Chintresting if True

RaceBannon said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

MikeDamone said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

HHusky said:

greenblood said:

I love how farmers and contractors openly say they have a need for a more exploited workforce.

I think they'd like any workforce. You can't grow an economy with our demographics while hating on immigration.

Contractors and farmers aren't looking for just any workforce. They are looking for a workforce that is willing to be paid at (let's be honest) below minimum wage. Tariffs have cut margins from farming, so they can't just hire anybody, the same goes for contractors because of the housing slowdown due to an already inflated housing market.

Below minimum wage you say? A “market” wage then.

Tariffs were a really stupid idea in retrospect, weren’t they?

I don't like tariffs but it was the only way to bring China to the floor to negotiate on the issue of intellectual property theft. Trump's tweets about tariffs lowering the trade deficit was borderline retarded. If the purpose was to hurt their economy, they were naturally going to import less goods, so an increase in the deficit was a given. People who don't know that are dumb. There was not a single alternative brought forth to fight the intellectual property theft China commits annually, outside of being left with our dicks hanging out and allowing the theft to continue. I posted months ago with Hondo that China's theft amounts to around $600 Billion a year. Which means that roughly 5% of China's entire GDP is raised through the theft of foreign governments and companies. 5% doesn't seem like much, but in most cases a 5% drop in annual GDP can send an entire country into chaos.

Tariffs weren't ideal, but necessary given the true purpose of them.

So according to trumptards, tariffs are stupid unless they aren’t.

Ironic

Learn to read, then maybe you can refer to things as stupid. Until then, stupid is is stupid does Forrest.

I read your dumbfuck post again. Here’s my reassessment:
You are stupid. Dumb as a fucking post. A total fucking retard.
Instead of “reading” and posting on HH, you might want to research and study micro-economics, and then get back to the board regarding your grand insights into tariffs.

That’s not an argument. Do better.

Here’s the argument:
1) tariffs are taxes on US consumers
2) they decrease the productivity, efficiency, and profitability of the US economy
3) tariffs damage US economic dominance by dragging our standards to the lowest common denominator
4) tariffs attack US competitive advantages in the highest margin sectors of the economy to appease domestic laggards (hi @greenblood )
5) Lowering US economic goals, objectives and strategies to address China economic manipulation is abdication, failure and surrender
6) foregoing US economic dominance to protect unskilled, ucompetive, uneducated domestic trump constituentlcies is suicide and and an abomination towards those with skills to succeed.

@greenblood has been promulgating this “strategic” tariff imbecility for a long time now. He’s had long enough time to figure it about by now.

LOL...rent free bitch.

If you read you’d see I don’t like tariffs either. But there is no other way to combat China’s intellectual property theft. Do you have another solution to that? Instead of mentioning another solution to that problem, you just continue to state the consequences of said tariffs. News flash, i don’t disagree. There is the long game and the short game. If short term tariffs solves a major problem, the consequences are worth it. You must be in the intellectual property theft is part of the free market crowd. Sad.

You dont like tariffs? Tough stand!
US economic interests win when domestic ingenuity and competitiveness are allowed to prevail and win. Winners win. That means you lose.

You think it’s ok that US taxpayers pay increased taxes for this fiasco? To subsidize failure and inefficiency?
Tariffs have been in place a long time now with deleterious impacts and no end in sight. Short term or long term.
The obese fool trump is going to negotiate a long term win? You’ve been shoveling this bullshit and apology for your failure for months now. It was stupid then and is self-evidently ignorant today.

No solution I see. Just some more bitching and moaning.

Real US competitors make China look like WSU playing football in the snow.
Engineering, tech, financial, legal, entertainment.

We beat them by being better.
Not by bitching and moaning. Not by penalizing ourselves and helping them in the long term with tariffs.

They steal our work and co opt American lackeys to do their bidding

Do you know any?

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

MikeDamone said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

HHusky said:

greenblood said:

I love how farmers and contractors openly say they have a need for a more exploited workforce.

I think they'd like any workforce. You can't grow an economy with our demographics while hating on immigration.

Contractors and farmers aren't looking for just any workforce. They are looking for a workforce that is willing to be paid at (let's be honest) below minimum wage. Tariffs have cut margins from farming, so they can't just hire anybody, the same goes for contractors because of the housing slowdown due to an already inflated housing market.

Below minimum wage you say? A “market” wage then.

Tariffs were a really stupid idea in retrospect, weren’t they?

I don't like tariffs but it was the only way to bring China to the floor to negotiate on the issue of intellectual property theft. Trump's tweets about tariffs lowering the trade deficit was borderline retarded. If the purpose was to hurt their economy, they were naturally going to import less goods, so an increase in the deficit was a given. People who don't know that are dumb. There was not a single alternative brought forth to fight the intellectual property theft China commits annually, outside of being left with our dicks hanging out and allowing the theft to continue. I posted months ago with Hondo that China's theft amounts to around $600 Billion a year. Which means that roughly 5% of China's entire GDP is raised through the theft of foreign governments and companies. 5% doesn't seem like much, but in most cases a 5% drop in annual GDP can send an entire country into chaos.

Tariffs weren't ideal, but necessary given the true purpose of them.

So according to trumptards, tariffs are stupid unless they aren’t.

Ironic

Learn to read, then maybe you can refer to things as stupid. Until then, stupid is is stupid does Forrest.

I read your dumbfuck post again. Here’s my reassessment:
You are stupid. Dumb as a fucking post. A total fucking retard.
Instead of “reading” and posting on HH, you might want to research and study micro-economics, and then get back to the board regarding your grand insights into tariffs.

That’s not an argument. Do better.

Here’s the argument:
1) tariffs are taxes on US consumers
2) they decrease the productivity, efficiency, and profitability of the US economy
3) tariffs damage US economic dominance by dragging our standards to the lowest common denominator
4) tariffs attack US competitive advantages in the highest margin sectors of the economy to appease domestic laggards (hi @greenblood )
5) Lowering US economic goals, objectives and strategies to address China economic manipulation is abdication, failure and surrender
6) foregoing US economic dominance to protect unskilled, ucompetive, uneducated domestic trump constituentlcies is suicide and and an abomination towards those with skills to succeed.

@greenblood has been promulgating this “strategic” tariff imbecility for a long time now. He’s had long enough time to figure it about by now.

LOL...rent free bitch.

If you read you’d see I don’t like tariffs either. But there is no other way to combat China’s intellectual property theft. Do you have another solution to that? Instead of mentioning another solution to that problem, you just continue to state the consequences of said tariffs. News flash, i don’t disagree. There is the long game and the short game. If short term tariffs solves a major problem, the consequences are worth it. You must be in the intellectual property theft is part of the free market crowd. Sad.

You dont like tariffs? Tough stand!
US economic interests win when domestic ingenuity and competitiveness are allowed to prevail and win. Winners win. That means you lose.

You think it’s ok that US taxpayers pay increased taxes for this fiasco? To subsidize failure and inefficiency?
Tariffs have been in place a long time now with deleterious impacts and no end in sight. Short term or long term.
The obese fool trump is going to negotiate a long term win? You’ve been shoveling this bullshit and apology for your failure for months now. It was stupid then and is self-evidently ignorant today.

No solution I see. Just some more bitching and moaning.

Real US competitors make China look like WSU playing football in the snow.
Engineering, tech, financial, legal, entertainment.

We beat them by being better.
Not by bitching and moaning. Not by penalizing ourselves and helping them in the long term with tariffs.

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

MikeDamone said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

greenblood said:

HHusky said:

greenblood said:

I love how farmers and contractors openly say they have a need for a more exploited workforce.

I think they'd like any workforce. You can't grow an economy with our demographics while hating on immigration.

Contractors and farmers aren't looking for just any workforce. They are looking for a workforce that is willing to be paid at (let's be honest) below minimum wage. Tariffs have cut margins from farming, so they can't just hire anybody, the same goes for contractors because of the housing slowdown due to an already inflated housing market.

