Jump to content

Tariff wars, they have began


Wally Fairway

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Wait, an almost 8 figure position in Fannie and Freddie?  As an individual?  When did they take this position pre or post 2008?  

Fannie and Freddie sticks have quadrupled since the election. Damn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also the more lumber than we can use is a flat lie.  Well, maybe not if we start clearcutting national forests.

Why stop at national forests? Lotsa big trees in Sequoia National Park, Yosemite and Yellowstone to name a few.

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he had just maintained focus on destroying the institutions of American democracy he could have relied on everyone remaining in their Fox News-induced comas. Making the products everyone relies on to live more expensive may actually cause the population to wake up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Auto Driller said:

If he had just maintained focus on destroying the institutions of American democracy he could have relied on everyone remaining in their Fox News-induced comas. Making the products everyone relies on to live more expensive may actually cause the population to wake up.

Too late he's already been elected and congress and the court are not gonna stop him. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, royiv said:

Why stop at national forests? Lotsa big trees in Sequoia National Park, Yosemite and Yellowstone to name a few.

Sequoia wood isn't great for building, but I'm all for cutting the trees down anyway just to drink those sweet sweet tears of our future generations 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, royiv said:

Why stop at national forests? Lotsa big trees in Sequoia National Park, Yosemite and Yellowstone to name a few.

 

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Even the thought of this might send me spiraling. 

yeah that shit isn't funny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, i know it sounds stupid to look for logic or reason in anything he does, but i have an honest question.

he wants to do a bunch of terrible shit, we get it. he did terrible shit during his first term, or at least tried to. but the only thing he seemed to care about was the economy. now to him, the economy is mostly the stock market with a splash of black employment numbers, but whatever. it's all he fucking talks about.

so if you're trump, and you can do most of your terrible shit without it affecting the economy (disabling govt agencies, pursuing your perceived political enemies, tax cuts for billionaire friends in exchange for whatever the fuck), then why would you do something like this that directly impacts (a) the actual economy and (b) how americans react to the economy (lower wages, layoffs, higher prices, gas, groceries).

i mean, the economy/stock market was in good shape. and even if biden did most of the heavy lifting post-covid, trump would've taken credit for it anyway, so why not just keep it humming and brag about it? that's what he did for 3 years after obama. all trump cares about is people thinking he's great and thinking he's smart and the best at everything. if the economy was good, he could've played golf 4x a week and spent the other days truthing about the dow.

so the question, and i'm not looking for answers like "because he's a dipshit moron", why do this?

is it to say we're not dependent on any other nations and he thinks that makes him a hero? is it because he (and those around him) genuinely don't understand how it works? and even if they don't, he's outwardly saying it's going to be bad for a while and people will understand. or is he just going full putin and trying to build a moat and fuck everybody over except him? i know the last one seems like the obvious answer, but he's way more fragile snowflake who seeks approval than he is putin strongman who rules with an iron fist. 

i'll hang up and listen.

 

16 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

right, which was the assumption.

so do we think he's ok being seen as the worst president of all time and the useful idiot who presided over the ashes, or does he somehow think this is going to be popular with people outside his cult? and yes, i do think he cares about that stuff almost as much as he wants to be a real billionaire.

putin was like 45 years old when he took over. does trump realize this is not going to work out for him the same way? 

While cruelty plays a role, I think it's less a player for Trump than say Bannon or Stephen Miller.  I think Trump sees this as a way to begin building his stature in the world as a great leader.  Great leaders end up with more territory than they started with and weak leaders lose territory.  I think Trump sees a future where he rules the western hemisphere, China rules Orient and Putin rules everything in between.  And instead of taking land by force, he is first trying to get enough voters in Canada and Mexico to ask "why do we wallow around with such poorly run governments when we could be part of the once again great US that Trump is building?"  Honestly think the guy is that delusional and those around him encourage it, profiting off the chaos. Above all else he wants the world to think he is the brightest visionary ever.  Everything he does, how he says everything is directed to get him up on Mt Rushmore.  

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also the more lumber than we can use is a flat lie.  Well, maybe not if we start clearcutting national forests.

The bulk of our best lumber already goes overseas.  They figure they are paying already for transport, might as well go the extra bit and get clear or select grade and leave us locals with #2 common crap.

Edited by pyrohornIII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also the more lumber than we can use is a flat lie.  Well, maybe not if we start clearcutting national forests.

The US and Canada have been in a trade war over lumber for decades.  Why would Biden do this?  Everything was just perfect, right?

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/us-south-lumber-production
 

 | 

Bloomberg News

November 4, 2024 2:06 PM, EST


The U.S. increased import duties on Canadian softwood lumber by nearly 81% in August,

 

The US could be self sufficient on lumber without touching NF.  However other federal and state owned lands would have to be allowed to be harvested and managed.  Next biggest constraint is mill capacity and skilled labor.

 

 

Edited by Incredulity
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

Sorry facts about the lumber industry hurt the leftists fe fes

I don't understand your point really. You say that the US and Canada had been involved in a trade war over lumber for decades, and indeed that is true I have had several run ins with Canadians online and we have discussed this. But then say Biden disrupted this in some way. Ok maybe having a trade war over lumber is a bad idea and Biden continuing this decades old trade was a bad policy but it clearly wasn't disruptive as you point out: it had been going on for decades.

But having a trade war over one particular product and just generally having a trade war over everything are very different.

I guess I don't understand why my fe fes would be hurt by you bringing this up, or what this has to do with the current situation.

Do you think because we have this lumber situation it makes sense to have it about every product with our biggest trading partner?

People are calling you an idiot because your post is incoherent and makes no sense, not that their fe fes were hurt.

Also just because Biden did something doesn't necessarily mean I think it's great.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Valmy77 said:

I don't understand your point really. You say that the US and Canada had been involved in a trade war over lumber for decades, and indeed that is true I have had several run ins with Canadians online and we have discussed this. But then say Biden disrupted this in some way. Ok maybe having a trade war over lumber is a bad idea and Biden continuing this decades old trade was a bad policy but it clearly wasn't disruptive as you point out: it had been going on for decades.

But having a trade war over one particular product and just generally having a trade war over everything are very different.

I guess I don't understand why my fe fes would be hurt by you bringing this up, or what this has to do with the current situation.

Do you think because we have this lumber situation it makes sense to have it about every product with our biggest trading partner?

Lumber prices going ballistic and fucking that bucolic international trade market has been presented repeatedly in this thread as a direct consequence of these tariffs. I provided context to the reality of US Canada lumber trade in response to a direct post that there isn’t enough timber supply in the US for the US market without logging NF.

I also said previously in the thread the academic economists consensus is tariffs don’t work.  There are nearly an infinite number of ways this could work out and many are bad.  There are going to be massive winners and losers in the short term,  that is certain.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

I guess I don't understand why my fe fes would be hurt by you bringing this up, or what this has to do with the current situation.

People are calling you an idiot because your post is incoherent and makes no sense, not that their fe fes were hurt.

IMG_4087.thumb.jpeg.08efa160b9e38fda43f3db9d40d3c360.jpeg

“The answer has always been right in front of you, you just had to read it for yourself.”

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Lumber prices going ballistic and fucking that bucolic international trade market has been presented repeatedly in this thread as a direct consequence of these tariffs. I provided context to the reality of US Canada lumber trade in response to a direct post that there isn’t enough timber supply in the US for the US market without logging NF.

I also said previously in the thread the academic economists consensus is tariffs don’t work.  There are nearly an infinite number of ways this could work out and many are bad.  There are going to be massive winners and losers in the short term,  that is certain.  

There is no way this works out anyway but bad. Our economy is going to be in shambles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

Only if you like going 600 miles and filling up in 10 minutes.

Fuel cells are pointless. They are inefficient and expensive. They require extensive infrastructure to utilize. And there is no particular need to go 600 miles on a single fill-up. Something like 90% of trips are 30 miles or less.  But even if you needed that you already have EVs that can go 400 and fill up 80% in 15 minutes. It isn't going to be that long before technology gets to your completely pointless requirement. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Sorority leopards about to be quite sad.

But the biggest category of agricultural imports from Mexico last year was fresh fruits, of which the US imported $9 billion worth, with avocados accounting for $3.1 billion of that total.

Lets think about that. We import 3.1B of a food we cannot produce in near enough quantity.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/01/economy/trump-tariffs-mexico-canada-china-increased-costs/index.html

No dummy. Once tariffs are in place, we’ll be importing $11.25 billion! Don’t you see how much wealthier we obviously became?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Underdog said:

JT wasting time trying to tug on Trump’s heartstrings, cocksucker has no empathy towards anyone/thing other than himself. 

That’s for the American people. He knows Trump is a narcissist without the capacity for empathy or shame. Every world leader knows that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JT and the Liberal Party should be thanking Trump. This is great for them politically as they were dead in the water.

The Conservatives and Poilievre are going to be big political losers if this goes on.

But really everyone is going to lose if these remain in place for awhile, especially in the short term.

But we'll see. In the past Trump has usually retreated when his more stupid ideas got push back. If his supporters start complaining he might think better of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We already log in the national forests. We always have. NFs are for resource management, not preservation; side benefits such as camping and hiking are just that. I've spent my entire life spending time in the Cascades of WA and OR - most of which is national forest land - and I guarantee that not only does logging still go on in them, quite often you can't even get to where you think you are going because the Forest Service roads are gated to allow for timber extraction.

Oregon is still primarily a resource colony due to timber, despite most of the mills in the PNW having shut down 40 years ago - since then softwoods have been exported to Asia to be milled there. Washington's economy is far more diverse and the state is much wealthier (3rd highest GDP per capita in the nation, ahead of California [4] and Texas [16]), but even here the timber industry is important and a good deal of that occurs in the national forests. A tariff war above and beyond the three-decade long timber wars would hurt not because you can't get the trees, but because there is no longer anywhere to turn them into lumber. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...