🚨 SCOTT BESSENT just laid out the entire strategy.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 5, 2025
It's absolute insanity that the Left opposes this. Trump's team knows what they're doing.
"Reprivatizing the economy. On one side, we're going to be bringing down government spending, which has been crowding out the private… pic.twitter.com/9fi5ejs6kr
LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
Post one. One.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
Guess we can start with this one:Adriacus Peratuun said:Post one. One.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
Do you have reading comprehension issues? Entirely different person posted that item.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:Guess we can start with this one:Adriacus Peratuun said:Post one. One.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150799/replies/4144563
Same poster. Also the poster formerly known as Millivanilli.Adriacus Peratuun said:Do you have reading comprehension issues? Entirely different person posted that item.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:Guess we can start with this one:Adriacus Peratuun said:Post one. One.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150799/replies/4144563
No.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:Same poster. Also the poster formerly known as Millivanilli.Adriacus Peratuun said:Do you have reading comprehension issues? Entirely different person posted that item.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:Guess we can start with this one:Adriacus Peratuun said:Post one. One.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:LOL! Just click on any of the dozens of threads you have started here hyping the safety and effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the bashing of anyone that doesn't agree with you.Adriacus Peratuun said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
You are truly one of mankind's greatest oddities. A Covid vaccine cheerleader that loves him some tariffs. My brain hurts.
please show me where I was ever a vaccine cheerleader. Interested in the basis of that comment.
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/150799/replies/4144563
BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) May 5, 2025
China, Japan, South Korea and the 10 ASEAN member states issue a joint statement opposing rising trade protectionism pic.twitter.com/ltcxHMbjDV
You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
Assassin said:🚨 SCOTT BESSENT just laid out the entire strategy.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 5, 2025
It's absolute insanity that the Left opposes this. Trump's team knows what they're doing.
"Reprivatizing the economy. On one side, we're going to be bringing down government spending, which has been crowding out the private… pic.twitter.com/9fi5ejs6kr
KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
Have you done your part and voluntarily overpaid for goods just to help out the unions and union bosses?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
Interested to see this deregulation he's talking about. Nothing substantial thus far.Assassin said:🚨 SCOTT BESSENT just laid out the entire strategy.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 5, 2025
It's absolute insanity that the Left opposes this. Trump's team knows what they're doing.
"Reprivatizing the economy. On one side, we're going to be bringing down government spending, which has been crowding out the private… pic.twitter.com/9fi5ejs6kr
How? Specifically how have the damages "far outweighed" the benefits?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
I thought Pence was deadRedbrickbear said:A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:Have you done your part and voluntarily overpaid for goods just to help out the unions and union bosses?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
My point is that you're correct but that is a luxury belief and probably not correctable in the short term.
My skivvies from Asia had a minuscule "pocket", made for the Asian model, I guess. Once I got the ones made in America, they cost a little more but my Lord they were made for an American!ATL Bear said:How? Specifically how have the damages "far outweighed" the benefits?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
Assassin said:I thought Pence was deadRedbrickbear said:A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
And he wonders why he is not VP...Redbrickbear said:Naw, he pops up every once in while to attack national conservative prioritiesAssassin said:I thought Pence was deadRedbrickbear said:A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
Interestingly I never see him coming out to attack the Left
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
I have explained 100 times. Apparently I am a dumbass for agreeing with Reagan. A tariff is just a tax to manipulate what we buy or can afford.. Harley Davidson almost went bankrupt. To protect them a special tariff waa put on all motorcycles over 750cc. They tried to make big Honda Yamaha etc big bikes more expensive so people would buy HD.
A tariff is a tax.
Mattel Inc., the maker of Barbie dolls, Hot Wheels cars and other popular toys, said that it would have to raise prices to offset higher costs related to Trump’s tariffs. https://t.co/HIFNY3MNb6
— WFAA (@wfaa) May 6, 2025
Assassin said:I thought Pence was deadRedbrickbear said:A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
I used to refer to Mike Pence as a potted plant. I really wish he and Hillary Clinton would just go away.Oldbear83 said:Assassin said:I thought Pence was deadRedbrickbear said:A little-known fact is that Jefferson wrote, “Cheap goods are a big part of the American Dream,” on the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but it never made it into the final version. https://t.co/Qcu7GBo7Cc
— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025
Pence is kinda the sloth Republican. Slow moving, doesn't do much, doesn't like those who do.
He's most at home in his natural habitat of bland statements and inaction, as suggested by lobbyists he's known all his career.
Ha! I laughed. At 6-5, Asian 2X or 3x is not the same for sure.Assassin said:My skivvies from Asia had a minuscule "pocket", made for the Asian model, I guess. Once I got the ones made in America, they cost a little more but my Lord they were made for an American!ATL Bear said:How? Specifically how have the damages "far outweighed" the benefits?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
Is that what you mean by outweighing?
JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025
The libs in this group confirmed that too!nein51 said:
No way. Chinese state media just told me a week ago that wasn't happening.
Maybe I misunderstand you. You are in favor of the tariffs because it will force most Americans to buy American. My question is what are you waiting for? You can pay extra and buy American cant you? You know, freedom? Why are you trying to force others to follow your decision? You want to support unions and over paid American workers. So whats the hold up? Are you going to try to force others to do the same? Why dont you do what you think is right? Do you need a mandate? Just do it and stop looking at my poor little wallet.KaiBear said:Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:Have you done your part and voluntarily overpaid for goods just to help out the unions and union bosses?KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:You have 'won' cheaper goods at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.Porteroso said:KaiBear said:Adriacus Peratuun said:
The debate goes nowhere because it is based on false assumptions.
1) there is no free trade. That premise is false. When one side has tariffs or erects other statutory hurdles to trade while the other side doesn't, it isn't free. Free requires both sides to comply. Free trade and fair trade are inextricably intertwined.
2) the USA isn't currently winning trade. The USA has some industries and some people who win [and therefore defend the system blindly] while other industries and people lose [and thus complain].
3) no system survives where the losers outnumber the winners.
4) trade decisions do not run independent of other governmental considerations such as national defense and currency bandwidth.
The fervency of a handful of defenders doesn't make them right. Their cherry picked data doesn't make them right. The number of adversely impacted people on the other side of the debate does inherently make them wrong. Public policy of every sort has to serve the greater good otherwise it inherently fails.
The new talking point of "it isn't what is being done but how it is being done" is laughable on its face as these same people have steadfastly thwarted every attempt to achieve these same goals in less confrontational ways. We didn't get to this point of frustration without passing through decades of globalists foiling every prior fair/balanced trade effort.
The same people who have benefitted from past policies can complain about taking some pain from a rebalancing effort. Their cries of victimhood are not well received. We don't care that you are taking a financial hit. Getting your way for forty years more than offsets a tiny amount of current pain. Suck it up Buttercup.
+ 1
Actually Americans don't really care about feee trade as much as you think. We are a net consumer economy. We mostly care about low priced consumables, and over the past 30 years we have won big time on that.
You have 'won' cheaper goods resulting critical national defense needs being supplied by our biggest international threat.
Seriously....do you have full time employment ? Have you EVER had full time employment ?
As nothing in your posting history suggests it.
But he's right. We have collectively traded those things for cheap trinkets. I've been guilty of and so has everyone on this board.
We have also all benefited in some way from cheap junk.
My point is the benefits have been far outweighed by the damages.
Such a stupid premise.
Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant
