Thread: I Was Wrong About Ron Paul On Immigration

Originally Posted by BrightNail

Ron Paul is awesome. That is all I am saying.

I just can't get on board with the "islofascistislamonazi" talk, nor can I buy the rhetoric of some here, that 'FREE TRADE' is bad.

Free trade benefits the CONSUMER. The managed trade we have now benefits the BIG CORPORATE ELITES, AND takes jobs away. THIS IS NOT FREE TRADE. I mean, people are arguing to "keep what we have".. tell that to the Auto workers in Michigan, or those losing jobs to China. As our dollar crumbles and businesses are clamouring overseas to get product.. you all are supporting that.

You are all missing the true point of FREE TRADE = American Consumers.
You are all missing the true point of the devlauation of the dollar = JOBS GO OVERSEAS.

Ron Paul's True Free trade will send more jobs to China and give full power to BIG CORPORATE Elites. Your statement is pure equivocation

Originally Posted by Once_A_Democrat

Originally Posted by BrightNail

Ron Paul is awesome. That is all I am saying.

I just can't get on board with the "islofascistislamonazi" talk, nor can I buy the rhetoric of some here, that 'FREE TRADE' is bad.

Free trade benefits the CONSUMER. The managed trade we have now benefits the BIG CORPORATE ELITES, AND takes jobs away. THIS IS NOT FREE TRADE. I mean, people are arguing to "keep what we have".. tell that to the Auto workers in Michigan, or those losing jobs to China. As our dollar crumbles and businesses are clamouring overseas to get product.. you all are supporting that.

You are all missing the true point of FREE TRADE = American Consumers.
You are all missing the true point of the devlauation of the dollar = JOBS GO OVERSEAS.

Ron Paul's True Free trade will send more jobs to China and give full power to BIG CORPORATE Elites. Your statement is pure equivocation

Prove it!

Yes, how so?

Paul wants to UNILATERALLY eliminate our tariffs. What that means is that we drop all of our protective tariffs, while allowing without negotiation China to keep its 25% industrial tariff on our goods. From the horses mouth:

Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American people.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=412

Free trade is not a bad thing when Its fair trade

I sent this question to RonPaul2008...

If Dr. Paul is successful in eliminating the IRS, I'm of the understanding that our smaller govrnment will be funded as outlined in the Constitution, through taxes and tariffs on foreign goods. If this is the case, how does that square with Dr. Paul's assertion that "Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American people."

Source of quote: http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=412

Please explain this apparent contradiction. Thank you.

I'll post their answer as soon as I get it.

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

I sent this question to RonPaul2008...

If Dr. Paul is successful in eliminating the IRS, I'm of the understanding that our smaller govrnment will be funded as outlined in the Constitution, through taxes and tariffs on foreign goods. If this is the case, how does that square with Dr. Paul's assertion that "Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American people."

Source of quote: http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=412

Please explain this apparent contradiction. Thank you.

Excellent question Pinestraw. I believe the Paul campaign will respond by saying that an excise tax (sales tax) will replace the income tax, as the founders had intended on......but the fact is that the tariff was BY FAR the primary revenue source for the founders, excise tax was merely a supplement to the tariff. Which leaves me scratching my head as to why Paul opposes tariffs so addimantly.

I used to think that there was no way that 12 million people could be deported or that illegal immigration could be prevented. I started listening to Ron Paul for some of his other views, and I found myself agreeing with him on illegal immigration. I've since convinced a few other pro-amnesty people that this is the way to go.

So, Ron Paul is responsible for converting many people to the anti-illegal immigration stance.

As far as the tariffs go, if we didn't have tariffs, many countries might drop theirs, or at least lower them. We would benefit overall because more of our goods would be bought by other countries, who would be richer from being able to sell us more goods, and likewise... it's circular. We would benefit, they would benefit, we would benefit, they would benefit. We would be able to import cars to other countries, as one example. GM and Ford might really go for that now-- but as it is, the tariffs are too high in many cases.

By not trading with Burma (not the government, but the people of the country), we are keeping the Burmese people poor and unable to fight back against their repressive government. We are not helping them (we keep them poor) and we are not helping our farmers/businesses (by denying them a market to sell their goods).

Finally, the H-1B visas don't really have anything to do with illegal immigration, do they? Those with H1-Bs go back to their own country when their time is up. I personally am against them because they're a form of corporate welfare, but I think that's a silly reason not to support a presidential candidate. Ron Paul is the only candidate who addresses the reasons behind the devaluation of our dollar (our currency) and thus the only one who could help that "sucking sound" of our jobs moving to other countries.

Originally Posted by brightmidnight

As far as the tariffs go, if we didn't have tariffs, many countries might drop theirs, or at least lower them. We would benefit overall because more of our goods would be bought by other countries, who would be richer from being able to sell us more goods, and likewise... it's circular. We would benefit, they would benefit, we would benefit, they would benefit. We would be able to import cars to other countries, as one example. GM and Ford might really go for that now-- but as it is, the tariffs are too high in many cases.

Our tariffs are practically non-existant as it is. We have I believe a 2.5% tariff while we face a 25% tariff if we want to sell into China. Its already way out of balence, and China is showing no signs of reducing their tariffs. Its also important to note that as we reduced our tariffs, our trade deficit and outsourcing of jobs coincided. Why? Because of the WTO, NAFTA, GATT, all reducing our tariffs -- basically over time distancing ourselves from the trade policy put into place by the founders.

Originally Posted by brightmidnight

As far as the tariffs go, if we didn't have tariffs, many countries might drop theirs, or at least lower them..

They won't
China is very protective of jobs for their workers. Just try to import to China - I have and it's a one -way street.