- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is Reaganomics and free trade officially dead?
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:13 am to frogtown
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:13 am to frogtown
quote:
No you haven't. You have not seen the effect of universal tariffs on all imports.
I saw the effects of his loopholes that raised manufacturing and over all job creation that increase American Citizen's pay while not raising prices.
Should Trump move to put a universal tariff plan in action, it will be in the same line as those.
I also know history and we funded the federal gov mainly by tariffs and excise taxes until FDR.
1
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:14 am to BCreed1
quote:
I also know history and we funded the federal gov mainly by tariffs and excise taxes until FDR.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:32 am to BCreed1
quote:
Rogerthecucker tried and broke it down to $12 a year per person
Then got mad and said that wasnt correct
I need to read that!
I believe SVDtiger was asked to show his math on how he got to $12 per person and he couldn't do it.
$80 billion in tariffs divided by a population of 330 million does not equal $12/person.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:35 am to BCreed1
quote:
What?
Here are the latest articles
quote:
Trump’s new trade war would cost middle-class families at least $1,700 a year, report warns
?
MATT EGAN, CNN
May 21, 2024 at 3:00 AM
So an extra $3 per day
yet everything else woulf be cheaper than now Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:47 am to SlowFlowPro
Laugh all you want. You can't change history.
FDR took Income tax to new heights during his admin and in the midst of a depression.
quote:
Tariffs were the greatest (approaching 95% at times) source of federal revenue until the federal income tax began after 1913. For well over a century the federal government was largely financed by tariffs averaging about 20% on foreign imports.
FDR took Income tax to new heights during his admin and in the midst of a depression.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:50 am to SDVTiger
I get their concerns, but they fail to look on the opposite side of the issue at hand.
It's not as black and white as they make it out to be.
It's not as black and white as they make it out to be.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:53 am to BCreed1
quote:
Laugh all you want. You can't change history.
Unless a lot of things change (not necessarily things I'd even be opposed to), it's an utterly stupid comparison.
We're not going to get $4-5T+ via tariffs
Posted on 5/21/24 at 9:58 am to SDVTiger
quote:
So an extra $3 per day
So you went from $12 per year to $3 a day.
You are a fricking genius.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:08 am to frogtown
quote:
So you went from $12 per year to $3 a day.
You really arent the brightest person
You might want to go back and stand in the corner where you belong
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:17 am to SDVTiger
quote:
You really arent the brightest person
Classic left wing Alinsky response.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote: Free Trade has resulted in redistribution of wealth and the relocation of jobs abroad. While creating much better jobs domestically that pay incredibly. Don't forget that.
Those jobs weren’t created because we shipped off the industry. They were created because of new technologies being discovered and developed. You can have both types of jobs. They’re not mutually exclusive. They have extremely little overlap in labor pool usage.
quote:
What is the point of a tariff if not to raise prices?
The point is to maintain the industry and middle class jobs that provided superior pay to these trash service sector and paper pushing jobs. The majority of the workers who were in these jobs aren’t capable of transitioning into high-end design and fabrication, nor is there enough demand in those sectors to soak them all up.
You can’t run a country and economy of this scale on boutique goods production, coding, and finance while having the other 200+ million as baristas and welfare leeches. It’s like a grown man trying to live off of caviar and snickers bars. You need a large portion of your economy to be the meat and potato jobs (ie industry).
Posted on 5/21/24 at 11:04 am to Decisions
quote:
Those jobs weren’t created because we shipped off the industry. They were created because of new technologies being discovered and developed.
Funded by the savings created by an efficient economy (aka, shipping the cheap jobs offshore).
quote:
You can have both types of jobs. They’re not mutually exclusive.
There is only so much money in our economy, and it can only reasonably increase slightly year over year. There is a finite amount of money to spend/invest domestically.
quote:
They have extremely little overlap in labor pool usage.
If we inefficiently divert our resources to "saving" these jobs, then the delta of that inefficiency can no longer circulate in more efficient endeavors.
quote:
The point is to maintain the industry
How?
quote:
The majority of the workers who were in these jobs aren’t capable of transitioning into high-end design and fabrication,
They need to make better life choices.
quote:
You can’t run a country and economy of this scale on boutique goods production, coding, and finance while having the other 200+ million as baristas and welfare leeches.
Pure histrionics. 200M? You've shown you have no desire to discuss this honestly.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 11:46 am to frogtown
quote:
Classic left wing Alinsky response.
Its amazing you dont even realize what you posted was next level stoopid
But why do you refuse to answer the question. The cucker at least attempted to
Posted on 5/21/24 at 11:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Funded by the savings created by an efficient economy (aka, shipping the cheap jobs offshore).
Oh, I suppose the savings these workers were previously accumulating from their jobs just never saw reinvestment into the economy? No one would have put it in a bank to loan out or a 401k to pump capital into the stock market? It only counts if it’s done by major players? My mistake.
quote:
There is only so much money in our economy, and it can only reasonably increase slightly year over year. There is a finite amount of money to spend/invest domestically.
The industrial base was already there. It takes relatively little capital to maintain and make incremental improvements versus building new.
quote:
quote: The point is to maintain the industry How?
Through protecting it from product dumping by bad actors and keeping regulation in check, as we’ve already proposed.
quote:
quote: The majority of the workers who were in these jobs aren’t capable of transitioning into high-end design and fabrication, They need to make better life choices.
Just come on out and say you’re an elitist. You can’t life choice your way out of a sub-100 iQ. They can still be more useful than what we as a nation have chosen to do with them instead, though. They could be working these jobs.
quote:
Pure histrionics. 200M? You've shown you have no desire to discuss this honestly.
I exaggerated for effect, but 65M on welfare and 16M in food services is still not preferable. By all means, though. Be dismissive. The effects of your way of economic mismanagement are all around us: screaming inequality, a destitute younger cohort, degrading infrastructure, and a hollowed out middle class.
Posted on 5/21/24 at 12:15 pm to Decisions
quote:
Oh, I suppose the savings these workers were previously accumulating from their jobs just never saw reinvestment into the economy?
Wrong type of savings, bubba
My comment was not about savings accounts
quote:
The industrial base was already there.
It's still there, if it fits into a modern economy.
We are the #2 manufacturer in the world, and our per capita output is very high. We have a huge manufacturing sector.
Our industrial sector is also massive, especially petro.
These industries never left, only the lower-levels of them did.
quote:
Through protecting it
How do you protect it?
The answer is raising prices. FWIW. We can keep playing this game where you try not to answer, but that's the point of tariffs.
quote:
Just come on out and say you’re an elitist.
I'm not. I'm from a working-class background.
I live in a blue collar city, too.
quote:
You can’t life choice your way out of a sub-100 iQ.
Sub-100 IQs can perform lower-level trade jobs, which are in demand currently, mind you.
quote:
They could be working these jobs.
While we lose higher-paying, more efficient, and more productive jobs.
That's not a good trade off.
I have no idea why y'all are so obsessed with devolving our economy out of some halcyon view of society from 60 years ago.
quote:
The effects of your way of economic mismanagement are all around us: screaming inequality, a destitute younger cohort, degrading infrastructure, and a hollowed out middle class.
Thank you, Mr. BLM. I assume you were proclaiming the same things on behalf of black people in America prior to Trump, right?
Posted on 5/21/24 at 12:35 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
Its amazing you dont even realize what you posted was next level stoopid
So pointing out you can't do basic math is next level stupid???
Posted on 5/21/24 at 12:39 pm to frogtown
quote:
So pointing out you can't do basic math is next level stupid???
This is truly amazing
You still refuse to answer and everyone knows why
Posted on 5/21/24 at 12:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We're not going to get $4-5T+ via tariffs
Who stated that we would?
Posted on 5/21/24 at 12:51 pm to Decisions
quote:
Those jobs weren’t created because we shipped off the industry. They were created because of new technologies being discovered and developed. You can have both types of jobs. They’re not mutually exclusive. They have extremely little overlap in labor pool usage.
Exactly.
quote:
The point is to maintain the industry and middle class jobs that provided superior pay to these trash service sector and paper pushing jobs. The majority of the workers who were in these jobs aren’t capable of transitioning into high-end design and fabrication, nor is there enough demand in those sectors to soak them all up.
You can’t run a country and economy of this scale on boutique goods production, coding, and finance while having the other 200+ million as baristas and welfare leeches. It’s like a grown man trying to live off of caviar and snickers bars. You need a large portion of your economy to be the meat and potato jobs (ie industry).
Listen to this man. He understands!
Posted on 5/21/24 at 2:24 pm to BCreed1
quote:
Who stated that we would?
Then why even bring it up as a comparison? What purpose did that serve if making a full comparison leads to "who stated that we would?"
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News