Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 05-18-2018, 10:47 AM   #16
elysiantraveller
Registered User
 
elysiantraveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6 View Post
Chinese imports are a very small portion of our economy. Sorry, but that's just the truth of it. Your facts and empirical data are constructs you use to support your erroneous position. I could easily find similar facts to support my position.

The whole thing is just silly. The US and China will work it out as I suggested some time ago. All this hand wringing is just that. The world and our economy will survive just fine.
Most imports are inputs... some more trade stuff for you to read and how trade deficits really don't mean anything:

Nearly all imports, even consumer goods, are inputs for US firms, retailers and factories

If the "US and China will work it out" how will you be happy? Do we actually advocate the exact same things?!?!? Punish improper trade practices selectively? (PS- TPP would have gone a long way to getting that done in the region by applying indirect pressure on the Chinese with 11 other nations.)

I thought this was all about Trade Deficits/Jobs/MAGA... or whatever... its a moving target with supporters of this agenda anyway.

If we get some concessions from the Chinese on intellectual property rights while allowing firms to bend the rules like ZTE what all was accomplished with all the bombast and stupidity? Nothing other than Trump-bots getting all fired up.

Trade still flows freely. I'm happy then... are you?

Last I checked the Steel Tariffs still aren't being enforced with the EU...

Speaking of steel:

Japan is planning retaliatory tariffs against US exports worth $409 million

Last edited by elysiantraveller; 05-18-2018 at 10:50 AM.
elysiantraveller is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 10:50 AM   #17
biggestal99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhorseplayer View Post
President Trump did not get where he is today by being stupid.
Trump U. is a good example.

How much did he lose in the lawsuit.

Allan
biggestal99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 10:59 AM   #18
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99 View Post
Trump U. is a good example.

How much did he lose in the lawsuit.

Allan
Like many wealthy people and companies, you oftentimes pay to make things go away regardless of guilt or innocence.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 11:23 AM   #19
mrhorseplayer
Registered User
 
mrhorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6 View Post
Like many wealthy people and companies, you oftentimes pay to make things go away regardless of guilt or innocence.



seems the left beieve anyone on the riight that is accused of anything is guilty and anyone from the left accused of anything is not guilty and is being bullied or whatever excuse after excuse.
mrhorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 11:24 AM   #20
Clocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6 View Post

Your recession comment is silly. You and Clocker need to get a room together and compare trade love notes. Both of you lose credibility every time you talk about trade. You act like you're reading tomorrow's newspaper and have all the facts when in reality you're just another anti-Trumper with an ax to grind.

You keep saying this, but you never present any facts, just unsubstantiated opinion. I for one have agreed with many things Trump has done. But my arguments against his trade policy are supported by history and by expert opinion from both sides of the aisle. No one here has ever responded to that evidence other that to say "anti-Trumper". Business people and economists on both sides of the aisle say tariffs are bad for our economy. I have presented evidence of this which has been ignored.

Bush's steel tariffs did not work and Trump's are no different. Trump's lumber tariffs have already added $6000 to the cost of the average new house. As I said here many times, Trump's own people said that his tariffs would increase the cost of living by up to 15%. No one here has even tried to argue that is wrong, or that the tariffs would be a net benefit in spite of that.

The one argument repeated over and over is that Trump is rich and therefore must be smarter than anyone here. You don't have to know trade and tariffs to make money in NY real estate or as the "talent" on a mediocre TV show. When Trump got out of his area, like casinos, he failed.

His own top advisors have opposed his trade policies. Gary Cohn, who has much better financial credentials than Trump, quit over the tariffs. Cohn's replacement, Larry Kudlow, is also opposed to tariffs.

Quote:
President Donald Trump's top economic adviser Gary Cohn is resigning, the White House announced on Tuesday.

Cohn, who had been rumored just weeks ago as a potential next chief of staff, will leave the White House in the wake of his fierce disagreement with the President's decision to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Cohn is expected to leave in the coming weeks, the White House said.

