledge Trump supporters, "get" them and don't dismiss them, but then say we'll be OK we just gotta adopt a pro-family tax policy. Or more govt-funded retraining. Basically stuff I'm not opposed to on principle it just seems like an insufficient fix, and these types never concede any cultural arguments, it's just taken as a given that the upsides of immigration outweigh the bad, and anyone claiming otherwise is some degree of bigot.

It's kinda Marxian actually, the way "elite" Republican pundits will deign to acknowledge Trump supporters but only in the sense of "oh they're economically frustrated, otherwise they wouldn't be so XENOPHOBIC" etc. etc.

Posted by: Cliff at February 03, 2016 04:35 AM (Pa4eZ)

707 "And a trade deficit isn't a bad thing.

Imagine you had a trade deficit with your neighbor. You took his tools and lawnmower and car, he took your sandals."Dustin

30 years of growing deficits is bad. Your example presumes the loan you took out on your house to pay for those things doesn't have to be repaid, with rising interest after the teaser rate balloons, or that the credit card you ran up can just be cancelled. Or that the kids don't find out the credit card was in their name.

And since it is coming down to inflating away our debt, one has to consider all the damage to the responsible American savers that have their savings "confiscated" by inflation, even inflation shows up in prices, and they are on week 99 of unemployment.

Don't fight the fed, so just go as deep in debt as they do, and assume you too can print currency forever, or that you can walk away from all that debt and catch some money from the helicopters, and get a loan bailout like LTCM millionaires did. You too must become too big to fail or jail, like Hillary.

And China didn't take our sandals, they bought our weapon tech from the Clintons so they can target multiple US cities with multiple warheads, and built their military. We are the ones buying sandals and toys with lead paint.

We bought Manhattan with beads .. that was good (probably urban legend, but still). Now we sell America off bit by bit to China for beads and toys, and consumers are drunk with joy of how cheap this is and what low rates they have on their debt.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 03, 2016 07:38 AM (5Gpe2)

708 Winning by trying to outbid the 'Free Shit Party' in stealing from the productive to give handouts to largely incoherent interest groups, through an enemy bureaucracy designed to distort everything in the Democratic party's favor. Yep, no Republican's every tried that brilliant idea. And I can't see how that race to the bottom could go wrong in the long run.

Posted by: MlR at February 03, 2016 07:42 AM (k4rgc)

709 Modern mass immigration DISTORTS markets because the entrepreneur does not pay for the full cost for his labor; instead, much of that cost is shifted to all citizens while the benefits of the hire in terms of profit are concentrated in the entrepreneur.

If wages rise too high in some sector after stopping mass immigration, the entrepreneur can automate. If he doesn't, he can seek something else. Or the relatively high wages will attract new labor in the sector.

Posted by: skzion at February 03, 2016 07:47 AM (9C0d4)

710 "he can seek something else." = "he can SELL something else."

Posted by: skzion at February 03, 2016 07:48 AM (9C0d4)

711 "So let me get this straight...

Someone, from the government will monitor the economy and decide on behalf "
No, you don't have it straight. Government already monitors, and borrows from the children. The five year plan promises were already made for decades that comparative advantage helps the slave world for now, but give it five more years and they will be capitalists buying our production. But Greenspan found a flaw ... bankers, corporatists and globalists can't be allowed to run policy for "we the people". "Someone from the government" is currently Lois Lerner clones, Clinton Foundationers, Soros manipulators.

It is goofy to act like we need so much more global governance
to "go protectionist" (another word made evil by the Orwellian word
shifters). We are where we are because of corporate lobbyists imposing
their will on our government, and making China a most favored nation. Our defense arm has some say, but that
gets overruled by Obama/Clinton "commies", and the open border
corporatists. We the people are ignored, mostly, except given cheap credit to boost trade, or given cash for clunkers which boosted foreign makers, or Ninja loans to mess up housing markets, and so on.

So we stop most immigration, and don't give
illegals citizenship, deport the criminals first. Then begin to bend US policy back to what is good for American people, stripping out the
corrosive globalist support for evil regimes. TPP instead bends toward
concession of our sovereignty toward the globalists.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 03, 2016 07:50 AM (5Gpe2)

712 This Neocon site loves high immigration - it allows the Neocon business owners to import slave labor.

They love mass immigration, except for Israel. Gee, I wonder why?

Posted by: GSR at February 03, 2016 08:01 AM (0WdRC)

713 I'm laughing at the idea that the working class doesn't pay income taxes.

It's stupid. they pay income tax, plus 15% payroll tax, plus sales tax. plus state income tax, plus property tax directly or through their rent. they probably pay a larger % of their income in taxes than professional classes.

the democrats and their tax plans are constantly descending on billionaires and landing on everyone else.

Posted by: x at February 03, 2016 08:04 AM (nFwvY)

714 OK here's a idea. Entry level worker reform. Minimum wage with no taxes taken out. (tax exempt). No social security, not medicaid/medicare or state/local/federal taxes!

Posted by: jhaley59 at February 03, 2016 09:04 AM (f4z3u)

715 Where is limiting immigration heresy?

As far as cultural issues not being a big attraction anymore, well hell -- the GOP has been selling that dead horse for 40 years and passed virtually nothing.Even when Planned Parenthood was caught on camera violating ethics and yes THE LAW, they were fully funded this year by our GOP Senate leaders.

MESSAGE FROM GOP ESTABLISHMENT : Weatherford are never going to deliver on our promises, but keep voting for us anyway.

Posted by: The Guy at February 03, 2016 09:16 AM (9IB5G)

716 Weatherford =we are. Damn autocorrect.

Posted by: The Guy at February 03, 2016 09:18 AM (9IB5G)

717 You know the most important thing to conserve? The people of the United States.

No. More. Immigration. Illegal, or legal.

America's people, their freedom, and their prosperity are my principles. Free trade and unrestricted immigration never were and never will be.

Posted by: Penn School Teacher at February 03, 2016 09:58 AM (Q9DOO)

718 Heresy?

I don't think we need to indulge the "reform-icon"'s like Rubio - of course -heresy of quasi welfare support payments for the poor and middle class at all.

How about just fixing economy?

We went from producing 20,000 businesses a year under Reagan to losing somewhere between 30 to 50,000 under Dear Leader. How about turning that around?

Male employment is at an all time low. An ALL TIME LOW. Emperor Buraq Hussein has forced over 16 million people to drop out of the work force - 16 MILLION! How about attacking those problems.

The key is small business. Small business employee was the engine of American Economic growth for decades. To get small business humming again, you've got to deal with two problems:

A. There are way too many unbelievably onerous regulations, which are almost impossible to deal with. This applies to the FEDs, the States and the Locals. Many of these regs are downright unconstitutional - so enforcing the Constitution for once might be a good place to start.

B. Our financial system no longer provides capital to new businesses, and that applies to Wall Street as well as the banks.

Wall Street only does profitable IPO's for it's darlings like Facebook or Google, but not for the no-name great new company nobody has ever heard of.

The Banks will only give a loan to a start-up after two years of profitability - got that - after they don't need it! And that will only happen with a great credit score, great prospects, loan guarantees up the wazzo and a bunch of collataral.

Our financial system has gone from a Capitalist wonder that efficiency directed capital to those businesses that most deserved it to a Crony Socialist Corrupt mess where capital is doled out to those with the best connections.

Again this corrupt mess was created by those same Establishment politicians that now say we have to some created quasi welfare hand outs. That's total nonsense.

We just need to get the government out of our lives and get rid of all Crony Trump/Rubio style favoritism.

Posted by: Unsk at February 03, 2016 09:58 AM (YkhAJ)

719

camel

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 12:33 PM (qCMvj)

720 Country's full. Moose out front shoulda told ya.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:34 PM (evdj2)

721 Ha? An oldie but goodie?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2016 12:36 PM (DUoqb)

722 First?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 03, 2016 12:37 PM (1xUj/)

723 722nd is the new First.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:38 PM (evdj2)

724 A revenant post! Or a zombie post.

Posted by: maddogg, now certified infrequently vile at February 03, 2016 12:38 PM (xWW96)

725 The problem, as Mark Krikorian argues, is that we've changed, and the world has changed. We don't need unskilled labor like we used to. Our native unskilled workers are having trouble earning a living.

If we could make this flash with accompanying thunder licks, I'd do it.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 03, 2016 12:39 PM (659DL)

726 You know it's weird days when David Frum isn't completely laughed off.

Posted by: NJJDB at February 03, 2016 12:39 PM (0vft6)

727 Bumpin' and grindin, yo.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at February 03, 2016 12:39 PM (TZYqp)

728 721 Ha? An oldie but goodie?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2016 12:36 PM (DUoqb)

722 First?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 03, 2016 12:37 PM (1xUj/)

723 722nd is the new First.
Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:38 PM (evdj2)

It's taken some of us this long to read the post through for the first time!

Posted by: filbert at February 03, 2016 12:41 PM (s5o+q)

729 Ace REALLY wants to make this point.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 03, 2016 12:41 PM (oVJmc)

730 From previous thread:

576 Renude.
Posted by: Grump928(c)

Golf clap. Slick.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 03, 2016 12:41 PM (AoLFQ)

731 You know it's weird days when David Frum isn't completely laughed off.

Frum ate an entire pound of butter writing that.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:41 PM (evdj2)

732 Populism, Nativism and Protectionism are the trinity of political victory in hard times.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:42 PM (evdj2)

733 I could just repost all my populism and good-enough-is-good-enough self-government rants.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:43 PM (evdj2)

734 Seems to me this is the ol' "false choice" thing.

You can either have total free trade, or total immigration control.

Wait, what?

"That's just what THEY want you to think!"

Posted by: filbert at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (s5o+q)

735 Time machine? or deja vu? I'm so confused.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (n22zQ)

736 This content is used!

Posted by: JackStraw at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (/tuJf)

737 Third option: admit the experiment was a failure and stop trying to make democracy work.

Posted by: a phoenician sailor at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (uEmgg)

738 Do I have to read all 730 comments? Or even Ace's treatise?

Posted by: SH at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (gmeXX)

739 An unrestricted free trade agenda might be more of a believably good thing if not for the complete acceptable of industrial espionage and patent theft that is at the heart of the China miracle.

China's low labor cost would not have been as 'successful' in hollowing out our mfring if the Federal government were serious about enforcing the trade and commerce laws on the books.

But they didn't, and the GOP is not a serious organization. It's a myopic, craven one.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 03, 2016 12:45 PM (wCF3s)

740 Ace REALLY wants to make this point.
Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 03, 2016 12:41 PM (oVJmc)
-------
And it is a great point to consider. The issues raised here are probably the most important to the future of the conservative "movement" - or to determine whether it has much of a future. But I suppose all that was beaten up in the first 600 comments.

I appreciate that Ace posted (and bumped/re-posted) it.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 12:45 PM (NUqwG)

741 Do I have to read all 730 comments? Or even Ace's treatise?
Posted by: SH at February 03, 2016 12:44 PM (gmeXX)

Yes.

(Crosses arms, begins tapping toe impatiently.)

Posted by: filbert at February 03, 2016 12:45 PM (s5o+q)

742 This post doesn't make anymore sense today than it did yesterday.

Waiiiiiiiiitttt a minute...

Yesterday was.... GROUNDHOG DAY!!!

HOLY CRAP!!!

Posted by: Tex Lovera at February 03, 2016 12:46 PM (wtvvX)

743 Flat tax. You make 10K? You pay 10%. You make 10M ? You pay 10% Taken out monthly. No exemptions,exceptions, loopholes, "credits." Everybody pays.

Posted by: JoeF. at February 03, 2016 12:46 PM (NfMNo)

744 We should offer lower taxes on corporations, and businesses in general, because they are high relative to the rest of the world, but stop or severely limit immigration, skilled and unskilled, to increase the wages of the working class. If there isn't enough skilled labor for certain positions have companies TRAIN people, and possibly offer enhanced tax credits to do so. That's simple to understand and easy to implement.

Posted by: Dr Spank at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (G8qjc)

745 Trump had this re-posted.

HERESY!!!!!!1

Posted by: Lower Class person whose opinions need to be guided at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (jagfX)

746 Ace has become ecologically responsible. He is recycling his posts.

Posted by: maddogg, now certified infrequently vile at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (xWW96)

747 An unrestricted free trade agenda might be more of a believably good thing if not for the complete acceptable of industrial espionage and patent theft that is at the heart of the China miracle.

Even the Chinese are now ensnared.

I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (659DL)

748 So Rubio is proud that he helped widen access to the EIC? Sounds a lot like something George HW Bush would have supported. You know, all compassionate and such.

What a tool.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (8ZskC)

749 This is all a pack of lies!

Posted by: Sarah Palin at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (XMhQP)

750 Reruns for lunch.
Story of my life.

Posted by: @votermom at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (cbfNE)

751 How about just fixing economy?

That's the simple, no-thought-required answer to everything.

Evidently, such a simple fix is beyond the comprehension of our betters in DC.

#WASTF

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (LUgeY)

752

If we didn't have open borders already and we followed the laws for those illegally coming in, e-verify, etc, some of this would be taking care of itself already.

We used to bring in the best and brightest, while Americans were handling the farming, and manufacturing. I do not know if they were paid fairly (child labor in the very beginning, but I'm talking about more recent good times). Populations were smaller, more to go around, more wide open land still uncut. We were able to give to 3rd world countries without it hurting us and our land.

There are other countries that have the immigration policies we used to have and adhere to. Scoring, only what is needed, best and brightest (usually highly degree'd, or wealthy enough tbh). They have to pay fees to get in, with background checks.

We supposedly became a wealthier nation even as the population increased, and then we stopped paying attention.

Big government is the monster. Can't keep up with all of the lobbyist bribes, and secret handshakes. Really fat pigs, gorging in dirty troughs of dirty money.

Tighten up the borders and immigration. Rise the wages that way. Shrink government, by getting rid of a bit here and there and by attrition. It will take decades/generations, but it can be done.

I refuse to believe Americans want to be lazy with no purpose in life, self-reliance, or independence. A sense of integrity and decency about themselves. If people see the fatcats, and fat@sses in government no longer screwing them, their attitudes might change. The government may even garner some respect again one day. Nobody cares, because our own government doesn't.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (qCMvj)

753 Is Ace taking the rest of the day off?

Posted by: dantesed at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (88xKn)

754 I think that Heath Ledger said it best as the Joker.

"The mob has plans, the cops have plans, Gordon's got plans. You know, they're schemers. Schemers trying to control their little worlds."

Insert Progressives, politicians and pundits for the above. Everyone thinks they know best and dammit, they are going to do it whether you agree or not.

For your own good.

Posted by: Grump928(c) says Free Sooth! at February 03, 2016 12:48 PM (evdj2)

755 It's great that Ace realizes there are other Americans (yeah I know - racist) that haven't seen any benefits from being American for going on 35 years. It would be nice if we could remind the twig armed financial banditos that they're privilege is secured by muscular men who do nasty things. But, hey, Manhattan Privilege has a real hard time listening.

Posted by: Puddin Head at February 03, 2016 12:49 PM (oDCMR)

756 I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

-----------

Program robots. Clean houses. Help people buy shirts. Babysit. Drive kids to activities. Other jobs are always created.

Posted by: SH at February 03, 2016 12:49 PM (gmeXX)

757 And tax credits to buy shoes for the ladies.

#Landslide

Posted by: Dr Spank at February 03, 2016 12:49 PM (G8qjc)

758 I and my wife are firmly middle class. Both with strong moral positions from our faiths.

The Republican Party has nothing to offer me.

They advance no policy that benefits me financially.

They advance no faith-based moral policy.

We have two cosmopolitan, progressive parties--there is no room for me.

For 20 years now, all the Republican Party has offered me was the threat that the Democrat Party was worse.

And in 20 years, EVERY FUCKING THING the Democrats wanted 20 years ago--THEY HAVE GOTTEN.

20 years ago, if you'd told Bill Clinton that in 2016 his party would have:

1) Health care reform passing, that is well on the way to single-payer but for the impending failure of 2 insurance companies
2) Gay marriage in all 50 states
3) The IRS, NSA, CIA, FBI, OSHA, EPA and every other federal agency colluding to stop conservative grassroot organizations--with no legal consequence
4) A solid 4 liberals on the SC, with 2 more who lean left
5) 99 weeks of unemployment
6) a trillion dollar spending budget--with no wars
7) Democrats starting every Presidential election with CA, FL, NY, PA, WI, MN, DE, IA, IL, CT, NH, VT, MA, MD, MI, NV, VA, OH, NM, OR, WA, HI all in firmly their pockets

And a lot more leftist advances

Clinton would have laughed and said you were out of your damned mind.

And yet--with the willing help of the Republican Party--here we are: Living in a dream Democrats of 1996 never could have imagined they'd ever achieve.

Posted by: RoyalOil at February 03, 2016 12:50 PM (fQ/0p)

759 Soo the big Rubio attraction in November will be Hey ill give you former middle class a check to stay home, welcome to welfare living !!

Amnesty is the end if rising wages
H1Bs are the end if hi paying jobs for Anericans

If I have to choose bw AmnestyRubio and AmnestyHillary Ilk take the Demicrat

They will expand cradle to grave entitlements faster and the drop will be smoother as the once great US middle class die

And The Rube wull launxh mlitary nation building far and wide like Mccain and WeeklyStandard want him to

And then they'll ask the MiddleClass to send their kids to die

Fxck them all

Posted by: ginaswo at February 03, 2016 12:50 PM (qxNrP)

760 U.S. Fencer To Wear Islamic Headcloth In Fencing Olympics

Sigh

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2016 12:50 PM (DUoqb)

761 If there isn't enough skilled labor for certain positions have companies TRAIN people
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (G8qjc)
------
Employee training used to be a standard part of personnel management (or so I perceived it at least). Now companies try to have as little training as possible as part of their human resource operations. They have been quite successful in pushing training costs off to the public particularly via community and junior college programs.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 12:50 PM (NUqwG)

762 A revenant post!

I saw The Revenant with No. 1 Son the other day. He had loved it the first time, hated it this time. (He always loves everything the first time he sees it).

So I shall add a movie review to the movie review.

The Revenant is at best an interesting failure. I like that it doesn't feel the need to maintain a blockbuster pace, it doesn't throw you into action tropes, it takes its time to develop.

It is very self-consciously art-housey. Pretty pictures, breathtaking landscapes, gory gore. It takes too many liberties wandering in and out of the supernatural.

It's long and slow. It's a beautifully photographed revenge movie. So basically it's a Tarantino film without snappy dialog.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 03, 2016 12:51 PM (1xUj/)

763 Bumped.

Posted by: Ace at 12:31 PM

****

THREADWINNER!

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 03, 2016 12:51 PM (NeFrd)

764 Tax the ultra rich is a heresy I'd be for. I don't mean the guy making $400K a year. I mean the guy making $40M a year. Raise the tax to 50% on income over $10M. Democrats get a lot of mileage out of the "Republicans only care about millionaires and billionaires" rhetoric. This would hurt that argument. Sell it as we are for low taxes on the middle and upper middle class but we understand the filthy rich need to pay their "fair share". Yes I know, like everyone here, that the rich already pay more than their fair share. But LIVs buy into the lie that Buffet's secretary pays more tax than Buffet.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 03, 2016 12:51 PM (0LHZx)

765 Personally, I abandoned total, doctrinaire, ideologically pure solutions after reading me some F.A. Hayek.

I'm more of a "what works" kind of guy now, but of a very conservative bent--"conservative" in this context meaning "if it ain't broke, don't fix it, but if something is broke, don't break everything else while trying to fix that" sort of approach.

"Conservative" in this context also means that you study carefully what people have done before, and note carefully what works and what doesn't work.

Unrestricted free trade works . . . in theory. It does not work in the real world, because people, in general, are bastards.

Unrestricted borders do not work in theory, and also do not work in practice, because people, in general, are bastards.

Some regime which tends toward freedom of trade, but has an element of reciprocity (i.e. you keep your markets free to me, I'll keep my markets free to you) has historically been the most effective in raising standards of living for both trade partners.

Some regime of controlled, but relatively open, immigration has proven to be advantageous in general to the USA through history.

Devils aplenty are in the details.

Posted by: filbert at February 03, 2016 12:51 PM (s5o+q)

766 Ace has become ecologically responsible. He is recycling his posts.
Posted by: maddogg, now certified infrequently vile at February 03, 2016 12:47 PM (xWW96)

or he's recently had some work done - resembling Amy Schumer just a bit too much

did he bleach his hair blond?

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 12:52 PM (qCMvj)

767 Free trade is not an issue that has benefited me. Open borders have not benefited me. H1B visas have directly destroyed my way of life. Tax cuts have not benefited ANYONE since there was no change in spending
(just more insane borrowing), and now money is worth less.

The neocon Bush-family Republicans have been less-than-worthless to me. The Democrats (if its possible) are even worse. I am excited about Trump because he represents a pull-back from the the edge. But we may already be well over the edge at this point.

I'm not voting for parties anymore. And if there aren't PEOPLE I'm willing to vote for, I'm staying home from now on (I have voted in every election since 1992).

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 03, 2016 12:52 PM (S2VsH)

768 747
An unrestricted free trade agenda might be more of a believably good
thing if not for the complete acceptable of industrial espionage and
patent theft that is at the heart of the China miracle.

Even the Chinese are now ensnared.

I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)

We will build another YUUUUUGE WALL to keep the Mongol Hordes out!

Posted by: Mao Tse Trump at February 03, 2016 12:53 PM (3b9U4)

769 tl;dr

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 03, 2016 12:53 PM (ItRhK)

770 I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

They become....restless.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 03, 2016 12:53 PM (oVJmc)

771 I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

-----------

Program robots. Clean houses. Help people buy shirts. Babysit. Drive kids to activities. Other jobs are always created.
Posted by: SH at February 03, 2016 12:49 PM (gmeXX)
------

Oh, super. here comes dystopia.

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 12:54 PM (NUqwG)

772 did he bleach his hair blond?
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 12:52 PM (qCMvj)

Donno. Wouldn't that take more than 5 gallons of peroxide? He's hairy like a spider, all over. No?

Posted by: maddogg, now certified infrequently vile at February 03, 2016 12:54 PM (xWW96)

773 760
U.S. Fencer To Wear Islamic Headcloth In Fencing Olympics

Sigh

where is Indiana Jones when you need him?

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 03, 2016 12:55 PM (ItRhK)

774 A heresy I could get behind would be a 90% tax on all Hollywood activities. Salaries, production costs, etc etc etc. For the children, of course. I think Hollywood needs to put its money where its mouth is. They love Bernie and his 90% tax rates, they can have them.

I am staunchly against taxation as a punitive measure, but in this case, I could hold my nose and support it. I know this isn't realistic or even a good idea, but I'm to the point they've driven me to - revenge.

Posted by: bicentennialguy at February 03, 2016 12:56 PM (vg8iE)

775 The entire premise of that argument is sophistic within the confines of a democratic republic?

So your support freedom, personal and economic liberty is based on what you "receive" from the government? Because that's what its come to.

Democrats have promised to steal from the productive class because to them "achievement" is bad. Exempli gratia, some people have too much money or perhaps when you die, you're not entitled to do so without the government grabbing a large portion of what you have, because, you know, you have too much- even though you've earned it and paid taxes on it. We can't have you transfer your hard earned wealth to you heirs without our taste.

Sounds more like the mafia or perhaps and socialist oligarchy.

What you offer them is freedom, liberty and the ability to do better in the future. You offer them opportunity.

They can go the route of voting for people who continue stealing from others to give to you. But sooner or later that ends- either at the point of a gun or the total collapse of the system. The other side is only going to take that for so long.

Fit in or fuck off.

Posted by: Marcus T at February 03, 2016 12:56 PM (GGCsk)

776 U.S. Fencer To Wear Islamic Headcloth In Fencing Olympics

Sigh

where is Indiana Jones when you need him?

-----------

On the bright side - no Ziki virus.

Posted by: SH at February 03, 2016 12:56 PM (gmeXX)

777 As long as we don't become like the European "conservative" parties: "The same as the liberals, just a little less so."

That's what Bush I was taking us toward, and that's how we got the "compromise" tax bill that ended his career and deepened the recession.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at February 03, 2016 12:56 PM (+ixid)

778 Program robots. Clean houses. Help people buy shirts. Babysit. Drive kids to activities. Other jobs are always created.

Posted by: SH

They may be but your examples aren't the best.

Program robots - this is already being automated in some form.
AI and expert systems are being developed that can learn and adapt automatically, precluding the need for 'programming.'

Clean houses. - Apparently you've never heard of a Roomba

Help buy shirts? Um, have you purchased anything online in the last 10 years?

Babysit - ok, now what does everyone else not named Kari, age 13 do instead?

Drive kids - Again, automated cars are coming

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 03, 2016 12:56 PM (wCF3s)

779
I refuse to believe Americans want to be lazy with no purpose in life, self-reliance, or independence. A sense of integrity and decency about themselves.

Americans? No.

The current parasites who makethe 52% of the (legally and illegaly) voting bloc who put Obama in the White House and want Bernie to hang the Koch Brothers from the highest tree? Yes.

At the earliest settling of this country, the guidingprinciple was "you do not work, you will not eat." We need to return to that.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at February 03, 2016 12:57 PM (X6fMO)

780 U.S. Fencer To Wear Islamic Headcloth In Fencing Olympics
-----------
Over, under, or in lieu of the mask?

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 12:57 PM (NUqwG)

781 The effectiveness of promising marginal rate income tax cuts has passed its sell-by date. The GOPe needs to understand this, Rush Limbaugh needs to understand this, and so do a lot of Tea Partiers.

Supply-side economics, as opposed to being voodoo economics (thank you, George Herbert Walker Texas Ranger Bumbleford Bush, you clueless twit) is simply a restatement of the law of diminishing returns. Not panacea, not voodoo.

Raise the marginal income tax rates on the Wall Street, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley types who hate us and vote against us anyway.

There. Now I feel better.

Posted by: Furious George at February 03, 2016 12:57 PM (3GAnN)

782 Posted by: RoyalOil at February 03, 2016 12:50 PM (fQ/0p)

_______

All your points are correct except the 99 weeks of UI. That shit ended in 2014.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 03, 2016 12:57 PM (0LHZx)

783 White House Invites CAIR To Accompany Obama To Visit Baltimore Mosque

Note to the White House: The FBI had to cut ties to CAIR because of their links to Islamic radicals.

Weasel Zippers

My G-D he is the devil and enemy all tied up in one.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (DUoqb)

784 Maybe if I take a long hot shower. . .

Posted by: Willburn Sooner at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (EM65V)

785 So did Ace like the movie?

Posted by: logprof at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (vsbNu)

786 A heresy I could get behind is a 100% tax on people calling for raising taxes on X sub-group of people.

I'd start with everyone who is currently registered as a
Democrat.

. . .

Oh, wait . . .

Posted by: filbert at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (s5o+q)

787 summer reruns in February ?

Posted by: seamrog at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (l4d1L)

788 I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?>>>

Cowboy Poetry FTW.

Posted by: Harry Reid at February 03, 2016 12:58 PM (Nkdwp)

789 Remember: Don't comment on old threads or you could get auto-banned.

Posted by: mindful webworker - so they say at February 03, 2016 12:59 PM (MDTpF)

790 #777 We're already there. Republicans have been Dem-lite since 2000.

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 03, 2016 12:59 PM (S2VsH)

791 I'm boycotting this thread.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:01 PM (qUNWi)

792 Ace gets to where I've been since 1987. No brag, just fact.

Trump is pissing me off, but he's the one that pushed the immigration issue out there, the first credible candidate in my lifetime to do that, to his credit. Won't vote Rubio.

Posted by: Mark in Portland at February 03, 2016 01:01 PM (QJBko)

793 I think a great way to increase readership on this site would be for Ace and the COBs to pay for each comment in the largest threads. Increased readership = increased advertising revenue = more successful blog overall. Bring in commenters from all over, just whomever has a snappy comment. Everyone could be an undocumented COB. Pay them directly via Paypal or bitcoin.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Posted by: Hopped Up On Something at February 03, 2016 01:02 PM (HMhol)

794 "Tax the ultra rich is a heresy I'd be for. I don't mean the guy making
$400K a year. I mean the guy making $40M a year. Raise the tax to 50% on
income over $10M. Democrats get a lot of mileage out of the 'Republicans only care about millionaires and billionaires' rhetoric.
This would hurt that argument."

Go after the hedge fund guys for declaring all their income as "capital gains".

The vast majority of them are big-time Democratic donors.

And virtually all live in Democratic-bulwark states.

Chuck Schumer would shit blood.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 03, 2016 01:02 PM (noWW6)

795 Mancotting even.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:02 PM (qUNWi)

796 Like Tucker Carlson pointed out, the money that conservatives have sent to Washington -- think tanks, lobbying groups, advocacy -- has virtually nothing to show for it. The state keeps sprawling, liberties contracting, spending on a rocket ride.

We're going to have to get smarter in our approach to weaning people off the state. An example from Egypt (under Nasser, I think) is instructive. Sorry I have no link, just memory of a magazine story:

The Egyptian government had long subsidized the production of bread. Loaves sold for a penny a loaf, so cheap they were used instead of cloths to clean restaurant tables.

But the government still lost money on the production. Every effort to raise the price to something like break-even -- two pennies a loaf, or three loaves for four cents -- triggered actual rioting. People were hooked on unreasonably cheap bread that "someone else" paid for.

So the government offered a second product, a larger loaf with sesame seeds, for three cents. Of course people bought it like crazy, because it was still cheap and they felt it was a better value. Eventually the penny loaves were discontinued.

Then, over time, the bigger loaves shrank and the sesame seeds went away. No riots, and the price held at three cents per loaf.

It's that kind of thinking, the kind that the marketing people at successful companies do every day, that can bring more reasonable policies and practices to government.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at February 03, 2016 01:03 PM (+ixid)

797 Ace is not on twitter and he was up late last night. So, was this an autobump?

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 03, 2016 01:03 PM (iQIUe)

798 I'm boycotting this thread.

Boycott was an Irishman and the use of his name in this context is anti-Irish racism.

You shall be lynched! Oh wait.

I call shenanigans! Um...

May I have a Mulligan?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 03, 2016 01:04 PM (1xUj/)

799

One of my robots will look and sound like Elvis.

The heavy-lifter one will look like Tim Tebow.

My cooking robot, will also be my clean up after cooking robot.

And, I'll read and sit on the beach and frolic in the ocean while they're all doing their thing.

My massage robot...

My medic robot...

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:04 PM (qCMvj)

800 Program robots. Clean houses. Help people buy shirts. Babysit. Drive kids to activities. Other jobs are always created.

We could start making virtual-reality vaginas. That company in the sidebar link couldn't keep up with demand.

Just sayin'...

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 01:04 PM (LUgeY)

801 It's long and slow. It's a beautifully photographed revenge movie. So basically it's a Tarantino film without snappy dialog.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 03, 2016 12:51 PM (1xUj/)

Or over 100 uses of the n-word.

I liked it, but it's not for everyone. I agree with your entire take.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 03, 2016 01:05 PM (xuouz)

802 712 This Neocon site loves high immigration - it allows the Neocon business owners to import slave labor.

Posted by: GSR at February 03, 2016 08:01 AM (0WdRC)

Oh, yeah, we just love immigration here. That's why we constantly express our love of Rubio.

You're rather a dim little troll aren't you, GSR? All that Jew hatin' is fogging up your little teeny tiny brain so you don't read real good.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:05 PM (u0lmX)

803 As an afterthought, I'll suggest people ponder a regime which features simultaneously more and more low-skilled worker immigration and a regime of supplementing too-low paychecks with taxpayer funding.

That will go well.

That has been going "well" the last 16 years under both halves of the bipartisan Party-In-Government.

And by "well", I don't mean for non-connected Americans.

Posted by: steveegg at February 03, 2016 01:05 PM (cL79m)

804 Bumping an 800 comment deep thread?

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 03, 2016 01:05 PM (f7rv6)

805 Sorry for feeding the troll.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:05 PM (u0lmX)

806 I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?

Dance, and sing!

You can dance if you want to..

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:06 PM (qCMvj)

807 My proclivity for public urination has made it impossible for me to sustain my babysitting business, wefty

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 03, 2016 01:06 PM (xuouz)

808 Did I say "16 years"? I meant "30 years".

Posted by: steveegg at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (cL79m)

809 Why do I have to chose? If "we" (well, politicians who profess to be conservative) can't convince people that the best system of government is one which generally leaves people alone and doesn't steal from one group to give to another, then they deserve the results of what they're wishing for.

I don't accept the premise that we need to "give" groups of people something. We're giving them a stable, growing economy, where they and their children can live generally freely without being hassled by the state or other groups. That should be enough. If there has to be some kickback, then I think we've reached the point de Toqueville identified as the end of this experiment.

Posted by: joe at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (KUaJL)

810 You can dance if you want to..
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:06 PM (qCMvj)

You can leave your job behind.
Cuz your job don't dance
and if you come dance you'll have
No job, like mine.

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (xuouz)

811
Hmmm. Ace I like when you do these think pieces, but this one seems off in almost all respects.

The framework, to start. "Heresy" is amisleading word, in this context. There's no faith or theoretical doctrine needed to know that immigration lawlessness and crony trade, er, managed trade, er, protectionism, and some kind of welfare-based social engineering are unworkable and stupid policies.

It's an obvious, practical judgement. A priori reasoning suffices in each case, but sadly we have lots of real work data to confirm that reasoning.

But let's stick with immigration, and how the very language reflects the distorted assumptions many are content to start with.

"Restrictionist" is a completely false concept. Borders and citizenship and rules for entry or immigration are simply the definition of the modern state. Each state controls all of these, for its own purposes, occasionally entering into agreements with other sovereign states to make special arrangements (visa waivers, land-grant immigration programs such as those in the US, Brazil, Argentina, etc.).

It's not "restrictionist" to have zero immigration, for example. Semantics matter when they reflect conceptual distortion, as in this case.

Restoring rule of law in immigration is fundamental, andhas political appeal to a super-majority because it's fair, it's smart, it's "normal", and it has practical benefits. Setting immigration policy on some sort of robot-rule track makes no sense. Just do itas it's always been done. Policy, set by laws passed by Congress.

Nearly zero immigration is a perfectly defensible, rational policy, completely inkeeping with our highest values, andpast practice, and thepolicies of most countries in most of history. But it's a policy choice, like tax rates or speed limits.

Anyway, the whole framework (including the political calculus) here seems way off, so there's not much to do save explore the semantic and policy problems. "Heresy" or faith or doctrinecan't even be glimpsed from where these issues get hashed out. But that'sone of the current maladies.Distorted definitions and frameworks yield arather impoverished and circular discussion.

Posted by: rhomboid at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (QDnY+)

812 "Raise the marginal income tax rates on the Wall Street, Hollywood, and
Silicon Valley types who hate us and vote against us anyway."

As Prof Reynolds says, "repeal the Hollywood tax cuts".

Go back to excise taxes on entertainment, as was once the case. That industry is too slippery accountingwise to be reliably taxed in any other way than an excise.

Americans are over-entertained anyway. It would be good for the culture and the country for them to reduce their intake.

Posted by: torquewrench at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (noWW6)

813

Boycott = Son of Cott.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (LUgeY)

814 Did you read those articles about why they can't build iPhones in this country? It's because they can't find people willing to be slaves. (Technically, I guess they can leave those dorms, but it probably permanently blacklists them,)

How do you propose that we fairly compete with countries that use slave labor? How do you propose that we compete with industries that are propped up by their governments?

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (5HBd1)

815 But my friends don't dance

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (NUqwG)

816

post # 697 is where today's comments start

just a PSA

at least I can go take my nap now, since I did my homework yesterday

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (qCMvj)

817 But my friends don't dance
Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (NUqwG)

You're still a friend of mine!

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (qCMvj)

818 One of my robots will look and sound like Elvis.

The heavy-lifter one will look like Tim Tebow.

My cooking robot, will also be my clean up after cooking robot.

And, I'll read and sit on the beach and frolic in the ocean while they're all doing their thing.

My massage robot...

My medic robot...

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:04 PM (qCMvj)

Yes, yes! But you forgot the clean the bathroom robot..the one who looks like the young Clint Eastwood.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (u0lmX)

819 Muslim Group protesting in six cities in Texas to legalize rape. In Houston Chronicle

Posted by: ThunderB at February 03, 2016 01:09 PM (2YU/0)

820 Eat shit and fuck.

And watch TV.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:09 PM (qUNWi)

821
It seems to be forbidden -- NATIONALIST, you know -- to suggest that American policy should favor Americans.

Posted by: ace at February 02, 2016 08:13 PM (dciA+)

----------------

This is why I think the election is about national sovereignty. A vast swath of Americans, conservative, moderate, and liberal look at the policies coming out of DC and think, "are they doing anything for the general welfare of the American citizen?"

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:09 PM (LXJ1e)

822 You can dance if you want to..
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:06 PM (qCMvj)

You can leave your job behind.
Cuz your job don't dance
and if you come dance you'll have
No job, like mine.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (xuouz)

And, sing!

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:09 PM (qCMvj)

823 >> Raise the marginal income tax rates on the Wall Street,
>> Hollywood, and Silicon Valley types who hate us and vote
>> against us anyway.

There would be plenty of room to restructure the tax regime to equalize treatment of those who manufacture and sell physical product vis-a-vis those whose products are largely a value-add on top of highly portable intellectual property owned by a wall-plate in Ireland or Bermuda.

There would be plenty of room to evaluate the accounting procedures applicable to those industries, to Hollywood and the code companies.

I would not object to a tax regime that limited the tax-deductibility of employee compensation above some level.

I would absolutely support efforts to cut 'too big to fail' banks down to size.

And 'free trade' is a basis for a trade policy, it is not in itself a trade policy, you trade freely with those who trade freely with you. Charlie Wilson of General Motors may have once said 'What's good for GM is good for the country and vice versa' but it's not clear today that what's good for Wal-Mart and Apple Computer is good for the country and vice-versa.

Posted by: JEM at February 03, 2016 01:10 PM (o+SC1)

824 Benefits for illegals equal about 40 grand a year. They then make 25 grand a year in cash. Their unskilled labor is valued at 65 grand a year.

My 30 years experience in manufacturing is valued a little less than that.
Let it Burn

Posted by: Big Ben - Bonnie Blue Party at February 03, 2016 01:10 PM (Jm0Wv)

825 I didn't catch name on Limbaugh, but he said original Tweet was from CNN & Rush said it was pushed by someone from Rubio camp.

Posted by: Carol at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (sj3Ax)

826 This post isn't used. It's pre-owned. See? It's gone through all the highly touted AoSHQ 150 point inspection check. That's how you know it's better than those other posts where they just ran it through the wash and vacuumed out the interior.

