Tab Content
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    03-15-2018, 07:18 AM
    Since this is one of Ron Pauls ideas from way back, now what do you think ?
    16 replies | 272 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    03-12-2018, 11:10 PM
    First this isn't a business letter I don't care about the correct "There or Their" and I know the difference, auto-correct puts in what it does :p As to the other part if the Canadian dollar is at par they won't be buying those hothouse peppers because then it's not worth it, when the dollar is at 75 cents it's like getting a 25% discount. Transversely when the dollar is at par Canadians buys tons of Americans foods like cheese and wine because it's a good deal for them, they just have to make sure they don't bring too much back or the Canadian border guards get them. Imports go way up and the importers and exporters under NAFTA do very well. The dollar is going to bounce around, at about 80 cents is where it starts being worth it, and at 70 cents it's almost always a better deal. And if there is an over supply of a perishable commodity such as a hothouse red peeper then it's even a better deal. Let the free markets handle this within a reasonable geographic area among allies, with no tariffs. But geopolitical foes should not be supplying our food at any discount, it's just not smart, again put high tariffs on them to discourage it from happening.
    50 replies | 631 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    03-12-2018, 06:24 PM
    I hear what you guys are saying, but I really think sometimes government needs to protect it's citizenry from making self sufficiency errors. Let me explain, I will use garlic as an example, you can buy grown in America garlic or grown in China garlic. One is 1/4 the price. We need to grow our own food supplies here we need the info-structure and everything to support it, we should NOT be depending on China for food at any discount. There may come a time when we can't depend on that product getting here and we need to be able to look after our own. So government seeing the bigger picture slaps a 50% tariff on Chinese garlic and gives American garlic growers big tax breaks to help level the playing field for our own long term good. Sorry I might have a little different philosophical outlook than some here, America making itself self-sufficient and not depending on other nations has to be a good thing, especially if those nations are far away. But I am not talking about vegetables imported from Canada into North Dakota for cheaper, because there dollar is down this month. Is steel in this equation, that is for you to answer, but food staples sure are.
    50 replies | 631 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    03-11-2018, 10:19 PM
    In the news this week Ron Paul came out against Tariffs. What I want to discuss is there place for tariffs in this new global economy. My thoughts are this, don't put tariffs on goods of any nations that have 1st world living conditions, so none on places like Canada or the UK or Germany places that pay there workers good benefits and fair wages. However that changes for me if the products are from nations that have poor wages and benefits for example Mexico, China and India. I am all for free markets, but is the playing field equal if a worker is forced to work 7 days a week 12 hours a day for $1/hr building cheap whatever? I guess this is one area I disagree with both Trump and Ron, tariffs need only to create a level playing field, not punish a nation that pays there people good wages but maybe just does it better, in capitalism America will win some of those but it might lose some too, and that's ok. But if Trump can stop factories from leaving America and setting up in Mexico/China/India that is a good thing. Oh My does that make Ron Paul a globalist:eek:
    50 replies | 631 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    02-24-2018, 04:28 PM
    Let me respond to this since you neg rep me 1) Age; Most car-rental companies require renters to be at least 21 years old, the legal drinking age in America in most states is 21, so moving gun buying and ownership to that age does not infringe on the second amendment in my opinion, just like those other restrictions are there to restrict people that are less experienced in life and also known for doing immature things as a group. 21 is good age to start since they are also well out of high school by then too. 2)Bump stocks produce rapid fire in a gimmicky manner, and it throws a bone to the other side. 3)The mental health data base is the one I have the most issues with actually, but hey we can't have crazy people with guns. Protect the second amendment by all means, but guns needs to be kept away from those members of society that have mental issue that includes rage. This might be controversial I know, the guns aren't killing people, it is the people pulling the triggers and pointing them. Even then all three of these can be bypassed if anybody wanted to buy this.
    51 replies | 874 view(s)
  • ProBlue33's Avatar
    02-24-2018, 02:39 PM
    Raise the age to 21, ban bump stocks, and create a data base for mental health, when the founders created the 2nd amendment mental and emotional health was much stronger. You didn't have any people on mental health aiding drugs, and if they were they were locked up. Because today many people just can't handle the pressures of modern life without them. I don't blame them either, but we need to protect ourselves from members of society that are more prone to just snap and do this type of thing.
    51 replies | 874 view(s)
No More Results
About ProBlue33

Basic Information


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
General Information
Last Activity
03-15-2018 06:19 PM
Join Date

2 Friends

  1. alexaforronpaul alexaforronpaul is offline


  2. Theocrat Theocrat is offline


    • Send a message via Skype™ to Theocrat
Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2




No results to display...
Page 1 of 23 12311 ... LastLast












Page 1 of 23 12311 ... LastLast