Connect with us

Economy

Tariffs and bailouts: Necessary evils if conservatives want free trade to return sooner

Published

on

Tariffs and bailouts Necessary evils if conservatives want free trade to return sooner

Republicans can debate all day whether they can fend off election day backlash from the trade war with China by bailing out farmers in key red states, but there’s no way to argue that these are conservative moves. They’re not, and the GOP will have to reconcile that well beyond the 2020 election.

At this stage, true conservatives are being forced into a major conundrum. Do we ignore the “fair trade” tactics that people like Senators Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer have been promoting for years and support the GOP for fear of Democrats, or do we stick to our guns and demand free trade continue to do what it has done for decades – drive American prosperity?

It isn’t popular in today’s politically charged atmosphere to be a conservative who opposes anything the President does. Few Republicans in DC have the political capital accumulated to enable them that luxury. Many who could survive getting on the President’s bad side by speaking out against his progressive view on trade have still chosen to support him even if that means simply avoiding the question. The taciturn approach seems to be the most popular one among free trade conservatives, including most in the House Freedom Caucus and some staunch conservatives in the Senate.

Others are taking the approach of blaming China, and while there is definitely truth in this notion, it doesn’t change the fact that the solution the President is employing not only goes against fiscal conservatism, but also fails to address the actual problem with trade. His constant hammering of trade deficits is a leftist talking point that is demonstrably untrue; when a nation’s economy is doing well, it will accumulate a trade deficit because it has the money to import. In other words, conventional wisdom has always shown trade deficits are a positive indicator of a country’s financial health.

But what the President says, perhaps for the sake of making it easily understandable to voters, isn’t actually what he’s fighting. He’s pushing against reliance on other nations for resources and labor as part of his goal to bring American jobs back home. He wants people to buy American and businesses to rely on each other instead of importing so much. These are goals that make sense until we look at actual trends of a rising global economy and apply the reality that we’re a consumer nation. With those concepts in the mix, it’s clear the President’s goals and plan to achieve them are two or three decades too late.

For the past three years, I’ve posted at least a dozen articles promoting free trade and reminding Republicans over 80% of them opposed Schumer’s Chinese tariff proposals as recently as 2015. Once the President embraced the Chuck-China plan, suddenly most in the GOP forgot what fiscal conservatism and unadulterated capitalism actually meant. I’ve invoked economists like Thomas Sowell. I’ve pointed to clear indicators that the economy is thriving despite tariffs and that if we stuck with free trade the economy would actually be doing even better. But the masses were unswayed. More importantly, the White House was unswayed.

The United States cannot survive a trade war for long because as prices go up, Americans will get antsy. The only solace is knowing China will be impacted more. That’s what the President is banking on.

Like it or not, that’s what conservatives have to bank on as well. We’re on this path and the President isn’t going to back down based on conservatives speaking out. It’s difficult for me to say that since I’m a huge proponent of keeping our politicians heading in the right direction, including our often-malleable President, but he’s pulled the trigger and placed his future in the hands of Xi Jinping, so we’re just going to have to ride out the storm.

We may be able to survive as an overall economy, but there are people who will be affected in the short term DC needs to protect from a political perspective if Republicans don’t want a bloodbath in 2020. The most obvious are the farmers, which means the other leftist economic policy must be invoked as well, namely bailouts. I can argue all day about how bailouts and subsidies are the least American financial concept in existence, but again I’m forced to stand down from coffee shop arguments over them and focus on political realities. If we’re stuck with tariffs, we’re stuck with bailouts. Thankfully, there’s a chance that if they are done properly, the revenue from the tariffs can pay for the bailouts. It’s a conservative solution for a progressive problem that shouldn’t have to be offered, but at this point there aren’t many other options.

The bottom line is this: If conservatives rightly want to put an end to tariffs, we need to either support them or stand down in arguing against them. China will be looking for weakening support for the President to decide whether or not to make a deal. If support for the President remains strong, especially in his caucus, then China will be more inclined to come to the table. We know mainstream media will bemoan the exact same tariffs they would have wholeheartedly supported if a Democrat proposed them, so we already have that uphill battle to fight. But if there’s contention within the GOP itself, China will be more emboldened to ride out the storm until a Democrat is in the White House.

Don’t get me started on the irony of a world where China’s hoping a Democrat will come in and bring back free trade.

When you’re going through hell, keep going. Winston Churchill was talking about more pressing matters when he said those words, but they apply to fiscal conservatives today.

If conservatives really want free trade to reemerge as our fiscal mantra, we have to push forward with these tariffs and bailouts. The sooner they can be effective, the sooner we’ll get back to doing things the right way.

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax won’t work

Published

on

Elizabeth Warrens wealth tax wont work

There’s a popular sentiment that’s present in many circles across America. The “rich” are the bad guys who plot against the common American to keep us down. In some cases, this is actually true; wealth has been used by many throughout history to buy favors, subvert prosperity for the economic middle- and lower-classes, and steer governments to do things that benefit them while hurting others. But corruption is much less of a driving force for the hatred towards the rich than envy. Few people would take the “moral high road” and turn down opportunities that would allow them to be rich. Just ask Bernie Sanders.

But this envy of the rich is manifesting into something much more dangerous than we’ve seen in the recent past. Senator Elizabeth Warren, a top contender for the Democratic nomination for president, has built her campaign around offering as much free stuff as possible and claiming that she’ll pay for it all through her wealth tax, which she currently proposes as 2% on any household with more than $50 million and 3% on any household worth more than a billion dollars. It’s a yearly tax that is designed to help her get elected. It isn’t designed to work, and either she knows this but hopes the people won’t see it, or she doesn’t realize it and she’s an idiot.

Wealth taxes have never worked. They hamper the ability of actual job-builders to build jobs. They also incentivize the rich to take their money elsewhere, which has a cascading effect on the economy when done in bulk. But perhaps most importantly is that the revenues projected to be generating from them never come to pass.

The saddest part is based on Warren’s own calculations of how much revenue she’ll generate compared to non-partisan estimates of how much her proposals will cost, it isn’t even close. We’re not talking about being off by millions, billions, or even trillions. If she gets her way, we’ll experience a budget shortfall of tens or even hundreds of trillions of dollars over a decade. This isn’t insignificant, but it may be part of the plan.

Who would plan for economic collapse? Someone who wants to install Modern Monetary Theory in America. That’s the only realistic conclusion that one can come to unless we’re to believe she’s a total liar. And that’s possible. She could be so eager to be a one-term president that she’s willing to make promises she knows are impossible to keep. But more likely, she’s going to try to keep those promises by taking us down a path in which we print money to pay our bills, leading to hyperinflation and the total collapse of the United States of America as a viable nation.

If that happens, she’ll have the ultimate form of socialism in which everyone is suffering equally. Well, everyone other than the elite.

This video by Reason breaks down other examples of hour Elizabeth Warren’s proposed wealth tax is either based on ignorance, deceit, or both. Her calculations are off by a few decimal points, but in a post-truth society, Democrats don’t care.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Rashida Tlaib says $15/hr minimum wage is too low. She wants $20/hr.

Published

on

Rashida Tlaib says 15hr minimum wage is too low She wants 20hr

There is nothing more progressive than taking something radical and destructive and doubling down on the spirit of the proposal. That’s what Representative Rashida Tlaib did today when she said the movement that’s pushing for $15 per hour nationwide may be behind on the times. $15 per hour is what whey needed before, but since the costs of milk and eggs have gone up, the new minimum wage should be $20 per hour.

It has already been established by the non-partisan CBO that $15 per hour would kill off 1.3 million jobs. While most Democrats balked at the number and said it was too high, the radical progressives saw it as an opportunity – there’s plenty of room to kill off even more jobs, from their reckoning.

Costs of many items are going up, but as the Washington Free Beacon pointed out, eggs and milk are actually lower than their peaks in 2015 and 2014, respectively, around the time when the “fight for $15” started ramping up. As usual, Tlaib is making things up to support her points.

The real minimum wage is zero, as anyone unemployed knows. But jobs have been rising across the board since the President took office. The economy is humming. In many industries, there is a shortage of workers able to fill positions, forcing many companies to raise wages organically. That’s how it should be. We don’t need Washington DC placing a blanket minimum on the country, especially considering the economic norms in West Virginia are very different from the economic norms in California. Leave it to the states to regulate the economies properly.

This is just further evidence that Rashida Tlaib and “The Squad” aren’t interested in helping America. They want to tear it down and rebuild it in the Justice Democrats’ image. This is no longer a secret, but it’s an under-reported fact.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

The real reason Kamala Harris and others keep dodging on Medicare-for-All funding

Published

on

The real reason Kamala Harris and others keep dodging on Medicare-for-All funding

Arguably the first major “dumb” moment for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was when she replied to a question about paying the $32 trillion price tag associated with Medicare-for-All. She said, “You just pay for it.”

Conservatives were laughing at the response while many Independents and even some Democrats were scratching their collective heads. But she meant exactly what we said. Let’s put a pin in that for a moment and move on to an interview Kamala Harris did with CNN.

Even the Democrat-friendly CNN reporter couldn’t help but press Harris about how she plans to pay for Medicare-for-All without raising taxes on the middle class. Bernie Sanders has acknowledged he’d have to raise taxes to pay for Medicare-for-All. What strange math does Harris know that Sanders does not? Is it simply artful dodging of the question over and over again as the Senator kept calling it an “investment”? Is she just pandering, knowing darn well she’ll have to raise taxes on everyone in order to fund socialized medicine but pretending like she won’t? Or is she being absolutely serious?

I’m going with that. She’s saying what she means. In essence, she’s saying what AOC said. Harris is just going to have the U.S. government pay for it even if tax dollars won’t cover it.

At this point one might be thinking that both Harris and Ocasio-Cortez are delusional. If that were the case, I wouldn’t be too worried. But they’re not delusional, at least not to the point that they don’t really know what they’re insinuating by saying the government is going to “invest” in Medicare-for-All and we’re just going to pay for it. There’s only one way to do this without drastic tax increases. It’s called Modern Monetary Theory and AOC has been on board with the disastrous concept since before she was elected. Now, it seems Harris is going to invoke the same methodology to pay for her version of Medicare-for-All and whatever else she has up her sleeve.

In essence, Modern Monetary Theory erases the fear of budget deficits and skyrocketing national debt by printing money. And more money. And again. Rinse. Repeat.

It’s the precursor for hyperinflation, though its proponents claim otherwise. They’ll tell you we’re already running trillion dollar deficits and nothing bad is happening, so why not keep going? Why not run five trillion dollar deficits? Or more? The government and the Fed have the power to keep printing as much money as they want, and as long as the U.S. Dollar is the world reserve currency, there’s really no way for hyperinflation to set in.

But it will. There’s no possible way to avoid it once the world takes note because they’ll instantly seek other avenues to replace the Dollar. That includes OPEC and the designation of the petrodollar being shifted. Nobody wants to rely on a currency that is being devalued by its own government. They’ll bail. And when they do, hyperinflation will set in.

When radical progressive politicians give strange responses about how they’re going to pay for their huge projects, take them at their word when they say they’ll just pay for it. They have a plan in mind that’s more dangerous than anything our economy has faced.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending