|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Nov 15, 2024 22:08:34 GMT
Well good to know we have so many experts in our forum, lol. Freon I asked you for clarification on your analysis. If you don’t want to back up your statements, that’s fine. I understand your reluctance. |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,403
|
Post by thor on Nov 15, 2024 22:20:40 GMT
Fobbit ignores the Gilded Age. The gilded age is included in that time frame you dumb moron. Lol. Holy shit. Poor Shitbag. Voted to return to the Gilded Age - where people like him were crushed under foot by corrupt monied interests who owned the government. So Fucking. Dumb. |
|
freonbale
Legend
Awesome.
Posts: 22,629
Member is Online
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 15, 2024 22:59:00 GMT
But it changed to what we have now. Why? Because as bad as our system is now (and I agree it has a lot of problems), the tariff-based system was WAY worse. It led to mass corruption, lower standards of living, lower quality products, and fewer products to choose from. And that is what you stupid righties voted for. Because if you do not study history, you are doomed to repeat it. Get ready for four years of economic hardship. Freon
Ok first observation on how this guy is misleading people.
Why use a 100% tariff as an example when Trump clearly said 60%? Okay let's say it's for demonstration purposes to make the math easy.
Then why did he list the two prices from the US and from China as being $5. As if the "cheaper goods from China" wasn't the entire selling point to normalizing trade with China in the late 90s?
It's a truism that American goods cost more than foreign imports. This isn't up for debate. It's as close to a fact as we get in modern political discourse.
And the fact that these goods can be more cheaply produced and sold for a higher profit is why Goldman Sachs releases their 1 dimensional "tariffs" talking points that trickle down to leftists thru CNN to promote their wealthy client's interests in investing overseas instead of domestically for greater ROIs.
So he's being disingenuous with a "the goods are $5 and $5, and now they're $10 and $5."
And if he's being disingenuous to set the stage for his argument ... why should I continue to listen?
Queshank
He was explaining a concept, using easy to understand numbers. He was trying to accommodate for people like YOU, lol. But you didn't get the concept. Word salad, in your ears. Freon |
|
freonbale
Legend
Awesome.
Posts: 22,629
Member is Online
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 15, 2024 23:02:50 GMT
Well good to know we have so many experts in our forum, lol. Freon I asked you for clarification on your analysis. If you don’t want to back up your statements, that’s fine. I understand your reluctance. MY analysis? I listened to what he and others have explained, and I am presenting THEIR analysis here. I am not an expert at this stuff, as all you who are picking apart his arguments seem to be. And since none of you are experts either, that you feel qualified to counter him with your OWN analysis, shows you are talking out of your anuses. The appropriate response, if you disagree, is to link a video that shows a different conclusion by someone equally as qualified. Freon |
|
freonbale
Legend
Awesome.
Posts: 22,629
Member is Online
|
Post by freonbale on Nov 15, 2024 23:05:59 GMT
But it changed to what we have now. Why? Because as bad as our system is now (and I agree it has a lot of problems), the tariff-based system was WAY worse. It led to mass corruption, lower standards of living, lower quality products, and fewer products to choose from. And that is what you stupid righties voted for. Because if you do not study history, you are doomed to repeat it. Get ready for four years of economic hardship. Freon No freon. Wrong again. Read up on the 1913 tax campaign. Something along the lines of “soak the rich”. The start of the the ongoing direct taxation movement, other than a one time tax after the civil war. Who am I to argue with your deep understanding of history, lol. With all you massively educated geniuses here, I just know we're gonna' win win win! Freon |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 15, 2024 23:22:07 GMT
Ok first observation on how this guy is misleading people.
Why use a 100% tariff as an example when Trump clearly said 60%? Okay let's say it's for demonstration purposes to make the math easy.
Then why did he list the two prices from the US and from China as being $5. As if the "cheaper goods from China" wasn't the entire selling point to normalizing trade with China in the late 90s?
It's a truism that American goods cost more than foreign imports. This isn't up for debate. It's as close to a fact as we get in modern political discourse.
And the fact that these goods can be more cheaply produced and sold for a higher profit is why Goldman Sachs releases their 1 dimensional "tariffs" talking points that trickle down to leftists thru CNN to promote their wealthy client's interests in investing overseas instead of domestically for greater ROIs.
So he's being disingenuous with a "the goods are $5 and $5, and now they're $10 and $5."
And if he's being disingenuous to set the stage for his argument ... why should I continue to listen?
Queshank
He was explaining a concept, using easy to understand numbers. He was trying to accommodate for people like YOU, lol. But you didn't get the concept. Word salad, in your ears. Freon
Nah. What he was doing was prefacing his argument and framing the issue in such a way as to manipulate people like YOU.
I mean. He argues first that US companies are selling the same products for the same price as foreign companies.
And then ... talking out of both sides of his mouth ... he argues that US companies that sell those products don't even exist ...
Perhaps I could interest you in some books on rhetoric and persuasion? "Don't Think of an Elephant" makes a good primer for the initiate.
Queshank
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Nov 16, 2024 0:30:07 GMT
I asked you for clarification on your analysis. If you don’t want to back up your statements, that’s fine. I understand your reluctance. MY analysis? I listened to what he and others have explained, and I am presenting THEIR analysis here. I am not an expert at this stuff, as all you who are picking apart his arguments seem to be. And since none of you are experts either, that you feel qualified to counter him with your OWN analysis, shows you are talking out of your anuses. The appropriate response, if you disagree, is to link a video that shows a different conclusion by someone equally as qualified. Freon What part did he say standard of living and quality of goods went down from the mid 1800s to early 1900s? Would 50% longer lifespans indicate a higher standard of living or lower? And now you want to have link-wars? Now you want to play the expert game? I’m not arguing for tariffs here, though I think they would be preferable to an income tax if given the choice of one vs the other… |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 0:47:19 GMT
I asked you for clarification on your analysis. If you don’t want to back up your statements, that’s fine. I understand your reluctance. MY analysis? I listened to what he and others have explained, and I am presenting THEIR analysis here. I am not an expert at this stuff, as all you who are picking apart his arguments seem to be. And since none of you are experts either, that you feel qualified to counter him with your OWN analysis, shows you are talking out of your anuses. The appropriate response, if you disagree, is to link a video that shows a different conclusion by someone equally as qualified. Freon What is his expertise? I mean besides being an advertising exec, morphing into ... using advertisements like that video to sell you into subscribing to his podcast? (Where's the morph really? amirite?) Queshank |
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Nov 16, 2024 1:29:26 GMT
Hey Q, are you as dumb as the average Trumper here and think China pays the tariffs? Just curious.
Dude.
The video makes a rather compelling argument for how China pays the tariffs.
Nobody buys their products. And they lose business.
Do you understand what "costs" are?
Queshank
Was that a yes or no?
|
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 2:15:52 GMT
Dude.
The video makes a rather compelling argument for how China pays the tariffs.
Nobody buys their products. And they lose business.
Do you understand what "costs" are?
Queshank
Was that a yes or no?
It was an "in exactly the same way corporations pay taxes."
So if you think corporations pay taxes, then the answer is yes.
If you think they don't, then the answer is no.
I'm open to both interpretations because I'm not a narcissistic prick who thinks my worldview is the only one.
How about you? (That's a question. Did you see it?)
Queshank
|
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Nov 16, 2024 2:29:05 GMT
It was an "in exactly the same way corporations pay taxes."
So if you think corporations pay taxes, then the answer is yes.
If you think they don't, then the answer is no.
I'm open to both interpretations because I'm not a narcissistic prick who thinks my worldview is the only one.
How about you? (That's a question. Did you see it?)
Queshank
You're so full of shit q. It's embarrassing.
China does not pay tariffs we put on their goods. Period.
|
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 3:04:30 GMT
It was an "in exactly the same way corporations pay taxes."
So if you think corporations pay taxes, then the answer is yes.
If you think they don't, then the answer is no.
I'm open to both interpretations because I'm not a narcissistic prick who thinks my worldview is the only one.
How about you? (That's a question. Did you see it?)
Queshank
You're so full of shit q. It's embarrassing.
China does not pay tariffs we put on their goods. Period.
And corporations don't pay taxes. They pass them on to their customers.
Period.
It's why we should eliminate corporate taxes. Cuz *checks notes* ... inflation!
I'm with you bud! Good we could come to this understanding. See you at the tea party meeting!
Queshank
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,562
|
Post by bama beau on Nov 16, 2024 3:04:52 GMT
.. Obviously you put no value on owning the libs ..
Trump voters.. Cultists.. are driven by a sense of revenge and are programmed to actively reject any examination of his claims .. Google searches for "tariffs" skyrocketed the day after the election .. You're so dumb you self program yourself rofl
I wonder why searches for tariffs could have skyrocketed?
Perhaps people who had no idea because they voted against Trump and thought it was going to go away were now looking into tariffs?
Watched the same phenomenon play out with Brexit and stupid leftists in America and abroad argue "that means the people of Britain who voted LEAVE were having buyer's remorse!" Couldn't possibly be all the people who thought "no way could it ever happen that Britain would leave the EU" were suddenly playing catchup and seeing what would happen if Britain did, in fact, leave the EU.
And it's an example for why I argue there's been a collapse of intellectualism on the left as the smartest people on the left have gone into tech instead of politics for a few generations now.
Because you have to be pretty stupid to think that makes an argument Fidds.
Queshank
Which being the more important, poli or tech? |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 3:06:29 GMT
You're so dumb you self program yourself rofl
I wonder why searches for tariffs could have skyrocketed?
Perhaps people who had no idea because they voted against Trump and thought it was going to go away were now looking into tariffs?
Watched the same phenomenon play out with Brexit and stupid leftists in America and abroad argue "that means the people of Britain who voted LEAVE were having buyer's remorse!" Couldn't possibly be all the people who thought "no way could it ever happen that Britain would leave the EU" were suddenly playing catchup and seeing what would happen if Britain did, in fact, leave the EU.
And it's an example for why I argue there's been a collapse of intellectualism on the left as the smartest people on the left have gone into tech instead of politics for a few generations now.
Because you have to be pretty stupid to think that makes an argument Fidds.
Queshank
Which being the more important, poli or tech?
Is that a real question?
Is either more important than the other?
Al Gore managed to invent the Internet as a senator. Why can't it be both?
Queshank
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,562
|
Post by bama beau on Nov 16, 2024 3:27:11 GMT
Which being the more important, poli or tech?
Is that a real question?
Is either more important than the other?
Al Gore managed to invent the Internet as a senator. Why can't it be both?
Queshank
Yes, that's what I'm asking. You attributed an intellectual drain of The Left to technolgy. Color me dubious. |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 3:49:59 GMT
Is that a real question?
Is either more important than the other?
Al Gore managed to invent the Internet as a senator. Why can't it be both?
Queshank
Yes, that's what I'm asking. You attributed an intellectual drain of The Left to technolgy. Color me dubious. Picked it up here.
Queshank
|
|
|
|
Post by RinsePrius on Nov 16, 2024 6:20:48 GMT
Funny that the anti-establishment populists want to return us to gilded age outcomes by replacing progressive taxation with regressive. Maybe they aren't anti-establishment after all.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,403
|
Post by thor on Nov 16, 2024 13:45:21 GMT
Hey Q, are you as dumb as the average Trumper here and think China pays the tariffs? Just curious.
Dude.
The video makes a rather compelling argument for how China pays the tariffs.
Nobody buys their products. And they lose business.
Do you understand what "costs" are?
Queshank
Poor, dumb, Que-Anon. Doesn't understand how tariffs work, either. No wonder your ass got run the fuck outta CA. |
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 18:28:51 GMT
Funny that the anti-establishment populists want to return us to gilded age outcomes by replacing progressive taxation with regressive. Maybe they aren't anti-establishment after all. It ain't the anti-establishment populists who seek rapid economic growth uber alles and call all policies that would curb that rapid economic growth (that goes to benefit the wealthy) ... anti American.
You guys seem to do some rather selective arguing referencing the Gilded Age.
Queshank
|
|
queshank
Legend
Posts: 4,490
Member is Online
|
Post by queshank on Nov 16, 2024 18:29:45 GMT
Dude.
The video makes a rather compelling argument for how China pays the tariffs.
Nobody buys their products. And they lose business.
Do you understand what "costs" are?
Queshank
Poor, dumb, Que-Anon. Doesn't understand how tariffs work, either. No wonder your ass got run the fuck outta CA. If you tried you could have made far more than 3 clueless statements in 3 sentences. I know you've got it in you cuz I've seen you do it before. I'm cheerin for you buddy!
Queshank
|
|
