Trump's Trade War

[retread 2951]

[retread 2951]

 

[F250 28777]

Well, the Mooch is right.

 

[Biff Tannen 45690]

10 hours ago, retread said:

 

I hope Ryan comes down with an intestinal parasite.

[Brisketexan 105145]

I hope Ryan comes down with an intestinal parasite.

That would never happen. Parasites have professional courtesy for one another.

[Aqua Buddha 14597]

18 hours ago, retread said:

 

Yet, during the Obama administration, they voted to kill Obamacare seemingly every week.

[retread 2951]

and fell flat on their face when it was their turn to produce healthcare legislation. They only had 2 decades to think about it...

[zork 629]

 

 

Quote

...

Trump says he is making up for the mistakes of past US presidents who gave away too much in both trade talks and in forming alliances during the cold war and afterward. Instead of seeing the US as a superpower making generous concessions for the sake of global order, Trump has in effect asked the US to be treated as an equal. Or as Gary Cohn, Trump’s former National Economic Council director, put it: “You treat us the way we treat you, or we’ll treat you the way you treat us.”

 

In all this, Trump has asked Americans to be patient while he plays tough with demands and tariffs in order to somehow achieve a greater good. “There may be a little pain for a little while, but ultimately for my farmers ... you’re going to do much better,” he told supporters in Michigan last April.

...

 

https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2018/0712/Trump-s-demand-for-reciprocity-with-allies

[SKJ 1311]

What are the odds that Trump actually understands international trade?

I mean, he did fucking go bankrupt with a casino, so it's obvious he's a complete fucking moron...

[Huckleberry 32861]

It's almost like zork doesn't realize that what he quoted is telling him that Trump's entire strategy is based on the USA willfully forfeiting its position as the only economic superpower.

[HenryJames 66063]

 

[Mapache 1117]

You reap what you sow....

In South Dakota, patience wears thin as tariffs hit home

https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/13/south-dakota-trump-tariffs-hit-home/780376002/

South Dakota farmers and ranchers this week weathered the first round of tariffs and talk of an imminent trade war. 

It's a hit they'd hoped to avoid for months and one they've been paying for for weeks as uncertainty loomed large over the market, dragging down the price of key crops. 

The tariff talks have already cost South Dakota farmers and ranchers hundreds of millions of dollars, experts said, as the value of their crops has dipped amid international concern about new tariffs. 

It's a loss that many can't sustain and one that elected officials and others worried could tank the state's economy. 

[Chad Fuck 17683]

The sheep are surprised the wolf is eating them. After he said he would.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

A) Haha.  Fuck them. 

B) This is exactly what I said was the reason they're not turning on Trump: 

"In the meantime, VanderWal said he encouraged South Dakota farmers and ranchers to reach out to their congressional delegates. Criticizing the president's tactics wouldn't yield a positive outcome, he said.

'It doesn’t do any good to take shots at the president; he doesn’t respond favorably to that,' VanderWal said."

But if Trump doesn't come through for them, I think they'll turn on him fast. 

Edited July 15, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[F250 28777]

"Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has promised that Trump will restore farmer profitability but he hasn't specified how and some economists are skeptical that the administration can come up with the billions of dollars necessary to cover losses.

"If this continues and the USDA does not discover a way to helicopter in and drop buckets of cash into the corn belt this fall, then I would not be surprised if there are tractor parades going to DC at some point in the next year," said Scott Irwin, University of Illinois agricultural economist."

 

https://qctimes.com/business/us-trade-immigration-and-biofuel-policies-hit-farmers-hard/article_17947ddd-5900-59a5-9df3-0be868c4aa58.amp.html

[Chad Fuck 17683]

They probably won’t be able to afford the diesel at that point. Illinois is a long way from DC by tractor.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

"Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has promised that Trump will restore farmer profitability but he hasn't specified how and some economists are skeptical that the administration can come up with the billions of dollars necessary to cover losses.

"If this continues and the USDA does not discover a way to helicopter in and drop buckets of cash into the corn belt this fall, then I would not be surprised if there are tractor parades going to DC at some point in the next year," said Scott Irwin, University of Illinois agricultural economist."

 

https://qctimes.com/business/us-trade-immigration-and-biofuel-policies-hit-farmers-hard/article_17947ddd-5900-59a5-9df3-0be868c4aa58.amp.html

Well there you go.  We'd have the pallets of cash to solve this crisis if only Obama hadn't given them to Iran! 

