Econ 101 for Presidential Candidates (and VN) - CATO

#201
#201
Vol8188 said:
Then don't allow access to your property, that's your right. But you have no right to tell me who can and cannot access mine.

You fear of immigrants is irrelevant. Milliions of Americans want to hire and/or rent to them and you have no right to tell those people what they can or cannot do with their property.
Click to expand...
First of all is it not a 'fear' of immigrants, and secondly the problem is with illegal immigrants. Moron.
 
#202
#202
FLVOL69 said:
We do if they're illegal, how about we start with getting the millions of Americans employed first?
Click to expand...

Hire the best regardless of nationality. I want the best people working for me, not the most American.

But if you stop wasting money on border control, people could afford to hire.
 
#204
#204
Vol8188 said:
Hire the best regardless of nationality. I want the best people working for me, not the most American.

But if you stop wasting money on border control, people could afford to hire.
Click to expand...

I don't care if you come from mars, just come in the front door and do it legally!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#206
#206
SpaceCoastVol said:
First of all is it not a 'fear' of immigrants, and secondly the problem is with illegal immigrants. Moron.
Click to expand...

I'm advocating for all immigration to be legal. If it's not fear, then explain. Why should we not allow all immigration?
 
#207
#207
SpaceCoastVol said:
Bullsh!t.. You want the cheapest people working for you.

wtf does that even mean?
Click to expand...

Here you go on your socialist, "free markets are bad" bs. What's wrong with that? You sound like a like a lib crying over Walmart. If you can create the same product for a cheaper price, that's a great thing?

Wtf does that mean? It means border control isn't free. Border patrol is paid for by taxes. Lower taxes and you create jobs.
 
#208
#208
FLVOL69 said:
I don't care if you come from mars, just come in the front door and do it legally!
Click to expand...

Why is the legality so significant? Last I checked we all hate politicians and lawyers but most of you seem to worship the arbitrary laws they create.

If your laws limit the freedoms of others you should have a damn good reason for why they are needed. I'm still waiting
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#209
#209
FLVOL69 said:
It means more undocumented Dems and more terrorists crossing over unchecked ..
Click to expand...

Step away from the Breit Bart....terrorist are not crossing our border and trump didn't lose the popular vote due to undocumented aliens. It's embarrassing our future president would even make such a baseless claim
 
#210
#210
Vol8188 said:
Why is the legality so significant? Last I checked we all hate politicians and lawyers but most of you seem to worship the arbitrary laws they create.

If your laws limit the freedoms of others you should have a damn good reason for why they are needed. I'm still waiting
Click to expand...
So basically anarchy is the way to go. Gotcha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#213
#213
Vol8188 said:
How did we get from questioning every law that limits freedom to pure anarchy?
Click to expand...
Because that is the next stop. I should have the freedom to shoot my rifle wherever, whenever and at whomever I want. My freedom.
 
#214
#214
SpaceCoastVol said:
Who defines what is a "damn good reason"?
Click to expand...

The courts and society. Unfortunately our society will accept any law because we've been convinced that it's somehow patriotic to listen to authority and accept whatever laws they create.

But before we can determine if something's a damn good reason, you'd have to give some reasons.
 
#215
#215
SpaceCoastVol said:
Because that is the next stop. I should have the freedom to shoot my rifle wherever, whenever and at whomever I want. My freedom.
Click to expand...

Your freedom does not include the freedom to harm another person. That's where government comes in. The only role of the government should be to protect freedoms. Anything else should not be a function of government.
 
#216
#216
Vol8188 said:
The courts and society. Unfortunately our society will accept any law because we've been convinced that it's somehow patriotic to listen to authority and accept whatever laws they create.

But before we can determine if something's a damn good reason, you'd have to give some reasons.
Click to expand...

Vol8188 said:
Your freedom does not include the freedom to harm another person. That's where government comes in. The only role of the government should be to protect freedoms. Anything else should not be a function of government.
Click to expand...


So you acknowledge that 'somebody' has to decide those boundaries. It just so happens that you define those boundaries as "arbitrary" if they don't mesh with your desires to hire a cheaper labor force. Your definition of a "free market" doesn't raise the standard of living, it lowers it for far more people. Except you.

But what is interesting too is that you say I don't have the freedom to harm another person. What are you basing that on?

Oh, and I do agree with you. I should be able to fly stoned if I want to. You know. As long as nobody is harmed, because that shouldn't be a government function to regulate that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#217
#217
SpaceCoastVol said:
So you acknowledge that 'somebody' has to decide those boundaries. It just so happens that you define those boundaries as "arbitrary" if they don't mesh with your desires to hire a cheaper labor force. Your definition of a "free market" doesn't raise the standard of living, it lowers it for far more people. Except you.

