Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work.

https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C

The Chinese have been manipulating the world markets with:
product dumping at below cost to destroy foreign competition,
also Govt subsidies  -
That’s why BHP closed most of their steel mills.
The Chinese have destroyed all their competition and it has cost us jobs.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:36am:

The Chinese have been manipulating the world markets with: product dumping at below cost to destroy foreign competition, also Govt subsidies  - That’s why BHP closed most of their steel mills. The Chinese have destroyed all their competition and it has cost us jobs.

... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 9:53am:

Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C

Yeah, right.

And that's why Canada, India, the EU has tariffs on Chinese products. Oh, and the US, under Biden (or whoever his puppet master is).  Because of Trump, right?

Pakman is an idiot. He doesn't understand why tariffs are imposed and how they work. Being fixated on retail price is blinkered. 

Buy American to avoid Trump trade war, says ECB chief Christine Lagarde

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/800x600q70/923/Bcwf3e.png

China was helped by the US and the West. Naively, they believed China's promises and allowed it to enter the WTO.
China broke most of its promises and has never played by the rules. Not within the WTO, not with the US, EU or Australia. China imposed punitive tariffs on Australia even though we have, again naively, a free trade agreement with them. A communist dictatorship will not behave like a liberal democracy. How astonishing!

Now that it has grown powerful, the Chinese military threatens everyone around it.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 9:53am:

Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C

It is a very good video, and Pakman explains it well.

However, it will go straight over the heads of MAGA cult members.

They, and their orange leader, just don't understand how Tariffs work and no amount of education will change their view.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 9:53am:

Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C

Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense.

If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers?
By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected.

The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers.

Frank wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 3:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers.

You just don’t get it!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 3:31pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who  :Dpaid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. You just don’t get it!

:D

I listened to Pakman and then explained why what he says is silly, ignorant bollocks.

Why don't you explain how it's not? Go on.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 3:31pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. You just don’t get it!

Nope.

And he never will.

They believe whatever Trump says, no matter what.

And in this case, Trump has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

Only Trump will fix it.

The Chinese have been manipulating the world markets with:
product dumping at below cost to destroy foreign competition,
also Govt subsidies  -
That’s why BHP closed most of their steel mills.
The Chinese have destroyed all their competition and it has cost us jobs.

Frank wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 3:33pm:

If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China -

That's exactly how it is.

The Tariffs are paid by the Americans, not the Chinese.

What is a tariff?

A tariff is a tax on imports, or foreign goods brought into the United States.

Who pays for tariffs?

This is a question that many Americans asked after the election. Trump has said foreign countries pay for tariffs, but tariffs are actually paid by American companies that import goods from abroad.

So if an American car manufacturer is importing a part from Mexico, it will have to pay a tariff on the part once it arrives in the country.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3UAeu4y_ow

Did Trumpy fix covid? Nope!

Hitting Chinese/Mexican/Canadian imports with tariffs will hurt. . .American consumers.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:43pm:

Did Trumpy fix covid? Nope! Hitting Chinese/Mexican/Canadian imports with tariffs will hurt. . .American consumers.

It sure will, as they're the ones who pay.  Literally.

Exactly!

Trumpy is going to see huge inflation. Lucky Americans!

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:41pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:33pm: If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - That's exactly how it is. The Tariffs are paid by the Americans, not the Chinese. What is a tariff? A tariff is a tax on imports, or foreign goods brought into the United States. Who pays for tariffs? This is a question that many Americans asked after the election. Trump has said foreign countries pay for tariffs, but tariffs are actually paid by American companies that import goods from abroad. So if an American car manufacturer is importing a part from Mexico, it will have to pay a tariff on the part once it arrives in the country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3UAeu4y_ow

If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers?

By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected.

The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:48pm:

Exactly! Trumpy is going to see huge inflation. Lucky Americans!

If he imposes the tariffs, inflation will skyrocket.

And, the rapist will blame it all on the Biden administration and his cult members will believe him.

You just wait and see.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:51pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 5:48pm: Exactly! Trumpy is going to see huge inflation. Lucky Americans! If he imposes the tariffs, inflation will skyrocket. And, the rapist will blame it all on the Biden administration and his cult members will believe him. You just wait and see.

You don't know what you are talking about, compulsive wankers.

Biden has already imposed tariffs on China. As have India, the EU, Canada. Are they doing it to punish their own people?

China imposed 200% tariffs on some Australian products. Was that punishing the Chinese consumers?

Give your self-frigging a rest, you'll ruin another keyboard.

Frank wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 3:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers.

Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh?

Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention.

Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows!

Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government.

He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad.

But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s.

If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no?

Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up?

You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it?

You've been farmed.

How does it feeeeel?

FD wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 6:09pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh? Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention. Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows! Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government. He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad. But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s. If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no? Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up? You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it? You've been farmed. How does it feeeeel?

Stupid waffle, son of Pakistan. It feels like being subjected to a trouser sniffing know nuffin's  endless stupid grimacing tapdancing. That's how it feels. Bbwian with words.

Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded.
Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/169/193/125/original/b4d22b8c98142851.png

Frank wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 7:35pm:

FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 6:09pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh? Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention. Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows! Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government. He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad. But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s. If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no? Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up? You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it? You've been farmed. How does it feeeeel? Stupid waffle, son of Pakistan. It feels like being subjected to a trouser sniffing know nuffin's  endless stupid grimacing tapdancing. That's how it feels. Bbwian with words. Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded. Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad.

But of course it's stupid waffle. Your DL said.

He's promised to tariff Chi-na. Fentanyl. Men of military age. Jails, mental hospitals and worse, mental asylum seekers.

He's pretending to tax Chi-na, not American consumers paying 20% extra for their iPhones. He's using national security laws - traditionally used in times of war - to supposedly punish the Chows.

Are you literally as dumb as he?

Dumb as a rock, as Tillerson said.

You.

FD wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:13pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 7:35pm: FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 6:09pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh? Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention. Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows! Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government. He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad. But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s. If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no? Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up? You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it? You've been farmed. How does it feeeeel? Stupid waffle, son of Pakistan. It feels like being subjected to a trouser sniffing know nuffin's  endless stupid grimacing tapdancing. That's how it feels. Bbwian with words. Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded. Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad. But of course it's stupid waffle. Your DL said. He's promised to tariff Chi-na. Fentanyl. Men of military age. Jails, mental hospitals and worse, mental asylum seekers. He's pretending to tax Chi-na, not American consumers paying 20% extra for their iPhones. He's using national security laws - traditionally used in times of war - to supposedly punish the Chows. Are you literally as dumb as he? Dumb as a rock, as Tillerson said. You.

So Biden imposed tariffs on China to hurt Americans.


Grin and tapdancer.

Frank wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:18pm:

FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:13pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 7:35pm: FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 6:09pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh? Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention. Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows! Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government. He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad. But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s. If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no? Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up? You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it? You've been farmed. How does it feeeeel? Stupid waffle, son of Pakistan. It feels like being subjected to a trouser sniffing know nuffin's  endless stupid grimacing tapdancing. That's how it feels. Bbwian with words. Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded. Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad. But of course it's stupid waffle. Your DL said. He's promised to tariff Chi-na. Fentanyl. Men of military age. Jails, mental hospitals and worse, mental asylum seekers. He's pretending to tax Chi-na, not American consumers paying 20% extra for their iPhones. He's using national security laws - traditionally used in times of war - to supposedly punish the Chows. Are you literally as dumb as he? Dumb as a rock, as Tillerson said. You. So Biden imposed tariffs on China to hurt Americans. Grin and tapdancer.

Oh, I see. Are you saying Biden's just as bad?

After everything you've said. The Biden crime family, the laptop from hell, the classified documents in his glovebox - Sleepy Joe secretly has a plan to tariff Chi-na's arse and pay off the US government deficit - using tariffs from Chi-na?

Is that it?

Do tell, dear boy. You're on a roll here. You go, girl.

FD wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:35pm:

Oh, I see. Are you saying Biden's just as bad? After everything you've said. The Biden crime family, the laptop from hell, the classified documents in his glovebox - Sleepy Joe secretly has a plan to tariff Chi-na's arse and pay off the US government deficit - using tariffs from Chi-na? Is that it? Do tell, dear boy. You're on a roll here. You go, girl.

Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded.
Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad.

FD wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:35pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:18pm: FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:13pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 7:35pm: FD wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 6:09pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. Ah, the rat-cunning of the inscrutable Commie Chow, eh? Why yes, old boy, Xi's tariffs most certainly were calculated to price our fine Aussie wines, beef and soy beans out of the reach of the Chow consumer. That was exactly their intention. Your DL has other ideas. He pretends his tariffs are form of taxation - on the Chows! Yes, your DL harks back to the Golden Era of free trade when there was no income tax at all, just tariffs. He literally thinks his tariffs are a form of taxation on the Chinese government. He also thinks the Chinese government exports illegal fentanyl to kill Americans off. He says it all the time. Xi, he says, looking straight at the camera, stop sending your fentanyl and maybe I won't have to tariff you so bad. But worse, he thinks Xi's emptying out his jails, mental hospitals and mental asylums and sending them all to America - men of "military age" that look like "trained killers". God knows what they're sent in to do, he says, but it can't be good. Presumably, they're all practicing their kung fu moves in secret training camps all over America, like some Hong Kong action flick from the 1970s. If DL tariffs Xi, DL says, he might stop sending them in, so there's that. But there's also the additional revenue raising benefit of getting money out of Chi-na. A win-win, no? Do you know your problem, old boy? You're trying to defend the thought bubbles of an 80 year old reality TV celebrity with dementia. Why don't you just fess up? You know it's the most ridiculous krap we've ever heard from an elected official - from any country. Why don't you just admit it? You've been farmed. How does it feeeeel? Stupid waffle, son of Pakistan. It feels like being subjected to a trouser sniffing know nuffin's  endless stupid grimacing tapdancing. That's how it feels. Bbwian with words. Chow tariff - cunning like you. But the chows lived. Aussie folded. Trump tariff ( (but not Biden, EU, curry muncher tariff) baaad. But of course it's stupid waffle. Your DL said. He's promised to tariff Chi-na. Fentanyl. Men of military age. Jails, mental hospitals and worse, mental asylum seekers. He's pretending to tax Chi-na, not American consumers paying 20% extra for their iPhones. He's using national security laws - traditionally used in times of war - to supposedly punish the Chows. Are you literally as dumb as he? Dumb as a rock, as Tillerson said. You. So Biden imposed tariffs on China to hurt Americans. Grin and tapdancer. Oh, I see. Are you saying Biden's just as bad? After everything you've said. The Biden crime family, the laptop from hell, the classified documents in his glovebox - Sleepy Joe secretly has a plan to tariff Chi-na's arse and pay off the US government deficit - using tariffs from Chi-na? Is that it? Do tell, dear boy. You're on a roll here. You go, girl.

He still doesn't get it, and he never will.

GOOD, WISE, ASTUTE

President Biden’s economic plan is supporting investments and creating good jobs in key sectors that are vital for America’s economic future and national security. China’s unfair trade practices concerning technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation are threatening American businesses and workers. China is also flooding global markets with artificially low-priced exports. In response to China’s unfair trade practices and to counteract the resulting harms, today, President Biden is directing his Trade Representative to increase tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on $18 billion of imports from China to protect American workers and businesses.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/14/fact-sheet-president-biden-takes-action-to-protect-american-workers-and-businesses-from-chinas-unfair-trade-practices/



BAAAAD, STUPID, DOESNT UNDERSTAND NUFFIN'
President Trump’s economic plan is supporting investments and creating good jobs in key sectors that are vital for America’s economic future and national security. China’s unfair trade practices concerning technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation are threatening American businesses and workers. China is also flooding global markets with artificially low-priced exports. In response to China’s unfair trade practices and to counteract the resulting harms, today, President Trump is directing his Trade Representative to increase tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on $18 billion of imports from China to protect American workers and businesses.

Naughty naughty, old boy. You selectively edited, you silly old thing.

Biden's Chi-na tariffs are part of a far wider economic plan, linked with key legislation to secure microprocessors, roll out high speed broadband, lead the way on renewables and create jobs in the process.


Quote:

With support from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act, these investments are creating new American jobs in manufacturing and clean energy and helping communities that have been left behind make a comeback.

Your DL doesn't just want to tariff Chi-na, he wants to tariff Everybody. He sells tariffs, the "most beautiful word in the dictionary", as a revenue raising measure. He's even floated the idea of replacing income taxes with them.

Biden's tariffs are directed at Chi-na as an economic/security measure. They're one component of an infrastructure/chips plan to make the US self sufficient in high tech manufacturing. They're linked to actual government investment in these areas and they've brought manufacturing back to the US - the exact opposite of your DL's failed first term in office, which saw the biggest manufacturing trade deficit to China in years.

Your DL was forced to import the face masks he never wore and the hand sanitizer he wanted to inject lungs with. Biden learned from your DL's failures: the US needs to become self sufficient in key manufacturing areas as a national security measure.

Your DL wants to use tariffs, a direct quote, to "tax Chi-na", along with everybody else.

Look, if your cult leader doesn't even understand how tariffs work, how is he possibly going to secure the kind of critical infrastructure he requires to make America great?

Biden's been spending the past four years getting 5G processors manufactured onshore. The aim is to build the infrastructure required for the next technological shift, AI, and prevent this technology being controlled by Beijing, which is already a decade ahead of the US in this area.

While your DL's been shrieking about Chi-na emptying out it's prisons, mental hospitals and mental asylums (which he thinks are far worse), Sleepy Joe's been quietly getting bills passed and rolling out the transition to smart, renewable technology.

This was definitely a missed opportunity for Karmala in the last election - to explain this transition, to make it a central part of her campaign. The contrast between the two visions - and the stakes for the global economy - could not be starker.

Your DL wants a return to a fossil fuel economy and the golden age of trade wars - without having the first idea about how they work. He thinks the US government can control the flow of US oil. He thinks tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, so that's he. But do you know?

Your cult-like devotion to such a vision explains everything we need to know about you.

You?

Yes, you naughty old thing, you.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:51pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 5:48pm: Exactly! Trumpy is going to see huge inflation. Lucky Americans! If he imposes the tariffs, inflation will skyrocket. And, the rapist will blame it all on the Biden administration and his cult members will believe him. You just wait and see.

i think that if inflation does go up, he would be wise to blame biden.
same goes for the border
trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah.
and the game of politics is all about persuasion and selling
and about being able to grab the microphone and riff
he was born to be president.

mere sardines like gweg and karmal can only look on in awe  ;D ;D

aquascoot wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:36pm:

trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah.

Yet, he can't sell steaks, vodka, gambling, mortgages, holidays, board games, ice, mattresses, vitamins, urine test kits, magazines, or cologne to Americans.

Thoughts?

FD wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:27pm:

Naughty naughty, old boy. You selectively edited, you silly old thing. Biden's Chi-na tariffs are part of a far wider economic plan, linked with key legislation to secure microprocessors, roll out high speed broadband, lead the way on renewables and create jobs in the process. Quote: With support from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act, these investments are creating new American jobs in manufacturing and clean energy and helping communities that have been left behind make a comeback. Your DL doesn't just want to tariff Chi-na, he wants to tariff Everybody. He sells tariffs, the "most beautiful word in the dictionary", as a revenue raising measure. He's even floated the idea of replacing income taxes with them. Biden's tariffs are directed at Chi-na as an economic/security measure. They're one component of an infrastructure/chips plan to make the US self sufficient in high tech manufacturing. They're linked to actual government investment in these areas and they've brought manufacturing back to the US - the exact opposite of your DL's failed first term in office, which saw the biggest manufacturing trade deficit to China in years. Your DL was forced to import the face masks he never wore and the hand sanitizer he wanted to inject lungs with. Biden learned from your DL's failures: the US needs to become self sufficient in key manufacturing areas as a national security measure. Your DL wants to use tariffs, a direct quote, to "tax Chi-na", along with everybody else. Look, if your cult leader doesn't even understand how tariffs work, how is he possibly going to secure the kind of critical infrastructure he requires to make America great? Biden's been spending the past four years getting 5G processors manufactured onshore. The aim is to build the infrastructure required for the next technological shift, AI, and prevent this technology being controlled by Beijing, which is already a decade ahead of the US in this area. While your DL's been shrieking about Chi-na emptying out it's prisons, mental hospitals and mental asylums (which he thinks are far worse), Sleepy Joe's been quietly getting bills passed and rolling out the transition to smart, renewable technology. This was definitely a missed opportunity for Karmala in the last election - to explain this transition, to make it a central part of her campaign. The contrast between the two visions - and the stakes for the global economy - could not be starker. Your DL wants a return to a fossil fuel economy and the golden age of trade wars - without having the first idea about how they work. He thinks the US government can control the flow of US oil. He thinks tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, so that's he. But do you know? Your cult-like devotion to such a vision explains everything we need to know about you. You? Yes, you naughty old thing, you.

Silly waffle and piggy tapdancing on ice.


Does Biden understand tariffs? Does he think tariffs on China are a tax on a foreign country?

FACT SHEET: President Biden Takes Action to Protect American Workers and Businesses from China’s Unfair Trade Practices
President Biden’s economic plan is supporting investments and creating good jobs in key sectors that are vital for America’s economic future and national security. China’s unfair trade practices concerning technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation are threatening American businesses and workers. China is also flooding global markets with artificially low-priced exports. In response to China’s unfair trade practices and to counteract the resulting harms, today, President Biden is directing his Trade Representative to increase tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on $18 billion of imports from China to protect American workers and businesses.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/14/fact-sheet-president-biden-takes-action-to-protect-american-workers-and-businesses-from-chinas-unfair-trade-practices/


Silly old Biden, he doesn't understand tariffs.  Your cult-like devotion to such a Biden vision explains everything we need to know about you.



"Oh! Look over there!! TRUMP!"

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:44pm:

aquascoot wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 4:36pm: trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah. Yet, he can't sell steaks, vodka, gambling, mortgages, holidays, board games, ice, mattresses, vitamins, urine test kits, magazines, or cologne to Americans. Thoughts?

Never mind the bollocks, here's Trump victory.




The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris.

Meanwhile, the Nasdaq and S&P 500 each rose by more than 2% on Wednesday to also hit new highs.

Frank wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 5:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 4:44pm: aquascoot wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 4:36pm: trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah. Yet, he can't sell steaks, vodka, gambling, mortgages, holidays, board games, ice, mattresses, vitamins, urine test kits, magazines, or cologne to Americans. Thoughts? Never mind the bollocks,  ...

Not bollocks.  Facts.

The rapist couldn't sell steaks, vodka, gambling, mortgages, holidays, board games, ice, mattresses, vitamins, urine test kits, magazines, or cologne to Americans.

Yet scooter says: "trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah."

Something doesn't add up, old boy.

Frank wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 5:02pm:

The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ...

Ah.

And who was POTUS on Wednesday?

I'm curious.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 5:30pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:02pm: The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ... Ah. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? I'm curious.

Don't delete the pertinent bit:

...after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris.



You are a dishonest, lying, contemptible little shhit, contemptible little lying shhit.

Creep.

aquascoot wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:36pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 5:51pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 5:48pm: Exactly! Trumpy is going to see huge inflation. Lucky Americans! If he imposes the tariffs, inflation will skyrocket. And, the rapist will blame it all on the Biden administration and his cult members will believe him. You just wait and see. i think that if inflation does go up, he would be wise to blame biden. same goes for the border trump has such powers of persuasion he could sell a bacon sandwich to the ayatollah. and the game of politics is all about persuasion and selling and about being able to grab the microphone and riff he was born to be president. mere sardines like gweg and karmal can only look on in awe  ;D ;D

Or he could blame Elon.

That could work, no? Elon made him so tariffs! How very dare he!

That way, he gets rid of Elon who by the time he's sworn in will be getting right up his nose.

Dark MAGA. What a load of krap.

Whoever heard of a goth futurist?

Frank wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:52pm:

FD wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 4:27pm: Naughty naughty, old boy. You selectively edited, you silly old thing. Biden's Chi-na tariffs are part of a far wider economic plan, linked with key legislation to secure microprocessors, roll out high speed broadband, lead the way on renewables and create jobs in the process. Quote: With support from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act, these investments are creating new American jobs in manufacturing and clean energy and helping communities that have been left behind make a comeback. Your DL doesn't just want to tariff Chi-na, he wants to tariff Everybody. He sells tariffs, the "most beautiful word in the dictionary", as a revenue raising measure. He's even floated the idea of replacing income taxes with them. Biden's tariffs are directed at Chi-na as an economic/security measure. They're one component of an infrastructure/chips plan to make the US self sufficient in high tech manufacturing. They're linked to actual government investment in these areas and they've brought manufacturing back to the US - the exact opposite of your DL's failed first term in office, which saw the biggest manufacturing trade deficit to China in years. Your DL was forced to import the face masks he never wore and the hand sanitizer he wanted to inject lungs with. Biden learned from your DL's failures: the US needs to become self sufficient in key manufacturing areas as a national security measure. Your DL wants to use tariffs, a direct quote, to "tax Chi-na", along with everybody else. Look, if your cult leader doesn't even understand how tariffs work, how is he possibly going to secure the kind of critical infrastructure he requires to make America great? Biden's been spending the past four years getting 5G processors manufactured onshore. The aim is to build the infrastructure required for the next technological shift, AI, and prevent this technology being controlled by Beijing, which is already a decade ahead of the US in this area. While your DL's been shrieking about Chi-na emptying out it's prisons, mental hospitals and mental asylums (which he thinks are far worse), Sleepy Joe's been quietly getting bills passed and rolling out the transition to smart, renewable technology. This was definitely a missed opportunity for Karmala in the last election - to explain this transition, to make it a central part of her campaign. The contrast between the two visions - and the stakes for the global economy - could not be starker. Your DL wants a return to a fossil fuel economy and the golden age of trade wars - without having the first idea about how they work. He thinks the US government can control the flow of US oil. He thinks tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, so that's he. But do you know? Your cult-like devotion to such a vision explains everything we need to know about you. You? Yes, you naughty old thing, you. Silly waffle and piggy tapdancing on ice. Does Biden understand tariffs? Does he think tariffs on China are a tax on a foreign country? FACT SHEET: President Biden Takes Action to Protect American Workers and Businesses from China’s Unfair Trade Practices President Biden’s economic plan is supporting investments and creating good jobs in key sectors that are vital for America’s economic future and national security. China’s unfair trade practices concerning technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation are threatening American businesses and workers. China is also flooding global markets with artificially low-priced exports. In response to China’s unfair trade practices and to counteract the resulting harms, today, President Biden is directing his Trade Representative to increase tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on $18 billion of imports from China to protect American workers and businesses. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/14/fact-sheet-president-biden-takes-action-to-protect-american-workers-and-businesses-from-chinas-unfair-trade-practices/ Silly old Biden, he doesn't understand tariffs.  Your cult-like devotion to such a Biden vision explains everything we need to know about you. "Oh! Look over there!! TRUMP!"

They're not sending in their best, dear boy. They're not sending you.

They're rapists, they bring in drugs and some, I assume, are good people.

Men of military age. Stone Cold killers.

You.

Frank wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 7:33pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:30pm: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:02pm: The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ... Ah. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? I'm curious. Don't delete the pertinent bit: ...after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris. You are a dishonest, lying, contemptible little shhit, contemptible little lying shhit. Creep.

And who was POTUS on Wednesday?

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 8:36am:

Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 7:33pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:30pm: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:02pm: The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ... Ah. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? I'm curious. Don't delete the pertinent bit: ...after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris. You are a dishonest, lying, contemptible little shhit, contemptible little lying shhit. Creep. And who was POTUS on Wednesday?

Yeah, GOOD question!  Who indeed? Nobody knows.

It's been a mystery for a couple of years now.

Frank wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 8:50am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 8:36am: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 7:33pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:30pm: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:02pm: The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ... Ah. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? I'm curious. Don't delete the pertinent bit: ...after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris. You are a dishonest, lying, contemptible little shhit, contemptible little lying shhit. Creep. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? Yeah, GOOD question!  Who indeed? Nobody knows. It's been a mystery for a couple of years now.

Sure, nobody knows who's President when the good stuff is happening.

"The market returns under Biden are the second best in modern history going back to 1945, Stovall found. The only stronger performance was during the booming dotcom days under former President Bill Clinton during the 1990s."

But when bad stuff is happening, Biden is definitely POTUS - right?

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 8:55am:

Frank wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 8:50am: greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 8:36am: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 7:33pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:30pm: Frank wrote on Nov 30th, 2024 at 5:02pm: The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to a record high, closing up more than 1,500 points on Wednesday ... Ah. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? I'm curious. Don't delete the pertinent bit: ...after Trump won the presidential election over Vice President Kamala Harris. You are a dishonest, lying, contemptible little shhit, contemptible little lying shhit. Creep. And who was POTUS on Wednesday? Yeah, GOOD question!  Who indeed? Nobody knows. It's been a mystery for a couple of years now. Sure, nobody knows who's President when the good stuff is happening. "The market returns under Biden are the second best in modern history going back to 1945, Stovall found. The only stronger performance was during the booming dotcom days under former President Bill Clinton during the 1990s." But when bad stuff is happening, Biden is definitely POTUS - right?

Definitely. The numbers are IN. When the markets respond to DL's trade wars, we'll remember this post.

DL can't change numbers, nor can sycophantic cult followers like the old boy.

We're onto them.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 5:34pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:31pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. You just don’t get it! Nope. And he never will. They believe whatever Trump says, no matter what. And in this case, Trump has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

Careful Greggery or Frank will insult you.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 9:53am:

Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C

Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit.

You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

Dnarever wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 8:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 5:34pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:31pm: Frank wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 3:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Pakman's ignorance is matched by his smugness - and the eager stupidity of those who lap up his nonsense. If it was really as he says - American importers and consumers wear the cost of tariffs, not China - then it would have been also Chinese importers and consumers who paid the price for Chinese government impsed tariffs on Australian goods, with no discernible effect on Australia. Were the ChiComms so stupid as to deliberately hurt their own companies and consumers? By Pakman's smug idiocy,  yes. Chinese tariffs on Australian goods were calculated to inflict pain on Chinese importers and Chinese consumers, leaving Australia unaffected. The ChiComms oppose tariffs in their own goods because they want to protect American companies and consumers. And so they threaten to impose retaliatory  tariffs of their own to hurt their own companies and consumers. You just don’t get it! Nope. And he never will. They believe whatever Trump says, no matter what. And in this case, Trump has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Careful Greggery or Frank will insult you.

Ooh!

Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 10:11pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased.

I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort?

That's a question.

Donald Trump threatens BRICS nations with 100pc tariffs if they seek to dethrone US dollar >:(

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2024 at 5:31pm:

Donald Trump threatens BRICS nations with 100pc tariffs if they seek to dethrone US dollar >:(

Look!  LOOK!
He can post ABC headlines!

You got jaw lock, cockwomble?

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

FD wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 11:10pm:

Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question.

No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it.

Mortdooley wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2024 at 8:53pm:

FD wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 11:10pm: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question. No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it.

You heard it here first, leftards.

No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more.

No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends.

We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no?

Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade.

They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave.

SEND THEM BACK !!!

FD wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 12:49am:

You heard it here first, leftards. No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more. No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no? Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade. They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave. SEND THEM BACK !!!

That's enough idiotic grimacing.






Trump told Trudeau that if Canada can’t survive without ripping off the US, then perhaps they should be annexed
;D

https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1863741063011225962

FD wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 12:49am:

Mortdooley wrote on Dec 2nd, 2024 at 8:53pm: FD wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 11:10pm: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question. No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it. You heard it here first, leftards. No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more. No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no? Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade. They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave. SEND THEM BACK !!!

clearly the fine citizens of the USA did not feel like they were winning under the rule of the leftie intellectuals and the washington elite

if the lefties didnt want to be chucked out of office , maybe they should have made sure that the 'winning' wasnt confined to the elites

they better have a rethink and admit they screwed up or remain in the wilderness yawning, ruining keyboards and posting silly snide comments  ::)

FD wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 12:49am:

Mortdooley wrote on Dec 2nd, 2024 at 8:53pm: FD wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 11:10pm: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question. No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it. You heard it here first, leftards. No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more. No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no? Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade. They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave. SEND THEM BACK !!!

;D

They just don't get it.

Pakman has to explain to yet another dopey right-winger how tariffs work.

Hilarious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOJlmHOGg8

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 1:52pm:

Pakman has to explain to yet another dopey right-winger how tariffs work. Hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOJlmHOGg8

Pakman is a smug eejit like you, groggy. He reads and consumes Big Media and then regurgitated it.

Neither you nor Prattleman explained this:

In response to China’s unfair trade practices and to counteract the resulting harms, today, President Biden is directing his Trade Representative to increase tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on $18 billion of imports from China to protect American workers and businesses.

Frank wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 1:59pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 1:52pm: Pakman has to explain to yet another dopey right-winger how tariffs work. Hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOJlmHOGg8 Pakman ...

... knows how tariffs work.  Yes.

Everything he said in the video was 100% correct.

The right-wing podcaster thought that China paid the tariffs   ;D

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 12:46pm:

FD wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 12:49am: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 2nd, 2024 at 8:53pm: FD wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 11:10pm: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question. No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it. You heard it here first, leftards. No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more. No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no? Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade. They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave. SEND THEM BACK !!! ;D They just don't get it.

we get who won the election  ;D ;D

tariffs do work. Yes there is pain in the beginning until manufacturing responds and then the next generation benefits from the tariffs. If America continues to allow China to dominate manufacturing domestic products then China will have a stranglehold on the American economy.

Who pays the tariff is the importer and the tariff goes to the government who then use that money to reduce costs in other areas of the economy.

China will end up owning America if the democrats were left to govern, Biden and co would be very wealthy but the average person would be decimated and dependent on China.

Leroy wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 2:28pm:

tariffs do work.

Yes.

Nobody has said they don't.

They work when they are strategically targeted.

However, the rapist's plan for a blanket tariff will not work.

Unless, of course, his goal is driving up inflation and making the average American poorer.

In that case, it'll work.

The blanket ban is the starting point, through negotiation this will change. People are more concerned about rising mortgages, energy and food costs and no one is complaining about the price of iphones or sneekers.

The tariffs raised will help to lower prices on energy, fuel and groceries.

aquascoot wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 2:27pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 12:46pm: FD wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 12:49am: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 2nd, 2024 at 8:53pm: FD wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 11:10pm: Mortdooley wrote on Dec 1st, 2024 at 10:11pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 9:53am: Watch this video clip. It involves a very good, very easy to understand, explanation regarding how tariffs work and why the country enacting the tariffs (in this case, the US) will see their consumers pay more and cause inflation to rise. Just watch it - it's very good. Just goes to show how Trump shapes his messages to make it look like he's going to hurt another country when the opposite is actually true, but his supporters don't question this or understand the issue - in this case, how tariffs actually work. https://youtu.be/vNDSorfJZ5M?si=6K5gBdTC9WPV-_6C Sounds reasonable but not very accurate. The end user pays everything, every expense is passed on as a cost of doing business. China as an example doesn't pay the tariffs, it just sees orders reduced or even end because customers go somewhere else to buy the same or similar product for a better price. Tariffs effect the producer of goods by making them more expensive. The difference in a product using starvation wage workers is always cheaper than a company that pays a living wage. Tariffs can level the consumer cost in favor of the company that pays well for workers. There are no tariffs on domestically produced goods and for all you "save the earth" people" carbon emissions are far less when your products don't need to be transported from another continent. The boy seems to think consumers will just pay the new price and cry that mean old Trump is to blame. It can make domestically produced products profitable again as an added benefit. You're just like the people who want property owners to pay higher taxes so they can have more government services but can't understand why their rent increased. I see. So who pays the tariffs, Mort? That's a question. No one if a legal product starts to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. Tariffs are tools to negotiate with, we need border control and the two Countries on our borders are not helping. All they have to do is control their side of the border, it isn't hard if they will just do it. You heard it here first, leftards. No one pays for tariffs. All those figures DL keeps spewing out - 25%, 100%, maybe more. No one ends up paying - if legal products start to be produced domestically or desire for that product ends. We'll win so much we'll grow tired of winning, no? Once all those foreign companies pack up, move to America, invest a few bil, build new manufacturing plants, employ millions of cheap workers and sell their lovely new products, next decade. They'll need to import a few million workers to get it all going, of course, but by then, Mort and his DL will be long gone. We'll hear their chants from the grave. SEND THEM BACK !!! ;D They just don't get it. we get who won the election  ;D ;D

Do you now? Do you get how all your farming and mining friends will now lose valuable contracts in Chi-na, due to your DL's tariffs?

Winners are grinners, no?

Leroy wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:07pm:

The blanket ban is the starting point, through negotiation this will change. People are more concerned about rising mortgages, energy and food costs and no one is complaining about the price of iphones or sneekers. The tariffs raised will help to lower prices on energy, fuel and groceries.

Respondents in a recent survey overwhelmingly feel that Apple's phones are overpriced, yet two out of five would go into credit card debt to get the iPhone 16.

Will the tariffs imposed on China:

a) make iPhones cheaper, or

b) make iPhones more expensive?

Who cares you can buy an android for less than half the price.

If you are worried about the price of iphones nothing is going to make you happy, you will constantly be chasing your tail to have the latest anything.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:14pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 6:07pm: The blanket ban is the starting point, through negotiation this will change. People are more concerned about rising mortgages, energy and food costs and no one is complaining about the price of iphones or sneekers. The tariffs raised will help to lower prices on energy, fuel and groceries. Respondents in a recent survey overwhelmingly feel that Apple's phones are overpriced, yet two out of five would go into credit card debt to get the iPhone 16. Will the tariffs imposed on China: a) make iPhones cheaper, or b) make iPhones more expensive?

That's a tough one, Greggery. Would you like Leroy to factor in the cost of importing millions of cheap labourers to work round the clock for less than the minimum wage?

Leroy wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:20pm:

Who cares you can buy an android for less than half the price.

Most android phones are made in China.

Will the blanket tariffs imposed on China:

a) make android phones cheaper, or

b) make android phones more expensive?

For those playing at home, the answer is b) the tariffs will make android phones more expensive.

Will this make the average MAGA cultist:

a) happy that they voted for Trump, or

b) unhappy that they voted for Trump?

The price of mobile phones is of little concern to most Americans, heating their house and putting food on the table is more urgent. Trumps plan is not about cheap phones.

reducing mortgages and consolidating the prices of groceries is far more important.

Leroy wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:37pm:

The price of mobile phones is of little concern to most Americans, heating their house and putting food on the table is more urgent. Trumps plan is not about cheap phones. reducing mortgages and consolidating the prices of groceries is far more important.

His blanket tariffs idea will send inflation through the roof.

Not only will every American be paying more for their smartphones, they'll also pay more for their groceries.

Approximately 310 million Americans use smartphones, and about 335 million of them need groceries to survive.

Although it remains to be seen what he does as president, ahead of the Nov. 5 election Trump proposed a 10% tariff on all U.S. imports, as well as a 60% tariff on products from China. Manufacturers and retailers typically pass on at least some of those costs to customers.

As a result, hefty new tariffs could cause prices for a range of consumer goods, from everyday items such as groceries to less frequent purchases like furniture, to rise, according to the analysis from Third Way. Trump's tariffs could cause a typical family's annual grocery budget in 2025 to swell by almost $200 next year, which would amount to an increase of more than 3%, according to Third Way.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 2:03pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 1:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 1:52pm: Pakman has to explain to yet another dopey right-winger how tariffs work. Hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOJlmHOGg8 Pakman ... ... knows how tariffs work.  Yes. Everything he said in the video was 100% correct. The right-wing podcaster thought that China paid the tariffs   ;D

China - all exporters to the US - will pay for the tariffs through loss of sales.

Prattleman's stupid schtik is about paying directly to the US government. But that is not the point of tariffs on hostile / unfair competitors.

Look at the reasons for Biden introducing tariffs. Prattleman doesn't talk about that, nor you. He doesnt say that Biden doesnt know what he is talking about or that Biden doesnt get it. Nor do you say it, creep. Why is that?

Frank wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 9:08pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 2:03pm: Frank wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 1:59pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 1:52pm: Pakman has to explain to yet another dopey right-winger how tariffs work. Hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOJlmHOGg8 Pakman ... ... knows how tariffs work.  Yes. Everything he said in the video was 100% correct. The right-wing podcaster thought that China paid the tariffs   ;D China - all exporters to the US - will pay for the tariffs through loss of sales. Prattleman's stupid schtik is about paying directly to the US government. But that is not the point of tariffs on hostile / unfair competitors. Look at the reasons for Biden introducing tariffs. Prattleman doesn't talk about that, nor you. He doesnt say that Biden doesnt know what he is talking about or that Biden doesnt get it. Nor do you say it, creep. Why is that?

No, that's not what your cult leader said, dear boy. Don't play games.

He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government.

He said the same about foreign countries and NATO, suggesting they pay NATO a "bill", rather than investing a percentage of their GDP in their militaries.

And yes, he said the same about Mexico, who were supposed to pay for his big, beautiful wall - all 28 new km of which he constructed.

So, is your DL stupid - or mendacious?

And how about you?

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:29pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 6:20pm: Who cares you can buy an android for less than half the price. Most android phones are made in China. Will the blanket tariffs imposed on China: a) make android phones cheaper, or b) make android phones more expensive? For those playing at home, the answer is b) the tariffs will make android phones more expensive. Will this make the average MAGA cultist: a) happy that they voted for Trump, or b) unhappy that they voted for Trump?

I don't think the price of phones bothers anyone except maybe you? No, what do you say.

Leroy wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 10:11pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 6:29pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 6:20pm: Who cares you can buy an android for less than half the price. Most android phones are made in China. Will the blanket tariffs imposed on China: a) make android phones cheaper, or b) make android phones more expensive? For those playing at home, the answer is b) the tariffs will make android phones more expensive. Will this make the average MAGA cultist: a) happy that they voted for Trump, or b) unhappy that they voted for Trump? I don't think the price of phones bothers anyone except maybe you? No, what do you say.

Respondents in a recent survey overwhelmingly feel that Apple's phones are overpriced, yet two out of five would go into credit card debt to get the iPhone 16.

FD wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 10:06pm:

No, that's not what your cult leader said, dear boy. Don't play games. He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government.

You are lying, badly.

Frank wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 11:21pm:

FD wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 10:06pm: No, that's not what your cult leader said, dear boy. Don't play games. He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government. You are lying, badly.

What sort of evidence would you need to see to change your mind?

Would a section of a rally where he's saying it will be the other countries that pay the tariffs, not the US people?

what about a tweet?

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 9:40am:

Frank wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 11:21pm: FD wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 10:06pm: No, that's not what your cult leader said, dear boy. Don't play games. He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government. You are lying, badly. What sort of evidence would you need to see to change your mind? Would a section of a rally where he's saying it will be the other countries that pay the tariffs, not the US people? what about a tweet?

Where Trump says that the Chinese will pay 'taxes directly to the US government'.
It was highlighted already, did you not see it?

FD wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 10:06pm:

He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government.

Trump did say that, or something similar, at his rallies.

But I don't believe he will impose crippling tariffs that, of course, would hit US consumers directly. And I'm sure he's aware of that.

The tariffs rants were just that - the usual campaign bullshit all politicians indulge in.

Trump was counting on his base having little to no comprehension of what tariffs are - I think his hunch was right.

Frank wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 9:46am:

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 9:40am: Frank wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 11:21pm: FD wrote on Dec 3rd, 2024 at 10:06pm: No, that's not what your cult leader said, dear boy. Don't play games. He said Chi-na would foot the bill for the tariffs, paying the taxes directly to the US government. You are lying, badly. What sort of evidence would you need to see to change your mind? Would a section of a rally where he's saying it will be the other countries that pay the tariffs, not the US people? what about a tweet? Where Trump says that the Chinese will pay 'taxes directly to the US government'. It was highlighted already, did you not see it?

So if Trump says he's putting a tax on another country, when talking about tariffs on China, is he lying?

Is he not saying they're going to pay taxes to the US government?

.

Maybe the Democrats should have countered Trump's tariff bullshit in terms Trump's base would have understood.

Like, say:

Old Macdonald had a farm EiEiO.
And on that farm were Chinese goods EIEIO.
But with a tariff here and a tariff there,
Here a tariff, there a tariff, everywhere a tariff...
Old Macdonald lost his farm EIEIO.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29^th, 2024 at 10:48am:

... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher.

So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 10:05am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation.

No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China.

Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 10:17am:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.

Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump.

Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 10:25am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:17am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.    Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump. Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years.

I was under the impression, after checking Biden's claim about creating 800,000 jobs, it’s more accurate to say 589k manufacturing jobs were recovered and 175k created.

So they're still in a net gain.

But I'd have to look at the numbers again to be sure.  Did you have a link to the official figures by any chance, save me some leg work?

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 10:25am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:17am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.    Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump. Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years.

Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035.

In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:05am:

I was under the impression, after checking Biden's claim about creating 800,000 jobs, it’s more accurate to say 589k manufacturing jobs were recovered and 175k created. So they're still in a net gain. But I'd have to look at the numbers again to be sure.  Did you have a link to the official figures by any chance, save me some leg work?

I just did a quick check on stats and when Biden took office there were just over 15mil workers in manufacturing and at the moment there is about 14.9mil.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:14am:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:25am: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:17am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.    Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump. Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years. Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035. In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

Dem/Greens say Dem/Greens are the Best! Yay!

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:14am:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:25am: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:17am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.    Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump. Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years. Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035. In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

Federal data shows that manufacturing employment has increased by 789,000 since Biden took office in January 2021.

The first three-quarters of those jobs represent a return to previous manufacturing employment levels, but history shows that is rare.

The post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:18am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 11:14am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:25am: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:17am: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 10:05am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 29th, 2024 at 10:48am: ... and Trumps' tariffs ill-conceived thought bubble will cost even more jobs and push inflation even higher. So your solution is buy everything from China and that will create jobs and push down inflation. No; Biden's  solution: public funding (via tax credits) for the CHIPS and IRA bills passed by Congress, to enable US-based  companies to compete with China. Trump would b foolish to cancel THAT government spending.    Jobs in manufacturing under Trump were steadily rising each year, after four years manufacturing jobs under Biden is below what they were when he took over from Trump. Biden has a net loss of manufacturing jobs in his four years. Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035. In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration. Federal data shows that manufacturing employment has increased by 789,000 since Biden took office in January 2021. The first three-quarters of those jobs represent a return to previous manufacturing employment levels, but history shows that is rare. The post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

And Biden beat Medicare, too!!
;D ;D ;D

More self-care and amusing exhibitions of agony.

Its real easy, in 2019 there were 15062000 people working in manufacturing jobs, in 2o24 there are 14900000 people working in manufacturing jobs.

You sound a bit like someone after being beaten by 200 runs in a cricket match saying we scored the most runs in the 32nd over.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:27am:

Its real easy, ...

Indeed.

The post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:31am:

Indeed. The post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

Its a world record no president has recovered this strongly from a covid pandemic.

There are other records too, under Biden sales of masks hit record numbers, no other president in history has sold half as many masks as Biden.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:36am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 11:31am: Indeed. The post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II. Its a world record no president has recovered this strongly from a covid pandemic. There are other records too, under Biden sales of masks hit record numbers, no other president in history has sold half as many masks as Biden.

And still, the post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:27am:

Its real easy, in 2019 there were 15062000 people working in manufacturing jobs, in 2o24 there are 14900000 people working in manufacturing jobs. You sound a bit like someone after being beaten by 200 runs in a cricket match saying we scored the most runs in the 32nd over.

So - if your figures are correct,  some manufacturing jobs were lost in the pandemic lockdowns (2020-2),  beyond the control of either Trump or Biden.

Greg has supplied the links re  the relevant job creation stats  (in #84).

So...do you want to cease government funding of Biden's  CHIPS, IRA, and Science acts?    

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:41am:

And still, the post-recession gains in manufacturing employment under Biden have been the strongest in 72 years, and the second strongest since World War II.

And I can see you are proud of that darling.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:27am:

Its real easy, in 2019 there were 15062000 people working in manufacturing jobs, in 2o24 there are 14900000 people working in manufacturing jobs. You sound a bit like someone after being beaten by 200 runs in a cricket match saying we scored the most runs in the 32nd over.

Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures?

We'll have a little look-see.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:44am:

So - if your figures are correct,  some manufacturing jobs were lost in the pandemic lockdowns (2020-2),  beyond the control of either Trump or Biden. Greg has supplied the links re  the relevant job creation stats  (in #84). So...do you want to cease government funding of Biden's  CHIPS, IRA, and Science acts?

Bidens term and covid are not in the same time span, I don't care if you want to compare two different things to meet your agenda, thats something you have to deal with. Facts are there were more manufacturing jobs in 2019 than there is today.

And just to be clear in 2018 there were 14855200 jobs and in 2019 there were 15065200 jobs.

Why not pay for CHIPS, IRA ect with Tariffs.

FD wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 11:51am:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 11:27am: Its real easy, in 2019 there were 15062000 people working in manufacturing jobs, in 2o24 there are 14900000 people working in manufacturing jobs. You sound a bit like someone after being beaten by 200 runs in a cricket match saying we scored the most runs in the 32nd over. Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:02pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 11:44am: So - if your figures are correct,  some manufacturing jobs were lost in the pandemic lockdowns (2020-2),  beyond the control of either Trump or Biden. Greg has supplied the links re  the relevant job creation stats  (in #84). So...do you want to cease government funding of Biden's  CHIPS, IRA, and Science acts?     Bidens term and covid are not in the same time span,

Your error: Biden was elected because of the poor economy at the start of his term when the pandemic was coming to an end; Trump would almost certainly have been re-elected if covid hadn't ruined the economy in his last year as prez. 


Quote:

I don't care if you want to compare two different things to meet your agenda,

I don't; see above.


Quote:

Facts are there were more manufacturing jobs in 2019 than there is today.

Greg's link:

"...more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration".

So, how to explain the discrepancy in these "facts"?


Quote:

And just to be clear in 2018 there were 14855200 jobs and in 2019 there were 15065200 jobs.

before the pandemic closed down the economy.


Quote:

Why not pay for CHIPS, IRA ect with Tariffs.

Because tariffs alone won't pay for those schemes, while higher inflation from tariffs is hurting other businesses who rely on consumers' purchasing power. .

But it's good to see you like Biden's 'big government' policies (costing $trillions in public funding).   

FD wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:37pm:

Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see.

[/quote]

Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:

FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment.

yes, you need to, so we can sort out the discrepancy beween the facts re job creation in the Trump and Biden terms of office.

Greg has linked to a serious examination of the data, you have merely asserted an increase in manufacturing jobs in 2019, and that there are less manufacturing jobs in the US in 2024 than in 2019.

(I'm wondering if your 2nd assertion conflates both manufacturing and non-manufacturing jobs, which might explain the discrepancy in the "facts" as presented so far).   

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:

FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, ... ?

That's how the world works, dear.

Arguing in good faith and all that.

You've made a claim, so the onus is now on you to provide the proof.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 2:07pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, ... ? That's how the world works, dear. Arguing in good faith and all that. You've made a claim, so the onus is now on you to provide the proof.

OK show me proof that I need to show proof sweetie.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 1:50pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment. yes, you need to, so we can sort out the discrepancy beween the facts re job creation in the Trump and Biden terms of office. Greg has linked to a serious examination of the data, you have merely asserted an increase in manufacturing jobs in 2019, and that there are less manufacturing jobs in the US in 2024 than in 2019. (I'm wondering if your 2nd assertion conflates both manufacturing and non-manufacturing jobs, which might explain the discrepancy in the "facts" as presented so far).

Makes no difference to me, if you don't know what the figures are then thats on you. I did my research and posted my observations, if you don't believe me then hooray for you.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 2:14pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 2:07pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, ... ? That's how the world works, dear. Arguing in good faith and all that. You've made a claim, so the onus is now on you to provide the proof. OK show me proof that I need to show proof sweetie.

Meh.

You had your chance, and you blew it.

Don't expect to ever be taken seriously in this forum ... sweetie.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 2:21pm:

Meh. You had your chance, and you blew it. Don't expect to ever be taken seriously in this forum ... sweetie.

OH no I've blown my chance to have Greggs pecker take me serious. Don't you believe in second chances or even a pardon darling?.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 2:19pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 1:50pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment. yes, you need to, so we can sort out the discrepancy beween the facts re job creation in the Trump and Biden terms of office. Greg has linked to a serious examination of the data, you have merely asserted an increase in manufacturing jobs in 2019, and that there are less manufacturing jobs in the US in 2024 than in 2019. (I'm wondering if your 2nd assertion conflates both manufacturing and non-manufacturing jobs, which might explain the discrepancy in the "facts" as presented so far).    Makes no difference to me, if you don't know what the figures are then thats on you. I did my research and posted my observations, if you don't believe me then hooray for you.

I do know what the figures we are currently discussing are: we have two sets of figures - yours  and gregs (in #84).

The latter set from a  linked article showing an in-depth examination of the jobs data. cf, your own two-line assertion re job creation in 2019 and a comparison with total (manufacturing?) jobs  in 2019 and 2024.

Note: ozpol is not an 'X'  or Sky News echo-chamber.

Btw how about acknowledging your particular error which I pointed out to you, in my post #98 and which you decided to ignore?

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 2:27pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 2:21pm: Meh. You had your chance, and you blew it. Don't expect to ever be taken seriously in this forum ... sweetie. OH no I've blown my chance to have Greggs pecker take me serious. Don't you believe in second chances or even a pardon darling?.

We call him curly.

How's it going over there curly ?  -  old darling.     ;D

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 4:41pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 2:19pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 1:50pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment. yes, you need to, so we can sort out the discrepancy beween the facts re job creation in the Trump and Biden terms of office. Greg has linked to a serious examination of the data, you have merely asserted an increase in manufacturing jobs in 2019, and that there are less manufacturing jobs in the US in 2024 than in 2019. (I'm wondering if your 2nd assertion conflates both manufacturing and non-manufacturing jobs, which might explain the discrepancy in the "facts" as presented so far).    Makes no difference to me, if you don't know what the figures are then thats on you. I did my research and posted my observations, if you don't believe me then hooray for you. I do know what the figures we are currently discussing are: we have two sets of figures - yours  and gregs (in #84). The latter set from a  linked article showing an in-depth examination of the jobs data. cf, your own two-line assertion re job creation in 2019 and a comparison with total (manufacturing?) jobs  in 2019 and 2024. Note: ozpol is not an 'X'  or Sky News echo-chamber. Btw how about acknowledging your particular error which I pointed out to you, in my post #98 and which you decided to ignore?

Don't you know how to look up manufacturing job numbers for each year?.

Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035.

In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 4:48pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 4:41pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 2:19pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 1:50pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment. yes, you need to, so we can sort out the discrepancy beween the facts re job creation in the Trump and Biden terms of office. Greg has linked to a serious examination of the data, you have merely asserted an increase in manufacturing jobs in 2019, and that there are less manufacturing jobs in the US in 2024 than in 2019. (I'm wondering if your 2nd assertion conflates both manufacturing and non-manufacturing jobs, which might explain the discrepancy in the "facts" as presented so far).    Makes no difference to me, if you don't know what the figures are then thats on you. I did my research and posted my observations, if you don't believe me then hooray for you. I do know what the figures we are currently discussing are: we have two sets of figures - yours  and gregs (in #84). The latter set from a  linked article showing an in-depth examination of the jobs data. cf, your own two-line assertion re job creation in 2019 and a comparison with total (manufacturing?) jobs  in 2019 and 2024. Note: ozpol is not an 'X'  or Sky News echo-chamber. Btw how about acknowledging your particular error which I pointed out to you, in my post #98 and which you decided to ignore? Don't you know how to look up manufacturing job numbers for each year?.

We are dealing with TWO sets of numbers.

You refuse to link yours.

You lose the debate.

 

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 4:52pm:

We are dealing with TWO sets of numbers. You refuse to link yours. You lose the debate.

Hey thats fine, if you just believe what someone tells you without doing a bit of research then you will probably win a lot of debates. I do my research so I know what the facts actually are and not what some random poster thinks. Its not my responsibility to inform you on what you are debating, if you don't know something then just research it before commenting on it. You could research it or you could just rely on another posters post.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 4:50pm:

Since Biden and Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy, not simply recovering from, but exceeding the manufacturing jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035. In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

Greggy is supporting crooked Joe Biden.   :-[

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:

Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment.

What are you? 10 yrs old?  :D :D

You make a claim then it's up to you to prove it.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 4:48pm:

Don't you know how to look up manufacturing job numbers for each year?.

What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D

John Smith wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:39pm:

What are you? 10 yrs old?  :D :D You make a claim then it's up to you to prove it.

I don't give a poo what you think. If I was 10 yrs old I would down the back of the school surrounded by a bunch of bullies chanting "prove it prove it"

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:45pm:

I don't give a poo what you think.

You gave a poo enough to respond ya dumbarse.  ::)

John Smith wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:40pm:

What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D

That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:02pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 4:52pm: We are dealing with TWO sets of numbers. You refuse to link yours. You lose the debate. Hey thats fine, if you just believe what someone tells you without doing a bit of research then you will probably win a lot of debates.

No, I'm reading the linked report from one set of experts, and waiting for your link to reveal the quality of your assertions...spot the difference? 

And I have reason NOT to rely on your assertions: you couldn't even defend an error you made re the period affected by the pandemic (which included parts of both Trump and Biden's terms).   


Quote:

I do my research so I know what the facts actually are and not what some random poster thinks.

 

Another gross error (your 2nd, regardless of the veracity of your unlinked assertions): the article to  which Greg linked  is not what  "some random poster thinks", it's the research of serious researchers.   


Quote:

Its not my responsibility to inform you on what you are debating,

Another clanger  :(: we are debating Trump and tariffs, and Trump's job creation cf. Biden's term. 


Quote:

if you don't know something then just research it before commenting on it. You could research it or you could just rely on another posters post.

Addressed above.

It's time for you to post your link to qualified researchers backing your assertions re the jobs data.

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:48pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to.

Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously.

Your reluctance to provide any indicates that you most likely made it up.

John Smith wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:53pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:48pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to. Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously.

:D :D :D
Which is why nobody has ever taken you seriously, thicko as mince-o.


You blurt and then scuttle. You never provide any evidence, except for your sheer, unbridled stupidity.
Last 25 moronic posts of yours - not one had any supporting evidence. You just mouth off as the thicko git you are, then go all 'oh, oh, standard practice".  What a pathetic little mutt you are.

John Smith wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:53pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:48pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to. Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously. Your reluctance to provide any indicates that you most likely made it up.

Settle John, don't take me serious, I promise I'll get over it.

I seriously don't care if you think I made it up.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 5:50pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:02pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 4:52pm: We are dealing with TWO sets of numbers. You refuse to link yours. You lose the debate. Hey thats fine, if you just believe what someone tells you without doing a bit of research then you will probably win a lot of debates. No, I'm reading the linked report from one set of experts, and waiting for your link to reveal the quality of your assertions...spot the difference?  And I have reason NOT to rely on your assertions: you couldn't even defend an error you made re the period affected by the pandemic (which included parts of both Trump and Biden's terms).    Quote: I do my research so I know what the facts actually are and not what some random poster thinks.   Another gross error (your 2nd, regardless of the veracity of your unlinked assertions): the article to  which Greg linked  is not what  "some random poster thinks", it's the research of serious researchers.    [quote]Its not my responsibility to inform you on what you are debating,

Another clanger  :(: we are debating Trump and tariffs, and Trump's job creation cf. Biden's term. 


Quote:

if you don't know something then just research it before commenting on it. You could research it or you could just rely on another posters post.

Addressed above.

It's time for you to post your link to qualified researchers backing your assertions re the jobs data.
[/quote]
I'm not trying to change your mind, you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe, you can even call me names and I won't mind.

The non-partisan Peterson Institute for International Economics has estimated Trump’s new proposed tariffs would lower the incomes of Americans, with the impact ranging from around 4% for the poorest fifth to around 2% for the wealthiest fifth.

A typical household in the middle of the US income distribution, the think tank estimates, would lose around $1,700 each year.

China cuts $690B in US imports.

Soybeans and corn switched from USA to Brazil and Argentina.

OH and they cut back on Australian imports as well.

Dnarever wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 7:35pm:

China cuts $690B in US imports. Soybeans and corn switched from USA to Brazil and Argentina. OH and they cut back on Australian imports as well.

China do this all the time, Australian wine was dumped, beef is banned due to some test. China will squeeze you into the ground and if you become to reliant they completely gut you.

America need a trade war so they can see what they are in for. Better now then later when China have more leverage. Its too late for Australia, China has already attached all the strings.

Most of the MAGA cultists' pick-up trucks and imported beers come from Mexico.

This is gonna be fun   :)

Frank wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 6:08pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:53pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:48pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to. Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously. :D :D :D Which is why nobody has ever taken you seriously, thicko as mince-o. You blurt and then scuttle. You never provide any evidence, except for your sheer, unbridled stupidity. Last 25 moronic posts of yours - not one had any supporting evidence. You just mouth off as the thicko git you are, then go all 'oh, oh, standard practice".  What a pathetic little mutt you are.

sometimes i think bwians yawns are better reading then a smith post  ;)

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:

FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment.

No worries, then I'll comment.

There are over 100,000 more manufacturing jobs in the US today than there were in November 2019, pre-covid, when your DL was in power and manufacturing was in decline.

The October 2024 figure was nearly 12.9 million. The growth in manufacturing is a direct result of the CHIPS and Infrastructure Acts, initiated by Sleepy Joe's administration and voted into law by Congress. The figure is growing as plants producing semiconductors, electric vehicles, batteries, and clean energy are opening up and employing all over the country. Texas, Florida, Georgia, Arizona at Utah are in the lead.

Would you like a link, or are you happy to go with my comment?

FD wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 10:17pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:52pm: FD wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 12:37pm: Thanks, Leroy. Have you posted a link to these figures? We'll have a little look-see. Why do I need to, if you are going to comment then make your comment, don't rely on me to do your research for you. If you have no idea about the figures then don't comment. No worries, then I'll comment. There are over 100,000 more manufacturing jobs in the US today than there were in November 2019, pre-covid, when your DL was in power and manufacturing was in decline. The October 2024 figure was nearly 12.9 million. The growth in manufacturing is a direct result of the CHIPS and Infrastructure Acts, initiated by Sleepy Joe's administration and voted into law by Congress. The figure is growing as plants producing semiconductors, electric vehicles, batteries, and clean energy are opening up and employing all over the country. Texas, Florida, Georgia, Arizona at Utah are in the lead. Would you like a link, or are you happy to go with my comment?

You don't need my approval, post what you like.

If Trump’s tariffs start a trade war, it would be an economic disaster

There is general agreement in the economic research on the effects of Trump’s trade and tariff wars in his first term as president, in which he placed tariffs on about $380bn of US imports. The overall impact on living standards for US workers and most Americans is found to be negative, with the cost of the tariffs being absorbed by US consumers. Employment overall did not increase, and may have fallen due to the negative impact of retaliatory tariffs.

The economic research looking at the expected impacts of tariffs that Trump has talked about going forward also finds the impact on the US economy to be negative. And there is potential for much more damage if other countries respond with more retaliatory tariffs than they did in 2018-2020.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 11:08am:

If Trump’s tariffs start a trade war, it would be an economic disaster There is general agreement in the economic research on the effects of Trump’s trade and tariff wars in his first term as president, in which he placed tariffs on about $380bn of US imports. The overall impact on living standards for US workers and most Americans is found to be negative, with the cost of the tariffs being absorbed by US consumers. Employment overall did not increase, and may have fallen due to the negative impact of retaliatory tariffs. The economic research looking at the expected impacts of tariffs that Trump has talked about going forward also finds the impact on the US economy to be negative. And there is potential for much more damage if other countries respond with more retaliatory tariffs than they did in 2018-2020.

So why did Biden impose tariffs on China, then?

Please explain. Feel free to call a friend, like Prattleman.

Frank wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 11:14am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:08am: If Trump’s tariffs start a trade war, it would be an economic disaster There is general agreement in the economic research on the effects of Trump’s trade and tariff wars in his first term as president, in which he placed tariffs on about $380bn of US imports. The overall impact on living standards for US workers and most Americans is found to be negative, with the cost of the tariffs being absorbed by US consumers. Employment overall did not increase, and may have fallen due to the negative impact of retaliatory tariffs. The economic research looking at the expected impacts of tariffs that Trump has talked about going forward also finds the impact on the US economy to be negative. And there is potential for much more damage if other countries respond with more retaliatory tariffs than they did in 2018-2020. So why did Biden impose tariffs on China, then? Please explain. Feel free to call a friend, like Prattleman.

