Scrim 115 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Trump's cornerstone problem is the unrealistic expectations of a huge part of his own base. Nobody who didn't vote for Trump is going to suddenly vote for him in 2020. Everyone who voted for Trump in 2016 will vote for him again in 2020, if they vote. What isn't accounted for is turnout. He turned out segments of the population who had never voted. 4 years from now, in most cases, their lives will still be just as shitty as they are now and they'll be just as mad at those Washington scoundrels as they were when they voted for Trump to go in and put them in concentration camps. Deep down, they'll know he's not totally responsible for their lives, but that change they expected to see, it didn't quite come and, well, Street Outlaws is on that election night and I hear that Big Chief and Doc are racing for the #1 spot, and who really cares if they vote anyway. That's his problem in 2020. If he doesn't do something to roust them next cycle, he loses... and there isn't any executive action he can take that will flip that switch. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 How ****ing stupid are these people about economics. I really hope this doesn't come about. Might as well just shoot autoworkers in the head. ****ing morons. Richard N. HaassVerified account @RichardHaass 3h3 hours ago Potus on verge of initiating trade war with steel tariffs, a move that could threaten success of his presidency more than ill-advised tweets Rob PriceVerified account @robaeprice 3h3 hours ago Trump is planning a trade war, @axios reports. 20% tariffs, first on steel, then aluminium, semiconductors, more. https://www.axios.co...2450764900.html … Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 couple things in response to BG's LOL post. 1. "Trump fired back" - lol, this reads like he actually did damage to the liberal media and not himself with his petty, childish tweets. 2. Trump's hardcore base hasn't shrunk much. You are right there. However, couple things. for one, his base isn't big enough to get him elected. There were a lot of undecided and last minute converts who pushed him over the top. He has clearly lost a bunch of those people, and he can't get reelected without them. If you don't believe this is true, you aren't paying attention. second, while Trump's base is sticking with him for now. Eventually, they are likely to turn on him too, when they realize the personal economic impact of most of his policies which syphon money from the lower and middle class and give it to the top 1%. It's easy to say rah rah MAGA and delude yourself into some idealistic vision of Trump's platform (which doesn't actually align with reality in any way, but whatever). But when those decisions actually start to hit the pockets of his base, his support will start to erode further. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Not understanding why you lost will only insure more losses. And the top 1% are largely Democratssuffering from affluensa Hardly the target audience of the right. Trumps tweets against the media have resulted in the media losing. CNN is a perfect example Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 "you" lol. We've been over this. Someday, you will be too embarrassed to tell your grandchildren that you were a Trump supporter. Link to post Share on other sites
Scrim 115 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 How ****ing stupid are these people about economics. I really hope this doesn't come about. Might as well just shoot autoworkers in the head. ****ing morons. Richard N. HaassVerified account @RichardHaass 3h3 hours ago Potus on verge of initiating trade war with steel tariffs, a move that could threaten success of his presidency more than ill-advised tweets Rob PriceVerified account @robaeprice 3h3 hours ago Trump is planning a trade war, @axios reports. 20% tariffs, first on steel, then aluminium, semiconductors, more. https://www.axios.co...2450764900.html … Sometimes, he lacks perspective on where US manufacturing is, now. He lived the large majority of his life in an era of incredible American manufacturing supremacy where we called the shots on everything. We still call most of the shots but now, but not all of them and there are production alternatives (and in some cases, advantages in not dealing with us) That being said, steel dumping has been a major issue. http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/27/us-considering-broad-scale-measures-to-fight-steel-dumping-wilbur-ross.html This is what his tariffs address. People saying BUT ZOMG WUDDABOUT ECONOMIC THEORY THAT SAYS FREE TRADE = BEST!!! aren't addressing this action in the context of it being a direct reaction to dumping. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 Sometimes, he lacks perspective on where US manufacturing is, now. He lived the large majority of his life in an era of incredible American manufacturing supremacy where we called the shots on everything. We still call most of the shots but now, but not all of them and there are production alternatives (and in some cases, advantages in not dealing with us) That being said, steel dumping has been a major issue. http://www.cnbc.com/...ilbur-ross.html This is what his tariffs address. People saying BUT ZOMG WUDDABOUT ECONOMIC THEORY THAT SAYS FREE TRADE = BEST!!! aren't addressing this action in the context of it being a direct reaction to dumping. dumping is already being dealt with as it should be with specific targeted actions. The Chinese are already faced with many actions against their steel dumping. What Trump and the morons are proposing is broad based tariffs that is just insanely ****ing stupid and will do so much harm to the American economy it shows how little these people know about how economies work. China exports very very little steel to the US. You know who does export steel to the US, Canada does and Canada imports a large amount of steel from the US because our countries have integrated production because of free trade. https://piie.com/blogs/china-economic-watch/chinese-steel-exports-united-states-dropped-dramatically-2016 However, less than 1 percent of Chinese steel exports were sold to the United States in 2016. So few Chinese steel products were exported to the United States because 20 US trade remedies (link is external) against steel mill imports from China were in effect as of December 1, 2016. Four of these trade remedies went into effect last year, resulting in a 57 percent drop in Chinese steel exports to the United States, from 2.21 million tons in 2015 to 0.95 million tons in 2016. Link to post Share on other sites
Scrim 115 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 dumping is already being dealt with as it should be with specific targeted actions. The Chinese are already faced with many actions against their steel dumping. What Trump and the morons are proposing is broad based tariffs that is just insanely ****ing stupid and will do so much harm to the American economy it shows how little these people know about how economies work. If not tariffs on dumpers, their international cohorts and complicit origin-launderers, what 'specific, targeted actions' would be more effective? Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 If not tariffs on dumpers, their international cohorts and complicit origin-launderers, what 'specific, targeted actions' would be more effective? why do you want to make steel more expensive and make American manufacturers who use steel who employ millions of more people than the steel industry does less competitive and have to lose business which means more Americans will lose their jobs ?\ US Steel Tariffs Against China Are Working: Americans Losing Jobs, Becoming Poorer As A Result New tariffs on imports are boosting steel prices in the U.S., offering a lifeline to beleaguered American steelmakers but raising costs for manufacturers of goods ranging from oil pipes to factory equipment to cars. U.S. steel producers who lost billions of dollars last year amid a flood of cheap imports are looking to capitalize on tighter supplies and higher pricing. That is shifting the dynamics of a supply chain that had come to rely on inexpensive foreign steel. Some manufacturers are pushing back. In a letter to the Department of Commerce requesting an exemption, Steelcase Inc. Chief Executive James Keane said a tariff on a special kind of Japanese steel could cost one of his subsidiaries $4 million to $5 million a year. The subsidiary, Polyvision, makes whiteboards for schools at a plant in Oklahoma, where it employs about 50 people. “If nothing changes, we would have to close our Oklahoma plant,” he wrote. “Schools can’t afford to pay more for these whiteboards, so if we raise prices to our customers they will use lower quality substitutes that are likely not made in the U.S.” And it's not as if we don't know that. Back a while President Bush imposed tariffs on steel imports. And we know what the outcome of that was: As a result of a Section 201 (“safeguard”) investigation brought at the behest of the U.S. steel industry, President Bush in March 2002 imposed tariffs on imports of certain steel products for three years and one day. The tariffs, combined with other challenges present in the marketplace at the time and in the months that followed, boosted steel costs to the detriment of American companies that use steel to produce goods in the United States. The resulting negative impact included job losses for thousands of American workers. The Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition (CITAC) Foundation requested a formal examination of the impact of higher steel costs on American steel-consuming industries,1 and in particular, a quantification of employment losses at those companies. This study employed straight-forward and widelyaccepted regression analysis using a variety of price and employment data to maximize the reliability of the results.2 We found that: • 200,000 Americans lost their jobs to higher steel prices during 2002. These lost jobs represent approximately $4 billion in lost wages from February to November 2002.3 • One out of four (50,000) of these job losses occurred in the metal manufacturing, machinery and equipment and transportation equipment and parts sectors. • Job losses escalated steadily over 2002, peaking in November (at 202,000 jobs), and slightly declining to 197,000 jobs in December.4 • More American workers lost their jobs in 2002 to higher steel prices than the total number employed by the U.S. steel industry itself (187,500 Americans were employed by U.S. steel producers in December 2002). Note that last line. The estimation of jobs lost to steel tariffs was higher than the total number working in the steel industry. And that, of course, is why we don't like tariffs on imports. They make us all poorer and get some number of us kicked out of our jobs too. Yes, this is true even if the importer is "playing unfair" or dumping. It is imports which make us richer. That's why we should never be taking actions which make imports more expensive. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 All that being said is that there is a large over capacity in China when it comes to steel production and it is a problem for other steel producers and an even larger problem for the Chinese themselves. Chinese overcapacity has the following effects for the US. Hurts US steel manufacturers. Helps US manufacturers who use steel. Helps American consumers since the goods they buy that use steel such as cars are less expensive. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Except shipping east to west is much more expensive then shipping west to east. Their failure rates on production are also a big problem for their manufacturing base. But having no restrictions on pollution does make their steel plants run more cost effectively. Good thing Trump got us out of that Paris noose. Link to post Share on other sites
Scrim 115 Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 It is imports which make us richer. That's why we should never be taking actions which make imports more expensive. No, imports make certain material goods cheaper. It does not make us 'richer' if it renders a huge swathe of our population unemployable and degrades our civilization as a whole. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted July 9, 2017 Author Share Posted July 9, 2017 MAGA Bradd JaffyVerified account @BraddJaffy Wow. A searing assessment of the President of the United States by political editor @CUhlmann of Australia's ABC. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted July 9, 2017 Author Share Posted July 9, 2017 More MAGA Lois RomanoVerified account @loisromano Brutal from the editor of Der Spiegel http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/donald-trump-is-a-menace-to-the-world-opinion-a-1148471.html Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted July 9, 2017 Author Share Posted July 9, 2017 Matt O'BrienVerified account @ObsoleteDogma 28m28 minutes ago Republicans say it’s no big deal if the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in 3…2…1 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/09/us/politics/trump-russia-kushner-manafort.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 … Link to post Share on other sites
JustDoIt 10 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Matt O'BrienVerified account @ObsoleteDogma 28m28 minutes ago Republicans say it’s no big deal if the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in 3…2…1 https://www.nytimes....v=top-news&_r=0 … YAWN Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted July 10, 2017 Author Share Posted July 10, 2017 Matt O'BrienVerified account @ObsoleteDogma 28m28 minutes ago Republicans say it’s no big deal if the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in 3…2…1 https://www.nytimes....v=top-news&_r=0 … love the open shirt on Fredo Trump's "friend" who set up the meeting Josh MarshallVerified account @joshtpm This appears to be Rob Goldstone, the man the Post identifies as the friend of Trump Jr. who set up the meeting. …http://prd-ext-webtier-1264707708.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com/missusa/members/profile/656516/year:2013 … Link to post Share on other sites
Scrim 115 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 MAGA Bradd JaffyVerified account @BraddJaffy Wow. A searing assessment of the President of the United States by political editor @CUhlmann of Australia's ABC. https://twitter.com/...878237767704576 He's the 'Senior News Editor and Writer, NBC Nightly News' yet his Twitter feed looks like the left wing version of a right wing facebook page during the Obama years. What makes you think this person is credible? It's amazing how powerful narrations are on some (if not most) people. "Obama is a fraud who lies to achieve his dangerous agenda of dismantling American values" "Trump is a hoaxing lunatic who continues to advance his unhinged and kooky theories on the backs of a naive voting population" People read things like that and confuse it for being the presentation fact. The restrict themselves to media ghettoes that only reinforce the things they've chosen to believe. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Matt O'BrienVerified account @ObsoleteDogma 28m28 minutes ago Republicans say it’s no big deal if the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in 3…2…1 https://www.nytimes....v=top-news&_r=0 … Love this response by the rest of the media Almost as much as I love this headline for DebBlasio, who chose to leave NY the day a police officer was shot and killed to go to Germany and protest Trump. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Essay21 2,385 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 That is a great headline. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Love this response by the rest of the media "Rest of the media" LOL, you are too much. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Thank you. Jr. Just released his emails. Looks like there was nothing there. How many more times does this Russian story need to continue down the same path? Unnamed sources say... Truth comes out disproving... Ignore story but come out with new one.... Use mountain of fake news as the only proof to justify the narrative. Do you think the demo/media would meet with a Russian Kremlin lawyer if they had dirt on Trump? Link to post Share on other sites
GOCUBSGO 77 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Transparency months after the fact isn't transparency. And he only released them because the NYT was about to publish them. It doesn't matter if the dirt ended up being worthless. You had the son of the Republican candidate for President of the United States meeting with a Russian lawyer to obtain high level, sensitive information damaging to the opposing candidate. Think about that for a second before you peddle your next moronic claim that he did nothing wrong and this story is just more fake news. He knew exactly who was helping him and what they were trying to provide. Again, BG confronted with verifiable facts and his response is always, bu-but-butt Hillary...bu-but-butt the Dems. Whether the Dems would have done the same thing is irrelevant because they didn't or weren't stupid enough to be caught. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Don't Google Ukraine and Hillary. It might be a little hard for you to maintain your beliefs. Meanwhile Trump Jr. Did nothing wrong, came clean, and the left is one again heading back to thier caves to await the next fake news that will somehow validate their refusal to accept that their ideas suck and their candidates are awful. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted July 11, 2017 Author Share Posted July 11, 2017 Jason ZengerleVerified account @zengerle "And may their first child be a high-quality child." Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now