Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Breaking: CNN Calls Race for Trump & Sanders
With just a few percent in, too:
Published in PoliticsRepublican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders have cruised to victories in the New Hampshire primary, CNN projects, in a pair of results that will shake up the presidential race and confirm the strength of anti-establishment candidates. The billionaire reality star’s victory restores the mantle of a winner to his campaign after he trailed in second last week in Iowa and validates him as a powerful new force in American politics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTh2DwlR-N0Sanders, meanwhile, delivered a painful blow to Democratic national front-runner Hillary Clinton after she edged out the slimmest of victories in Iowa. His win ensures that the fight for the Democratic nomination will only intensify heading into Nevada, South Carolina and the Super Tuesday contest and may exacerbate signs of internal discontent about the structure of Clinton’s campaign that are already emerging.
How does one implement labor protectionism in a global economy without also enacting trade protectionism? Who determines what jobs get protected? How? Why is it governments job to do so? Where in the Constitution is the government granted the power to do these things?
Here is a CNN report on the tiff.
My favorite pull- “Republicans said before the document even arrived they would break the long precedent of hearing from the President’s budget chief as they draft their own fiscal blueprint.”
and “The decision enraged Democrats, who said the decision broke four decades of precedent.”
This all took place during the NH primary.
You do realize our Founders invented a form of protectionism? The so-called American School of the 19th century? Protectionism has always been constitutional; the Constitution clearly gives the federal government the right to levy tariffs and control the borders.
And it’s not a matter of picking and choosing jobs. It’s about engineering a tight labor market; once the government has restricted the supply of labor, employers will sort out how best to allocate workers themselves.
Picking and choosing which jobs to protect is why so many upper middle class professions are so heavily subsidized. Of course I’m not advocating that.
Yes, I’d missed that. I’d seen Ryan saying the tax hike idea was dead on arrival, but I would have taken that for granted. And of course Ryan is making the most of it politically — a rare chance to give Republicans a hint of what Obama would be doing if Ryan et al weren’t in his way.
Again you’re talking about trade protectionism to enforce a restricted labor market. Do you really think that’s going to work in a modern globalized economy?
Sorry I missed this earlier. You’re not entirely wrong, but I would argue that you’re letting your perfect be the enemy of the good here. I see no path towards the minarchist constitutional state that you and I prefer through one single President. Even if we elect Ludwig Rand von Hayek president tomorrow and populate congress entirely with attendees from Freedom Fest, they will not return us to our platonic ideal of government. What matters is that we are moving in the right direction. Reagan didn’t achieve all of his limited government goals like eliminating the Dept. of Education, but he did move the country rightwards – that matters. My belief is that we need a President that will move us in that direction while showing the people the positives of limited government. People scare easily. People don’t like change. Thus change has to be gradual and the positives need to be emphasized. Within any given Presidency there is probably capital for one or two big pushes (Reagan had Taxes and defeating the Soviets, Obama had Healthcare). It will take many presidents in a row to get us where you and I would like. To that end I think its more important to get someone elected who will win on one or two important conservative issues rather than try and force Ludwig Rand von Hayek into the general election which would just result in President Hilary Sanders.
I would add to this that there are two things that matter. There are the goals we seek, and there is the desperate urgency of preserving what we have left. If we think that is not worth our while we have no understanding of how much we have to lose.
So who is moving that way?
I would say that either President Cruz or President Rubio would move us in the right direction. President Walker sure would have.