Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

I am against Trump because he failed to realize the single biggest threat to our country is Climate change.
The action he took to dismantle the EPA is tragic.

He told his supporters he would drain the swamp. His first administrator at EPA was so crooked he had to resign due to pressure from a republican house. Private phone booths in his office so he could call head of chemical manufactures and work on rolling back regulations. Pure Swamp.

Then he gutted our State Department and have set back our relations with our allies for a generation.

No I want him gone.

He lies and has done nothing to help fight the China issue

---

I am against Trump because he failed to realize the single biggest threat to our country is Climate change. - Your opinion. I'm personally not on the Climate Change bandwagon like some are...

His first administrator at EPA was so crooked he had to resign due to pressure from a republican house. - many early appointees were swamp people, no doubt. I don't think anybody has any clear understanding of how big the swamp is...

work on rolling back regulations - What do you think caused the economy to expand (prior to the CCP Virus)? Regulations were probably a bigger impact than the tax cuts on the economy expansion. I am sure you want all this regulations and higher taxes because you are held down by the MAN!

Then he gutted our State Department and have set back our relations with our allies for a generation. - Good! Part of the swamp you just criticized him for... Nonetheless, I care more about the USA than relations with other country's. Especially, when they are not paying their fair share. Funny how liberals want people, in our country, pay their fair share; however, they don't give a damn about other country's!

He lies and has done nothing to help fight the China issue - Fundamentally, NOT TRUE!!!! What the hell do you think the tariffs were about? Everything else regarding China... well, screw them...

I agree with the "screw China" part. China sucks.

But Trump has had a revolving door of cabinet members, staff, department heads, Etc.

That's on him. You're going to have to get rid of a couple of people along the way, but at some point he has to accept responsibility for hiring all these people that supposedly were not doing their jobs correctly. Or more accurately, most of them were fired for simply not blindly supporting him, and actually doing their jobs.
If you have a revolving door of staff, that means you're not good at hiring, or you're looking for Yes Men. I think that much is pretty obvious at this point.

So I think he's been pretty bad in that aspect. He has been good for business, though.

Pacfanweb said:

---

I agree with the "screw China" part. China sucks.

But Trump has had a revolving door of cabinet members, staff, department heads, Etc.

That's on him. You're going to have to get rid of a couple of people along the way, but at some point he has to accept responsibility for hiring all these people that supposedly were not doing their jobs correctly. Or more accurately, most of them were fired for simply not blindly supporting him, and actually doing their jobs.
If you have a revolving door of staff, that means you're not good at hiring, or you're looking for Yes Men. I think that much is pretty obvious at this point.

So I think he's been pretty bad in that aspect. He has been good for business, though.

---

Yep, it is on him, I agree... Give the man some credit for recognizing the people as the swamp and getting rid of them.

The military people that were appointed are coming out afterwards saying he is a threat to various things. Consider, these people were believers in war for some reason. Perhaps, their pockets are being lined by military corporations.

I believe that people are massively flawed and money is driving their decisions. That, in of itself, is the creation of the swamp. Everybody is working an angle.

Trump probably is too... You have to pick the less of the evils...

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

I'm as conservative as it gets, but I also have a VERY low threshold for bull*****

And that threshold has been crossed. I was here arguing with Civilized all during the runup to the election.

But we don't always disagree.

---

If we're in here labeling each other, you can call me what you want but I prefer 'rational humanist' to 'liberal'.

And I think we actually fundamentally agree more than it sometimes seems. Especially about people buying into and promoting crazy ass conspiracy theories that defy all common sense, on either side of the aisle.

People need to think a lot more with their brains and a lot less with their voter ID cards.

---

Yeah you don't strike me as a frothing at the mouth liberal by any means. Just used you as an example of someone who's at least a little bit on the other side of the aisle from me that I was having discussions with.

I don't know where that dude got the idea but I was a leftist and had been railing against Trump for 4 years, or that I had been banned by conservative mods at the brickyard. Neither of those things could be further from the truth.
I simply grew weary of the constant baiting and useless bickering and just stopped posting one day, really.
There wasn't any one thing that caused it. I just stopped and the longer it got, the less desire I had the post there. I do still read there a bit and may even break my moratorium shortly, but I certainly was not banned.
I remember reading where Denver, who is pretty much the conservative mod there, investigated my absence and had checked to see if I someone else had banned me.

I like this place because you can actually have somewhat of an adult discussion that mostly does not devolve into people simply trying to rile other posters up for their own amusement. I have no use for that and don't understand others who seemed to live for it.

I'm the dude. Sorry if I offended you. I also had heard that you had been banned. Since you even were questioned whether or not you were banned my assumption carried weight. Lot's of folks have different opinions and view Trump differently. I do think you tend to lean a little more toward Romney than you do Republican.... that's my take on it. You can agree or disagree.

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

I'm as conservative as it gets, but I also have a VERY low threshold for bull*****

And that threshold has been crossed. I was here arguing with Civilized all during the runup to the election.

But we don't always disagree.

---

If we're in here labeling each other, you can call me what you want but I prefer 'rational humanist' to 'liberal'.

And I think we actually fundamentally agree more than it sometimes seems. Especially about people buying into and promoting crazy ass conspiracy theories that defy all common sense, on either side of the aisle.

People need to think a lot more with their brains and a lot less with their voter ID cards.

---

rational humanist'

That in the eyes of some, including me, is scarier than a Liberal. A liberal is a person that I just disagree with politically. A humanist is a person that defies God.

That being said, it's your life, not mine...

BBW12OG said:

---

I'm the dude. Sorry if I offended you. I also had heard that you had been banned. Since you even were questioned whether or not you were banned my assumption carried weight. Lot's of folks have different opinions and view Trump differently. I do think you tend to lean a little more toward Romney than you do Republican.... that's my take on it. You can agree or disagree.

---

Who "questioned" whether I had been banned or not? Nobody here, other than you. That's the first think I can remember being posted here about that at all, when you did it just today. So your 'assumption' was based on you just throwing it out there.
Plus this:
"

Quote:

---

Seriously you and your ilk spent years blasting away at how illegitimate President Trump is and now you are going to get all sanctimonious? I'm sure the Georgia Senate elections are going to be full of BS as well. Democrats want absolute power and absolute control over the country to push their socialist agendas. Figured you, after all your time on TOS would have mellowed out a bit... guess you are still as delusional here as you were there.

---

You literally just made that crap up. You clearly have no idea of my posting history and no conception of which way I "lean" at all, just with that BS you spouted right that.

I do remember after they got to noticing I was missing some asked about me and if I had been banned or was okay or whatever, and Denver investigated and said I had not been. Which was true, I just stopped posting.

Anyway, I really don't care how you think I "lean". Romney is more of a conservative than Trump is, that's for sure. Whether he's "more of a Republican"....what does that even mean anymore?

I don't know Romney's total platform. I know he doesn't care for Trump, but that doesn't mean he's "not a Republican" at all...whatever a "Republican" is these days.

I voted for him over Obama. He IMO would have been a better President than Obama OR Trump, but that's kind of irrelevant at this point.

I was fine with Trump and overlooked his numerous lies and embarrassments the last 3 years, since the military was funded and the economy was going well. His disrupting the "swamp" wasn't all bad at all.

But his attempt to overturn a lawful election by simply thinking he couldn't lose unless it was "rigged", along with so many folks just buying into that nonsense makes me "not sorry" that he's gone.

That said, I'd also laugh at the libs if somehow all this nonsense DID turn into something legit and the election results were reversed.

IseWolf22 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

I'm as conservative as it gets, but I also have a VERY low threshold for bull*****

And that threshold has been crossed. I was here arguing with Civilized all during the runup to the election.

But we don't always disagree.

---

If we're in here labeling each other, you can call me what you want but I prefer 'rational humanist' to 'liberal'.

And I think we actually fundamentally agree more than it sometimes seems. Especially about people buying into and promoting crazy ass conspiracy theories that defy all common sense, on either side of the aisle.

People need to think a lot more with their brains and a lot less with their voter ID cards.

---

Yep. Most people don't fall neatly into Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative. Pundits like to divide the electorate like that because it helps them sell an "us vs. them" narrative, where your side is righteous and the other side is morally bankrupt.

In reality, most people have a variety of views across the political spectrum. They want what is best for the country, even you think their views/methods are fundamentally wrong.

---

I actually have no issue with people having liberal ideas and/or thoughts. In fact, in my community, I debate more with conservatives than liberals. I do this because the arguments, i hear, from Republicans, are typically formed by MSM and without a solid foundation. So, I challenge the thinking in order to get them to have a more solid foundation to their belief.

