Question For Those That Voted For Trump

[cwericb]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

[Paarslaars]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

 

Well, if prices go up 20% then the US will find those goods somewhere cheaper I guess, so Mexico will be forced to take a cut on those goods or will not be able to sell them at all.

[rkbabang]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

 

Well, if prices go up 20% then the US will find those goods somewhere cheaper I guess, so Mexico will be forced to take a cut on those goods or will not be able to sell them at all.

 

That's pretty naive view of things, but even if it were true, we will still be paying more for those things or we will be buying things of cheaper quality.  If neither of those were true, then we would already be buying from those other places and not Mexico. 

 

http://reason.com/archives/2017/01/26/the-folly-of-buy-american-and-hire-ameri

"Trump is never more certain than when he is completely clueless. The truth is that protection against foreign trade leads away from prosperity and strength. A country that deprives itself of foreign goods is doing to itself what an enemy might try to do in wartime—cut it off from outside commerce. It is volunteering to impoverish itself. Countries don't "ravage" us when they make "our" products; they help us. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the essence of trade—foreign or domestic—is that it makes both buyer and seller better off. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother."

 

[20ppy]

-->"Then we have a country starting to invade a large piece of ocean, let's and support a dangerous maniac acquiring nukes and ICBM's and, keeps threatening Taiwan and we should not do anything about it?

 

Then let me ask you this on the latter. If it was ok to impose sanctions on a country that invaded territory where its citizens wanted the invaders, then how is it ok not to impose sanctions on a country/regime that takes over oceans, significantly threatens world piece/survival and basically want to take back by force if necessary territory where its citizens don't want them?"<--

 

We differ on the ways of solving issues and what the facts really are. I will only list some my side of facts:

* Suppose that China is taking "large piece of the ocean" with force, yet it expelled nobody in the areas. China claims that it owned the area since the ancient times. The disputing country Philippine in this case won a UN court ruling. Philippine is not pursuing this case at this time. Call it a status quo, but it's at least peaceful. UN had a resolution on Israel with violent territory disputes and this case actually threatens lives and U.S. and world interests.

 

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force. Both Russia and U.S. have, not to mention all these empires of past 200 years. Ironically, the majority of the people in China and Taiwan resoundingly say that they belong to one China and they should reunite one day. Relations have been thawing for 20 years and so much so, now they can travel freely in both places. There is no invaders in this case. So much non factual stuff in all these, no wonder.

 

[rb]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

 

Well, if prices go up 20% then the US will find those goods somewhere cheaper I guess, so Mexico will be forced to take a cut on those goods or will not be able to sell them at all.

Actually no, the adjustment will probably be made through FX rates.

 

But even if what you say is true. Then what the US will do is shift it's trade deficit from Mexico to another country(s). In addition Mexican retaliation will hurt the US. Furthermore the disruption to supply chains will add further pain. Brilliant!

[Jurgis]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

[sys]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

 

it would allow trump to say that mexico is paying for it.  which, i think, is all that he cares about.

[Cardboard]

"Ironically, the majority of the people in China and Taiwan resoundingly say that they belong to one China and they should reunite one day."

 

Yet they recently elected a president looking to push forward the independence. So much for majority and resoundingly supporting One China.  ::)

 

I also guess that my country should claim 10,000 square km in both the Atlantic and the Pacific. I could always say that the Natives had some old tradition and that they are ours.

 

Cardboard

[20ppy]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

 

China ruled on Tibet in 1717–1720 if you look at it. It is probably reasonable to call it history. Logic fails if we make everything anachronistic?

[Jurgis]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

 

The first China rule on Tibet is 1717–1720 if you look at it. It is probably reasonable to call it history. Are we now going to not even respect logic and make everything anachronistic?

 

What logic? You said bolded above. This is clearly not true.

[Cardboard]

"I don't think we are discussing with reason and intelligence anymore."

 

Sure we are. It is just that you are hell bent about defending that regime who killed its own people. Tiananmen Square remember? Then all the Mao's attrocities and now they are gearing again to do more.

 

Cardboard

[Tim Eriksen]

"Ironically, the majority of the people in China and Taiwan resoundingly say that they belong to one China and they should reunite one day."

 

Yet they recently elected a president looking to push forward the independence. So much for majority and resoundingly supporting One China.  ::)

 

I also guess that my country should claim 10,000 square km in both the Atlantic and the Pacific. I could always say that the Natives had some old tradition and that they are ours.

 

Cardboard

I don't think we are discussing with reason and intelligence anymore.

 

I don't think you ever were

[tengen]

Who ultimately pays the 20% import tax will depend on the whether the goods being sold are easily substituted by goods from another source. If they are not easy to replace, the Mexicans will simply raise prices to compensate for the 20% tax and US consumers will wind up paying. In the end it doesn't matter as this is most likely an empty threat.

[Parsad]

I hate to harp on this subject, but if Trump is so detached from reality that he doesn’t understand that instituting a 20% tax on Mexican imports would make Americans, not Mexicans pay for his wall than how dumb is this guy?

 

it would allow trump to say that mexico is paying for it.  which, i think, is all that he cares about.

 

I think you will see some serious inflation either over the next four years, or in the ensuing years as a result of some of the policies that are going to be implemented.  Alot of cash is going to flow into assets over the next few years from reduced taxes, repatriation, etc.  Combine this with tariffs on imported goods, increasing national debt due to a lack of tax revenue and increased infrastructure expenditure, and you could see hyper-inflation at some point.  Cheers! 

[20ppy]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

 

The first China rule on Tibet is 1717–1720 if you look at it. It is probably reasonable to call it history. Are we now going to not even respect logic and make everything anachronistic?

 

What logic? You said bolded above. This is clearly not true.

 

So China's earlier rules on Tibet doesn't count? This logic.

 

 

[Jurgis]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

 

The first China rule on Tibet is 1717–1720 if you look at it. It is probably reasonable to call it history. Are we now going to not even respect logic and make everything anachronistic?

 

What logic? You said bolded above. This is clearly not true.

 

So China's earlier rules on Tibet doesn't count? This logic.

 

So past occupation justifies new re-occupation? I am sure Vladimir Putin would be happy to hear this.

[20ppy]

*  From historical perspective, for the past 200+ years and thru 2 world wars, China has not taken large pieces of land by force.

 

Not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Tibet_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China

 

The first China rule on Tibet is 1717–1720 if you look at it. It is probably reasonable to call it history. Are we now going to not even respect logic and make everything anachronistic?

 

What logic? You said bolded above. This is clearly not true.

 

So China's earlier rules on Tibet doesn't count? This logic.

 

So past occupation justifies new re-occupation? I am sure Vladimir Putin would be happy to hear this.

 

No it doesn't. But is that why we are hell bent doing what we are doing today?

[Mephistopheles]

This thread as all other political threads, is a shit show!

 

Tell me, has anyone here ever changed their opinion on any political issue as the result of these threads? And I think the average IQ and rationality here is superior to the rest of the population; so theoretically one would assume that if people can learn and change their minds anywhere, it would be here...but it doesn't seem like it lol.

[onyx1]

This thread as all other political threads, is a shit show!

 

Tell me, has anyone here ever changed their opinion on any political issue as the result of these threads? And I think the average IQ and rationality here is superior to the rest of the population; so theoretically one would assume that if people can learn and change their minds anywhere, it would be here...but it doesn't seem like it lol.

 

 

...and I'll say it again:  Facts and logic don't matter in politics, even among the most rational.

[John Hjorth]

All participants in this topic,

 

I suppose you aren't all invested in cash or cash equivalents, with no intention to change that [meaning: If so, why are you even a board member here?].

 

A fellow baord member posted a few days ago, that this board has turned from an investing board to a political board. It's certainly not for me to decide what to post on this board - the board as set up by Sanjeev many years ago contains a lot of freedom for board members with regard to posting.

 

Sanjeev asked two very specific questions as the OP in this topic, which were clearly investment related, -however, to some extent, political.

 

In some of the last posts in this topic I now read things about China many years ago ...

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

In short : Not trying to be condecending here, or even patronizing ... - but don't you - as investor - have anythings else to do? - Something that you have thought about with regard to an investment, that would be worth sharing with your fellow board members on here? As investor., there is always things to do... - the to do list is about endless, unless you suffer from investment burnout!

 

Also, in short: You are all missed - to some extent - some more, some less - in the investment forum topics! I always appreciate investment input from fellow board members!

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Thanks for reading my grumbling rant.

[Jurgis]

No it doesn't. But is that why we are hell bent doing what we are doing today?

 

I'm not saying that US should pursue confrontation policy with China because of Tibet.

Just wanted to QFT.

Peace.

[Jurgis]

don't you - as investor - have anythings else to do?

 

Perhaps you should ask this question to couple CEOs who post on this thread.  ;D

 

Edit: Although we are all "grown ups" here, IMHO, political threads are toxic for communities like this. I've seen investment communities destroyed by political threads before. I have asked Sanjeev to consider not allowing political threads. His choice was to allow them ... and I respect it. But, yeah, political threads are mostly a sewer and your comments/questions are well given.

 

Peace.

[SmallCap]

This thread as all other political threads, is a shit show!

 

Tell me, has anyone here ever changed their opinion on any political issue as the result of these threads? And I think the average IQ and rationality here is superior to the rest of the population; so theoretically one would assume that if people can learn and change their minds anywhere, it would be here...but it doesn't seem like it lol.

 

Your right I don't think that anyone here has read some other posters well thought through argument on a topic and suddenly smacked their head with their palm and said, "wow, they are so right and I am so wrong, now I am thinking straight" That doesn't happen, especially among people who have considered these issues in the past.

 

Here is what does happen, I read someones well thought through and argued post and their opinion is different then mine, I at the time acknowledge that they do have a point and it makes me start the process of rethinking my own thoughts. For any intelligent thoughtful person this doesn't happen in 5 minutes, we would never be ready to concede that we were wrong all these years. But the seed of a new thought sticks in our heads for days, weeks, months, years. We read more topics on it that call our original thinking into question and possibly reinforce that posters point. Finally a long time later my thinking and opinion have changed but by that time I usually have forgotten all about that original post that started me thinking and I think that I have come to this way of thinking all by myself or I convince myself that I have really always thought this way.

 

So it seems pointless because we never see dramatic conversions but there are conversions, they are just slow.

 

Also on any thread like this the majority of posts are worthless but there are golden ones in there and we don't always know which ones. I sometimes get tired of sifting through the trash on a thread like this but then someone comes along and explains something that is outside of my existing echo chamber and explain it in a way that makes sense.

[John Hjorth]

don't you - as investor - have anythings else to do?

 

Perhaps you should ask this question to couple CEOs who post on this thread.  ;D

 

Edit: Although we are all "grown ups" here, IMHO, political threads are toxic for communities like this. I've seen investment communities destroyed by political threads before. I have asked Sanjeev to consider not allowing political threads. His choice was to allow them ... and I respect it. But, yeah, political threads are mostly a sewer and your comments/questions are well given.

 

Peace.

 

Jurgis,

 

Thanks, and peace, taken with a *high five*.

[rb]

This thread as all other political threads, is a shit show!

 

Tell me, has anyone here ever changed their opinion on any political issue as the result of these threads? And I think the average IQ and rationality here is superior to the rest of the population; so theoretically one would assume that if people can learn and change their minds anywhere, it would be here...but it doesn't seem like it lol.

 

Your right I don't think that anyone here has read some other posters well thought through argument on a topic and suddenly smacked their head with their palm and said, "wow, they are so right and I am so wrong, now I am thinking straight" That doesn't happen, especially among people who have considered these issues in the past.

 

Here is what does happen, I read someones well thought through and argued post and their opinion is different then mine, I at the time acknowledge that they do have a point and it makes me start the process of rethinking my own thoughts. For any intelligent thoughtful person this doesn't happen in 5 minutes, we would never be ready to concede that we were wrong all these years. But the seed of a new thought sticks in our heads for days, weeks, months, years. We read more topics on it that call our original thinking into question and possibly reinforce that posters point. Finally a long time later my thinking and opinion have changed but by that time I usually have forgotten all about that original post that started me thinking and I think that I have come to this way of thinking all by myself or I convince myself that I have really always thought this way.

 

So it seems pointless because we never see dramatic conversions but there are conversions, they are just slow.

 

Also on any thread like this the majority of posts are worthless but there are golden ones in there and we don't always know which ones. I sometimes get tired of sifting through the trash on a thread like this but then someone comes along and explains something that is outside of my existing echo chamber and explain it in a way that makes sense.

A very good description of how I moved on from being a die hard right-winger.