Now to go read the post again.

Posted by: Dead Parrot Society at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (AJeMv)

827 This is the link from last night, with the list of reasons "free trade" and "comparative advantage" are old and tired Utopian thinking.

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3076

Even the originator of comparative advantage theories listed most of these limitations, which we see now demonstrated over the last 30 years of job migration and deficits.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (5Gpe2)

828 820 Eat shit and fuck.

But I don't want to eat shit.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (u0lmX)

829 It's weird how 2 of the 3 basic things humans do are dirty words.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (qUNWi)

830 Posted by: notsothoreau at February 03, 2016 01:07 PM (5HBd1)

When you tax the ever-loving crap out of imported goods, it tends to off-set the slave-labor benefit of outsourcing. Is that heresy enough for ya?

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (S2VsH)

831 I don't need no commas I do what I want.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:12 PM (qUNWi)

832 Yes, yes! But you forgot the clean the bathroom robot..the one who looks like the young Clint Eastwood.
Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:08 PM (u0lmX)

heh.

so many ideas!

I guess we need a few chameleon robots, else they take up too much space. (Unless they hang from the ceilings when they are "sleeping." Or, fold into the walls.)

oh-oh

o_O

Karma Chameleon
~Culture Club

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcA9LIIXWw

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:12 PM (qCMvj)

833 Posted by: Unsk at February 03, 2016 09:58 AM (YkhAJ)

Repealing Ocare and just returning to the health insurance scheme we had before it would clear up many of this country's economic troubles.

Then start enforcing immigration laws. We already have them in place.

Cut business taxes.

It's really not that complicated.

Posted by: Soona at February 03, 2016 01:12 PM (Fmupd)

834 I didn't catch name on Limbaugh, but he said original Tweet was from CNN & Rush said it was pushed by someone from Rubio camp.
Posted by: Carol at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (sj3Ax)

RUBIO GOING DOWN! RUBIO GOING DOWN!

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at February 03, 2016 01:14 PM (qCMvj)

835 It's weird how 2 of the 3 basic things humans do are dirty words.
Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (qUNWi)
-------
That's a short list.
????

Eat
Drink
Sleep
Shit
Piss
Phuck

Posted by: RioBravo at February 03, 2016 01:14 PM (NUqwG)

836 Boycott = son of Cott
Ben Cott = son of boycott
Been Caught = Run!

Posted by: Hopped Up On Something at February 03, 2016 01:14 PM (HMhol)

837 829, only the Anglo-Saxon words "shit" and "fuck" are dirty. The French ones--"defecate ", "coitus" are okay.

This goes back to 1066.....

Posted by: JoeF. at February 03, 2016 01:15 PM (NfMNo)

838 I didn't catch name on Limbaugh, but he said original Tweet was from CNN & Rush said it was pushed by someone from Rubio camp.

Ladies and gentlemen, your crapweasel hack political consultants in full bloom!!!!!

Catastrophic unforced error.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (659DL)

839 3 of the 6 things people do are dirty words.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (qUNWi)

840 then what you are really arguing for is a government jobs program
disguised as a tariff. Government artificially makes it difficult to use
foreign cheap labor for crappy jobs, thereby (theoretically) employing
domestic workers to do those crappy jobs at inflated wages. If we're
going to do that, then why not just have government make-work jobs? It
would be about as effective.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 02, 2016 09:18 PM (lVU49)"

-----------------

The opposite is actually true. Loose immigration allows corporations to subvert the American market in labor by bringing in cheap labor. The companies are, in effect, giving away some additional value (American sovereignty) to the cheap labor they have no right to give.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (LXJ1e)

841 >>>I ask the following: What do seven billion people do in a robotic world?<<<

They buy sexbots and lots of vitamin-water.

Posted by: Fritz, your local automation expert at February 03, 2016 01:17 PM (BngQR)

842 So crazy, Amy Schumer posted the same thing like 2 hours ago.

Posted by: Dr Spank at February 03, 2016 01:18 PM (G8qjc)

843 Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (qUNWi)

The ones having to do with the naughty bits.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at February 03, 2016 01:18 PM (u0lmX)

844 You can have unfettered immigration or you can have a liberal welfare state. You cannot have both.

(Oh, and here's another vote for a guaranteed income coupled with elimination of the current welfare regime, because unless somebody decides to ban AI-derived technology from the market there are going to be a lot of idle service-sector employees in the next 20 years.)

Posted by: joncelli, Boned like You at February 03, 2016 01:19 PM (RD7QR)

845 Biggest problem with trying to get manufacturing back in this country is this: no infrastructure.
By which I mean: mining, refining, materials processing, machine tools, and on and on ....
Closed up 20 years ago, scrapped out ....
We barely have the infrastructure to build the infrastructure any more.
Posted by: sock_rat_eez identifies as a wackobird hobbit at February 02, 2016 08:58 PM (Z8DIA)

-------------

Sounds like a massive economic boom in the offing. IF the right policies are in place (not just immigration).

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:19 PM (LXJ1e)

846 How do you propose that we fairly compete with countries that use slave labor? How do you propose that we compete with industries that are propped up by their governments?

That's the nasty little secret that was never told to the American people when this whole notion of a "global economy" was first started.

We are not now nor have we ever been on equal ground with other countries.

There is no doubt that we'd be far better off economically if we made our own products again. Manufacturing is less prone to market downturns than is the service sector and provides much more upward mobility. It also provides a diversity of opportunity for people of all abilities, be they engineers, accountants, welders, painter, assemblers or truck drivers.

Look no further than the globalists in DC and their disastrous support of NAFTA, GATT and making our enemies the ChiComs our Most Favored Trade partners to see how we've been sold out. How any of them managed to get elected after doing that is a mystery to me.

#WASTF

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 01:20 PM (LUgeY)

847 Catastrophic unforced error.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (659DL)

There is nothing catastrophic about it except in the minds of Trump supporters.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 03, 2016 01:22 PM (OrI3J)

848 Imma frame that comment Backwards Boy.

Posted by: eleven at February 03, 2016 01:22 PM (qUNWi)

849 My 30 years experience in manufacturing is valued a little less than that.
Let it Burn

My 35 years of manufacturing experience is worth exactly Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch.

I've been funemployed for over 8 years now.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 01:25 PM (LUgeY)

850 Uh, nood

Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 03, 2016 01:26 PM (xuouz)

851 i can Sagger dance...

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 03, 2016 01:26 PM (ItRhK)

852 Posted by: Carol at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (sj3Ax)

What tweet are you talking about?

Posted by: Rusty Nail at February 03, 2016 01:26 PM (S2VsH)

853 He says if your daughters are unchaperoned he has the right to rape

Posted by: ThunderB at February 03, 2016 01:29 PM (2YU/0)

854 Trump should propose pulling out of NAFTA or at least kicking out Mexico.

NAFTA was sold by saying illegal immigration would stop by making Mexico more prosperous. That didn't happen, therefore one of the primary foundations of its existence is a lie.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:30 PM (LXJ1e)

855 You can have unfettered immigration or you can have a liberal welfare state. You cannot have both.

Actually, you can't have either. Both are guaranteed destruction ... unless your country is so undesirable that no one even bothers thinking about emigrating there or your people so honest and decent that they are ashamed to ever be living off of the state and the liberal welfare state is never really used. But, if your country is in any way desirable or your people have little shame about sponging off of the stagnating state then you can't have either.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at February 03, 2016 01:31 PM (zc3Db)

856 (Oh, and here's another vote for a guaranteed income coupled with elimination of the current welfare regime, because unless somebody decides to ban AI-derived technology from the market there are going to be a lot of idle service-sector employees in the next 20 years.)
Posted by: joncelli, Boned like You at February 03, 2016 01:19 PM (RD7QR)

-------------

True, but if it impacts the lawyers there'll be laws against it.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:31 PM (LXJ1e)

857 And can we please have some of these "reporters" try retraining for a new career? It's mostly a way for the Feds to give money to the schools. If you are 40 or older, you will have problems finding work, training or no. Companies will not hire you just on the training. They want you to have experience,but won't provide the internships for that.