Tariffs aren't inherently bad, old boy.

Biden's tariffs were carefully targeted at strategic sectors. Good.

The rapist is proposing a blanket ban. Bad.

https://youtu.be/HKOJlmHOGg8

This reminds me of a interview of Kamala Harris.

She said she was going to build the wall on Mexico border and the host asked her about her calling the wall stupid when Trump wanted to build it.

She wanted to build the wall but if Trump wanted to it was stupid.

Same again, tariffs are good unless Trump wants tariffs then they are stupid.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 11:20am:

Frank wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:14am: greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:08am: If Trump’s tariffs start a trade war, it would be an economic disaster There is general agreement in the economic research on the effects of Trump’s trade and tariff wars in his first term as president, in which he placed tariffs on about $380bn of US imports. The overall impact on living standards for US workers and most Americans is found to be negative, with the cost of the tariffs being absorbed by US consumers. Employment overall did not increase, and may have fallen due to the negative impact of retaliatory tariffs. The economic research looking at the expected impacts of tariffs that Trump has talked about going forward also finds the impact on the US economy to be negative. And there is potential for much more damage if other countries respond with more retaliatory tariffs than they did in 2018-2020. So why did Biden impose tariffs on China, then? Please explain. Feel free to call a friend, like Prattleman. Tariffs aren't inherently bad, old boy. Biden's tariffs were carefully targeted at strategic sectors. Good. The rapist is proposing a blanket ban. Bad. https://youtu.be/HKOJlmHOGg8

Biden is an expert when it comes to tariffs.

Trump, on the other hand, doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them.

"Today’s actions to counter China’s unfair trade practices are carefully targeted at strategic sectors—the same sectors where the United States is making historic investments under President Biden to create and sustain good-paying jobs—unlike recent proposals by Congressional Republicans that would threaten jobs and raise costs across the board. The previous administration’s trade deal with China failed to increase American exports or boost American manufacturing as it had promised. Under President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been created and new factory construction has doubled after both fell under the previous administration, and the trade deficit with China is the lowest in a decade—lower than any year under the last administration."

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 11:36am:

on the other hand, doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them. "Today’s —the same sectors where the United States is making historic investments under President Biden to create and sustain good-paying jobs—unlike recent proposals by Congressional Republicans that would threaten jobs and raise costs across the board. The previous administration’s trade deal with China  to increase American exports or boost American manufacturing as it had promised. Under President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been created and new factory construction has doubled after both fell under the previous administration, and the trade deficit with China is the lowest in a decade—lower than any year under the last administration."

You do know this is not a fact sheet but a advertisement for the democrats, just like Biden says no one is above the law and he will abide by the jury's decision.

It all falls flat when you look at the actual numbers. In 2019 there were 15mil+ jobs in the manufacturing industry and now there is less than 15mil.

You have swallowed more democrat lies without even knowing.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 12:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:36am: on the other hand, doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them. "Today’s —the same sectors where the United States is making historic investments under President Biden to create and sustain good-paying jobs—unlike recent proposals by Congressional Republicans that would threaten jobs and raise costs across the board. The previous administration’s trade deal with China  to increase American exports or boost American manufacturing as it had promised. Under President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been created and new factory construction has doubled after both fell under the previous administration, and the trade deficit with China is the lowest in a decade—lower than any year under the last administration." You do know ...

... that Biden is an expert when it comes to tariffs and Trump doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them?

Yes, I do know that.

Frank wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 6:08pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:53pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:48pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to. Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously. :D :D :D Which is why nobody has ever taken you seriously, thicko as mince-o.

thats exactly what you are sore end, a nobody ;D ;D

Leroy wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 7:00pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:53pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:48pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 4th, 2024 at 5:40pm: What he doesn't know is if YOU know how to look them up :D That is of no concern to me, however why the attention, have you some rules that I need to adhere to. Rule? It's standard practice that when you make a claim, you support it with evidence. At least it is if you want to be taken seriously. Your reluctance to provide any indicates that you most likely made it up. Settle John, don't take me serious, I promise I'll get over it. I seriously don't care if you think I made it up.

Rest assured, I definitely do not take you seriously.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 12:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:36am: on the other hand, doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them. "Today’s —the same sectors where the United States is making historic investments under President Biden to create and sustain good-paying jobs—unlike recent proposals by Congressional Republicans that would threaten jobs and raise costs across the board. The previous administration’s trade deal with China  to increase American exports or boost American manufacturing as it had promised. Under President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been created and new factory construction has doubled after both fell under the previous administration, and the trade deficit with China is the lowest in a decade—lower than any year under the last administration." ... It all falls flat when you look at the actual numbers. ...

Okay, let's look at the numbers.

Since President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office in January 2021, more than 775,000 manufacturing jobs have been added to the economy. The growth is expected to continue, with the Biden-Harris Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act estimated to create 336,000 manufacturing jobs a year until 2035.

In contrast, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during former President Donald Trump’s single term. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic manufacturing job growth had all but plateaued under the Trump administration.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 11:32am:

Same again, tariffs are good unless Trump wants tariffs then they are stupid.

No, 45's tariffs, as currently understood, are profoundly misguided. They fail to target industries where the United States possesses a domestic sector under siege by cheap imports, industries ostensibly in need of protection. The rationale behind tariffs is to render imports more expensive, thereby incentivising consumers to purchase locally produced goods. This, in turn, supports domestic industries, safeguards jobs, and fosters economic growth.

An alternative approach would be to subsidise those industries, providing them with the breathing room to enhance efficiency and achieve competitiveness without ongoing government intervention. However, this strategy requires public funding, and for 45's faction, anything resembling such "socialist" measures, unless it pertains to defence contractors, is kryptonite.

Instead, 45’s tariffs are being indiscriminately applied to all imports, including sectors where no domestic alternative exists. The result? Higher prices for consumers with no corresponding benefit to local industries, many of which are either non-existent or uncompetitive.

Stupid.

There are pathways to implement tariffs intelligently, without wreaking havoc on the economy. First, target tariffs towards industries with established domestic production, offering consumers viable local options. Second, utilise revenue from these tariffs to subsidise and expand emerging sectors, enabling them to compete with imports. Once these industries can meet a substantial share of domestic demand, extend tariffs to their competitors, allowing consumers the choice of paying the tariff or buying locally.

Of course, even this cursory strategy ignores the complexity of supply-chain dynamics and the compounding impact of tariffs on imported components. But such nuance is irrelevant in 45’s plan, which is as economically illiterate as his promise to build a border wall and make Mexico pay for it.

He claims these blanket tariffs will apply to Canada, Mexico, and China, with China bearing even steeper levies that, according to him, “they” will pay, not the American consumer.

https://media.tenor.com/fwJDXbBW7-8AAAAM/wrong-not.gif

The revenues, he asserts, will fund further tax cuts, predictably skewed to benefit the wealthiest. In reality, ordinary Americans, including those who voted for him, will shoulder the financial burden amid a cost-of-living crisis, without access to affordable domestic alternatives to mitigate the impact of these tariffs.

When prices soar, people will inevitably turn against 45. If he’s shrewd, he’ll exploit the backlash to argue for drastic deregulation, ostensibly to “rebuild” domestic industries. In practice, this would entail gutting workers’ rights, slashing wages, and dismantling environmental protections, all of which elevate the costs of local manufacturing.

At best, 45’s tariff scheme would yield a more polluted America with stagnant wages and higher consumer prices. At worst, it risks spiralling inflation, elevated interest rates, and a catastrophic recession that could leave the nation’s economy in tatters.

OR, you could just say Trump will put a tax on China, vote for him and walk willingly off a cliff.

Tragically, we’ve already seen how that choice played out. More alarming still are his prospective cabinet picks, handpicked sycophants and yes-men poised to ensure there are no guardrails this time, only blind obedience to his most destructive impulses.

That is why Trump's tariffs are stupid, not simply because it's Trump doing it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 12:10pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 12:02pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:36am: on the other hand, doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them. "Today’s —the same sectors where the United States is making historic investments under President Biden to create and sustain good-paying jobs—unlike recent proposals by Congressional Republicans that would threaten jobs and raise costs across the board. The previous administration’s trade deal with China  to increase American exports or boost American manufacturing as it had promised. Under President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, nearly 800,000 manufacturing jobs have been created and new factory construction has doubled after both fell under the previous administration, and the trade deficit with China is the lowest in a decade—lower than any year under the last administration." You do know ... ... that Biden is an expert when it comes to tariffs and Trump doesn't even know how they work and thus has no idea how to apply them? Yes, I do know that.

It is a sure sign of dishonest idiots like you, creepy groggy, to delete the second clause of a sentence, splice something else to it and then triumphantly grin at your own supposed cleverness.

This way you also avoid addressing the actual point that was made. Bbwianesque.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 1:38pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 11:32am: Same again, tariffs are good unless Trump wants tariffs then they are stupid. No, 45's tariffs, as currently understood, are profoundly misguided. They fail to target industries where the United States possesses a domestic sector under siege by cheap imports, industries ostensibly in need of protection. The rationale behind tariffs is to render imports more expensive, thereby incentivising consumers to purchase locally produced goods. This, in turn, supports domestic industries, safeguards jobs, and fosters economic growth. An alternative approach would be to subsidise those industries, providing them with the breathing room to enhance efficiency and achieve competitiveness without ongoing government intervention. However, this strategy requires public funding, and for 45's faction, anything resembling such "socialist" measures, unless it pertains to defence contractors, is kryptonite. Instead, 45’s tariffs are being indiscriminately applied to all imports, including sectors where no domestic alternative exists. The result? Higher prices for consumers with no corresponding benefit to local industries, many of which are either non-existent or uncompetitive. Stupid. There are pathways to implement tariffs intelligently, without wreaking havoc on the economy. First, target tariffs towards industries with established domestic production, offering consumers viable local options. Second, utilise revenue from these tariffs to subsidise and expand emerging sectors, enabling them to compete with imports. Once these industries can meet a substantial share of domestic demand, extend tariffs to their competitors, allowing consumers the choice of paying the tariff or buying locally. Of course, even this cursory strategy ignores the complexity of supply-chain dynamics and the compounding impact of tariffs on imported components. But such nuance is irrelevant in 45’s plan, which is as economically illiterate as his promise to build a border wall and make Mexico pay for it. He claims these blanket tariffs will apply to Canada, Mexico, and China, with China bearing even steeper levies that, according to him, “they” will pay, not the American consumer. The revenues, he asserts, will fund further tax cuts, predictably skewed to benefit the wealthiest. In reality, ordinary Americans, including those who voted for him, will shoulder the financial burden amid a cost-of-living crisis, without access to affordable domestic alternatives to mitigate the impact of these tariffs. When prices soar, people will inevitably turn against 45. If he’s shrewd, he’ll exploit the backlash to argue for drastic deregulation, ostensibly to “rebuild” domestic industries. In practice, this would entail gutting workers’ rights, slashing wages, and dismantling environmental protections, all of which elevate the costs of local manufacturing. At best, 45’s tariff scheme would yield a more polluted America with stagnant wages and higher consumer prices. At worst, it risks spiralling inflation, elevated interest rates, and a catastrophic recession that could leave the nation’s economy in tatters. OR, you could just say Trump will put a tax on China, vote for him and walk willingly off a cliff. Tragically, we’ve already seen how that choice played out. More alarming still are his prospective cabinet picks, handpicked sycophants and yes-men poised to ensure there are no guardrails this time, only blind obedience to his most destructive impulses. That is why Trump's tariffs are stupid, not simply because it's Trump doing it.

Trump is a negotiator. America have nothing to negotiate with and have always been duped into bad deals because they have no leverage.

Trumps tariffs are there to give him some leverage when he negotiates.

China's strong economy is because they leverage everything, you should know that from watching them dominate Australia.

The fat is gone from the american economy and smarter trading needs to be done if they want to stay relevant.

Canada and Mexico have feasted on weak deals from America and Trump is going to turn that around.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 2:02pm:

Trump is a negotiator. America have nothing to negotiate with and have always been duped into bad deals because they have no leverage. Trumps tariffs are there to give him some leverage when he negotiates.

So he's lying about the Tariffs?


Quote:

China's strong economy is because they leverage everything, you should know that from watching them dominate Australia. The fat is gone from the american economy and smarter trading needs to be done if they want to stay relevant. Canada and Mexico have feasted on weak deals from America and Trump is going to turn that around.

Neo-Liberalism, your problem is with Neo-Liberalism.

The shift to neoliberalism under Reagan, with its emphasis on free markets, deregulation, privatisation, and reduced government intervention, fundamentally reshaped the U.S. economy. Manufacturing declined as industries went global, jobs moved offshore, and economic power shifted to banking and services.

Tariffs won’t reverse this trajectory.

If tariffs are being used as bargaining chips, what is the goal? Trump claims it’s to bring back manufacturing, but where’s the strategy? Tariffs are the only tool he has articulated. How does he intend to challenge neoliberalism, the ideological foundation of the Republican Party itself?

In reality, the tariffs will likely deepen the neoliberal playbook. Deregulation will be repackaged as the "solution" to any economic fallout, with both "red tape" (labour protections) and "green tape" (environmental safeguards) on the chopping block. Rather than restoring industry, this approach entrenches the very system that hollowed out manufacturing in the first place.

Meanwhile, China will call Trump’s bluff because, frankly, he lacks alternatives. He’s betting everything, going nuclear, before he even has a viable hand to play. His approach is reckless brinkmanship, and sadly, China’s leadership appears more strategic and disciplined.

Making matters worse, Trump has systematically purged advisors who might challenge him or offer sound counsel, replacing them with sycophants. This leaves him isolated, incapable of crafting a coherent response to the high-stakes game he’s started.

I don’t think you fully grasp how precarious this situation is. Trump’s rhetoric is hollow, his strategy ill-conceived, and the stakes are enormous. If this is truly a bluff, as you suggest, then it’s a dangerous one. He’s unlikely to see it through, folding seems inevitable, unless, of course, he’s willing to gamble the financial stability of the entire economy just to “prove” something to China.

And of course, it's the people, including his base, that will have to bail him out, paying more for practically everything, while he sits back lying, saying "China" has paid billions in tariffs.

I really hope I'm wrong, because we'll suffer in that trade too, not just his supporters and the rest of the people in the US.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 2:02pm:

Trump is a negotiator. America have nothing to negotiate with and have always been duped into bad deals because they have no leverage.

The US are the worlds strongest nation and strongest economy, They have strong professional negotiators and are working from a position of power in every negotiation.

The Australia trade agreement for instance is that heavily loaded to the US benefit that most people who examined it suggested Australia to not sign up. There is little for Australia in the trade agreement.

Look at sugar where Australia has a efficiency advantage and could sell under the price of US sugar farmers same with beef, Australia are excluded from both industries and almost anything else where Aus has a trading advantage, not so in the other direction. Most other countries have similar positions. The US are the clear winner in almost all of their trade agreements. The US only allow competition in the industries where they get to win.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:13pm:

Leroy wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 2:02pm: Trump is a negotiator. America have nothing to negotiate with and have always been duped into bad deals because they have no leverage. Trumps tariffs are there to give him some leverage when he negotiates. So he's lying about the Tariffs? Quote: China's strong economy is because they leverage everything, you should know that from watching them dominate Australia. The fat is gone from the american economy and smarter trading needs to be done if they want to stay relevant. Canada and Mexico have feasted on weak deals from America and Trump is going to turn that around. Neo-Liberalism, your problem is with Neo-Liberalism. The shift to neoliberalism under Reagan, with its emphasis on free markets, deregulation, privatisation, and reduced government intervention, fundamentally reshaped the U.S. economy. Manufacturing declined as industries went global, jobs moved offshore, and economic power shifted to banking and services. Tariffs won’t reverse this trajectory. If tariffs are being used as bargaining chips, what is the goal? Trump claims it’s to bring back manufacturing, but where’s the strategy? Tariffs are the only tool he has articulated. How does he intend to challenge neoliberalism, the ideological foundation of the Republican Party itself? In reality, the tariffs will likely deepen the neoliberal playbook. Deregulation will be repackaged as the "solution" to any economic fallout, with both "red tape" (labour protections) and "green tape" (environmental safeguards) on the chopping block. Rather than restoring industry, this approach entrenches the very system that hollowed out manufacturing in the first place. Meanwhile, China will call Trump’s bluff because, frankly, he lacks alternatives. He’s betting everything, going nuclear, before he even has a viable hand to play. His approach is reckless brinkmanship, and sadly, China’s leadership appears more strategic and disciplined. Making matters worse, Trump has systematically purged advisors who might challenge him or offer sound counsel, replacing them with sycophants. This leaves him isolated, incapable of crafting a coherent response to the high-stakes game he’s started. I don’t think you fully grasp how precarious this situation is. Trump’s rhetoric is hollow, his strategy ill-conceived, and the stakes are enormous. If this is truly a bluff, as you suggest, then it’s a dangerous one. He’s unlikely to see it through, folding seems inevitable, unless, of course, he’s willing to gamble the financial stability of the entire economy just to “prove” something to China. And of course, it's the people, including his base, that will have to bail him out, paying more for practically everything, while he sits back lying, saying "China" has paid billions in tariffs. I really hope I'm wrong, because we'll suffer in that trade too, not just his supporters and the rest of the people in the US.

Jesus mate you could get a show on MSNBC or at least a seat on the View.

All I know is Trump has a proven record and gets deals done, I think Soleimani was the last one to call Trumps bluff.

Leroy wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:37pm:

ProudKangaroo wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 6:13pm: Leroy wrote on Dec 5th, 2024 at 2:02pm: Trump is a negotiator. America have nothing to negotiate with and have always been duped into bad deals because they have no leverage. Trumps tariffs are there to give him some leverage when he negotiates. So he's lying about the Tariffs? Quote: China's strong economy is because they leverage everything, you should know that from watching them dominate Australia. The fat is gone from the american economy and smarter trading needs to be done if they want to stay relevant. Canada and Mexico have feasted on weak deals from America and Trump is going to turn that around. Neo-Liberalism, your problem is with Neo-Liberalism. The shift to neoliberalism under Reagan, with its emphasis on free markets, deregulation, privatisation, and reduced government intervention, fundamentally reshaped the U.S. economy. Manufacturing declined as industries went global, jobs moved offshore, and economic power shifted to banking and services. Tariffs won’t reverse this trajectory. If tariffs are being used as bargaining chips, what is the goal? Trump claims it’s to bring back manufacturing, but where’s the strategy? Tariffs are the only tool he has articulated. How does he intend to challenge neoliberalism, the ideological foundation of the Republican Party itself? In reality, the tariffs will likely deepen the neoliberal playbook. Deregulation will be repackaged as the "solution" to any economic fallout, with both "red tape" (labour protections) and "green tape" (environmental safeguards) on the chopping block. Rather than restoring industry, this approach entrenches the very system that hollowed out manufacturing in the first place. Meanwhile, China will call Trump’s bluff because, frankly, he lacks alternatives. He’s betting everything, going nuclear, before he even has a viable hand to play. His approach is reckless brinkmanship, and sadly, China’s leadership appears more strategic and disciplined. Making matters worse, Trump has systematically purged advisors who might challenge him or offer sound counsel, replacing them with sycophants. This leaves him isolated, incapable of crafting a coherent response to the high-stakes game he’s started. I don’t think you fully grasp how precarious this situation is. Trump’s rhetoric is hollow, his strategy ill-conceived, and the stakes are enormous. If this is truly a bluff, as you suggest, then it’s a dangerous one. He’s unlikely to see it through, folding seems inevitable, unless, of course, he’s willing to gamble the financial stability of the entire economy just to “prove” something to China. And of course, it's the people, including his base, that will have to bail him out, paying more for practically everything, while he sits back lying, saying "China" has paid billions in tariffs. I really hope I'm wrong, because we'll suffer in that trade too, not just his supporters and the rest of the people in the US. Jesus mate you could get a show on MSNBC or at least a seat on the View. All I know is Trump has a proven record ...

... as a rapist and convicted criminal as well as the worst businessman & politician America has ever seen.