No, I was always right and I am right now.
Somewhat.
Definitely. I flipped 180.
Other.
Yes there is. You're just making up $#@!.Originally Posted by TheCount
If other countries reduce or end their tariffs, then tariffs are being removed.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
How about not being screwed instead of "protected"?
Which countries are removing what tariffs?
Many of them will be removing a lot. But first Trump has to announce the tariffs, which he has, then he has to make some deals. It has to go in that order. But that is exactly what he campaigned on, and he is a very capable negotiator.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Is that why he has already closed so many other trade deals since taking office- he is an awesome negotiator?
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/12/cana...otiations.html
Canada's PM Trudeau: Our Trump tariff exemption has nothing to do with NAFTA talks
Canada's exemption from President Donald Trump's tariffs have nothing to do with talks on the North American Free Trade Agreement, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told CNBC on Monday.
"We don't link together the tariffs and the negotiations for NAFTA, but we're happy to continue to move forward on the negotiations," he said in an interview on "Power Lunch."
"We know well that with this president there are moments of unpredictability
Last edited by Zippyjuan; 03-12-2018 at 10:05 PM.
Your religious beliefs as to the outcome of this trade war - that higher tariffs create lower tariffs - are based upon trust in your messiah the god emperor. Those of us who do not share your faith have no such assurances.
Your beliefs are also nonsensical because the justification of national security as the reason for protectionism will not be changed by the reduction of foreign tariffs.
Why don't you stay on the sideline like you always have, dear liberty champion?
He's been too busy playing golf. Is that what you want to hear?
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
That's fine, we are all on record.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Yes, yes it is.
And there will be no liberty if Bolshevik mobs, out of work and in debt up to their eyeballs due to "open trade" practices, win the day.
It already has been through it's Detroit stage.
That said, Hong Kong was the very definition, the epitome of free trade, where the people of a remote island, with no resources, turned itself into an economic powerhouse.
Until they found out that the feckless British, whom they had been a protectorate of for decades while they prospered, decided they wanted nothing more to do with them anymore.
And the whole island and all it's people was handed over to Communist Chinese, and there wasn't a $#@!ing thing they could do about it.
There are more important freedoms than the freedom to make a quick buck off fake Rolexes, suits and noodle houses.
So, why does Hong Kong rank #1 in Human Freedom and the US is 23rd?
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...s-in-the-world
There is no spoon.
Good question.
I've never seen any of the "best of" lists rank Hong Kong first.
But that doesn't address my concern: that the people of Hong Kong, in spite of economic prosperity, have no say, no self determination, in their future.
They were dependent on Britain, now they are dependent and ultimately subject to control, of mainland China.
Upon further reading, I see that list is based on a (St)Cato report.
Curious metrics must have been used.
Do you honestly think the UK is 6th in freedom, while we are 23rd?
Pretty sure Britain would have liked to have held onto Hong Kong forever. They didn't have a choice in the matter.
Maybe not having a say in their future is precisely THE reason for their success. Stossel has done specials on Hong Kong over the years. Most people who live there have no idea why they have flourished. People like Jackie Chan are Commies and want Hong Kong to go that route. It is probably a good thing someone forced capitalism on them. Not being able to vote was the luckiest break those people ever had.
On the other hand, trade wars, which Trump is most definitely engaging in, have a very disturbing tendency of culminating in real hot wars. If that happens to any significant degree, you can kiss any semblance of liberty goodbye.
Chris
"Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon
"...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul
How anyone on this website could in good conscience support the US Fed Gov increasing taxes anywhere, anytime, on anyone, is simply unfathomable.
The bigger government gets, the smaller I wish it was.My new motto: More Love, Less Laws
If you are even able to get them to admit it is a tax their argument is that it's the best option as different types of taxation go. Interestingly I haven't seen the income tax, property tax, sales tax, or any other tax removed prior to said tariffs being imposed so I'm not quite sure what their point is.
This is 180 degrees backwards.
lol - should I have included the adjective "ostensible" or "proper" to describe "role"? I think you know what I was getting at.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
Some of us are not looking for brownie points by shouting out slogans to prove how anti-tax and libertarian we are. Some of live in the real world and realize the real world is not a libertarian utopia that has our best interests at heart. One can also say how can anyone on this site support Communist China and their economy over our own.
If a foreign government's policy is to deny Americans access to their markets, increases tariffs on our imports and has the intent to undermine our economy then it is well within reason for our government to retaliate through tariffs. The government's purpose is to ensure strategic free trade that is designed to be advantageous to America first and foremost. Trade policy should be used to advance America’s national and economic security priorities NOT work against it as advocated by some here. This can be done by making access to U.S. markets contingent on foreigners playing by the rules in ALL sectors. If they don’t cooperate, they should pay a tariff in the best interests of Americans first.
Um, neither do we.
That said, why is Switzerland, that has extremely stiff tariffs and immigration control, ranked number 2?
What you don't seem to get is that China denying access to American goods is not good for their economy. Nor is subsidizing their industry so that their goods are cheaper for Americans. These actions are extremely detrimental to overall wealth creation and accumulation within their country. Sure, it might benefit the Communist regime temporarily but it does nothing to raise the standard of living of their people.
And you would have us follow suit.
Not countering the protectionism of other countries has resulted in the loss of 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs lost since Bush I.
Temporarily? Are you really now going to deny how far the Chinese have come to be the economic powerhouse through export policies built on protectionism during that period?
The total taxes paid will go way down, that's why. You aren't considering what is going to happen in the other direction when we have to pay far less taxes to sell our stuff in other countries.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Source on their having high tariffs?
That's not what I found here.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...st-tariffs.asp
This is a flat out lie.
What you mean to say is: There have been a loss of 55,000 factories and 6,000,000 (actually it's 5.5 million) manufacturing jobs since Bush I.
Can you spot the difference?
You cannot leap to the conclusion that a lack of US protectionism is the singular cause of 6,000,000 manufacturing jobs disappearing. The US economy has added over 40 million jobs in that same time period. Prior to Bush, the pace of manufacturing job loss was only slightly less than it was after him.
It's more likely that trade policy accounts for maybe 10% of this job loss. The biggest factor by leaps and bounds is automation and technology, followed by market inefficiencies. Again I ask, shall we ban technology to save your precious jobs? Let's just stop progressing all together? Or even better, why not dictate by law that we can only use the technology that was available at the peak of our manufacturing employment in the 1970s. Production and output would be far lower, but hey, more people might be employed in back-breaking, disease ridden, manual labor tasks.
Last edited by fcreature; 03-13-2018 at 12:09 PM.
The Swiss do not make much of their own, I recall reading a study showing high import duties on items that they do make.
But I cannot recall it off the top of my head, so I stand corrected.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us