I said big government, not just social programs. I want an end to all unnecessary spending, not just some of it.I don't remember saying my vote is based on that alone. What is your point?The free-traitors? What the hell are you talking about?Competition doesn't destroy jobs, it gives them to people who want them more. In any case, I didn't say Bush is wrong about everything he does. So I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish by drawing vague similarities in imagined sound bytes.It's moral integrity to not force employers to discriminate when giving jobs (in this case, by only giving them to Americans). What the employers do depends on THEIR moral compass. In any case, why do you assume they are "American" jobs? Just because Americans held them first?I support the right of employers to not be forced to give jobs to the incompetent just because they live in the US. If you consider it immoral, so be it.ROFL. Good argument.

The problem with that is your argument assumes the premise that there is no authoritarian piece of legislation within the Constitution, which is something you have not proven.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

Libertarians such as Ron Paul neglect the big spending, instead concentrate on 1 or 2 billion dollars of pork for talking points. Why? Because it they will never get any voters if they proposed to get rid of the big social spending programs.

Is that principled?



http://www.financialsense.com/editor...ges/1209_3.gif

Maybe you should consider trade, since the US trade deficit is logarithmically approaching 1 trillion dollars a year, 10% of the Gross National Product, and more FTAs are on the table to be considered.

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. These are the same arguments Democrat southerners made in 1860, "It lowers the price of cotton."

The price of goods made by cheap labor doesn't reflect the lower labor cost, the business owners mark up the price and reap in the profits, while putting free-labor out of business. Exactly what happened before the US Civil War.

Those that use cheap foreign labor have no integrity, in fact a war was fought against that practice once, it was called the US Civil War.

Employers DO NOT have the right to unilaterally decide foreign business deals.

Employers DO NOT have the right to unilaterally decide if they can or cannot hire foreigners.

Employers DO NOT have the right to unilaterally decide their tax rates.

The US Constitution gives Congress the powers to regulate foreign trade, and pass tariffs. If you have a problem with the US Constitution then you have a problem with the United States. You Libertarians have a serious problem with the notions of national identity, such as your stance on open-borders anarchy.

To Libertarians there is no such thing as an American, a Chinese, or a Mexican, everyone lives in a global Libertarian Utopia of love and flowers in their hair. Not only is this childish, it is dangerous thinking.

There you go again, you just accused every American who has ever held a job of being incompetent, obsolete, and not needed. According to you, when there is cheap foreign labor to be had, Americans are not needed, throw away tools. That is unAmerican, just as Communism is unAmerican.

Americans will never vote for someone with a pissy attitude like that. Libertarians have no chance of winning.

The Constitution doesn't make legislation, Congress does.

Uh, Paul voted against the IWR. If that's not big spending, I don't know what is.Why are you asking questions with false premises?Getting rid of pork? Yes. Providing false premises in questions? Probably not as much.Okay, I'm considering it. Now what?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.Is this some kind of a cheap attempt to somehow link this to slavery?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.What the hell is "free-labor?"The civil war was fought over foreign labor?You're right. The other business or employee has to agree to it. Thanks, captain obvious.Right, because the other nation can reject the offer. What is your point in pointing out the obvious?Who said they do?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?"What open-border anarchy? Just what the hell are you talking about?Good thing I don't actually think that. Otherwise I would have to live with the unbearable fact that you think I am childish. *GASP!* No, I didn't. I REFERRED to the incompetent who happen to live in America. Your talent for misunderstanding is astounding.Now you're accusing Americans of being obsolete because that statement implies that they are totally inferior to foreign laborers.Who made you the chief council member of the "unAmerican" commission?If that is the case, then that is because the majority of Americans are retarded handout lovers.Are you going to continue sucking down semantics or are you going to address the main issue? Here, I'll rephrase it for you:

"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 a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Americans.

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.

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.

Maybe you should go to the official Libertarian website and read their Utopian schemes and their platform.

Incompetent means incompetent. According to the free-traders 99% of Americans are incompetent and obsolete because they earn more then 50 cents an hour.

You call Americans incompetent, its much worse then the more accurate term "obsolete."

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.

If the Constitution had no authority then there is no law.

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.

Yes, nobody knows about the Iraq War Resolution. Really? NEVER? Can you prove that?Again, can you prove that always happens?That was free labor.Again, slavery is not the same.Just the incompetent ones. And I'm not running for office.Totally irrelevant.Where did I say that? Seriously, I see no connection between what you said and this debate.What do you mean exploiting?Yes, competition. Got a problem with that?Then don't take part in it. Stop telling the Chinese laborers and US employers what to do. It's not your business (literally).Do you understand what competition is? Or is it as unknown to you as the IWR?Americans work for free?That doesn't mean it should be done. Your argument is "can be done, so must be done?"ROFL. So disagreeing with your baseless opinion is unAmerican?Prove it.Sorry, but the burden of proof is on you, given that you made the claim.Yes, it does. But I still didn't say what you think I said. You're delusional.I didn't know there was a monarchy or absolute commission of "free-traders." Where is their blog that says this? Yes, some Americans are incompetent. Got a problem with the truth?Like I said, I won't sacrifice my morals to appease public opinion.That has nothing to do with what I said.What the hell is your point?How is this relevant?What are you smoking? It might land you in jail if you're not careful. I certainly hope you are more coherent when you are in public, and especially when around cops.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

If you want to tackle spending, how about the big social programs taking up a majority of the federal budget. You have about 50 senators, and 300 Democrat congressmen to fight through, GOOD LUCK!



[quote]Has the price of toys, cars, ANYTHING gone down since NAFTA and trade with other foreign cheap labor countries? NO!

1) Are you denying a business marks up the price of an item to make a profit?

2) Are you denying China doesn't have any internal taxation or export taxes? Every other country does.

Of course a Libertarian would think slavery was free labor, with their twisted sort of logic. Most of the Confederate defenders are Libertarians today.

I am talking about the 100,000% inflation of the Confederacy, because all they did was print money, like your beloved free-trader buddies controlling our money supply today.

Slavery is the issue, its all about mindset. Libertarians and Confederate slavers can only think in terms of 'cheap labor', built their entire economy around it. It came crashing down on their faces.

I am drawing a parallel between the mindset of a southern Democrat slaver Confederate, and the free traitors of today. What they did 150 years ago is as relevant as what is going on today. History shouldn't be forgotten, or we'll repeat the same mistake.

You didn't get the memo? You can exploit another human being without putting chains on their feet and slapping them around with a bull whip. WELCOME TO THE 21ST CENTURY!

Not when it costs America its industrial capacity, gives Communist China an industrial capacity, millions of good paying jobs, lowers the standard of living, imports poverty, makes the average Chinese slave hate their American masters, and gets Democrats elected.

Libertarian philosophy is, "Nobody should intrude on another's freedom." It is my business, this stuff doesn't happen in a vaccume. No company has the freedom to do foreign business, because the Constitution gives Congress the powers of tariff and regulation. If you have a problem with the Constitution then you have a problem with America.

(Libertarians believe in extra-constitutional doctrine, so when you hear a Libertarian say something is unconstitutional, take it with a grain of salt.)

Are you going to deny a business will not drastically undercut their competition less it drastically cuts into their profits?

According to you, Americans should work for free, or at least 50 cents an hour.

I would rather trust the founding fathers then a lunatic Libertarian. The founding fathers ran the entire federal budget on tariffs.

Are you denying that if Congress never prohibited the states from imposing interstate tariffs that they never would impose tariffs? WOW! AMAZING! You have no idea how people think, politics, and how governments operate. If the commerce clause never existed, every state WOULD have tariffs.

Your the anti-war protester latching onto Ron Paul. You have no idea what Libertarians really are.

Well according to you, and according to Libertarians, Americans need to sacrifice much of their wages to stay "globally competative." So therefore YOU and your Libertarian bretheren really want Americans to work for as little as possible.

To accuse some Americans of being incompetent because they earn more then 50 cents an hour is to accuse ALL Americans of being incompetent. Fat. Lazy. Obsolete. Ugly Americans. So you accuse.
Quote:

It is immoral to take advantage of the wage disparity between the United State worker, and a worker of a corrupt and/or Communist nation. Not that I care about the foreign worker, I only care about making the most money myself.

You said the Constitution is not Authoritarian. It certainly is Authoritarian, being the highest law of the land.


Most anti-war nuts are Democrat. Most Democrats are socialists to a degree. Socialism is the complete opposite of anarcho-capitalism which is Libertarianism.

I thought you Libertarians want to legalize drugs. The only thing a Socialist Congress and a Libertarian presidency will accomplish is the legalization of weed.

Here's to free trade and outsourcing-India Business-Business-The Times of India

(without our consent) The US propped up those ingrate's economy on the backs of the American worker, and this is the thanks we get.

[quote=PaleoRepublican;1120117]If you want to tackle spending, how about the big social programs taking up a majority of the federal budget. You have about 50 senators, and 300 Democrat congressmen to fight through, GOOD LUCK!



I didn't know NAFTA represented all drops in labor costs, EVER. That sure is new to me. I guess cheap labor didn't exist prior to NAFTA. ROFL. Get back to proving what you said and answering my question rather than trying to dodge it by asking stupid "are you denying" questions.Really? Well, that's an even greater incentive to be one, since they apparently figured out how to live forever.What a totally retarded statement. Where did Ron Paul say he was going to "just print money" to drive inflation up? What a totally retarded statement.So because they both liked cheap labor, their economies will crash down on them? That has to be the dumbest correlation = causation statement I have ever seen.Which is retarded, because it doesn't accomplish anything. Hey, let me try something. Hitler wore shoes, and so do protectionists. Thus, protectionism will lead to the Holocaust.

That statement uses your logic.I didn't forget history, I just realized that this particular event is totally irrelevant.Well, then I guess they are agreeing to it, so there is no problem.I thought you just said they were practically slaves? Now the Chinese are getting good paying jobs?Uh, what? The only way it would lower the standard of living is if Americans start competing. It will either send the jobs away or they will stay here and lower the standard of living, even assuming Americans don't just move to jobs that cannot be as easily sent overseas.Imports poverty? What the hell does that mean?Hate their masters? But I thought the Chinese were getting good paying jobs?We have the freedom to do whatever the government allows us to do. We are arguing what should or should not be allowed. I have presented a good argument, all you are saying is you should be allowed to hold a gun to the company's head because you are incompetent.So the Constitution = America? I didn't know we lived on a sheet of paper.What did I say that was unconstitutional? Provide the specific portion of the Constitution, please.I'm not sure that sentence makes any sense. Can you rephrase?Nope, I never said that.