Why do conservatives support immigration and trade restrictions?

[The Rabbi]

First I am not unhappy. You are projecting because you are getting your ass kicked here.

First off, projection is you thinking I'm getting my ass kicked here.

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

 

[FaerieGodfather]

What authoritarian policies would those be? Conservatives are not libertarians and libertarians are not anarchists.

The War on Drugs. Hawkish foreign policy. Restrictions on LGBT rights. I'd say restrictions on abortion here, but most Libertarians I know are rather hypocritically pro-life. The subject matter of this thread is authoritarian immigration and trade policies supported by some conservatives; these are positions I agree with, but they are authoritarian positions nonetheless.

How would that pledge open the door to unlimited immigration?

Borders and nations are legal fictions. Enforcing border control and limiting immigration are initiating force against people for simply attempting to cross an imaginary line.

 

[The Rabbi]

What authoritarian policies would those be? Conservatives are not libertarians and libertarians are not anarchists.

The War on Drugs. Hawkish foreign policy. Restrictions on LGBT rights. I'd say restrictions on abortion here, but most Libertarians I know are rather hypocritically pro-life. The subject matter of this thread is authoritarian immigration and trade policies supported by some conservatives; these are positions I agree with, but they are authoritarian positions nonetheless.

How would that pledge open the door to unlimited immigration?

Borders and nations are legal fictions. Enforcing border control and limiting immigration are initiating force against people for simply attempting to cross an imaginary line.

Hawkish foreign policy is authoritarian? You clearly dont know what youa re talking about.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

You are demonstrating that you define any conservative who doesn't toe the line with your view of conservatism as not conservative at all. My, how McCarthyist of you. How puerile.

Since we're on the topic of "freedom" as you so define it, another key tenet of "basic" conservatism is free thought, the ability to think freely without negative repercussions, a philosophical viewpoint that holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism instead of pure authoritarianism or dogma. For example here, in your thread where you insist that real conservatives allow for the free movement of labor, immigration, and trade, you have restricted free thought by insisting that those who don't agree with you are not conservative.

Don't lecture me about "free movement" of anything unless you're prepared to accept that not all conservatives agree with your version of conservatism.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

You are demonstrating that you define any conservative who doesn't toe the line with your view of conservatism as not conservative at all. My, how McCarthyist of you. How puerile.

Since we're on the topic of "freedom" as you so define it, another key tenet of "basic" conservatism is free thought, the ability to think freely without negative repercussions. For example here, in your thread where you insist that real conservatives allow for the free movement of labor, immigration, and trade, you have restricted free thought by insisting that those who don't agree with you are not conservative.

Don't lecture me about "free movement" of anything unless you're prepared to accept that not all conservatives agree with your version of conservatism.

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want. I am not stopping you. But I will point out that is what you are doing.
Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

 

[bripat9643]

What authoritarian policies would those be? Conservatives are not libertarians and libertarians are not anarchists.

The War on Drugs. Hawkish foreign policy. Restrictions on LGBT rights. I'd say restrictions on abortion here, but most Libertarians I know are rather hypocritically pro-life. The subject matter of this thread is authoritarian immigration and trade policies supported by some conservatives; these are positions I agree with, but they are authoritarian positions nonetheless.

How would that pledge open the door to unlimited immigration?

Borders and nations are legal fictions. Enforcing border control and limiting immigration are initiating force against people for simply attempting to cross an imaginary line.

How is limiting immigration "authoritarian?" it doesn't limit the freedom of American citizens in any way. In fact, it improves their ability to find employment that pays well.

 

[bripat9643]

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

You are demonstrating that you define any conservative who doesn't toe the line with your view of conservatism as not conservative at all. My, how McCarthyist of you. How puerile.

Since we're on the topic of "freedom" as you so define it, another key tenet of "basic" conservatism is free thought, the ability to think freely without negative repercussions. For example here, in your thread where you insist that real conservatives allow for the free movement of labor, immigration, and trade, you have restricted free thought by insisting that those who don't agree with you are not conservative.

Don't lecture me about "free movement" of anything unless you're prepared to accept that not all conservatives agree with your version of conservatism.

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want. I am not stopping you. But I will point out that is what you are doing.
Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

There's nothing "conservative" about allowing unlimited immigration.

 

[leftwinger]

The OP never answered. Free Trade? Not what I saw. Overseas all of South Korea is Korean products. Malaysia is Proton cars, massive tax on imports.

You want USA on "fair trade" with these countries but they are not? Bad deal. Singapore.........maybe a bit more open to USA products.

 

[FaerieGodfather]

Hawkish foreign policy is authoritarian? You clearly dont know what youa re talking about.

Yes, clearly I don't know what I'm talking about. I must be confused.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

Capitalism is the at the very core of conservatism.

But at what point during the effort to ensure capitalism do we wind up hindering it? When we accept foreign labor (or illegal) over American labor, in favor of paying them cheaper wages, you favor one form of capital over another. If Americans aren't working and paying into the economy, or contributing their capital to such, that's not "free movement of labor and capital" as you put it, since foreigners and their capital are the only things actually moving.

There is no "comparative advantage" given you are favoring one type of commodity from another country (foreign labor and capital), at the expense of American commodities (American labor and capital).

Also, it seems we are the only ones right now exporting labor along with other things, if so involuntarily. Wouldn't that mean we're giving other countries an "absolute advantage"?

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want.

Your mistake is thinking I'm trying to redefine anything as anything else. I don't force my interpretations of reality onto other people, unlike you.

 

[Pop23]

The basic value of conservatism is free movement of labor and capital. People are free to offer their labor to employers, employers are free to hire whom they want, consumers are free to buy what they want and sellers are free to sell what they want.
Given that why do conservatives support immigration and trade restrictions when those things are the antithesis of basic conservatives values?

