• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AOC "and" Trump using a Socialist Agenda on Trade?

Luckyone said:
Trump’s Take on Trade Sounds a Lot Like Ocasio-Cortez’s Brand of Socialism

This brought a smile to my face because the article truly makes a good case that what Trump is doing with his Trade Wars is based on a socialistic idea.

Comments welcome.
Click to expand...

More nonsense.

Nobody’s arguing that Trump or his trade policy meet the dictionary definition of socialism, with its all-encompassing embrace of state planning.
Click to expand...

That alone shows there is no comparison between Trump and AOC.

But what about a lite version, which demands a greater role for the state in managing trade flows and intervening in corporate decisions?
Click to expand...

Trump isn't "managing trade flows". Trump isn't "intervening in corporate decisions". He's not telling any businesses what to do. Trump, in regards to trade, is leveling the playing field between countries. Corporations are free to determine and carry out decisions that make the most sense for their business.

Luckyone, you really need to stop listening to this nonsense. Please...think for yourself. It's really not hard to do.
 
Mycroft said:
More nonsense.



That alone shows there is no comparison between Trump and AOC.



Trump isn't "managing trade flows". Trump isn't "intervening in corporate decisions". He's not telling any businesses what to do. Trump, in regards to trade, is leveling the playing field between countries. Corporations are free to determine and carry out decisions that make the most sense for their business.

Luckyone, you really need to stop listening to this nonsense. Please...think for yourself. It's really not hard to do.
Click to expand...

that's called socialism bud. Good for you to finally embrace it.
 
Luckyone said:
Trump’s Take on Trade Sounds a Lot Like Ocasio-Cortez’s Brand of Socialism

This brought a smile to my face because the article truly makes a good case that what Trump is doing with his Trade Wars is based on a socialistic idea.

Comments welcome.
Click to expand...

What?!?! State managed foreign trade and the protection of American markets is socialism in the same way state controlled fire depts., police forces, courts, justice depts. and the military are state controlled protections of our country our laws our people and our property? Stop the presses!!! We must tell them American people immediately. Face it Americans love socialism.
 
NeverTrump said:
that's called socialism bud. Good for you to finally embrace it.
Click to expand...

No. That's not called socialism. That's called a government with a good foreign trade policy.
 
NeverTrump said:
I thought you wanted smaller/no government. Now your a globalist? Sheesh.
Click to expand...

It is indeed true that libertarian philosophy endorses free trade. However, globalists want nothing to do with protectionism, and have, for decades, fought to lower trade restrictions in both the EU and in the US. Having a 'smaller' government has little to do with trade practices because, and this is more of mistake on the part of economists, the idea is that a state will always act in its own self interests, when in fact, that's just not true. A state does, in a limited extent, have a right to protect its own interests. It can't colonize other nations, mind you, like the british did. But certainly, if other states are trying to game trading laws to get an edge on the US, the US can, and should, intervene to protect the interests of its people. It has nothing to do with having a smaller or larger government, but rather, this is the responsibility of government, otherwise, it's simply a banana republic.....a government in name only.


as I said, protectionism, mercantilism, etc, predate socialism by forever. I'm sure socialism has, if anything, stolen ideas from the early protectionists, rather then the other way around.
 
NeverTrump said:
I thought you wanted smaller/no government. Now your a globalist? Sheesh.
Click to expand...

I want a government to do what the Constitution mandates. Nothing more. Given the government overreach nowadays, what I want will result in smaller government...not no government.

The Constitution gives the federal government the responsibility to negotiate trade rules with other countries. Congress has given the President that direct responsibility. Trump is doing his job.

This has nothing to do with whatever you think "globalist" is.
 
Mycroft said:
I want a government to do what the Constitution mandates. Nothing more. Given the government overreach nowadays, what I want will result in smaller government...not no government.

The Constitution gives the federal government the responsibility to negotiate trade rules with other countries. Congress has given the President that direct responsibility. Trump is doing his job.

This has nothing to do with whatever you think "globalist" is.
Click to expand...

Technically, among the left, "globalist" has become an antisemitic term. So he violates his own intersectionality there.

This Anti-Semitic Term Was Casually Used At The White House 3 Times This Week | HuffPost
 
Mycroft said:
I want a government to do what the Constitution mandates. Nothing more. Given the government overreach nowadays, what I want will result in smaller government...not no government.

The Constitution gives the federal government the responsibility to negotiate trade rules with other countries. Congress has given the President that direct responsibility. Trump is doing his job.

This has nothing to do with whatever you think "globalist" is.
Click to expand...

Yeah sure and when Obama negotiated trade deals it was called policing the world... Anything to make orange cheeto look good.
 
NeverTrump said:
Yeah sure and when Obama negotiated trade deals it was called policing the world... Anything to make orange cheeto look good.
Click to expand...

No. When Obama negotiated trade deals (wait...did Obama actually "negotiate trade deals"?), it wasn't called "policing the world". It was called "failure".

But seriously...don't you know that Obama is past history? Jeez...get over him, already.
 
Mycroft said:
No. When Obama negotiated trade deals (wait...did Obama actually "negotiate trade deals"?), it wasn't called "policing the world". It was called "failure".
Click to expand...

OK smart guy, what's the difference between NAFTA and USMCA?
 
NeverTrump said:
OK smart guy, what's the difference between NAFTA and USMCA?
Click to expand...

???

They are two different regional trade deals. One replacing the other.

What? You want a line by line comparison?

Forget it.

In any case, Obama has nothing to do with either of them.
 
Mycroft said:
The left loves to alter the meaning of words. They love to spin words to fit their desired agenda and narrative.

This article is a perfect example of this.
Click to expand...

Pot... meet kettle.

The only reason we keep talking about socialism ad nauseam is this very sentiment.
 
Mycroft said:
???

They are two different regional trade deals. One replacing the other.

What? You want a line by line comparison?

Forget it.

In any case, Obama has nothing to do with either of them.
Click to expand...

Name something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom