shaggybaxter

Who really believes tariffs are good business

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Clove Hitch said:

His rambling non-sequiturs, his  obsession with Hillary  and other clearly delusional statements  (e.g. calling everybody a "bigot" when nothing bigoted has been said), all point to somebody grappling with an out of control pysch. pathology. 

He's like Nanny Govt was-- clearly sick in the head. I stopped seeing Nanny Govt as a venomous, hate filled wacko and started seeing a sick person.  Made me wish I could do something nice for him or get him some help.  Same with Dum-fuk-joe/Rat's ass-- the guy is clearly a gibbering crazy person.  Somebody needs to bake him some cookies or lasagna, maybe mow his yard-- do something for him, because he clearly is not well.  At any rate, first rule with delusional people is to wall off the crazy, so I'm putting the poor guy on ignore. 

A lot of righties seem to have deep-seated social maladjustments (I'd suggest that almost all of them do). Their love of authority just for the sake of authority, and their obvious resentment of any social reinforcement, make me think that they've had to deal some rather bad stuff in their early lives.

We can see for example that a lot of Trump's mental problems stem from his lack of paternal approval, his father actually drove his brother to suicide. And Trump believed that being this kind of overbearing dishonest asshole is good..... and righties who want a punisher of a father-figure love him.

The fact that there are enough of them to forge a successful political party (with the assistance of voter suppression, packing courts, and serious voter apathy) is the disturbing thing about America. What they don't see, is that they are the product of the social changes in the US over the past 50 years that they despise and want to undo. If the standard of a relatively happy, relatively well-adjusted family life, with commensurate priorities, had remained the average, there wouldn't be so many hateful fuck-heads in the USA today.

-DSK

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They have no shame. 

Mexico Agreed to Take Border Actions Months Before Trump Announced Tariff Deal

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/08/us/politics/trump-mexico-deal-tariffs.html

Excerpt -

The deal to avert tariffs that President Trump announced with great fanfare on Friday night consists largely of actions that Mexico had already promised to take in prior discussions with the United States over the past several months, according to officials from both countries who are familiar with the negotiations.

Friday’s joint declaration says Mexico agreed to the “deployment of its National Guard throughout Mexico, giving priority to its southern border.” But the Mexican government had already pledged to do that in March during secret talks in Miami between Kirstjen Nielsen, then the secretary of homeland security, and Olga Sanchez, the Mexican secretary of the interior, the officials said.

The centerpiece of Mr. Trump’s deal was an expansion of a program to allow asylum-seekers to remain in Mexico while their legal cases proceed. But that arrangement was reached in December in a pair of painstakingly negotiated diplomatic notes that the two countries exchanged. Ms. Nielsen announced the Migrant Protection Protocols during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee five days before Christmas.

And over the past week, negotiators failed to persuade Mexico to accept a “safe third country” treaty that would have given the United States the legal ability to reject asylum seekers if they had not sought refuge in Mexico first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a yuge win. Many people are saying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

We can see for example that a lot of Trump's mental problems stem from his lack of paternal approval, his father actually drove his brother to suicide. And Trump believed that being this kind of overbearing dishonest asshole is good.....

Way back when Trump first came to prominence and it became clear what sort of lowlife he was I said that his father must have been a real piece of work to make him that way.

Apparently I was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Way back when Trump first came to prominence and it became clear what sort of lowlife he was I said that his father must have been a real piece of work to make him that way.

Apparently I was right.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Tariffs were never going to happen. Pure distraction exercise. 

If His Lardassness were to be backed into a corner on this whole deal, he might have thrown caution to the wind (yes I know that is not an option) and imposed tariffs on Mexico, or Alberta, or Gondwanaland. There are no limits to this loon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump Says He’ll Raise China Tariffs If Xi Won’t Meet at G-20

Quote

 

Of the tentative meeting with Xi, Trump said: “We’re expected to meet and if we do that’s fine, and if we don’t -- look, from our standpoint the best deal we can have is 25% on $600 billion.”

Trump added: “If we don’t have a deal and don’t make a deal, we’ll be raising the tariffs, putting tariffs on more than -- we only tax 35% to 40% of what they said then they had another 60% that’ll be taxed.”

For some Chinese experts, this sounds again like a trick. "Trump wants to use maximum pressure to force China to come back to the negotiation table. And if there’s no meeting between the two leaders, Trump will put the blame on China," said Zhou Xiaoming, a former Mofcom official and diplomat.

If Trump carries out his threat to extend the 25% charge to all imports from China, it will start hitting vital communication tools and everyday consumer goods.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-10/trump-says-he-ll-raise-tariffs-on-china-again-if-xi-skips-g20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears “Tariffs” are the entirety of his international diplomacy and negotiating plan. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6a00d8341d3df553ef013485dfbf91970c-800wi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

It appears “Tariffs” are the entirety of his international diplomacy and negotiating  bullying plan. 

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

It appears “Tariffs” are the entirety of his international diplomacy and negotiating plan. 

Your Congress & Senate can take his toy away any time they have the balls to do so, so it's not all on him.

FKT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
52 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

It appears “Tariffs” are the entirety of his international diplomacy and negotiating plan. 

Your Congress & Senate can take his toy away any time they have the balls to do so, so it's not all on him.

FKT

Congress certainly has their role as a co-equal part of the government (though, President Trump has made it clear he prefers to be more Imperial).

That said, we were told they guy is a master negotiator - a brilliant businessman.  All he knows is lying, bullying, and empty threats.

Sadly, there is a sizable portion of the US willing to overlook those traits because "Hillary was worse!" or "He makes Liberal heads explode!"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Your Congress & Senate can take his toy away any time they have the balls to do so, so it's not all on him.

FKT

Congress is almost ready, but it seems the Senate has been Mitchified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

taxing consumers is sure getting popular among republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raz'r said:

taxing consumers is sure getting popular among republicans.

Yeah but not enough to reduce the deficit

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Swimsailor said:

And yet they stil support him...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/rural-voters-tired-and-frustrated-with-trump-but-sticking-with-him/ar-AACLyQ7?ocid=spartanntp

They should just change the headline to "Trump supporters are still dumb as fuck."

As Ron White likes to say “you can’t fix stupid.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Customs fraud is thriving thanks to Trump's trade war

Quote

 

Through the first four months of 2019, imports from China are down 12 percent from the comparable period last year — from $162 billion to $143 billion. Meanwhile, over the same period, U.S. goods imports from the world increased slightly from $804 billion to $807 billion.

That’s paltry import growth for a robust economy, but suggests that at least some of the goods, components and raw materials that U.S. retailers and manufacturers are foregoing from China can be sourced elsewhere. It may also mean that Chinese-made products are being transshipped and relabeled as originating in other countries. 

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/448205-customs-fraud-thrives-thanks-to-trumps-trade-war?rnd=1560365803

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt Trump or his supporters care - those are all just Gook countries anyway - it's not like they can tell them apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of people used to believe tariffs are good business
 

Quote

 

...

A 2015 Monmouth poll found that only 24 percent of Democrats believed free trade agreements were good for the United States. But when Monmouth asked the same question last month, the pollster found that support for trade deals has risen to 55 percent among Democrats. The Pew Research Center says that 72 percent of Democrats believe the North American Free Trade Agreement has been beneficial for the United States.

...

 

So, uh, Dunce Cap Tip to Trump.

Biden and Harris seem to have noticed the change and reacted. Others are slower to change...

Quote

Other Democrats may have a harder time making that shift, particularly those on the party's left flank. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) has already published a trade platform that calls for more "Buy America" programs and, as Trump often does, criticizes America's trade deficit. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) has criticized Trump's steel and aluminum tariffs for not being protectionist enough, and she opposes Trump's NAFTA rewrite for the same reason. Both Vox and The New Republic have described her strategy as trying to "outflank" Trump on trade.

Trying to "outstupid" Trump on trade is a terrible idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Treasury Department Is Entrenching Trump's Nonsense View of Trade Deficits
 

Quote

 

Don Boudreaux, an economist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, says the report's focus on bilateral trade deficits is "completely untethered to economic reality." In an interview this week with Reason, he compared the Treasury Department's scrutiny of bilateral trade deficits to astrophysicists giving serious consideration to a geocentric model of the solar system.

But such is the gravitational pull of Trump-style economic nationalism, which posits that trade deficits are proof other countries are taking advantage of the United States.

Peter Navarro, Trump's top trade advisor, argued in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed that lowering America's trade deficit would boost growth. In fact, no such correlation seems to exist for other countries around the world. As I've previously written:

In 2017, for example, the United States recorded GDP growth of 2dogballs percent and ran a trade deficit of about $502 billion. But look at other countries that had similar growth rates. France grew at 2.16 percent but had a trade deficit of $18 billion. Germany grew at 2.16 percent too, but ran a trade surplus of $274 billion.

The same is true at the higher end of the growth scale. Ireland grew by 7dogballs percent and had a $101 billion trade surplus in 2017; India grew by 7.17 percent with a $72 billion trade deficit. It's also true at the bottom. Italy's economy grew by a mere 1.57 percent with a $60 billion trade surplus; the United Kingdom grew by 1.82 percent despite a $29 billion trade deficit.

 

But maybe the best evidence of faultiness of the Trump administration's view of trade deficits comes from the very Treasury Department report that's meant to bolster the Trump administration's worldview.

On the first page, the report highlights how the United States' trade deficit with China grew to a record high of $419 billion in 2018. "A key driver of this increase was a sharp decline in U.S. exports to China in the fourth quarter of 2018, a time when U.S. imports from China were sustained," the report says.

The fourth quarter of 2018, of course, is the first full quarter after Trump imposed two rounds of tariffs on Chinese imports—the first in July and the second, larger set in August—with the expressed intent of reducing America's trade deficit. The opposite occurred.

 

I'm as sorry as usual for posting more Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a cite from the link above

 

RCEP is seen as a mechanism for China to draft the rules of Asia-Pacific trade, following a US retreat from the region as it withdrew from another trade pact at the start of President Donald Trump's administration.
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/protectionism-slammed-as-southeast-asian-leaders-rally-to-trade-pact-11653370

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than start another trade/tariff thread, here is some reasonable analysis of the Trump administration's trade policy approach, and the USMCA from a Canadian perspective.

"From NAFTA to USMCA and the Evolution of US Trade Policy" by Dan Ciuriak.

From bro-in-law's eco-think tank.  Not much there with which I would disagree...

Can you believe it?  Tariffs still don't make sense?  Neither does "weaponization" of relationships.

Enjoy,
b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, bacq2bacq said:

From bro-in-law's eco-think tank.  Not much there with which I would disagree...

I struggle to believe it's a coherent vision and I think the author spends too much time treating this product of Trumpworld as an actual vision; in short it's the oh so typical normalization of Trumps incompetence.

It's much, much more important to look at Trump as optics. Trumps selling an image of reindustrialization to the US people - he's selling the image of steel making. Whatever the foreign policy objectives if the goal is to re-industrialize the US why is there very little being done with in the US to support this goal? Similarly if the goal is generational conflict with and containment of China - why is there so little being done to prepare for this inside the US?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I struggle to believe it's a coherent vision and I think the author spends too much time treating this product of Trumpworld as an actual vision; in short it's the oh so typical normalization of Trumps incompetence.

It's much, much more important to look at Trump as optics. Trumps selling an image of reindustrialization to the US people - he's selling the image of steel making. Whatever the foreign policy objectives if the goal is to re-industrialize the US why is there very little being done with in the US to support this goal? Similarly if the goal is generational conflict with and containment of China - why is there so little being done to prepare for this inside the US?

Trump lives in a gilt world.    He cannot tell true alloy from pot metal with electroplate.   Of course there is no substance to his trade policy.    He’s a little terrier that barks at everything,    By accident he occasionally barks at a thief instead of the Mailman.    He does nothing to help protect the Amazon package, at worst the thief accidentally steps in some dog shit.  His base love to listen to him bark, and don’t think the shit smells.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump calls India’s tariff hike ‘unacceptable,’ demands its withdrawal

Quote

India slapped higher tariffs on 28 U.S. products following Washington’s withdrawal this month of key trade privileges for New Delhi. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/27/us-india-trade-donald-trump-on-indias-tariff-hike-on-us-goods.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taxi drivers (actually GrabPay) here in Singapore think a trade war will be won by China. As they say, China has been poor recently and is not afraid. Are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Taxi drivers (actually GrabPay) here in Singapore think a trade war will be won by China. As they say, China has been poor recently and is not afraid. Are you?

China media has for weeks and months said China can not win this trade war by compromise. They would rather take a big hit and suffer in the short term, but ultimately outlast the opponent. How would Xi suddenly u-turn on that? It's not going to happen. And now China revealed some of their trade war tools. For example accepting payments for exports in Euro only. Trump has nothing up his sleeve to deal with that, or has he???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ato said:

And Singapore cabbies are always right!

I ALWAYS listen to what cabbies have to say. I will say that Sing is either in a slowdown or will be shortly based on cabbie-net. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Raz'r said:

trade war will be won by China

of course it will , Asians understand long term , as in decades .......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ato said:

What happened at G20? Xi made Trump do a deal?

From NZ Herald

US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to a new cease-fire today in a year-long trade war during their meeting on the sidelines of a conference in Japan, averting, at least for now, an escalation feared by financial markets and the business community while negotiations continue.

Trump said US tariffs in place against Chinese imports will remain, but that new tariffs he's threatened to slap on billions worth of other Chinese goods will not be triggered for the "time being".

He announced US and China would restart stalled trade talks, saying, "we're going to work with China where we left off."

End

China will win this pissing match Donnie is simply making all the right noises for his retarded base who still believe they are winning..

They are much like mushrooms

Kept in the dark and fed bullshit

They love  it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the Duopoly Limit Unitary Executive Power To Tax?

Not holding my breath waiting for that to actually happen.
 

Quote

 

A bill introduced this week by Sens. Tom Carper (D–Del.) and Tim Kaine (D–Va.), and Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D–Fla.) would place new limitations on two laws that currently allow presidents to unilaterally impose tariffs for supposedly "national security" purposes.

The legislation targets Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962—which Trump invoked last year to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports under thinly justified national security grounds—and to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which Trump was intending to use against Mexico last month before backing down. Under the bill, presidents would retain the power to impose tariffs for national security reasons, but those tariffs would automatically lift after 120 days unless they receive congressional approval.

 

Or, on the 119th day, a new PANIC will emerge to threaten national security. Which seems a whole lot more likely to me.

Quote

The bill could be an important check against the White House's ongoing threats to hit imported cars and car parts with tariffs. The Commerce Department has provided the president with a framework for using Section 232 tariffs—by stretching the definition of "national security" to ridiculous lengths. Trump has so far declined to take action. Also noteworthy is Trump's seemingly out-of-nowhere announcement Wednesday that he could consider tariffs against Vietnamese imports.

Uh huh. And the same group who won't say there's anything ridiculous about a Cherry Blossom emergency are going to suddenly decide to stop abusing "emergency" powers?

Quote

The bill also provides an interesting political test for congressional Democrats, who have so far been content to criticize Trump's trade war without taking substantial action to stop it. Democrats on the campaign trail have also stepped up their criticisms of Trump's trade policies, but a recent survey by The Atlantic found that only one candidate (John Delaney) in the 25-person field favored getting America back into the Trans-Pacific Partnership—a good reminder that the political left remains as skeptical of trade as much of the Trumpian right.

Who's John Delaney? Someone that Dave Barry invented like Harvey Heckman?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look - Trump doesn't like our exports of aluminium

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/trump-airs-concern-at-surge-in-australian-aluminium-exports-20190703-p523un.html

Now keep in mind that Australia is a high cost country, higher wages, better working conditions and at least as strong environmental laws as the USA. Plus we have a trade imbalance in your favour.

Yet Trump is still upset.

And some of you wonder why we think tariffs are simply a protectionist move with nothing to do with fair trade?

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Oh look - Trump doesn't like our exports of aluminium

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/trump-airs-concern-at-surge-in-australian-aluminium-exports-20190703-p523un.html

Now keep in mind that Australia is a high cost country, higher wages, better working conditions and at least as strong environmental laws as the USA. Plus we have a trade imbalance in your favour.

Yet Trump is still upset.

And some of you wonder why we think tariffs are simply a protectionist move with nothing to do with fair trade?

FKT

I’m not sure he even knows it’s protectionist. He was raised on a “those  who get paid more are winning” which of course doesn’t hold with global trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spent 3 hours yesterday doing price increases again. 

So Trump tells me that China is paying the tariff on newly imported goods, then tell me why you and I are paying more for all of the old stock that gets a price increase too?

Another pay increase for Sol's best Americans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fat Point Jack said:

Spent 3 hours yesterday doing price increases again. 

So Trump tells me that China is paying the tariff on newly imported goods, then tell me why you and I are paying more for all of the old stock that gets a price increase too?

Another pay increase for Sol's best Americans. 

Of course China doesn't pay tariffs.  Tariffs are paid in the US by the importer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

Of course China doesn't pay tariffs.  Tariffs are paid in the US by the importer.

JHC , have you any idea at all .....................................

 

rhetorical question :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mid said:

JHC , have you any idea at all .....................................

 

rhetorical question :rolleyes:

So then you agree with my statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Memo to jzk

You pay the tariff JZK........You exhibit such short attention span thinking,  you are incapable of the correct conclusion.

Snip:

But Trump’s tariffs are not paid by the Chinese government or companies located in China. They are paid by importers of Chinese goods - usually U.S. companies or the U.S.-registered units of foreign companies.

(This statement makes JZK technically correct,  however that is not where it ends:)

Importers often pass the costs of tariffs on to customers, for the most part manufacturers and consumers in the United States.

Educate yourself here:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-tariffs-explainer/explainer-who-pays-trumps-tariffs-china-or-u-s-customers-and-companies-idUSKCN1SC1ZC

Donnie's talking up tariffs like he's winning and you're paying for it,  and financially  bailing the Soy Farmers and the Cotton farmers while you do that, did you have a bowl of stupid for breakfast?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economics 101 :

Supply and Demand .

The end user , in this case the American consumer pays .

End of .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 8:35 PM, Raz'r said:

I’m not sure he even knows it’s protectionist. He was raised on a “those  who get paid more are winning” which of course doesn’t hold with global trade.

It's only a win if the other guy loses. 

"Win-win" is just bullshit for luring in suckers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jzk said:

Of course China doesn't pay tariffs.  Tariffs are paid in the US by the importer.

The tariff is only applied to new imports.  The tariff price increases are being applied to the new stock plus the old stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Fat Point Jack said:

The tariff is only applied to new imports.  The tariff price increases are being applied to the new stock plus the old stock.

Possibly because replacing old stock when it sells will cost more thanks to Trump's tax increase.

The pre-tax prices are gone and you need to be able to restock the shelves at the current prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fat Point Jack said:

The tariff is only applied to new imports.  The tariff price increases are being applied to the new stock plus the old stock.

I am in the exact same situation.  it would be too complicated to try to figure out what of my inventory is old stock and what is new stock for pricing purposes, and then raise prices on everything at different times as that stock runs out.  I need to be sure I am covering my costs, and the easiest way to do that is to just raise the price of everything.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another answer to the topic question:

Duopoly Presidential Contenders
 

Quote

 

...

The Warren campaign's trade policy plan attempts to draw a distinction between the progressive senator and President Donald Trump, who has spent a good deal of his time in office threatening to terminate existing trade deals without getting very much in return. Warren says her administration "will engage in international trade—but on our terms and only when it benefits American families."

It's a classic example of a sentence where nothing that comes before the "but" really matters. Warren's policy is aiming, essentially, for a more competent version of the protectionism that Trump has brought to the forefront of American politics in the past two years.

...

It's easy to criticize Trump's foolish use of tariffs, but Warren's refusal to take tariffs off the table is a good illustration of the struggle that Democrats, generally, are having in confronting Trump's trade policies. As Axios reported over the weekend, not a single candidate in the Democratic field is currently willing to commit to repealing Trump's tariffs on Chinese-made goods.

 

The evidence that Trump's trade policies are harming the economy continues to grow. Dan Drezner, a professor of international politics at Tufts University, notes that Trump's tariffs have "unwittingly sanctioned the U.S. economy" by reducing both domestic and foreign investment. Business investment in the second quarter of 2019 fell into the negative numbers, while investment from China has dropped by a whopping 88 percent since 2016, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Democrats should be eager to run against those policies, but instead they seem to be taking a wait-and-see approach. The strategy appears to be based on the hope that Trump's trade policies will tip the economy into a recession (or into a period of reduced growth) before November 2020—thus allowing Democrats to make the election a referendum on Trump's handling of the economy while promising they'd do a better job of implementing, essentially, the same trade policies.

 

As always, I apologize for posting more Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese, Canadians, Mexicans, Europeans, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland,...many many others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BravoBravo said:

The Chinese, Canadians, Mexicans, Europeans, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland,...many many others are making plans that don't include the USA because their POTUS is a fuckwit.

There I FIFY, you're welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Navig8tor said:

There I FIFY, you're welcome.

 

Kit.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Another answer to the topic question:

Duopoly Presidential Contenders
 

As always, I apologize for posting more Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading.

The problem is that tariffs are politically popular.  Trump is "fighting" for the American worker.  But any small gain to the American worker is offset by a large fucking over of the American consumer.  And that hurts other American workers.  Warren knows all about this,   Everyone with a brain knows all about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BravoBravo said:

The Chinese, Canadians, Mexicans, Europeans, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland,...many many others

So a general answer to the topic question of who believes taxes are good business would be politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Reuters

Donnie still writing checks to the farmers, he’s so winning the Tariff war with China.

 

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than half of the Trump administration’s $8.4 billion in trade aid payments to U.S. farmers through April was received by the top 10% of recipients, the country’s biggest and most successful farmers, a study by an advocacy group showed on Tuesday. 

Highlighting an uneven distribution of the bailout, which was designed to help offset effects of the U.S.-China trade war, the Environmental Working Group said the top 1% of aid recipients received an average of more than $180,000 while the bottom 80% were paid less than $5,000 in aid. 

The EWG, a Washington-based non-profit, said it obtained data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture through Freedom of Information Act requests for its research, the results of which could not be independently verified by Reuters. 

The Trump administration last year began rolling out federal aid for farmers to compensate for lower farm good prices and lost sales after Washington’s trade dispute with China wiped out a key export market for U.S. agricultural goods. 

The first round of aid, announced in 2018, was up to $12 billion. The second round, unveiled last week, involves up to $16 billion dollars and $14.5 billion of that is direct payments.

U.S. farmers, a key constituency of President Donald Trump, have been among the hardest hit in the year-long trade war between the world’s two largest economies. Shipments of soybeans, the most valuable U.S. farm export, to top buyer China sank to a 16-year low in 2018.

“Farm bailout payments designed to offset the impacts of President Trump’s trade war have overwhelmingly flowed to the largest and most successful farmers,” EWG said in a statement.

It said the first round of payments had been linked to crop production, favoring the biggest producers of certain crops. The second round, rolled out last week, would further favor big farms because it was designed to pay per acre, EWG said.

“The bigger the farm, the bigger the government check,” it said. A USDA spokeswoman said aid payments were made based on a producer’s individual production. “The more acres they farm and bushels per acre they produce - the more assistance they receive,” she said in emailed comments. 

The department has made changes to its new farm aid and said it would pay farmers according to geographic location rather than by crop. A Reuters analysis of the payment rates posted online showed farmers in the cotton-growing Mississippi Delta states stand to be the greatest beneficiaries of the program. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2019 at 7:05 AM, BravoBravo said:

The Chinese, Canadians, Mexicans, Europeans, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland,...many many others

So we list Europeans, then go on to list countries in europe as well?

That's like saying the United States population, Michigan, Florida, and Idaho... 

I suspect a slightly improved education could have rectified a lot of your issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cockeyed optimist!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More debt for farm welfare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

More debt for farm welfare?

The family farms don't get enough to even touch the damage done to their markets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, especially ones where the government can manipulate their currency at the drop of a dime (pun intended).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Donald J. Trump
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500
Mr. Trump:
Attempting to justify that which is economically and ethically unjustifiable – namely, the punitive taxes that you impose on Americans who purchase imports from China – you (as reported by the Wall Street Journal) declared yesterday about the Chinese that “If they don’t want to trade with us anymore, that would be fine with me.”
Who in hell, sir, do you think you are? What gives you the moral authority to elevate your personal preferences over those of the millions of Americans who choose to trade with the Chinese? What gives you the right to deny to these fellow citizens the gains from trade that they obviously believe they enjoy as a result of such trading?
Nothing. Nothing whatsoever.
Yes, in 2016 you won a nationwide popularity contest. But that victory means neither that your fellow Americans, all 327 million of them, thereby come to share your personal preferences, nor that you’ve acquired the right to elevate your personal preferences above those of any other individual.
All of your huffing, puffing, and pontificating about trade reveal that your eye-popping economic ignorance is matched only by your monstrous arrogance in assuming that you and your sidekicks are entitled to override the peaceful commercial choices of others.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, jzk said:

Yes, in 2016 you won a nationwide popularity contest

Ahem, he actually lost the popularity contest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking that a change may be coming in the trade war.

We could be in deep shit by April.

"If the U.S. continues to raise a wall of tariffs on Chinese goods in the coming months and China responds, expect a global recession in three quarters, Morgan Stanley said Monday.

“As we view the risk of further escalation as high, the risks to the global outlook are decidedly skewed to the downside,” Morgan Stanley chief economist Chetan Ahya said. The firm believes a global recession will come in about nine months if the trade war further escalates through the U.S. raising tariffs to 25% “on all imports from China for 4-6 months,” Ahya said. “We would see the global economy entering recession in three quarters,” he said in a note to investors.

President Donald Trump on Thursday unexpectedly announced that, beginning Sept. 1, the U.S. will add levies of 10% on the remaining $300 billion in Chinese imports that had not previously faced duties. These new tariffs “raise downside risks significantly,” Ahya said."


Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/morgan-stanley-escalating-trade-war-means-global-recession-is-coming.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Yes, in 2016 you won a nationwide popularity contest

Ahem, he actually lost the popularity contest.

What, you expect him to actually know..... or care..... about the actual facts?!?

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some are speculating Trumps doing this in order to force Powell to cut rates.  100% believable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

What, you expect him to actually know..... or care..... about the actual facts?!?

- DSK

You mean, Donald Boudreaux?  Yeah, I am sure he wishes he was as well informed as you are.  FYI, he probably likes Trump as much as you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I am thinking that a change may be coming in the trade war.

We could be in deep shit by April.

"If the U.S. continues to raise a wall of tariffs on Chinese goods in the coming months and China responds, expect a global recession in three quarters, Morgan Stanley said Monday.

Never happen - the Republicans are the smart ones with the money.

Everyone knows that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buckle up -

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/china-confirms-it-is-suspending-agricultural-product-purchases-in-response-to-trumps-new-tariffs.html

Excerpt -

China confirmed reports that it was pulling out of U.S. agriculture as a weapon in the ongoing trade war.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said Chinese companies have stopped purchasing U.S. agricultural products in response to President Trump’s new 10% tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sean said:

Buckle up -

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/china-confirms-it-is-suspending-agricultural-product-purchases-in-response-to-trumps-new-tariffs.html

Excerpt -

China confirmed reports that it was pulling out of U.S. agriculture as a weapon in the ongoing trade war.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said Chinese companies have stopped purchasing U.S. agricultural products in response to President Trump’s new 10% tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods.

 

Donnie will be on twitter shortly to blame this on Jerome and the Feds inaction, there is no way he will take the blame for this debacle he's a very stable genius and a smart businessman.

Even when he's jumping off the cliff,  the leemings will follow.

Winning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the US labeled China a currency manipulator but the currency has only devalued 2.5 percent this year.  They’re not doing a very good job but they might have a little extra incentive now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donnie picked a fight he might not win, must be crushing......... for the bully.

Hopefully a few more a few more will come to realize that it was his singular ego and self proclaimed business prowess that got him on this collision course.

Wonder what plan B looks like? Wait a minute you don't have?

Winning trade wars was easy you said..........

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who really believes tariffs are good business?

Whirlpool. No, wait. Aluminum manufacturers. No, wait. JSW Steel. No wait.
 

Quote

 

The fact that a steelmaker that once praised Trump's tariffs is now learning a painful lesson about the realities of "economic nationalism" might seem like karma—with maybe a touch of schadenfreude too. There's been plenty of that to go around. Aluminum manufacturers have sought protection from the tariffs that were supposed to help them. Appliance-maker Whirlpool initially cheered tariffs on washing machines before getting walloped by tariffs on steel and aluminum. And the American steel industry in general has suffered over the past year, largely because tariffs have increased prices and triggered a decline in demand—which has led to layoffs rather than the promised resurrection of American steelmaking.

But JSW Steel's suit is a welcome development. It's a chance for the courts to review the obvious problems with how the Commerce Department has handed Trump's trade policies.

The lawsuit demonstrates the extent to which Trump's trade policies are failing even for the industries that were supposed to be "winning." More government control over trade doesn't produce prosperity. It produces the special kind of misery that JSW Steel is now experiencing.

 

Offered with the usual apology for posting more Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to a Chinese economics professor on - I think Bloomberg? - who basically said the point of all of this now seems to have been to shatter the supply chain co-dependency that had developed.  The US didn't like the Chinese power as the 'inevitable gatekeeper' of large scale manufacturing and that by launching into this trade war and giving China no face-saving way out, it allows other countries in the region can pick up US business - assuming they're nimble enough to do it.

He said "I don't think this was Trump's plan but he has some very long term thinkers advising him".  I think that's a bit of 20:20 hindsight personally but we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fakenews said:

So the US labeled China a currency manipulator but the currency has only devalued 2.5 percent this year.  They’re not doing a very good job but they might have a little extra incentive now.

China wants to manipulate their currency so we get good deals on their stuff?  Sounds horrible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites