By Vincent Cook
By appealing to tariffs and other forms of economic regulation, Republicans have tossed aside any commitment to free market economics.
related posts
33 sats \ 2 replies \ @IamSINGLE 10 Aug
They are actually same. Republicans will promise to build and Dems will promise to build but in reality they will only build for themselves and destroy for everyone else.
reply
32 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
Woods' Law:
reply
28 sats \ 0 replies \ @IamSINGLE 10 Aug
Yes, šÆ
reply
40 sats \ 12 replies \ @Satosora 10 Aug
"marks the entrenchment of an organized ānational conservativeā movement within the party that espouses an anti-free-market ideology, overtly scorning individual liberty in favor of a powerful nation-state.
This right here is very dangerous.
Having our freedoms encroached upon.
reply
20 sats \ 11 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
I agree. I've found a lot of the rhetoric from the right, as they sense power coming their way, rather disconcerting.
reply
40 sats \ 7 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Neither party is laissez faire or classical liberal
Which rhetoric do you find disconcerting?
reply
21 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
Growing support for ramping up domestic policing and surveillance, mostly. It's in the name of dealing with illegal immigration and women crossing state lines for abortions, but that's not relevant. Giving the state increased powers always backfires.
reply
24 sats \ 5 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
I see
The FBI and intelligence agencies are not political neutral. They definitely favor Democrats now.
reply
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
That's true, but when Republicans actually have power they seem to forget that and increase the powers held by those agencies.
reply
36 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Certainly under W Bush
Under Trump many agencies were trying to undermine or sabotage him
Like his cabinet
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
That's why I said "actually have power". I don't think Trump ever did, but I think they're sensing that it will be different this time.
view replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 10 Aug
I feel each new president always tries to increase their power in the agency by appointing key people.
But each time it seems to backfire.
Either with incompetency or corruption.
reply
31 sats \ 2 replies \ @Satosora 10 Aug
I feel the right is trying to push as much as they can while they have the momentum.
reply
41 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
I wish they'd push peace and freedom, rather than their true authoritarian desires.
There's a saying that Republicans campaign as Ron Paul and then govern as John McCain.
reply
23 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 10 Aug
If you have Ron Paul in office, you are already winning.
reply
59 sats \ 13 replies \ @riberet19 10 Aug
It seems that both paths for the United States condemn it.
reply
38 sats \ 10 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Kamala is literally a communist. She had to most radical left voting record as a Senator, like Bernie Sanders.
reply
58 sats \ 0 replies \ @riberet19 10 Aug
Clearly I prefer the right-wing path for the US, but it doesn't look like it's going to be a big gamble either.
reply
47 sats \ 8 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
I don't think she's ideological at all. She's just a psychopath seeking power and in California the easiest path is on the left.
reply
36 sats \ 7 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
How do you explain her national campaign in 2019 or her current campaign?
reply
31 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
She's scrubbed any mention of actual policies from her campaign materials and her campaign is leaking to the media that she doesn't support any of that stuff anymore. I'd say that speaks to my hypothesis.
In 2019, she was probably trying to ride the socialist momentum from Bernie's 2016 campaign. I don't think she failed because of policies. People just don't like her.
reply
26 sats \ 5 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
You donāt actually believe her?
Every leftist politician pretends to be a moderate than governs left.
Does she support fracking in Pennsylvania?
Is she going to restart keystone XL?
Her campaign is trying to deceive gullible voters
reply
31 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
I'm not saying she won't govern left. I'm saying she doesn't have any ideological commitment to it.
She'll do whatever increases her power and in general socialist policies grant more power to politicians.
reply
24 sats \ 3 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
The people who selected her are hard left.
By selecting Walz instead of Shapiro she also demonstrated she is controlled by the hard left.
view replies
37 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
Yeah, we're pretty boned, in the short term.
reply
51 sats \ 0 replies \ @riberet19 10 Aug
I think that these 4 years of mandate are going to be hard whoever governs, the US needs better candidates with better ideas.
reply
60 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
We donāt have to speculate. Harris will continue Biden agenda. Any change will be more radically left.
Trump will continue what he did during his first term.
reply
31 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
Getting perpetually rugged by his own appointees?
reply
37 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Possibly
I mean his economic and fiscal policies
reply
41 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
Fair enough. We will likely get better energy policy, immediately.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Kamala is literally a Marxist: equity or equality of outcome
Her only excuse is she doesn't know what she is saying
reply
25 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 10 Aug
Whether blue or red - both options will leave us in a situation where we are increasing our fiscal deficits and we are further becoming enslaved.
reply
41 sats \ 4 replies \ @didiplaywell 10 Aug
The very important thing to read from this attitude from the republican party is that if they take this postures, undiscernible from the democrat party, it's solely because the Overton Window commands them to, and thus, it's because people themselves have lost all sense on governance and economy, and focus solely on "manners" and "morals", the reason the debate has degraded from "republicanism vs socialists" to "conservatives and liberals" (both equally socialists).
The exact same thing happened here, and Milei was the first one to bring that up and make it evident, calling our republican faction "leftists with manners".
reply
41 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
This is them showing their true statist colors and lust for power. Americans may value freedom to do what they want, but they also have a serious problem with wanting to dictate what everyone else can do.
reply
56 sats \ 2 replies \ @didiplaywell 10 Aug
The current position of the Overton Window may for sure be coincident with what bureaucrats want the state to be, but should it shift you will see politicians, the car sellers, immediately shift their speeches too, for it will be politically profitable. Bureaucrats will still not support it, but politicians can rely on the power of public support and will sell to people what people demands. We were able to see that in real time happening here: as Milei shifted the Overton Window by miles, it was so much that even the socialists had to start endorsing free markets in their speeches. Even if it was solely by word, it does shows how much public opinion weighs on what politicians and bureaucrats can or can not do.
What you say about yankee americans applies equally anywhere, anytime. It's not less of a truth here. It's so easy to lose perception of implications when you accept actions that seem to occur far away. That effect is one of many items listed in the "The Inevitability of Socialism" text I'm working on, and making that more evident is part of the parallel work I'm working on.
reply
41 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 10 Aug
When Republicans are out of power, they sound like Milei. It's when they sense they may actually get to wield it that their tone changes.
reply
41 sats \ 0 replies \ @didiplaywell 10 Aug
That's due to a common syndrome in politics, so much it haves a name: the infamous Baglini's Theorem
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @160ed04091 10 Aug
Supporters of Republican economic policies often emphasize the benefits of economic growth, arguing that a robust economy ultimately benefits everyone. Critics, however, may focus on issues of economic inequality and the distribution of wealth, questioning whether growth is equally shared
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Aug
Growth has never been equally shared in US or world history
Not even in USSR was growth equally shared
Sharing is the opposite of caring: look at any socialist country such as Venezuela
reply