I believe you are correct. They operate with a debilitating blind spot. That of not acknowledging that most nation-states view the world economy as a warfare playground, and state actions as weapons deployment. China's One Belt & Road for example. Libertarians lack the military mindset necessary to see it as such. Their ideas are better suited to peacetime conditions. Less so for recognizing a silent war, winning it, and transitioning from wartime to peacetime conditions.
I concur here. I neither think he is controlled opposition nor a sleeper, and Constitutionally, he can say what he wants, but tariffs are one of the few economic powers the President has, as Congress affirms it. The only requirement is that the excise tax, tariff or whatever needs to be uniform across the US, which this is, since it is a national tariff.
The Constitution actually grants Congress the power to levy tariffs, but in recent years as a result of certain laws Congress has passed, the president and the executive branch have controlled when and how tariffs are placed on goods entering the United States.
The Constitution’s Article I, Section 8 states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, … but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
Over time, as Congress gave the president expanded powers on its behalf to enact tariff policies, opponents to several tariffs laws argued the statutes were an unconstitutional congressional delegation of authority to the president. Known as the non-delegation doctrine, the question of how much of its authority Congress can grant to the president and the judiciary goes back to the time of Chief Justice John Marshall.
Theoretically, Congress cannot delegate its enumerated powers to any of the other branches. Listed powers in Article I reside exclusively within Congress, and “delegation” violates Separation of Powers.
Same goes with Senate Judiciary Committee determining Article III court rules of FRCP (1938) via threats to SCOTUS, unconstitutionally. Court rule determination authority lies exclusively with SCOTUS (Article III), not Congress (Article I).
TBH. I think the only reason why Rand is still Republican.
Is mostly because the various Libertarian Parties. Or Libertarian adjacent parties. Have spent a few decades either adopting policy points unpopular with the majority of the electorate.
Or shooting themselves in the foot because they don’t sideline certain more extreme elements or positions. Ala the meme Ancap no age of consent people. As one example
He's being consistence to his beliefs,. this is why I support him. Why should the president have this much power, it's all a movie to set precedent. Once they get voted in and stay in, they will be harder to change.
President Trump has this much power because he knows what to do with it and he knows he has the authority to do so. These tariffs are just another way he is fighting for the American people as opposed to wealthy (and greedy) corporations.
I heard years ago this guy was dirty with Big Pharma money. Not with donations but with investments like Nancy. Kind of forgot about with the attacking of Fraudci. Who knows if that was done to throw people off the scent?
TBH this is just how hardcore libertarians are. Their absolutism is a strength but also a critical weakness.
This is why Paul could be friends with Romney. He honestly was unable to see that what Romney's "business" was doing was hollowing out the country.
Libertarians can't see that tariffs and nation-state dumping are anti-market, warlike forces that need to be responded to.
I believe you are correct. They operate with a debilitating blind spot. That of not acknowledging that most nation-states view the world economy as a warfare playground, and state actions as weapons deployment. China's One Belt & Road for example. Libertarians lack the military mindset necessary to see it as such. Their ideas are better suited to peacetime conditions. Less so for recognizing a silent war, winning it, and transitioning from wartime to peacetime conditions.
I concur here. I neither think he is controlled opposition nor a sleeper, and Constitutionally, he can say what he wants, but tariffs are one of the few economic powers the President has, as Congress affirms it. The only requirement is that the excise tax, tariff or whatever needs to be uniform across the US, which this is, since it is a national tariff.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/how-congress-delegates-its-tariff-powers-to-the-president
The Constitution’s Article I, Section 8 states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, … but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
Over time, as Congress gave the president expanded powers on its behalf to enact tariff policies, opponents to several tariffs laws argued the statutes were an unconstitutional congressional delegation of authority to the president. Known as the non-delegation doctrine, the question of how much of its authority Congress can grant to the president and the judiciary goes back to the time of Chief Justice John Marshall.
Congress gets to tax Americans and the President gets to tax non American countries.
Theoretically, Congress cannot delegate its enumerated powers to any of the other branches. Listed powers in Article I reside exclusively within Congress, and “delegation” violates Separation of Powers.
Same goes with Senate Judiciary Committee determining Article III court rules of FRCP (1938) via threats to SCOTUS, unconstitutionally. Court rule determination authority lies exclusively with SCOTUS (Article III), not Congress (Article I).
TBH. I think the only reason why Rand is still Republican.
Is mostly because the various Libertarian Parties. Or Libertarian adjacent parties. Have spent a few decades either adopting policy points unpopular with the majority of the electorate.
Or shooting themselves in the foot because they don’t sideline certain more extreme elements or positions. Ala the meme Ancap no age of consent people. As one example
I don't think of him as a sleeper, more or a douchebag that's been in plain sight for years. Mr. Principle.
Hit the nail on the head Sir.
Rand tends to stand on principle and the constitution. It's typically never about party, but aligning with the constitution and law.
I can get behind that, but I'll never forget when he endorsed Romney.
Trump and rand have a good relationship. Trump understands why he does what he does.
Hes Ron lite
It has been sooooooo disappointing watching him out himself.
He's being consistence to his beliefs,. this is why I support him. Why should the president have this much power, it's all a movie to set precedent. Once they get voted in and stay in, they will be harder to change.
President Trump has this much power because he knows what to do with it and he knows he has the authority to do so. These tariffs are just another way he is fighting for the American people as opposed to wealthy (and greedy) corporations.
It's so disheartening. His father was like a hero to me in my youth. What happened to the son? Apparently the son turned into a scumbag.
I've also heard that Ron Paul was controlled opposition, though I can't remember where
Anything’s possible.
Ron seems to be about the most trustworthy politician there is, though.
Rand is not, but he still doesn’t suck. He’s just not MAGA. Has some surprising guts though.
Ted Cruz has joined the no tariffs bandwagon as well.
Jesus christ.
RINOs gonna RINO...
I heard years ago this guy was dirty with Big Pharma money. Not with donations but with investments like Nancy. Kind of forgot about with the attacking of Fraudci. Who knows if that was done to throw people off the scent?
This is disappointing. I was a Ron Paul supporter and thought Rand would be more like his dad. Painful to hear he is not.
Him and now Cruz is quacking like a duck too. Makes me sick we here in Texas have not even one good senator.