- 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: Tariffs on importers from China going to 25% Friday, apparently
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:36 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:36 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:you can't be serious. mr american businessman, it's ok if you get stolen from because, well, china.
a lot of the theft is a result of businesses decision to play by their rules, when they know the consequences. While obviously it’s a huge market that business want to capture, but if they deem that more as more important than the well-known consequences, it seems a bit disingenuous to complain about those consequences when they inevitably happen
quote:none of this has anything to do with what's really at stake: us companies that are being stolen from for military purposes, as i have stated before. trump is not starting a trade war over fair use practices alone
a lot of accusations of “IP theft” in general (not specific to China at all) are often extremely ridiculous. Just look examples of companies using algorithms to flag for things in YouTube videos, and complain some copyright on the video, even though they would fall under “Fair Use.” Nintendo is one company that has a ton of examples of this.
quote:this is where the tds starts to show up. twisting into pretzels because orange man bad
people use those complexity and ambiguities to make questionable or even outright dishonest accusations for their own self-serving interests
0
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:38 pm to 90proofprofessional
This is beautiful for my business. My manufacturing facility is in India and only uses Indian made parts. My competition has been flooding the market with cheaply made Chinese stuff for years, and a few have no recourse because their facilities are in China.
My market share finna go up more and more. Gotta love it.
My market share finna go up more and more. Gotta love it.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:38 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:alot or amost zero? it's really closer to the latter. the occasional fred graph doesn't really qualify for the former.
he does post a lot of substantive, objective, and empirically-supported information
quote:because the book on him is out: tds, especially in regards to gdp and tariffs
I’ve seen a lot of posters insult him and make accusations that he’s avoided a topic about an economic issue or data that was released, when he had not only discusses that topic, he was insulted in that topic as well
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:48 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:let me break one situation down for you
with responses that are largely (or even exclusively) just insults aimed at the poster because the topic is counter to the board’s views or the poster is seen as someone who has a different partisan perspective.
i made a comment about something i had seen reported multiple times
npc scoffed
i started citing articles, up to 12 in fact, backing up what i had stated
ncp droned on and on that i needed to "interact with the data" to substantiate my point
i stated that it wasn't my point and the substantiation had already been done in the articles i had posted. it took FOREVER to get him to actually read just one of them
he cherry picked one data point and claimed victory
i showed him later in the same article that his point was contradicted and in fact, part of the underlying problem
ever since then, npc makes the delusional claim that i didn't post any articles to support my point. every time i challenge him, he refuses to actually substantiate ANYTHING he says about the exchange. he is a juvenile fraud, a snake oil salesman and a chicken
do you want to hear about any other instances because there are more
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:51 pm to 90proofprofessional
Good, frick them!
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:52 pm to bfniii
quote:
90 is responding to that with some made up conspiracy theory that the trilateral commission is coercing trump into completely unjustified tariffs
quote:
the occasional fred graph doesn't really qualify for the former.
should you ever get over that crippling aversion to data that you seem to have, maybe look at and consider what the "fred graph" contains once in a while. i'm not going to bother to set it up and post it if it doesn't demonstrate something specifically responsive to a claim or a question.
quote:
tds,
^ the refrain of the incurably lazy and stupid
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:52 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:
What's the downside?
We pay more for crappy American products?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 1:52 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:what difference does it make what we started with? it makes none and any non-npc/tds would know that. the idea is to apply pressure and that's exactly what happened and, MAGIC WAND, chini will be here tomorrow
how strange that we initiated it by taxing imports of primary metals & laundry equipment
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:04 pm to bfniii
hi
say one wanted to assert that obama's cbo and wh manipulated official data, and use the claim that revisions were always downward following rosy initial estimates as evidence.
how would you support the claim that the revisions were always downward?
would you start by:
a) finding out and reporting how many revisions were downward, out of total revisions under his tenure, or
b) quickly googling and linking a handful of articles about individual downward revisions, and linking them without comment?
i know which one i wouldn't do, if i cared about being right
say one wanted to assert that obama's cbo and wh manipulated official data, and use the claim that revisions were always downward following rosy initial estimates as evidence.
how would you support the claim that the revisions were always downward?
would you start by:
a) finding out and reporting how many revisions were downward, out of total revisions under his tenure, or
b) quickly googling and linking a handful of articles about individual downward revisions, and linking them without comment?
