George Will

[aix_xpert]

He advocated lower taxes and then seized up and agreed to a lower tax pittance. He insisted he would veto any spending bill he didn’t like, then signed the budgets as written. He said he would end our wars but cowered in the face of resistance. He unilaterally started an all out trade war with the test of the world (including our allies like Germany) saying it would be easy to win and would reduce the trade deficit. The exact opposite happened and as things got worse he doubled down on his mistake. He said he would build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, then confiscated money intended for the military. He said he would reduce the number of regulations businesses would face, implemented a plan to do it, then quietly backed it off.

Your question is precisely why George Will is so anti-Trump. Many, if not most Trump supporters think he is a conservative because he talks bad about liberals and the left. But he is as far from being conservative as most liberals. He is a mercantilist, nationalist state capitalist (fascism light) who is just as on board with big government as the left. Will left the Republican Party because it became Trump’s party which means it eschews conservative principles and replaces them with big government MAGA principles. He recognizes that the ascendance of MAGA will set back small government conservatism for generations to come.

If you look at your argument and apply any pragmatism then there is no way a true conservative (that you represent Will as being) would endorse Biden and Hillary.

Trump said he'd veto spending bills he didn't like. Yep. And he didn't. So instead, Will endorses a candidate that wants 3.5 TRILLION in additional bloated spending.

Trump said he end our wars. He didn't end them. He reduced our troop counts, stabilized the region, and negotiated multiple peace accords between Arab states and Israel. But he didn't pull out the final 2K troops from Afghanistan. So instead, he endorsed a candidate that voted for every one of the wars, and when pulling out, managed to turn the entire country (including billions in military hardware and financial aid) over to a terrorist organization.

He unilaterally started an all out trade war. Eh, sure he did. He applied tarriffs which you are against and renegotiated NAFTA. Given the 3% national unemployment rate he achieved, sustained market growth, all without the unbridled inflation of the current administration, I'd argue his trade policies seemed to work. Well, up until a man-made virus was released and wiped out all his progress.

He said he would build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Unfortunately, Congress and the courts blocked him, so he tried his best to work around it. So instead, Will endorsed the people who prevented Trump from performing his 'conservative' action of securing our borders and then once they took power, literally opened the flood gates to what might be the largest human migration of all time.

So based on this analysis there are only two possible conclusions: Will has the intellectual capability of a 6 year old, who roots for his enemy because he didn't get exactly what he wanted from his supporters, or Will is paper conservative who actually endorses liberalism and its causes.

 

[aix_xpert]

He fought a manufacturing war concocted from his own imagination and was not his war to be involved in anyway.

I finally got a part that I have been waiting on since May. Virtually everything my company uses gets backordered. It only started happening after the trade war commenced.

If you are whining about supply chain issues, welcome to the CCP/DNC pandemic. That's not on Trump.

 

[Alpha Woke]

He fought a manufacturing war concocted from his own imagination and was not his war to be involved in anyway.

I finally got a part that I have been waiting on since May. Virtually everything my company uses gets backordered. It only started happening after the trade war commenced.

You should think more about this one.

Trump trying to bring manufacturing back has f-all to do with the worlds shipping gridlock.

 

[Ponca Dan]

If you are whining about supply chain issues, welcome to the CCP/DNC pandemic. That's not on Trump.

The pandemic is not on Trump. The supply chain issues are.

 

[Ponca Dan]

You should think more about this one.

Trump trying to bring manufacturing back has f-all to do with the worlds shipping gridlock.

We’ll just have to disagree on this.

 

[Ponca Dan]

If you look at your argument and apply any pragmatism then there is no way a true conservative (that you represent Will as being) would endorse Biden and Hillary.

Trump said he'd veto spending bills he didn't like. Yep. And he didn't. So instead, Will endorses a candidate that wants 3.5 TRILLION in additional bloated spending.

Trump said he end our wars. He didn't end them. He reduced our troop counts, stabilized the region, and negotiated multiple peace accords between Arab states and Israel. But he didn't pull out the final 2K troops from Afghanistan. So instead, he endorsed a candidate that voted for every one of the wars, and when pulling out, managed to turn the entire country (including billions in military hardware and financial aid) over to a terrorist organization.

He unilaterally started an all out trade war. Eh, sure he did. He applied tarriffs which you are against and renegotiated NAFTA. Given the 3% national unemployment rate he achieved, sustained market growth, all without the unbridled inflation of the current administration, I'd argue his trade policies seemed to work. Well, up until a man-made virus was released and wiped out all his progress.

He said he would build a wall and have Mexico pay for it. Unfortunately, Congress and the courts blocked him, so he tried his best to work around it. So instead, Will endorsed the people who prevented Trump from performing his 'conservative' action of securing our borders and then once they took power, literally opened the flood gates to what might be the largest human migration of all time.

So based on this analysis there are only two possible conclusions: Will has the intellectual capability of a 6 year old, who roots for his enemy because he didn't get exactly what he wanted from his supporters, or Will is paper conservative who actually endorses liberalism and its causes.

You have convinced me. George Will is an intellectual 6 year old who is a closet leftist who is throwing a tantrum because Donald Trump is not conservative enough, and who is desperate to stay on the A-list for all the best Georgetown cocktail parties. It is so obvious I don’t know why I hadn’t seen it before. I read his 2019 book, The Conservative Sensibility, and completely misunderstood the whole thing. Damn! I feel so foolish!

 

[iasooner2000]

George Won’t

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

Damn! I feel so foolish!

You should have felt that way the first time you bragged about not voting.

 

[Ponca Dan]

You should have felt that way the first time you bragged about not voting.

Why?

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

George Will is no Thomas Sowell.

And he’s no Rush Limbaugh (a reliable conservative) either.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

Why?

Because it was foolish.

 

[Ponca Dan]

And he’s no Rush Limbaugh (a reliable conservative) either.

I thought Rush was a reliable conservative too, until he rejected several true conservatives for Donald Trump.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Because it was foolish.

What is foolish about refusing to vote for someone whose policies you despise? It seems to me it is foolish to give your stamp of approval to someone you know will eventually betray your most cherished beliefs.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

I thought Rush was a reliable conservative too, until he rejected several true conservatives for Donald Trump.

Rush was never content to just sit back and let Hillary have the presidency. If George Will is the “true conservative,” then “true conservatism” is an abomination of which I want no part.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

What is foolish about refusing to vote for someone whose policies you despise? It seems to me it is foolish to give your stamp of approval to someone you know will eventually betray your most cherished beliefs.

What was so absolutely despicable about Trump’s policies? I’ve never agreed 100% with anyone I ever voted for, but to refuse to vote is either cowardly, or just pain stupid, or probably both.

 

[Ponca Dan]

What was so absolutely despicable about Trump’s policies? I’ve never agreed 100% with anyone I ever voted for, but to refuse to vote is either cowardly, or just pain stupid, or probably both.

For me the tariffs, subsidies to make up for the results of the tariffs, the unbridled trade war with everyone in sight, including our most trusted allies, coupled with the broken promise to end our regime change wars crossed the line into despicable. I’ll ignore the personal insult that makes up the rest of your reply.

I would ask you, however, to explicitly name something Trump did that you disagreed with. Was it something of substance? Or is more along the lines of wishing he’d have cooled it with his mean tweets? Did you come on this board to voice your displeasure with a willingness to defend your complaint from what you knew would be furious responses from the Trump faithful? Maybe you did but I don’t remember it.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

For me the tariffs, subsidies to make up for the results of the tariffs, the unbridled trade war with everyone in sight, including our most trusted allies, coupled with the broken promise to end our regime change wars crossed the line into despicable. I’ll ignore the personal insult that makes up the rest of your reply.

I would ask you, however, to explicitly name something Trump did that you disagreed with. Was it something of substance? Or is more along the lines of wishing he’d have cooled it with his mean tweets? Did you come on this board to voice your displeasure with a willingness to defend your complaint from what you knew would be furious responses from the Trump faithful? Maybe you did but I don’t remember it.

