Washing machines/dryers prices up 17% under Trump (thank you, tariffs)

[tigerred59]

Wanna buy laundry equipment for your home? Good luck paying more than you used to, thanks to Donald J. Trump and his tariffs.
In this thread, we will come up with ideas as to how to lower said prices again:
Opinion | Trump’s tariffs are already backfiring

**** appliances, all my tax cut money, ie ZERO is going on these high ass gas prices!!!!! thank you Trump!!

 

[Correll]

My words.

Your response.

In the context of whites dying, you cite evolution and say let them get left behind.


IN evolution, "getting left behind" is dying.


Please don't pretend to be too stupid to know that.



Yep. And with no exposure to communities were they just aren't good jobs available.






Your assumptions about me are incorrect.

I did get skills to get a better job. And I did get a better job.


Afterwards, looking back, I realized something.

It was far harder than was reasonable.


That was a result of bad government policy, imo.


I do not look down on people that were not able to work their way though college. It was ******* hard.

I do not look down on people, that were not able to reduce their income for the time it takes to develop new skills. It was ******* hard.


I want policies that make such tasks, within reach of more people,

AND makes life better for those that just can't or choose not to.



The difference is that I care about the interests of my fellow Americans, even if they are not exactly like me,


while you want them to die off.

Actually I want them to adapt, and if you did it clearly anyone can do it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Adapt or die. That is your answer.


I want trade and immigration policy to improve their lot.


That's the difference between us.


Oh, and that you consider my having a concern for my fellow American to be worthy of condemnation and ridicule,



while I consider your utter callousness and indifference to the suffering of others, to be worthy of condemnation and ridicule.

Yes, you want to improve their lot at the cost of the other 99% of the country. You want the government to save them since they will not save themselves.

You are a statist, through and through.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

YOur 99% is just shit pulled out of your ass.


I want government policy that serves the interest of America as a whole, and it's citizens.


Our trade policy and immigration policy has been crafted with no concern for these people for a long time now.


It is time for them to get their interests served, for a change.


Spouting buzz words, like "statist" is really, really weak shit.

Please explain how preventing me from buying a $1200 washer and drier set from LG, and forcing me to buy a $1400 washer and drier set from GE, is in the best interest of me a US citizen, and not in the best interest of a few select union workers at GE, at my expense?

When American workers benefit, America benefits.

Instead of having broken families raising the next generation of criminals, you have productive tax payer, raising more tax payers to pay your social security when you retire.


THat makes a better nation for you to live in, well worth the few extra dollars.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yes, you want to improve their lot at the cost of the other 99% of the country. You want the government to save them since they will not save themselves.

You are a statist, through and through.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

YOur 99% is just shit pulled out of your ass.


I want government policy that serves the interest of America as a whole, and it's citizens.


Our trade policy and immigration policy has been crafted with no concern for these people for a long time now.


It is time for them to get their interests served, for a change.


Spouting buzz words, like "statist" is really, really weak shit.

There are roughly 5 million less manufacturing jobs than there once was. So if everyone of those are now unemployed we are talking about 1.5% of the country. And out of those jobs lost 85% have been to automation and not trade. So we are talking about 15% of 1.5%.

Also, in 1990 we exported $329 billions worth of goods, today that number is $1.4 trillion. According to the National Association of Manufactures, the US had a 12.7 billion dollar surplus of manufactured good with our trading partners, to include China in 2015.

Yet you whine about things being unfair and want the government to save the day.

You are a statist because your first choice to fix what you see as a problem is to run to the government.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Those are some nice out of context and badly processed numbers.

OH, and a very nice buzzword. STATIST, hardly gets any use these days.



When the problem is TRade policy, and Immigration, policy, I turn the the government to change the policy.


That you characterize that as something worthy of ridicule is just you being an disingenuous ass.

They are neither out of context nor poorly processed. The numbers are real and they expose that you are a fraud, the problems you claim exist do not.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

For most workers, real wages have barely budged for decades

"a look at five decades’ worth of government wage data suggests that the better question might be, why should now be any different? For most U.S. workers, real wages — that is, after inflation is taken into account — have been flat or even falling for decades, regardless of whether the economy has been adding or subtracting jobs."

Making people pay more for the things they buy will not fix that problem.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Flopper]

Most of what you're saying is just not true. Our trading partners aren't coming after us. They are just responding to actions Trump has taken.

I am not referring to just since Trump took office. I am talking about generations of predatory trade policies, like that seen with Airbus.

Trump Right on Trade Predators

"Richard Evans of British Aerospace explained: “Airbus is going to attack the Americans, including Boeing, until they bleed and scream.” And another executive said, “If Airbus has to give away planes, we will do it.” "


And do I even have to talk about the Chinese?!

Trump is right in pointing out that trade deficits are bad but he's dead wrong in assuming trade deficits are a result cheating by our trading partners.

Why do you assume he is assuming? Maybe he seriously looked at the issue and thought about it deeply, if quickly, and concluded based on the evidence that they are cheating.

In the world of international trade, tariffs are the nuclear option, the option of last resort for several reasons.

It's been decades. The Rust Belt looks like a war zone. The working poor are so squeezed that White Life spans are actually DROPPING.

First, it forces the other country to respond in kind.

No, it does not.

The leaders of our Trading "Partners" have a choice, allow for more balanced trade, or risk a trade war.

They are supposed to be so much more adult and professional and smarter than Trump.

So, why are they risking a global trade war?

They must think they are really, hugely benefiting from the status quo to risk it.

Second, there are always unintended consequences; that is the tariff may protect a certain industry by restricting imports but it will invariable hurt another industry that needs those imports to maintain profits.

I'm sure there will be some examples of that. But it is a price we have to pay. Allowing our trading "partners" to benefit so hugely at our expense is not sane.

And our we asking so much? If the trade deficit dropped to a still massive and huge 150 billion a year, Trump would go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents, and coast though re-election.


Why the strong pushback? Why are THEY risking a global trade war?

Third there are a number of other options, that can be used that are less likely to start a trade war and more likely to lead to positive negotiations. Unfortunately, those options are technical and not likely to score any political points for the president.

Bullshit. People are dying from the economic stress caused by this shit. We need strong and aggressive action NOW.

It is easy to blame the large trade deficit on foreign governments that block the sale of U.S. products in their markets, which hurts American businesses and lowers their employees’ standard of living. It’s also easy to blame foreign governments that subsidize their exports to the U.S., which hurts the businesses and employees that lose sales to foreign suppliers (though U.S. households as a whole benefit when foreign governments subsidize what American consumers buy).

But foreign import barriers and exports subsidies aren’t the reason for the U.S. trade deficit. The real reason is that Americans are spending more than they produce. The overall trade deficit is the result of the saving and investment decisions of U.S. households and businesses. The policies of foreign governments affect only how that deficit is divided among America’s trading partners.

The reason why Americans’ saving and investment decisions drive the overall trade deficit is straightforward: If a country saves more of total output than it invests in business equipment and structures, it has extra output to sell to the rest of the world. In other words, saving minus investment equals exports minus imports — a fundamental accounting identity that is true for every country in every year.

So reducing the U.S. trade deficit requires Americans to save more or invest less. On their own, policies that open other countries’ markets to U.S. products, or close U.S. markets to foreign products, won’t change the overall trade balance.

The U.S. has been able to sustain a trade deficit every year for more than three decades because foreigners are willing to lend it the money to finance its net purchases, by purchasing U.S. bonds and stocks or investing in U.S. real estate and other businesses. There is no guarantee that this will continue in the decades ahead; but there is also no reason why it should come to an end. While foreign entities that lend to U.S. borrowers will want to be repaid some day, others can take their place as the next generation of lenders.

The real reason for the trade deficit? Our spending habits

If tariffs make US manufacturing more competitive, that will encourage more investment in US manufacturing both by US companies and foreign companies, I have received some very encouraging anecdotal reports on this, and it is verified by the surge in manufacturing employment.


AND, might I add, that, the status quo that you are so supportive of, is not sustainable, because, someday, those loans will grow beyond our ability to service them.


Then the House of Cards, come tumbling down in flames and ruin.


The sooner we change that shit, the better.

In markets not controlled by the goverment, companies become more competitive by producing a better product for the price. This is the kind of success that brings in investment capital and opens up new markets.

Steel and Aluminum companies don't have worry about producing better products at better prices. They just have to lobby congress and the administration to keep those tariffs coming to force Americans to buy their products.

And that House of Cards is far more likely to come tumbling down when Americans are paying more and getting less.

1. The world market is controlled by governments and government policies. See the EU support of Airbus, as a small symbolic example, or the Chinese government's refusal to crack down on movie pirating.


2. If the American manufacturers cant' compete with foreign manufacturers, and the massive and ever growing trade deficit shows they, in large, they cannot, regardless of what the reason is, then we need to consider how American interests are served by constantly losing.

If you do little checking you'll


3. This country is not going to fall apart because of a small dialing back of the consumer economy. 17% more for washers and dryers? I just bought a washer and dryer for my rental unit, if the prices were inflated, it did not slow me down, or place undue hardship on me.

1. No government intervention in international trade is at an all time low. 47% of American goods are traded without tariffs, at least they were till Trump started his trade war.

The WTO, ruled against the EU on subsidies and they began rectifying the situation within days. Still pending is the EU complaint of US support of Boeing in violation of WTO rules.

The WTO has dozens of complaints against the US as it does most all major economic powers. When we look at most complaints, the intent was not to give a company or industry unfair advantage. For example, the State of Washington gave Boeing substantial tax breaks to make the state more attractive to the air frame business. France has also done the same. The EU claims the US government has awarded huge military contracts to Boeing and profits were moved to finance the expansion of it's commercial air frame division.

The US and other countries are protesting the price cuts in Chinese steel in 2018. The reason for the price cuts is China overproduced steel in 2017 in order to have sufficient supply to satisfy demand in 2018 because of mandated mill closures to revamp the mills due to environmental problems. The price cuts seem a clear violation of WTO rules but again it seems the intent was not to force competition out of the market.

Not long ago, China was an oasis for pirated music and videos. CDs and DVDs were easily copied and sold cheaply at roadside markets. That is changing rapidly with technological changes primarily streaming video and greater enforcement of copyright laws which protects both Chinese and foreign media companies. DVD and CD sales have dropped 28% drop last year and will continue to drop as the nation turns to streaming.

2. That's not true. US exports have increased 60% since 2010. Most American business sectors compete quite well in foreign markets. Most of the industries that don't complete well in foreign markets are those that are very labor insensitive or the completion has a distinct advantage due demographics or geography.

The mistake most people make in looking at US trade is assuming the trade deficit is due to the inability of US industries to compete which is not so.

The fact is our trade deficit is due to the fact that Americans consume much more than they produce thus we import to make up the difference. Trying to blame this on cheating by other countries is absurd. The US has not had trade surplus since 1975. To generate a surplus we are going to have to consume less or produce more both of which has consequence. It's that simple.

3. Don't know enough about washing machines to comment.

 

[Flopper]

4% unemployment, more jobs than people and 108 straight months of economic expansion. The majority of Americans are doing just ******* fine. All you give a shit about is one tiny little part of America

Stop acting like the well being of America or Americans is your concern.


You admitted that you are comfortable with declining White Life spans.


You cited evolution and stated your lack of concern for those that can't adapt. IN Evolution, those that can't adapt die off.


You did that in the context of a comment from me on declining white life spans.


So, don't even try to run away from what you said, ie that you don't even ******* care if large numbers of Americans die, or in the context of evolution, large groups of your fellow Americans DIE OFF.


So, we are past the point of the discussion where you get to pretend that you support your policies because they are good for America or Americans.

These policies are good for Americans and America. More freedom and less government is always good for the people. If the weak get weeded out along the way, that is the nature of life.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Your characterization of people that can't find decent jobs as "weak" is incorrect and just an excuse for you to dismiss the valid interests of people you don't like.


The rest of US, will be taking steps to improve the job market, so that those people can find better jobs, and that wages will rise for the rest of US also.


You need to start explaining what is so great about the status quo, that you don't care about if it is good for other people or not.


Are you just that personally selfish? Or are you so full of hate that you support these policies BECAUSE they hurt working class whites?

You need to tell me what sucks so much about 4% unemployment, more jobs than people to fill them and 108 straight months of economic expansion.

I already described the economic pain hidden by those numbers. Your response was that those people should just die off.

How are you going to improve upon a job market that already has more jobs than people to fill them?

More good jobs and rising wages, across the board.

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

I'm not sure what bubble you are living in. But you need to get out more.

And once again you call me full of hate when it is you that only cares about white people.

No, I was referencing the people you said, repeatedly now, that you want to die off.

Me replying to what YOU said about white people, you race baiting moron.

Currently there are 6.8 million job openings. That figure is forecast to rise to 34 million by 2024 unless something changes.

If you want a job it is there, but it may not be in the little town you live in and it may require you to take on more responsibilities than you won't and work longer hours and go school at night.

Jobs have changed so much in the last 30 or 40 years. Most new employers today look at applicants asking what can you do for me. They don't hire people just to fill a desk chair and move papers across a desk or fill a slot on an assembly line. As an employee, you have to be flexible, do different jobs, take on different products, improve your education. You are more likely today to be hired if you assure the boss you can do the job. However, you are more likely to be fired if you can't.

I believe a lot of these changes are due to the flattening of the management structure. Where once an employee use to report to a group leader, who reported to a section head, who reported to the department head, who reported to a division head. Today, the employee is likely to report directly to department head who reports to the CEO. So your boss has a wider view of the business and has a better understanding of how his people directly effect the end product and profits. This carries right down to the employee so he or she is more likely see himself as a key component in the organization.

The old jobs of 40 or 50 years ago are gone and not going to return and no amount government interference in the market place is going to change that.

The bottom line is if you can't pull your weight, there's not likely to be a union or an employee rule book that will save your job. Some people just can't make it in this new environment. That's why we have safety nets.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wanna buy laundry equipment for your home? Good luck paying more than you used to, thanks to Donald J. Trump and his tariffs.
In this thread, we will come up with ideas as to how to lower said prices again:
Opinion | Trump’s tariffs are already backfiring

**** appliances, all my tax cut money, ie ZERO is going on these high ass gas prices!!!!! thank you Trump!!

What did Trump have to do with it?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

Or they can't pass a drug test.

I made a pickup today at a steel company we go to often. The shipper said they are busy as hell, but can't find workers; they need 11 right now.

They had an orientation for new applicants. 45 people showed up. The HR worker doing the orientation said right from the beginning he isn't going to waste anybody's time. He's telling everybody that all applicants that are offered employment at the company will have to pass a drug screen before getting hired. At that point, about 20 people walked out of the room. He went on to add that the type of testing used for the hiring process will be hair samples, and after hire, urine tests will be the method for random testing. About another 10 people walked out.

We hae a serious problem with labor in this country, and it isn't pay or not enough Americans to do the jobs.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

Or they can't pass a drug test.

I made a pickup today at a steel company we go to often. The shipper said they are busy as hell, but can't find workers; they need 11 right now.

They had an orientation for new applicants. 45 people showed up. The HR worker doing the orientation said right from the beginning he isn't going to waste anybody's time. He's telling everybody that all applicants that are offered employment at the company will have to pass a drug screen before getting hired. At that point, about 20 people walked out of the room. He went on to add that the type of testing used for the hiring process will be hair samples, and after hire, urine tests will be the method for random testing. About another 10 people walked out.

We hae a serious problem with labor in this country, and it isn't pay or not enough Americans to do the jobs.

Perhaps it is time to rethink drug testing and not care if a employee gets high on their own time.

 

[Flopper]

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

Or they can't pass a drug test.

I made a pickup today at a steel company we go to often. The shipper said they are busy as hell, but can't find workers; they need 11 right now.

They had an orientation for new applicants. 45 people showed up. The HR worker doing the orientation said right from the beginning he isn't going to waste anybody's time. He's telling everybody that all applicants that are offered employment at the company will have to pass a drug screen before getting hired. At that point, about 20 people walked out of the room. He went on to add that the type of testing used for the hiring process will be hair samples, and after hire, urine tests will be the method for random testing. About another 10 people walked out.

We hae a serious problem with labor in this country, and it isn't pay or not enough Americans to do the jobs.

Perhaps it is time to rethink drug testing and not care if a employee gets high on their own time.

No, I don't agree with that. America needs productive workers.

 

[Toro]

hahahaha

my favorite thing is watching Trump worshippers tell us why raising taxes, i.e. tariffs, is good for America

hahahaha

 

[Aldo Raine]

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

Or they can't pass a drug test.

I made a pickup today at a steel company we go to often. The shipper said they are busy as hell, but can't find workers; they need 11 right now.

They had an orientation for new applicants. 45 people showed up. The HR worker doing the orientation said right from the beginning he isn't going to waste anybody's time. He's telling everybody that all applicants that are offered employment at the company will have to pass a drug screen before getting hired. At that point, about 20 people walked out of the room. He went on to add that the type of testing used for the hiring process will be hair samples, and after hire, urine tests will be the method for random testing. About another 10 people walked out.

We hae a serious problem with labor in this country, and it isn't pay or not enough Americans to do the jobs.

Perhaps it is time to rethink drug testing and not care if a employee gets high on their own time.

And there is the answer, supposed to be the freest society in the world. Big brother is always in your house.

 

[Toro]

And yet we have record low unemployment. Facts are contradicting the theory.

The record low unemployment rate was in May 1953 when it hit 2.5%.

Civilian Unemployment Rate

But you probably think Trump was responsible for that

lol

 

[Flopper]

hahahaha

my favorite thing is watching Trump worshippers tell us why raising taxes, i.e. tariffs, is good for America

hahahaha

I find it so strange to hear republicans arguing for tariffs and, protecting American workers, taking the position democrats held for half a century.

 

[Toro]

The funny thing about the Trumptard worshippers believing everything their Orange God tells them is that America has a higher tariff, i.e. tax on trade, than almost all of our major trading partners!

Orange Jesus Worshippers whoring for their Orange God over higher taxes is hilarious!

 

[Toro]

hahahaha

my favorite thing is watching Trump worshippers tell us why raising taxes, i.e. tariffs, is good for America

hahahaha

I find it so strange to hear republicans arguing for tariffs and, protecting American workers, taking the position democrats held for half a century.

We've entered BizarroWorld, where so-called conservatives are telling us that higher taxes are good for us.

 

[Flopper]

The funny thing about the Trumptard worshippers believing everything their Orange God tells them is that America has a higher tariff, i.e. tax on trade, than almost all of our major trading partners!

Orange Jesus Worshippers whoring for their Orange God over higher taxes is hilarious!

It will be interesting to see where corporate American political contributions go.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

Or they can't pass a drug test.

I made a pickup today at a steel company we go to often. The shipper said they are busy as hell, but can't find workers; they need 11 right now.

They had an orientation for new applicants. 45 people showed up. The HR worker doing the orientation said right from the beginning he isn't going to waste anybody's time. He's telling everybody that all applicants that are offered employment at the company will have to pass a drug screen before getting hired. At that point, about 20 people walked out of the room. He went on to add that the type of testing used for the hiring process will be hair samples, and after hire, urine tests will be the method for random testing. About another 10 people walked out.

We hae a serious problem with labor in this country, and it isn't pay or not enough Americans to do the jobs.

Perhaps it is time to rethink drug testing and not care if a employee gets high on their own time.

I'm beginning to wonder if that's not the solution. I know at our company my employer goes through this all the time when looking for new workers, and every driver knows it's a federal law we must participate in drug screenings. Yet they fill out applications anyway, I guess hoping our company breaks the law or something.

I've seen a lot of people at my stops lose their jobs over drug tests, and other than that, they were great workers and great people to work with. To be honest, I hate being drug tested myself even though I have nothing to hide. It's just too intrusive that somebody is looking at what you did two weeks ago in the privacy of your own home.

 

[Correll]

I am not referring to just since Trump took office. I am talking about generations of predatory trade policies, like that seen with Airbus.

Trump Right on Trade Predators

"Richard Evans of British Aerospace explained: “Airbus is going to attack the Americans, including Boeing, until they bleed and scream.” And another executive said, “If Airbus has to give away planes, we will do it.” "


And do I even have to talk about the Chinese?!

Why do you assume he is assuming? Maybe he seriously looked at the issue and thought about it deeply, if quickly, and concluded based on the evidence that they are cheating.





It's been decades. The Rust Belt looks like a war zone. The working poor are so squeezed that White Life spans are actually DROPPING.





No, it does not.

The leaders of our Trading "Partners" have a choice, allow for more balanced trade, or risk a trade war.

They are supposed to be so much more adult and professional and smarter than Trump.

So, why are they risking a global trade war?

They must think they are really, hugely benefiting from the status quo to risk it.




I'm sure there will be some examples of that. But it is a price we have to pay. Allowing our trading "partners" to benefit so hugely at our expense is not sane.

And our we asking so much? If the trade deficit dropped to a still massive and huge 150 billion a year, Trump would go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents, and coast though re-election.


Why the strong pushback? Why are THEY risking a global trade war?

Bullshit. People are dying from the economic stress caused by this shit. We need strong and aggressive action NOW.

It is easy to blame the large trade deficit on foreign governments that block the sale of U.S. products in their markets, which hurts American businesses and lowers their employees’ standard of living. It’s also easy to blame foreign governments that subsidize their exports to the U.S., which hurts the businesses and employees that lose sales to foreign suppliers (though U.S. households as a whole benefit when foreign governments subsidize what American consumers buy).

But foreign import barriers and exports subsidies aren’t the reason for the U.S. trade deficit. The real reason is that Americans are spending more than they produce. The overall trade deficit is the result of the saving and investment decisions of U.S. households and businesses. The policies of foreign governments affect only how that deficit is divided among America’s trading partners.

The reason why Americans’ saving and investment decisions drive the overall trade deficit is straightforward: If a country saves more of total output than it invests in business equipment and structures, it has extra output to sell to the rest of the world. In other words, saving minus investment equals exports minus imports — a fundamental accounting identity that is true for every country in every year.

So reducing the U.S. trade deficit requires Americans to save more or invest less. On their own, policies that open other countries’ markets to U.S. products, or close U.S. markets to foreign products, won’t change the overall trade balance.

The U.S. has been able to sustain a trade deficit every year for more than three decades because foreigners are willing to lend it the money to finance its net purchases, by purchasing U.S. bonds and stocks or investing in U.S. real estate and other businesses. There is no guarantee that this will continue in the decades ahead; but there is also no reason why it should come to an end. While foreign entities that lend to U.S. borrowers will want to be repaid some day, others can take their place as the next generation of lenders.

The real reason for the trade deficit? Our spending habits

If tariffs make US manufacturing more competitive, that will encourage more investment in US manufacturing both by US companies and foreign companies, I have received some very encouraging anecdotal reports on this, and it is verified by the surge in manufacturing employment.


AND, might I add, that, the status quo that you are so supportive of, is not sustainable, because, someday, those loans will grow beyond our ability to service them.


Then the House of Cards, come tumbling down in flames and ruin.


The sooner we change that shit, the better.

In markets not controlled by the goverment, companies become more competitive by producing a better product for the price. This is the kind of success that brings in investment capital and opens up new markets.

Steel and Aluminum companies don't have worry about producing better products at better prices. They just have to lobby congress and the administration to keep those tariffs coming to force Americans to buy their products.

And that House of Cards is far more likely to come tumbling down when Americans are paying more and getting less.

1. The world market is controlled by governments and government policies. See the EU support of Airbus, as a small symbolic example, or the Chinese government's refusal to crack down on movie pirating.


2. If the American manufacturers cant' compete with foreign manufacturers, and the massive and ever growing trade deficit shows they, in large, they cannot, regardless of what the reason is, then we need to consider how American interests are served by constantly losing.

If you do little checking you'll


3. This country is not going to fall apart because of a small dialing back of the consumer economy. 17% more for washers and dryers? I just bought a washer and dryer for my rental unit, if the prices were inflated, it did not slow me down, or place undue hardship on me.

1. No government intervention in international trade is at an all time low. 47% of American goods are traded without tariffs, at least they were till Trump started his trade war.

Yeah, that sounds like bullshit. Perhaps 47% don't have a FORMAL OR OBVIOUS tariff, but the assholes that wanted to make Boeing bleed and scream, aren't the type of people to hesitate to hide a tariff or lie about it.

The WTO, ruled against the EU on subsidies and they began rectifying the situation within days. Still pending is the EU complaint of US support of Boeing in violation of WTO rules.

No, they didn't. The EU appealed. The article I read, the people involved, did not really expect any real impact any time soon.

The WTO has dozens of complaints against the US as it does most all major economic powers. When we look at most complaints, the intent was not to give a company or industry unfair advantage. For example, the State of Washington gave Boeing substantial tax breaks to make the state more attractive to the air frame business. France has also done the same.

If such breaks were that significant, I don't think that we would have had decades of trade deficits in the hundreds of billions a year.

Sounds like, at best, a false equivalence and at worse, just a bad actor trying to muddle the waters to fool the gullible.

The EU claims the US government has awarded huge military contracts to Boeing and profits were moved to finance the expansion of it's commercial air frame division.

Takes some serious gall to complain about money spent on military equipment that is used to protect them.

The US and other countries are protesting the price cuts in Chinese steel in 2018. The reason for the price cuts is China overproduced steel in 2017 in order to have sufficient supply to satisfy demand in 2018 because of mandated mill closures to revamp the mills due to environmental problems. The price cuts seem a clear violation of WTO rules but again it seems the intent was not to force competition out of the market.

I'm sure that that is a great comfort to steel workers around the world that lose jobs.

I want to be clear about something. I'm past caring about reasons or excuses for why this trade is not beneficial to US.


Time to balance it or stop it. Either way works for me.

Not long ago, China was an oasis for pirated music and videos. CDs and DVDs were easily copied and sold cheaply at roadside markets. That is changing rapidly with technological changes primarily streaming video and greater enforcement of copyright laws which protects both Chinese and foreign media companies. DVD and CD sales have dropped 28% drop last year and will continue to drop as the nation turns to streaming.

So, we just forget about the hundreds of billions of intellectual property that was stolen and continue to be stolen, because the rate of theft is dropping?

Yeah, that's not the way I roll.

2. That's not true. US exports have increased 60% since 2010. Most American business sectors compete quite well in foreign markets. Most of the industries that don't complete well in foreign markets are those that are very labor insensitive or the completion has a distinct advantage due demographics or geography.

The mistake most people make in looking at US trade is assuming the trade deficit is due to the inability of US industries to compete which is not so.

The fact is our trade deficit is due to the fact that Americans consume much more than they produce thus we import to make up the difference. Trying to blame this on cheating by other countries is absurd. The US has not had trade surplus since 1975. To generate a surplus we are going to have to consume less or produce more both of which has consequence. It's that simple.

I vote for both actually.

 

[Correll]

Stop acting like the well being of America or Americans is your concern.


You admitted that you are comfortable with declining White Life spans.


You cited evolution and stated your lack of concern for those that can't adapt. IN Evolution, those that can't adapt die off.


