has he ever said anything that was actually a ... fact? it seems every single thing he posts is a lie.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
We kept our church basement open until 11:00, when we got the all clear, had about15 there, we are in the Berg in Western Ky, 3" of rain so far!
I forgot all of that. Congrats, I guess - you predicted that Trump would cause a stock market crash and you might be right. But what I don't understand is why anyone would be happy about that. Unless you don't have any retirement investments and just want to stick it to people who do.
Another thing I don't understand is that some of you equate being against Trump's tariffs as being "liberal". But true left wingers should be in favor of this too - particularly organized labor. Mondale would have been for this in 84 while Reagan would have been completely opposed.
Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad, Tariffs are good, tariffs are bad.
Here is a fact.....we won't know the end result of this for some time now.....months, maybe a year or so, and given where we were on the global economic stage the last 4 years, that could not continue in a business as usual fashion.
Here is a fact.....we won't know the end result of this for some time now.....months, maybe a year or so, and given where we were on the global economic stage the last 4 years, that could not continue in a business as usual fashion.
Trump caused a stock market crash?
Hopefully not, but I expect to lose a lot of money today. How about you?
The stock market is completely disconnected from reality, totally fueled by trillions of government borrowing. I’m happy someone is trying to fix the fundamental issues that have led to $37 trillion in debt and total destruction of the middle class.
Tariffs aren’t the whole plan. It’s a three legged stool of tariffs, income tax cuts and cuts to government spending. We are already seeing the 10 year drop which is critical given the position the Biden admin left us in. We need rates to be lower when we refinance $10 trillion of short term borrowing they stuck us with.
Will it work? I don’t know. What we’ve been doing certainly isn’t working. I have some optimism.
No one is happy the market is dropping (unless they’re short). But I’m not concerned with it either. I just don’t care about short term moves in the market. I can tell you every one of my consumer facing clients with super regional to national presence that relies on consumer discretionary spend has been feeling the recession for 2+ years. Doesn’t matter what government borrowing and spending did to GDP numbers so bureaucrats could convince you there was no recession.
I am happy the Trump admin seems to understand the issues and does have a plan, regardless of what the never Trumpers think.
You can claim there is no plan and this is all chaos, but as I just showed you, a lot of us were talking about this before he was in office this time.
I’m below 40 with a toddler. I care far more about the country over a time frame measured in decades, not daily market fluctuations.
You’re a fool if you sell today. If you’re in a position where you need that cash today, you’re a fool for being that exposed to equities.
So let’s do real talk.
US Imports in 2024 were $4.1 trillion $’s (link below)
US GDP is about 26% of the worlds GDP and Imports are about 15% of US GDP so US Imports are about (15% of 26%) 4% of the total world economy.
If we assume that every worker produces the same amount of GDP worldwide we can multiply that by 4% by the number of workers employed worldwide to figure out how many additional workers would be needed to bring home all of the US Import business. This is likely an underestimate however because many of the things we import are cheap but labor intensive stuff, the most obvious example being apparel (clothing and shoes).
Anyway Google says there are about 3.5 billion people working globally. 4% of 3.5 billion is 140 million workers,working globally to produce the imports that we import each year.
US Population right now is 340 million, 163 million of which are currently employed. Of the remaining 177 million, 59 million are retired and 73.6 million are children. So that leaves 44.4 million working age non employed adults in the US.
If we onshore a job for all 44.4 million of those people we would still need 96 million people’s worth of work to match those imports. That means on at least 2/3 of those imported products, US consumers will have to pay the full price of the tariffs on those imports. We will also have to pay higher prices for all of the stuff that does onshore, because if it was currently price competitive it would already be made here.
If we don’t have workers to produce the stuff we’re currently importing then we pay the tariff. The only way to not pay the tariff is to not buy the good. So long run tariffs can only equal higher prices and/or less stuff. That means tariffs lower the quality of life in the long run for the country implementing them.
All of this assumes no retaliation on our exports because if people also stop buying our stuff (most certainly to happen) then we get that negative impact long term as well. Tariffs shrink the pie plain and simple.
US Imports in 2024 were $4.1 trillion $’s (link below)
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, December and Annual 2024 | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $98.4 billion in December, up $19.5 billion from $78.9 billion in November, revised.
www.bea.gov
US GDP is about 26% of the worlds GDP and Imports are about 15% of US GDP so US Imports are about (15% of 26%) 4% of the total world economy.
If we assume that every worker produces the same amount of GDP worldwide we can multiply that by 4% by the number of workers employed worldwide to figure out how many additional workers would be needed to bring home all of the US Import business. This is likely an underestimate however because many of the things we import are cheap but labor intensive stuff, the most obvious example being apparel (clothing and shoes).
Anyway Google says there are about 3.5 billion people working globally. 4% of 3.5 billion is 140 million workers,working globally to produce the imports that we import each year.
US Population right now is 340 million, 163 million of which are currently employed. Of the remaining 177 million, 59 million are retired and 73.6 million are children. So that leaves 44.4 million working age non employed adults in the US.
If we onshore a job for all 44.4 million of those people we would still need 96 million people’s worth of work to match those imports. That means on at least 2/3 of those imported products, US consumers will have to pay the full price of the tariffs on those imports. We will also have to pay higher prices for all of the stuff that does onshore, because if it was currently price competitive it would already be made here.
If we don’t have workers to produce the stuff we’re currently importing then we pay the tariff. The only way to not pay the tariff is to not buy the good. So long run tariffs can only equal higher prices and/or less stuff. That means tariffs lower the quality of life in the long run for the country implementing them.
All of this assumes no retaliation on our exports because if people also stop buying our stuff (most certainly to happen) then we get that negative impact long term as well. Tariffs shrink the pie plain and simple.
Last edited:
A whole bunch of gobbledygook. If you listened to his interviews on Stern back in the 90s 00s you would know Trump gets a hardon for a stock market crash.
Are you celebrating?
Not sure where you guys are these days. Seemed to pivot back to the occupy Wall Street sentiment after Luigi Mangione got you all hot and bothered. Retired all your BLM gear, while you were out stopping Jews from going to class.
Hard to keep up with whether you’re now supporting Trump with a meme about a guy on Wall Street killing himself.
Who said anything about selling. I'm talking about on paper. I get it - you're young and retirement is a long way in the future for you. But for those over 50, even a short term stock market drop is a big concern.
You cashing out today to cut your losses I guess? Will it go back up after today? Or is it the lowest point it will ever be in history?
Trump saves Coyote vs. ACME (will now be released next year after having been shelved after production)
God Bless America
God Bless America
the market goes down in 5th gear. It goes up in 1st gear. This will take a while to recover from. It will recover, but I hate a self imposed crash.
Smaller companies will have to take negative steps to stay afloat. For instance,Reverse spits and issuing more shares to avoid bankruptcy for tanking share price
I'm not convinced he's leaving either. I think the rumors are just a leverage play.
Maybe, but I expect it will be a positive in a few months as it usually is once economic knee jerk reactions calm down.
See where Adams in NYC left the Dem/lib party. Running for mayor now as an independent. Probably won't help him. Damage already done.
** Wise Words Department **
"In order to see birds it is necessary to become a part of the silence."
-Robert Wilson Lynd
"In order to see birds it is necessary to become a part of the silence."
-Robert Wilson Lynd
YOu did.
YOu can only lose money when you sell, which is precisely when you've gained it.
My whole life I've tried to be a conservative, pragmatic person. Never believed everything I was told/read. Never went 'with the crowd'. Would look at 'conspiracy theorists' and would think...I don't want to be that guy.
10-15 years ago when she would be on talk shows, etc talking about this (vaccine effects) I would have said 'sure'.
Now....the effects of vaccines...cover-ups of it....government campaign to discredit those voicing their opinions .........after the last 6-8 years, I tend to believe them.
10-15 years ago when she would be on talk shows, etc talking about this (vaccine effects) I would have said 'sure'.
Now....the effects of vaccines...cover-ups of it....government campaign to discredit those voicing their opinions .........after the last 6-8 years, I tend to believe them.
Jenny McCarthy Reveals Chilling Encounter After Challenging Vaccine Narrative | The Gateway Pundit | by Vigilant Fox
A high-level insider confessed he was hired to smear her—and explained why he couldn’t go through with it.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
Saw one up close right at about 3 years ago as an EF-1 passed over our little rural neighborhood, taking out several trees, lifting up my chicken coop and relocating it about 30 feet away (with chickens in it), and relocating all of my deck furniture from the back of the house all the way around to the side of the house, with a few cushions across the street in the neighbors yard. I looked out the side door when it was approaching and saw the scariest wall cloud out beyond our garage, then i had to pee, i ran to the bathroom, but my wife was in there, one of the kids was in the other, then i heard "the train" and said, "I can hold it" and ran downstairs. Fortunately most of us in the area had minimal structural damage. I lost part of a downspout and had a light broken, some lost some shingles and some metal trim, worst was probably a guy over on another street lost a lot of a pole barn he had under construction. I think I had the most yard damage of anybody on my street.
Last edited:
Yeah, all of a week into the portal and they're in full blown panic mode, completely ignoring the fact we didn't have our roster completed until late May last year.
Total US economic loss of all tariffs is equal to this:
1.
100% of the tariffs on any good we continue to import. My main category here is apparel. We would have to tariff clothing and shoes at like 400% to onshore those industries so where these things are made is just going to shift from one tariffed country to another to get the lowest rate applied. That also means we do not have onshore capabilities so we will bear 100% of the tariffs in a price increase.
Example:
Let’s consider a $100 pair of Nike’s made in Vietnam. The imported cost of that shoe is around $20. So a 46% tariff will make that $29.20. That means our new price at retail is $109.20 so we end up paying 10% more for every $100 worth of Nike’s we got before the tariff. Nike’s would cost $80-$100 to produce in the US and would be well over $200 at retail if made in the US so the tariff will just be paid by us and nothing changes in this industry.
2.
100% of the cost difference between domestic and foreign production of any good that we onshore production for. If this tariff makes the manufacturer onshore it means that the product costs less than the foreign cost plus the tariff but assuming importers were behaving rationally prior to tariffs the cost of foreign production without a tariff was less than US production. So whatever that difference is we have to pay for.
Example:
A Kia costs $10,000 to make in South Korea, now they have a 25% tariff so the cost is now $12,500 to get that vehicle into the US. If Kia can make it in the US for $11,500 they will onshore that production. Unfortunately US consumers will still have to bear the $1500 cost difference.
3
The difference in the amount of good we could consume with these extra prices and the amount of goods we will be able to consume without these extra these prices. A tariff is not going to raise your pay. So if you have $20,000 on discretionary money to spend today and cars and shoes and clothes and fruit and vegetables are all more expensive you will have to consume less with your $20,000 so your quality of life will go down .
4.
Loss of sales for any US exporter exposed to retaliatory tariffs by foreign governments. All of this will offset any gains in US employment and many of our exports involve highly skilled labor. So tariffs lower the amount of high skilled jobs for US workers and increase the number of low skilled jobs for US workers.
I know the first argument to this will be extra money for workers here. Yes that’s true but the rest of us are paying that in higher prices so tariffs are effectively a transfer of money and goods from everyone to the people who will now be employed in the US that were not employed or were underemployed prior to the tariffs. Also the net size of the pie over the long run gets smaller.
1.
100% of the tariffs on any good we continue to import. My main category here is apparel. We would have to tariff clothing and shoes at like 400% to onshore those industries so where these things are made is just going to shift from one tariffed country to another to get the lowest rate applied. That also means we do not have onshore capabilities so we will bear 100% of the tariffs in a price increase.
Example:
Let’s consider a $100 pair of Nike’s made in Vietnam. The imported cost of that shoe is around $20. So a 46% tariff will make that $29.20. That means our new price at retail is $109.20 so we end up paying 10% more for every $100 worth of Nike’s we got before the tariff. Nike’s would cost $80-$100 to produce in the US and would be well over $200 at retail if made in the US so the tariff will just be paid by us and nothing changes in this industry.
2.
100% of the cost difference between domestic and foreign production of any good that we onshore production for. If this tariff makes the manufacturer onshore it means that the product costs less than the foreign cost plus the tariff but assuming importers were behaving rationally prior to tariffs the cost of foreign production without a tariff was less than US production. So whatever that difference is we have to pay for.
Example:
A Kia costs $10,000 to make in South Korea, now they have a 25% tariff so the cost is now $12,500 to get that vehicle into the US. If Kia can make it in the US for $11,500 they will onshore that production. Unfortunately US consumers will still have to bear the $1500 cost difference.
3
The difference in the amount of good we could consume with these extra prices and the amount of goods we will be able to consume without these extra these prices. A tariff is not going to raise your pay. So if you have $20,000 on discretionary money to spend today and cars and shoes and clothes and fruit and vegetables are all more expensive you will have to consume less with your $20,000 so your quality of life will go down .
4.
Loss of sales for any US exporter exposed to retaliatory tariffs by foreign governments. All of this will offset any gains in US employment and many of our exports involve highly skilled labor. So tariffs lower the amount of high skilled jobs for US workers and increase the number of low skilled jobs for US workers.
I know the first argument to this will be extra money for workers here. Yes that’s true but the rest of us are paying that in higher prices so tariffs are effectively a transfer of money and goods from everyone to the people who will now be employed in the US that were not employed or were underemployed prior to the tariffs. Also the net size of the pie over the long run gets smaller.