But what is interesting too is that you say I don't have the freedom to harm another person. What are you basing that on?
Click to expand...

They seem to be extremely arbitrary since you provide reasoning for why they are needed.

If you are right and I'm wrong, if this would actually lower the standard of living, then I guess you believe increasing minimum wage raises the standard of living?

What am I basing that on? Protecting people and their property from others is the entire reason we've established governments. To protect individual freedoms
 
#218
#218
Vol8188 said:
They seem to be extremely arbitrary since you provide reasoning for why they are needed.

If you are right and I'm wrong, if this would actually lower the standard of living, then I guess you believe increasing minimum wage raises the standard of living?

What am I basing that on? Protecting people and their property from others is the entire reason we've established governments. To protect individual freedoms
Click to expand...
There is a line where individual freedoms have to take a backseat to the greater good. So now all we have to do is define "the greater good".

The minimum wage argument is a very interesting one. I could argue that it does, but that would be disingenuous. It is a very short term fix, and one that I am totally against. But the interesting thing is that when wages are raised, those low income people all of a sudden have to start paying taxes. That is the ONLY good thing about it.
 
#219
#219
SpaceCoastVol said:
There is a line where individual freedoms have to take a backseat to the greater good. So now all we have to do is define "the greater good".

The minimum wage argument is a very interesting one. I could argue that it does, but that would be disingenuous. It is a very short term fix, and one that I am totally against. But the interesting thing is that when wages are raised, those low income people all of a sudden have to start paying taxes. That is the ONLY good thing about it.
Click to expand...

That's been the entire goal. Explain why it is beneficial to use tax payer money for border enforcement. That's what I've been asking for a long time now. But we have to be careful with taking the rights of business owners for the "greater good" that's a slippery slope to communism.

If you don't support raising the minimum wage, you shouldn't support the minimum wage at all. It's entire purpose is to artificially inflate wages above market value.
 
#220
#220
Vol8188 said:
That's been the entire goal. Explain why it is beneficial to use tax payer money for border enforcement. That's what I've been asking for a long time now. But we have to be careful with taking the rights of business owners for the "greater good" that's a slippery slope to communism.

If you don't support raising the minimum wage, you shouldn't support the minimum wage at all. It's entire purpose is to artificially inflate wages above market value.
Click to expand...
I don't support the minimum wage any more than I support Social Security as the sole means of retirement.

So why don't you then tell me why it's beneficial to use taxpayer money for roads. Or law enforcement in general.

Enter the AnCap crowd in 3...2...1............
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#221
#221
SpaceCoastVol said:
I don't support the minimum wage any more than I support Social Security as the sole means of retirement.

So why don't you then tell me why it's beneficial to use taxpayer money for roads. Or law enforcement in general.

Enter the AnCap crowd in 3...2...1............
Click to expand...

If you don't support minimum wage, then you'll have to explain why immigration would be bad.

Law enforcement if done properly would be protecting rights. Roads could be privately funded, but there's a million things more important that government is doing but shouldn't that should be addressed before raising that question.
 
#222
#222
Vol8188 said:
If you don't support minimum wage, then you'll have to explain why immigration would be bad.

Law enforcement if done properly would be protecting rights. Roads could be privately funded, but there's a million things more important that government is doing but shouldn't that should be addressed before raising that question.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with immigration. But for sake of argument, let's open the doors wide and free to any and all mooslim immigrants from the middle east that want to come here. Good idea, no?
 
#223
#223
Vol8188 said:
Why is the legality so significant? Last I checked we all hate politicians and lawyers but most of you seem to worship the arbitrary laws they create.

If your laws limit the freedoms of others you should have a damn good reason for why they are needed. I'm still waiting
Click to expand...

They worship the state. Bottom line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#224
#224
SpaceCoastVol said:
Because that is the next stop. I should have the freedom to shoot my rifle wherever, whenever and at whomever I want. My freedom.
Click to expand...

Take it one law at a time. Even I am not advocating total anarchy. I'm compromising.

Why do you resist small government so much?
 
#225
#225
SpaceCoastVol said:
So you acknowledge that 'somebody' has to decide those boundaries. It just so happens that you define those boundaries as "arbitrary" if they don't mesh with your desires to hire a cheaper labor force. Your definition of a "free market" doesn't raise the standard of living, it lowers it for far more people. Except you.
Click to expand...

Support this. You're talking about the economics but arguing against the experts. They will teach you in econ 101 that you are wrong. Did you miss that class?

Oh, and I do agree with you. I should be able to fly stoned if I want to. You know. As long as nobody is harmed, because that shouldn't be a government function to regulate that.
Click to expand...

Yes, as long as you don't hurt anybody, you should be allowed to do pretty much what you want.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top