Quote:
|
Uh, Paul voted against the IWR. If that's not big spending, I don't know what is.
|
What the hell is IWR? It must be such a big government program, nobody knows about it.
*slow clap* Yay, Ron Paul cut 100 million dollars out of a 3 trillion dollar budget, yaaaaay. Slap yourselves on the back for a job well done. Whoopty dooooo.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Labor costs are the most, if not only, important cost to doing business in the modern world. Going to a foreign cheap labor source does not increase efficiency, is not competative, does not benefit Americans, and only gets Socialist Democrats elected.
|
What are you smoking? Cheap labor reduces the production costs of something while not reducing other qualities. That is efficiency. Do you know what the word "efficiency" is? Yes, it is competitive because companies will compete to produce a product for less. And yes, if product costs go down, companies will be able to compete to lower prices of said goods for buyers, including American buyers. But you are right, retarded and incompetent American voters could be more likely to elect those who would give their lazy asses handouts.
|
Cheap foreign labor does reduce production cost, but the end-user consumer never sees a drop in price. The cheap-labor nation TAXES their own exports, and the business owner who employs cheap foreign labor rakes in massive profits MARKING UP THE PRICE of the item up. The exact same thing happened with King Cotton (slavery). You do not want to return to a Confederate economy.
There you go again, accusing all American workers of being incompetent, you will never win elections with an attitude like that.
Quote:
|
Is this some kind of a cheap attempt to somehow link this to slavery?
|
Slavery had nothing to do with racism, it was all about cheap foreign labor and the gluttons who owned the plantations obstructing the Industrialization of the United States. Why do you think a bunch of white guys killed a bunch of white guys over it? Cause they cared about blacks? HAHAHAHAHA! Thats a funny one.
Quote:
|
That might happen, but then someone who wants to enter the market can just make less of a profit and be able to compete with the companies. What you are doing is assuming that corporation do not compete under any circumstances.
|
YOu mean one company exploiting cheap Chinese labor competing against another company exploiting cheap Chinese labor? That kind of competition?
First of all, that should not be taking place.
Second of all, if one company exploiting cheap Chinese labor undercuts the 2nd company exploiting cheap Chinese labor, they will only undercut by pennies.
Quote:
|
What the hell is "free-labor?"
|
Americans.
Quote:
|
Right, because the other nation can reject the offer. What is your point in pointing out the obvious?
|
Because the other nation can reject the offer, and because the US has the Constitutional authority to reject the offer also. If you got a problem with the US Constitution then hold a Constitutional Convention.
Quote:
|
ROFL. First of all, having the power to regulate trade doesn't mean it HAS to be regulated. Maybe I just don't like the way Congress uses their powers, hmm? Furthermore, the US Constitution was made by men, and is not infallible. Prohibition used to be a part of the Constitution. Are you saying that anyone who disagreed with it had a "problem with the United States?"
|
The US Constitution is one of the best documents made by mankind. To think otherwise is unAmerican.
If Congress never excersized its powers to regulate interstate trade, each state would have their own little tariffs.
Quote:
|
What open-border anarchy? Just what the hell are you talking about?
|
Maybe you should go to the official Libertarian website and read their Utopian schemes and their platform.
Quote:
|
No, I didn't. I REFERRED to the incompetent who happen to live in America. Your talent for misunderstanding is astounding.
|
Incompetent means incompetent. According to the free-traders 99% of Americans are incompetent and obsolete because they earn more then 50 cents an hour.
Quote:
|
Now you're accusing Americans of being obsolete because that statement implies that they are totally inferior to foreign laborers.
|
You call Americans incompetent, its much worse then the more accurate term "obsolete."
Quote:
|
If that is the case, then that is because the majority of Americans are retarded handout lovers.
|
I am a Republican who use to be a Libertarian. I listen to Rush, Michael Savage, watch FOX news, would never vote for a Democrat nomatter what.
33% of Republicans voted for Ross Perot in 1992 BEFORE NAFTA. That is the biggest 3rd party split since Teddy Roosevelt. IF THIS ISN'T resolved soon, the Republicans will lose horribly in 2008. Republicans lost in 2006 and people still scratch their head. I think I know why; Globalism. The Republican Party was started by hard core protectionists and anti-slavery abolitionists.
Quote:
|
"The problem with that is your argument assumes the premise that there is no authoritarian wording within the Constitution, which is something you have not proven."
|
If the Constitution had no authority then there is no law.
Quote:
A federal judge ruled today that graphic pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison must be released over government claims that they could damage America's image.
Someone should tell them that bad press can be prevented by not abusing prisoners in the first place. Censorship is only needed to preserve the good reputation of those who have tortured and/or murdered already.
Reply With Quote
|
Like I said, if you anti-war protesters vote for Ron Paul simply because he is anti-war, YOU WILL GET THE WHOLE LIBERTARIAN PACKAGE!
However, the Democratic Party was mostly pro-slavery (pro cheap labor) and free-trade throughout its history, so maybe Ron Paul is good for them. But since Democrats have never been principled, that probably doesn't matter. Oh I forgot, anti-war, theres your big principle.