You did that in the context of a comment from me on declining white life spans.


So, don't even try to run away from what you said, ie that you don't even ******* care if large numbers of Americans die, or in the context of evolution, large groups of your fellow Americans DIE OFF.


So, we are past the point of the discussion where you get to pretend that you support your policies because they are good for America or Americans.

These policies are good for Americans and America. More freedom and less government is always good for the people. If the weak get weeded out along the way, that is the nature of life.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Your characterization of people that can't find decent jobs as "weak" is incorrect and just an excuse for you to dismiss the valid interests of people you don't like.


The rest of US, will be taking steps to improve the job market, so that those people can find better jobs, and that wages will rise for the rest of US also.


You need to start explaining what is so great about the status quo, that you don't care about if it is good for other people or not.


Are you just that personally selfish? Or are you so full of hate that you support these policies BECAUSE they hurt working class whites?

You need to tell me what sucks so much about 4% unemployment, more jobs than people to fill them and 108 straight months of economic expansion.

I already described the economic pain hidden by those numbers. Your response was that those people should just die off.

How are you going to improve upon a job market that already has more jobs than people to fill them?

More good jobs and rising wages, across the board.

Anyone that cannot find a “descent” job is either not looking or needs some new skills.

I'm not sure what bubble you are living in. But you need to get out more.

And once again you call me full of hate when it is you that only cares about white people.

No, I was referencing the people you said, repeatedly now, that you want to die off.

Me replying to what YOU said about white people, you race baiting moron.

Currently there are 6.8 million job openings. That figure is forecast to rise to 34 million by 2024 unless something changes.

If you want a job it is there, but it may not be in the little town you live in and it may require you to take on more responsibilities than you won't and work longer hours and go school at night.

Jobs have changed so much in the last 30 or 40 years. Most new employers today look at applicants asking what can you do for me. They don't hire people just to fill a desk chair and move papers across a desk or fill a slot on an assembly line. As an employee, you have to be flexible, do different jobs, take on different products, improve your education. You are more likely today to be hired if you assure the boss you can do the job. However, you are more likely to be fired if you can't.

I believe a lot of these changes are due to the flattening of the management structure. Where once an employee use to report to a group leader, who reported to a section head, who reported to the department head, who reported to a division head. Today, the employee is likely to report directly to department head who reports to the CEO. So your boss has a wider view of the business and has a better understanding of how his people directly effect the end product and profits. This carries right down to the employee so he or she is more likely see himself as a key component in the organization.

The old jobs of 40 or 50 years ago are gone and not going to return and no amount government interference in the market place is going to change that.

The bottom line is if you can't pull your weight, there's not likely to be a union or an employee rule book that will save your job. Some people just can't make it in this new environment. That's why we have safety nets.

I see a lot in there about what workers have to do, and shit about what employers have to do.


I've been in situations where the power has been reversed, and the employER had to put his mind towards what he could offer me.


That's what I want to see for more of my fellow Americans. Cause let me tell you, if was ******* great.


Your assumption that the changes you have seen are inevitable and immutable, is just you being too close to the problem.

 

[Flopper]

It is easy to blame the large trade deficit on foreign governments that block the sale of U.S. products in their markets, which hurts American businesses and lowers their employees’ standard of living. It’s also easy to blame foreign governments that subsidize their exports to the U.S., which hurts the businesses and employees that lose sales to foreign suppliers (though U.S. households as a whole benefit when foreign governments subsidize what American consumers buy).

But foreign import barriers and exports subsidies aren’t the reason for the U.S. trade deficit. The real reason is that Americans are spending more than they produce. The overall trade deficit is the result of the saving and investment decisions of U.S. households and businesses. The policies of foreign governments affect only how that deficit is divided among America’s trading partners.

The reason why Americans’ saving and investment decisions drive the overall trade deficit is straightforward: If a country saves more of total output than it invests in business equipment and structures, it has extra output to sell to the rest of the world. In other words, saving minus investment equals exports minus imports — a fundamental accounting identity that is true for every country in every year.

So reducing the U.S. trade deficit requires Americans to save more or invest less. On their own, policies that open other countries’ markets to U.S. products, or close U.S. markets to foreign products, won’t change the overall trade balance.

The U.S. has been able to sustain a trade deficit every year for more than three decades because foreigners are willing to lend it the money to finance its net purchases, by purchasing U.S. bonds and stocks or investing in U.S. real estate and other businesses. There is no guarantee that this will continue in the decades ahead; but there is also no reason why it should come to an end. While foreign entities that lend to U.S. borrowers will want to be repaid some day, others can take their place as the next generation of lenders.

The real reason for the trade deficit? Our spending habits

If tariffs make US manufacturing more competitive, that will encourage more investment in US manufacturing both by US companies and foreign companies, I have received some very encouraging anecdotal reports on this, and it is verified by the surge in manufacturing employment.


AND, might I add, that, the status quo that you are so supportive of, is not sustainable, because, someday, those loans will grow beyond our ability to service them.


Then the House of Cards, come tumbling down in flames and ruin.


The sooner we change that shit, the better.

In markets not controlled by the goverment, companies become more competitive by producing a better product for the price. This is the kind of success that brings in investment capital and opens up new markets.

Steel and Aluminum companies don't have worry about producing better products at better prices. They just have to lobby congress and the administration to keep those tariffs coming to force Americans to buy their products.

And that House of Cards is far more likely to come tumbling down when Americans are paying more and getting less.

1. The world market is controlled by governments and government policies. See the EU support of Airbus, as a small symbolic example, or the Chinese government's refusal to crack down on movie pirating.


2. If the American manufacturers cant' compete with foreign manufacturers, and the massive and ever growing trade deficit shows they, in large, they cannot, regardless of what the reason is, then we need to consider how American interests are served by constantly losing.

If you do little checking you'll


3. This country is not going to fall apart because of a small dialing back of the consumer economy. 17% more for washers and dryers? I just bought a washer and dryer for my rental unit, if the prices were inflated, it did not slow me down, or place undue hardship on me.

1. No government intervention in international trade is at an all time low. 47% of American goods are traded without tariffs, at least they were till Trump started his trade war.

Yeah, that sounds like bullshit. Perhaps 47% don't have a FORMAL OR OBVIOUS tariff, but the assholes that wanted to make Boeing bleed and scream, aren't the type of people to hesitate to hide a tariff or lie about it.

The WTO, ruled against the EU on subsidies and they began rectifying the situation within days. Still pending is the EU complaint of US support of Boeing in violation of WTO rules.

No, they didn't. The EU appealed. The article I read, the people involved, did not really expect any real impact any time soon.

The WTO has dozens of complaints against the US as it does most all major economic powers. When we look at most complaints, the intent was not to give a company or industry unfair advantage. For example, the State of Washington gave Boeing substantial tax breaks to make the state more attractive to the air frame business. France has also done the same.

If such breaks were that significant, I don't think that we would have had decades of trade deficits in the hundreds of billions a year.

Sounds like, at best, a false equivalence and at worse, just a bad actor trying to muddle the waters to fool the gullible.

The EU claims the US government has awarded huge military contracts to Boeing and profits were moved to finance the expansion of it's commercial air frame division.

Takes some serious gall to complain about money spent on military equipment that is used to protect them.

The US and other countries are protesting the price cuts in Chinese steel in 2018. The reason for the price cuts is China overproduced steel in 2017 in order to have sufficient supply to satisfy demand in 2018 because of mandated mill closures to revamp the mills due to environmental problems. The price cuts seem a clear violation of WTO rules but again it seems the intent was not to force competition out of the market.

I'm sure that that is a great comfort to steel workers around the world that lose jobs.

I want to be clear about something. I'm past caring about reasons or excuses for why this trade is not beneficial to US.


Time to balance it or stop it. Either way works for me.

Not long ago, China was an oasis for pirated music and videos. CDs and DVDs were easily copied and sold cheaply at roadside markets. That is changing rapidly with technological changes primarily streaming video and greater enforcement of copyright laws which protects both Chinese and foreign media companies. DVD and CD sales have dropped 28% drop last year and will continue to drop as the nation turns to streaming.

So, we just forget about the hundreds of billions of intellectual property that was stolen and continue to be stolen, because the rate of theft is dropping?

Yeah, that's not the way I roll.

2. That's not true. US exports have increased 60% since 2010. Most American business sectors compete quite well in foreign markets. Most of the industries that don't complete well in foreign markets are those that are very labor insensitive or the completion has a distinct advantage due demographics or geography.

The mistake most people make in looking at US trade is assuming the trade deficit is due to the inability of US industries to compete which is not so.

The fact is our trade deficit is due to the fact that Americans consume much more than they produce thus we import to make up the difference. Trying to blame this on cheating by other countries is absurd. The US has not had trade surplus since 1975. To generate a surplus we are going to have to consume less or produce more both of which has consequence. It's that simple.

I vote for both actually.

Applying tariffs forces people to either pay more for American good or get poorer quality, so consumers suffers. Retaliatory tariffs by other countries on American exports hurts businesses and thus their employees. So a tariff war hurts both producers and consumers. The same is true for other countries. If the war accelerates, you end up with a worldwide recession and everybody loses.