Picture of Huckabee at a pro-amnesty event

[literatim]

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/9978/huckabeewithmexicanssg6.jpg

[InRonWeTrust]

This must have been before he photocopied his "tough" new immigration policy from a magazine.

[Paulitician]

Are you sure it's a pro-amnesty event? Or do you just assume it is?

[sharedvoice]

LOL Awesome. The Huckster is going down I don't care what the friggen' polls say.

Too funny. :D:D

[SamLowrey]

This must have been before he photocopied his "tough" new immigration policy from a magazine.

LOL!

[apc3161]

Are you sure it's a pro-amnesty event? Or do you just assume it is?

I agree, we need evidence.

I remember a while back someone wrote an article about how Paul wasn't invited to a NRA conference where all the other candidates got to speak to a packed banquet.

I got upset and wrote them an email...It turned out he was invited and he just declined...

I'm not going to be so quick to jump to conclusions, was this an amnesty even or is there just a Mexican flag in the background? For all we know it could be a trade summit.

[SamLowrey]

I agree, we need evidence.

I remember a while back someone wrote an article about how Paul wasn't invited to a NRA conference where all the other candidates got to speak to a packed banquet.

I got upset and wrote them an email...It turned out he was invited and he just declined...

What is your evidence he was invited? I wrote them too - I'm sure I got the same response. I don't buy it.



I'm not going to be so quick to jump to conclusions, was this an amnesty even or is there just a Mexican flag in the background? For all we know it could be a trade summit.

A "trade summit." That's just as bad IMO. Seems all these "summits" serve is a way for them to take bribes while selling us down the river.

[apc3161]

What is your evidence he was invited? I wrote them too - I'm sure I got the same response. I don't buy it.



A "trade summit." That's just as bad IMO. Seems all these "summits" serve is a way for them to take bribes while selling us down the river.

Trade is essential to our country. If it was a trade summit where they agreed to lower tariffs, I would be happy about that.

[SamLowrey]

Trade is essential to our country.

Don't buy that, either. Seems to be repeated often enough, though.

Trade is just a vechicle to undermine or sovereignty. Look how they are selling the SPP.

[MooCowzRock]

Don't buy that, either. Seems to be repeated often enough, though.

Trade is just a vechicle to undermine or sovereignty. Look how they are selling the SPP.

Then what the hell should we beleive? You seem to be going on like "dont believe anything you hear" and I'm wondering how the hell we can ever tell even using the slightest bit of common sense when we should believe what we hear...

[SamLowrey]

Then what the hell should we beleive? You seem to be going on like "dont believe anything you hear" and I'm wondering how the hell we can ever tell even using the slightest bit of common sense when we should believe what we hear...

Common sense is the key.

Common sense says exporting our manufacturing base is a bad thing.
The religion (and it is a religion) of Free Market says it doesn't matter and tries to suppress common sense with convoluted examples of grocery stores. Walter Williams loves to use this example - what's the problem, you have a personal trade deficit with the grocery store, he says. But his example is flawed. To make it correct, the example should be a person who is UNEMPLOYED and continues to buy things at the grocery store. THEN where does that example lead you? The US is not producing much and less all the time. Few of the jobs now actually produce anything. Think we can survive as a nation of lawyers, entertainers, various "agents" and consultants? And those are the people "working." Think of how many people you see every day that have no visible means of income - have no job and nowhere to be. They are probably getting your money through our wealth-redistribution program. But I digress...

What does common sense say about the illegal alien invasion?
What do the "Free Market" globalists say - usually from their university offices or in their gated communities?

Common sense to me says that in the BEST of circumstances free trade between nations is going to result in an averaging of the qualities of lives between the two. With a billion people living on dirt floors, where does that leave us? And when I say "averaging" what is really true is 5 steps down for us and 1 step up for the foreign country. Gotta pay those "transaction costs" and shipping..... Actually, I'm painting a much rosier portrayal of what will happen, but I've already made my point.

[apc3161]

Common sense is the key.

Common sense says exporting our manufacturing base is a bad thing.
The religion (and it is a religion) of Free Market says it doesn't matter and tries to suppress common sense with convoluted examples of grocery stores. Walter Williams loves to use this example - what's the problem, you have a personal trade deficit with the grocery store, he says. But his example is flawed. To make it correct, the example should be a person who is UNEMPLOYED and continues to buy things at the grocery store. THEN where does that example lead you? The US is not producing much and less all the time. Few of the jobs now actually produce anything. Think we can survive as a nation of lawyers, entertainers, various "agents" and consultants? And those are the people "working." Think of how many people you see every day that have no visible means of income - have no job and nowhere to be. They are probably getting your money through our wealth-redistribution program. But I digress...

What does common sense say about the illegal alien invasion?
What do the "Free Market" globalists say - usually from their university offices or in their gated communities?

Common sense to me says that in the BEST of circumstances free trade between nations is going to result in an averaging of the qualities of lives between the two. With a billion people living on dirt floors, where does that leave us? And when I say "averaging" what is really true is 5 steps down for us and 1 step up for the foreign country. Gotta pay those "transaction costs" and shipping..... Actually, I'm painting a much rosier portrayal of what will happen, but I've already made my point.

You've made the point that you are wrong, yes.

I would suggest a simple trade 101 class as to why trade is essential to any country.

Let me tell you a simple fact about trade, it is voluntary. No one is forcing either side. Why would any person engage in a transaction that was not in their benefit?
contrary to what you believe, two people can walk out of transaction and both be better off, but you seem to think that one has to get screwed in the process in order for the other to benefit which is not true.

You seem to think that wealthy countries are worse off when they trade with poor countries. Let me ask you a question concerning say a wealthy doctor, should he spend time cutting his own lawn or should he simply pay poor people to do it for him? It seems you would argue that he should do it himself. I would argue that he should work, make a lot of money, and then use some of that to pay the gardeners, that way not only is his yard nice, but he also made some money.

The same analogy can be used for wealthy and rich countries. Why should a wealthy country focus on say textiles? They shouldn't. They should focus on IT, service jobs, banking, consulting, aerospace, and other high tech industries. Why? Because it pays better. To focus on lesser paying tasks would be a waste of the wealthy country's intelligence and infrastructure. It makes more sense to just buy low tech products from poor countries, not create them yourselves.

Here let me prove it to you really simply.

Tell me, in the history of ALL MANKIND, one nation that was ruined by trade. Tell me in the history of all mankind, one nation that had a closed trading policy that did better than a country without one.

I'm going to leave you with one of my fav. Benjamin Franklin quotes, "No nation was ever ruined by trade." When you go and do the research, you will find that he is right.

I know these seems counter intuitive, but its true. Trade is a great thing.

[SamLowrey]

You've made the point that you are wrong, yes.

I would suggest a simple trade 101 class as to why trade is essential to any country.

If you are basing this on "101" classes then it is obvious why your views are so "simple." Most of this is taught in ECON 101, though. What else do they teach in those classes. Well, if you missed the first day, they lay out a whole slew of absurd ASSUMPTIONS that need to be accepted in order to make this Free Trade theory work. One that sticks in my mind is that there is ZERO COST TO ENTER A MARKET. That one assumption alone should be enough to demonstrate to people how ridiculous the whole notion is. Apparently I can just start making cars with no startup cost and start competing with the other auto manufacturers. Sure, the theory works in that imaginary world, but this needs to be absorbed into the creative writing department or somewhere they write fiction because it has no relevance to the real world.



Let me tell you a simple fact about trade, it is voluntary. No one is forcing either side. Why would any person engage in a transaction that was not in their benefit?
contrary to what you believe, two people can walk out of transaction and both be better off, but you seem to think that one has to get screwed in the process in order for the other to benefit which is not true.

You seem to think that wealthy countries are worse off when they trade with poor countries. Let me ask you a question concerning say a wealthy doctor, should he spend time cutting his own lawn or should he simply pay poor people to do it for him? It seems you would argue that he should do it himself. I would argue that he should work, make a lot of money, and then use some of that to pay the gardeners, that way not only is his yard nice, but he also made some money.


Does he want the yard done right? Will the illegal aliens (let's be frank) blow all the clippings into his neighbor's yard? Will they be casing his house to break in to later? And since we don't REALLY live in free market system, the "landscaper's" wife and kids will be going to the emergency room and costing everyone else more in taxs, lower services, etc....

Every doctor I knew from a generation or so ago did things around their house - they liked it. They weren't the hothouse orchids the media seems to think. They were real men. They, like most people, inherently know self-sufficiency is ideal. Same thing can be said about countries.....



The same analogy can be used for wealthy and rich countries. Why should a wealthy country focus on say textiles?


Should a country become vunerable to economic blackmail? Well, the country that provides all these "textiles" suddenly has LEVERAGE over your country. Was that not covered in ECON 101?

Like I say, those who want globalism USE trade to achieve it.



They shouldn't. They should focus on IT, service jobs, banking, consulting, aerospace, and other high tech industries.



Why can China do both? Why can't the US? You present a false choice.

I guess there are no "poor" people in the US who can work in these textile mills? Are they all mowing lawns for doctors? Something doesn't add up here.



Why? Because it pays better. To focus on lesser paying tasks would be a waste of the wealthy country's intelligence and infrastructure. It makes more sense to just buy low tech products from poor countries, not create them yourselves.

Which makes us vunlerable both economically and from a security standpoint. Did your ECON 101 class discuss the COST of inspecting containers coming from overseas? Did they talk about the cost of invasive species? Diseases from abroad?

Also, shouldn't your market theory say that the price of these "cheap" goods is going to be determined by THE MARKET? So what that means is that the price isn't going to be that much less than if it was made in the US. They don't run a charity.

Real world check: What are the prices of shirts made in foreign lands? I regularly see shirts that are $40 or more. And these are largely junky shirts, not fitted at all (it is pretty obvious making shirts that assume a more or less tube shaped torso is the easiest to manufacture, so that is what we get) and with shoddy workmanship. Think those saving are getting passed on to the consumer? Maybe in an ideal world where anyone can enter in to the market with zero cost, eh? Not in the real world.



Here let me prove it to you really simply.

Tell me, in the history of ALL MANKIND, one nation that was ruined by trade. Tell me in the history of all mankind, one nation that had a closed trading policy that did better than a country without one.


The US is being ruined by trade. I thought that was obvious. Trade deficits, falling dollar, etc....

Seems China is making out ok, though. Building a new NAVY to challenge ours. Space program on track. Kinda like the US before we got so fixated on international trade and things were made in the US.



I'm going to leave you with one of my fav. Benjamin Franklin quotes, "No nation was ever ruined by trade." When you go and do the research, you will find that he is right.

What would he have said about the very COMMON practice of "dumping" alone?

China said we could go hang - they are going to subsidize their industries and if we don't like it "tough." Perhaps you can send them your ECON 101 textbook and they will see the evil of their ways and realize nationalism is not "cool" any more. I'm sure they will stop.




I know these seems counter intuitive, but its true. Trade is a great thing.

"....in theory, when dealing in an imaginary world" I would add.


So, you learned all this in your ECON 101 class from a textbook. As I recall, we usually had to buy the textbook the professor chose....one he just happened to write himself. Great way to get kickbacks in this racket of teaching "Free Market" religion in schools.

Don't get me wrong, some things are useful and can be applied in very limited situations. It just doesn't work the way they claim in many situations except the imaginary ones in classrooms.

[apc3161]

If you are basing this on "101" classes then it is obvious why your views are so "simple." Most of this is taught in ECON 101, though. What else do they teach in those classes. Well, if you missed the first day, they lay out a whole slew of absurd ASSUMPTIONS that need to be accepted in order to make this Free Trade theory work. One that sticks in my mind is that there is ZERO COST TO ENTER A MARKET. That one assumption alone should be enough to demonstrate to people how ridiculous the whole notion is. Apparently I can just start making cars with no startup cost and start competing with the other auto manufacturers. Sure, the theory works in that imaginary world, but this needs to be absorbed into the creative writing department or somewhere they write fiction because it has no relevance to the real world.




Does he want the yard done right? Will the illegal aliens (let's be frank) blow all the clippings into his neighbor's yard? Will they be casing his house to break in to later? And since we don't REALLY live in free market system, the "landscaper's" wife and kids will be going to the emergency room and costing everyone else more in taxs, lower services, etc....

Every doctor I knew from a generation or so ago did things around their house - they liked it. They weren't the hothouse orchids the media seems to think. They were real men. They, like most people, inherently know self-sufficiency is ideal. Same thing can be said about countries.....



Should a country become vunerable to economic blackmail? Well, the country that provides all these "textiles" suddenly has LEVERAGE over your country. Was that not covered in ECON 101?

Like I say, those who want globalism USE trade to achieve it.




Why can China do both? Why can't the US? You present a false choice.

I guess there are no "poor" people in the US who can work in these textile mills? Are they all mowing lawns for doctors? Something doesn't add up here.



Which makes us vunlerable both economically and from a security standpoint. Did your ECON 101 class discuss the COST of inspecting containers coming from overseas? Did they talk about the cost of invasive species? Diseases from abroad?

Also, shouldn't your market theory say that the price of these "cheap" goods is going to be determined by THE MARKET? So what that means is that the price isn't going to be that much less than if it was made in the US. They don't run a charity.

Real world check: What are the prices of shirts made in foreign lands? I regularly see shirts that are $40 or more. And these are largely junky shirts, not fitted at all (it is pretty obvious making shirts that assume a more or less tube shaped torso is the easiest to manufacture, so that is what we get) and with shoddy workmanship. Think those saving are getting passed on to the consumer? Maybe in an ideal world where anyone can enter in to the market with zero cost, eh? Not in the real world.



The US is being ruined by trade. I thought that was obvious. Trade deficits, falling dollar, etc....

Seems China is making out ok, though. Building a new NAVY to challenge ours. Space program on track. Kinda like the US before we got so fixated on international trade and things were made in the US.



What would he have said about the very COMMON practice of "dumping" alone?

China said we could go hang - they are going to subsidize their industries and if we don't like it "tough." Perhaps you can send them your ECON 101 textbook and they will see the evil of their ways and realize nationalism is not "cool" any more. I'm sure they will stop.



"....in theory, when dealing in an imaginary world" I would add.


So, you learned all this in your ECON 101 class from a textbook. As I recall, we usually had to buy the textbook the professor chose....one he just happened to write himself. Great way to get kickbacks in this racket of teaching "Free Market" religion in schools.

Don't get me wrong, some things are useful and can be applied in very limited situations. It just doesn't work the way they claim in many situations except the imaginary ones in classrooms.

I'm too tired right now, but I will debunk every single thing you just said because you are completely wrong.

My question is this though, you do know Ron Paul is a staunch supporter of free trade right? Unless you are a troll, I don't see what you are doing here.

Real quick, you mentioned self-sufficiency. Do you make your own shoes? Do you grow your own food? Do refine your own gasoline?

You don't do you? Why not? Because doing so would be idiotic. The idea that a country should be "Self sufficient" is the dumbest notion for the same reasons (Very few exceptions). Let me tell you who is arguably the most self sufficient country today, North Korea, they export and import very little. That is pretty much their motto. If you think that is the best path than power to you.

So this idea of "self sufficiency" was the easiest aspect to debunk. I'll address the rest in more detail tomorrow.

I'm going to leave you with this question, " Why don't you make your own pencils?"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8623236253181646181&q=milton+friedman+free+to+choose&total=32&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

That there is a man who is pretty considered one of the greatest if not the greatest American economists of all time.

[xao]

I'm too tired right now, but I will debunk every single thing you just said because you are completely wrong.

My question is this though, you do know Ron Paul is a staunch supporter of free trade right? Unless you are a troll, I don't see what you are doing here.

Real quick, you mentioned self-sufficiency. Do you make your own shoes? Do you grow your own food? Do refine your own gasoline?

You don't do you? Why not? Because doing so would be idiotic. The idea that a country should be "Self sufficient" is the dumbest notion for the same reasons (Very few exceptions). Let me tell you who is arguably the most self sufficient country today, North Korea, they export and import very little. That is pretty much their motto. If you think that is the best path than power to you.

So this idea of "self sufficiency" was the easiest aspect to debunk. I'll address the rest in more detail tomorrow.

I'm going to leave you with this question, " Why don't you make your own pencils?"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8623236253181646181&q=milton+friedman+free+to+choose&total=32&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

That there is a man who is pretty considered one of the greatest if not the greatest American economists of all time.

He is for trade that helps us, not hurts us. There is a difference and it certainly won't be with unfriendly countries. Or countries that have been taking advantage of us.

Btw what sam said was pretty much dead on correct.