Every candidate must weigh in on Donald Trump
Rarely does a figure more polarize politics than Donald Trump. Much of the establishment wing of the Republican party is frustrated by Mr. Trump and much that has been said about his policies is simply not true.
Donald Trump has received much criticism and derision on his desire to raise tariffs. Many of the pseudo intellectuals on the right believe that tariffs are a detriment to profits and will wreck the economy. The historical facts paint a different picture.
"Free foreign trade gives our money, our manufactures, and our markets to other nations to the injury of our labor, our tradespeople, and our farmers. Protection keeps money, markets, and manufactures at home for the benefit of our own people."
Throughout the 19th century tariffs were generally high and recognized as a useful tool for both economic policy and fiscal policy. Tariffs are not a black and white issue as so many would suggest. A tariff on raw materials like iron ore, oil and other minerals is a bad idea. A tariff that simply allows a corporation to monopolize an industry and artificially raise prices is also a bad idea. But reasonable intelligent tariffs that protect growing industries and high paying jobs have been a part of economic policy for centuries. Tariffs should also be imposed on those products necessary for the defense of the nation.
In a perfect world with true free trade we would not need tariffs and we would not desire them. The problem actually lies in monetary policy. Unless we are willing to devalue the dollar we have no other mechanism short tariffs to address the trade deficit.
Jeb Bush has criticized Mr. Trump on his immigration stance. But once again we find that history is firmly in the Trump camp. Jeb Bush's notion that we can maximize economic growth the growth in immigration does not jibe with the historical record. There are times when increased immigration will benefit the growth and wealth of the nation. But historically this has been true only when a nation is aggressively exploiting natural resources, has suffered a large loss in man power due to war or disease, or the nation is growing so fast that jobs cannot be filled.
None of these conditions apply today.
Legal immigration can be just as nefarious as illegal immigration. Many on Wall Street are suggesting that we must drastically increase (a million people every year) legal immigration because there is a shortage of "skilled" workers.
This is patently false. In a capitalist free-market economy it is nearly impossible to have a shortage of skilled workers. What many of these people are really saying is that the wages are to high for technical and other skilled workers.
It is not my job, nor is it your responsibility to make Facebook or other tech companies more profitable. If the business titans wish to lower the wages of skilled workers it is their responsibility to train more workers.
Politically Correct Speech
PC or "politically correct" is nothing more than anti-intellectualism. If certain groups are off limits for discussion than rational intelligent discourse becomes impossible. Some of Mr. Trump's rhetoric has been characterized as politically incorrect and over the top. While this may be true it really doesn't matter. There was an issue that none of the Republicans wanted to talk about. That of course was immigration. By ramping up his rhetoric to a high level Trump was able to get people talking about the issue. This has been standard practice for hundreds of years and shold have been recognized as such.
If we continue to bow to the tyrants of political correctness we doom ourselves to a dumbing down of society. An intellectual argument should stand on its merits. When the argument is criticized as being politically incorrect then we know for sure that our opponents have no intellectual leg to stand on.
During the last primary I suggeseted strongly that many who came here illegally must be deported. I still feel that those who commit crimes and those who have come here in the last few years (since the economic troubles began) must be sent back home.
One of my opponents suggested that we would be called racists and nazis if we did this. So what? Is it not more important to stand on principles? Is it not more important that we stand with the people of the 8th district? If name calling upsets a candidate he should probably not be in politics. It is a critical weakness.