He still does not understand

[Pat Hartman]

Not sure you've noticed Pat but Harris has been all over the place answering questions and doing interviews. trumps handlers aren't letting him anywhere. His cognitive decline , like biden's, has become more and more apparent.

Yes, but WHO is she doing interviews with? The View, right, they'd ask tough questions. Charlemagne the Great. Is he even coherent enough to ask intelligent questions? She has don't ONE interview in her entire campaign with an outlet that is not 100% in her corner. She couldn't even get the 60 minutes interview right. They had to EDIT her segment to allow her the opportunity to substitute at least one different answer that we are aware of. Now, that's journalism at its lowest level. 60 minutes has fallen so far it is really sad. For nearly 60 years, I was a faithful viewer even given their obviously liberal bias but they've been off my DVR list for several years now. I'm guessing, they will lose enough audience over this to make it no long an important show.

 

[moke123]

the 60 minutes interview right.

The one trump's handlers wouldn't let him do? They won't let him do anything that isn't a safe space cause god forbid someone fact checks him. His town hall with univision didn't go too well, did it.

Kamala did fox. When's trump doing rachel maddow?

 

[AccessBlaster]

View attachment 116580

Damn, I thought for sure we were taking a day trip to Jekyll Island

 

[NauticalGent]

Damn, I thought for sure we were taking a day trip to Jekyll Island

A subject folks care not to know about. Pity. Being from Georgia, I've actually been there...beautiful place. Hard to believe that one on the most evil events in the history of the US happened there.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Let's say Trump was wrong with his statement and or description of Tariffs

How do we combat unfair trade practices? Do we just rely on wishful thinking? When China floods the market with millions of tons of cheap steel, are we supposed to accept inferior products at a lower price? The U.S. can’t simply sit back anti-dumping duties, countervailing tariffs, and investment in domestic manufacturing are necessary steps.

My guess, Tariffs are part of the solution, but people want to shoot the messenger, literally.

 

[NauticalGent]

Both sides have been a part of the whole Tariff thing. Although the POTUS has some authority, it is Congress that wields the power - this is true in just about everything the folks on here want to argue about and pin on that office. Ridiculous.

But since my job is the equivalent to the Maytag Repair Man, this does help get me through the day!

 

[AccessBlaster]

So Trump is wrong but there's no good alternative?

 

[NauticalGent]

Personally, in my opinion, ALL tariffs are bad ideas and only hurts the citizens of the country who imposes them. If the current President is not doing what they can to dispense with them, they are advocates of the problem.

That being said, to effect a change, your real target should be your Congressman - not the idiot in the oval office.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Personally, in my opinion, ALL tariffs are bad ideas and only hurts the citizens of the country who imposes them. If the current President is not doing what they can to dispense with them, they are advocates of the problem.

That being said, to effect a change, your real target should be your Congressman - not the idiot in the oval office.

If you dispense with tariffs on our side, how do you combat the tariffs coming from the competition?

 

[NauticalGent]

No idea, but I have read that tariffs imposed by countries we export to were in retaliation to tariffs imposed on them. Since we import a whole hell of a lot more than we export, it could be as easy as not trading with those countries.

 

[NauticalGent]

If you dispense with tariffs on our side, how do you combat the tariffs coming from the competition?

And, my point remains that tariffs hurt us, the voters. Arguing over which side "did it worse" is an exercise in futility.

 

[Steve R.]

Kamala did fox.

And she refused to answer the questions! She was also late, (maybe on purpose?) to lessen her exposure to valid questions. Still waiting for her to disclose at what McDonald's she worked at. A simple question.

Furthermore, the so called "moderators" concerning Trumps appearances have been openly adversarial against Trump. Harris did not have to face two adversarial inquisitors. Supposedly, in the last debate inquisition the "moderators" were not supposed to fact check Trump, but did that in violation of the agreed rules. Harris was not fact checked. Democrats cheat to tilt elections in their favor.

 

[moke123]

Still waiting for her to disclose at what McDonald's she worked at. A simple question.

That's weird.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

you would not expect to economic growth to occur

Growth occurs as you serve more customers. The increased flow of money is (very loosely) analogous to more electrons in the electrical circuit meaning more amperes, which contributes to more power or strength.

Growth is an offshoot of adding value by increasing SOMETHING that brings in income. A single transaction is zero sum. The solution to make business get bigger is to have more transactions. At the micro level, nothing changes. But at the macro level, volume changes.

 

[Steve R.]

That's weird.

Not weird at all. She made a claim, now she has to demonstrate that it was true. Apparently, her assertion as being a middle class person who worked in fast food is a lie. That means she is a fraud and cannot be trusted.

 

[moke123]

Not weird at all. She made a claim, now she has to demonstrate that it was true. Apparently, her assertion as being a middle class person who worked in fast food is a lie. That means she is a fraud and cannot be trusted.

Even weirder.

 

[Steve R.]

The discussion on the effects of tariffs on the consumer is too one dimensional. One dimensional means that we are not considering other policies that also affect the consumer and the economy as a whole.

As a quickie superficial example, tariffs will result in higher prices paid by the consumer. However, Harris proposes to increase corporate taxes, tax unrealized capital gains, and apparently wants to stifle price gouging (price controls?). These proposed actions by Harris, will also increase costs to consumers and will affect the economy. Increase corporate taxes means that the consumer will pay more for a product. The tariff discussion needs to be more comprehensive (thee dimensional).

 

[Steve R.]

Even weirder.

What is weird is not condemning a candidate that blatantly lies, refuses to answer questions, and presents a fraudulent image of herself to the public.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Raises in minimum wage are what is driving the automation of many industries. I guess having a $20 minimum wage looks good on paper. Too bad that there are 0 jobs available for unskilled workers. Decisions like this have consequences. High school kids no longer have after-school jobs. That is the difference between 60 years ago and today. Everyone of my friends worked at least a few hours a week at some menial job to earn spending money. None of my granddaughters friends did. My granddaughters worked because my daughter and I insisted on it. It doesn't matter what the children do, they need to learn the disicipline of showing up and doing something useful.

Tariffs are not single purpose. Some are there to protect critical industries. Others are there to counteract cheating by a particular country. Some are there because the country has imposed similar tariffs on our exports.

Some of them will cause price increases and some of them will not because the exporter will absorb the cost of the tariff. The car industry is a primary example of tariffs gone bad. Cars are ridiculously expensive. My current car cost more than my first house which was a 3b, 2b, ranch in a nice suburb of Nashville around 1600 sq ft. Unions made US cars stupidly expensive. Even manufacturing them in right-to-work states doesn't seem to pass on a reduction in cost. Probably due to the tariffs on imports. The question here becomes, since Ford no longer believes that the average American worker should be able to afford its products, the prices have continued to escalate. We won't even discuss the cost of rules imposed by various government bureaucracies. The tariffs were initially to protect the American auto industry because the European and Japanese imports were better quality and cheaper than American products. So as the foreign car companies started building manufacturing or actually, final assembly plants, mostly in right-to-work states, you would think they would pass on their cheaper manufacturing costs to Americans. No, instead, they set their prices to be comparable to US cars and got a profit increase. The American worker lost big in this case. Tariffs in this case created a perverse incentive. They created a worse competitive environment than previously existed and the cost of a car continues to escalate. The only good thing is the quality of American products improved.

 

[Pat Hartman]

No idea, but I have read that tariffs imposed by countries we export to were in retaliation to tariffs imposed on them.

Mostly, it is the other way around.

Trump's objective is "free trade". That = no tariffs or reciprocal tariffs. No tariffs is in a pure sense "better" but reality sets in and that changes the equation. You cannot make a general statement. You have to look at the policies one at a time. AND you have to always have an objective when you establish a tariff. It must be spelled out. Are you trying to "punish" the trading partner? What for? How can the tariff be removed? Are you trying to protect an American industry? How will you know if you succeeded? Metrics must be specified and the policy needs to reevaluated every x years. There is no reason for us to roll over and play dead. Why is it rational for us to allow foreign actors to put our critical industries out of business by selling into our markets subsidized goods as the Chinese did with steal and solar panels as two examples but it is OK for them to not allow us to practice the same tactics? Why is it OK for them to buy up all our farmland, especially adjoining military bases when they do not let us buy their farmland? Did the rest of the American people sign a suicide pact that I never signed? In reality this actually comes down to something very dark. Congress, not the President, makes these decisions and Congress is bought and paid for. The Biden crime family is a perfect example. But there are many and this corruption runs on both sides of the aisle. It isn't just a Democrat problem. The Republicans seem to be more subtle in their corruption but the press could find it if there were any actual investigative journalists left. Not sure what they learn in journalism school anymore but it no longer has anything to do with Who, What, Where, and When. "Just the facts, please".

Even weirder.

Are you just being a jerk or is this supposed to have some subtle meaning?