Nailed it.
Fools cry about daily market fluctuations.
Watched him till we were in the clear. He even bragged about being on early. I swear that dude gives himself a hearty pep talk in front of a mirror before going on air on a night like this. He lives for those kind of nights.
in a hotel the hallway is generally the most interior space, so the safest.
False.So let’s do real talk.
US Imports in 2024 were $4.1 trillion $’s (link below)
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, December and Annual 2024 | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $98.4 billion in December, up $19.5 billion from $78.9 billion in November, revised.www.bea.gov
US GDP is about 26% of the worlds GDP and Imports are about 15% of US GDP so US Imports are about (15% of 26%) 4% of the total world economy.
If we assume that every worker produces the same amount of GDP worldwide we can multiply that by 4% by the number of workers employed worldwide to figure out how many additional workers would be needed to bring home all of the US Import business. This is likely an underestimate however because many of the things we import are cheap but labor intensive stuff, the most obvious example being apparel (clothing and shoes).
Anyway Google says there are about 3.5 billion people working globally. 4% of 3.5 billion is 140 million workers,working globally to produce the imports that we import each year.
US Population right now is 340 million, 163 million of which are currently employed. Of the remaining 177 million, 59 million are retired and 73.6 million are children. So that leaves 44.4 million working age non employed adults in the US.
If we onshore a job for all 44.4 million of those people we would still need 96 million people’s worth of work to match those imports. That means on at least 2/3 of those imported products, US consumers will have to pay the full price of the tariffs on those imports. We will also have to pay higher prices for all of the stuff that does onshore, because if it was currently price competitive it would already be made here.
If we don’t have workers to produce the stuff we’re currently importing then we pay the tariff. The only way to not pay the tariff is to not buy the good. So long run tariffs can only equal higher prices and/or less stuff. That means tariffs lower the quality of life in the long run for the country implementing them.
All of this assumes no retaliation on our exports because if people also stop buying our stuff (most certainly to happen) then we get that negative impact long term as well. Tariffs shrink the pie plain and simple.
It seems other countries tarrifing the hell out of our goods thought it a great idea, until we decided to play hardball.
You said you were leaving.
Honor your word.
No, it's the hubris of you and Trump.
If the decision was good why would the market react the way it has?
It's not like Wall St is made up of people who are uneducated. Why would they be selling in mass if this was a good decision?
People on his cabinet are going to fare well regardless. It's actually in their benefit to see a crash. I mean both Elon and Trump have mentioned everything going to hell but it'll be better in the long run.
That's literally their way to keep you on a string.
Billionaires don't give a shit about you, we're ants to them.
If dollars were seconds the typical American makes 22 days in their lifetime or 2m dollars. A billion is worth 32 years. Musk was worth 12,000 years. They don't give a rats ass about you. They just want more money for themselves and their current actions show that but y'all are too ignorant to understand.
Last edited:
Just like trustincal.
Not convinved.
Most of the 36T is owed to ourselves.
National debt is not the same as the debt you or me have, though we do need to manage it better.
Also if you really care about reducing debt you'd not support Trump and his economic ideas and actions.
We could be 45T to 50T in debt by 2029 and y'all won't say a thing. It's only when a dem is in office that y'all go nuts.
21% Democrat Approval rating begs to differ with your assessment.
From personal experiences I can attest to the above.
Way too much to type. But I have been evaluated so many different times for my heart issues and such. Every time it is going through three cycles so each set of contractors can get a piece of the pie. Every time.
I think there are many sources out there this morning showing Trump’s math is wrong. His tariff rates are that countries trade surplus with US divided by that countries exports to the US. That’s not a tariff rate. That’s a metric that means nothing other than that country produces good much more cheaply than the US.
I love the people who think that a nation 37T dollars in debt was going to be able to shoulder that burden forever and ever. Guess what dumbasses, the end was coming either way. Your precious stocks would have been completely wiped out by the fall. You think austerity is bad? What happens when there are zero social safety nets, no one has food, no one has medicine, no one has a job? The four horsemen, that's what.
At least someone has the nuts to try and forestall the complete collapse that was destined to come in short order. I do have concerns. I don't know if this will work, but I do know that congress is doing nothing, and that is what got us 37T in debt to start with.
At least someone has the nuts to try and forestall the complete collapse that was destined to come in short order. I do have concerns. I don't know if this will work, but I do know that congress is doing nothing, and that is what got us 37T in debt to start with.
This is patently false, and you're a hand-wringing simpleton. Go breathe into a paper bag, and take the day off.
