shaggybaxter

Who really believes tariffs are good business

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

Personally, I think Trump has let the cookie out of the cookie jar.. a way to raise taxes without anyone in either party having to actually cast a vote!

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/07/749163931/trumps-tariff-bounty-how-much-the-u-s-has-brought-in-and-where-the-money-is-goin

$63 billion by the summer.  And both parties get to run on the 'no new taxes' platform?  And the money goes into the Treasury directly and isn't necessarily covered by any congressional-dealing since it's 'new money'?  Just goes into the general fund and sloshes around. 

--- Guaranteed the next president won't reset them to zero, regardless of party.  

Well, it is a consumption tax which seems to be regarded as fair elsewhere in the tax universe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saorsa said:

Well, it is a consumption tax which seems to be regarded as fair elsewhere in the tax universe.

Actually it's widely regarded as regressive elsewhere in the tax universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Well, it is a consumption tax which seems to be regarded as fair elsewhere in the tax universe.

The most important aspect is that no congressman or senator actually has to VOTE to raise taxes.  God forbid that!!!  It just happens like CHRISTMAS!

We'll see if I'm proven wrong - but I'm betting not.  This is easy money.   BTW: Yes, it's a tax on Americans but frankly, it's an easy one to pay (and collect) and one of the big reasons we cut trade deals with So. Korea and, more importantly, updated NAFTA with Mexico.  China was fun but the growth window is closing we're reshoring south of the border.  Look to India next.

 

 

Share this post


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

The most important aspect is that no congressman or senator actually has to VOTE to raise taxes.  God forbid that!!!  It just happens like CHRISTMAS!

We'll see if I'm proven wrong - but I'm betting not.  This is easy money.   BTW: Yes, it's a tax on Americans but frankly, it's an easy one to pay (and collect) and one of the big reasons we cut trade deals with So. Korea and, more importantly, updated NAFTA with Mexico.  China was fun but the growth window is closing we're reshoring south of the border.  Look to India next.

 

 

If we aren't going to exert military force the only war we can fight is economic and tariffs are one way to do that.

Here is another way to pick up some extra cash in the US and make China compete.

Drop this subsidy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Here is another way to pick up some extra cash in the US and make China compete.

Drop this subsidy.

Yes, that is an odd situation. I don’t think the USPS is subsidized by the US government. Plus last I heard the USPS likes the parcel delivery business. That asymmetric postal rate issue is much deeper. Somehow the Chinese are able to fly all that stuff here for cheap and then the USPS delivers it. Saves the savvy US consumer billions. I just got a carburetor for my weed whacker for a few bucks from China in just a few days. I bet the price at the local shop would be at least 10 times more plus I would have to drive there and fuss with the ignorant counter help, then it would be backordered anyways ... vs. about 3 minutes on eBay. Sounds like an economic benefit to me.

If I had to guess it is more related to the completely out-of-whack US parcel delivery pricing. And the crazy US wholesale middleman markups. UPS and FedEx bloated rates don’t seem to have any relation to the task at hand. Why would anyone reduce their parcel rates when the US consumer apparently doesn’t care?

Share this post


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

Yes, that is an odd situation. I don’t think the USPS is subsidized by the US government. Plus last I heard the USPS likes the parcel delivery business. That asymmetric postal rate issue is much deeper. Somehow the Chinese are able to fly all that stuff here for cheap and then the USPS delivers it. Saves the savvy US consumer billions. I just got a carburetor for my weed whacker for a few bucks from China in just a few days. I bet the price at the local shop would be at least 10 times more plus I would have to drive there and fuss with the ignorant counter help, then it would be backordered anyways ... vs. about 3 minutes on eBay. Sounds like an economic benefit to me.

If I had to guess it is more related to the completely out-of-whack US parcel delivery pricing. And the crazy US wholesale middleman markups. UPS and FedEx bloated rates don’t seem to have any relation to the task at hand. Why would anyone reduce their parcel rates when the US consumer apparently doesn’t care?

Right, it's subsidized by the USPS customers.  There was a time when the US actively encouraged imports from developing nations to help them grow their economy from exports not aid.  The government did run the post office at the time and the subsidies were paid then.  It wasn't a big deal at the time because there was very little personal importation of goods.  Some of the stuff is flown but a lot comes in in containers and the USPS has to deal with sorting all of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, El Boracho said:

Yes, that is an odd situation. I don’t think the USPS is subsidized by the US government.

The USPS doesn't get federal monies but the Fed govt. sure took a lot from them in the form of pension funding.

Share this post


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

Yes, that is an odd situation. I don’t think the USPS is subsidized by the US government. Plus last I heard the USPS likes the parcel delivery business. That asymmetric postal rate issue is much deeper. Somehow the Chinese are able to fly all that stuff here for cheap and then the USPS delivers it. Saves the savvy US consumer billions. I just got a carburetor for my weed whacker for a few bucks from China in just a few days. I bet the price at the local shop would be at least 10 times more plus I would have to drive there and fuss with the ignorant counter help, then it would be backordered anyways ... vs. about 3 minutes on eBay. Sounds like an economic benefit to me.

If I had to guess it is more related to the completely out-of-whack US parcel delivery pricing. And the crazy US wholesale middleman markups. UPS and FedEx bloated rates don’t seem to have any relation to the task at hand. Why would anyone reduce their parcel rates when the US consumer apparently doesn’t care?

This is the rare occasion where Saorsa has a point, and its not trolling.   The international rate needs to be renegotiated.    It’s cheaper to export a box from Shenzhen to Toledo then from Cleveland to Toledo.    At one time the US was a net exporter, and we negotiated a very favorable international postal deal with the world, where we agreed the expensive ‘final miles’ to the consumer  would be paid by the receiving country.    Now we import everything, and subsidize delivery for the foreign competition, not the Cleveland factory.    Trump actually got this one sorta right a couple years ago.    So he played golf and broke NAFTA, instead of fixing it.   

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/23/641140144/unraveling-the-mystery-behind-international-shipping-rates

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Lark said:

This is the rare occasion where Saorsa has a point, and its not trolling.   The international rate needs to be renegotiated.    It’s cheaper to export a box from Shenzhen to Toledo then from Cleveland to Toledo.    At one time the US was a net exporter, and we negotiated a very favorable international postal deal with the world, where we agreed the expensive ‘final miles’ to the consumer  would be paid by the receiving country.    Now we import everything, and subsidize delivery for the foreign competition, not the Cleveland factory.    Trump actually got this one sorta right a couple years ago.    So he played golf and broke NAFTA, instead of fixing it.   

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/23/641140144/unraveling-the-mystery-behind-international-shipping-rates

Fortunately, Trump does not manage the Post Office. He could never ever fix it. I try not to see these imbalances as some kind of simple country vs. country competition as Trumpists certainly do. The big losers here are the middlemen that lose their markup for doing essentially nothing but stand in the middle of (obstructing) the transaction to take their cut. The sooner these worthless idiots get a new profession the better. They should have seen the writing on the wall 20 years ago when internet commerce changed everything. Now the snowflakes whine about postal rate imbalances because their laughing all the way to the bank game might quit working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, El Boracho said:

If I had to guess it is more related to the completely out-of-whack US parcel delivery pricing. And the crazy US wholesale middleman markups. UPS and FedEx bloated rates don’t seem to have any relation to the task at hand. Why would anyone reduce their parcel rates when the US consumer apparently doesn’t care?

Pretty much. Every time I look on eBay for something ex USA, the postal charges are extortionate. The UK and France are way cheaper and faster to Australia.

Recent price on an item $75 for the item and $250-odd for delivery. It wasn't big or heavy, just not coming via USPS.

They didn't get the sale.

FKT

Share this post


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

The most important aspect is that no congressman or senator actually has to VOTE to raise taxes.  God forbid that!!!  It just happens like CHRISTMAS!

We'll see if I'm proven wrong - but I'm betting not.  This is easy money.

KNOW NEW TAXES is a proven winner in political campaigns.

On the shipping thing, the Amazon truck appeared the other day with a couple of packages. My wife asked the driver if there were three. No.

Then, about 15 minutes later, a different Amazon truck appeared with the third package. I can't figure out how this makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

Then, about 15 minutes later, a different Amazon truck appeared with the third package. I can't figure out how this makes sense.

 

The first problem is the term 'Artificial Intelligence' - Computers aren't intelligent.  They optimize models.  The key to understanding what happened PROBABLY lies in what's sometimes referred to as 'dithering' - small changes to the parameters so that the code can "see" what happens.  AI HAS to be wrong sometimes or it never gets better.  Hopefully, your package was dithered.   The aforementioned theory is probably bullshit :)

What's more likely is that the packages arrived at a slightly different time or at slightly different location in the stacks of boxes at the distribution center and so got stacked on a different truck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

I can't figure out how this makes sense.

There are some overworked and underpaid humans in the process that may not be modeled accurately in the system. Or, the system is only concerned with some measure of overall efficiency...the bottom line at AMZN...so what looks like bad judgement is somehow the best way. I think the airlines lead in this regard: maximum apparent confusion leads to maximum profitability in some magic way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, austin1972 said:

The USPS doesn't get federal monies but the Fed govt. sure took a lot from them in the form of pension funding.

The pension issue is a whole 'nuther problem for the USPS.  Congress turned them loose and imposed stricter rules on them than the have themselves for civil service pension funding.  Right now it's the USPS biggest problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

the system is only concerned with some measure of overall efficiency...the bottom line at AMZN...so what looks like bad judgement is somehow the best way.

