The Numbers Are In And America's Businesses Broadly Support Trump's Tariffs

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

The Navy needs to kill the Gerald Ford Carrier class. It's got a lot of problems that are going to cost
billions more to fix. That program needs to die, the F-35 program should be greatly cut back maybe
even terminated.

Yup. The Israelis seem to do just fine Prefering the older designs, that have the bugs worked out of them.

[jpsb]

I’m talking about retaliatory measures that will inevitably result from the current situation. 

Big deal, US exports to China $127 billion
China direct exports to the US $526.2 billion

So you tell me, who has more to lose USA or China? China loses a half a trillion dollars in a trade
war, we lose 127 billion. I'll take those odds any day.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

With this rebuttal, you've decided that stupid and idiotic non sequiturs are perfect derailing tactics when losing an argument.

You've also proven that you Still haven't read the course requirements before jumping in and shooting your mouth off.

Only 2 hyperlinks genius.

I posted them on pg 1.

Clueless, as usual.

 

[INVAR]

Right. After You told me you had work with the level of stupid You were presented with as an excuse for Your off the wall replies.

You're projecting again. 

The Libs have taught you well.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em eh?

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

You're projecting again. 

The Libs have taught you well.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em eh?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-has-investigations-into-chinese-espionage-in-all-50-states_2598562.html

Receiving/Buying Stolen Property is OK, because it's Free Trade.

Spare me your circular argument white robed sanctimony.

[edpc]

The very least we can do is put a tariff equal to the Chinese's tariff on Chinese imports to the USA.

That is fine, as long as you are prepared to pay 30% more for various items.

[INVAR]

That is fine, as long as you are prepared to pay 30% more for various items.

We've been told to suck it up and that we should be 'GLAD' to be forced to pay more for items that are said to be harmful to the country.

Same advice the libs give us when they hike taxes on their targeted industries and products.

[INVAR]

Spare me your circular argument white robed sanctimony.

Don't read what I post then.  Put on your big boy panties or put me on ignore if you have no self-control.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Don't read what I post then.  Put on your big boy panties or put me on ignore if you have no self-control.

Self Control is not my problem.

Errant children are.

[INVAR]

Self Control is not my problem.

Apparently it is.  Where we 'errant children' are concerned.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Apparently it is.  Where we 'errant children' are concerned.

The position you've staked out as Big Govt interference is no different from getting rid of Law Enforcement because it restricts Free Trade.

The hill you've moved this discussion onto is built upon the idea that I or Anyone else shouldn't be stopped from breaking into your house and stealing as much as I can, and then selling it to your neighbors as Free Trade.

For others here who might be interested in the Criminal Aspects of what You are defending (since I'm doubting You are):

https://www.google.com/search?q=China+industrial+espionage&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1

Where do you get off with That?

How is That Free Trade?

[INVAR]

The position you've staked out as Big Govt interference is no different from getting rid of Law Enforcement because it restricts Free Trade.

No, those are your words and assertions.  Not mine.

The hill you've moved this discussion onto is built upon the idea that I or Anyone else shouldn't be stopped from breaking into your house and stealing as much as I can, and then selling it to your neighbors as Free Trade.

Those bullshit talking points are just bullshit talking points.

We opened our house to Most Favored Nation Trading Status to China.  We invited them in.  No one 'broke in.  Stupid idea on Billy Jeff's Part, but what is done is done and now - after decades of that status and our comfort with cheap Chinese shit and iPhones and other tech stuff that now runs the world - you want to accuse the Chinese of 'breaking in'.

Makes about as much sense as setting out the welcome mat for third world migrants to violate our laws to come squat here, vote Democrat and then turn around and call them criminals after this government and both parties made them a preferred constituency and helped them to come right in through the side door.

For the record, I'm against using this government to tax the American people in order to punish specific groups and peoples to coerce them into changing their preferences to whatever it is the government wants them to buy or not buy.  Because that is what a tariff is.  A tax on Americans.  Not a tax on China.  We pay it if we want stuff made from there. 

But now, we get to not only pay the tax on Chinese stuff we are now dependent on, we get to subsidize Soybean farmers with our tax dollars to the tune of billions for the reciprocal actions taken by China to close their markets to our crops.  Another lose-lose situation created by this government that you now engage in Apologetics for.

But somehow, taxes and bailouts are now the "Conservative position" in this brave new Trumpian party of yours.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

No, those are your words and assertions.  Not mine.

Those bullshit talking points are just bullshit talking points.

We opened our house to Most Favored Nation Trading Status to China.  Wehttp://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?action=post;quote=1759485;topic=327022.75;last_msg=1759485 invited them in.  No one 'broke in.  Stupid idea on Billy Jeff's Part, but what is done is done and now - after decades of that status and our comfort with cheap Chinese shit and iPhones and other tech stuff that now runs the world - you want to accuse the Chinese of 'breaking in'.

Makes about as much sense as setting out the welcome mat for third world migrants to violate our laws to come squat here, vote Democrat and then turn around and call them criminals after this government and both parties made them a preferred constituency and helped them to come right in through the side door.

For the record, I'm against using this government to tax the American people in order to punish specific groups and peoples to coerce them into changing their preferences to whatever it is the government wants them to buy or not buy.  Because that is what a tariff is.  A tax on Americans.  Not a tax on China.  We pay it if we want stuff made from there. 

But now, we get to not only pay the tax on Chinese stuff we are now dependent on, we get to subsidize Soybean farmers with our tax dollars to the tune of billions for the reciprocal actions taken by China to close their markets to our crops.  Another lose-lose situation created by this government that you now engage in Apologetics for.

But somehow, taxes and bailouts are now the "Conservative position" in this brave new Trumpian party of yours.

I don't have to Accuse the Chinese of Breaking In. I've given you a whole universe of articles Proving they're intellectual property burglers, which Again, your preaching points Ignore.

The remainder of your reply is just a rerun of your all too well previously published 'Principled' selectively, and intentionally uninformed screeds.

[INVAR]

I don't have to Accuse the Chinese of Breaking In. I've given you a whole universe of articles Proving they're intellectual property burglers, which Again, your preaching points Ignore.

Well just nuke them from orbit then, just to be sure you show them who's boss and make yourself feel better.

The remainder of your reply is just a rerun of your all too well previously published 'Principled' selectively, and intentionally uninformed screeds.

Yes, we know that is what you consider small government, low tax positions to be; screeds.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Well just nuke them from orbit then, just to be sure you show them who's boss and make yourself feel better.

Yes, we know that is what you consider small government, low tax positions to be; screeds.

Small Govt, Low Tax?

How small is small enough for you?

While you and I, with a proper compliment of military small arms Might, be able to survive in a country without police the vast majority of people could not.

If I have to pay for cops to keep burglers and white collar criminals suppressed, and suffer the penalties of jail if I violate the same laws, I expect them to suppress All such burglers.

Tell me, Is protecting the Rights, Persons, and Properties of Citizens a Lawful and Expected function of Govt or not?

and spare me the obvious that Citizens cannot sue the police for failing to do so.

I'm not talking about after the fact litigation here.

Because if they're not we can save a hell of a lot of money by just getting rid of every police dept at every level throughout the country.

And you can feel good about your (Libertarian) Principles.


Answer the question.

[INVAR]

Small Govt, Low Tax?

How small is small enough for you?

Smaller than all stripes of big government liberals want.  Both the Democrat and Republican types.


I have no plans to answer your non-sequitur thread subject derailment of tariffs to equate their absolute necessity with having a police force.  It's stupid.

And you can feel good about your (Libertarian) Principles.

I always do.

Answer the question.

I just did.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Smaller than all stripes of big government liberals want.  Both the Democrat and Republican types.


I have no plans to answer your non-sequitur thread subject derailment of tariffs to equate their absolute necessity with having a police force.  It's stupid.

I always do.

I just did.

You did no such thing, as ever.

You derailed the subject. I answered you by pointing out the hole in your Principles which any 12 year old could drive a truck through.

I gave you links to endless articles on Chinese Espionage for monetary and political gain tin the US.

You ignored them, as usual.

Since you're OK with Espionage how would you be with giving the Rosenbergs a posthumous pardon and apology?

So you're proud of being a Libertarian.

That explains a lot.

[INVAR]

You derailed the subject.

You are projecting, yet again.  The subject was supporting tariffs or opposition to the same.  You turned it into an bullshit argument to insist I want to do away with the police.

I gave you links to endless articles on Chinese Espionage for monetary and political gain tin the US.

Take it up with Team Clinton.  You got two decades of global policy set forth from their friendship with the Chicom s.

Since you're OK with Espionage how would you be with giving the Rosenbergs a posthumous pardon and apology?

So you're proud of being a Libertarian.

See?  You yank this thread-derailment non-sequitur bullshit out of your ass and fling it like a monkey thinking you can make this crap stick. 

For the record, I was never a fan of Ron Paul aside from his views on the debt, so - you are wrong again in your assumption.

That explains a lot.

You do a whole lot of assuming.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Smaller than all stripes of big government liberals want.  Both the Democrat and Republican types.


I have no plans to answer your non-sequitur thread subject derailment of tariffs to equate their absolute necessity with having a police force.  It's stupid.

I always do.

I just did.

I'm assuming a lot?

After You "answer" my question, by calling it "stupid"?

If it's stupid a genius of your caliber should have no trouble at all answering it, but as usual, You Can't, so it's Stupid.

Next Please. Get back in line, behind me, and sniff my ideological superiority.

[Frank Cannon]

You are projecting, yet again.  The subject was supporting tariffs or opposition to the same.  You turned it into an bullshit argument to insist I want to do away with the police.

Take it up with Team Clinton.  You got two decades of global policy set forth from their friendship with the Chicom s.

See?  You yank this thread-derailment non-sequitur bullshit out of your ass and fling it like a monkey thinking you can make this crap stick. 

For the record, I was never a fan of Ron Paul aside from his views on the debt, so - you are wrong again in your assumption.

You do a whole lot of assuming.

[INVAR]

I'm assuming a lot?

After You "answer" my question, by calling it "stupid"?

Yes, quite a leap to assume that because I called your questions bullshit - you assume I'm a libertarian after you wound yourself up into a frenzy having an argument with yourself that I want to do away with police departments because I believe in small, limited government.

But that's what you do.

[DCPatriot]

WTH?

This woman has put a price on her head...with the NYT' blessing. 

They could care less about her.  In fact, if she dies violently, it would better feed their lying agenda.

There's no way the NYT is going to allow her byline on the editorial page.

Shirley, they can't be serious.   

[Frank Cannon]

WTH?

This woman has put a price on her head...with the NYT' blessing. 

They could care less about her.  In fact, if she dies violently, it would better feed their lying agenda.

There's no way the NYT is going to allow her byline on the editorial page.

Shirley, they can't be serious.

Said just like a dumbass effing white person.......typical.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Yes, quite a leap to assume that because I called your questions bullshit - you assume I'm a libertarian after you wound yourself up into a frenzy having an argument with yourself that I want to do away with police departments because I believe in small, limited government.

But that's what you do.

Read back to the Top of the page, and read what You posted.

Seriously, get your meds checked.

Amnesia does not become you.



Compose yourself.

Have a small child hold up a mirror you can look into before you have another keyboard spasm.

Keep telling yourself you are a grown man.

Keep telling yourself you are Not a pigeon and we are Not playing chess.


Is protecting the Rights, Persons, and Properties of Citizens a Lawful and Expected function of Govt or not?


Answer the question

[INVAR]

Is protecting the Rights, Persons, and Properties of Citizens a Lawful and Expected function of Govt or not?


Answer the question

If you want to believe taxing Americans to change their consumer habits to benefit companies that funnel money into politicians pockets is doing the above, how are you any different than Leftist Democrats who think the same thing but differ on the targets?