Flake & Corker - Rejected RINOs Bite the Dust

Discussion in 'Congress' started by protectionist, Oct 25, 2017.

  1. RealDave
    Offline

    RealDave Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2016
    Messages:
    6,090
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Ratings:
    +3,364
    Wow, you really aren't too swift.

    Trump threatens to impose import duties to protect US manufacturers.

    I guess a Trump asskisser would be too stupid to think other countries would retaliate & imposer import duties on US goods.

    The end result, Trump will help the US manufacturers gain the US market at the expense of the export markets. I'll assume you know the rest of the world has a pile more people than the US.
     
  2. Marion Morrison
    Offline

    Marion Morrison Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    16,407
    Thanks Received:
    3,346
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +17,405
    You gonna be out in the streets wearing a dress, and sporting a realistic-looking Airsoft rifle on the 4th?
     
  3. busybee01
    Offline

    busybee01 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    Messages:
    3,335
    Thanks Received:
    373
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,970
    You really do not understand economics. If the price of making something is above what they can sell it for then they will not sell it. You cannot sell at a loss and stay in business. You have to take the bell curve and add a break even point. If the position on the bell curve is below that break even point then it will not be made.
     
  4. busybee01
    Offline

    busybee01 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    Messages:
    3,335
    Thanks Received:
    373
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,970
    If there were no Clinton there would be no Trump. If the nominee had been Biden or even Sanders Trump would have been clobbered. 25% of Trump's support was a vote against Clinton and that is all. The only shit sandwich that is being served is from you.
     
  5. alang1216
    Offline

    alang1216 Pragmatist

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,728
    Thanks Received:
    261
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +754
    Maybe in an ideal world this is true, but in the real world products are often sold below cost. A loss-leader is a product sold at a loss to attract customers. If you have other products to accessorize the loss-leader it makes sense. Also you might want to eliminate competition with a goal of then to raise prices once you have a monopoly:

    China’s hold over the international steel market is pretty clear. It produces half the world’s steel and in 2015, finished imports from China to the EU were up 140% on 2013. Imports now account for a quarter of the EU market, and at the same time, prices for a range of major EU product classes have collapsed.


    This trend, replicated to differing degrees worldwide, has led to accusations in the US and elsewhere that China is selling its steel at a loss, or more accurately in this case, keeping costs artificially low so that other producers cannot compete, in a practice widely known as “dumping”.
     
  6. busybee01
    Offline

    busybee01 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    Messages:
    3,335
    Thanks Received:
    373
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,970
    You are largely talking about retailers. Manufacturers cannot do that. We are talking about American manufacturers not foreign. We also protect various producers of goods as well Don't pretend the rest of the world does this and we do not.
     
  7. alang1216
    Offline

    alang1216 Pragmatist

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,728
    Thanks Received:
    261
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +754
    Manufacturers can and do. Foreign firms dump and use loss-leaders and US firms dump and use loss-leaders. They just have to see it to be in their long-term interests. All governments get prodded to protect domestic markets. It is something that should be temporary but never seems to be.
     
  8. protectionist
    Offline

    protectionist Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    Messages:
    18,098
    Thanks Received:
    1,304
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +5,668
    As I just taught you, tariffs DON"T raise the price of import. Neither does anything else. Why would you raise a price when that cause you to LOSE money ? Go back and read my prior posts (10 times if necessary - until it sinks in)
     
  9. alang1216
    Offline

    alang1216 Pragmatist

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,728
    Thanks Received:
    261
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +754
    I can find nothing that agrees that tariffs DON"T raise the price of goods. If you can back up your assertion I'm anxious to see. Three examples:

    A 45 percent tariff on Chinese-made goods could drive up U.S. retail prices on those goods by an average of about 10 percent, Capital Economics has calculated. Consumers would find it hard to escape the price squeeze.

    The benefits of tariffs are uneven. Because a tariff is a tax, the government will see increased revenue as imports enter the domestic market. Domestic industries also benefit from a reduction in competition, since import prices are artificially inflated. Unfortunately for consumers - both individual consumers and businesses - higher import prices mean higher prices for goods. If the price of steel is inflated due to tariffs, individual consumers pay more for products using steel, and businesses pay more for steel that they use to make goods. In short, tariffs and trade barriers tend to be pro-producer and anti-consumer.

    Let us start right from the beginning: a tariff is a tax levied just on imports. But it will result in consumers paying more...
     
  10. protectionist
    Offline

    protectionist Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    Messages:
    18,098
    Thanks Received:
    1,304
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +5,668
    So now I'm looney tune, huh ? HA HA HA You really shouldn't shoot your mouth off on what you obviously have no clue. Listen rookie, I've been in this forum for years and have authored hundreds of OPS, thousands of posts, and am well known as one of the most far right posters in the forum, with 4 times as many thanks to my posts as you have.

    The difference is (and you can look them up) my thinks come from the conservatives in this forum. WIth your looney pro-immigration and pro-globalist ideas, I could easily see your thanks coming from all the liberals, who support that garbage. Did you campaign for Hillary Clinton ? Or Obama before that ? They both subscribe to you anti-American, leftist trash. If you weren't so green as grass here, you'd know that next to me, you look like Nancy Pelosi. YOU are the liberal kook.

    Note how you harken back to Ronald Reagan and the 1980s. As I already taught you, globalism was an accepted thing among conservative THEN, when we didn't have the massive amount of outsourcing that we have now. But now, with all that American business gone to China, Mexico, etc. we're in a different economics.

    Now, among conservatives, outsourcing is BAD, both the international and the domestic (immigration) versions. That's why Republicans selected Donald Trump out of a field of 16 Republican candidates, and why he beat the globalist/immigrationist Hillary Clinton. A fourth grader could explain this.

    The definition of a NATION applies to ALL nations. We have a distinct language (American English) and a distinct culture. When foreigners came here , yes they were a melting pot. That means they blended in to the American culture, rather than retained their previous culture. They learned English. Listened to and played rock n, roll, bluegrass, blues, jazz, watched American TV shows, etc. You speaking for multiculturalism is another evidence of your liberalism, while you laughably go around posing as a conservative.

    The reason why others shouldn't do what my family did almost 90 years ago, is because our nation is waaaay too overpopulated, and the only immigrants we should be accepting now, are those FEW bringing large amounts of CAPITAL to open businesses and create jobs (for AMERICANS), and those bringing rare skills that we covet (ex. great scientist, great violinist, etc)
     

Share This Page