Maybe but I can't figure out how. Delivery truck miles are kinda expensive and human driver minutes are more expensive. My driveway is really long and the street out front is a mostly-closed 17 mile loop. It doesn't lead to anything except the US highway from which it came. Sending a truck out the loop at all is expensive and sending it down a really long driveway that's going to burn several human minutes is more so. I'd think a high priority for max efficiency would be to avoid duplicating expensive deliveries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, while all the Trumpaloos have been touting the ends to justify the means, GDP just came in at a whopping 1.9%.  Weird, when that black dude was POTUS you all thought that was treasonous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Swimsailor said:

So, while all the Trumpaloos have been touting the ends to justify the means, GDP just came in at a whopping 1.9%.  Weird, when that black dude was POTUS you all thought that was treasonous.

So tired of winning! One more tax cut for the wealthy should really get that magic trickle-down going. Everyone will be a millionaire in 2020! Greatest economy ever! Steel, autos, coal, so much winning they had to shut the factories!

And who knew that the trade wars would be easy to win! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Swimsailor said:

So, while all the Trumpaloos have been touting the ends to justify the means, GDP just came in at a whopping 1.9%.  Weird, when that black dude was POTUS you all thought that was treasonous.

 

And back in 2012 Donnie tweeted about the very same numbers saying the economy was in deep trouble.

 

Q1 GDP has just been revised down to 1.9% http://1.usa.gov/3hAL  The economy is in deep trouble.

 
 
 
 

Isn't it funny what a difference seven years and a successful presidential campaign make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USPS pension problem was caused by congress.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-04/congress-not-amazon-messed-up-the-u-s-postal-service

From the cite:

Let's start with the USPS mandate: It was formed with a very different directive than its private-sector competitors, such as FedEx Corp. and United Parcel Service Inc. Those two giant private shippers, along with a bevy of smaller ones, are for-profit companies that can charge whatever they believe the market will bear. The USPS, by contrast, is charged with delivering to every home and business in America, no matter how remote. And, they can only charge what Congress allows; increases require approval. It also has congressional pressure and oversight on where it must maintain postal offices. The USPS has been slowly closing sites where there is insufficient customer demand. But closing an obsolete or little-used facility invariably entails a battle with each representative, who in turn faces voter anger when the local post office is targeted for closing. FedEx or UPS can open or close locations with little problem as demand and package traffic dictate.

Then there is the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA), which some have taken to calling "the most insane law" ever passed by Congress. The law requires the Postal Service, which receives no taxpayer subsidies, to prefund its retirees' health benefits up to the year 2056. This is a $5 billion per year cost; it is a requirement that no other entity, private or public, has to make. If that doesn't meet the definition of insanity, I don't know what does. Without this obligation, the Post Office actually turns a profit. Some have called this a "manufactured crisis." It's also significant that lots of companies benefit from a burden that makes the USPS less competitive; these same companies might also would benefit from full USPS privatization, a goal that has been pushed by several conservative think tanks for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

now soreass - which bunch of dipshits in congress caused that problem? 

<cough > Republicunts </ cough >

and why did they do it? as a favor to private carriers and because they hate the postal service.

this isn't news, chump.

Share this post


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

So tired of winning! One more tax cut for the wealthy should really get that magic trickle-down going. Everyone will be a millionaire in 2020! Greatest economy ever! Steel, autos, coal, so much winning they had to shut the factories!

And who knew that the trade wars would be easy to win! 

That's why I was so frustrated..Tax cuts CAN work IF you have a capital starved economy AND investors are confident that stable policies will exist going forward.  Simply put, the US is not capital starved - in any way, shape, or form.  The tax cut had no chance of pushing the growth dial.  None.  Pure political theater.   My great hope was the tax cut laws would SIMPLIFY and close loop holes.  The increase of the standard deduction cleaned up some minor issues by papering them over, not by removing them.  Fail.  Total, abject, fail.  Opacity is a primary tool of the authoritarian.

 

2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Then there is the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA), which some have taken to calling "the most insane law" ever passed by Congress. The law requires the Postal Service, which receives no taxpayer subsidies, to prefund its retirees' health benefits up to the year 2056. This is a $5 billion per year cost; it is a requirement that no other entity, private or public, has to make. If that doesn't meet the definition of insanity, I don't know what does. Without this obligation, the Post Office actually turns a profit. Some have called this a "manufactured crisis." It's also significant that lots of companies benefit from a burden that makes the USPS less competitive; these same companies might also would benefit from full USPS privatization, a goal that has been pushed by several conservative think tanks for years. 

I'm a big fan of the postal service.  I would love to see that requirement imposed on the other branches of government or the private sector.  Let's see how that works out.

Share this post


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

The law requires the Postal Service, which receives no taxpayer subsidies, to prefund its retirees' health benefits up to the year 2056. This is a $5 billion per year cost; it is a requirement that no other entity, private or public, has to make.

Yep, especially since the USPS hires contractors these days, for the most part. Contractractors have no access to those benefits. Total money grab. Congress will appropriate those monies to something else to suit them.

I used to work very closely with the USPS. They're actually a very tight govt. entity but got screwed by the shitheads in Congress, who will dip into that fund for some dumb endeavor.
The USPS is one of the most efficient govt. agencies we have. Give your postal worker a spiff if you can. Last time I tried, I got a book of stamps. Maybe a little miscommunication in that transaction.

Share this post


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

I'm a big fan of the postal service.  I would love to see that requirement imposed on the other branches of government or the private sector.  Let's see how that works out.

That would be good if only from believing that pensions are guaranteed (OH wait, they are, by the government) and failure proof. 

Selling pie in the sky isn't only for religions.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That would be good if only from believing that pensions are guaranteed (OH wait, they are, by the government) and failure proof. 

that government "guarantee" isn't for the whole value of the pension. Just ask a US Air pilot.

getting sick of people who brag out one side of their mouth about the wonders of private retirement returns - which have been delivered to you fucks on a silver platter with 3 decades of government policy that insists "THE MARKET MUST GO UP" and then mocking government guarantees on other shit. You've voted yourself guaranteed government returns via tax policy and government policy. 

Then, it's just another day in the US gerontacracy where y'all vote yourself pie in the sky and then sit around telling each other you earned it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

that government "guarantee" isn't for the whole value of the pension. Just ask a US Air pilot.

getting sick of people who brag out one side of their mouth about the wonders of private retirement returns - which have been delivered to you fucks on a silver platter with 3 decades of government policy that insists "THE MARKET MUST GO UP" and then mocking government guarantees on other shit. You've voted yourself guaranteed government returns via tax policy and government policy. 

My wife isn't a US Air pilot but got stiffed by an underfunded 'pension'.

I'm not happy with the environment the government creates but, it's the current state of the sea and wind and I need to adapt to it.

I don't expect a shift anytime soon.

 

Share this post


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

The USPS pension problem was caused by Republicans congress......

FIFY

So, you enjoy getting screwed by your overlords. We already knew.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

My wife isn't a US Air pilot but got stiffed by an underfunded 'pension'.

I'm not happy with the environment the government creates but, it's the current state of the sea and wind and I need to adapt to it.

I don't expect a shift anytime soon.

 

I believe the vast majority of pensions will all eventually consolidate.  They'll get merged into something that vaguely looks like SSI.  You'll have a 'retirement' program and a 'healthcare' program (i.e, medicare).  There will be some private plans but they'll be quasi regulated as well.

In 10 years, millennials will be the single largest voting block and will be that way for 40 years following.  They'll pick what happens.  I hope you've been nice to them :)  My daughter told me that for helping her with college, I've been promoted from 'puppy chow' in the home to 'hot dogs!'.  SWEEET.  I'm hoping to get to 'chicken fingers' within a few years.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I'm not happy with the environment the government creates

BULLSHIT.

You brag every fucking day here about how you got yours and fuck everyone else. That's your whole schtick. Your rode it, cashed out, and now are arguing for policy that entrench your advantage. Don't pretend you don't want this  - you do. You actively argue for it. Don't claim you are "adapting to it" when you are advocating the very thing happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

In 10 years, millennials will be the single largest voting block and will be that way for 40 years following.  They'll pick what happens.  I hope you've been nice to them :)  My daughter told me that for helping her with college, I've been promoted from 'puppy chow' in the home to 'hot dogs!'.  SWEEET.  I'm hoping to get to 'chicken fingers' within a few years.

May I have my children contact your daughter?  Just want them to consider the options.

Share this post


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

I believe the vast majority of pensions will all eventually consolidate.  They'll get merged into something that vaguely looks like SSI.  You'll have a 'retirement' program and a 'healthcare' program (i.e, medicare).  There will be some private plans but they'll be quasi regulated as well.

In 10 years, millennials will be the single largest voting block and will be that way for 40 years following.  They'll pick what happens.  I hope you've been nice to them :)  My daughter told me that for helping her with college, I've been promoted from 'puppy chow' in the home to 'hot dogs!'.  SWEEET.  I'm hoping to get to 'chicken fingers' within a few years.

 

My wife and I essentially paid for our two sons college educations.  I’m hoping to get upgraded to no less than a TV dinner.  Hope springs eternal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cmilliken said:

I believe the vast majority of pensions will all eventually consolidate.  They'll get merged into something that vaguely looks like SSI.  You'll have a 'retirement' program and a 'healthcare' program (i.e, medicare).  There will be some private plans but they'll be quasi regulated as well.

In 10 years, millennials will be the single largest voting block and will be that way for 40 years following.  They'll pick what happens.  I hope you've been nice to them :)  My daughter told me that for helping her with college, I've been promoted from 'puppy chow' in the home to 'hot dogs!'.  SWEEET.  I'm hoping to get to 'chicken fingers' within a few years.

 

Hey, let them vote for what they want which seems to be all sorts of security (except physical, that takes guns and scary people).  They get to pay for it.

Social Security had already been implemented as a 1 percent tax before I was born.  I was in grade school when it was first increased and that was about the time I was learning about money.  I recall vaguely folks bitching about the 50% increase in taxes.  That was about the time I started learning about what taxes were.  By the time I got out of HS, they had doubled again to 3%.  I do remember the discussions in civics class where I was told that the money was invested.  Then I found out it was not all invested.  Some was going to pay older folks their benefits.  I asked what happened to their investment and never got a satisfactory answer but, the taxes kept going up.  Folks started telling me that SS wouldn't be around when I was 65 (coincidentally, this was actually before 1965).  There were some forward thinkers who had said so in 1938 but what the fuck did they know.

One day I bitched about the most recent raise and my boss took my pay stub and told me how to think about each line item on it.  When it got to FICA he told me just pretend that doesn't exist.  There is no way you can come up with a tax deduction to reduce it.  The government takes it with a promise that you will get something back someday; don't count on it.  Until then, forget it and concentrate on the other numbers that you can change. 

And then came "health insurance" all I had to do was put up a little more than 1/3 of 1% and not have to worry when I reached 65.  That's up to 1.45% now.  It could go higher but the folks who actually believed in Social Security and Medicare as what they needed are on Medicaid and that comes out of a different pocket.

That "get off my yard" you hear is actually "That pot of water is going to boil you stupid frog".

I will however admit that there are some folks near my age who are lying to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

My wife and I essentially paid for our two sons college educations.  I’m hoping to get upgraded to no less than a TV dinner.  Hope springs eternal.

If you left them without student debt, you done good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

If you left them without student debt, you done good.

Thank you.  We did some sacrificing but got it done.  

No loans, no debts, and a functioning but not new car.  Now the pressure is on them to do the same for their kids.  My parents paid for my college and they were both factory workers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Hey, let them vote for what they want which seems to be all sorts of security (except physical, that takes guns and scary people).  They get to pay for it.

Social Security had already been implemented as a 1 percent tax before I was born.  I was in grade school when it was first increased and that was about the time I was learning about money.  I recall vaguely folks bitching about the 50% increase in taxes.  That was about the time I started learning about what taxes were.  By the time I got out of HS, they had doubled again to 3%.  I do remember the discussions in civics class where I was told that the money was invested.  Then I found out it was not all invested.  Some was going to pay older folks their benefits.  I asked what happened to their investment and never got a satisfactory answer

That's because you're too stupid to understand what a BOND is.

Oh and "doubled again to 3%" does not compute. Surprise surprise, you don't understand either finance/investing OR math.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

That's because you're too stupid to understand what a BOND is.

Oh and "doubled again to 3%" does not compute. Surprise surprise, you don't understand either finance/investing OR math.

- DSK

1.5 to 3.0 is doubling.

I understand what a bond is but I can't by my own bonds with my own money.  The government collects cash, buys their own bond and has the cash in another pocket and spends it.

It's like having 10 bucks in your left pocket and need 20 to get to payday.  So, you take the ten from your left pocket, count it and count it again as you put it in the right pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saorsa said:

1.5 to 3.0 is doubling.

I understand what a bond is but I can't by my own bonds with my own money.  The government collects cash, buys their own bond and has the cash in another pocket and spends it.

It's like having 10 bucks in your left pocket and need 20 to get to payday.  So, you take the ten from your left pocket, count it and count it again as you put it in the right pocket.

Uh huh

So, you think they should ship all the money they collect to a giant warehouse, store it by the pallet load? Drawing zero interest, what a good deal that would be.

The government can can do all kinds of things YOU can't.... like kill people, for example.

This is just being goddam stupid about money. If you hate Social Security for moral principles, that's fine. Don't accept the money when your turn comes. But trying to nitpick the whole issue of the SocSec bond system is just fucking ignorant.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steam Flyer said:

Uh huh

So, you think they should ship all the money they collect to a giant warehouse, store it by the pallet load? Drawing zero interest, what a good deal that would be.

The government can can do all kinds of things YOU can't.... like kill people, for example.

This is just being goddam stupid about money. If you hate Social Security for moral principles, that's fine. Don't accept the money when your turn comes. But trying to nitpick the whole issue of the SocSec bond system is just fucking ignorant.

- DSK

No, but the idea that it is invested and gets some return is bull.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

No, but the idea that it is invested and gets some return is bull.

 

You truly do not understand bonds.

I guess if you still pretended to care about deficits (like, say for example if  Democrat was in the White House) you could act all pissed off that the Social Security bond system was being used to mask the true size of the Federal deficit (which actually has some basis in truth).

Here you're just trying peddle noddle-head nonsense to a working class guy who saved and invested and retired early thanks to this knowledge. Keep sucking up that Fox/Rush crapola, it's making you smart!

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:
On 11/1/2019 at 7:46 PM, Steam Flyer said:

to a working class guy who saved and invested and retired early thanks to this knowledge.

YOU DIDN'T BUILD THAT!

Actually, you're right, I didn't. I just got on for the ride.

However knowing how finance works is really really important if you want to play in a capitalist economy.