Below minimum wage you say? A “market” wage then.

Tariffs were a really stupid idea in retrospect, weren’t they?

I don't like tariffs but it was the only way to bring China to the floor to negotiate on the issue of intellectual property theft. Trump's tweets about tariffs lowering the trade deficit was borderline retarded. If the purpose was to hurt their economy, they were naturally going to import less goods, so an increase in the deficit was a given. People who don't know that are dumb. There was not a single alternative brought forth to fight the intellectual property theft China commits annually, outside of being left with our dicks hanging out and allowing the theft to continue. I posted months ago with Hondo that China's theft amounts to around $600 Billion a year. Which means that roughly 5% of China's entire GDP is raised through the theft of foreign governments and companies. 5% doesn't seem like much, but in most cases a 5% drop in annual GDP can send an entire country into chaos.

Tariffs weren't ideal, but necessary given the true purpose of them.

So according to trumptards, tariffs are stupid unless they aren’t.

Ironic

Learn to read, then maybe you can refer to things as stupid. Until then, stupid is is stupid does Forrest.

I read your dumbfuck post again. Here’s my reassessment:
You are stupid. Dumb as a fucking post. A total fucking retard.
Instead of “reading” and posting on HH, you might want to research and study micro-economics, and then get back to the board regarding your grand insights into tariffs.

That’s not an argument. Do better.

Here’s the argument:
1) tariffs are taxes on US consumers
2) they decrease the productivity, efficiency, and profitability of the US economy
3) tariffs damage US economic dominance by dragging our standards to the lowest common denominator
4) tariffs attack US competitive advantages in the highest margin sectors of the economy to appease domestic laggards (hi @greenblood )
5) Lowering US economic goals, objectives and strategies to address China economic manipulation is abdication, failure and surrender
6) foregoing US economic dominance to protect unskilled, ucompetive, uneducated domestic trump constituentlcies is suicide and and an abomination towards those with skills to succeed.

@greenblood has been promulgating this “strategic” tariff imbecility for a long time now. He’s had long enough time to figure it about by now.

LOL...rent free bitch.

If you read you’d see I don’t like tariffs either. But there is no other way to combat China’s intellectual property theft. Do you have another solution to that? Instead of mentioning another solution to that problem, you just continue to state the consequences of said tariffs. News flash, i don’t disagree. There is the long game and the short game. If short term tariffs solves a major problem, the consequences are worth it. You must be in the intellectual property theft is part of the free market crowd. Sad.

You dont like tariffs? Tough stand!
US economic interests win when domestic ingenuity and competitiveness are allowed to prevail and win. Winners win. That means you lose.

You think it’s ok that US taxpayers pay increased taxes for this fiasco? To subsidize failure and inefficiency?
Tariffs have been in place a long time now with deleterious impacts and no end in sight. Short term or long term.
The obese fool trump is going to negotiate a long term win? You’ve been shoveling this bullshit and apology for your failure for months now. It was stupid then and is self-evidently ignorant today.

No solution I see. Just some more bitching and moaning.

Real US competitors make China look like WSU playing football in the snow.
Engineering, tech, financial, legal, entertainment.

We beat them by being better.
Not by bitching and moaning. Not by penalizing ourselves and helping them in the long term with tariffs.

Swaye said:

I needed a brake booster, master cylinder and proportioning valve setup for an old Jeep CJ I have. So, there's this place called Pirate Jacks that builds cool setups in house in NC. Whole system was 475 bucks late last year when I first started looking at them. Went to buy one yesterday and they are 572. So I call the guy up and ask him why his prices jumped 100 bucks in less than 6 months. Tariffs was the response. I don;t know if tariffs are having an impact in China, but they are having an impact here. Cool story, I know.

HHusky said:

PurpleJ said:

HHusky said:

PurpleJ said:

HHusky said:

greenblood said:

I love how farmers and contractors openly say they have a need for a more exploited workforce.

I think they'd like any workforce. You can't grow an economy with our demographics while hating on immigration.

What a racist piece of shit you are.

Obviously.

"Poor whites can't pick crops. That's colored folk work."

-HHusky, CSA

We clearly need to make a lot more poor whites if you want the economy to grow in keeping with your racial preferences.

LebronJamesDawg said:

creepycoug said:

RaceBannon said:

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

greenblood said:

Swaye said:

I needed a brake booster, master cylinder and proportioning valve setup for an old Jeep CJ I have. So, there's this place called Pirate Jacks that builds cool setups in house in NC. Whole system was 475 bucks late last year when I first started looking at them. Went to buy one yesterday and they are 572. So I call the guy up and ask him why his prices jumped 100 bucks in less than 6 months. Tariffs was the response. I don;t know if tariffs are having an impact in China, but they are having an impact here. Cool story, I know.

It’s effecting China more.

Tariffs are bad, most here agree with this premise.

BUT Chinese manufacturing is imminently replaceable by other cheap developing nations, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, etc. Tariffs on China short term will speed up the cycle of US supply chains switching to these countries which will ultimately make the tariffs negligible to American consumers and American competitiveness. Many of these nations are also our allies and/or democracies as opposed to authoritarian regimes bent on our downfall.

The CCP is engaging in unrestricted warfare and have a billion people under slavery to be able to do so.

Here's a talk with General Robert Spalding who has a PHD in Economics on how China is gaining its advantages over the US.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHgqPaqUt80

TLDW the world view that open markets will eventually defeat the CCP is outdated. In part, because we don't actually have open markets.

That's exactly right. The assumption of the efficient market is helpful as a baseline to begin analysis. But of course we all know that markets contend with externalities. In the international context, especially with China, the externalities are many. You're always going to have a gross comparative advantage when you can make people do things they'd rather not do. It's not real. And then there's the stealing. When your trade counter-party is willing to break the rules and do other inefficient shit, you're not operating in a rational economic context.

It's analogous to arguing free markets would have ended slavery. Slavery was inefficient and in a vacuum paid labor may have replaced it but that completely ignores all political and historical context. Nevermind the additional moral implications.

That's an interesting argument. When I first read what you wrote, I thought, "how could free market labor ever displace slave labor?" But of course ..., it requires capital to 'own' anything. Housing, care (whatever care they provided, such as it was), food, costs of enforcing "ownership" rights. I'm sure it wasn't cheap to keep a slave.

Still, you didn't have to pay them, which is a big nut. And given that plantations raised much of their own food, that slave owners didn't really do much to care for their slaves (I assume that anyway), that you needed the equipment they used any way (so not a savings there), I don't know ... I find it hard to believe that even from a strictly rational economic point of view that a slave owner would hire labor that goes home every day and deals with their own housing and food.

From the labor supply side, you'd have to explain to me the argument, because I can't see it. How would an efficient market for labor result in paid labor replacing slave labor?

I don't know but slavery did retard the development of the South and allow the Yankees and their manufacturing to run over them. An educated work force even in mid 19th century standards and a paid work force allowed the industrial revolution to flourish in the north. An industrial society will crush an agrarian society particularly when you had free men farming within the borders of the industrial nation. Food production also out produces slave produced food

One could argue that paid labor did replace slave labor. At the cost of 500,000 lives or so but still.

The whole notion of Chivalry and slavery was never going to last in the modern world. It just wasn't

That's got to be the argument. It may even be the case that paid labor with basic means of self-sustaining oneself is more productive even in simple agrarian applications.

Agreed. It just wasn't going to last. It just wasn't.

“In the NFL they got a bunch of old white men owning teams, and they got that slave mentality. And it’s like, ‘This is my team. You do what the fuck I tell y’all to do or we get rid of y’all.’

“The players are who make the ship go. We make it go. Every Sunday, without Todd Gurley and without Odell Beckham, Jr. without those players, those guys, there is no football. And it’s the same in the NBA.”