Brief synopsis of last night's debate

[Ray From Cleveland]

Let me tell you what tariffs do: we place a tariff on imported products from China. China in return puts a tariff on our exported products and it ends up being a wash.

I don't want to take away from the objective of this thread and redirect it......but, it's NOT a "wash" based on the dollars we import and export:

Which supports what I stated: It's difficult enough to sell our products overseas due to the US manufacturing costs. If our exported products were taxed in retaliation to our import tariffs, then the situation would become worse.

 

[nat4900]

Which supports what I stated: It's difficult enough to sell our products overseas due to the US manufacturing costs. If our exported products were taxed in retaliation to our import tariffs, then the situation would become worse.

Again, this is off topic, but since I'm a simple man, this is what I notice in the above chart of imports/exports"

We import $92 billion of pharmaceutical....but export only $51
We import $247 B of oil products....while exporting $61B

Ergo, we should manufacture here an additional $90 B or so of pharmas, and stop exporting our $61 B of oil products thereby cutting our imports of them to $186B or so.

 

[amrchaos]

Which supports what I stated: It's difficult enough to sell our products overseas due to the US manufacturing costs. If our exported products were taxed in retaliation to our import tariffs, then the situation would become worse.

Again, this is off topic, but since I'm a simple man, this is what I notice in the above chart of imports/exports"

We import $92 billion of pharmaceutical....but export only $51
We import $247 B of oil products....while exporting $61B

Ergo, we should manufacture here an additional $90 B or so of pharmas, and stop exporting our $61 B of oil products thereby cutting our imports of them to $186B or so.

Wait--how are companies going to make a profit?

 

[Care4all]

Which supports what I stated: It's difficult enough to sell our products overseas due to the US manufacturing costs. If our exported products were taxed in retaliation to our import tariffs, then the situation would become worse.

Again, this is off topic, but since I'm a simple man, this is what I notice in the above chart of imports/exports"

We import $92 billion of pharmaceutical....but export only $51
We import $247 B of oil products....while exporting $61B

Ergo, we should manufacture here an additional $90 B or so of pharmas, and stop exporting our $61 B of oil products thereby cutting our imports of them to $186B or so.

Wait--how are companies going to make a profit?

the same way they make a profit on all goods?

 

[Care4all]

As example, we may have to have pay more for some goods, like oil....(though doubtful) but the savings we would get by not having to be involved in the middle eastern hell hole of a mess, could save us trillions in taxes we would have to pay for the wars and skirmishes and save some Military lives as well...

 

[ninja007]

Last night is pretty easy to judge. The more bullcrap the RW's make up about it, the better the Dems did.

so far, they must have done pretty well.

yeS, they covered the important issues like global warming/climate change/new name of the decade, free stuff, black lives matters etc... nothing about illegals, the debt, the ME.

 

[Votto]

Here is a synopsis of the debate.

"Hillary, you are so wonderful. Why is the world keep talking about those illegal e-mails that gave away government secrets? Hillary, we love you with all our hearts! Appoint us, we need jobs!!"

There was no debate. A debate demands a difference of opinion in some form or fashion.

First, you may have chosen to miss that I CLEARLY stated that Clinton is not my favorite candidate.....

Second, there WAS disagreement over the NRA strangle hold on congress; disagreement over the Glass-Steagal; disagreement over extending the ACA.....

Your problem is that since the disagreements were done CIVILY, you missed them......Sounds that you like food=fights over actual issue-based debates.

No one likes the "middle" candidate. You know, the one that you hold your nose to vote for every time there is a general election. It happens for both parties.

This nomination process is a sham. They already have picked their candidate and you will vote for Hillary and like it dimwit.

 

[Claudette]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

Your perspective of substantive must be uniquely non-dimensional.

Just because you agree with something does not render it "substantive".

 

[Wry Catcher]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

Your perspective of substantive must be uniquely non-dimensional.

Just because you agree with something does not render it "substantive".

Hmmm, a good point but off the mark. Look in the mirror first, then point fingers.

a. NRA
b. Climate Change
c. Income inequality
d. High cost of higher education
e. Institutional racism
f. Income tax reform
g. Equal pay for equal work
h. Diplomacy first, fire power only when necessary
j. Criminal justice reform
k. Comprehensive Immigration reform

Are examples of substantive issues. Now, let's examine the GOP debate:

1. Round up 11 Million Aliens and sent them back to where they came from.
2. Might makes right - neo cons r us.
3. More guns for everyone
4. Repeal Obamacare
5. Ain't Obama, Clinton, Awful
6. Bush has no energy
7. Build a wall.
8. Take our country back
9. Tax the working poor more; cut taxes for corporations & the wealthy

 

[Meathead]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

Your perspective of substantive must be uniquely non-dimensional.

Just because you agree with something does not render it "substantive".

Hmmm, a good point but off the mark. Look in the mirror first, then point fingers.

a. NRA
b. Climate Change
c. Income inequality
d. High cost of higher education
e. Institutional racism
f. Income tax reform
g. Equal pay for equal work
h. Diplomacy first, fire power only when necessary
j. Criminal justice reform
k. Comprehensive Immigration reform

Are examples of substantive issues. Now, let's examine the GOP debate:

1. Round up 11 Million Aliens and sent them back to where they came from.
2. Might makes right - neo cons r us.
3. More guns for everyone
4. Repeal Obamacare
5. Ain't Obama, Clinton, Awful
6. Bush has no energy
7. Build a wall.
8. Take our country back
9. Tax the working poor more; cut taxes for corporations & the wealthy

Is there something seriously wrong you? I mean beyond just being a hack.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

Your perspective of substantive must be uniquely non-dimensional.

Just because you agree with something does not render it "substantive".

Hmmm, a good point but off the mark. Look in the mirror first, then point fingers.

a. NRA
b. Climate Change
c. Income inequality
d. High cost of higher education
e. Institutional racism
f. Income tax reform
g. Equal pay for equal work
h. Diplomacy first, fire power only when necessary
j. Criminal justice reform
k. Comprehensive Immigration reform

Are examples of substantive issues. Now, let's examine the GOP debate:

1. Round up 11 Million Aliens and sent them back to where they came from.
2. Might makes right - neo cons r us.
3. More guns for everyone
4. Repeal Obamacare
5. Ain't Obama, Clinton, Awful
6. Bush has no energy
7. Build a wall.
8. Take our country back
9. Tax the working poor more; cut taxes for corporations & the wealthy

Is there something seriously wrong you? I mean beyond just being a hack.

Thanks so much for sharing meathead, I very much value your personal attacks.

 

[bedowin62]

it's hilarious that left-wing losers thinnk their tired eat-the-rich pitchfork and torch mentality and hyperbole is actually "adressing" anything!!!


libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That was, as the Donald would say, a very low-energy affair.

I agree.

None of them came out of it looking like a winner. And none of them talked about what matters and the plans they have for what they didn't talk about.

No winners in that debate.

LOL, a perfect description of both Republican debates; The Dems debate was substantive, as everyone with both feet in reality understand.

Your perspective of substantive must be uniquely non-dimensional.

Just because you agree with something does not render it "substantive".

Hmmm, a good point but off the mark. Look in the mirror first, then point fingers.

a. NRA
b. Climate Change
c. Income inequality
d. High cost of higher education
e. Institutional racism
f. Income tax reform
g. Equal pay for equal work
h. Diplomacy first, fire power only when necessary
j. Criminal justice reform
k. Comprehensive Immigration reform

Are examples of substantive issues. Now, let's examine the GOP debate:

1. Round up 11 Million Aliens and sent them back to where they came from.
2. Might makes right - neo cons r us.
3. More guns for everyone
4. Repeal Obamacare
5. Ain't Obama, Clinton, Awful
6. Bush has no energy
7. Build a wall.
8. Take our country back
9. Tax the working poor more; cut taxes for corporations & the wealthy

a. NRA - A patriotic organization standing against the totalitarian thinking of Democrats.

b. Climate Change - Too many lies, not enough evidence. You are not to be believed.

c. Income inequality - A Democrat political construct. You have always had "income inequality", and always will. A fry flipper is not a brain surgeon.

d. High cost of higher education - The Democrats run the system. Talk to them.

e. Institutional racism - The Democratic Party. They could not survive without it.

f. Income tax reform - Steal from the makers, give to the takers. Screw the middle class, and to hell with investment and job creation.

g. Equal pay for equal work - Talk to Hillary's staff.

h. Diplomacy first, fire power only when necessary - In your case, diplomacy means surrender.

j. Criminal justice reform - Setting the bad guys free.

k. Comprehensive Immigration reform - Encourage the illegal invasion of future voters.

 

[nat4900]

f. Income tax reform - Steal from the makers, give to the takers. Screw the middle class, and to hell with investment and job creation.

There is nothing worse than someone (like you) that gets consistently screwed.....and actually starting to like it.

Just on the above cited issue, we've had "trickle down economics", and we got screwed....
then we've had the infamous GWB's tax breaks for the rich to create jobs, and we got screwed....
finally we had the GOP taking over congress on a platform of "jobs, jobs, jobs"....and we got screwed

Some of us are a bit "sore" from being screwed....YOU, on the other hand, kind of like bending over.

 

[bedowin62]

f. Income tax reform - Steal from the makers, give to the takers. Screw the middle class, and to hell with investment and job creation.

There is nothing worse than someone (like you) that gets consistently screwed.....and actually starting to like it.

Just on the above cited issue, we've had "trickle down economics", and we got screwed....
then we've had the infamous GWB's tax breaks for the rich to create jobs, and we got screwed....
finally we had the GOP taking over congress on a platform of "jobs, jobs, jobs"....and we got screwed

Some of us are a bit "sore" from being screwed....YOU, on the other hand, kind of like bending over.

SO WHO IS GETTING SCREWED AND LIKING IT????


another idiot who makes a fool of himself daily denying basic realities and projecting his own Party's sins onto others.

since Progressives have been in charge the very richest got richer and the very poorest got poorer; BOTH AT A FASTER PACE UNDER PROGRESSIVES

 

[nat4900]

since Progressives have been in charge the very richest got richer and the very poorest got poorer; BOTH AT A FASTER PACE UNDER PROGRESSIVES

The above from someone who has his TV remote stuck on FOX.......So, "progressives" have been in charge?

 

[bedowin62]

since Progressives have been in charge the very richest got richer and the very poorest got poorer; BOTH AT A FASTER PACE UNDER PROGRESSIVES

The above from someone who has his TV remote stuck on FOX.......So, "progressives" have been in charge?

of course your have idiot, self-deceiving loser. you're in charge when you're trying to brag about the healthcare you supposedly have given people? the gay marriage thing? the economy??

face it you're a loser like all the others in your ilk trying to have it both ways

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

f. Income tax reform - Steal from the makers, give to the takers. Screw the middle class, and to hell with investment and job creation.

There is nothing worse than someone (like you) that gets consistently screwed.....and actually starting to like it.

Just on the above cited issue, we've had "trickle down economics", and we got screwed....
then we've had the infamous GWB's tax breaks for the rich to create jobs, and we got screwed....
finally we had the GOP taking over congress on a platform of "jobs, jobs, jobs"....and we got screwed

Some of us are a bit "sore" from being screwed....YOU, on the other hand, kind of like bending over.

If you are screwed, it's likely your own doing.