ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
I was almost nine (an important distinction at that age). We lived on Riverside Drive in Augusta (KY) and I remember setting on the front porch watching the storms come up the river and on the other side.

You are right, it was surreal.
I was 4 1/2...I don't remember shit about it. I was too busy winding up Evil Knievel or looking through the bionic mans magnifying eye.
 
Last edited:
Me liking this post while I eat bananas counting how many were in the bunch using my fingers and toes and looking confused saying: Wha wha What? Of course, that still makes me smarter than a dim so...
I believe that @HymanKaplan sees the world like this...
iu
 
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.
Then why complain? Oh, I forgot, TDS. That and you still don't understand what is going on.

About the crash, What crash? A bit over dramatic don't you think? Plus, ebbs and flows. It is people like you who jump ship when ish gets hard (stock market goes down) when most intelligent people say wait it out, history proves it corrects itself in time.

What am I saying, "most intelligent people"? You don't qualify in that statement. I have a bunch of bananas here, why don't you take your shoes off and I will teach you a little math.
 
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.
Better seek some cover, I heard the sky is heavy with all of those carbon emissions.
 
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.
Keep doing your thing but these folk won't believe ya. In the words of @Craftydragon he'll rather trust billionaires than some liberal on RR. Eventhough literally everything you posit is on point.

It's been like 10min since I posted and the market has gone from being down 1k points to 1500.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fact_Checker
You're just making stuff up. Nobody on here celebrates deficit spending. Are you drunk?
I said debt. Deficit spending is not the same as national debt.

We have a national debt of 37T. Deficit spending is the difference between our budget and what we spend in a year. If we budget 4T and spend 7T we have a deficit for that year of 3T.

Also a Trade Deficit which is what I was talking about in my tariff post is completely different from a budget deficit which is what you're referring to
 
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.
Funny you should post this. My wife and I were just discussing this last night. I personally don't own stock. She does and has invested and is teaching my daughter to invest her money in stocks. They have done pretty good so far and of course my wife will not sell either. It is suckers like that who are the ones those in the stock market who make money like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screwduke1
Hmmmm. Has anyone heard about this?

May have to hit pause a couple times to read it...

Well, those numbers are false. Milwaukee had around 30K more votes than Dane did. Not to mention Dane people don't have a life. But make yourself feel good calling a 10% loss as ballot box stuffing. It's a Club MAGA go to feel good emotion over getting off their a$$es and actually voting.
 
If you’re a spec builder right now, you’re pulling back. You’re on pause, you have no idea what the future price of construction is gonna cost.
 
Funny you should post this. My wife and I were just discussing this last night. I personally don't own stock. She does and has invested and is teaching my daughter to invest her money in stocks. They have done pretty good so far and of course my wife will not sell either. It is suckers like that who are the ones those in the stock market who make money like.

Exactly. And actually, NOW is the time to BUY. So far, the market is at the same level that it was 11 months ago. We've bled off 11 months of "earnings" Buying now is easy money.
 
None of you guys were talking this way last fall. It was all about how great Trump’s economy was and how the Biden economy would improve right away if Trump was elected. Now you’re saying we need to go into a recession (on purpose) so things will improve at some point in the future.
Regardless, the country is much better off with Trump than Harris.
 
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.
What makes those "sources" any more trustworthy than the ones who show the math is right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDC888
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.
Oh....they were doing SOMETHING. Spending money we didn't have.
 
Bro
You really love hearing yourself type.
You may be right, but vearing off your original point is a hallmark of your chirping.
Carry on.
Make America Great Again!
Never miss a vote.
You don't even know what my original point is. You just write this stuff for "like" clicks as nobody knows wtf you're talking about.
 
What makes those "sources" any more trustworthy than the ones who show the math is right?
First of all, the "tariffs charged to the U.S." on the chart he presented is literally the trade deficit we have with the country. So that fact alone means what he is presenting is false. Look at the 90% example below.


I'll explain it with a question for ya.

Example 1

Say you have 2 trading partners.

Country A is this political thread

Country B is all of reddit.

Is it reasonable for Country B to not want a trade deficit with Country A? Why?

The answer should be an obvious no.

The math behind these tariffs is basically deficit over exports.

Country B being the bigger country would be expected to receive more goods than they give, correct? There's only so many people on this thread versus the millions on Reddit.

What Trump is doing is taking the deficit of country B and dividing it over the exports from Country A. He takes this and divides the number by 2 to get the reciprocal tariff rate.

Say Country A trades Country B, 10B of goods while Country B trades A 1B of goods. Being that we in Country A are a smaller country, this makes perfect sense as we only have so many people.

Country B has a 9B trading deficit.

Trump is taking 9B, the deficit, and dividing it over 10B, exports from A, which yields 90%.

This 90% will be on his chart as "tariffs charged to the U.S."

The reciprocal tariffs appear to be half of that number or 45%. He's doing this to make sure trade is even between the two countries.

But think about it. How could trade ever be even between these two countries? It can't, which leads to Example 2.

Example 2

Say you have two countries, Country C with 1m people and Country D with 10m people. Each country wants to buy one good for each person in their country. Say each good is $1.

In this example, everyone got received 1 item.

One country would receive 10M goods while the other would receive 1M goods.

I.E. The country with 10M people will have a $9m deficit with the country of 1M people. Did Country C screw over Country D? Trump would say yes but that makes zero sense. Both countries got what they wanted but because of the difference in population, at least in this example, you have high tariff rates for the smaller countries.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: Fact_Checker
Illegals dont get to vote. Duh.
It is now proven that the do / have.
OK, so some voted. Net form that, your claim is that 10% of WI voters were illegals & thus won the election for Dims? You really going to stand by that silly sh!t? If not, what's that got to do with Dims winning?
 
Roll Call....You guys make through the storms?
All is well here at the Welder's household! My son is getting ready to leave for class and he just told me that he heard my phone going off nearly all night due to a severe weather alert. The first time I heard it is when I awoke at 0630, lol.

Besides my normal night time meds, I also partake in a little Delta 8 about an hour before I plan on going to sleep ; works like a charm.
 
OK, so some voted. Net form that, your claim is that 10% of WI voters were illegals & thus won the election for Dims? You really going to stand by that silly sh!t? If not, what's that got to do with Dims winning?

Illegals aside, it's f***ing Wisconsin, who KNOWS what those weirdos are going to do election to election.

GO BENGALS.

Speaking of sports, The Cardinals have been a pleasant surprise at the start of the season so far. Ivan Herrera hit three 'taters (a first for a Cardinal catcher) yesterday, and he did it w/o a torpedo bat.
 
Tomorrow marks the start of the anniversary of the greatest tornado outbreak in Kentucky history. April 3 , 1974

I was 11 and it was surreal.
Recall driving down I71 from Cincy a month or two later. A wide (1/2 mile?) swath of downed trees crossed 71 thru a forested area in Oldham. Was unbelievable. I was at work when these occurred, but DW took photos from our apartment balcony of actual funnel clouds. We still have somewhere. Son was 6 mo. old.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: HymanKaplan
Trying to explain tariffs and their myriad uses/circumstances to some people on here is like trying to teach a monkey differential mathematics.
Which is why I have no clue how they'll turn out - good/bad/indifferent. So waiting and seeing. But sure gives short-term ammo to opponents to blame them for any ill-economic changes.
 
Builders employ a lot of people and provide a lot of inventory for homebuyers.

Who does your heart bleed for?

You’ve convinced me. Not only should we drop tariffs so spec builders can continue building spec houses, we should also make sure we don’t deport any illegal aliens because they also rely on that labor.

While we’re at it, maybe the federal government can subsidize mortgage rates for buyers of spec homes rather than trying to rebalance the economy of the US so mortgage rates drop.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT