Thanks for the articles, I'll read them when I get a chance. I wasn't aware of those figures; rolling in my mind was that I'd read somewhere that immigrants to

Thanks for the articles, I'll read them when I get a chance. I wasn't aware of those figures; rolling in my mind was that I'd read somewhere that immigrants took substantially more social benefits than natives (like 50% more, perhaps attributable to the culture). But I'm not sure if that was documented or undocumented or what, just a vague memory. First reaction would be that anarcho-capitalism is a thing, albeit not a philosophy I think would possibly work (See Stefan Molyneux rambling on youtube). I agree with your second point completely, the question is about the little guy. Neither of their policies would affect me much at all, so I feel it's my responsibility to vote for who I think would help the poor most. Is the third one true? For example where I live in China there is a huge Apple advertising presence even with the 10-20% price increase versus USA prices. And with free trade, couldn't it be cheaper to be a "foreign" company without losing much presence / market share? I feel like tariffs are essential for forcing companies to stay to maintain market presence, instead of free trade deals.