1. The so called “trade war” was one of my favorite Trump policies. China was really taking a hit, and jobs believed to have left the USA were returning. Not sure who our “most trusted allies” are supposed to be, because I don’t trust any of them. Especially the ones who make it damned near impossible to do business in their countries.

2. Loved my rather generous tax cut.

3. Really, really, REALLY liked how Trump stood by his judicial nominees. Too bad they didn’t have the balls to do the same.

4. I’ve heard differing reports of how much border wall was built. Regardless, illegal border crossings were reduced more than any wall probably would have done so, which means less money going back to Mexico. Only a complete moron, with zero understanding of cash flow, would have thought Mexico was going to actually write a check to pay for any wall.

5. Liked his stance on cultural issues, particularly taking down statues and renaming buildings and bases. Basically, leave that it alone instead of pursuing a bunch of Mickey-Mouse bullshit.

6. Liked his overall attitude of not seeing the oil and gas industry as an enemy. That industry overwhelmingly supported Trump here and in east Texas.


Disagreed with Trump on the response to Chicom-19. He should have put the claw end of a hammer through Fauci’s forehead and silenced that little shit. Never should have been any shutdowns. Just tell the American people what they can do to reduce the risk of infection, and then let them fight through it

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

The challenge for Dan....Will you take this challenge?

Go through your house and tell us how much of your products are made in china, and how much are made right here in the USA.

I will help you out, and start. For me its about 80% China, 10% Vietnam, 10% USA.

You should know the next question coming, but we will start there.

 

[Ponca Dan]

The challenge for Dan....Will you take this challenge?

Go through your house and tell us how much of your products are made in china, and how much are made right here in the USA.

I will help you out, and start. For me its about 80% China, 10% Vietnam, 10% USA.

You should know the next question coming, but we will start there.

I won’t go through my house like you requested, but let’s assume my house is like yours. So what’s your next question?

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

If everything is made in China, how do you propose to bring the manufacturing back to the US?

 

[Syskatine]

Was anti-Trump because Trump is not a conservative. That pissed off a whole conglomerate of Trumistas on this board. But Will is a conservative first, last and always, and does not deviate ftom his conservative principles on behalf of partisan politics. When it cones to economics George Will says it best.

Quotation of the Day... - Cafe Hayek

Tweet… is from page 83 of George Will’s hot-off-the-press 2021 book, American Happiness and Discontents: The Unruly Torrent, 2008-2020 – a collection of many of his columns over these years; (the column from which the quotation below is drawn was originally published in the Washington Post on...

cafehayek.com

Dan, it's impossible for anybody that values conservatism on any level to not respect George Will's intellect and writing. I frequently -- generally, even -- disagree with him, but there is no doubt he is an extraordinary writer.

I really got started on him years and years ago when I was a pup and read Men at Work, a book about baseball.

The criticism: The decline of George Will is inversely proportional to the rise of redneck conservatism that stands for nothing beyond self interest and imagery. Ironically and sadly for him and all of us, what we're seeing is a natural consequence of his ideology.

He is a mercantilist, nationalist state capitalist (fascism light) who is just as on board with big government as the left.

Maybe the best observation you've had on the board. He spent so much money and ran up such a deficit, it's crazy. Just like all of his other republican predecessors.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

Dan, it's impossible for anybody that values conservatism on any level to not respect George Will's intellect and writing. I frequently -- generally, even -- disagree with him, but there is no doubt he is an extraordinary writer.

I really got started on him years and years ago when I was a pup and read Men at Work, a book about baseball.

The criticism: The decline of George Will is inversely proportional to the rise of redneck conservatism that stands for nothing beyond self interest and imagery. Ironically and sadly for him and all of us, what we're seeing is a natural consequence of his ideology.



Maybe the best observation you've had on the board. He spent so much money and ran up such a deficit, it's crazy. Just like all of his other republican predecessors.

What the fcuk is wrong with pursuing one’s own self interest? If I don’t guard my own interest, then who will? You, Dan and Dave? No thanks, Comrade Kaprugina.

 

[aix_xpert]

You have convinced me. George Will is an intellectual 6 year old who is a closet leftist who is throwing a tantrum because Donald Trump is not conservative enough, and who is desperate to stay on the A-list for all the best Georgetown cocktail parties. It is so obvious I don’t know why I hadn’t seen it before. I read his 2019 book, The Conservative Sensibility, and completely misunderstood the whole thing. Damn! I feel so foolish!

I like sarcasm. But as a defense mechanism, it pretty much states that you cant actually argue my point so you'd rather dismiss it. But I'll give you an easy question: How does a staunch conservative like Will justify recommending Clinton over Trump in 2016? Only in the eyes of a 'protect the swamp' conservative (such as a McCain or Romney) would such a position make sense. And if your goal is to protect the swamp, then you aren't a conservative.

 

[Ponca Dan]

If everything is made in China, how do you propose to bring the manufacturing back to the US?

The mistake people made when they bought into Trump’s lie (well, really it was Peter Navarro’s lie) that American manufacturing was being devastated by Chinese encroachment was manufacturing in America was at or near an all-time high. Trump listened to Navarro because Navarro told him what he wanted to hear. Economies and markets, at least free markets, are incredibly fluid like shifting sands at the beach. The manufacturing jobs that were taking a hit from Chinese competition were old-time 50’s and 60’s jobs best suited for emerging markets, things like steel manufacturing, for instance. Trump latched onto Navarro’s thoroughly debunked theories because it let him look like a white knight to disgruntled rust belt union workers, men who helped push him to victory. He promised his tariffs would bring those jobs back. But in reality those jobs were doomed because of automation and the economic fact that China held a comparative advantage over America because it has a billion workers willing to do rote backbreaking work for considerably less pay. As is the case every time with command economies (the tariffs are a perfect example of a command economy) the initial results looked great but eventually turned into crap. Free market economists like Donald Boudreaux told Trump exactly what would happen, and when things turned south on him in typical narcissistic belligerent fashion Trump doubled down on his mistake. The. pandemic came at the perfect time for Navarro to deflect blame to it.

But far more important than that - far more important - is we’re supposed to be a free society that honors private ownership of the means of production. The owners of that which gets manufactured are the ones who get to decide where it get manufactured. The attempt to unilaterally impose tariffs is a “big government” tactic that flies in the face of private ownership to the same degree as Bernie Sanders’ socialism. So IMO Trump’s trade war is just as despicable as AOC’s Green New Deal.

 

[aix_xpert]

The mistake people made when they bought into Trump’s lie (well, really it was Peter Navarro’s lie) that American manufacturing was being devastated by Chinese encroachment was manufacturing in America was at or near an all-time high. Trump listened to Navarro because Navarro told him what he wanted to hear. Economies and markets, at least free markets, are incredibly fluid like shifting sands at the beach. The manufacturing jobs that were taking a hit from Chinese competition were old-time 50’s and 60’s jobs best suited for emerging markets, things like steel manufacturing, for instance. Trump latched onto Navarro’s thoroughly debunked theories because it let him look like a white knight to disgruntled rust belt union workers, men who helped push him to victory. He promised his tariffs would bring those jobs back. But in reality those jobs were doomed because of automation and the economic fact that China held a comparative advantage over America because it has a billion workers willing to do rote backbreaking work for considerably less pay. As is the case every time with command economies (the tariffs are a perfect example of a command economy) the initial results looked great but eventually turned into crap. Free market economists like Donald Boudreaux told Trump exactly what would happen, and when things turned south on him in typical narcissistic belligerent fashion Trump doubled down on his mistake. The. pandemic came at the perfect time for Navarro to deflect blame to it.

But far more important than that - far more important - is we’re supposed to be a free society that honors private ownership of the means of production. The owners of that which gets manufactured are the ones who get to decide where it get manufactured. The attempt to unilaterally impose tariffs is a “big government” tactic that flies in the face of private ownership to the same degree as Bernie Sanders’ socialism. So IMO Trump’s trade war is just as despicable as AOC’s Green New Deal.

So tarriffs against state-owned Chinese companies is an attack on private enterprise and ownership. Is that really your message?

 

[Ponca Dan]

I like sarcasm. But as a defense mechanism, it pretty much states that you cant actually argue my point so you'd rather dismiss it. But I'll give you an easy question: How does a staunch conservative like Will justify recommending Clinton over Trump in 2016? Only in the eyes of a 'protect the swamp' conservative (such as a McCain or Romney) would such a position make sense. And if your goal is to protect the swamp, then you aren't a conservative.

I addressed that earlier in the thread. I have no idea what Will is thinking by endorsing Hillary. The only explanation that makes sense to me is he understands no one would ever confuse anything Hillary did with conservatism. Her administration would have been just as disastrous as Biden’s is. The demise of Hillary’s brand of government interference would strengthen the argument for conservative principles of small government and free markets. Trump, OTOH, posed a much greater danger to conservatism because people will equate MAGA policies to conservative policies. When big government MAGA policies fail, as they surely eventually would do, the Left would seize on the failure and proclaim “look where conservatism gets us!” It would set back the idea of true conservatism for generations, if not forever. That being the case Will surmised that Trump posed a much greater long term threat to the health of the country,

Now let me stipulate: this is PURE CONJECTURE on my part. But it makes far more sense to me than the idea that after decades of fighting against leftist ideas he suddenly at 80 years of age has decided Georgetown cocktail parties are his main priority.

And finally: yes, I admit sarcasm is not my strong suit.

 

[aix_xpert]

I addressed that earlier in the thread. I have no idea what Will is thinking by endorsing Hillary. The only explanation that makes sense to me is he understands no one would ever confuse anything Hillary did with conservatism. Her administration would have been just as disastrous as Biden’s is. The demise of Hillary’s brand of government interference would strengthen the argument for conservative principles of small government and free markets. Trump, OTOH, posed a much greater danger to conservatism because people will equate MAGA policies to conservative policies. When big government MAGA policies fail, as they surely eventually would do, the Left would seize on the failure and proclaim “look where conservatism gets us!” It would set back the idea of true conservatism for generations, if not forever. That being the case Will surmised that Trump posed a much greater long term threat to the health of the country,

Now let me stipulate: this is PURE CONJECTURE on my part. But it makes far more sense to me than the idea that after decades of fighting against leftist ideas he suddenly at 80 years of age has decided Georgetown cocktail parties are his main priority.

And finally: yes, I admit sarcasm is not my strong suit.

So you think that conjecture is more likely than the real fear of losing his platform by choosing to endorse Trump? Remember, we are talking about endorsing Hillary, so none of "Trump's non-conservative missteps" had actually occurred yet.

 

[Ponca Dan]

So tarriffs against state-owned Chinese companies is an attack on private enterprise and ownership. Is that really your message?

Yes, that’s my message. Government imposed tariffs are an affront to the notion of free markets and freedom in general. Trump kept telling people that “China” (presumably the Chinese government) was paying America (presumably the American government) billions of dollars because of his tariffs. It was a bald faced lie; virtually every economic analysis showed the American company that was importing the goods was footing the tariff bill, passing it on the their buyers and ultimately the American consumer was the one paying. Trump said the tariffs would reduce the trade deficit. The trade deficit went up. Trump said his trade war would be easy to win. We’re still fighting it. Trump (Navarro) scoffed at the notion other countries would retaliate with tariffs of their own. They retaliated.

 

[Ponca Dan]

So you think that conjecture is more likely than the real fear of losing his platform by choosing to endorse Trump? Remember, we are talking about endorsing Hillary, so none of "Trump's non-conservative missteps" had actually occurred yet.

Yes, I think it is much more likely. I do not think GW feared losing his platform for one minute. He’s an institution at WaPo, I suppose the only true conservative they have. He endorsed Reagan without incident. I think the powers that be at WaPo would not concern themselves too much if he endorsed Trump. I imagine they expected him to endorse Trump, and were quite surprised when he did not.

 

[aix_xpert]

Yes, that’s my message. Government imposed tariffs are an affront to the notion of free markets and freedom in general. Trump kept telling people that “China” (presumably the Chinese government) was paying America (presumably the American government) billions of dollars because of his tariffs. It was a bald faced lie; virtually every economic analysis showed the American company that was importing the goods was footing the tariff bill, passing it on the their buyers and ultimately the American consumer was the one paying. Trump said the tariffs would reduce the trade deficit. The trade deficit went up. Trump said his trade war would be easy to win. We’re still fighting it. Trump (Navarro) scoffed at the notion other countries would retaliate with tariffs of their own. They retaliated.

You keep referencing the trade deficit. Yet it DID go down in 2019, which would imply that his actions were working. Add in the 3.5% unemployment rate for the country, and the economic stability without gaudy inflation, all while the Fed raised interest rates SEVEN times. I'd argue that Trump's economic policies were the best this country has seen in ages.

The fact that 2020 spikes all those numbers due to COVID does not change those facts.

 

[aix_xpert]

Yes, I think it is much more likely. I do not think GW feared losing his platform for one minute. He’s an institution at WaPo, I suppose the only true conservative they have. He endorsed Reagan without incident. I think the powers that be at WaPo would not concern themselves too much if he endorsed Trump. I imagine they expected him to endorse Trump, and were quite surprised when he did not.

Well, given what I've read about the treatment of even moderates at these liberal rag papers, I respectfully disagree with you. Bari Weiss was an institution at the NYTimes and simply a moderate and yet was run out of town for not being liberal enough. WaPo isn't any different, and in fact, D.C. was openly hostile to anyone who was pro-Trump. I don't blame him for caving. I fully understand it. But his conservative bonafides were rightfully trashed by that decision, and there's no recovering of them.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Well, given what I've read about the treatment of even moderates at these liberal rag papers, I respectfully disagree with you. Bari Weiss was an institution at the NYTimes and simply a moderate and yet was run out of town for not being liberal enough. WaPo isn't any different, and in fact, D.C. was openly hostile to anyone who was pro-Trump. I don't blame him for caving. I fully understand it. But his conservative bonafides were rightfully trashed by that decision, and there's no recovering of them.

2019 Trade Gap is $616.8 Billion | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

The U.S. international trade deficit decreased in 2019 according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau. The deficit decreased from $627.7 billion in 2018 to $616.8 billion in 2019, as imports decreased more than exports. As a percentage of U.S. gross domestic...

www.bea.gov

 

[aix_xpert]

2019 Trade Gap is $616.8 Billion | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

The U.S. international trade deficit decreased in 2019 according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau. The deficit decreased from $627.7 billion in 2018 to $616.8 billion in 2019, as imports decreased more than exports. As a percentage of U.S. gross domestic...

www.bea.gov

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...019-for-first-time-in-six-years-idUSKBN1ZZ1WP

They even get credit to Trump's actions for the reduction.

 

[soonerinlOUisiana]

I addressed that earlier in the thread. I have no idea what Will is thinking by endorsing Hillary. The only explanation that makes sense to me is he understands no one would ever confuse anything Hillary did with conservatism. Her administration would have been just as disastrous as Biden’s is. The demise of Hillary’s brand of government interference would strengthen the argument for conservative principles of small government and free markets. Trump, OTOH, posed a much greater danger to conservatism because people will equate MAGA policies to conservative policies. When big government MAGA policies fail, as they surely eventually would do, the Left would seize on the failure and proclaim “look where conservatism gets us!” It would set back the idea of true conservatism for generations, if not forever. That being the case Will surmised that Trump posed a much greater long term threat to the health of the country,

Now let me stipulate: this is PURE CONJECTURE on my part. But it makes far more sense to me than the idea that after decades of fighting against leftist ideas he suddenly at 80 years of age has decided Georgetown cocktail parties are his main priority.

And finally: yes, I admit sarcasm is not my strong suit.

“I have no idea what he was thinking!”

I’ve used this phrase numerous times in my life, invariably with regard to someone who turned out to be a dumbfvck. George Will is an Ivy League educated dumbfvck, with great writing skills.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

The mistake people made when they bought into Trump’s lie (well, really it was Peter Navarro’s lie) that American manufacturing was being devastated by Chinese encroachment was manufacturing in America was at or near an all-time high. Trump listened to Navarro because Navarro told him what he wanted to hear. Economies and markets, at least free markets, are incredibly fluid like shifting sands at the beach. The manufacturing jobs that were taking a hit from Chinese competition were old-time 50’s and 60’s jobs best suited for emerging markets, things like steel manufacturing, for instance. Trump latched onto Navarro’s thoroughly debunked theories because it let him look like a white knight to disgruntled rust belt union workers, men who helped push him to victory. He promised his tariffs would bring those jobs back. But in reality those jobs were doomed because of automation and the economic fact that China held a comparative advantage over America because it has a billion workers willing to do rote backbreaking work for considerably less pay. As is the case every time with command economies (the tariffs are a perfect example of a command economy) the initial results looked great but eventually turned into crap. Free market economists like Donald Boudreaux told Trump exactly what would happen, and when things turned south on him in typical narcissistic belligerent fashion Trump doubled down on his mistake. The. pandemic came at the perfect time for Navarro to deflect blame to it.

But far more important than that - far more important - is we’re supposed to be a free society that honors private ownership of the means of production. The owners of that which gets manufactured are the ones who get to decide where it get manufactured. The attempt to unilaterally impose tariffs is a “big government” tactic that flies in the face of private ownership to the same degree as Bernie Sanders’ socialism. So IMO Trump’s trade war is just as despicable as AOC’s Green New Deal.

That's a fair assessment, and I would agree and disagree, but we would be at that for some time because we each have different takes on something that is hard to prove one way or the other. The problem I have with your answer is that it didn't answer the question. You gave me every reason why you didn't like tariffs, but what would you do to bring back industry to America?

 

[Syskatine]

So tarriffs against state-owned Chinese companies is an attack on private enterprise and ownership. Is that really your message?

Yes, that’s my message. Government imposed tariffs are an affront to the notion of free markets and freedom in general. Trump kept telling people that “China” (presumably the Chinese government) was paying America (presumably the American government) billions of dollars because of his tariffs. It was a bald faced lie; virtually every economic analysis showed the American company that was importing the goods was footing the tariff bill, passing it on the their buyers and ultimately the American consumer was the one paying. Trump said the tariffs would reduce the trade deficit. The trade deficit went up. Trump said his trade war would be easy to win. We’re still fighting it. Trump (Navarro) scoffed at the notion other countries would retaliate with tariffs of their own. They retaliated.

Yes, Trump lied as usual and he probably did more harm than good.

However, you didn't really answer what we're supposed to do if our businesses are trying to participate in a market that's being manipulated by a sovereign government. If the free market is out the window, why do you insist that American business still play by free market rules?

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

Yes, Trump lied as usual and he probably did more harm than good.

However, you didn't really answer what we're supposed to do if our businesses are trying to participate in a market that's being manipulated by a sovereign government. If the free market is out the window, why do you insist that American business still play by free market rules?

OMG I actually agree with sys. I'll be headed to the doctor to get checked out.

 

[Syskatine]

OMG I actually agree with sys. I'll be headed to the doctor to get checked out.

I'm in my neurologist's office now getting scanned.

 

[aix_xpert]

Yes, Trump lied as usual and he probably did more harm than good.

However, you didn't really answer what we're supposed to do if our businesses are trying to participate in a market that's being manipulated by a sovereign government. If the free market is out the window, why do you insist that American business still play by free market rules?

This is going to hurt, but I'm about to like a @Syskatine post.

As for doing more harm than good, all I can say is that his economic numbers pre-Covid were the greatest the US has seen in decades.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

This is going to hurt, but I'm about to like a @Syskatine post.

As for doing more harm than good, all I can say is that his economic numbers pre-Covid were the greatest the US has seen in decades.

Just got back from the doctor's office. They shoved a covid test up my nose. Turns out agreeing with Sys is a symptom of covid. Luckily it turned out negative, so I dodged a bullet there.