Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
28 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Dumb motherfuckers

That was my thought while reading through that. People act like Dotard just showed up on the scene and OMG I had no idea it would be like this!

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have a 100 percent trade deficit with my supermarket, and not only that shopping there has cost my family jobs as field hands.  If I can shift all food production to my house, all profits, revenues, and jobs will stay in my house. 

image.thumb.jpeg.82bb700cc022dd42560c1b87a0e273df.jpeg

I wonder what Walmart thinks about this.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
20 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Y'all?

Your stupid fucking ass was 100% one of the fucking morons acting like it wasn't a big deal. You absolutely contributed to this by acting above it so you are part of the American public that you're decrying. You literally fucked yourself so congratulations. Insert a tired DJ Khaled gif about playing yourself here, you fucking idiot.

Protesteth much? If you're not y'all, then you're not y'all. 

But, yeah... It was me all along, supporting Trump by saying Trump ain't shit. 

He ain't shit and y'all still ain't gonna do shit. 

I'm played. 

Posted
21 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

First things first, you gotta keep the wife happy. Easiest way to keep her happy is to get her a boyfriend, but he has to be less charismatic than you and have a smaller penis than you. That's where I come in. 

danielle-thomas-with-gia.jpg.2a5db07f680e6d4e4e7d70d951a3f4c0.jpg

  • Haha 1
Posted
45 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have a 100 percent trade deficit with my supermarket, and not only that shopping there has cost my family jobs as field hands.  If I can shift all food production to my house, all profits, revenues, and jobs will stay in my house. 

image.thumb.jpeg.82bb700cc022dd42560c1b87a0e273df.jpeg

Presidents did this?  Or wealthy CEOs looking to ever-lower costs in pursuit of keeping their graphs trending up and to the right?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Presidents did this?  Or wealthy CEOs looking to ever-lower costs in pursuit of keeping their graphs trending up and to the right?

How about American consumers did this? Consumers will always choose the cheaper alternative.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The Trump administration is trying to turn back time.  All that they'll accomplish is wrecking shit that will take decades to repair.

This.  You can't put the globalization of the economy back in the tube.  You just can't.  It's impossible.  Without a time machine.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have a 100 percent trade deficit with my supermarket, and not only that shopping there has cost my family jobs as field hands.  If I can shift all food production to my house, all profits, revenues, and jobs will stay in my house. 

image.thumb.jpeg.82bb700cc022dd42560c1b87a0e273df.jpeg

"The Globalist days of FDR are coming to a close.  President Trump will bring those jobs back to the US of A, so that going forward, no American will be denied the opportunity to work in a sweatshop!"

- Karoline Leavitt (probably)

Edited by DixonHur
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have a 100 percent trade deficit with my supermarket, and not only that shopping there has cost my family jobs as field hands.  If I can shift all food production to my house, all profits, revenues, and jobs will stay in my house. 

image.thumb.jpeg.82bb700cc022dd42560c1b87a0e273df.jpeg

Now ask her where that globalist Trump gets all his cheap hats/products made...

Edited by pacman
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

How about American consumers did this? Consumers will always choose the cheaper alternative.

Cheaper alternatives for consumers only exist after a strategic decision is made by a corporate leadership to import cheaper alternatives.

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This.  You can't put the globalization of the economy back in the tube.  You just can't.  It's impossible.  Without a time machine.

It's not a literal time machine.  It's more of a prosperity time machine.   You make the average person's existence ugly enough to where they will accept the conditions you dictate to survive.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Red Five said:

That was my thought while reading through that. People act like Dotard just showed up on the scene and OMG I had no idea it would be like this!

That's the part that blows my mind. 2020 wasn't that long ago. If I forgot everything about Trump's last run the word CHAOS will stick with me. It was a slow rolling ball of shit that picked up speed over the entirety of his term. Not sure how anyone can look back and say "I want more of that!".

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Over the last 50 years, your generic plastic army men (you know, these guys):

little_green_army_men.jpg

Have been stamped the following things, in this order:

Made in Japan

Made in Taiwan, ROC

Made in China

Made in Vietnam (I think that's the new locale)

The point being that jobs in factories that make cheap injection molded plastic toys are NOT first-world country jobs; they move as economies develop.  We are never getting "cheap injection molded plastic toy jobs" back in the US....nor do we want them.  Because the choice is either a shit job paying a sub-par wage, or a job in American conditions paying a good wage, in which case your $5 bag of plastic army men just became a $15-$20 bag of plastic army men.

Now, do the same for plastic car parts, electronic components, etc. etc. ad infinitum.  

Americans DO NOT WANT THOSE JOBS.  How do we know?  Well we can look around at OTHER really hard, low-wage jobs: picking strawberries, installing roofs, working low-level construction jobs....and see that Americans don't want those jobs, either.  That's why millions of hard working brown people are doing them.  AND.....American consumers don't want to pay for goods, products, and services at the high prices that would follow such jobs paying the wage necessary to draw Americans.  If you hated $7 eggs, you're REALLY gonna hate $8 lettuce, and $10 strawberries, and a new house that costs $300k instead of $240k.

You can bring back 90,000 cheap injection molded plastic toy factories.....not one job will result.

Or you can force the issue...and the factories will still close, because nobody is gonna buy the $20 bag of plastic army men.

Sure, there are some manufacturing opportunities and jobs that can and should exist in the US.  And yes, globalization has left some people behind.  But what is happening here is the elevation to god-like status of "mediocre white men." What, oh WHAT will we do with all of our mediocre white men?  We yell at EVERYONE ELSE to "better themselves...learn to code!" and all that shit.  But for mediocre white men?  Nope, they should stay EXACTLY as they are, and we should just jump into a time machine to take us back to a time when 1) we had the the only major economy left standing after WWII, thus making us a manufacturing center, and 2) they didn't even have to compete for most of the decent manufacturing jobs because minorities and women largely need not apply.

The Trump administration is trying to turn back time.  All that they'll accomplish is wrecking shit that will take decades to repair.  Fucking idiots.

 

The bolded cannot be stated enough. Dumb MAGA that I talk to always talk about how tariffs will bring back manufacturing. No it won't. A lot has changed since the 1970's. First and foremost, the salaries of the men sitting around the big table at these corporations has multiplied by eleventybillion. Good luck convincing the CEO, COO, and CFO at these companies that six figures is still a respectable salary. Couple that with the fact that no American is working for 3 dollars an hour. That ship has sailed on most products, and like you said, those products will move locations as countries begin to raise their living wage standards.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Bill Clinton's signature notwithstanding, can anyone tell the class which party was responsible for NAFTA?

Anyone? Anyone?

The Whigs?

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I have a 100 percent trade deficit with my supermarket, and not only that shopping there has cost my family jobs as field hands.  If I can shift all food production to my house, all profits, revenues, and jobs will stay in my house. 

image.thumb.jpeg.82bb700cc022dd42560c1b87a0e273df.jpeg

If this was really his intent, there are two things that he's doing that he wouldn't be doing. 

1) He wouldn't be demanding things in return (ie, stop fentanyl, lol).

2) He wouldn't be backtracking and removing tariffs right away- or in some cases never implementing them in the first place.

If I was a CEO of a corporation with production in Canada, and was convinced that Trump was intent on doing what the quote above attributes as his intent, I could act on that.  I wouldn't like it, but the mandate would be clear.  As it is though, why in the hell would I start the years long process of building a new billion dollar plant in Cleveland when the impetus for doing so could very well be null and void before the board meeting is over?

 

Edited by TexasHooch
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted

The other issue is the authority he is using under the National Emergencies Act can be revoked by Congress in an expedited fashion and without his signature. Of course the House GOP cucked it self for this year and blocked an effort to force a congressional vote, 

but the uncertainty question remains. You can’t build an industrial policy on the back of an economics provision designed to give President’s short term economic powers. Sure companies will say all the right things. But I’m not actually going to put real money into a factory in Cleveland under such an impermanent policy.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted

So we actually have people stupid enough to think corporations will stop outsourcing jobs to cheaper labor markets? Seriously? Can't fucking wait to see that.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TexasHooch said:

If this was really his intent, there are two things that he's doing that he wouldn't be doing. 

1) He wouldn't be demanding things in return (ie, stop fentanyl, lol).

2) He wouldn't be backtracking and removing tariffs right away- or in some cases never implementing them in the first place.

If I was a CEO of a corporation with production in Canada, and was convinced that Trump was intent on doing what the quote above attributes as his intent, I could act on that.  I wouldn't like it, but the mandate would be clear.  As it is though, why in the hell would I start the years long process of building a new billion dollar plant in Cleveland when the impetus for doing so could very well be null and void before the board meeting is over?

 

Yeah, tariffs to protect domestic industry, unless targeted against specific misbehavior, like dumping, is a very long game.  It probably hasn't ever brought jobs back to a nation, but if it did, it would take 20 years.  Twenty painful, costly years.

And, as Bates wisely points out, the timeframe and (un)certainty is such that the required domestic investment just isn't going to happen.

It's gonna be whack-a-mole for foreign manufacturing.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

The other issue is the authority he is using under the National Emergencies Act can be revoked by Congress in an expedited fashion and without his signature. Of course the House GOP cucked it self for this year and blocked an effort to force a congressional vote, 

but the uncertainty question remains. You can’t build an industrial policy on the back of an economics provision designed to give President’s short term economic powers. Sure companies will say all the right things. But I’m not actually going to put real money into a factory in Cleveland under such an impermanent policy.

I don’t know, there are some really shit stupid CEOs out there.

Posted
31 minutes ago, Okie State said:

So we actually have people stupid enough to think corporations will stop outsourcing jobs to cheaper labor markets? Seriously? Can't fucking wait to see that.

 

Well, you see, that's today's message.  Tomorrow's will be something else, like "America needs to have some suffering first".

 

Posted
4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Bill Clinton's signature notwithstanding, can anyone tell the class which party was responsible for NAFTA?

Anyone? Anyone?

It's fucking bizarro world.  Trump hammered Obama/Hillary over TPP in the leadup to the 2016 election and then pulled all his buffoonery with tariffs and backing out of NAFTA the first time.  Just one of many ways  he completely went against what the party was supposed to stand for and the spineless Rs all fell in line.

2 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

The other issue is the authority he is using under the National Emergencies Act can be revoked by Congress in an expedited fashion and without his signature. Of course the House GOP cucked it self for this year and blocked an effort to force a congressional vote, 

but the uncertainty question remains. You can’t build an industrial policy on the back of an economics provision designed to give President’s short term economic powers. Sure companies will say all the right things. But I’m not actually going to put real money into a factory in Cleveland under such an impermanent policy.

It would have been nice if Biden and the Ds would have reined in presidential power to unilaterally enact tariffs when they had control of congress.  Not only did they not, they actually left a lot of Trump's tariffs in place.  Apparently there's no party of free trade in America any more.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1


×
×
  • Create New...