FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=53819
You don’t see a potential downside from his proposed tariffs?SeattleGriz wrote:On a more serious note, lower fuel prices and use the USCMA to bother China. US has last right of refusal on that mofo, so China can't just run to Canada or Mexico and build a plant on the border.
Keep pushing his economic nationalism, which keeps us away from foreign wars as well.
China and the EU will both do what they did last time, devalue their currency. Do a Google search of China+currency+tariffs, and you'll get tons of hits how China did this exact same thing back in 2017. China and the EU ate a lot of the tariffs by devaluing their currencies.UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 4:29 pmYou don’t see a potential downside from his proposed tariffs?SeattleGriz wrote:On a more serious note, lower fuel prices and use the USCMA to bother China. US has last right of refusal on that mofo, so China can't just run to Canada or Mexico and build a plant on the border.
Keep pushing his economic nationalism, which keeps us away from foreign wars as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There were no retaliatory tariffs?SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 6:38 pmChina and the EU will both do what they did last time, devalue their currency. Do a Google search of China+currency+tariffs, and you'll get tons of hits how China did this exact same thing back in 2017. China and the EU ate a lot of the tariffs by devaluing their currencies.
I mostly believe Trump will use tariffs as a means to force change. The US is worth lots of money and if certain countries don't want to play, we will take our money elsewhere. That's also how Trump will stem the flow of illegals. Threaten Mexico financially to stop them like they did when he was last President and all of a sudden, crossings dry up compared to now.
Not knocking you here, but if you, and I, haven't heard anything in the MSM, I would have to say there were none or ineffective. You know if they were a problem, the MSM would have tried to make Trump look bad, but they didn't. In fact, the Biden administration kept some of Trump's tariffs that were supposed to have started said trade war.UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 6:54 pmThere were no retaliatory tariffs?SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 6:38 pm
China and the EU will both do what they did last time, devalue their currency. Do a Google search of China+currency+tariffs, and you'll get tons of hits how China did this exact same thing back in 2017. China and the EU ate a lot of the tariffs by devaluing their currencies.
I mostly believe Trump will use tariffs as a means to force change. The US is worth lots of money and if certain countries don't want to play, we will take our money elsewhere. That's also how Trump will stem the flow of illegals. Threaten Mexico financially to stop them like they did when he was last President and all of a sudden, crossings dry up compared to now.
How do the proposed tariffs compare to the first term tariffs as far as amounts/percentages and breadth of products covered?
Are you sure that he won't start a trade war? That American workers won't suffer as a result?
There was retaliation and export heavy industries and their workers paid the price.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:10 pmNot knocking you here, but if you, and I, haven't heard anything in the MSM, I would have to say there were none or ineffective. You know if they were a problem, the MSM would have tried to make Trump look bad, but they didn't. In fact, the Biden administration kept some of Trump's tariffs that were supposed to have started said trade war.
Hell, remember that dipshit Paul Krugman saying the world economy was going to crash due to Trump's failures?
Don't know numbers yet.
Going to need to see some receipts on those please.UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:19 pmThere was retaliation and export heavy industries and their workers paid the price.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:10 pm
Not knocking you here, but if you, and I, haven't heard anything in the MSM, I would have to say there were none or ineffective. You know if they were a problem, the MSM would have tried to make Trump look bad, but they didn't. In fact, the Biden administration kept some of Trump's tariffs that were supposed to have started said trade war.
Hell, remember that dipshit Paul Krugman saying the world economy was going to crash due to Trump's failures?
Don't know numbers yet.
trump's new proposed tariffs are larger and cover more products then his previous tariffs. If he implements the tariffs he proposed during the campaign the retaliation will be significantly greater than it was his first term.
I'm seriously considering selling my securities before this happens because it will hit the stock market hard and I don't want to go through what happened to my investments in 2008 again.
You can bookmark this page for reference.
Disentangling the Effects of the 2018-2019 Tariffs on a Globally Connected U.S. Manufacturing SectorSeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:35 pmGoing to need to see some receipts on those please.UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:19 pm
There was retaliation and export heavy industries and their workers paid the price.
trump's new proposed tariffs are larger and cover more products then his previous tariffs. If he implements the tariffs he proposed during the campaign the retaliation will be significantly greater than it was his first term.
I'm seriously considering selling my securities before this happens because it will hit the stock market hard and I don't want to go through what happened to my investments in 2008 again.
You can bookmark this page for reference.
Yeah, no. Miraculously just published in time to attack tariffs that have been in place for almost eight years and this is how he starts off:UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:43 pmDisentangling the Effects of the 2018-2019 Tariffs on a Globally Connected U.S. Manufacturing Sector
Dude has no clue how to measure and is as reliable as Krugman. Once again, if these tariffs were to have hurt Americans we'd have heard the MSM howl. Besides, and once again, Trump will use them as bargaining chips.The unprecedented increase in tariffs imposed by the United States against its major trading
partners since early 2018 has brought renewed attention to the economic effects of tariffs.
While there are already vast theoretical and empirical literatures documenting the effects of
changes in trade policy, it is not clear how prior estimates apply to the present day when
there are virtually no modern episodes of a large, advanced economy raising tariffs in a way
comparable to the U.S. in 2018-2019. Further complicating the process of estimating the
effects of tariffs is the rapid expansion of globally interconnected supply chains, in which
tariffs can have impacts through channels beyond their traditional effect of limiting import
competition.
Another important feature of these tariffs is that they were imposed, in part, to boost the
U.S. manufacturing sector by protecting against what were deemed to be the unfair trade
practices of trading partners, principally China. Thus, while existing research has mostly
documented negative consequences of the tariff increases on the broad economy–including
higher prices, lower consumption, reduced business investment, and drops in the valuations
of affected firms–some might view these effects as an acceptable cost for achieving the policy
aim of ensuring more robust manufacturing activity in the United States.
This paper provides the first comprehensive estimates of the effect of recent tariffs on
the U.S. manufacturing sector. A key feature of this analysis is accounting for the different
ways that tariffs could affect manufacturers in the presence of global trade and supply chain
linkages. On the one hand, U.S. import tariffs may protect some U.S.-based manufacturers
from import competition in the domestic market, allowing them to gain market share at
the expense of foreign competitors. On the other hand, U.S. tariffs have also been imposed
on intermediate inputs, and the associated increase in costs may hurt U.S. manufacturers’
competitiveness in producing for both the export and domestic markets. Moreover, U.S.
trade partners have imposed retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports of certain goods, which could
again put U.S. firms at a disadvantage in those markets, relative to their foreign competitors.
Disentangling the effects of these three channels and determining which effect dominates is
an empirical question of critical importance.
It was published in 2019. You again dismiss any expert who's points run counter to your and trump's agenda.SeattleDingleberry wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:16 pmYeah, no. Miraculously just published in time to attack tariffs that have been in place for almost eight years and this is how he starts off:UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:43 pm
Disentangling the Effects of the 2018-2019 Tariffs on a Globally Connected U.S. Manufacturing Sector
Dude has no clue how to measure and is as reliable as Krugman. Once again, if these tariffs were to have hurt Americans we'd have heard the MSM howl. Besides, and once again, Trump will use them as bargaining chips.The unprecedented increase in tariffs imposed by the United States against its major trading
partners since early 2018 has brought renewed attention to the economic effects of tariffs.
While there are already vast theoretical and empirical literatures documenting the effects of
changes in trade policy, it is not clear how prior estimates apply to the present day when
there are virtually no modern episodes of a large, advanced economy raising tariffs in a way
comparable to the U.S. in 2018-2019. Further complicating the process of estimating the
effects of tariffs is the rapid expansion of globally interconnected supply chains, in which
tariffs can have impacts through channels beyond their traditional effect of limiting import
competition.