That being said, we all have beliefs; however, I will fight with you and against you so that none of our belief affect the others beliefs. In other words, classic liberalism...

Pacfanweb I was referring TOS when discussing you being banned. You were very similar with your posting style there as I see you are here. I don't want to get into a verbal sparring match with someone who basically is arguing two different points. Not sure if you are trying to get a rise or just being....well....yourself. I did go back and look at your posting style. Not that I needed to. I have a good memory. Anyway, like I said, you are more Romney than Republican. And by that I mean the swamp, DC lifers, the status quo etc.... Romney, Ryan, McCain all RINOs when it came to bucking the system. Trump my friend for all of his flaws destroyed "your" system of political norms. People like you are happy to take whatever the DNC run media tells you as facts and move on with your head in the sand and claim you are happy as clam and there's nothing to see. Well Republicans are not happy with that. That's why hopefully the SCOTUS will right the ship. If you are so anti-Trump what do you think is going to happen when Sleepy Joe and Willie's Side Piece take over and God forbid have the Senate as well? You don't think this country will take a hard left Socialist swing? If you think that is good then no, you are NOT a Republican and your conservative values are highly damn questionable.

Pacfanweb said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

I'm the dude. Sorry if I offended you. I also had heard that you had been banned. Since you even were questioned whether or not you were banned my assumption carried weight. Lot's of folks have different opinions and view Trump differently. I do think you tend to lean a little more toward Romney than you do Republican.... that's my take on it. You can agree or disagree.

---

Who "questioned" whether I had been banned or not? Nobody here, other than you. That's the first think I can remember being posted here about that at all, when you did it just today. So your 'assumption' was based on you just throwing it out there.
Plus this:
"

Quote:

---

Seriously you and your ilk spent years blasting away at how illegitimate President Trump is and now you are going to get all sanctimonious? I'm sure the Georgia Senate elections are going to be full of BS as well. Democrats want absolute power and absolute control over the country to push their socialist agendas. Figured you, after all your time on TOS would have mellowed out a bit... guess you are still as delusional here as you were there.

---

You literally just made that crap up. You clearly have no idea of my posting history and no conception of which way I "lean" at all, just with that BS you spouted right that.

I do remember after they got to noticing I was missing some asked about me and if I had been banned or was okay or whatever, and Denver investigated and said I had not been. Which was true, I just stopped posting.

Anyway, I really don't care how you think I "lean". Romney is more of a conservative than Trump is, that's for sure. Whether he's "more of a Republican"....what does that even mean anymore?

I don't know Romney's total platform. I know he doesn't care for Trump, but that doesn't mean he's "not a Republican" at all...whatever a "Republican" is these days.

I voted for him over Obama. He IMO would have been a better President than Obama OR Trump, but that's kind of irrelevant at this point.

I was fine with Trump and overlooked his numerous lies and embarrassments the last 3 years, since the military was funded and the economy was going well. His disrupting the "swamp" wasn't all bad at all.

But his attempt to overturn a lawful election by simply thinking he couldn't lose unless it was "rigged", along with so many folks just buying into that nonsense makes me "not sorry" that he's gone.

That said, I'd also laugh at the libs if somehow all this nonsense DID turn into something legit and the election results were reversed.

---

Trump has a right to challenge the election just like Gore did in 2020. That is a part of our system.

If you exclude all of the other bull that comes from Powell, Guliani, or folks of the like I don't think you can just look at the numbers and say that something weird didn't happen.

Weird things happening like throwing out election officials from polling places, just stopping vote counting in the middle of the night, wild swings in vote totals after everyone supposedly stopped counting, and voter totals that just don't add up.

Throw that out there with an actual video of ballots being pulled out from under a table in Georgia after the poll workers were told to leave and then those being tabulated, The odd statistic .07% of mail in ballots being rejected, as opposed to the 3% historically, Trump pulling a larger share of the vote in places like NY since the 60s, Trump pulling a larger share of minority voters of any republican since the 60s....and he still lost.

Something isn't seem right and he is well within his rights to challenge it all he wants....Al Gore conceded on the 13th of December when all of his legal challenges had been exhausted. That case went all the way to the supreme court like Trump's case is going to.

As far as what Trump says....if I had to guess the most presidents talked the way that Trump did, but the combination of a media not covering for him and not having a filter on social media means that we get a front row seat to it...which is a first for any president.