[Bozo_Casanova 26470]

Central planning and price control to own the libs.

[atomheartbevo 89674]

How many small farms are limping along, year-to-year, and all it takes is two bad years in a row and the bank moves in?

We already have a good idea of how many people are heavy in debt and have no real savings.

[GSU&UT 1798]

4 hours ago, F250 said:

"Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has promised that Trump will restore farmer profitability but he hasn't specified how and some economists are skeptical that the administration can come up with the billions of dollars necessary to cover losses.

"If this continues and the USDA does not discover a way to helicopter in and drop buckets of cash into the corn belt this fall, then I would not be surprised if there are tractor parades going to DC at some point in the next year," said Scott Irwin, University of Illinois agricultural economist."

 

https://qctimes.com/business/us-trade-immigration-and-biofuel-policies-hit-farmers-hard/article_17947ddd-5900-59a5-9df3-0be868c4aa58.amp.html

[Biff Tannen 45690]

5 hours ago, F250 said:

"Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has promised that Trump will restore farmer profitability but he hasn't specified how and some economists are skeptical that the administration can come up with the billions of dollars necessary to cover losses.

"If this continues and the USDA does not discover a way to helicopter in and drop buckets of cash into the corn belt this fall, then I would not be surprised if there are tractor parades going to DC at some point in the next year," said Scott Irwin, University of Illinois agricultural economist."

 

https://qctimes.com/business/us-trade-immigration-and-biofuel-policies-hit-farmers-hard/article_17947ddd-5900-59a5-9df3-0be868c4aa58.amp.html

Tractor parades?  Maybe in his honor.  They will never admit they were conned.

[retread 2951]

They can join in the  military parade. They can lead the parade after the F-35D flyover with 5 HDMI ports, wi-fi, and heads-up HBO.

Edited July 15, 2018 by retread

[Mojo Hand 4580]

30 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Tractor parades?  Maybe in his honor.  They will never admit they were conned.

They'll be protesting the evil Dems who probably wouldn't vote for all of the amazing bills that Republicans never bring to the floor. 

[SaucyJack 3488]

2 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

They'll be protesting the evil Dems who probably wouldn't vote for all of the amazing bills that Republicans never bring to the floor. 

Just had to. 

[F250 28777]

3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Tractor parades?  Maybe in his honor.  They will never admit they were conned.

I don't know. If people across the midwest start losing their farms and livelihood, I could see his support plummeting.

Its easy to remain loyal when it doesn't cost you anything, it's much more difficult when it costs your family a pound of flesh.

 

[atomheartbevo 89674]

4 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

[atomheartbevo 89674]

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

I don't know. If people across the midwest start losing their farms and livelihood, I could see his support plummeting.

Its easy to remain loyal when it doesn't cost you anything, it's much more difficult when it costs your family a pound of flesh.

 

And some of those states (Oklahoma for instance) were blue within the last 15-20 years.

Plenty of those people have dreams of passing the family farm down or farming for decades more.  They don’t have a rich daddy bailing them out, and this is not because they made poor decisions either.  This trade war is not some relic of Obama - Trump is out there openly bragging about going hard in the paint on these countries. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

7 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

They don’t have a rich daddy bailing them out, and this is not because they made poor decisions either.  

Except for the Trump voters. 

[Kringelbert Fishtybuns 943]

20 minutes ago, F250 said:

Its easy to remain loyal when it doesn't cost you anything, it's much more difficult when it costs your family a pound of flesh.

 

I trying real hard to be the shepherd but I’m fixing to change my name to Shylock.

[GSU&UT 1798]

@Bozo_Casanova has posted things like this many times, but it bears repeating. This is what will eventually get people off their asses and motivated at some point. There is no way we can continue to see a continuing trend of crazy wealth disparity and think there will be no repercussions.

 

 

[ScottishHorn 172]

Corn, Soybean, rice and wheat farmers receive billions in subsidies every year.  I imagine the farmers will be assisted in some way to compensate for any price fluctuations like they always have

[F250 28777]

29 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

Corn, Soybean, rice and wheat farmers receive billions in subsidies every year.  I imagine the farmers will be assisted in some way to compensate for any price fluctuations like they always have

What is interesting is that the Trump administration is interfering so much in the market place that the law of unintended consequences is playing out in real time.

For instance, the EPA began issuing ethanol exemptions for some refineries which is already creating winners and losers in that industry. Unsurprisingly, there seems to be evidence of rent-seeking behavior driving the exemptions. What does seem to be an unintended consequence is that the ethanol requirements were essentially a subsidy for the corn industry but that subsidy is being wiped out due to the EPA exemptions.

By granting exemptions to the highest bidders through rent-seeking,  the EPA is putting a strain on the biofuel industry sector and the corn industry and this isn't even tarrif related. That's two industries plus their associated complimentary industries impacted by the EPA. When you throw in the tarrifs, things get a lot more complicated.

Tarrifs are all about the government picking winners and losers. With as much tinkering going on in the market across multiple industries the law of unintended consequences will see to it that there most certainly be losers.

I would like to take this time to remind everyone about the recent tax cuts and ballooning deficit. Yeah, I'm sure the government will throw in some money for the midwest to keep some of the voters happy. Trump's running the U.S. economy like it's one of his businesses.

 

 

[Brisketexan 105145]

^^
And he’s gonna walk away from the rubble, leaving someone else to clean up the bankrupt mess. Just like always.

[Horn Dog 9863]

12 hours ago, Mapache said:

You reap what you sow....

In South Dakota, patience wears thin as tariffs hit home

https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/13/south-dakota-trump-tariffs-hit-home/780376002/

South Dakota farmers and ranchers this week weathered the first round of tariffs and talk of an imminent trade war. 

It's a hit they'd hoped to avoid for months and one they've been paying for for weeks as uncertainty loomed large over the market, dragging down the price of key crops. 

The tariff talks have already cost South Dakota farmers and ranchers hundreds of millions of dollars, experts said, as the value of their crops has dipped amid international concern about new tariffs. 

It's a loss that many can't sustain and one that elected officials and others worried could tank the state's economy. 

Womp womp

[Hornius Emeritus 12462]

4 hours ago, ScottishHorn said:

Corn, Soybean, rice and wheat farmers receive billions in subsidies every year.  I imagine the farmers will be assisted in some way to compensate for any price fluctuations like they always have

 

There is a stark difference between what you imagine and reality.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-next-american-farm-bust-is-upon-us-1486572488?mod=djmc_pkt_ff

[F250 28777]

The know-nothing party is not making America great.

 

 

[GSU&UT 1798]

We're headed for a recession unless Trump takes a 180 pretty soon right?

[ScottishHorn 172]

10 hours ago, F250 said:

What is interesting is that the Trump administration is interfering so much in the market place that the law of unintended consequences is playing out in real time.

For instance, the EPA began issuing ethanol exemptions for some refineries which is already creating winners and losers in that industry. Unsurprisingly, there seems to be evidence of rent-seeking behavior driving the exemptions. What does seem to be an unintended consequence is that the ethanol requirements were essentially a subsidy for the corn industry but that subsidy is being wiped out due to the EPA exemptions.

By granting exemptions to the highest bidders through rent-seeking,  the EPA is putting a strain on the biofuel industry sector and the corn industry and this isn't even tarrif related. That's two industries plus their associated complimentary industries impacted by the EPA. When you throw in the tarrifs, things get a lot more complicated.

Tarrifs are all about the government picking winners and losers. With as much tinkering going on in the market across multiple industries the law of unintended consequences will see to it that there most certainly be losers.

I would like to take this time to remind everyone about the recent tax cuts and ballooning deficit. Yeah, I'm sure the government will throw in some money for the midwest to keep some of the voters happy. Trump's running the U.S. economy like it's one of his businesses.

 

 

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  Tax revenue keeps breaking records every quarter.  You could argue the tax cuts are the one positive of the trump administration.  Corporate earnings are up 20%. This factor hasn't even hit the markets yet and wont until later this year.  We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

[JimmyJames 12271]

9 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  Tax revenue keeps breaking records every quarter.  You could argue the tax cuts are the one positive of the trump administration.  Corporate earnings are up 20%. This factor hasn't even hit the markets yet and wont until later this year.  We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

This board isn’t dumb enough to listen to your blather. Take it to texags where someone might listen to your bullshit. And cut the “we” crap. 

[F250 28777]

3 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  Tax revenue keeps breaking records every quarter.  You could argue the tax cuts are the one positive of the trump administration.  Corporate earnings are up 20%. This factor hasn't even hit the markets yet and wont until later this year.  We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

The deficit is directly tied to both taxes AND spending. If you decrease taxes you must decrease spending, this is the part that Republicans tend to forget while they sing of supply side economics and simultaneously practice Keynesian strategies.

 

[Tuco 5076]

15 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  Tax revenue keeps breaking records every quarter.  You could argue the tax cuts are the one positive of the trump administration.  Corporate earnings are up 20%. This factor hasn't even hit the markets yet and wont until later this year.  We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

This is a straight up fucking lie.  There were record breaking revenue in April, based mainly on the 2017 tax law and economy, because that's when the final accounting on 2017 is performed.  January also had higher revenue in 2018, I suspect for similar reasons. Every other month this year has had lower tax revenue.  Yet the Republicans are pushing this lie hard.  Any reasonable analysis is showing lower revenue for 2018.   

reality

 

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

11 hours ago, ScottishHorn said:

Corn, Soybean, rice and wheat farmers receive billions in subsidies every year.  I imagine the farmers will be assisted in some way to compensate for any price fluctuations like they always have

 

20 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  Tax revenue keeps breaking records every quarter.  You could argue the tax cuts are the one positive of the trump administration.  Corporate earnings are up 20%. This factor hasn't even hit the markets yet and wont until later this year.  We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Amazingly, in two posts you throw out deficit spending as a potential means to help farmers, then complain about the deficit expanding due to a spending problem.

 

 

Edited July 16, 2018 by Francisco 2.0

[Hornius Emeritus 12462]

21 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

The deficit is expanding because of spending, not the tax cuts.  

 

Good God.  It's BOTH.  How many times do you have to be beat over the head with the stick of economic reality before you understand? Reagan had to sign the biggest tax increase in history because decreasing taxes + increasing spending = enormous deficits.  Which is why our debt nearly tripled in the time Reagan was president. Bush II did the same thing and our debt doubled during his 8 years. 

Give your logic, we should reduce taxes to zero. That would REALLY generate revenue.

[ScottishHorn 172]

3 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Amazingly, in two posts you throw out deficit spending as a potential means to help farmers, then complain about the deficit expanding due to a spending problem.

 

 

I'm not for farm subsidies.  I was just pointing out they were out there and they may receive them to offset pricing issues.  I'm for cutting all spending

[ScottishHorn 172]

1 minute ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

Good God.  It's BOTH.  How many times do you have to be beat over the head with the stick of economic reality before you understand? Reagan had to sign the biggest tax increase in history because decreasing taxes + increasing spending = enormous deficits.  Which is why our debt nearly tripled in the time Reagan was president. Bush II did the same thing and our debt doubled during his 8 years. 

Give your logic, we should reduce taxes to zero. That would REALLY generate revenue.

People like you.  Republican and Democrats alike, are against cutting spending.  There is plenty of tax revenue to support our nation.  I'm taxed at 45% if you throw in all my tax liability.  Is that not enough for you?

[ScottishHorn 172]

9 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

Good God.  It's BOTH.  How many times do you have to be beat over the head with the stick of economic reality before you understand? Reagan had to sign the biggest tax increase in history because decreasing taxes + increasing spending = enormous deficits.  Which is why our debt nearly tripled in the time Reagan was president. Bush II did the same thing and our debt doubled during his 8 years. 

Give your logic, we should reduce taxes to zero. That would REALLY generate revenue.

Of course he did, his military spending was off the charts

[wildcat09 29354]

22 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

The sheep are surprised the wolf is eating them. After he said he would.

[ScottishHorn 172]

10 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

Good God.  It's BOTH.  How many times do you have to be beat over the head with the stick of economic reality before you understand? Reagan had to sign the biggest tax increase in history because decreasing taxes + increasing spending = enormous deficits.  Which is why our debt nearly tripled in the time Reagan was president. Bush II did the same thing and our debt doubled during his 8 years. 

Give your logic, we should reduce taxes to zero. That would REALLY generate revenue.

That's not what I'm saying at all.  Why dont you read some if the financial reports for the 2nd quarter from some S&P 500 companies and you might see what im talking about

[ScottishHorn 172]

21 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

Good God.  It's BOTH.  How many times do you have to be beat over the head with the stick of economic reality before you understand? Reagan had to sign the biggest tax increase in history because decreasing taxes + increasing spending = enormous deficits.  Which is why our debt nearly tripled in the time Reagan was president. Bush II did the same thing and our debt doubled during his 8 years. 

Give your logic, we should reduce taxes to zero. That would REALLY generate revenue.

It doubled again during Obama's 8 years

[pyrohornIII 4815]

Maybe part of that was the bailout he had to do because of the mess W left him with?

5 minutes ago, ScottishHorn said:

It doubled again during Obama's 8 years