Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 4/10/2025 at 6:06 AM, Willfully Horn said:

Lock her criminally stupid ass in the jailhouse. She intentionally committed voter fraud.  
 

i know nothing will be done. Laws and austerity for thee, not for me.

Now now don’t be so quick to judge. It’s entirely possible that she committed tax fraud instead.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Now now don’t be so quick to judge. It’s entirely possible that she committed tax fraud instead.

You must not be on my text group, in which I remind everyone that my judgement is infallible. I text this message five dozen times a day. If you were in my text group, you’d know I am right.

Edited by Willfully Horn
Posted
42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that I have criticized every one of Miriam Adelson's handpicked nutjob neocons.

....but not the man who put them in positions of power.  Or the actions he's taken on their advice.  Or the folks who don't meet your definition of "neocon" but who have led him to wage economic war against....literally the entire world.  Or an entire admin intent on writing due process out of the detention and deportation process, including of "home-growns."  Nope.  When it comes to that stuff, well, it's just a head-scratcher indeed that we just need to give all those folks and the admin the benefit of the doubt and our full support.

None of those people you claim to criticize so much would be in those positions were it not for the man who you steadfastly refuse to criticize putting them there.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

You haven’t said shit about Patrick DuMont. 

I don’t really get invested in the NBA, but from what I pick up the dude sucks as hard as warmongering neocons like waltz. 

Posted
On 4/10/2025 at 6:06 AM, Willfully Horn said:

Lock her criminally stupid ass in the jailhouse. She intentionally committed voter fraud.  
 

i know nothing will be done. Laws and austerity for thee, not for me.

Well, in the first instance, it is probably a Hawaiian criminal violation.

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

....but not the man who put them in positions of power. 

A criticism of his appointments, and particularly the fact he turned the picks over to his little delusional Zionist deep pocket donor is a criticism of Trump. 

 

26 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Or the folks who don't meet your definition of "neocon" but who have led him to wage economic war against....literally the entire world. 

I’m ok with the play against china. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t but think a play needs to be run. Suck it up buttercup.  You’ll be ok. 
 

 

Edited by Anastasis
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

You are one of the chief clowns in the clown room. 

Let me know when you have anything to say on the people being kidnapped from the streets and sent to prison in El Salvador. Hypocrite. Everything you've bitched about is actually coming true and you can't be fucking bothered to say anything. We know the reason. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
33 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I’m ok with the play against china. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t but think a play needs to be run.

There's an ocean of daylight between "a play needs to be run" and "the play actually being run."  Shit, I noticed that we're getting some warm-weather spiders back in my house again.  A play definitely needs to be run.  This play, however, would be really, really, beyond fucking stupid:

RRS_House-Fire_blog-300x300.png.webp

The play is to force China out of the global economic system - that's literally what the admin's mouthpieces have advocated.  That is - and would be to any nation - an act of war.  It's fucking stupid.  Nevermind that my point was NOT just as to China, but rather as to THE ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD.  He has started a fucking trade war, and irrevocably broken our national and trading relationship with fucking CANADA for fuck's sake.  He has declared the EU and even the UK as enemies "out to fuck us over."  Those relationships are fucked, not to recover in any near future.

The dude can pretty much do no wrong in your eyes....and that says more about you than any number of posts you've made over the years.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

If we are in a tech race with China, why is the US cutting research funding on our universities?  Also, all of the ICE and border patrol bullshit has created enough uncertainty that has killed tourism and is starting the brain drain.  It's like we saw the dumb shit other countries have done before and want to replicate it.  China has enough problems of their own, but it seems like Xi isn't stupid and will win in the end by making good strategic moves that will elevate China's presence in the world.  Xi is happy to see the US isolate while he dominates trade with the rest of the world.

Edited by westexhorn
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, westexhorn said:

If we are in a tech race with China, why is the US cutting research funding on our universities?  Also, all of the ICE and border patrol bullshit has created enough uncertainty that has killed tourism and is starting the brain drain.  It's like we saw the dumb shit other countries have done before and want to replicate it.  China has enough problems of their own, but it seems like Xi isn't stupid and will win in the end by making good strategic moves that will elevate China's presence in the world.  Xi is happy to see the US isolate while he dominates trade with the rest of the world.

America Last. Trump First.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

The dude can pretty much do no wrong in your eyes....

I can appreciate that you probably believe that because I push back on some the insance drivel you roll out here. Like OMG there will no flu vaccine strains for the 2025/2026 season, and just regurgitating objectively false propaganda and misinformation on this thread and then ghosting when I torch it. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, safe sex said:

I mean, in September it will be announced that vaccines cause autism, so...

IMO, it will be virtually impossible to design much less execute a well conducted study [in that timeframe] that settles the issue of vax related outcomes, much less the likely multifactorial explanation for the rise in autism diagnoses. RFK is silly to put this timeline out only to have to blow it up later. 

Edited by Anastasis
eta bracket for clarity
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
IMO, it will be virtually impossible to design much less execute a well conducted study [in that timeframe] that settles the issue of vax related outcomes, much less the likely multifactorial explanation for the rise in autism diagnoses. RFK is silly to put this timeline out only to have to blow it up later. 

Definitely bookmark this for when Ana defends whatever “study” RFK manages to pull off.
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Definitely bookmark this for when Ana defends whatever “study” RFK manages to pull off.

Please do. You are nothing but bluster. The timelines just don't pencil out. The only potential roadmap I could see to even a starting point of a good robust study in that timeframe would be leveraging the FDA Sentinel system. 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

The real question is why you are engaging with a known troll.  Put anaphylaxis on ignore where it belongs🍊

These bitches in here using my name in a discussion about Tulsi, I quote them and point out a NYT times article published yesterday relevant to the DNI. They start have a series of seizures. I know I know, I am the one trolling. Welcome to the Clown Room. 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
4 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I’m ok with the play against china. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t but think a play needs to be run

“We have to do something, and this thing which has literally never worked is something, so I support doing it.”
 

Does @TahoeHorn know you are stealing his bit?

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
These bitches in here using my name in a discussion about Tulsi, I quote them and point out a NYT times article published yesterday relevant to the DNI. They start have a series of seizures. I know I know, I am the one trolling. Welcome to the Clown Room. 

giphy.gif
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

“We have to do something, and this thing which has literally never worked is something, so I support doing it.”

Why did Biden keep the Trump I tariffs targeting China on and even ultimately increase them when he took over office. Where were all the Chinese tariffs threads from 2021-2024 with the status quo hot takes? 100% on EV, 50% on solar, etc. etc. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Why did Biden keep the Trump I tariffs targeting China on and even ultimately increase them when he took over office. Where were all the Chinese tariffs threads from 2021-2024 with the status quo hot takes? 100% on EV, 50% on solar, etc. etc. 

what an utterly inapt comparison, are you serious?

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
Why did Biden keep the Trump I tariffs targeting China on and even ultimately increase them when he took over office. Where were all the Chinese tariffs threads from 2021-2024 with the status quo hot takes? 100% on EV, 50% on solar, etc. etc. 

You mean…targeted, industry/product-specific tariffs, which is pretty much THE way that most sane economists agree tariffs have utility? Yeah. Kinda different than “BLANKET 145% TARIFFS!”
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Why did Biden keep the Trump I tariffs targeting China on and even ultimately increase them when he took over office. Where were all the Chinese tariffs threads from 2021-2024 with the status quo hot takes? 100% on EV, 50% on solar, etc. etc. 

no, but seriously are you for real with these questions? 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

IMO, it will be virtually impossible to design much less execute a well conducted study [in that timeframe] that settles the issue of vax related outcomes, much less the likely multifactorial explanation for the rise in autism diagnoses. RFK is silly to put this timeline out only to have to blow it up later. 

This is like C- level trolling.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Biden kept the Trump I tariffs and expanded them. The strategy that "literally never works". Y'all realize how transparent the politics are here. 

Again, this comparison is so bad and silly that you literally cannot be serious.

For the record, the previous round of agricultural tariffs also didn’t “work” and cost us global export market share we will never get back, but do you actually not understand how raising tariffs* from ~20% on China and  ~3% on the rest of the world to 124% on China and 10%+ on the rest of the world represent not only a fundamental change in strategy and a huge break from 80 years of unbroken bipartisan national policy? Are you so captivated by the view from within the depths of your own lower bowel that you that from where you sit Peter Navarro is playing it straight, but all the market professionals and business managers dealing with this madness are crisis actors? 
Brother you’re on an island with Tommy Tuberville, MarkWayne Mullin and Stephen Miller. You’re not in a position to lecture anybody about “transparent politics,” but it must be tough on the spine, carrying that much water on just one side. 
 

 

 

*again, also pretty dumb outside of those few categories where we need to maintain strategic capacity and China is subsidizing low prices with the express intent of disrupting American production. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
Posted
9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Biden kept the Trump I tariffs and expanded them. The strategy that "literally never works". Y'all realize how transparent the politics are here. 

What has been said repeatedly is that targeted, temporary tariffs can be useful in a trade strategy.  

What is kind of strange is that Trump, who's had an incipient hard-on for tariffs most of his life, implemented apparently only rational tariffs in his first administration.  Maybe Lighthiser and some of the others kept him between the rails.

But that may also have emboldened him into this insanity.  Which I am almost 100% sure is motivated almost solely by his desire to eliminate income tax.

I'm guessing that at some point in life he came across the fact that the US didn't always have an income tax.  And then someone told him that we relied on tariffs to finance the government.  And everything after that has been a rationalization in his mind ("ripoff" trade deals, return manufacturing to US, gLoBAliSM!).

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What is kind of strange is that Trump, who's had an incipient hard-on for tariffs most of his life, implemented apparently only rational tariffs in his first administration.  Maybe Lighthiser and some of the others kept him between the rails.

No.  This idea is entirely a framing device used by the non-business general news media to put the current tarriff regime into some kind of relative context. The 2017 tarriffs have been an unmitigated disaster. They just seem relatively minor in comparison in terms of the scale of disaster. 

 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No.  This idea is entirely a framing device used by the non-business general news media to put the current tarriff regime into some kind of relative context. The 2017 tarriffs have been an unmitigated disaster. They just seem relatively minor in comparison in terms of the scale of disaster. 

 

Perhaps I should have said "comparatively rational."  

I'm not sure I have a huge problem with tariffs on things like EV and solar, where they are more akin to anti-dumping measures.  That may ultimately be wrong, economically, but it seems more defensible than what's going on now.  As you noted on your original post.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not sure I have a huge problem with tariffs on things like EV and solar, where they are more akin to anti-dumping measures.  That may ultimately be wrong, economically, but it seems more defensible than what's going on now.  As you noted on your original post.

No, I think we agree that a tarriffs on the import of products where we need to protect strategic capacity in a handful of key areas from dumping or being undercut by subsidy make sense. But that's not what Trump did in 2017 and it's not what we are doing now.  This will badly damage our interests and radically weaken our economic leverage in any negotiation. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, I think we agree that a tarriffs on the import of products where we need to protect strategic capacity in a handful of key areas from dumping or being undercut by subsidy make sense. But that's not what Trump did in 2017 and it's not what we are doing now.  This will badly damage our interests and radically weaken our economic leverage in any negotiation. 

This.  Most everyone (sane) agrees that tariffs have their place -- 1) protect strategic capacity, 2) countermeasures against dumping/extreme subsidies, that sort of thing.

The 2017 tariffs on solar panels, for example, had some rational basis.  The metals tariffs....not as much...but most could at least see and understand the reasoning, even if they disagreed.  And the damage they did to US ag interests was utterly stupid.  The later Biden tariffs on EVs and semiconductors made more sense (semiconductors absolutely fall in that "strategic capacity" bucket -- the CHIPS act (incentivizing re-shoring of semiconductor manufacturing) was a perfect element of how you should approach the issue).

An approach using tariffs like a rifle bullet (targeted, with thoughtful selection of the target and the impact of same) is nothing at all like using tariffs like 50 bombers full of 2,000 lb bombs.  Fascinating that someone who regularly rants against indiscriminate use of military force (like 2,000 lb bombs that take out whole blocks) is cheering for the indiscriminate use of economic force against.....literally the entire fucking planet.  Yes indeed, for him, it is all about "politics and teams," and it's refreshing to see him drop all pretenses, even if he also makes himself look silly as he tries to deny what he's doing in plain sight.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
14 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, I think we agree that a tarriffs on the import of products where we need to protect strategic capacity in a handful of key areas from dumping or being undercut by subsidy make sense. But that's not what Trump did in 2017 and it's not what we are doing now.  This will badly damage our interests and radically weaken our economic leverage in any negotiation. 

Your economic knowledge vastly surpasses mine.  I have been unable to clearly find reportage of exactly what Trump tariffed in his first administration and what exactly the Biden administration retained.  I do recall the ag tariffs being highly problematic and also what seems to be relatively targeted Chinese tariffs.  But I don't have a clear picture on it anymore.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

but do you actually not understand how raising tariffs* from ~20% on China and  ~3% on the rest of the world to 124% on China and 10%+ on the rest of the world represent not only a fundamental change in strategy and a huge break from 80 years of unbroken bipartisan national policy?

Eighty years of bipartisan national policy, lol. I can post videos of D and R politicians going back to the 80 and 90s talking about using tariffs to bring China to heel. Given the state of geriatric political class, some of those same folks are still in Congress. I think that the tariffs at these levels are a short-term tactic to kickstart all variety of negotiations on matters directly related to trade and many other issues not, across a variety of partners. It's just a opening play being run. It's not like we haven't had this exchange on another board. I think that most of these are lifted or heavily moderated by the end of the summer. And as discussed on the other board, I have skin on that. I don't think that Trump has any rigorous philosophical beliefs on anything, esp the economy.

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

The 2017 tarriffs have been an unmitigated disaster.

The rhetoric around it here is just political theatre. None of y'all said single shit from 2021-2024 when Trump I tariffs were approved and even expanded. 

 

I do think it's hilarious that you turned a post about NYT article about saving humanity from WWIII and the seizures that followed into tariff talk though.  Like there aren't a million other threads for it Bozo. 

Edited by Anastasis
Posted
52 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Fascinating that someone who regularly rants against indiscriminate use of military force (like 2,000 lb bombs that take out whole blocks) is cheering for the indiscriminate use of economic force against.....literally the entire fucking planet. 

Oh, I don’t know, I think @Anastasis is, broadly speaking, in favor of stepping back from global centrality, (or dismantling the global American Empire, if you prefer) and in favor of de-dollarization as the mechanism of achieving that. He probably sees the current Republican project as the most likely way to get from A to B.
What I think he doesn’t understand is the risk to himself and his family this poses, or the very real risk of worldwide human calamity and political violence that will likely result in the anarchic interregnum between the American Empire and whatever comes next. 
We are at least as likely to drown the Tree of Liberty in blood as to simply water it, and that’s what he and others like him don’t get. They think they are special.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Eighty years of bipartisan national policy, lol. I can post videos of D and R politicians going back to the 80 and 90s talking about using tariffs to bring China to heal.

Well that’s the difference between how you and I observe economic and monetary policy. You look where they point and I watch what their hands are doing. 
 

 

13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that the tariffs at these levels are a short-term tactic to kickstart all variety of negotiations on matters directly related to trade and many other issues not, across a variety of partners. It's just a opening play being run. It's not like we haven't had this exchange on another board. I think that most of these are lifted or heavily moderated by the end of the summer.

IMG_2056.thumb.jpeg.f10578552349bcb57917fbdb53c8d0fc.jpeg

34 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I do think it's hilarious that you turned a NYT article about saving humanity from WWIII into tariff talk though.  Like there aren't a million other threads for it Bozo. 

There there.

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Eighty years of bipartisan national policy, lol. I can post videos of D and R politicians going back to the 80 and 90s talking about using tariffs to bring China to heel. Given the state of geriatric political class, some of those same folks are still in Congress. I think that the tariffs at these levels are a short-term tactic to kickstart all variety of negotiations on matters directly related to trade and many other issues not, across a variety of partners. It's just a opening play being run. It's not like we haven't had this exchange on another board. I think that most of these are lifted or heavily moderated by the end of the summer. And as discussed on the other board, I have skin on that. I don't think that Trump has any rigorous philosophical beliefs on anything, esp the economy.

The rhetoric around it here is just political theatre. None of y'all said single shit from 2021-2024 when Trump I tariffs were approved and even expanded. 

 

I do think it's hilarious that you turned a post about NYT article about saving humanity from WWIII and the seizures that followed into tariff talk though.  Like there aren't a million other threads for it Bozo. 

Yeah. Trump is definitely playing 5-D chess here. It’s all going according to plan!

 

Mr Rogers Clown GIF

Edited by DDD Dad
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Eighty years of bipartisan national policy, lol. I can post videos of D and R politicians going back to the 80 and 90s talking about using tariffs to bring China to heel. Given the state of geriatric political class, some of those same folks are still in Congress. I think that the tariffs at these levels are a short-term tactic to kickstart all variety of negotiations on matters directly related to trade and many other issues not, across a variety of partners. It's just a opening play being run. It's not like we haven't had this exchange on another board. I think that most of these are lifted or heavily moderated by the end of the summer. And as discussed on the other board, I have skin on that. I don't think that Trump has any rigorous philosophical beliefs on anything, esp the economy.

The rhetoric around it here is just political theatre. None of y'all said single shit from 2021-2024 when Trump I tariffs were approved and even expanded. 

 

I do think it's hilarious that you turned a post about NYT article about saving humanity from WWIII and the seizures that followed into tariff talk though.  Like there aren't a million other threads for it Bozo. 

That's objectively not true.  People were grousing about those tariffs immediately, and about the farm subsidies they provoked later.  Granted, it was on a smaller scale than today, but so were the tariffs.

The more striking part is that Biden kept some of them in place, when his trade strategy is a lot more rational.

And, I find it interesting that none of these post-hoc justifications for Trump's actions come from Trump himself, or even the administration.  They're all invented by some outsider to try to justify the madness.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The rhetoric around it here is just political theatre. None of y'all said single shit from 2021-2024 when Trump I tariffs were approved and even expanded. 

 

PiLotICal tHeAtAr

image.thumb.png.96e8887386339088aec3112eff55dcd0.png



×
×
  • Create New...