SCOTUS denies hearing of Pennsylvania case.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/biden-trump-us-election-news-12-08-20/h_5aea05d0b214c3b5c332cde033b18517

Like I said... the lefties want to ruin this great country really bad. The only way to stop them is in Georgia. President Trump knows it's over now. May as well keep fighting to give the socialists something to scream at the sky about while wearing their ***** hats. I'm sure there's quite a few on here that have them and do/did just that!

cowboypack02 said:

---

I just want to point out that everyone seems to think that Trump has a issue with telling the truth....but the same people have no complaints anyone else is dishonest about anything

For example Biden is giving press conferences standing in front of a sign that says "Office of the President Elect" but no one blinks an eye. The only issue is that there is no 'Office of the President Elect". That seems awfully dishonest to me.

Why does Biden get a pass for such things?

---

The magical * D * beside his name. You know, the one that allows you to get your hair done during a lock down, dine at fancy restaurants inside during a lock down, go on vacations to visit family during a lock down, travel out of state and out of the country during a lock down, block legislation that would help Americans and openly admit it was "ALL" political and have the media slobber all over you for saying that. Not to mention the * D * allows you to make misogynistic remarks with ZERO push back or accountability from the DNC run media and their sheep. You also can make horrible insulting comments about the LGBTQ community and claim you "have learned from your mistakes" "seen the light" or the best one ever..."my account was hacked." But is that all it allows you to do? HELL NO!! You can dress up in black face while screaming at the top of your lungs that every damn Republican is RAYYYYCEEEESSSSTTTT!!!!!!! non stop on every DNC msm station and get away with it. I'd be damned ashamed if I were a democrat and could support these types of people and their policies. I do however think that it is just as much a reflection on the people that do these things as the people who support them. Before the lefties go "but, but Trump.." At least when he said "just grab them by the *****" he didn't deny it and damn sure let you know he said it and didn't give a **** what you thought about it.

He is the President-Elect. Are you just objecting to the use of "Office of?"

More states joining.

PackBacker07 said:

---

Do the 6 conservative SCOTUS Justices so want to ruin the country? Or are they just acknowledging the derangement of the current Trump "campaign?"

---

The only place the the Texas case can be heard is in the Supreme Court. If the court thinks the case has merits then then should hear it and since its on the docket I think they will.

There have been several other cases that the Supreme Court has turned down in regards to this election already so I don't think you can through out there that the conservative Justices just want to ruin country. I would say that the judicial branch at the lower levels and politicians have already done a pretty good job of that without the SC

Finally....there are only 5 conservative Justices...not 6

Good listen about what's going on with Texas and the overall lawsuit

Pacfanweb said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

You don't think this country will take a hard left Socialist swing? If you think that is good then no, you are NOT a Republican and your conservative values are highly damn questionable.

---

1. I don't think the country will take a hard left socialist swing. No. Biden is a moderate, all things considered.
2. No, I do not think such a swing would be a good thing by any means. There's nothing I've ever posted anywhere that would make you think that I do, either.
3. You're damn right I'm not a Republican. Republicans suck now. They are the Democrats of the 90s at this point. They all suck. I'm conservative, something that has become a foreign concept to nearly all Republicans. Trump sure as hell isn't even remotely conservative overall.
We could go issue-by-issue, but I can guarantee you I come out as a moderate conservative by any definition you want to use. That is something long lost to the Republican Party, who is also never seen a dollar that doesn't need to be spent, just like the Democrats.
If I really went and researched the platforms, I would probably identify more with Libertarians than anyone at this point

---

Wow....glad to see you still have your anger issues under control. Well good thing for you is that if you are so disheartened you can:

1 - Suck it up and get over it. Not going to change. It's called politics.
2 - Start your own party, run candidates that fall in line with what your beliefs are and BE THE CHANGE.
3 - Find a country that welcomes your personal beliefs, ideas, values etc... and "EDITED BY BBW12OG."

As far as Biden being a moderate... a moderate democrat today is a socialist 5 years ago. Your...errr.... the party you don't support but seem to fall in line with..... is borderline Marxist by terms used 5 years ago. With the diatribe that is espoused by your...errrr....sorry again... "squad" they are leaning more and more toward communism everyday. Mandatory masks, mandatory lock downs for the peons, no travel, no visiting families, no church services allowed, mandatory curfews...yeah... Biden and Co. are moderate all right. All the way up to eliminating student debt, defunding police ( or redistributing funds ) however the commies want to spin it and most of all making sure that all people have similar salaries except the ones in power because they need to be paid more because they are the ones that tell us what we can and cannot do. Yeah... Biden is a moderate all right. Keep regurgitating your DNC run media talking points. We really didn't have to ask you who you are.... you flat out told us yourself.

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

Now is the same climate change back in the 50's and 60's that was causing the second Ice Age or the recent one from the 80's and 90's that was bringing on Global Warming? I get confused with all of you scientific types changing the narratives to fit your agendas decade by decade.... please explain for us idiots.

How does this make any sense at all?

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

He's a dumb ass and can't help it; momma and daddy dropped the ball. 6 time bankrupt.

American businesses and consumers, not China, are bearing the financial brunt of President Trump's trade war, new data shows, undermining the president's assertion that the United States is "taxing the hell out of China."

"U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers," Mary Amiti, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. The other authors of the paper were David E. Weinstein of Columbia University and Stephen J. Redding of Princeton.

Many of the products that the United States sells to China are undifferentiated commodities, like agricultural goods, but China sends many specialized consumer goods like silk embroidery, laptops and smartphones to the United States. China can easily swap Brazilian soybeans for American ones, but the types of goods that China sends to the United States are harder for American businesses to substitute.

While Trump's tariffs may have brought some countries to the negotiating table, in the long run the tariffs likely also contributed to pushing other potential trade partners away. When negotiating trade agreements, countries want partners whose policies are stable and predictable, with the goal of establishing a long-term, win-win partnership. Trump's eagerness to resort to tariffs, including in relations with close allies, has made the U.S. a less desirable trade partner for other countries.

The national security case for tariffs on steel and aluminum is even murkier: while there may be a case for ensuring domestic production capacity for these commodities, it isn't clear tariffs are the best instrument (or that they even achieve this goal). These tariffs antagonized many of America's closest security partners, particularly Canada, which undermined efforts to cultivate a broader multilateral alliance to challenge China. Moreover, the Trump administration's frequent recourses to national security on flimsy grounds will make it more difficult for the U.S. to push back when other countries cloak protectionism in tenuous appeals to national security.

Of course you and the lefties don't want to hurt China.... I'm sure you are wearing your Lebron jersey and anxiously waiting for China Joe to be your "fake" Emperor in Chief while the socialist/marxist party that you blindly follow sell our country out to China and Iran. AGAIN....

ciscopack said:

---

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

He's a dumb ass and can't help it; momma and daddy dropped the ball. 6 time bankrupt.

American businesses and consumers, not China, are bearing the financial brunt of President Trump's trade war, new data shows, undermining the president's assertion that the United States is "taxing the hell out of China."

"U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers," Mary Amiti, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. The other authors of the paper were David E. Weinstein of Columbia University and Stephen J. Redding of Princeton.

Many of the products that the United States sells to China are undifferentiated commodities, like agricultural goods, but China sends many specialized consumer goods like silk embroidery, laptops and smartphones to the United States. China can easily swap Brazilian soybeans for American ones, but the types of goods that China sends to the United States are harder for American businesses to substitute.

While Trump's tariffs may have brought some countries to the negotiating table, in the long run the tariffs likely also contributed to pushing other potential trade partners away. When negotiating trade agreements, countries want partners whose policies are stable and predictable, with the goal of establishing a long-term, win-win partnership. Trump's eagerness to resort to tariffs, including in relations with close allies, has made the U.S. a less desirable trade partner for other countries.

The national security case for tariffs on steel and aluminum is even murkier: while there may be a case for ensuring domestic production capacity for these commodities, it isn't clear tariffs are the best instrument (or that they even achieve this goal). These tariffs antagonized many of America's closest security partners, particularly Canada, which undermined efforts to cultivate a broader multilateral alliance to challenge China. Moreover, the Trump administration's frequent recourses to national security on flimsy grounds will make it more difficult for the U.S. to push back when other countries cloak protectionism in tenuous appeals to national security.

---

All of that is political speech.. (Edit) All of that is BS from some swamp person writing a paper. USMCA

Does anybody here work with international trade?

I do! The tariffs are doing exactly what they were intended to do. Companies are looking for alternative sources around the world. The fashion industry has been moving away from China as fast as they can, excluding fast fashion.

So, have you truly seen an increase in the price of goods? I haven't! Prices are set by the market. If the cost goes up, then margins are compressed. What are companies doing? They are finding alternative supply chains away from China.

The big threat the country has is this move will take a long time. So many raw materials are still made in China. The complete supply chain is not supportable in this hemisphere. If we pull back on the tariffs, this will stop the transition.

1) no appreciable increase in prices - go ahead and quote stats to dispute this. Just look at your pocketbook
2) stock market continues to go up - everyone's retirement, if invested, has seen a nice boost
3) gas prices have come down

How can #2 be true if #1 is also true? Trump tax plan!!!

The net affect is more cash in ones pocket

caryking said:

---

ciscopack said:

---

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

He's a dumb ass and can't help it; momma and daddy dropped the ball. 6 time bankrupt.

American businesses and consumers, not China, are bearing the financial brunt of President Trump's trade war, new data shows, undermining the president's assertion that the United States is "taxing the hell out of China."

"U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers," Mary Amiti, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. The other authors of the paper were David E. Weinstein of Columbia University and Stephen J. Redding of Princeton.

Many of the products that the United States sells to China are undifferentiated commodities, like agricultural goods, but China sends many specialized consumer goods like silk embroidery, laptops and smartphones to the United States. China can easily swap Brazilian soybeans for American ones, but the types of goods that China sends to the United States are harder for American businesses to substitute.

While Trump's tariffs may have brought some countries to the negotiating table, in the long run the tariffs likely also contributed to pushing other potential trade partners away. When negotiating trade agreements, countries want partners whose policies are stable and predictable, with the goal of establishing a long-term, win-win partnership. Trump's eagerness to resort to tariffs, including in relations with close allies, has made the U.S. a less desirable trade partner for other countries.

The national security case for tariffs on steel and aluminum is even murkier: while there may be a case for ensuring domestic production capacity for these commodities, it isn't clear tariffs are the best instrument (or that they even achieve this goal). These tariffs antagonized many of America's closest security partners, particularly Canada, which undermined efforts to cultivate a broader multilateral alliance to challenge China. Moreover, the Trump administration's frequent recourses to national security on flimsy grounds will make it more difficult for the U.S. to push back when other countries cloak protectionism in tenuous appeals to national security.

---

All of that is political speech.. (Edit) All of that is BS from some swamp person writing a paper.

Does anybody here work with international trade?

I do! The tariffs are doing exactly what they were intended to do. Companies are looking for alternative sources around the world. The fashion industry has been moving away from China as fast as they can, excluding fast fashion.

So, have you truly seen an increase in the price of goods? I haven't! Prices are set by the market. If the cost goes up, then margins are compressed. What are companies doing? They are finding alternative supply chains away from China.

The big threat the country has is this move will take a long time. So many raw materials are still made in China. The complete supply chain is not supportable in this hemisphere. If we pull back on the tariffs, this will stop the transition.

1) no appreciable increase in prices - go ahead and quote stats to dispute this. Just look at your pocketbook
2) stock market continues to go up - everyone's retirement, if invested, has seen a nice boost
3) gas prices have come down

The net affect is more cash in ones pocket

---

Very easy to spot the ones that do not work internationally and with international trade.

Cthepack said:

---

caryking said:

---

ciscopack said:

---

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

He's a dumb ass and can't help it; momma and daddy dropped the ball. 6 time bankrupt.

American businesses and consumers, not China, are bearing the financial brunt of President Trump's trade war, new data shows, undermining the president's assertion that the United States is "taxing the hell out of China."

"U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers," Mary Amiti, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. The other authors of the paper were David E. Weinstein of Columbia University and Stephen J. Redding of Princeton.

Many of the products that the United States sells to China are undifferentiated commodities, like agricultural goods, but China sends many specialized consumer goods like silk embroidery, laptops and smartphones to the United States. China can easily swap Brazilian soybeans for American ones, but the types of goods that China sends to the United States are harder for American businesses to substitute.

While Trump's tariffs may have brought some countries to the negotiating table, in the long run the tariffs likely also contributed to pushing other potential trade partners away. When negotiating trade agreements, countries want partners whose policies are stable and predictable, with the goal of establishing a long-term, win-win partnership. Trump's eagerness to resort to tariffs, including in relations with close allies, has made the U.S. a less desirable trade partner for other countries.

The national security case for tariffs on steel and aluminum is even murkier: while there may be a case for ensuring domestic production capacity for these commodities, it isn't clear tariffs are the best instrument (or that they even achieve this goal). These tariffs antagonized many of America's closest security partners, particularly Canada, which undermined efforts to cultivate a broader multilateral alliance to challenge China. Moreover, the Trump administration's frequent recourses to national security on flimsy grounds will make it more difficult for the U.S. to push back when other countries cloak protectionism in tenuous appeals to national security.

---

All of that is political speech.. (Edit) All of that is BS from some swamp person writing a paper.

Does anybody here work with international trade?

I do! The tariffs are doing exactly what they were intended to do. Companies are looking for alternative sources around the world. The fashion industry has been moving away from China as fast as they can, excluding fast fashion.

So, have you truly seen an increase in the price of goods? I haven't! Prices are set by the market. If the cost goes up, then margins are compressed. What are companies doing? They are finding alternative supply chains away from China.

The big threat the country has is this move will take a long time. So many raw materials are still made in China. The complete supply chain is not supportable in this hemisphere. If we pull back on the tariffs, this will stop the transition.

1) no appreciable increase in prices - go ahead and quote stats to dispute this. Just look at your pocketbook
2) stock market continues to go up - everyone's retirement, if invested, has seen a nice boost
3) gas prices have come down

The net affect is more cash in ones pocket

---

Very easy to spot the ones that do not work internationally and with international trade.

---

Meaning?

caryking said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

caryking said:

---

ciscopack said:

---

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

Tariffs paid by American consumers. Great job Mr. Trump.

Again your children and theirs will pay for climate change. Just look around fella.

---

He's a dumb ass and can't help it; momma and daddy dropped the ball. 6 time bankrupt.

American businesses and consumers, not China, are bearing the financial brunt of President Trump's trade war, new data shows, undermining the president's assertion that the United States is "taxing the hell out of China."

"U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers," Mary Amiti, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. The other authors of the paper were David E. Weinstein of Columbia University and Stephen J. Redding of Princeton.

Many of the products that the United States sells to China are undifferentiated commodities, like agricultural goods, but China sends many specialized consumer goods like silk embroidery, laptops and smartphones to the United States. China can easily swap Brazilian soybeans for American ones, but the types of goods that China sends to the United States are harder for American businesses to substitute.

While Trump's tariffs may have brought some countries to the negotiating table, in the long run the tariffs likely also contributed to pushing other potential trade partners away. When negotiating trade agreements, countries want partners whose policies are stable and predictable, with the goal of establishing a long-term, win-win partnership. Trump's eagerness to resort to tariffs, including in relations with close allies, has made the U.S. a less desirable trade partner for other countries.

The national security case for tariffs on steel and aluminum is even murkier: while there may be a case for ensuring domestic production capacity for these commodities, it isn't clear tariffs are the best instrument (or that they even achieve this goal). These tariffs antagonized many of America's closest security partners, particularly Canada, which undermined efforts to cultivate a broader multilateral alliance to challenge China. Moreover, the Trump administration's frequent recourses to national security on flimsy grounds will make it more difficult for the U.S. to push back when other countries cloak protectionism in tenuous appeals to national security.

---

All of that is political speech.. (Edit) All of that is BS from some swamp person writing a paper.

Does anybody here work with international trade?

I do! The tariffs are doing exactly what they were intended to do. Companies are looking for alternative sources around the world. The fashion industry has been moving away from China as fast as they can, excluding fast fashion.

So, have you truly seen an increase in the price of goods? I haven't! Prices are set by the market. If the cost goes up, then margins are compressed. What are companies doing? They are finding alternative supply chains away from China.

The big threat the country has is this move will take a long time. So many raw materials are still made in China. The complete supply chain is not supportable in this hemisphere. If we pull back on the tariffs, this will stop the transition.

1) no appreciable increase in prices - go ahead and quote stats to dispute this. Just look at your pocketbook
2) stock market continues to go up - everyone's retirement, if invested, has seen a nice boost
3) gas prices have come down

The net affect is more cash in ones pocket

---

Very easy to spot the ones that do not work internationally and with international trade.

---

Meaning?

---

Agreeing with you.

More states jumping on the lawsuit

Supreme Court defeat for team Trump today.
Huge defeat. Trump personally tweeted for them to please help him. They choose not too because he has no case.

This crap is over.

States lawsuits just starting.