Political Posts

[Gregmal]

8 minutes ago, nsx5200 said:

With that, I have found many of @Dinar's arguments to be on-point and worthy of consideration even though we may be, at the end, standing on different sides of the aisle on many issues.  I hope Dinar continues to participate in this forum, as that expands the potential valid view points.  For others that don't make similar cuts, there's always the "ignore" button available to me.  I invite others to hit that "ignore" button on me if they feel like my post's signal-to-noise ratio is too low as well.

Exactly. Without high quality contributors or people with the balls to share different viewpoints, there’s nothing for the freeloaders to enjoy or cry about. But if that’s the attitude then it is what it is.

[Cigarbutt]

5 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Exactly. Without high quality contributors or people with the balls to share different viewpoints, there’s nothing for the freeloaders to enjoy or cry about. But if that’s the attitude then it is what it is.

Your post is a typical example of what @nsx5200 describes in her/his first paragraph.

Ignore is always a last resort (and most insulting) solution (IMHO).

-----

i've been looking into the possibility of using 'intelligent' bots in online 'discussions' that would help to prevent argumentative slippage. Some work has been done by 'experts' and, in some patterns, this can result in less human communication but sometimes what's left occurs at a deeper level, whatever that means.

[flesh]

28 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

This would make sense if there was a rational logic to the amounts and rates.  But a lot of these countries have no tariffs on the US or they are restricted to a limited number of products.  What exactly is Malaysia and Bangladesh supposed to "negotiate"?  They don't buy American good because they don't have the capital and we don't make goods they want or need.  So we are punishing American consumers for wanting to buy cheap clothing.  What exactly do you "negotiate" on that?

If your numbers are accurate when these countries call to negotiate USA will say, let’s figure out what you can buy from us and if we can get close, we will put you at 10%. 
 

There’s always more that could be bought, just how much more. Cancel your purchases from less important trade partners and replace with USA and or move some of your facilities here to compensate. Or, give us a discount on x. 
 

Simple in an occams razor way. 

Edited April 3, 2025 by flesh

[dwy000]

11 minutes ago, flesh said:

If your numbers are accurate when these countries call to negotiate USA will say, let’s figure out what you can buy from us and if we can get close, we will put you at 10%. 
 

There’s always more that could be bought, just how much more. Cancel your purchases from less important trade partners and replace with USA and or move some of your facilities here to compensate. Or, give us a discount on x. 
 

Simple in an occams razor way. 

But that implies that Malaysia and these other nations have the ability to purchase more stuff.  And whatever they buy is meaningless in the scheme of things for the US.  The US economy and consumers benefit way more from the inexpensive goods they produce than whatever meager sales they purchase from the US.  As it stands, the US consumer is the only one hurt.  These countries aren't impacted that much because even with tariffs they're probably the cheapest available.

[Paarslaars]

I think things will be different. EU, China and Canada will form closer alliances. They will trade with US only if they have to and everthing else they will get from eachother. US is big but not bigger than the others combined... This is how you stand up to a bully.

[coc]

50 minutes ago, flesh said:

I haven’t read dinar as I’ve recently come back to the forum. I don’t read what he’s quoted as saying in this thread as a war monger etc. He sounds like an informed realist to me. 
 

OTOH I understand that being direct isn’t appreciated by most. 

Realist? He's calling the extermination and cleansing of a few million people a "war" as if Israel is fighting Imperial Japan or the Nazi war machine. (In BOTH of which conflicts massive war crimes were committed by both sides - the idea that the US "saved Japanese lives" by bombing its civilians to smithereens is political/war propaganda.)

 

How can people as smart as those on this board be so naive, stupid, and verbalistic on world issues? 

 

And if you would like to escape the echo chamber and get the take of the current GrandDaddy of all "realist" political thinkers, look up what Mearsheimer has to say on these issues. (The guy who wrote the books of the "realist" school.) Rather than some internet yahoo with an extermination fetish sitting behind his keyboard. 

[Sweet]

 

interesting counter point

[coc]

9 minutes ago, Sweet said:

 

interesting counter point

 

I don't see this as a serious counter point. All he's saying is "No one else has any ideas" - well, OK, but first do no harm. A bad idea isn't better than no idea. 

 

Tariffs as a whole *could* be effective. This across the board, make it up as we go, every country is the enemy thing...

[lnofeisone]

 

6 minutes ago, Sweet said:

 

interesting counter point

 Can you help me understand what makes this interesting? I thought it was a bunch of words that form sentences that don't really say a whole lot. Do we need manufacturing to take advantage of AI? I work in AI, and I can't fathom how manufacturing is going to enhance my experience or my productivity. His argument that AI will do everything but healthcare is ridiculous. It's like saying "we should stop doing research into medicine because further advances can cause shrinkage of what makes up 10% of our workforce today."

 

These tariffs are what they are. Trump is attempting to implement a tax cut while maintaining the appearance of a balanced budget. Today he wiped $2T from the S&P 500. 

[Dalal.Holdings]

I find it very funny that everyone operates under the premise that these Tariffs are long term bad for America. Of course, everyone is letting short term market movements drive their emotions which corrupt their reasoning.

 

Here's what Buffett said about America's trade deficit, when it was much much smaller than it is today:

 

 

Quote

My remedy may sound gimmicky, and in truth it is a tariff called by another name. But this is a tariff that retains most free-market virtues, neither protecting specific industries nor punishing specific countries nor encouraging trade wars. This plan would increase our exports and might well lead to increased overall world trade. And it would balance our books without there being a significant decline in the value of the dollar, which I believe is otherwise almost certain to occur.

 

Quote

There is no free lunch in the IC plan: It would have certain serious negative consequences for U.S. citizens. Prices of most imported products would increase, and so would the prices of certain competitive products manufactured domestically. The cost of the ICs, either in whole or in part, would therefore typically act as a tax on consumers.

 

Quote

Above all, the pain of higher prices on goods imported today dims beside the pain we will eventually suffer if we drift along and trade away ever larger portions of our country’s net worth.

 

[lnofeisone]

6 minutes ago, Dalal.Holdings said:

I find it very funny that everyone operates under the premise that these Tariffs are long term bad for America. Of course, everyone is letting short term market movements drive their emotions which corrupt their reasoning.

 

Here's what Buffett said about America's trade deficit, when it was much much smaller than it is today:

 

 

 

 

 

You have a trade deficit with your local market where you buy your food. Are you going to take action?

 

Buffett proposed a mechanism to address the trade deficit, as seen in the trade certificate idea. It was thoughtful and reasonably well argued. Very different than what we are seeing today. 

[Dalal.Holdings]

3 minutes ago, lnofeisone said:

You have a trade deficit with your local market where you buy your food. Are you going to take action?

 

Buffett proposed a mechanism to address the trade deficit, as seen in the trade certificate idea. It was thoughtful and reasonably well argued. Very different than what we are seeing today. 

 

His mechanism was an effective huge tariff on imports that would have immediately resulted in elimination of Trade deficit. It would have been massively more disruptive

 

Your "local market" analogy is irrelevant and deserves no further mention.

 

Quote

We would achieve this balance by issuing what I will call Import Certificates (ICs) to all U.S. exporters in an amount equal to the dollar value of their exports. Each exporter would, in turn, sell the ICs to parties–either exporters abroad or importers here–wanting to get goods into the U.S. To import $1 million of goods, for example, an importer would need ICs that were the byproduct of $1 million of exports. The inevitable result: trade balance.

 

Edited April 3, 2025 by Dalal.Holdings

[Ghost]

16 hours ago, cubsfan said:

 

The ripoff happened long ago when all the jobs were outsourced and everyone told them how great this would be for them.  Turns out - it destroyed communities and there was no regard for the displaced workers - none.  But a whole lot of other people got rich.

 

Now the government workers in DC are getting a taste of it - and turns out, they don't like it either.

 

Cubsfan..I gotta ask you don't actually believe Mr. Trump gives a Fig about the middle or working class do you? 

 

Come on...all Mr. Trump has cared about his entire life is power and wealth...he wants to be the most powerful, wealthiest man on planet earth.   If he can pull off another term, that goal should be a lock.   

 

 

[Dalal.Holdings]

“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”

 

[lnofeisone]

4 minutes ago, Dalal.Holdings said:

 

His mechanism was an effective huge tariff on imports that would have immediately resulted in elimination of Trade deficit. It would have been massively more disruptive

 

Your "local market" analogy is irrelevant and deserves no further mention.

 

 

Ah, so instead you are celebrating a huge tariff on imports that fail to produce an immediate trade balance? LOL

 

Here is the best laid-out paper countering Buffett's idea, and even these authors are hedging their commentary. https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_538.pdf This is a long way of saying that what Buffet proposed 20 years ago is hella better than what you are seeing today. 

 

My local market commentary is also very relevant. You have a trade deficit with them, but you don't mind because it provides you sustenance to live on. Trade isn't a zero sum game. 

[cubsfan]

44 minutes ago, Paarslaars said:

I think things will be different. EU, China and Canada will form closer alliances. They will trade with US only if they have to and everthing else they will get from eachother. US is big but not bigger than the others combined... This is how you stand up to a bully.

 

Really, China?   China has 60% tariffs on US goods, but the US is the bully.  Gotcha 

 

If tariffs are so horrible, how did China grow at 10% per annum for decades?

 

Why don't they ditch them?

[lnofeisone]

6 minutes ago, Dalal.Holdings said:

“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”

 

Now do this crazy math and normalize against GDP. You'll see something magical. 

[cubsfan]

13 minutes ago, Ghost said:

 

Cubsfan..I gotta ask you don't actually believe Mr. Trump gives a Fig about the middle or working class do you? 

 

Come on...all Mr. Trump has cared about his entire life is power and wealth...he wants to be the most powerful, wealthiest man on planet earth.   If he can pull off another term, that goal should be a lock.   

 

 

 

That's pretty idiotic really.  If Trump wanted to be richer, he would have never run for a second term. He had it made.

 

Running for a second term resulting in the opposition trying to bankrupt him by destroying his businesses, then try to kill him, then put him in jail for 300 years.

 

Yeah, I'm sure he did this for the money.

Edited April 3, 2025 by cubsfan

[mcliu]

11 minutes ago, lnofeisone said:

Ah, so instead you are celebrating a huge tariff on imports that fail to produce an immediate trade balance? LOL

 

Here is the best laid-out paper countering Buffett's idea, and even these authors are hedging their commentary. https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_538.pdf This is a long way of saying that what Buffet proposed 20 years ago is hella better than what you are seeing today. 

 

My local market commentary is also very relevant. You have a trade deficit with them, but you don't mind because it provides you sustenance to live on. Trade isn't a zero sum game. 

I don't think you have a trade deficit with the grocery store because you're paying for your groceries.

 

The better analogy would be if you were part owner of the grocery store and as such, you paid your groceries in IOUs or shareholder advances. However, these IOUs are exchangeable for fractions of your ownership. Overtime your ownership of the store would be diluted. 

[Gregmal]

Yea that’s one of the dumbest and easily disputable anti Trump talking points. I don’t know what it is that motivates him, but everyone knows all the money from politics is made after leaving office. $700k an hour speaking gigs, deals with lobbyists, etc.

 

Personally I would’ve bailed on any sort of endeavor if I had to deal with 1/10 what Trump has had to put up with. Frankly I don’t understand his motivation but money is such a dumb tv made fallback. 

[Luke]

19 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Really, China?   China has 60% tariffs on US goods, but the US is the bully.  Gotcha 

 

If tariffs are so horrible, how did China grow at 10% per annum for decades?

 

Why don't they ditch them?

You have to realize that at the time when China implemented those trade barriers, they majority was poor and sold themselves as wageslaves to foreign companies to produce things and extract a tiny surplus value with the wages and taxes they were able to take home. They then built from that.

 

Its a totally different place from which they came from than where the US is right now. It was guaranteed that China would uphold these tariffs for decades because there is no new POTUS after 4 years when people want change again.

 

There is no way Trump will be able to resurrect manufacturing in the next decade, its a process that takes longer, persistent tariffs and a lot of pain for the society that has to go back into factories.

 

My gut feeling tells me today was a very significant historic day that will go down as one of the largest geopolitical shifts of this century, in a negative way for the US and a major positive shift for Eurasia.

Edited April 3, 2025 by Luke

[cubsfan]

1 minute ago, Luke said:

You have to realize that at the time when China implemented those trade barriers, they majority was poor and sold themselves as wageslaves to foreign companies to produce things and extract a tiny surplus value with the wages and taxes they were able to home. They then built from that.

 

Its a totally different place from which they came from than where the US is right now. It was guaranteed that China would uphold these tariffs for decades because there is no new POTUS after 4 years when people want change again.

 

There is no way Trump will be able to resurrect manufacturing in the next decade, its a process that takes longer, persistent tariffs and a lot of pain for the society that has to go back into factories.

 

My gut feeling tells me today was a very significant historic day that will go down as one of the largest geopolitical shifts of this century, in a negative way for the US and a major positive shift for Eurasia.

 

You have not told me why China persists in having such high tariffs in place for decades.

 

Why don't they get rid of them, if they are so concerned about "free trade"?

[Luke]

i cheered for trump, also after the attack on his life but the last few weeks have been a wake-up call: This guy is anything but educated, foreseeing,I was hopeful and optimistic for trump and my inner self cheered for him, especially after the attack on his life. But the last few weeks were an ugly wake up call: This guy is anything but educated, foreseeing and able to take different viewpoints. 

Trump sees the world as one big real estate market where everything is for sale, relationships are there to use them for ones personal gain and pull the dirtiest of sales tricks to respectable political personell of the world. He is destroying everything the united states have build up in prestige and international respect in a matter of a few months and handling the keys of economic and political dominance to other actors.

Edited April 3, 2025 by Luke

[cubsfan]

5 minutes ago, Luke said:

i cheered for trump, also after the attack on his life but the last few weeks have been a wake-up call: This guy is anything but educated, foreseeing,I was hopeful and optimistic for trump and my inner self cheered for him, especially after the attack on his life. But the last few weeks were an ugly wake up call: This guy is anything but educated, foreseeing and able to take different viewpoints. 

Trump sees the world as one big real estate market where everything is for sale, relationships are there to use them for ones personal gain and pull the dirtiest of sales tricks to respectable political personell of the world. He is destroying everything the united states have build up in prestige and international respect in a matter of a few months and handling the keys of economic and political dominance to other actors.

 

Not at all. It's a reset for the USA, plain and simple. America first. 

 

If the rest of the world wants to decend into socialism, so be it.

 

We tried it with Biden - it's not the American way.

Edited April 3, 2025 by cubsfan

[Luke]

1 minute ago, cubsfan said:

You have not told me why China persists in having such high tariffs in place for decades.

 

Why don't they get rid of them, if they are so concerned about "free trade"?

China uses its own domestic market to scale out global companies that can underprice their competitors. If their own market would be owned by international companies they would be stuck and have no control about their economic future.

 

The US has exactly that ALREADY, they own large cap technology companies etc BUT these companies do not employ a lot of people anymore. Thats why there is a large part of the society that has been left alone and could not join into that wealth creation.

 

Now, look at your domestic market, americans now have no choice but pay up or buy your domestic cars, semiconductors or other non existing manufacturing merch.

 

Cars might get a boost, but will the tariffs make intel more competitive? TSCM is still years ahead and continues to progress and delivery globally while intel cant make proper chips...ON TOP comes that manufacturing for a lot of basics will not return because financial capital in the US wont invest in large factories to make toys that costs hundred of millions that are uncompetitive globally.

 

You will then face huge inflation, very angry citizens and trump soon will either cut tariffs of or will be voted out.