Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    37615
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Of course not. But the tards would have you believe that we overregulated and either couldn't keep manufacturing and other business here or that's the reason it won't come back.
  2. Everyone that whinges about CR has said that for years.
  3. It's really fairly astonishing that the GOP has managed to so completely vilify an agency whose mission is to protect consumers from rapacious corporate practices. I mean, it's right there in the name. One can certainly understand why the robber barons hate it, but somehow they have convinced their victims to hate it too. Mind bottling.
  4. Another thing this points out is the dilemma with domestic vs. offshore manufacturing. The main reason offshore manufacturing is cheaper is that lack of regulation in "third world countries" permits them to produce at much cheaper rates. That is, regulation pertaining to the environment, worker safety, living wages, etc. But even with proper or adequate regulation, those industries are inherently hazardous to the environment and to workers. In some sense, we may actually be better off not having those industries domestically because no matter how well regulated, they are hazardous. We sure as shit don't want those industries back with 19th century regulation or lack thereof. But, offshoring doesn't really solve the problem because those hazards have a global dimension, particularly environmental ones. And, over the long-long haul (that we may not survive as a species that long), global prices are going to equalize. So, in some utopian world, we would have kept those industries, regulated them appropriately to mitigate the hazards as best as possible, and consumers pay the prices. And we'd have a better industrial base, more decent jobs, and better national security. Tariffs are not THE solution to any of this, but might be a small part.
  5. I'm not sure it's clear to anyone. This is a bit of an economic grey area, I think. But, on balance, history has told us that most of the possibilities are not good. The one positive thing tariffs can do is protect domestic industry. But that assumes that there is an industry. A solid example of this is EVs. We have an industry, but it's delicate and could be severely undercut by dumped Chinese imports (dumped meaning sold below cost/subsidized by China and exported here). And, in any case, I think that justification requires temporary tariffs only, not long term or indefinite. A lot of the industry these would ostensibly protect I don't think really exists here and it will take years and massive investment to bring it back, if it comes back at all. Examples are probably steel, aluminum, timber, textiles. So, what we're going to do, most likely, is find other cheap-ass places to import goods from and consumers/purchasers will suffer in the mean time.
  6. Lighthizer is no longer in the administration is he? From what I gather, he was a or the driving force behind Trump I tariffs and actually knew what he was doing as USTR. Which is probably why Biden maintained most of those. So, it would seem Trump still doesn't understand tariffs and this time no one does. Also, lol at $600M.
  7. Think it was Texas Relays Student Committee. If not that, something kind of similar.
  8. Motherfucker, what do you think "setting the persons aside" means? Sometimes I think you don't read very carefully. My post quietly shat on corporations, director compensation practices, and Trump world in particular. Also, apparently the grants, although not options, were restricted. Probably restricted so they don't dump all their shares at once and tank the stock price, not for any semi-legitimate shareholder compensation reason. It's a fucky transaction any way you slice it.
  9. To be clear, I knew Jeff some in undergrad. He's a decent guy, seemed sharp. I know very little about his practice or ethics or any of that. However, I have found that most pretty decent, sharp people I have known that ultimately went to law school turned out to be sharp, decent attorneys. It's the ones that might be some kind of savant, that is outwardly kind of meh, but maybe stacking grades in undergrad and law school that you may have to worry about. Or not.
  10. Fair enough and I heartily agree that bad management is as or more responsible for problems with unions.
  11. Pretty accurate, I think. "We'll do our best to stop those danged immigrants and that nasty ol' fentanyl." And someone will declare a huge victory.
  12. The irony here is thicc af.
  13. Also one of the effects of more recent rounds of tariffs was to find alternative sources of goods/manufacturing. Principally, apparently, Vietnam, where a lot of Asian manufacturing was headed anyway.
  14. Without commentary. Revenue generation. Fix trade imbalances. Potentially incentivize purchasing of US goods and increasing US manufacturing. That will take a decade or more.
  15. Also, I think historically, tariffs have not been applied to consumer goods, per se, except in fairly narrow categories like EVs. They have certainly been applied to raw materials and commodities that end up in consumer goods, metals, timber/lumber, wheat. Across-the-board tariffs with major trading partners are pretty unprecedented, I believe.
  16. But schools should be under local control! @Balcones Hypocrites.
  17. Setting aside the persons involved, it's not a completely unusual transaction. Members of the BOD granted shares. Two things do stand out, they're not options, apparently, but outright shares, and it's $800,000+ at current prices. Corporations grant options to directors as a form of compensation and to "align" their performance with that of the company. Options meaning restricted as to vesting and subsequent sale, so that the director is incentivized to stick around and make the company profitable. Even though directors of major, Fortune 500 companies tend to be overcompensated, it's usually to the tune of a couple hundred grand for a few meetings a year and some ostensible liability. A one-time payment of $800k to undistinguished directors of a shitass, unprofitable corporation is pretty extraordinary. Then you add in the Trump circle jerk and it's pretty disgusting.
  18. Some presidential tariff powers are delegated by Congress, generally, see the above CRS links. Some are pursuant to treaties, which may permit and circumscribe POTUS or the US' ability to impose tariffs, in accordance with the treaty. Tariffs imposed in violation of the treaty may breach the treaty, causing it to dissolve.
  19. More than you wanted to know about that. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44707
  20. It wasn't based on "unflattering data points." Those came out later. It was pure-dee racism and a threat to the mediocre white man order. Similarly, you can't justify criticism of the BLM protests because their "leaders" are minor-league shitstains. The movement itself was righteous, as was King's. Both of them ignited a public dialog about the subject of their protests and MLK's with landmark legislation. There's not been any landmark legislation as a result of BLM, but it's definitely under discussion.
  21. I have, by and large, changed my tune on unions. I remain somewhat skeptical of government employee unions. Unlike the private sector, government is not really known for abusing employees, and there are other means that can be used to exert upward wage/benefit pressures. I'm willing to entertain discussion on it.
  22. Amusing thing. I have had one argument before the Texas Supreme Court. The argument that preceded mine concerned whether the administrative suspension of a driver's license that coincides with arrest for DWI was a violation of due process. So, the lawyer that was arguing it was some poor schlub misdemeanor criminal defense lawyer with little appellate experience, especially outside criminal law. He wasn't bad by any stretch, but just . . . so . . . casual about the whole thing.
  23. I think another aspect of this is that, rather than seeking children in the first place, they believe or are led to believe that faith can conquer their predilections. I don't believe Catholics explicitly teach this, nor do mainstream Prod denominations. Catholics do "offer" celibacy, which may be attractive, while fundagelicals tend to believe and evangelize that faith can conquer anything, and, indeed that such "deviations" (real and perceived) are the result of inadequate faith.
  24. Let's not forget that presidential track record on budget deficit explosions.
  25. Because they don't give a fuck. Actual job performance means nothing if it doesn't toe the MAGA line. There's no guarantee, and an absolute likelihood, that MAGA replacements will suck shit through a straw, and also orange man's crank.
×
×
  • Create New...