Ignorance may be strength but knowledge is still power.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US has turned into the China of the early 1400s.  The dominant society in the world, and since it became a net exporter of oil last month, not needing anything really from the rest of the world.  We can get our own rare Earth's if required.  As a result, the US can play its own tune economically.  We are winners, right?  China in the 1400s went into decline due to its suppression of science and innovation.  Perhaps it is, but in the short term, I don't see suppression of innovation a problem.  Funding basic science, maybe.  But then I do see a threat to this closed economic system from the increased concentration of economic control.  There is a scenario of the US economy being controlled by a small number of large players, much like the South Korean syndicates.   However, South Korea does not live in its own controlled world as the US oligopolies will be.  The result will be interesting, especially as the rest of the world goes its own way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
More

Brazil and Argentina have been presiding over a massive devaluation of their currencies. which is not good for our farmers. Therefore, effective immediately, I will restore the Tariffs on all Steel & Aluminum that is shipped into the U.S. from those countries. The Federal....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A busy boy POTUS is.  Tariffs on Argentina and Brazil and now this:

Trump plans $2.4 billion tariffs on French wine, cheese and handbags in new trade war with longstanding ally

He also said that he is in no hurry to close a trade deal with China.

DOw futures are down 290 points.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

DOw futures are down 290 points.

You do have to wonder who in Trumps universe shorted that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2019 at 11:36 AM, Shortforbob said:

:rolleyes:

Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
More

Brazil and Argentina have been presiding over a massive devaluation of their currencies. which is not good for our farmers. Therefore, effective immediately, I will restore the Tariffs on all Steel & Aluminum that is shipped into the U.S. from those countries. The Federal....

so why not put the tariffs on  farm goods not steel and ally?

Share this post


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

You do have to wonder who in Trumps universe shorted that?

The list is long and not particularly distinguished. Grifters one and all.

The DOw is down more than 400 points.  Is this Dec going to be a rerun of last December’s collapse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Harder pretext. Trumps doing metal tariffs under the guise of national security.

Which means by stating the wrong reason on his twatter account,  when Brazil appeals to the WTO, the range one will lose.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The Q said:

Which means by stating the wrong reason on his twatter account,  when Brazil appeals to the WTO, the range one will lose.. 

Institutional corrosion is part of Trumps appeal to his base. Weakening the WTO, and any institution, is a goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Q said:

so why not put the tariffs on  farm goods not steel and ally?

Because Brazil & Argentina sell farm produce to the Chinese and steel/aluminium to the USA. Trump is pissed off that some other countries are selling into what WAS a USA market.

Bit pointless putting a tariff on something you don't buy though.

Not that Trump would be capable of actually figuring that out by himself.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
9 hours ago, The Q said:

so why not put the tariffs on  farm goods not steel and ally?

Harder pretext. Trumps doing metal tariffs under the guise of national security.

akaGP is right about this.

Which does leave me wondering about this:

9 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

Trump plans $2.4 billion tariffs on French wine, cheese and handbags in new trade war with longstanding ally

Do we have a wine, cheese, and handbag PANIC that has escaped my attention?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

akaGP is right about this.

Which does leave me wondering about this:

Do we have a wine, cheese, and handbag PANIC that has escaped my attention?

We will soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from above:

"... Warren opposed the Obama administration's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and has said she would block all new trade deals that do not impose American environmental and labor standards on other nations..."

Doesn't sound realistic to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What tariffs have wrought...

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6667-us-china-trade-deal/b8ef0d1826ca2b48f121/optimized/full.pdf#page=6

In return for a reduction in tariffs China, among other things, agreed to purchase $200 billion of U.S. products over the next two years, to stop theft of intellectual property and to end currency manipulation. Duties on $375 billion in Chinese products will be maintained until phase 2 is concluded.

Share this post


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

from above:

"... Warren opposed the Obama administration's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and has said she would block all new trade deals that do not impose American environmental and labor standards on other nations..."

Doesn't sound realistic to me.

But she’s found The real issue. The US citizen wants clean air and water, but don’t give a shit if the Chinese have clean air and water. So, in a sense, Walmart and the Chinese miracle have outsourced the US pollution to China. If we want US local producers to have a shot to compete on price, you have to hold foreign producers to the same standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who really believes tariffs are good business?

Apparently not Trump's Agriculture Dept
 

Quote

 

...

Now even Trump's own Agriculture Department is disputing the president's numbers. The agency is projecting a $3.9 billion increase in agricultural exports to China this year, Bloomberg reports. The one caveat is that the new projections look only at the current federal fiscal year—which ends on September 30—leaving open the slim possibility that China could hike purchases by a whopping $10 billion during this year's final quarter.

The increasingly unavoidable conclusion is that Trump greatly exaggerated the extent to which his deal would make up for the pain farmers have suffered during the trade war. On Friday morning, Trump seemed to cop to that reality by tweeting out a promise to continue bailing out farms if China's agriculture purchases don't meet expectations.

It should go without saying that "tariff money coming into the USA" is coming out of the pockets of American consumers, manufacturers, and farmers, because that's how tariffs work.

...

 

With apologies for the Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleading, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2020 at 12:11 PM, Raz'r said:
On 1/16/2020 at 9:42 AM, Blue Crab said:

from above:

"... Warren opposed the Obama administration's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and has said she would block all new trade deals that do not impose American environmental and labor standards on other nations..."

Doesn't sound realistic to me.

But she’s found The real issue. The US citizen wants clean air and water, but don’t give a shit if the Chinese have clean air and water. So, in a sense, Walmart and the Chinese miracle have outsourced the US pollution to China. If we want US local producers to have a shot to compete on price, you have to hold foreign producers to the same standards.

^ This ^

It began with factories in California and Texas moving a few miles across the border to escape EPA regulation.

Actually no, it began factories moving from New England to the South, in the 1870s. Of course, cheap gullible labor was a bigger part of that move, than just anti-pollution sentiment. But there was a strong dislike of industrial pollution... and a growing awareness of cities pollution... even then.

There is not enough air and water on the planet for us to allow poisoning it for profit. It is especially stupid to do pay for it with our own money.

One key difference between young people and old people is that young people understand the smallness and fragility of the earth. Old people tend to think that we still live on the frontier, that it's all still like Daniel Boone on TV.

- DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's Top Trade Official Says China Tariffs Didn't Harm Coronavirus Preparedness. Don't Buy His Spin.
 

Quote

 

The Trump administration ignored the warnings of medical professionals who said hiking tariffs on Chinese imports would reduce America's ability to respond to a public health crisis—like the one the health care system is currently facing.

But amid the COVID-19 outbreak, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is still trying to defend the Trump administration's actions. After numerous news outlets (Reason among them) reported last week on the disastrous consequences of Trump's trade policy as it relates to the ongoing shortage of coronavirus-fighting medical equipment, Lighthizer took to the pages of The Wall Street Journal to defend the administration's actions. His arguments are misleading at best and, in the end, actually serve as an admission that Trump's anti-trade policies have indeed harmed America's preparedness for an outbreak.

First, Lighthizer points out that "the administration imposed no new tariffs on several key products needed to fight the virus like breathing masks, oxygen masks, ventilators, and nebulizers."

This is true. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about many other products. Hand sanitizer, patient monitors, thermometers, oxygen concentrators, medical protective clothing, sterile gloves, and more were targeted with tariffs in three phases since July 2018. Those tariffs were imposed despite repeated warnings from medical professionals that they would disrupt supply chains and erode the health care industry's ability to respond to a crisis, as Reason reported last week.

 

"Look at the taxes we didn't impose, not the ones we did!"

Or maybe...
 

Quote

 

Thirdly, Lighthizer argues that the whole thing has been blown out of proportion because "the U.S. Trade Representative granted immediate exclusions from [the China tariffs] for all critical medical products weeks ago."

In other words, he wants credit for undoing the very policies that he's also claiming didn't actually harm America's coronavirus response. If they didn't matter, one might wonder, why undo them?

The obvious answer is that the Trump administration knows full well that the tariffs were a barrier to importing medical equipment that would be critical to fighting the coronavirus. They know that because medical professionals literally told them so at public hearings about the China tariffs.

Removing the tariffs was the right thing to do, but Lighthizer and Trump don't get to take credit for choosing on March 10 to lift barriers that they were responsible for imposing in the first place, nor do they get credit for the fact that they left the tariffs in place until well after COVID-19 had reached American shores.

 

They know the stupid trade war did damage and but want to pretend not to know it while trying to belatedly undo a bit of the damage.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

Trump's Top Trade Official Says China Tariffs Didn't Harm Coronavirus Preparedness. Don't Buy His Spin.
 

"Look at the taxes we didn't impose, not the ones we did!"

Or maybe...
 

They know the stupid trade war did damage and but want to pretend not to know it while trying to belatedly undo a bit of the damage.

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

Good link Tom.  Credible. 

honest question: how did the libertarian members of the legislature react to Trump's tariffs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Good link Tom.  Credible. 

honest question: how did the libertarian members of the legislature react to Trump's tariffs?

Justin Amash called them corporate welfare, among other cheerleading comments. Right as usual.

To the extend he can be called libertarian,

Rand Paul: A Tariff Is Simply A Tax

He won't join the LP or quit the GOP, but

Massie noted that tariffs are breeding cronyism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry. I know what they quietly said about it in articles  What did they do about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

I'm sorry. I know what they quietly said about it in articles  What did they do about it?

I thought they said it loudly in articles. As if that makes more sense.

I guess they did what our elk usually do when vastly outnumbered by authoritarian Duopoly types: got called names, mostly.

Rand Paul was right that Congress simply didn't want to rein in the power to tax any more than they want to rein in the power to make war. The bipartisan consensus seems to be that it's safer to leave those powers in one person. Not much those of us who disagree can do about it when vastly outnumbered.

Removing the person is one answer, something Justin Amash voted to do, causing me to ask people here if he's a Fauxbertarian Trumpublican. No answer, of course, much to my delight. Questions to which the answer is obvious, but which still won't be answered, are my very favorite kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

… Removing the person is one answer, something Justin Amash voted to do, causing me to ask people here if he's a Fauxbertarian Trumpublican. No answer, of course, much to my delight. Questions to which the answer is obvious, but which still won't be answered, are my very favorite kind.

Readers are all too aware but even so, endless boring repetition can't hurt. After all, one or maybe even two of the thousands of readers here might forget for a second or two what your favorite things are. We need PROSELYTIZATION, TOM! AND WE NEED IT RFN. 

[sarc]

endless boring repetition can't hurt. After all, one or maybe even two of the thousands of readers here might forget for a second or two what your favorite things are. We need PROSELYTIZATION, TOM! AND WE NEED IT RFN. 

[sarc]

endless boring repetition can't hurt. After all, one or maybe even two of the thousands of readers here might forget for a second or two what your favorite things are. We need PROSELYTIZATION, TOM! AND WE NEED IT RFN. 

[sarc]

endless boring repetition can't hurt. After all, one or maybe even two of the thousands of readers here might forget for a second or two what your favorite things are. We need PROSELYTIZATION, TOM! AND WE NEED IT RFN. 

[sarc]

endless boring repetition can't hurt. After all, one or maybe even two of the thousands of readers here might forget for a second or two what your favorite things are. We need PROSELYTIZATION, TOM! AND WE NEED IT RFN. 

[sarc]

Personaly, I rue the day when an SA reader doesn't know what the real Tom Ray, not even a speck of sweat on God's testicles, from Podunk Gorda, FL thinks about this or that. Yes, he could have a much broader audience on other social media platforms but no, his tent is pitched here. Yes, dear reader, he does have his own thread but it gets ignored so what the hey?

 

soapbox.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Plenipotentiary Tom said:

Rand Paul was right that Congress simply didn't want to rein in the power to tax any more than they want to rein in the power to make war. The bipartisan consensus seems to be that it's safer to leave those powers in one person. Not much those of us who disagree can do about it when vastly outnumbered.

Rand Paul has oh so effectively tried to rein in the powers of people to make war and tax, it’s true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's trade war exacerbated shortage of medical equipment

Quote

 

Many of the key personal protective equipment items healthcare workers need are Chinese in origin. According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, roughly half of the PPE items the U.S. imports come from China, and the percentages are much higher for some items: 70 percent of mouth-nose protective equipment and 57 percent of goggles and visors. Additionally, 45 percent of protective garments and 39 percent of gloves the U.S. imports come from China.

“China makes 120 million masks a day, while U.S. hospitals are asking volunteers to make them at home. We need Chinese PPE, ventilators and much more now.”

“China makes 120 million masks a day, while U.S. hospitals are asking volunteers to make them at home. We need Chinese PPE, ventilators and much more now,” said Peter Petri, a professor of international finance at the Brandeis International Business School.

The U.S. doesn’t have the supply chains and manufacturing capabilities it would need to make all of this equipment. Shifting a global production process is a complicated, costly process under the best of circumstances — which current conditions are not. The Association for Accessible Medicines, a pharmaceutical trade group, also argued that the rule would cripple Americans’ ability to get medications quickly and cheaply.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/trump-s-trade-war-exacerbated-shortage-medical-equipment-n1170466

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raz'r said:

who coulda thunk it?

 

4CDD2CAB-1A0E-468E-85F2-3E38C4449FFC.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When that level of selfish, stupid, ignorant, oafish incompetence got elected POTUS it was a given that one way or another a lot of people were going to die.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

When that level of selfish, stupid, ignorant, oafish incompetence got elected POTUS it was a given that one way or another a lot of people were going to die.

And the oaf wouldn't know or care.

ozymandius.jpg?w=529

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ishmael said:
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

When that level of selfish, stupid, ignorant, oafish incompetence got elected POTUS it was a given that one way or another a lot of people were going to die.

And the oaf wouldn't know or care.

ozymandius.jpg?w=529

Our you sayeng Trumpe ist in PBS' schoolle of "kinge of kinges" ?

Share this post


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

Our you sayeng Trumpe ist in PBS' schoolle of "kinge of kinges" ?

Many people are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Snaggletooth said:

Our you sayeng Trumpe ist in PBS' schoolle of "kinge of kinges" ?

 
I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

Share this post


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

who coulda thunk it?

Who knew?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ishmael said:
 
I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

Sonnetry Petrarchan! :wub:  Shelley, baby!

Share this post


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

who coulda thunk it?

Koch-$pon$ored Trump cheerleaders, as noted in post 864.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to suspend collection of import tariffs for three months to give U.S. companies financial relief amid the coronavirus pandemic, according to administration officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 4:43 PM, Mid said:

As that great American philosopher Gomer Pyle would have said: “surprise, surprise, surprise.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites