Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

Stupid rant.

Tariffs protect and create American jobs.

Of course you have been insulated all your life in the education field where it's almost impossible to be fired for any thing less than a felony.

Trump: "I could announce 50 to 100 deals right now because I'm the shopkeeper and I keep the store. I know what countries are looking for and I know what we're looking for and I can just set those terms and they can go shopping or they don't have to go shopping, because everybody… pic.twitter.com/l6qXSH92dD

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 6, 2025

nein51 said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

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.


Tariffs are a useful tool. One of many tools. No good mechanic uses only one tool or throws away a useful tool.

---

A chainsaw is a useful tool. A good mechanic doesn't use a chainsaw to change a tire.

---

Probably uniquely qualified to say "can confirm" lol

---

we need the story on this one

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

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.


Tariffs are a useful tool. One of many tools. No good mechanic uses only one tool or throws away a useful tool.

---

A chainsaw is a useful tool. A good mechanic doesn't use a chainsaw to change a tire.

---

Probably uniquely qualified to say "can confirm" lol

---

we need the story on this one

---

Oh I just meant I have been around shops for 25 years now and a good mechanic is not using a chainsaw lol

Though I have cut off a wheel or two with a cutting torch

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

Stupid rant.

Tariffs protect and create American jobs.

Of course you have been insulated all your life in the education field where it's almost impossible to be fired for any thing less than a felony.

---

I am proud to have coached, taught and administrated. I have also ranched, clerked, rode a garbage truck, cut cedar posts, I have done lots of summer jobs. Yardwork, security at concerts (worked a few White Zombie and Metallica concerts among others) beer route, tent maker. My parents both taught. Dad taught algebra to one of the posters on this board though I havent seen him in a few years. There are posters here that have taught and/or had parents that teach.

My parents didnt have to pay anything for my brother and I to attend Baylor. I course we know yours didnt either.

If you think Americans should overpay to support American made products, please do it. Freedom is a good thing. But why do you feel so good about controlling others?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

You are smarter than that LIQR, but OK I will play.'

The idea is not to 'voluntarily overpay', but instead to make decisions, personal and national, that are aligned with my values.

Frankly, when your side ran things they had no intention of righting the trade imbalance, reining in government bloat and overreach, or respecting the constitutional limits of their office.

Now, your side has shown they are willing to allow innocents to be raped and murdered rather than deport gangsters, they are willing to abuse the Constitution rather than let the President exercise his Constitutional powers, and they are still lying out their ass about the facts of the matter, not least about the intentions of the Trump Administration and the effects in China, Canada and other places to the tariffs.


No one likes paying more, but the adults and the ones who still love our country are willing to endure short-term pain to address the trade situation.

This IS what we voted for, even putting up with Trump's annoying style of talk (seriously though, it isn't half as bad as Obama's arrogance, Hillary's contempt for ordinary Americans and Joe Biden's Zombie President years) in order to undo as much of the Democrats' crimes against our country as we can in the next four years.

Go ahead and lie, we're used to it. Your problem is that enough people are fed up with your BS, that very few people are stupid enough to believe your crap.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

I didn't know buying local was supporting union bosses

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

I didn't know buying local was supporting union bosses

---

Only at Union Jack

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025

---

This can't be true. So many here said it would never happen.

Watcher Guru is the new Babylon Bee. It's the only thing that makes since.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

You are smarter than that LIQR, but OK I will play.'

The idea is not to 'voluntarily overpay', but instead to make decisions, personal and national, that are aligned with my values.

Frankly, when your side ran things they had no intention of righting the trade imbalance, reining in government bloat and overreach, or respecting the constitutional limits of their office.

Now, your side has shown they are willing to allow innocents to be raped and murdered rather than deport gangsters, they are willing to abuse the Constitution rather than let the President exercise his Constitutional powers, and they are still lying out their ass about the facts of the matter, not least about the intentions of the Trump Administration and the effects in China, Canada and other places to the tariffs.


No one likes paying more, but the adults and the ones who still love our country are willing to endure short-term pain to address the trade situation.

This IS what we voted for, even putting up with Trump's annoying style of talk (seriously though, it isn't half as bad as Obama's arrogance, Hillary's contempt for ordinary Americans and Joe Biden's Zombie President years) in order to undo as much of the Democrats' crimes against our country as we can in the next four years.

Go ahead and lie, we're used to it. Your problem is that enough people are fed up with your BS, that very few people are stupid enough to believe your crap.

---

What did I lie about?

You ;lied about the "my side" crap. I voted for one democrat at the county level 20 years ago. One. Never voted dem on state or federal. Trump is in his 5th year. I could make a;long list of his lies but it wouldn't matter. Some people with believe whatever he tells them. Meanwhile he and his cronies are getting richer and richer. PS, Biden was not a good president. We are lucky he is gone.

nein51 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

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.


Tariffs are a useful tool. One of many tools. No good mechanic uses only one tool or throws away a useful tool.

---

A chainsaw is a useful tool. A good mechanic doesn't use a chainsaw to change a tire.

---

Probably uniquely qualified to say "can confirm" lol

---

we need the story on this one

---

Oh I just meant I have been around shops for 25 years now and a good mechanic is not using a chainsaw lol

Though I have cut off a wheel or two with a cutting torch

---

I thought maybe you'd gone to the Red Green school of auto customization

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

You are smarter than that LIQR, but OK I will play.'

The idea is not to 'voluntarily overpay', but instead to make decisions, personal and national, that are aligned with my values.

Frankly, when your side ran things they had no intention of righting the trade imbalance, reining in government bloat and overreach, or respecting the constitutional limits of their office.

Now, your side has shown they are willing to allow innocents to be raped and murdered rather than deport gangsters, they are willing to abuse the Constitution rather than let the President exercise his Constitutional powers, and they are still lying out their ass about the facts of the matter, not least about the intentions of the Trump Administration and the effects in China, Canada and other places to the tariffs.


No one likes paying more, but the adults and the ones who still love our country are willing to endure short-term pain to address the trade situation.

This IS what we voted for, even putting up with Trump's annoying style of talk (seriously though, it isn't half as bad as Obama's arrogance, Hillary's contempt for ordinary Americans and Joe Biden's Zombie President years) in order to undo as much of the Democrats' crimes against our country as we can in the next four years.

Go ahead and lie, we're used to it. Your problem is that enough people are fed up with your BS, that very few people are stupid enough to believe your crap.

---

What did I lie about?

You ;lied about the "my side" crap. I voted for one democrat at the county level 20 years ago. One. Never voted dem on state or federal. Trump is in his 5th year. I could make a;long list of his lies but it wouldn't matter. Some people with believe whatever he tells them. Meanwhile he and his cronies are getting richer and richer. PS, Biden was not a good president. We are lucky he is gone.

---

Sure, Hunter.

My 'go ahead and lie' was to your team, and you know damn well there are a whole butt-ton of lies there.

'Maryland Man' et al.

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear 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 thought Pence was dead

---

Naw, he pops up every once in while to attack national conservative priorities

Interestingly I never see him coming out to attack the Left

---

And he wonders why he is not VP...

If memory serves, he pretty much went over to the left side after the 2020 fabricated vote

---

Your memory is not serving then, it is horrible. He is a conservative with principles and a moral backbone. He is nearly fundamentalist conservative.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025

---

This can't be true. So many here said it would never happen.

Watcher Guru is the new Babylon Bee. It's the only thing that makes since.

---

Did anyone here say it wouldn't happen?

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear 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 thought Pence was dead

---

Naw, he pops up every once in while to attack national conservative priorities

Interestingly I never see him coming out to attack the Left

---

And he wonders why he is not VP...

If memory serves, he pretty much went over to the left side after the 2020 fabricated vote

---

Your memory is not serving then, it is horrible. He is a conservative with principles and a moral backbone. He is nearly fundamentalist conservative.

---

No he has no backbone

He caved on the Indiana religious freedom act when the LGBTQ lobby threw a fit and got the big business sector in Indianapolis to call him.

It had overwhelming support among the people of Indiana and the legislature.

Pence essentially gutted the law to appease the Left and Big Business.

[The law says a person's right to religious expression takes precedence in disputes unless there is a "compelling governmental interest" that trumps religious considerations and cannot be achieved any other way.

Indiana's RFRA resembles laws on the books in 19 other states, as well as a federal measure passed in 1993 that a Christian-owned business, Hobby Lobby, used successfully in 2014 to block the Affordable Care Act's contraception coverage mandate.]

[Once it became clear that Pence was going to have to make a stand on religious freedom, he folded. Indiana's religious freedom law was gutted at Pence's direction within a week of it being passed.]

Pence is finished politically.

Hope he simply rides off into the sunset and enjoys his life.

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Redbrickbear 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 thought Pence was dead

---

Naw, he pops up every once in while to attack national conservative priorities

Interestingly I never see him coming out to attack the Left

---

And he wonders why he is not VP...

If memory serves, he pretty much went over to the left side after the 2020 fabricated vote

---

Your memory is not serving then, it is horrible. He is a conservative with principles and a moral backbone. He is nearly fundamentalist conservative.

---

His conservatism was always secondary to his desire to see America play empire on the world stage.

A type of "America second" agenda

Big business and the defense industry is who he was really looking out for during his career

[And as Michael Brendan Dougherty correctly pointed out on "The Editors" podcast, Pence's "conservatism" isn't even coherent. His commitment to "strong national defense and global leadership" is clearly in tension with the constitutional norms and liberties that Pence also champions. See, the "Global War on Terror."

I could go on. It was a bad speech, perfectly illustrating how badly Mike Pence misreads the current moment. Luckily for the country, polls indicate that voters agree.]

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/pence-vs-populism/

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

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 at the price of decent paying jobs for the American middle / working class.

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?

---

Such a stupid premise.

Though I bet your 6th graders thought you were brilliant

---

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.

---

Stupid rant.

Tariffs protect and create American jobs.

Of course you have been insulated all your life in the education field where it's almost impossible to be fired for any thing less than a felony.

---

Wut? You really think Tarriffs protect and create Mercan jobs? I've never spent one day in the classroom accept to make C's. Can you tell me how it protect and create jobs?

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

KaiBear said:

---

Pence is finished politically.

Hope he simply rides off into the sunset and enjoys his life.

---

Agreed

We're a country, not a convenience store. https://t.co/bRoXGyooVU

— Adam Johnston (@ConquestTheory) May 6, 2025

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

nein51 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

TARIFFS: China is in free fall. Factories closing. CCP official ‘disappearing’. empty cargo ships loitering around ports. Millions out of work. Time is running out. pic.twitter.com/K0wbUvIMzK

— @amuse (@amuse) May 2, 2025

---

I've been saying they need us just as much as we need them. There is no method to replace the U.S. market. It doesn't exist.

---

It's so obvious, yet his critics studiously ignore it, choosing to make arguments assuming that we are the only ones who will bear any pain at all.

Sure, we are going to go thru growing pains.
Everyone else is going to go thru withdrawal pains, which in some cases will carry existential risk.

we have the best assets. We have the best hands. It is exceedingly difficult to craft a viable scenario where we emerge from this in a worse position. We are too big, too strong, too important to everyone else.

---

The Hubris is incredible. You think people around the world are just going to roll over and give Trump what he wants?
Yep. They don't have any choice. They are going to get frozen out of our markets if they don't make concessions. You are acting like they can just flip us the bird and go sell all that stuff they're geared to make for us to someone else. (news flash: they can't).

Come on, when backed into a corner your response is "Oh well, we need them give him what he wants?"
Again. Explain what their options are. (they don't have any good ones, and the ones your complaints presume they will make are among the worst available to them).

For how long do they have no choice? How do they react to having no choice? This is not aimed at one Nation, like sanctions. This is across the board.
The cheapest, least cost, least damage option they have to save as many jobs as they can is to cut a deal with us. Picking up their toys & going home = instant recession for THEM.

Come on, you are former CIA. You guys don't think about scenarios through to an end game??
I do. You don't. In fairness, neither do any of the loudest critics of Trump's trade policies.

Trump didn't do this in a win-win how can we make this better for both sides, he did it as a F-you, give me what I want or else...
What we have now is most certainly not a win-win. And if we let it continue, it will be bad for them as well as us. At. Some. Point. the trade deficit house of cards will collapse and everyone will be poorer.

Come on CIA, how do National leaders react to that situation?
They try to salvage as many exports/jobs as they can.
They try to offer things that will placate us. Paying for the cost of what we're doing to Yemen would be a very good start, for example.

Gladly we want to make Trump happy? Appeasement? investigate options, create alliances and then move away from that group? Or worse? We are talking most of the world, not just one Nation.
Geez you are emoting here. We're not talking about most of the world. THe problem we're trying to sovle involves a dozen nations or so with whom we have the lion's share of our trade deficit.

---

You are like those snowflakes screaming at the sky rather than thinking this thru. We are in a very commanding position. WE have the trade deficit. THEY depend on us buying their stuff. If we don't, THEY go into severe recession, in some cases economic collapse....long before we do. Those elected officials we're negotiating with don't want to lose an election because they waited too long to cut a deal with us and forced their economies into recession. We have the resources and skills to make almost everything we import. It is madness to continue running these kinds of trade deficits, selling equities in our real estate, equities, and sovereign debt to finance our consumption. We did it mostly for THEM....to build relationships to help us all win the Cold War. And it worked! Now is not the time to continue sweetheart deals that fostered wildly unbalanced trade relationships. Now is the time to use our substantial leverage to force a level playing field.

I'm not a critic of globalism per se. I have often pointed out its benefits....why we did it....why it was in our interest to do so. AND IT WORKED! I have also pointed the costs of globalism, why it is madness to continue incurring its costs when we no longer have any need to do so. It is long past time to start making things again. We are cutting the cord with globalism because we have to. We cannot sustain it. The textbooks literally say "export-led growth is the only sustainable growth." And we do NOT have export led growth. Us buying their TVs and them buying our paper is not trade. That is us rent seeking our way to disaster. China wants to subsidize steel? Fine. We buy it and make ships to sell to China. THAT is trade. (but that is a far cry from what is happening.)

---

Two things. First, export led growth is the path of under-developed economies.
Indeed. Look how fast it built China! Good news is, export led growth has positive impacts no matter how developed your economy is. (i.e. why are you so indifferent to the benefits of trade surpluses? trade deficits are not morally superior, are they? surely you don't mean to suggest there is absolutely no way now how that we could ever run a trade surplus again.?

We are a country so large, productive, and capital rich that we are our own greatest customer. Nearly 85% of U.S. GDP comes from domestic consumption and investment.
Food for thought about how relatively unimportant trade is to us. That in turn should prompt questions about how then could tariffs be so harmful, about why we should tolerate any trade deficits at all, much less a structural trade deficit for 50 years.

We don't rely on foreign buyers to sustain our economy, nor do or will we ever need to.
Yes. So why then would we need to rely on foreign suppliers to sustain our economy? (particularly when we run massive deficits to do it which threaten not just our fiscal health but that of our trade partners (who are also allies).) Over and over and over again we see your reflexive assumption that we are doomed to trade deficits no matter what, and it's not that big a deal anyway since trade deficits are good for the body & soul.

Doing so would require us to weaken the dollar and suppress domestic consumption, and that's dangerous to our overall economy.
That's where your analysis runs off the rails. The biggest threat to the value of dollar is trade deficits spinning out of control. At. Some. Point. our allies will be able to buy no more of them. Check the Fed balance sheet. In 17 years it's gone from under $1T to nearly $9T.
UNSUSTAINABLE. (i.e. trade deficits facilitate financing of fiscal deficits.)

Moving away from an unfair global player like China is one thing. Spinning trade deficits as a greater problem than they are is political theater to dupe the American people.
You are correct to note that trade deficits have had (some) positive impacts. What is perplexing is that you are completely blind to the reality that they also have negative impacts. They have hollowed out the middle class, whose grievances have gone unheeded. Until now.....

Second, aside from Mexico, Canada, and the UK, no major trading partner sends more than 25% of its exports to the U.S. In fact, for most, including China, the U.S. accounts for less than 15% of their export markets, reflecting relatively low economic dependence on America.
Thank you for pointing out parts of the solution. None of those nations with small percentages of US exports will have difficulty executing agreements to either purchase more US goods, or investing in more production in the USA (like Reagan forced the Japanese to do in the 80's). Those solutions will be easy. The bigger relationships will be more challenging, but if we can move a lot of the China production to Mexico and Canada, then reducing the percentages on their surplus with us will not be painful at all. Mex/Can will get a smaller portion of a much bigger pie and we get a bigger portion of that bigger pie. win/win solution.

---

I'd like to sell US cars all over Asia. We could export key proprietary components from the USA but assemble them in India, then sell to Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc...... Even if the US originated content was 10%, it'd be better than what we have now (0%). Those are the kinds of things being discussed as we speak. Countries who run trade surpluses with us are going to be expected to offer deals that will help reduce their surplus. If they do so, we will have incentive to keep aircraft carriers in the area to keep the Chinese at bay, to keep the pirates at bay, to keep the terrorists at bay. We'll even charge them a discounted rate per round for ordnance expended. (remember, trade policy always serves national security policy).

This is not hard to figure out. But you have to quit thinking like a globalist and start figuring out how you are going to bring more and better jobs home to the USA. We have incurred unsustainable debt and endured decades of trade deficits to maintain the current world order. It's not working out well for us. So it's going to change....because it must change. We will not have to work terribly hard to get to a better place, so long as we make it abundantly clear that we are DONE with the status quo and new arrangements need to be made forthwith.

---

It's fascinating how confidently you argue that trade deficits are a sign of economic weakness,
A short periods of deficits followed by periods of trade surpluses is not a sign of economic weakness. It's the natural order. An escalating structural trade deficit of +50 years is a sign of economic DISTRESS.

...while pointing to China's export led growth as something to consider, never mind that China's position is now unraveling precisely because it lacks strong internal demand, capital access, and consumer mobility. It built China because China was a low income country with cheap labor, weak currency, and limited domestic demand, and now their export dependence has turned into a vulnerability, as it has in Germany and several European and Asian economies.
I don't think you realize it, but you just acknowledged what the textbooks say about export-led growth = powerful, sustainable, transformative. If it can transform a poor country with cheap labor, weak currency, and a limited domestic market into a peer competitor of the mightiest nation on earth in scarcely more than 20 years, imagine what it could do for a stronger country! Trade surpluses did not cause the Chinese pathologies you cite. Poor policy decisions did. They chose to invest enormous sums to build their military into a peer competitor of the mightiest nation on earth, rather than build a consumer market. More importantly, they continued the folly of central economic planning.

....Meanwhile, the U.S. with a $29 trillion economy powered 85% by domestic consumption and investment has been running trade deficits for decades and leading the world in GDP, innovation, and capital inflows. Why is that such a problem vs a feature of our unique economic position?
Because what we're doing is not sustainable. It is not trade. It is just consumption financed by giving away equity in our assets.

But your spin attempts are creating logic conflicts. You can't simultaneously say trade is unimportant to our economy (because it's a small share of GDP) and then turn around and act like the trade deficit is an existential crisis.
Tell us you do not understand the subject material without saying you do not understand the subject material. Trade is LESS important to us than our trading partners, for the reason you cited (85% domestic consumption). The problem with the capital inflows is that they involve a loss of equity that escalates pressure on the foundation of the globalist model - the strong dollar. At. Some, Point. the house of cards will collapse. We have to create products to attract foreign held dollars rather than offering up ever greater shares of equities. "Goods for equity" is not trade. It's payment for consumption.

If trade isn't systemically central to our economic engine, then a deficit is not a system destroying problem. That contradiction alone undermines your entire framework. Not to mention defeating the idea that tariffs could replace income tax.
What you cite is not a contradiction. It's a fallacy built on the absolutely insane premise that trade deficits are such a good thing that we must not only continue them but grow them as high as we can! The more we have, the richer we become! (because of all the things we got from handing equity over to foreign interests).

And as if to drive home the conflicted reality, your claim that tariffs aren't damaging because trade is small ignores a fundamental point, even small percentages can carry disproportionate effects in highly integrated supply chains. Tariffs don't just hurt trade, they raise input costs for U.S. businesses, reduce competitiveness, and push inflationary pressure onto consumers. The inflation risk isn't in the macro size of trade, it's in the structure (integration) of production.
More theory, with implicit assumption that other countries never take any steps (currency, tariffs, quotas, subsidies, etc...) to restrict our imports or propel their exports. Tariffs reshape demand, to offset unfair trading practices. They give our industries a chance to recover, to grow, to become more efficient, etc..... China does not have the same cost advantage they had 30 years ago. Mexico either. And, of course, Canada and Japan and EU have no inherent labor cost advantage over us at all. I mean, stand back and look at how silly your point is. We were a trade surplus production oriented economy with high tariffs throughout our rise the the mightiest country on earth....the "arsenal of democracy." We didn't have then all those pathologies China has now, did we? I mean, history laughs at what you're trying to sell here.

You say we shouldn't rely on foreign suppliers, which in some areas we are completely in agreement on reducing it. However we don't have scalable domestic alternatives for many of these goods and materials.
And why is that? Must it always be so? Are you really saying we have no hope of ever making red iron again?
And we never will, at least not in labor intensive industries like textiles or low margin electronics where we can't compete without massive public subsidies.
Never? Why will our robots be more costly to run than Chinese robots? Why must we PLAN on using our AI to design automated production lines in someone else's country?

Not to mention, in order to expand in the industries we need to for strategic reasons, (minerals, coal, steel, energy,) we need a deregulation renaissance to even think about it, and an educational and skills overhaul to execute. But that's being ignored in favor of a chaotic trade war.
LOL you are imputing what your argument needs. Hasn't Trump said something about energy dominance, reopening coal plants, turning the EPA into an agency that will help propel growht, etc....? (might not the messaging we do hear belie an agenda to make precisely the changes you cite (correctly) as necessary?) Why do you assume such is NOT happening?

It ignores both labor realities and capital efficiency. The U.S. doesn't need to build everything to benefit, we already extract value through advanced production, financing, services, intellectual property, and being the global hub of consumption. It's how we've built our advantage. Not to mention we do a lot of high value manufacturing here.
LOL we've built an advantage by being an enormous consumer markets that our trade partners cannot do without.....each of them face economic calamity if frozen out of our markets. yes. That is power. But it is not a sustainable position long-term. It is the "too big to fail" model.....a customer that owes so much to the bank that the bankers cannot abandon it without running existential risk.

And to muddy this debate even further, you continue to lean into one of the biggest fallacies by grossly overstating the relationship between the Fed balance sheet and trade deficits. Our fiscal deficit is a domestic spending problem, not a function of trade.
Again, you are simply in over your head. How can you not see that the trade deficit facilitates financing of the budget deficit? The trade deficit creates an ocean of surplus dollars abroad seeking a place to call home - T-bills, stocks, bonds, real estate, etc... Surplus USD is what fed the sub-prime crisis.....we were running out of assets to facilitate capital in-flow, to the point we started putting literal junk....loans no sane banker would ever make unless coerced to do so....into mortgage backed securities.

I keep pointing this out, but it's not computing with you. Blaming trade deficits for debt is like blaming your grocery store for your credit card bill. The real issue is entitlement spending growth and tax base stagnation. And frankly, it's dishonest to use trade deficits as a stand in for the political unwillingness to tackle structural fiscal reform. You'll notice I don't argue anywhere against DOGE efforts, even if some methods have been radical. The reason is because I do think a sledgehammer approach is required to address this real issue. THAT IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUE FROM TRADE. In fact I keep pushing to see if we'll ever have the will to address Social Security and Medicare at a structural level.
LOL again, "tell me you don't understand the subject material without saying you don't understand the subject material.

Your quip that this is "not hard to figure out" underlies the oversimplification of a complex global economy that you and this administration keep stumbling over.
They're not stumbling over it. They stomping it flat as a pancake, because it no longer well serves the common good of the American people.
And their back and forth inconsistent actions and rhetoric reflect it. The result is this warped model relying on coercion. The U.S. will simply demand better terms, companies will just reshuffle supply chains, other countries will bend, and somehow Americans will get more jobs, lower prices, and stronger security. That's not a strategy, it's wish casting.
LOL the wish-casting is thinking that continuing to do the same kinds of negotiation within the current model is going to generate different, much less transformative results.
At best we'll likely get some lower tariffs on our goods to other countries, which as a believer in trade will happily applaud. We might get some strategic investment too (again hooray!). But let's be honest, that is nothing close to the objectives outlined in the political rhetoric, or even in your own evolution of spin.
So you say there will be some benefits, but if they don't match the rhetoric they're a failure? (you're flailing....)
And Apple moving production from China to India doesn't validate Trump's tariffs. It validates diversification and risk management in global business, not reshoring.
It validates what I have said here repeatedly - "trade policy always serves national security policy." Yes, it would have been nice if we could have brought those jobs home, but we did not have the sills base and infrastructure to do so on such short notice. Soon, thanks to $8T+ in announced foreign investments in (disproportionately tech) production, will be able to do so. But forcing those jobs out of China NOW was a huge win for the US. It was a flexing of muscles to remind our adversary to be very, very careful.

Finally, this idea that we must "quit thinking like globalists" is just sloganism.
No, it's just shaking you by the collar to quit regurgitating mantras about how globalism will cure all ills at no cost whatsoever.
It's because of our global integration that we've built the most powerful economy on Earth.
We are indeed powerful, but it is because of consumption, not production, and that is an imbalance which we cannot continue. China outstrips us in steel & shipbuilding by margins that are dire and imminent strategic threats. And that is a symptom of a broader problem....we can't rifle-shot a fix for the steel & ships problem unless we just tariff ourselves a protected bubble, in which we would indeed risk the pathologies you have cited about tariffs. We have to work more broadly to bring substantial percentages of production back home. Not all of it. just enough to get to an overall trade balance.

Unraveling that based on a romanticized view of mercantilist era balanced trade and national "hard reset" rhetoric isn't just economically reckless, it's strategically backwards. We don't need to burn down the house to renovate a room. Strategic reform, investment in high-skill capacity, and domestic competitiveness will take us further than any tariff bludgeon ever will.
LOL why is it ok for others to engage in mercantilism against us and wrong for us to resist it, to try to create a more level field for competition? The trade deficit, its length, size, and its trend, is hardly a sign of strength, it's a sign of economic dysfunction, distress, destruction....

---

you are correct to cite that the world economy is a big & complicated thing. You are wrong to presume that we cannot change it to our benefit. Doing so cannot be done with an exacto knife. We've got to swing a sledge hammer to crack loose the rusty bolts of an enormous superstructure operating to our disadvantage. I mean, we run a $235B trade deficit with the EU, give them US equities to pay for it, then have to spend borrowed money to go defend the EU from the Houthis. How can we miss the irony in that...?

We cannot fail at this, and we will not. Trump is right on the big picture. He is right on the tactics of how to get there. Watch & wait. "Golden Age of America" is good political messaging for the masses, the kind of narrative building that any successful movement must do. In reality, he's indeed building a new world order.....the old one in which I got a BBA and an MBA is receiving a long-overdue coup d'grace. A new one is going to emerge. Historic times. If you don't quit *****ing, you'll miss it.

KaiBear said:

---

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

---

I like facts, not opinions and innuendo .

J.R. said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

---

I like facts, not opinions and innuendo .

---

One guy's 'fact' is another guy's 'opinion'.

And I have never seen either alter a poster's preconceived notion.

KaiBear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

---

I like facts, not opinions and innuendo .

---

And I have never seen either alter a poster's preconceived notion.

---

Me either. All the back-and-forth inevitably leads nowhere. We would be just as well off talking to ourselves.

boognish_bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

---

I like facts, not opinions and innuendo .

---

And I have never seen either alter a poster's preconceived notion.

---

Me either. All the back-and-forth inevitably leads nowhere. We would be just as well off talking to ourselves.

---

Only somewhat true. Many are here to learn. Many are open to new things, new ideas. Some are obviously not.

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Sure

And exactly what informations would alter your mindset in the slightest ?

---

I like facts, not opinions and innuendo .

---

And I have never seen either alter a poster's preconceived notion.

---

Me either. All the back-and-forth inevitably leads nowhere. We would be just as well off talking to ourselves.

---

Only somewhat true. Many are here to learn. Many are open to new things, new ideas. Some are obviously not.

---

Well, under that theme. Open to learn and admitting error is one thing. But...

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025

---

This can't be true. So many here said it would never happen.

Watcher Guru is the new Babylon Bee. It's the only thing that makes since.

---

Could they have begun trade negotiations without killing markets for farmers and ranchers? I would never set my neighbor's house on fire and have it spread to my home because he doesn't cut his grass.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025

---

This can't be true. So many here said it would never happen.

Watcher Guru is the new Babylon Bee. It's the only thing that makes since.

---

Could they have begun trade negotiations without killing markets for farmers and ranchers? I would never set my neighbor's house on fire and have it spread to my home because he doesn't cut his grass.

---

Apparently you would pull up a big portion of sod from your yard to exchange it with Dallas grass from the neighbors.

Presidents from both parties have had decade to do so and it never happened without the US coming out on the short-end so, I guess not.

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇨🇳🇺🇸 China confirms plans to begin trade negotiations with the United States. pic.twitter.com/0axmbLeBaV

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) May 6, 2025

---

This can't be true. So many here said it would never happen.

Watcher Guru is the new Babylon Bee. It's the only thing that makes since.

---

Could they have begun trade negotiations without killing markets for farmers and ranchers? I would never set my neighbor's house on fire and have it spread to my home because he doesn't cut his grass.

---

Apparently you would pull up a big portion of sod from your yard to exchange it with Dallas grass from the neighbors.

Presidents from both parties have had decade to do so and it never happened without the US coming out on the short-end so, I guess not.

---

We should expect that presidents make decisions based on the facts in front of them.

We've never seen leaders start with a false fact "they're ripping us off" then attack everyone.

Assassin said:

---

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

---

This scenario will play out with thousands of companies across the country. Companies not affected by tariffs are going to raise prices. Why? Because they can. Everything is going up. Most of the proles have not figured that out yet.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

---

This scenario will play out with thousands of companies across the country. Companies not affected by tariffs are going to raise prices. Why? Because they can. Everything is going up. Most of the proles have not figured that out yet.

---

Didnt something happen on that already and they did some legislation about price-gauging?

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

---

This scenario will play out with thousands of companies across the country. Companies not affected by tariffs are going to raise prices. Why? Because they can. Everything is going up. Most of the proles have not figured that out yet.

---

Some of it is real, some of it is not, but even the meritless cases of companies raising prices underscores the fact that not only are Americans paid well relative to their competition, they want to be paid even better.

Removing economic pressure from Asia through tariffs, or maybe even through better trade deals, will raise made in America prices too. Bringing back manufacturing will absolutely be inflationary.

Assassin said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

---

This scenario will play out with thousands of companies across the country. Companies not affected by tariffs are going to raise prices. Why? Because they can. Everything is going up. Most of the proles have not figured that out yet.

---

Didnt something happen on that already and they did some legislation about price-gauging?

---

It is unlikely that Republicans in Congress will want the government to tell American companies how much they can charge for anything outside medicine and national defense, maybe a few other industries.

Freedom isn't as big of a deal for Republicans anymore, but the optics alone would be awful.

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Hallmark is handing out new pricing sheets to customers in their stores and telling everyone it’s because of Trump’s tariffs

🚨 After being told this she looked it up online, it says Hallmark manufactures in Kansas. She called corporate, they confirmed it’s all in Kansas. After… pic.twitter.com/mmiGK63Znn

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 7, 2025

---

This scenario will play out with thousands of companies across the country. Companies not affected by tariffs are going to raise prices. Why? Because they can. Everything is going up. Most of the proles have not figured that out yet.

---

Didnt something happen on that already and they did some legislation about price-gauging?

---

It is unlikely that Republicans in Congress will want the government to tell American companies how much they can charge for anything outside medicine and national defense, maybe a few other industries.

Freedom isn't as big of a deal for Republicans anymore, but the optics alone would be awful.

---

Your "freedom" loving faction of the GOP gave us the liberty killing patriot act and a civil rights crushing surveillance regime that would have made the Founding Fathers start shooting

Not to mention endless military interventions in every sand box on earth in service to non-American interests

And of course got into economic bed with one of the most evil and totalitarian States on earth (communist China)

Bush Republicans as "lovers of freedom" is not a funny idea…it's a disgusting lie.

Sorry you can't keep exporting jobs overseas….i know that makes Wall Street mad (the real people Bush Republicans want to defend the freedom of)