i know which one i wouldn't do, if i cared about being right
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:06 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:this isn't an academic textbook. this is the real world and what you're saying is MUCH easier said than done. the deal has to be beneficial to all parties, it has to solve the initial problem and you have to somehow have all the countries lined up to make it happen. additionally, you have to find countries who can supply what you would have gained in the unilateral deal at the same rates and quantities. and btw, explain how that's "better" instead of just different. the pressure is indirect as opposed to direct. so it's possible the direct pressure would yield and even greater deal sooner than the indirect pressure. you have no idea. you're just tds blustering
multilat deals that cut china out while getting us better deals than we already have is a much better way
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:06 pm to bfniii
quote:
what difference does it make what we started with? it makes none and any non-npc/tds would know that. the idea is to apply pressure
that makes the washing machine thing make even LESS sense
but coherence has never really been your thing
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:10 pm to bfniii
quote:
this is the real world and what you're saying is MUCH easier said than done
we were damn near all the way there with TPP before Trump & Co bailed on it and the rest of them finished the deal without us
then we just took many of the same provisions written up in TPP, put them in USMCA, added in an increase from 63% to 75% on some autos and y'all declared it a tremendous deal
quote:
you have no idea. you're just tds blustering
never change!Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:10 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:
the refrain of the incurably lazy and stupid
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:10 pm to Allyn McKeen
quote:
I think I will drop some real world data here to give some context. Others may have different numbers.
I sell roughly 30,000 "widgets" per month that I purchase from China.
Before the punitive tariffs took place last year, they cost me $0.45 each FOB factory. They have been coming in for years at 5.7%. So, without the shipping, they were ~47.5 cents each.
When the 10% tariff started, it was additional to the existing 5.7%, so the new tariff was 15.7% total. When the 10% went into effect, the factory dropped my price to $0.41 each which kept the cost less the shipping at 47.5 cents each.
When there is a 25% tariff, your goods no longer deal with normal tariff prices, so the 25% is a flat rate. For products that normally don't have duties, the increase is from 10% to 25%, but for this product, the increase is actually from 15.7% to 25%. Like last time, the factory is going to offer some compensation for the increase, and they will drop my price to $0.39 as long as the tariffs remain at 25%. The cost without shipping will go to $0.4875.
The net result for my bottom line is a change from 47.5 cents to 48.75 cents. Shipping is variable, so I see fluctuations in landed costs throughout the year. My customers will not see any changes in what they pay me for the widgets.
I put this information out to muddy the waters. When a duties bill comes in, I am the one that pays it, but in this case you could argue that the Chinese are the ones actually footing the tab.
Here is some more real world data.
I purchase from manufacturers that outsource to Chinese factories for producing their goods. When the tariffs went into effect last year most of our manufacturers we purchase from used it as an excuse to raise all their pricing regardless if the tariffs actually effected their commodities pricing. We had year long pricing contracts that manufacturers broke saying they could no longer honor pricing they had told us they could honor. In the end, us as a stocking distributor are getting charged more money and we are having to pass it on to the consumers. Not only that but for our larger customers we have to bid out material and firm their pricing for sometimes up to a year. If manufacturers raise their prices we make less money as we have to continue honoring the pricing we bid for their projects.
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:11 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:
protecting all those jobs for software engineers
We aren't "protecting" anyone.
But let's get this straight.
You think the current Chinese trade model is fair, and makes long-term economic sense for the US?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:11 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:2 scenarios
a case of an insider selling his employer's secrets?
ib scenario: everyone does what they want. companies steal from the us and use the ip against us
#2: "hey, remember that time we bought the ip on the black market? orange man came down on us hard and it hurt the entire country for years. maybe we should think twice about this."
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:15 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:and this is the standard liberal response. they want you to get mired down in the trees so that you don't see the forest
who did they lay off and where were they working
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:17 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:lie? what is wrong with hoping for that? tariffs seem to be one way of making that happen. oh wait, i just remembered. orange man bad
promises of a return to our old manufacturing greatness by tariffs and threats of tariffs was always a cruel lie
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:19 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:missing the forest for the trees, greatest hits vol 2! by ktel records
Yet, if someone buys some software, then lends it to a friend to use on his/her computing, then it's suddenly theft?
Posted on 5/9/19 at 2:23 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
let's get this straight.
You think the current Chinese trade model is fair, and makes long-term economic sense for the US?
Good question. No.
I think that abandoning the multilateral approach, particularly TPP and TTiP, is abandoning the only way that can eventually get us an international trade order that we want, if "we" are people who like the benefits of trade with lower and lower barriers. I think our current approach cannot resolve our problems with China, and that any token agreement we may eventually get will be vague, superficial, and impossible to enforce, being totally depending on Beijing's good faith, because what we basically need is for them to change their entire state-led paradigm. They won't actually do that just for us, even if we tax our imports from them at 25%. What they may do, is accommodate something we focused much more on a few years back- something token to reduce the bilat trade deficit.
Page 15 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News