re: There are a lot of "conservatives" who want to end the MAGA/America First Populism.

quote:

---

If you can’t afford goods made in the United States, I suggest you work harder and invest better, not demand the ability to fund China

---

Everything you buy is made in the US if that's an option?

quote:

---

Like protectionist tariffs to prop up inefficient American industry and woke corporations, and workers who are unwilling to adapt?

---

Those woke corporations are multinationals with no loyalty to the United States and you know it. Make the bastards keep the jobs here. And a social safety net has never referred to tariffs, it’s unemployment insurance and welfare and retraining programs, all things we currently pay for because you can’t stop funding the Chinese government

quote:

---

Everything you buy is made in the US if that's an option?

---

Absolutely

quote:

---

Absolutely

---

What kind of iced tea do you drink?

quote:

---

What kind of iced tea do you drink?

---

I drink coke. And even so, you are ignoring the initial caveat that I buy American when it’s an option. Someone drinking sweet tea isn’t betraying the country if there isn’t an an American option to get their tea from

Globalist that believe in this world govt concept- means they want unelected people controlling their lives. A Globalist wants to hand over everything the US has built and let a set of random people like Karl Schlop crew to make all the rules. That is a religion as one would have to put a lot of Faith in a few people to tell the world what we’re going to do. Crazy shite. Definitely not a fricking Democracy.

Amen

In my opinion, the debate between libertarianism and populism usually comes down to a debate between philosophy and practicality, pragmatism and degrees. Libertarianism has a serious “no true Scotsman” problem within its ranks. Libertarian is a big umbrella that encompasses everything from literal anarchists to communists who want more individual liberty. So, deciding on what level of government should exist while applying libertarian principles to economics is a constant subject of debate. The reality is that the libertarian ideal is hard to agree upon and is likely different depending on which libertarian you ask.

A lot of libertarian concepts make perfect sense within the context of a single country, but start to face severe challenges when applied to foreign policy, particularly with communist countries utilizing literal slave pabor.

As such, libertarianism on an international scale tends to lead to a regulatory race to the bottom that impoverishes American workers in exchange for building up Communist nations. However, the same concepts that built the American middle class in the first place, and indeed the middle classes of all Industrialized nations, works the same in Communist countries if you wait long enough.

In muly opinion, the real problem with capitalism verses socialism vs communism is patience. How long are you willing to wait for the invisible hand of the market to work? How long are you willing to endure pain to build something sustainable?

Our current system in the United States uses the federal reserve and entitlements to cushion the blow of recessions wo that they don’t “feel” as bad for the average person. This tends to cause the recessions to last longer, but results in significantly less starvation. It also keeps the booms from being as productive, but hopefully stretches them out. The idea is to somehow moderate the economy to make it less prone to wild swings that physically harm workers. A communist economy is all about trying to eliminate all suffering and inevitably leading to shortages and mass suffering. Libertarianism is all about creating a relatively free market where it booms and busts as its naturally prone to do until it naturally self-regulates at a position of equilibrium. Communist countries can subsidize their industries to undercut American industries to corner the market. They can do this far longer than market economies can. Eventually, communism always fails at this, but it can take decades to exhaust them. Americans, meanwhile, will spend decades having to find new employment for workers trained to make that resource, have valuable facilities sitting mothballed, and be subject to supply chain disruptions. This is all the more pressing when war enters the equation.

There are many supplies a nation needs to adequately wage a modern war. If one lacks one of those, they will have to find somewhere to get it or they will not be able to wage war. This concept was on full display during WWII, especially with regards to some of Japan and Germany’s more desperate moves to seize regions housing critical resources like oil and rubber.

Libertarians tend to look at competitive advantage and free trade as the ultimate long term booms, as they are, but ignore how important supply chains are during periods of temporary disruptions. Having a diverse local economy that can produce everything it needs if inadvertently cut off from the outside world strengthens a nation’s leverage on the international stage. This can come at a cost of productivity, but in the unlikely event supply chains are severed due to war or natural disasters, a nation deprived of a critical resource like mocrochips or energy, will simply collapse if that resource cannot be supplied readily in time. This almost happened to the UK and Germany last winter with natural gas supply disruptions. Their economies were only “saved” by a mild winter.

America’s free-market approach to communist china has created a Chinese middle class which is starting to demand better working conditions and individual liberties. This has caused Chinese manufacturing to no longer be the cheapest game in town as more and more manufacturers are leaving China for locations offering cheaper labor or significant shipping savings. The free market is (albeit slowly) building a Chinese middle class until they are a sustainable market for goods and no longer competitive with America’s middle class. The same is true for Mexico. However, this is also being accomplished by importing tens of millions of Mexico and Central America’s underclass into the US.

I don’t believe Americans have the patience to wait out the free market making the entire world a sustainable place. By the time it is, most populists assume the U.S. will be bankrupted and insolvent and its population impoverished. Populists believe that entitlements are necessary to save people from consequences of bad economic choices and circumstances. Mass-immigration can either make those entitlements more or less sustainable VERY quickly depending on how they are run. Immigration also places increased downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on costs of housing. This is another area where the libertarian ideal in the short term would result in massive pain, so the populist response is to pull the handbrake.

I believe that our current government could use a LOT more libertarian concepts. I believe right wing populism to actually be MORE libertarian than the status quo (not to be confused with actually libertarian in principle). Libertarians should embrace this right wing populist agenda in order to move the U.S. closer to the direction libertarians ultimately want to go, trading incremental progress for perfect unworkable principles.

In libertarian economics, the real winning formula is time. Over time, free market capitalism generates more wealth and less poverty than any other system. Libertarians should learn to embrace that philosophy with respect to politics and make the slow necessary changes to grind out wins and push America further and further towards the free market end-goal.

quote:

---

But there is, the Charleston Tea Company. It's just expensive. You can also get US grown rice; do you buy it? And those are just two items; I find it extremely difficult to believe your claim. You wear US made jeans and shoes?

---

I do actually buy my rice domestically and says the clothes I’m wearing were manufactured domestically. I do own and consume things that weren’t built in the Us but I try not to