View Poll Results: The discussion in this thread changed my mind

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, I was always right and I am right now.

    8 100.00%
  • Somewhat.

    0 0%
  • Definitely. I flipped 180.

    0 0%
  • Other.

    0 0%
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 360

Thread: Trump Steel Tariffs Could Kill Up to 40,000 Auto Jobs, Nearly One-Third of Steel Workforce

  1. #1

    Default Trump Steel Tariffs Could Kill Up to 40,000 Auto Jobs, Nearly One-Third of Steel Workforce

    https://www.cfr.org/blog/trump-steel...teel-workforce

    March 8, 2018




    “I want to bring the steel industry back into our country,” declared President Trump last month. “Maybe [things] will cost a little bit more, but we’ll have jobs.”

    Tariff opponents in Congress and industry, however, have argued that what may be good for steel won’t be good for other industries. Asked why auto manufacturers are so opposed to tariffs if the impact on their costs is minimal, as the administration is arguing, newly elevated Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro was dismissive. “Look, they don’t like this. Of course they don’t,” he said. “What do they do? They spin. They put out fake news. They put all this hyperbole out.”

    Is Navarro right? To answer, we’ve analyzed historical data to estimate the impact of Trump’s proposed 25 percent steel tariffs on auto sales and employment. For the technically minded, you can follow the details of our calculations in the endnotes.

    We estimate that an average car requires roughly 1.2 tons of steel to build.[1] Given that tariffs tend to increase import prices (which determine domestic prices) by at least as much as the tariff, we calculate that a 25 percent steel tariff will increase the price of new passenger vehicles manufactured in the United States between 0.5 and 0.8 percent.[2]

    Now, based on calculations for the sensitivity of auto sales to price, we estimate that such price rises of American-made cars would translate into a decline of between 1.6 and 3.6 percent in global sales.[3] This we illustrate in the top left figure above, which shows our sales projections with and without the Trump tariffs.

    But what does this mean for American auto jobs? The historical relationship between U.S. auto sales and employment is tight, as shown below.

    Based on this relationship, we would expect declining sales to result in auto-industry job losses ranging from 18,000 to 40,000 by the end of 2019.[4] This we illustrate in the bottom left figure above.

    Given that employment in the U.S. auto industry is vastly higher than in the U.S. steel industry, such job losses would swamp any possible increase in steel employment. As we show in the right-hand figure above, the total amount of jobs at risk from Trump’s steel tariffs in the U.S. auto industry alone is equivalent to almost one-third of the entire U.S. steel industry workforce.

    In short, Navarro is wrong—deeply so. Employment in the U.S. auto industry will suffer from Trump’s tariffs to a vastly greater degree than it could possibly benefit in the U.S. steel industry.


    1. ^ According to the World Steel Association, the amount of steel required to produce one ton of automobile or auto-part product ranges from 0.2 to 1.0 tons. For our calculations, we use a midpoint range of 0.5 to 0.7 to estimate that an average passenger vehicle of roughly two tons uses between 1.0 and 1.4 tons of steel. An earlier version of this post over-estimated average vehicle steel input and this has been corrected.
    2. ^ This estimate assumes that the auto industry will pass steel costs on to consumers and that steel prices in the United States will rise 25 percent due to tariffs. The latter assumption is conservatively based on recent findings that a 1 percent increase in tariff costs, alone, tends to raise import prices slightly more than 1 percent.
    3. ^ The boundaries of this range incorporate different methodologies for estimating automobile price sensitivities in recent research.
    4. ^ A portion of these laid-off workers who work in auto retail could conceivably be hired later by foreign auto companies exporting to the U.S. that gain market share over domestic producers.
    Truth is a social construct.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    In short, this council on foreign relations blogger is wrong. The assumption that all things being equal and no other business decisions will occur, thus prices must rise with the tariffs is too simple to be true. I know a single variable that throws this assumption out the window, the corporate tax cuts from 35% to 21%. Suddenly corporations are much more profitable due to the tax windfall, thus there is no reason to raise prices on their products to maintain the same profitability with the tariffs, in fact the effect of the tax cut is a company can push tighter margins and enjoy the same profitability. Additionally if the result is for a car maker to purchase higher quality steel, they can reduce their faults/error rates during production testing, a competent company can use this to reduce the overall impact of using the higher cost steel.

    Again, in short, a deliberately elementary analysis generated to push a globalist narrative.
    I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16
    There won't be a contested convention
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
    The shooting of Gabrielle Gifford was blamed on putting a crosshair on a political map. I wonder what event we'll see justified with pictures like this.

  4. #3

    Default

    Those numbers are complete bunk .

  5. #4

    Default

    Just wondering, but would people not realize that there's an increased demand for steel?

    I just wonder why it has to be that the auto company investors will just say, "oh well, put up the cobwebs, turn out the lights and shutter the doors, I guess the economy's broken" rather than, "hmm. . . it seems like a really good time to open a steel plant." That seems to line up with economic theory, even in a controlled environment.

    If there's one thing America is good at these days, it's consuming, consuming, and —did I mention consuming?—, and where there's a demand, there's a would-be supplier. Even if the supply is artificially limited, people don't just up and quit trying to meet that demand.

    China's economy didn't stop booming even though they tariff the ever-living-f'k out of everything that crosses their borders. Apparently people over there are still trying to make it work, and the laws of supply and demand obviously work even in an isolated [—I was looking for a better word here, because China has no problem shipping goods out of their country] economy. If putting up tariffs dissuaded investors as much as the author of the article would have us believe, then China would have shriveled up and blown away long ago, and yet, they're the ones lending us money.
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 03-10-2018 at 10:22 AM.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Just wondering, but would people not realize that there's an increased demand for steel?

    I just wonder why it has to be that the auto company investors will just say, "oh well, put up the cobwebs, turn out the lights and shutter the doors, I guess the economy's broken" rather than, "hmm. . . it seems like a really good time to open a steel plant."

    If there's one thing America is good at these days, it's consuming, consuming, and —did I mention consuming?—, and where there's a demand, there's a would-be supplier. Even if the supply is artificially limited, people don't just up and quit trying to meet that demand.
    That maybe true if the tariff was design to tax every import with steel it in. But the way I understand it, it only affects raw material not the finished products, so Americans would still be consuming just not what is made in the states. So the most likely outcome would be for producers to set up shop outside the country and then import the finished good. The reason behind the job loss

    Nevermind, seeing as the top steel exporters (Canada and Mexico) are exempted from the tax, it would mostly likely have a minimal effect on job loss.
    You can maintain power over people, as long as you give them something. Rob a man of everything, and that man will no longer be in your power. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    Trust principles; not people.
    My Che avatar is my unique way of giving a big middle finger to the, the neocons, the globalists, imperialists and most importantly to the left and right political establishment who hate his guts till this day. My admiration for him ends where his anti imperialist pro communism ideology starts.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    That maybe true if the tariff was design to tax every import with steel it in. But the way I understand it, it only affects raw material not the finished products, so Americans would still be consuming just not what is made in the states. So the most likely outcome would be for producers to set up shop outside the country and then import the finished good. The reason behind the job loss

    Nevermind, seeing as the top steel exporters (Canada and Mexico) are exempted from the tax, it would mostly likely have a minimal effect on job loss.
    We have seen this movie before already. Bush's steel tariffs excluded Canada and cost an estimated 200,000 jobs in manufacturing.

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/he...18-03-08#false

    The Bush steel tariffs
    In early 2002, then-President George W. Bush imposed steel tariffs of up to 30% on imports of steel in an effort to shore up domestic producers against low-cost imports.

    These tariffs were controversial both at home and abroad because, even as they helped steelmakers, they squeezed steel users, such as the auto industry.

    They were also seen as hypocritical at a time when the Republican administration was trying to encourage other countries to liberalize trade policies — and reduce their tariffs — through the Doha Round of World Trade Organization talks that were happening at the time.
    (sound familiar?)

    Some 200,000 workers in U.S. manufacturing lost their jobs because of tariffs under George W. Bush
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty View Post

    Half the crap I write here is just to entertain myself.
    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    We have seen this movie before already. Bush's steel tariffs excluded Canada and cost an estimated 200,000 jobs in manufacturing.

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/he...18-03-08#false



    (sound familiar?)
    But Trump is planning to exempt more countries which would mean even less effect on the job market. Btw I would like to see what would happen after 10 yrs plus of continuous tariffs. I think long term effect could lead to creation of homegrown industries and job growth. Sorta like the effect sanctions have on a country (see Russia, Iran and to an extent North Korea).
    You can maintain power over people, as long as you give them something. Rob a man of everything, and that man will no longer be in your power. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    Trust principles; not people.
    My Che avatar is my unique way of giving a big middle finger to the, the neocons, the globalists, imperialists and most importantly to the left and right political establishment who hate his guts till this day. My admiration for him ends where his anti imperialist pro communism ideology starts.

  9. #8

    Default

    RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
    RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

    So sad.
    "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



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
    RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

    So sad.

    But this time is different because ... Trump. He's a $#@!in genius, man. /s
    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

  12. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    RPF 2008 - "Government shouldn't be picking winners and losers!"
    RPF 2018 - "uh, nevermind"

    So sad.
    Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.
    I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16
    There won't be a contested convention
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
    The shooting of Gabrielle Gifford was blamed on putting a crosshair on a political map. I wonder what event we'll see justified with pictures like this.

  13. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.
    I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  14. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.

    I remember the that too. From that to cheerleading for the very opposite in a few short years. Trump and his cheerleaders are definitely "advancing" the cause of liberty in a different direction.
    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

  15. #13

    Default

    I think the culture war has affected people across the spectrum:



    There's general panic that we're living in the twilight of civilization. Half the people say there's nothing to see here, and the other half say these are the end times.


  16. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.
    We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

    I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16
    There won't be a contested convention
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
    The shooting of Gabrielle Gifford was blamed on putting a crosshair on a political map. I wonder what event we'll see justified with pictures like this.

  17. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

    What country are you from? I thought America was monetizing debt by printing money to pay for debt with artificially controlled interest rates. What we want is free trade because the world is rejecting our dollar and wanting to trade with anything else but the dollar.

  18. #16

    Default

    I would actually expect a slight job increase to flat . The companies that have held off hiring needed positions in the last ten years got a tax break to help them pay the ridiculous health ins premiums they pay on ea employee .



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    We should be pro free trade. The question is how do you approach other countries that are not pro free trade. What we have currently is complete submission to foreign powers. Is that what should be advocated on RPF, submission to foreign mercantilism? In order to reach free trade parity where in effect there are no tariffs, all barriers should be the same so the net effect is zero.

    I would ask Elon Musk how he feels about subsidies. Seems to me that green car manufacturers have an unfair advantage since the government has arbitrarily decided what the cars of the future will look like at the expense of combustion engines. Seems Elon Musk is a hypocrite and is not interested in free trade, but is interested in keeping Chinese cars out of the market. Go figure.

    As far as trade deficits, the American people ought be glad anyone is even accepting printed fiat for assets. We'll see how their attitudes towards imported products change when the dollar crashes.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  21. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    I would actually expect a slight job increase to flat . The companies that have held off hiring needed positions in the last ten years got a tax break to help them pay the ridiculous health ins premiums they pay on ea employee .
    Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?
    You can maintain power over people, as long as you give them something. Rob a man of everything, and that man will no longer be in your power. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    Trust principles; not people.
    My Che avatar is my unique way of giving a big middle finger to the, the neocons, the globalists, imperialists and most importantly to the left and right political establishment who hate his guts till this day. My admiration for him ends where his anti imperialist pro communism ideology starts.

  22. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?
    The companies effected will have more money now , so no negative effect on them. One of the reasons they hold off on hiring is cost of employer provided ins which is not related to health care law.

  23. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.
    I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

    I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

    The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

    Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

    Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.

  24. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Why do u talk like this? the query is about effect of the tariffs on auto jobs. Not the effect of the healthcare law on jobs. To simplify it for u, what do u think the effect of raising the cost of a materials used in building cars do to auto jobs? up, down or no effect?
    Personally , I am a free trade guy . However if there are controls , the kind that do not matter are the better end of it . I am giving this thread One Star though , because it certainly sucks . While I am free trade , there are some tariffs I would not oppose .
    Last edited by oyarde; 03-11-2018 at 12:38 PM.

  25. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    I know a single variable that throws this assumption out the window, the corporate tax cuts from 35% to 21%. Suddenly corporations are much more profitable due to the tax windfall, thus there is no reason to raise prices on their products to maintain the same profitability with the tariffs, in fact the effect of the tax cut is a company can push tighter margins and enjoy the same profitability.
    That assumes that the auto industry had previously been paying an effective corporate tax rate of 35%. It wasn't, it was more like 7% - 8% across the entire industry. That's due to the loopholes they previously enjoyed. I don't know which, if any of those loopholes have been eliminated, but the goal of the new tax law was simplification - so I don't doubt that loopholes disappeared in exchange for the rates being lowered.

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    Additionally if the result is for a car maker to purchase higher quality steel, they can reduce their faults/error rates during production testing, a competent company can use this to reduce the overall impact of using the higher cost steel.
    That's a big IF. It assumes they had not been using high quality steel - and quality is something that typical quality engineering processes in the US generally assure
    The only easy day was yesterday.

  26. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

    I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

    The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

    Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

    Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.

    You must spread some reputation around......
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #24

    Default

    Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

    Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    I recall a time where RPF was largely anti-protectionist. Where they despised Progressive authoritarians of the image of Teddy Roosevelt. Where spending mattered and the 2nd Amendment was sacrosanct. That was a long time ago.
    ^^^YEP^^^
    There is no spoon.

  30. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    I have been pro tariff in all the years I have been here.

    I have been a Second Amendment absolutist for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of border and immigration control for all the years I have been here.

    I have been in favor of vast and massive spending cuts across the board, including the military, in all the years I've been here.

    The winds of political change have blown all around me, and yet I like to think that I have remained true to my beliefs, even if those are not 100% in line with small l libertarianism.

    Just because Trump happens to agree and advocate some of these positions, does not at all make me a "Trumptard" or whatever, any more than my agreeing with Obama on such things as asset forfeiture, police and prison reforms/abolition makes me a Bolshevik in the manner of the current leftist mobs in the streets and on TeeVee.

    Not saying that you were making that accusation or assumption, I just took your post as opportunity to get that on the record.
    Same here. Been anti- "free trade" (note the quotations) since I first learned about Ross Perot.

  31. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

    Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.
    And most of those plants were built in more rural areas away from detroit to provide better paying jobs for the peasants and tax revenues in counties that had nothing like that before .

  32. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.
    And bailouts - let's not forget bailouts
    The only easy day was yesterday.

  33. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    Yeah bailing out US banks that made bad investments is not the same as advocating for fair, beneficial, reciprocal international trade. And your disingenuous, rudimentary equivocation of the two is harmful to any logical thinker.
    Yeah... using government to benefit one politically connected industry at the expense of the others. Yeah, totally different. Because logic!
    "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

  34. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Let's not forget, there would be no US auto industry if not for tariffs.

    Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, just to name a few, all have US plants, employing US workers, being part of the US economy, because it was cheaper to build them here, instead of importing them.
    No US auto industry if not for tariffs, huh?

    Next you'll tell me there wouldn't be schools without taxes.

    The benevolent government, protecting US industry. You think they give a $#@! about American workers?

    They tax and debase and drive the middle class into poverty yet they are the protecters of the vulnerable? You barely have to scratch the surface to smell bull$#@!.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Are steel tariffs a bad idea?
    By timosman in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 03-09-2018, 10:32 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-08-2018, 05:10 PM
  3. Europe Renews Tariffs On Chinese Steel Pipes As High As 72%
    By Swordsmyth in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-06-2018, 06:31 PM
  4. Stocks Fall as Trump Announces Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum
    By Zippyjuan in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-06-2018, 06:14 PM
  5. Donald Trump, Steel Tariffs, and the Costs of Chaos
    By timosman in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 03-04-2018, 06:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •