Ocasio-Cortez is an economic illiterate

“I love the uneducated”.

Bonespurs J. Bumbledumb

 

It’s not a diploma

 

Very true, a congressperson is supposed to represent their district and sadly she represents hers.

 

No, I was referring to the poster I was talking to. He didn't deflect very well from the fact that he made the statement implying that the government spent every penny of 'unaccounted' dollars from the Pentagon.

 

Yeah she is great

 

You've no idea of my academic achievements, so you shouldn't reference to them. See, smart people generally don't make generalizations. The generalizations have a tendency to be wrong.

 

Uh.....didn't you make a generalization about the left?

 

Is this a generalization and therefore wrong?

 

Except Trump has actual accomplishments and is competent...Aside from those differences, perhaps.

 

Apparently there are a lot of "illiterates."

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/p...o-cortezs-70-top-tax-rate-proposal-2019-01-15

http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-green-new-deal-has-strong-bipartisan-support/

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/green-new-deal-tax-poll_us_5c54c97ce4b08710475376b4

 

Remember, Obama was a 'Constitutional Scholar', which actually meant he had once used a copy as a paper weight. Remember, the left's media pretended and pretends to this very day, that Joe Biden (Once the dumbest man in Congress) was an intellectual giant.

One new lightweight with a paper credential should surprise no one.

 

Well Obama was a constitutional scholar

 

So I'll post this question for the 8th time on this forum and encourage a response, because as of yet not a single anti-tariff individual has had the balls to respond. Maybe you will.

You get to choose one of the following, which will you choose?

1. We impose tariffs on overseas manufactured products in order to equalize the currency manipulation and low labor costs. This makes products cost more, but removes the advantages of moving production overseas.

Or

2. We accept low cost overseas manufactured products resulting in lower wages, and loss of manufacturing employment. Or, reduce the trade inequality by removing labor and environmental regulations to stay competitive in the global market.


Like I said, I have posted this upwards of 8 times, and as of yet, not a single person has responded.

So which do you choose?

 

Foolish me...I crazily believe a 'scholar' in a field should know something about his 'expertise'. A quick review of his actions in the field makes him yet another 'expert' whose expertise consists mostly of making pronouncements and decisions that the high court consistently reverses, as a want-to-be expert.

 

Well the Chicago university where he was a professor of constitutional law sure thought he knew the subject. Lol

 

Oh...Oh! I've got this. You present a false 'either/or' argument, a classic logic error.

Either we buy into option 1 or we must buy into option 2 ignoring the universe of other ideas out there. For example, your logic fallacy ignores the possibility we take a bit from 1, mix in a bit from 2 and then season with a few new ideas not on your list.

Personally, I'd make out trade policy exceptionally simple. We simply mirror whatever programs our would be trade partner has to deal with us. If they have 30% duties on auto imports, we apply the same 30% duty to their car imports. That resolves, over time, unfair tarrifs. To fix programs that are illegal, like intellectual property theft, well one precludes ALL products from the transgressor that uses the tech stolen and pressure our other trading partners to do the same.

 

Just because academia will not police itself does not a constitution scholar make.

 

Hahahaha

 

I thought it was rather pithy myself.

 

The funny part is that their 3 year old level temper tantrums have turned this would be 1st term nobody into the 3rd most famous elected official (after Trump and Sanders) with choice House Committee positions. The more they hate her, the most powerful she becomes. It's gotten to the point that she's seriously being considered as a 2024 Dem presidential candidate despite having done nothing and only having the job for a month!

 

I will decide who is a constitutional scholar because I am the decider!!!!

 

Sounds akin to the WTO dispute settlement system. A system being attacked by the US!

 

Well she does hit all the Dem's rigorous standards.
Dumber than dirt...check
minority...check
female...check
clueless about money...check
easy to look at...check
safe district...check

The only requirement missing is the lesbian or transgender card and who knows, that could be played if the voters balk at selecting a lightweight.

 

I prefer a quote from long ago...

G.K. Chesterton said in 1930, “Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”

Obama remains a faux Constitutional scholar...

 

I will decide what is truth and what is fiction because I am the decider!!!!