Another important feature of these tariffs is that they were imposed, in part, to boost the
U.S. manufacturing sector by protecting against what were deemed to be the unfair trade
practices of trading partners, principally China. Thus, while existing research has mostly
documented negative consequences of the tariff increases on the broad economy–including
higher prices, lower consumption, reduced business investment, and drops in the valuations
of affected firms–some might view these effects as an acceptable cost for achieving the policy
aim of ensuring more robust manufacturing activity in the United States.
This paper provides the first comprehensive estimates of the effect of recent tariffs on
the U.S. manufacturing sector. A key feature of this analysis is accounting for the different
ways that tariffs could affect manufacturers in the presence of global trade and supply chain
linkages. On the one hand, U.S. import tariffs may protect some U.S.-based manufacturers
from import competition in the domestic market, allowing them to gain market share at
the expense of foreign competitors. On the other hand, U.S. tariffs have also been imposed
on intermediate inputs, and the associated increase in costs may hurt U.S. manufacturers’
competitiveness in producing for both the export and domestic markets. Moreover, U.S.
trade partners have imposed retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports of certain goods, which could
again put U.S. firms at a disadvantage in those markets, relative to their foreign competitors.
Disentangling the effects of these three channels and determining which effect dominates is
an empirical question of critical importance.
Now if you want to talk about something that really happened, Trump had to help farmers due to tariffs. That's what I'm talking about. He uses them to gain concessions, but will need to adjust money to help out other industries. It was a net positive and history, not some shoddily written economics paper, is the true arbiter. Biden kept the Trump tariffs. Nuff said.
Dude. You have no clue if this guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground. He's the guy that tells us the US created jobs when we find out it was an adjustment. He provided nothing more than his opinion. Never been out in the real world. A fucking academic, if you could call him that, trying to tell the real world what happened.UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:25 pmIt was published in 2019. You again dismiss any expert who's points run counter to your and trump's agenda.SeattleDingleberry wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:16 pm
Yeah, no. Miraculously just published in time to attack tariffs that have been in place for almost eight years and this is how he starts off:
Dude has no clue how to measure and is as reliable as Krugman. Once again, if these tariffs were to have hurt Americans we'd have heard the MSM howl. Besides, and once again, Trump will use them as bargaining chips.
Now if you want to talk about something that really happened, Trump had to help farmers due to tariffs. That's what I'm talking about. He uses them to gain concessions, but will need to adjust money to help out other industries. It was a net positive and history, not some shoddily written economics paper, is the true arbiter. Biden kept the Trump tariffs. Nuff said.
You're about as good at refuting these risks of trump's policies as progressives are at explaining why socialism will work this time.
The dude who believes that trump did nothing wrong complaining about a stolen election that he tried to steal (fomenting a seditious riot on January 6, bulling state officials into "finding" votes, arranging for slates of fraudulent electors) and who believes that giving putin Ukraine will save lives probably shouldn't be commenting on people not knowing their ass from a hole in the ground.SeattleDingleberry wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:32 pmDude. You have no clue if this guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground. He's the guy that tells us the US created jobs when we find out it was an adjustment. He provided nothing more than his opinion. Never been out in the real world. A fucking academic, if you could call him that, trying to tell the real world what happened.
We will see what Trump actually does with Tariffs and as Seattle already stated, Trump was using this pre-election tariff talk to intimidate for future negotiations.. might be just blusterUNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:45 pmThe dude who believes that trump did nothing wrong complaining about a stolen election that he tried to steal (fomenting a seditious riot on January 6, bulling state officials into "finding" votes, arranging for slates of fraudulent electors) and who believes that giving putin Ukraine will save lives probably shouldn't be commenting on people not knowing their ass from a hole in the ground.SeattleDingleberry wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:32 pm
Dude. You have no clue if this guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground. He's the guy that tells us the US created jobs when we find out it was an adjustment. He provided nothing more than his opinion. Never been out in the real world. A fucking academic, if you could call him that, trying to tell the real world what happened.
I'm telling you based on my knowledge and experience that it will be an economic cluster fvck for the American people if trump implement his tariffs.
It was truly pathetic and his post about it afterwards was hilarious.Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 6:00 amThe “Fake News” needs Trump to survive so they slink down to Mar a Largo begging on hands and knees before Trump….. hopefully they felt shamed but I doubt it
https://open.substack.com/pub/heatherco ... dium=emailNovember 18, 2024
HEATHER COX RICHARDSON
NOV 19
Letters From An American
On Friday, Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo locked in a $6.6 billion deal with the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company for it to invest $65 billion in three state-of-the-art fabrication plants in Arizona. This will bring thousands of jobs to the state. The money comes from the CHIPS and Science Act, about which Trump told podcaster Joe Rogan on October 25: “That CHIPS deal is so bad.” House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said he would work to repeal the law, although he backed off that statement when Republicans noted the jobs the law has brought to their states.
Also on Friday, a Trump-appointed federal judge struck down a Biden administration rule that would have made 4 million workers eligible for overtime pay. The rule raised the salary level below which an employer has to pay overtime from $35,568 to $43,888 this year and up to $58,656 in 2025. The decision by Texas judge Sean D. Jordan kills the measure nationally.
On Sunday, speaking from the Amazon rainforest in Brazil, President Joe Biden said that it would not be possible to reverse America’s “clean energy revolution,” which has now provided jobs across the country, primarily in Republican-dominated states. Biden noted that the U.S. would spend $11 billion on financing international responses to climate change in 2024, an increase of six times from when he began his term.
But President-elect Trump has called climate change a hoax and has vowed to claw back money from the Inflation Reduction Act appropriated to mitigate it, and to turn the U.S. back to fossil fuels. What Trump will have a harder time disrupting, according to Nicolás Rivero of the Washington Post, is the new efficiency standards the Biden administration put in place for appliances. He can, though, refuse to advance those standards.
Meanwhile Trump and his team are announcing a complete reworking of the American government. They claim a mandate, although as final vote tallies are coming in, it turns out that Trump did not win 50% of the vote, and CNN statistician Harry Enten notes that his margin comes in at 44th out of the 51 elections that have been held since 1824. He also had very short coattails—four Democrats won in states Trump carried—and the Republicans have the smallest House majority since there have been 50 states, despite the help their numbers have had from the extreme gerrymandering in states like North Carolina.
More Americans voted for someone other than Trump than voted for him.
Although Trump ran on lowering the cost of consumer goods, Trump and his sidekick Elon Musk, along with pharmaceutical entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, have vowed to slash the U.S. government, apparently taking their cue from Argentina’s self-described anarcho-capitalist president Javier Milei, who was the first foreign leader to visit Trump after the election. Milei’s “shock therapy” to his country threw the nation into a deep recession, just as Musk says his plans will create “hardship” for Americans before enabling the country to rebuild with security.
Why do you think they never stopped talking about Trump for the past 4 years? They would of had only a few hundred people watching the past 4 years if they stopped talking about Trump. Podcasters are kicking MSM butts and ole Morning Joe knows he obsolete without Donald .... if you can't beat him, join him.....kalm wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 7:52 amIt was truly pathetic and his post about it afterwards was hilarious.Caribbean Hen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 6:00 am
The “Fake News” needs Trump to survive so they slink down to Mar a Largo begging on hands and knees before Trump….. hopefully they felt shamed but I doubt it
But what do you mean they need Trump to survive?
There’s some truth here. The over-arching problem of course is that anyone can podcast with zero education and training in news journalism or repercussions for providing misinformation (except Alex JonesCaribbean Hen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:00 amWhy do you think they never stopped talking about Trump for the past 4 years? They would of had only a few hundred people watching the past 4 years if they stopped talking about Trump. Podcasters are kicking MSM butts and ole Morning Joe knows he obsolete without Donald .... if you can't beat him, join him.....
Did Racheal show up pan handling at Mar a Largo as well?
).