Trump Tariffs = Tax Hike on all

[SDHornet]

This entire thing is stupid. There's no reason to hurt our manufacturers and farmers; there's no reason to hurt China's. Trade and globalization isn't some zero-sum game. Will some of our sectors get outsourced? Of course. But any economist worth their salt will tell you that lifting other nations up allows them to turn around and spend money on our more expensive services, creating better paying jobs. As China has.

Mexico is another great example. Not only did we significantly lift their people up through NAFTA, but they now spend more on US goods and services than we lost in jobs. Sucks for those who lost manufacturing positions, but more high-paying US jobs were created and it was a net increase on our GDP. And not only that, but it helped decrease illegal crossings by Mexicans that it's almost non-relevant today.

Agree on several of your comments. But that is a very narrow view of the situation. China is nothing like Mexico. China has been on a course to control most of global trade on their terms. And their terms are not in the best interest of a global free market system.

Trade wars are never good for the involved parties in the near term. Everyone is in universal agreement on that. But there is also universal agreement that China's actions over the last 20+ years are not good for anyone but China. The ways to combat their actions can be debated, and several ways have already been tried with little success. Everyone knows that success won't happen overnight no matter what course is taken. Trump is taking the most forceful and blunt approach at a time when it is most affordable. We will never get them to concede to all, or even most, of our fair trade demands, but slowing their march to global economic control is occurring. That alone is a minor victory.

Also ignore the human rights abuses and environmental negligence done by Chinese industry...but yeah I mean why not defend China in this trade war.

[JohnStOnge]

It's CBS, so I take it with a grain of salt.
.

And therein lies a problem. Trump and the Republicans can't deal with the truth so it is important for them to discredit credible media sources like CBS. And a substantial proportion of the US population has bought into that crap.

CBS is a credible news source. If you have a "grain of salt" attitude towards CBS you are closing your eyes. That does not mean they never make mistakes. But you are closing your eyes. Remaining willfully blind to reality.

[CID1990]

“There’s no reason to hurt China’s <industries>”

Actually, yes there is. There are multiple reasons.

From the empire the Chinese are trying to create, complete with *real* reeducation camps for dissenters, to the wrecking of the environment that will lie largely at their feet (regardless of whether the West goes completely green or not), to the absolute global economic hegemony that they seek - via a leader for life (that always works out well). Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it.

China needs to be thwarted and resisted at every turn. We won’t see it, but our children will see a modern world under complete Chinese control if we don’t get our heads out of the sand.

All this apologizing for China reminds me of the apologizing for Russia the very same people were doing just a few short years ago (the 1980s called)

Russia is small and insignificant compared to China in the threat that the Chinese pose. They already cast poisonous influence in governments around the world, including our own. Now is the time to wake up. They’ll be interfering in the 2020 elections - as they have before. Let’s see who notices and who doesn’t. (And compare that with who was up in arms about Russia)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

It's CBS, so I take it with a grain of salt.
.

And therein lies a problem. Trump and the Republicans can't deal with the truth so it is important for them to discredit credible media sources like CBS. And a substantial proportion of the US population has bought into that crap.

CBS is a credible news source. If you have a "grain of salt" attitude towards CBS you are closing your eyes. That does not mean they never make mistakes. But you are closing your eyes. Remaining willfully blind to reality.

No, they're not.

[GannonFan]

“There’s no reason to hurt China’s <industries>”

Actually, yes there is. There are multiple reasons.

From the empire the Chinese are trying to create, complete with *real* reeducation camps for dissenters, to the wrecking of the environment that will lie largely at their feet (regardless of whether the West goes completely green or not), to the absolute global economic hegemony that they seek - via a leader for life (that always works out well). Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it.

China needs to be thwarted and resisted at every turn. We won’t see it, but our children will see a modern world under complete Chinese control if we don’t get our heads out of the sand.

All this apologizing for China reminds me of the apologizing for Russia the very same people were doing just a few short years ago (the 1980s called)

Russia is small and insignificant compared to China in the threat that the Chinese pose. They already cast poisonous influence in governments around the world, including our own. Now is the time to wake up. They’ll be interfering in the 2020 elections - as they have before. Let’s see who notices and who doesn’t. (And compare that with who was up in arms about Russia)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A lot of truth in this - China's no joke. Forget the trade-secret corporate espionage stuff, that's just small potatoes compared to the other stuff.

[Chizzang]

“There’s no reason to hurt China’s <industries>”

Actually, yes there is. There are multiple reasons.

From the empire the Chinese are trying to create, complete with *real* reeducation camps for dissenters, to the wrecking of the environment that will lie largely at their feet (regardless of whether the West goes completely green or not), to the absolute global economic hegemony that they seek - via a leader for life (that always works out well). Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it.

China needs to be thwarted and resisted at every turn. We won’t see it, but our children will see a modern world under complete Chinese control if we don’t get our heads out of the sand.

All this apologizing for China reminds me of the apologizing for Russia the very same people were doing just a few short years ago (the 1980s called)

Russia is small and insignificant compared to China in the threat that the Chinese pose. They already cast poisonous influence in governments around the world, including our own. Now is the time to wake up. They’ll be interfering in the 2020 elections - as they have before. Let’s see who notices and who doesn’t. (And compare that with who was up in arms about Russia)

"Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it..."

I can't eye roll hard enough at this ^ comment

There are "thugs" all over the globe
We don't give a sh!t about thugs unless it suits us (whoever's in office at the moment)
and by this you're suggesting "the rest of the world" isn't watching Hong Kong right now?
and Putin murder squads and quarterly tank rolls

It will be our children's war to fight - if they don't opt to just succumb
Good luck

BTW:
this problem started in the 1950's and we've done nothing but exacerbate it for 75 years



and you sound like a global warming alarmist teen angster

[GannonFan]

“There’s no reason to hurt China’s <industries>”

Actually, yes there is. There are multiple reasons.

From the empire the Chinese are trying to create, complete with *real* reeducation camps for dissenters, to the wrecking of the environment that will lie largely at their feet (regardless of whether the West goes completely green or not), to the absolute global economic hegemony that they seek - via a leader for life (that always works out well). Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it.

China needs to be thwarted and resisted at every turn. We won’t see it, but our children will see a modern world under complete Chinese control if we don’t get our heads out of the sand.

All this apologizing for China reminds me of the apologizing for Russia the very same people were doing just a few short years ago (the 1980s called)

Russia is small and insignificant compared to China in the threat that the Chinese pose. They already cast poisonous influence in governments around the world, including our own. Now is the time to wake up. They’ll be interfering in the 2020 elections - as they have before. Let’s see who notices and who doesn’t. (And compare that with who was up in arms about Russia)

"Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it..."

I can't eye roll hard enough at this ^ comment

There are "thugs" all over the globe
We don't give a sh!t about thugs unless it suits us (whoever's in office at the moment)

Slight correction, we tend to only care about the "thugs" that affect us and have an impact on the US. Not really about what suits us.

[Chizzang]

"Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it..."

I can't eye roll hard enough at this ^ comment

There are "thugs" all over the globe
We don't give a sh!t about thugs unless it suits us (whoever's in office at the moment)

Slight correction, we tend to only care about the "thugs" that affect us and have an impact on the US. Not really about what suits us.

Wrong...
Saddam Hussein wasn't affecting sh!t and had zero impact on anything



I've got 35 more examples if you want to play this game
trust me I got the language right on my explanation

[GannonFan]

Slight correction, we tend to only care about the "thugs" that affect us and have an impact on the US. Not really about what suits us.

Wrong...
Saddam Hussein wasn't affecting sh!t and had zero impact on anything



I've got 35 more examples if you want to play this game
trust me I got the language right on my explanation

Revisionism. He sure seemed to be affecting things when he invaded Kuwait. Or was that just us seeing it as something that suited us? Let's keep playing, I sense there's a lot of holes in those 35 examples. Or is it just 34 examples now?

[Chizzang]

Wrong...
Saddam Hussein wasn't affecting sh!t and had zero impact on anything



I've got 35 more examples if you want to play this game
trust me I got the language right on my explanation

Revisionism. He sure seemed to be affecting things when he invaded Kuwait. Or was that just us seeing it as something that suited us? Let's keep playing, I sense there's a lot of holes in those 35 examples. Or is it just 34 examples now?

That's about the dumbest response a breathing human could post...
So like 1990 what happened in the 13 years in between then



Yeah, like I sad... and you made my example even stronger
The Bush Halliburton war of 1991 and the shockingly another bush Halliburton war of 2003
"as it suits us" or more accurately as it suits the sitting administration

BTW:
I don't even know anybody who would argue this point - except for you

[GannonFan]

Revisionism. He sure seemed to be affecting things when he invaded Kuwait. Or was that just us seeing it as something that suited us? Let's keep playing, I sense there's a lot of holes in those 35 examples. Or is it just 34 examples now?

Ever the Delaware Corporatist.

I live in PA. And I'm a Jill Stein voter. Stop supporting the establishment, you conformist.

[GannonFan]

Revisionism. He sure seemed to be affecting things when he invaded Kuwait. Or was that just us seeing it as something that suited us? Let's keep playing, I sense there's a lot of holes in those 35 examples. Or is it just 34 examples now?

That's about the dumbest response a breathing human could post...
So like 1990 what happened in the 13 years in between then



Yeah, like I sad... and you made my example even stronger
The Bush Halliburton war of 1991 and the shockingly another bush Halliburton war of 2003
"as it suits us" or more accurately as it suits the sitting administration

BTW:
I don't even know anybody who would argue this point - except for you

So you were fine with the annexation of Kuwait then? That's your position? Man, when the conversation drifts away from Comcast your credibility drops off the cliff. You're like the original reason for the stay in your lane comment.

[Chizzang]

That's about the dumbest response a breathing human could post...
So like 1990 what happened in the 13 years in between then



Yeah, like I sad... and you made my example even stronger
The Bush Halliburton war of 1991 and the shockingly another bush Halliburton war of 2003
"as it suits us" or more accurately as it suits the sitting administration

BTW:
I don't even know anybody who would argue this point - except for you

So you were fine with the annexation of Kuwait then? That's your position? Man, when the conversation drifts away from Comcast your credibility drops off the cliff. You're like the original reason for the stay in your lane comment.

Please continue:
you're arguing that we waited 10 years to attack Iraq because ..?



The only "lane violation" going on here is your obsession with Semantics
and now being cornered into defending the Bush child / Halliburton debacle

again: A situational corner only you would find yourself painted into
because I used the wrong variant on a particular word
and you need to be the smartest guy in the room

[GannonFan]

So you were fine with the annexation of Kuwait then? That's your position? Man, when the conversation drifts away from Comcast your credibility drops off the cliff. You're like the original reason for the stay in your lane comment.

Please continue:
you're arguing that we waited 10 years to attack Iraq because ..?



The only "lane violation" going on here is your obsession with Semantics
and now being cornered into defending the Bush child / Halliburton debacle

again: A situational corner only you would find yourself painted into
because I used the wrong variant on a particular word
and you need to be the smartest guy in the room

It's not semantics, you actually used the Persian Gulf War (circa 1991) as an example of Sadaam doing nothing and not affecting anything and us then sticking our nose into the situation. It's all right there, that's what you said. That doesn't pivot on one particular word at all. Defend that. Oh, and I'm not the smartest person in the room, unless you and I are here by ourselves and then yes, yes I am.

[Chizzang]

Please continue:
you're arguing that we waited 10 years to attack Iraq because ..?



The only "lane violation" going on here is your obsession with Semantics
and now being cornered into defending the Bush child / Halliburton debacle

again: A situational corner only you would find yourself painted into
because I used the wrong variant on a particular word
and you need to be the smartest guy in the room

It's not semantics, you actually used the Persian Gulf War (circa 1991) as an example of Sadaam doing nothing and not affecting anything and us then sticking our nose into the situation. It's all right there, that's what you said. That doesn't pivot on one particular word at all. Defend that. Oh, and I'm not the smartest person in the room, unless you and I are here by ourselves and then yes, yes I am.

Ya... Gulf War
After Saddam Hussein rolled into Kuwait in August 1990
it was natural to wonder whether restoring the Kuwaiti prince
and protecting the Saudi monarchy was worth American blood...

At the time
the Pentagon claimed satellite photographs showed a quarter of a million Iraqi troops
were poised to roll across the Saudi border...

The St. Petersburg Times and NY Times decided to check
They purchased commercial satellite photos of the border region - which showed empty desert...

When contacted the office of then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney for evidence to the contrary
“trust us,” was the best the Pentagon could do....

“It was a pretty serious fib," putting it mildly...
A war of Administration needs - Halliburton and Exxon Mobil Royal Dutch Shell vs. The Truth
We never needed to do anything in 1991 or 2003 and there's no worthy argument to date otherwise

[GannonFan]

It's not semantics, you actually used the Persian Gulf War (circa 1991) as an example of Sadaam doing nothing and not affecting anything and us then sticking our nose into the situation. It's all right there, that's what you said. That doesn't pivot on one particular word at all. Defend that. Oh, and I'm not the smartest person in the room, unless you and I are here by ourselves and then yes, yes I am.

Ya... Gulf War
After Saddam Hussein rolled into Kuwait in August 1990
it was natural to wonder whether restoring the Kuwaiti prince
and protecting the Saudi monarchy was worth American blood...

At the time
the Pentagon claimed satellite photographs showed a quarter of a million Iraqi troops
were poised to roll across the Saudi border...

The St. Petersburg Times and NY Times decided to check
They purchased commercial satellite photos of the border region - which showed empty desert...

When contacted the office of then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney for evidence to the contrary
“trust us,” was the best the Pentagon could do....

“It was a pretty serious fib," putting it mildly...
A war of Administration needs - Halliburton and Exxon Mobil Royal Dutch Shell vs. The Truth
We never needed to do anything in 1991 or 2003 and there's no worthy argument to date otherwise

So you're tripling down on it then. Then you're pro-Russian annexation of Crimea, pro-Chinese island building in international waters to assume ownership of those regions, and pro anybody really deciding to take whatever land they want, or even just keeping what they have (so you're pro-Serbian and pro-Assad as well)? Awesome position, I'm sure that can't possibly turn out poorly in the long term. Country Darwinism. Can you even see the sky from the hole you're in?

[Chizzang]

Ya... Gulf War
After Saddam Hussein rolled into Kuwait in August 1990
it was natural to wonder whether restoring the Kuwaiti prince
and protecting the Saudi monarchy was worth American blood...

At the time
the Pentagon claimed satellite photographs showed a quarter of a million Iraqi troops
were poised to roll across the Saudi border...

The St. Petersburg Times and NY Times decided to check
They purchased commercial satellite photos of the border region - which showed empty desert...

When contacted the office of then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney for evidence to the contrary
“trust us,” was the best the Pentagon could do....

“It was a pretty serious fib," putting it mildly...
A war of Administration needs - Halliburton and Exxon Mobil Royal Dutch Shell vs. The Truth
We never needed to do anything in 1991 or 2003 and there's no worthy argument to date otherwise

So you're tripling down on it then. Then you're pro-Russian annexation of Crimea, pro-Chinese island building in international waters to assume ownership of those regions, and pro anybody really deciding to take whatever land they want, or even just keeping what they have (so you're pro-Serbian and pro-Assad as well)? Awesome position, I'm sure that can't possibly turn out poorly in the long term. Country Darwinism. Can you even see the sky from the hole you're in?

Because you can't defend your ridiculous position on the two Iraq Wars - and nobody can or even tries
you're now making a half dozen assumptions to distract from the actual debate

Our twenty years war in Iraq is now over a quarter-century
and the CBO in 2017 calculated a total cost of $2.4 trillion (2,400,000,000,000.00)

[∞∞∞]

Because you can't defend your ridiculous position on the two Iraq Wars - and nobody can or even tries
you're now making a half dozen assumptions to distract from the actual debate

Our twenty years war in Iraq is now over a quarter-century
and the CBO in 2017 calculated a total cost of $2.4 trillion (2,400,000,000,000.00)

In a few days, kids who weren't born on 9/11 can be sent away to die for the cause, or whatever.

[Chizzang]

Because you can't defend your ridiculous position on the two Iraq Wars - and nobody can or even tries
you're now making a half dozen assumptions to distract from the actual debate

Our twenty years war in Iraq is now over a quarter-century
and the CBO in 2017 calculated a total cost of $2.4 trillion (2,400,000,000,000.00)

In a few days, kids who weren't born on 9/11 can be sent away to die for the cause, or whatever.

Most Americans are also unaware that the WMD claims have now been completely put to rest as false
all of the intelligence reports are now available...
and it is firmly established that Iraq had long abandon their Nuclear program

Both Iraq wars were based on complete fiction

Yes Iraq rolled tanks into Kuwait... and so what
Why would we care about that, Kuwait was a puppet regime and Saudi Arabia could handle Iraq



Sadams military consisted of his Republican Guard and WWII Russian tanks... The end
as one Pilot said: We could have defeated them with a single A-10 and 50 Marines

2.4 trillion dollars later - here we are

[GannonFan]

In a few days, kids who weren't born on 9/11 can be sent away to die for the cause, or whatever.

Most Americans are also unaware that the WMD claims have now been completely put to rest as false
all of the intelligence reports are now available...
and it is firmly established that Iraq had long abandon their Nuclear program

Both Iraq wars were based on complete fiction

Yes Iraq rolled tanks into Kuwait... and so what
Why would we care about that, Kuwait was a puppet regime and Saudi Arabia could handle Iraq



Sadams military consisted of his Republican Guard and WWII Russian tanks... The end
as one Pilot said: We could have defeated them with a single A-10 and 50 Marines

2.4 trillion dollars later - here we are

Stop it, you're embarrassing yourself. You're saying that both Iraq wars were about the same thing and they just weren't, no matter how many times you try to scramble to say so. The first Iraq war was based on Iraq invading Kuwait. You say that was fiction. Show the proof that Iraq didn't invade Kuwait. I'm not arguing about the second war in the 2000's, my point of contention in this thread centers on the first war. Your dismissal of a Kuwait being a "puppet regime" (to whom would beg the question) just brings more attention to your silence regarding Crimea and the Yellow Sea and really anywhere else where stronger countries seize territory from smaller ones, which apparently you're perfectly okay with.

[BDKJMU]

In a few days, kids who weren't born on 9/11 can be sent away to die for the cause, or whatever.

Most Americans are also unaware that the WMD claims have now been completely put to rest as false
all of the intelligence reports are now available...
and it is firmly established that Iraq had long abandon their Nuclear program

Both Iraq wars were based on complete fiction

Yes Iraq rolled tanks into Kuwait... and so what
Why would we care about that, Kuwait was a puppet regime and Saudi Arabia could handle Iraq



Sadams military consisted of his Republican Guard and WWII Russian tanks... The end
as one Pilot said: We could have defeated them with a single A-10 and 50 Marines

2.4 trillion dollars later - here we are

Nope.
https://championshipsubdivision.com/for ... es%2C+iraq

[Chizzang]

Most Americans are also unaware that the WMD claims have now been completely put to rest as false
all of the intelligence reports are now available...
and it is firmly established that Iraq had long abandon their Nuclear program

Both Iraq wars were based on complete fiction

Yes Iraq rolled tanks into Kuwait... and so what
Why would we care about that, Kuwait was a puppet regime and Saudi Arabia could handle Iraq



Sadams military consisted of his Republican Guard and WWII Russian tanks... The end
as one Pilot said: We could have defeated them with a single A-10 and 50 Marines

2.4 trillion dollars later - here we are

Stop it, you're embarrassing yourself. You're saying that both Iraq wars were about the same thing and they just weren't, no matter how many times you try to scramble to say so. The first Iraq war was based on Iraq invading Kuwait. You say that was fiction. Show the proof that Iraq didn't invade Kuwait. I'm not arguing about the second war in the 2000's, my point of contention in this thread centers on the first war. Your dismissal of a Kuwait being a "puppet regime" (to whom would beg the question) just brings more attention to your silence regarding Crimea and the Yellow Sea and really anywhere else where stronger countries seize territory from smaller ones, which apparently you're perfectly okay with.

You don't even read my posts....
I never said they were about thee same thing - I said they were both based on fiction

And I stand by that
So what if Iraq rolled tanks into the Puppet Regime of Kuwait..?
Kuwait was a House of Saud political construction and Iraq wanted it back from olden days

Seriously ..?
Saudi Arabia can handle Iraq - and Iraq never NEVER threatened Saudi Arabia
it was all just a war of opportunity and advantage

I kinda spent a lot of time studying the war in the 1990's
a lot of time... ask me anything about the 1st war in Iraq

[Chizzang]

Most Americans are also unaware that the WMD claims have now been completely put to rest as false
all of the intelligence reports are now available...
and it is firmly established that Iraq had long abandon their Nuclear program

Both Iraq wars were based on complete fiction

Yes Iraq rolled tanks into Kuwait... and so what
Why would we care about that, Kuwait was a puppet regime and Saudi Arabia could handle Iraq



Sadams military consisted of his Republican Guard and WWII Russian tanks... The end
as one Pilot said: We could have defeated them with a single A-10 and 50 Marines

2.4 trillion dollars later - here we are

Nope.
https://championshipsubdivision.com/for ... es%2C+iraq

Yup... WMD's complete fiction
There is not a single piece of verified credible evidence of WMD's in Iraq - not one

[CID1990]

“There’s no reason to hurt China’s <industries>”

Actually, yes there is. There are multiple reasons.

From the empire the Chinese are trying to create, complete with *real* reeducation camps for dissenters, to the wrecking of the environment that will lie largely at their feet (regardless of whether the West goes completely green or not), to the absolute global economic hegemony that they seek - via a leader for life (that always works out well). Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it.

China needs to be thwarted and resisted at every turn. We won’t see it, but our children will see a modern world under complete Chinese control if we don’t get our heads out of the sand.

All this apologizing for China reminds me of the apologizing for Russia the very same people were doing just a few short years ago (the 1980s called)

Russia is small and insignificant compared to China in the threat that the Chinese pose. They already cast poisonous influence in governments around the world, including our own. Now is the time to wake up. They’ll be interfering in the 2020 elections - as they have before. Let’s see who notices and who doesn’t. (And compare that with who was up in arms about Russia)

"Xi is a thug and it won’t be long before the rest of the world sees it..."

I can't eye roll hard enough at this ^ comment

There are "thugs" all over the globe
We don't give a sh!t about thugs unless it suits us (whoever's in office at the moment)
and by this you're suggesting "the rest of the world" isn't watching Hong Kong right now?
and Putin murder squads and quarterly tank rolls

It will be our children's war to fight - if they don't opt to just succumb
Good luck

BTW:
this problem started in the 1950's and we've done nothing but exacerbate it for 75 years



and you sound like a global warming alarmist teen angster

I’ve been on about China for years, buddy - what you hear now is frustration more than anything

And yeah- there are other thugs in the world- but only one in a country with a third of the world’s population and an actual stated desire to project power to other hemispheres

BTW - of course the world is watching... that’s good - the tut-tutting that we’ll hear from the media and world leaders won’t mean a hill of beans. The lack of action on China will be much more entertaining than anything.... because of course we shouldnt want to “hurt China’s industries”. So the squashed Hong Kongers on YouTube will be the latest in a long line of causes against China that just go away. Like Tibet or Tiananmen Square

Our children will have no option to succumb because we will have already done it for them. The histrionics over tariffs in this thread alone should be proof that we don’t have the will to standup to anyone much less China


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SDHornet]

Nope.
https://championshipsubdivision.com/for ... es%2C+iraq

Yup... WMD's complete fiction
There is not a single piece of verified credible evidence of WMD's in Iraq - not one

Huh, but Robert Mueller told Congress there was credible evidence. Surely he wasn't lying.