Not sure they oppose legal immigration

11 million illegals with a 19 Trillion debt makes absolutely no sense.

 

[leftwinger]

Maybe they want those 11-30mil Illegals to work and pay into SSI under bogus number. Revenue increase. The hope is they return "home" and never collect?

 

[FaerieGodfather]

Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

Yes. Yes, I am disputing that because it is not true. The fact that American conservatives embraced these principles-- late last century-- does not make them "bedrock principles" of conservatism. You are using words that you do not understand the definition of.

How is limiting immigration "authoritarian?" it doesn't limit the freedom of American citizens in any way. In fact, it improves their ability to find employment that pays well.

It may come as a shock to you, but foreigners are people too. Limiting immigration is authoritarian because it is inherently limiting the freedom of people.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

You are demonstrating that you define any conservative who doesn't toe the line with your view of conservatism as not conservative at all. My, how McCarthyist of you. How puerile.

Since we're on the topic of "freedom" as you so define it, another key tenet of "basic" conservatism is free thought, the ability to think freely without negative repercussions. For example here, in your thread where you insist that real conservatives allow for the free movement of labor, immigration, and trade, you have restricted free thought by insisting that those who don't agree with you are not conservative.

Don't lecture me about "free movement" of anything unless you're prepared to accept that not all conservatives agree with your version of conservatism.

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want. I am not stopping you. But I will point out that is what you are doing.
Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

There's nothing "conservative" about allowing unlimited immigration.

Of course there is. Free movement of labor and capital is a basic conservative value. Goverment restriction on trade is not a conservative value.

 

[The Rabbi]

The OP never answered. Free Trade? Not what I saw. Overseas all of South Korea is Korean products. Malaysia is Proton cars, massive tax on imports.

You want USA on "fair trade" with these countries but they are not? Bad deal. Singapore.........maybe a bit more open to USA products.

It doesnt matter what other countries do. They lose by imposing high tariffs on imports.

 

[bripat9643]

Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

Yes. Yes, I am disputing that because it is not true. The fact that American conservatives embraced these principles-- late last century-- does not make them "bedrock principles" of conservatism. You are using words that you do not understand the definition of.

How is limiting immigration "authoritarian?" it doesn't limit the freedom of American citizens in any way. In fact, it improves their ability to find employment that pays well.

It may come as a shock to you, but foreigners are people too. Limiting immigration is authoritarian because it is inherently limiting the freedom of people.

They may be people, but they aren't Americans. Limiting immigration doesn't limit my freedom, and that's all I care about. That's all any American should care about. Our government exists to serve the interests of Americans, not foreigners. They can fix the problems with their own country rather than bringing their problems to this one.

 

[bripat9643]

You are demonstrating you are not a conservative and show you hold absurd contradictory beliefs.

You are demonstrating that you define any conservative who doesn't toe the line with your view of conservatism as not conservative at all. My, how McCarthyist of you. How puerile.

Since we're on the topic of "freedom" as you so define it, another key tenet of "basic" conservatism is free thought, the ability to think freely without negative repercussions. For example here, in your thread where you insist that real conservatives allow for the free movement of labor, immigration, and trade, you have restricted free thought by insisting that those who don't agree with you are not conservative.

Don't lecture me about "free movement" of anything unless you're prepared to accept that not all conservatives agree with your version of conservatism.

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want. I am not stopping you. But I will point out that is what you are doing.
Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

There's nothing "conservative" about allowing unlimited immigration.

Of course there is. Free movement of labor and capital is a basic conservative value. Goverment restriction on trade is not a conservative value.

Wrong. There's nothing conservative about unlimited immigration.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you dispute that free movement of labor and capital are traditionally bedrock principles of conservatism?

Capitalism is the at the very core of conservatism.

But at what point during the effort to ensure capitalism do we wind up hindering it? When we accept foreign labor (or illegal) over American labor, in favor of paying them cheaper wages, you favor one form of capital over another. If Americans aren't working and paying into the economy, or contributing their capital to such, that's not "free movement of labor and capital" as you put it, since foreigners and their capital are the only things actually moving.

There is no "comparative advantage" given you are favoring one type of commodity from another country (foreign labor and capital), at the expense of American commodities (American labor and capital).

Also, it seems we are the only ones right now exporting labor along with other things, if so involuntarily. Wouldn't that mean we're giving other countries an "absolute advantage"?

You can redefine "conservative" to mean "statist" all you want.

Your mistake is thinking I'm trying to redefine anything as anything else. I don't force my interpretations of reality onto other people, unlike you.

You are babbling using terms you dont understand. Labor is labor. Capital is capital. Capitalism means free trade which means buyers and sellers coming together in free agreement without gov't imposing restrictions.

 

[Norman]

The basic value of conservatism is free movement of labor and capital. People are free to offer their labor to employers, employers are free to hire whom they want, consumers are free to buy what they want and sellers are free to sell what they want.
Given that why do conservatives support immigration and trade restrictions when those things are the antithesis of basic conservatives values?

I only support restrictions concerning bombs... Whether they come in a package or on the back of a muslim!

Liberals want to restrict guns... but not bombs. It makes no sense.


But seriously for a moment, musllims aren't compatible with freedom, that is why you don't import them. It's a government program anyway to import them, nothing to do with free markets so you say: NO!

 

[leftwinger]

It doesnt matter what other countries do. They lose by imposing high tariffs on imports

What you mean they lose? they have a captive closed market of 50mil customers. But they also get access to our 300mil market? sound like a 1/6 built in head start for South Korea?