I was once in a Novell CNE class. There was a guy in there that had been a tractor driver. Now, most tractor drivers are not going to become network engineers. This guy kinda liked computers. The local unemployment place told him they'd put him through the classes, and provide a motel room and expense account for food. He was signed up for all 7 classes, back to back. First day, of the first class, he realized he was in over his head and was just not going to get this stuff. But he took advantage of the free hotel room and expense account for a nice vacation. This kind of thing unfortunately happens.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 03, 2016 01:31 PM (5HBd1)

858 Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 03, 2016 01:16 PM (659DL)

Rick Wilson? Or is he still preoccupied with trolling Nazis to link them to Trump?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 03, 2016 01:32 PM (UR5FZ)

859 This is the link from last night, with the list of
reasons "free trade" and "comparative advantage" are old and tired
Utopian thinking.

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3076

Even
the originator of comparative advantage theories listed most of these
limitations, which we see now demonstrated over the last 30 years of job
migration and deficits.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 03, 2016 01:11 PM (5Gpe2)

Which totally ignores the fact the, despite the limitations placed on the two state/two goods model, comparative advantage is by no means either old or Utopian thinking AND ignores how much richer Americans are in general because of relatively unfettered free trade.

Don't believe me? look at the standard of living of "poor" people today vs. 'poor" people thirty years ago. How many of them have TV's? How many of them have central air? How many (not on welfare) can afford consumer goods that would have been unthinkable 30 years ago? You guys are barking up the wrong tree blaming free markets for the issues you are trying to find a solution to. Sort of like Rosie O'Donnell getting mad at her scale because she's fat.

I am really glad also you guys weren't around to advocate for buggy whip makers.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 03, 2016 01:35 PM (OrI3J)

860 I think that Ace is to a certain extent missing the picture.

He's looking at the secondary effects caused by the root problem.

Think of Obama (as well as the Democrat Party and GOPe) as the anti-Reagan.

Reagan was about lowering the influence and control by government in your life. He did this by lowering taxes and regulation.

Think of regulation as a hidden tax if everything costs more, then you have less money to accomplish the things you wish to accomplish.

And that right there is the crux of the problem-

"When Obama said - "You didn't build that." - He wasn't just talking about some rich 1% guy walking around in a Top Hat-

he was talking about everyone with a job and their paycheck.

He was saying in essence - you didn't earn that.

And what follows is this -

Government has a right to what the Left and the Rovian GOPe would call your "disposable income".

Sure, you can have money for food and provide shelter for yourself,

but beyond that...well, pally, your just not spending it right. There's a huge pool of middle class money that Our Betters want for their schemes and cronies.

The middle class is shrinking and even those of us with good jobs look at how your ability to maintain yourself just at the same level has been harmed by higher taxes and silly but horrifically costly gov't schemes, which you will have to pay for.

Reagan sought to limit gov't "income" to free the power of the lower and middle classes.

Obama (the Democrats and the Rovian GOPe) seek to limit your ability and power by running up your financial liabilities to obscene levels:

Just a couple of years ago, the additional tax liability for everyone incurred by Obama was roughly the cost of a house $140K.

There is a concerted effort (by both Democrats and the GOPe) to take away the benefits of holding a middle class job - i.e.. your ability to use your "disposable income" for your own benefit.

Just look at who they are importing- low and no skill immigrants who will remain on the public dole forever,
at exactly the time when low and no skill jobs are going away do to robotics.

So, now we have a whole new crew of "needy" whose "needs" are greater than yours so they must be supported by you.

And HB1 workers imported to lower middle class wages.

Ask yourself this:

Is the big problem that American workers wages are too high because they're greedy fuckers and make American companies non-competative-

or is the problem that taxes and regulations are so high and so intrusive (for all the feel good goodies that Our Betters want) that they make American companies uncompetitive and prevent them from eating to pay proper wages to their workers?

Well, okay TL/DR. I know.

The main thing is that whatever else is done - taxes, regs, and gov't spending must define drastically if the middle class is too survive.

So, I'll just shorthand the other stuff.

Yes, there is a proper argument to be made regarding tariffs on goods that impact national defense. We want those made right here in America. Steel might be one of those.

There is a case to be made for proper public works - a "space program" to build multiple nuclear power plants and gas turbines in every state for very cheap energy nationwide.

Perhaps a hardened US power grid- not a centralized "smart" grid-

but a radically decentralized series of dumb grids, which would be much less vulnerable.

Posted by: naturalfake at February 03, 2016 01:40 PM (0cMkb)

861 The number of undocumented people in the USA already is falling

Posted by: Bubba at February 03, 2016 01:42 PM (n766o)

862 The number of undocumented people in the USA already is falling

How would one know since they are undocumented?

Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:46 PM (rwI+c)

863 My lying eyes tell me differently.

Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:47 PM (rwI+c)

864 Isn't a guaranteed income just a massive redistribution of wealth?

And what type of income is possible without massive increase of taxes?

Let say we roll up all current transfer payments (I think that's about $1 trillion) and distribute them to the working age people. That's what $6K to $7K per year?

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:47 PM (LXJ1e)

865 863 My lying eyes tell me differently.
Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:47 PM (rwI+c)

--------------

Mine too.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 01:50 PM (LXJ1e)

866 Good fences make good neighbors.

Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:55 PM (rwI+c)

867
How would one know since they are undocumented?

Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:46 PM (rwI+c)

863
My lying eyes tell me differently.

Posted by: Grump928(C) intones ominously at February 03, 2016 01:47 PM (rwI+c)

Those tens of thousands of border jumpers every month? Those are just a figment of our imaginations, apparently.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 03, 2016 01:59 PM (OrI3J)

868 Well put, naturalfake.

I'd add one other factor to your equation: CEO salaries that are grossly disproportionate. They're pricing themselves out of the market.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 02:00 PM (LUgeY)

869 Oh, and MAGA, Trump has already said he's repeal NAFTA.

Another one of my buttons gets pushed. That POS should never have been even considered, much less passed and signed.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 02:02 PM (LUgeY)

870 OK... I grabbed this from the thread in Instie cause it made me laugh.

Best tweet response on Trump's feed: "You must be a joy on family game night."

Posted by: redbanzai at February 03, 2016 02:04 PM (OrI3J)

871 869 Oh, and MAGA, Trump has already said he's repeal NAFTA.

Another one of my buttons gets pushed. That POS should never have been even considered, much less passed and signed.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 03, 2016 02:02 PM (LUgeY)

-----------------

I honestly did not know that. It's a proven policy failure.

Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 03, 2016 02:05 PM (LXJ1e)

872 "You have to give people some reason to vote for you."

The working class won't buy into a TruCon candidate unless/until there's a track record of success a benefit to the working class. Reagan delivered that.

Rand-o-nomics ala Ryan etc (and pretty much what Ted's pushing) - the libertarian, free-market, free commerce/trade system, with monetarist Fed controls and "global" over national priorities - efficiency above all, at whatever cost - has no tangible, credible immediate benefits to show the working class. It rests on indirect, trickle-down theories and the results lag the remedy by months and years.

It's a high-buy-in, trust-wise, for the workers. When you're cavorting with every sleazy fatcat crony in the Beltway, the CoC, etc..., that buy-in-price becomes prohibitive, as it has now.

(read Peter Schweitzer's "Extortion" and you'll never buy in, FWIW - these guys are a mafia and cannot be trusted to reform anything except at the risk of losing their offices or other coercion)

I don't see Ted as either trying to or being capable of selling the full TruCon agenda to the 2016 general electorate. Trump's expressly staying away from major economic policy upheavals - replacing ObamaCare with another universal system, no changes to SS, MC, etc... He's not asking the working class to take a hit in terms of uncertainty or loss of present benefits while they're reeling. He's also advocating protectionism to shield those vulnerable, under siege workers.

TruCon-nomics is too bitter a pill to be swallowed whole right now. Building a Wall is enough - a tangible project that shows results. Then you bank that political capital and see what you can do about implementing the rest of the agenda.

Those who think a "true conservative" can win in 2016 (and yes, I've been one) don't appreciate how far down the GOP and the idea of "conservatism" has fallen in the public eye. "Conservative" to two generations now means "the Bushes." We need a more measured buy in, and immigration and protectionism are means to demonstrate good faith and get working class trust support again. A solid mandate in the general is necessary, and I think that even if Ted could win, he'd do so on a much thinner margin that Trump's populism with public sentiment where it is right now.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at February 03, 2016 02:13 PM (cyTfJ)

873 >>>>Cut all the government money and give folks the option to work or go hungry. That's the way it has been throughout history and it's a great motivator.
Posted by: notsothoreau at February 02, 2016 09:15 PM (5HBd1)

I know this is out of order (I'm just jumping in - pardon), but it is the essence of truth and I just want to point it out.

Thank you, now back to your regularly scheduled randomness.

Posted by: 7Mike at February 03, 2016 02:25 PM (pxwEr)

874 >>>587 Irongrampa, ever the optimist.
Posted by: OneEyedJack

Yeah, I was thinkin he left out the part about how bloody the "road back" will be.

Posted by: 7Mike at February 03, 2016 02:30 PM (pxwEr)

875 Long post from a blue collar guy. I've worked in the woods as a timber faller all my life since 1964, starting in a logging camp on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington, served in the 9th I.D. in Vietnam 1967-8. The money was good, far more than most college grads at the time, so much so that there were regular letters to editor from mostly school teachers whining about it. Very hazardous, over 600 deaths in the woods since 1905 in my county of around 50k population, including 2 recently in a dying occupation.

High pay (with all benefits) because of danger and real skill needed to "save" brittle old growth cedar trees on steep slopes without breaking them, worth up to $20-30 K apiece and weighing as much as 75 tons apiece (3 log truck loads). Piece work, minimal supervision, working alone for most part. Most non-union because of migratory nature of job to job as opposed to N.W, mill workers in a fixed location with a large capital plant. Republican loggers, fighting enviros, independent streak as opposed to Democrat mill workers doing repetitive work and heavily unionized.

Fast forward to the 80s, commodity price collapses, going to small 2d and 3rd growth timber, heavily mechanized on easy terrain, small value for each piece, hard to break so small. State Industrial Insurance rates of $12/hour or more for loggers...end result swarms of illegals with minimal skills working off the books. Dead and dying towns mill closures, sneering from the urban D's, fights between Salvadorans and Mexicans over who gets to harvest minor forest products for florists. I've seen trees completely stripped of branches , dozens of vans fill of illegals heading out every morning to get their 80 cent/pound cedar tips and salal leaves.

My opinion the best way to solve the illegal problem is to fine the ever loving shit out of anyone employing them, especially some of the Fortune 500 companies that urged us, behind closed doors, as contractors to hire them , but covered their asses by hiding behind their sub contracts that specified who was responsible for following the law.

Posted by: JHW at February 03, 2016 02:51 PM (w+zdY)

876 If the Chinese cannot sell quality steel competitively, then they aren't actually putting the domestic steel industry out of business, are they? They are putting the domestic "crappy steel" industry out of business. That's fine! If California wastes money buying crappy steel, how is that China's problem? Would California have been better off if they had bought crappy domestic steel instead?

Finally, something I know something about:

The Chinese GOVERNMENT-OWNED FIRMS are putting our steel companies out of business by fraudulently claiming that the steel they are selling to the California Government (with money they got from the feds by TAXING PEOPLE LIKE YOU, CHEMJEFF) meets chemical content and porosity/inclusion production values that they DON'T. The certification papers aren't worth the value of the paper they're printed on. Meanwhile, President O'Dipschnitt has done his best to nickel-and-dime to death the domestic steel industry (AND ANYONE ELSE WHO USES COAL)to raise their costs at the same time by codifying into virtual law the idea that further carbon dioxide generation or coal use here is going to destroy the world. (Something the Chinese don't really have to put up with).

The Chinese are successfully pulling a scam on us because they know our government is producer-hostile. It doesn't matter that we find out down the road that the material California bought is bad because their domestic competitors here in the bidding process will be OUT OF BUSINESS. We can argue with them, maybe issue them fines they won't pay, but it won't bring back that US Steel plant that just died.

I believe it hurts the Real Right's (not the Paleo's, or the "Alts" or whatever they're called this week) when you pretend that both of the heavily manipulated sides of the scale, the Chinese government's currency manipulations (among many others) and Oblahblah's Carbon Follies are both really some sort of free market process we're cursed to put up with the results of because of Ricardo.

I don't really like the idea of tariffs, they're third or forth down my list of preferences compared to "everyone else has an attack of sanity..." I don't like the alt.right or whatever they call themselves this week, and I think Trump originally started out to be the Perot of this election cycle when he would up being the Dog that caught the Car. I don't like any of the candidates, I really wish Cruz hadn't voted for that damn Corker Amendment, or I'd like him a lot more. I wish Perry were still in.

But you seem oblivious to the mountain of Elephant Shit in the room, that has nothing to do with the free market, that's tilting the market and making the paleos think they need the tariffs and the Hipsters think they need Bernie to take away everyone's 401K.

If you want to prevail, you need to bring your own answer to the Multiple Choice question, right now it looks like the list is restricted to: Tariffs, Bernie, or You Deserve This Elephant Shit.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 05:03 PM (kCfMX)

877 But, to make a long story short: the Chinese are selling steel with fraudulent certification papers; they think they can get away with it because our government is openly hostile to the idea of domestic manufacturing, especially if it involves producing CO2.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 05:05 PM (kCfMX)

878 "Which totally ignores the fact ... how much richer Americans are
in general because of relatively unfettered free trade.
How many (not on welfare) can afford consumer goods that would have
been unthinkable 30 years ago? .... Sort of like Rosie O'Donnell getting mad at her scale because she's
fat." red banzai

we don't have unfettered free trade, and all the productivity gains are made with or without the export of jobs. It could be argued cheap labor forestalls productivity gains, like mechanized pickers for field work. Flat screens MAYBE were made more cheaply by foreign slaves, but at what other longer term costs? What human costs? What costs to sovereignty and liberty?

Looking at the flaws of the vaunted comparative advantage doesn't mean it can't be useful, it just isn't "The Golden Rule". We have to make deals the serve America first, not believe in a magic formula. The globalists seem to prefer US weaker and dependent ... see BH Obama, or George Soros.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 03, 2016 05:09 PM (5Gpe2)

879 As just one tiny example of what constitutes the "comparative advantage" environment these days, I want to present the following article on chlorine compound manufacture from an obscure web publication called "The New York Times." I'd tell a joke about their being affiliated with the alt.right or Pat Buchanan, but don't have the energy any more, I need to get back to productive stuff.

Anyway:

http://tinyurl.com/refrigerant-fraud

Read that, and realize, it's probably the tip of the iceberg.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 05:31 PM (kCfMX)

880 ...and I just realized that a 'w' got stripped off at some point during the tinyurl process. Well, at least we have amp persands

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 05:34 PM (kCfMX)

881 Or maybe we don't.

amp

Frau Blucher!

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 05:36 PM (kCfMX)

882 The Ted Cruz "Invasion" video is funny as hell... Ted being the lone voice calling for a five-fold increase in H1-B visas. H1-B is specifically for STEM types. We need thousands off Operation Paperclips every year to scalp other countries advanced technology...

Posted by: Burnt Toast at February 03, 2016 07:59 PM (T78UI)

883 \amp

&

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 08:51 PM (kCfMX)

884 Oh, in Chromium the & persands work.

Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain at February 03, 2016 08:51 PM (kCfMX)

Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.1119 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0336 seconds, 893 records returned.
Page size 574 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.