Kudlow is an avid free-trader and has urged the president in recent days not to follow through on the steel and aluminum tariffs.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/06/polit...ffs/index.html


More detailed objective arguments by Cohn as to why the tariffs are bad policy here: http://www.businessinsider.com/gary-...ax-cuts-2018-5

Steel tariffs will be a really good thing for the 150,000 people in the steel industry. They will hurt the 5 million people in industries that use steel as an input and all consumers that buy anything made with steel. How about some objective arguments showing that the tariffs will help the American consumer, rather than dismissing opposition as anti-Trumper?
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
Clocker is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 11:38 AM   #21
mrhorseplayer
Registered User
 
mrhorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
You keep saying this, but you never present any facts, just unsubstantiated opinion. I for one have agreed with many things Trump has done. But my arguments against his trade policy are supported by history and by expert opinion from both sides of the aisle. No one here has ever responded to that evidence other that to say "anti-Trumper". Business people and economists on both sides of the aisle say tariffs are bad for our economy. I have presented evidence of this which has been ignored.

Bush's steel tariffs did not work and Trump's are no different. Trump's lumber tariffs have already added $6000 to the cost of the average new house. As I said here many times, Trump's own people said that his tariffs would increase the cost of living by up to 15%. No one here has even tried to argue that is wrong, or that the tariffs would be a net benefit in spite of that.

The one argument repeated over and over is that Trump is rich and therefore must be smarter than anyone here. You don't have to know trade and tariffs to make money in NY real estate or as the "talent" on a mediocre TV show. When Trump got out of his area, like casinos, he failed.

His own top advisors have opposed his trade policies. Gary Cohn, who has much better financial credentials than Trump, quit over the tariffs. Cohn's replacement, Larry Kudlow, is also opposed to tariffs.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/06/polit...ffs/index.html


More detailed objective arguments by Cohn as to why the tariffs are bad policy here: http://www.businessinsider.com/gary-...ax-cuts-2018-5

Steel tariffs will be a really good thing for the 150,000 people in the steel industry. They will hurt the 5 million people in industries that use steel as an input and all consumers that buy anything made with steel. How about some objective arguments showing that the tariffs will help the American consumer, rather than dismissing opposition as anti-Trumper?





the history and same type of peeps talking the same bs without tryinng or doing anything different. President Trump is puting America first for a change
mrhorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:18 PM   #22
Clocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhorseplayer View Post
the history and same type of peeps talking the same bs without tryinng or doing anything different.

This country is part of a global economy. Trump is opposed to that, and is trying to return us to the kind of nationalist, protectionist country we were before WWII. How is that doing anything different?
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
Clocker is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:25 PM   #23
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
This country is part of a global economy. Trump is opposed to that, and is trying to return us to the kind of nationalist, protectionist country we were before WWII. How is that doing anything different?
Good God man. Stop with the hyperbole.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:28 PM   #24
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
People who oppose strong attempts to regain our footing with regard to int'l trade always remind me of this man. I think you guys got used to Obama for too long.

tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:34 PM   #25
Clocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6 View Post
Good God man. Stop with the hyperbole.

Do you deny that Trump is a nationalist, and strongly believes that this country has gotten too globalist? And that he is using protectionist tariffs to combat that globalist trend?
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
Clocker is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:36 PM   #26
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
my arguments against his trade policy are supported by history and by expert opinion from both sides of the aisle. Business people and economists on both sides of the aisle say tariffs are bad for our economy. I have presented evidence of this which has been ignored.
There are qualitative opinions on both sides of the spectrum, and rather than produce opinions which already support my own thinking, I'd rather lean on my personal experience and education and let Trump have more leeway to produce the results I believe he is capable of getting. After years of playing giveaway, it certainly won't be a pretty process. I'm sure there will be setbacks. However, changing how we conduct negotiations on trade is a must if we are to see any new direction in our account deficit or even a change in attitudes among our trade partners.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:39 PM   #27
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
Do you deny that Trump is a nationalist, and strongly believes that this country has gotten too globalist? And that he is using protectionist tariffs to combat that globalist trend?
First and foremost, I believe Trump feels we have bent over and held our ankles for far too long on the international scene, and wasted great wealth in doing so. Everything he does speaks to this being his primary impetus and thought process. It can come out as nationalistic and anti-globalist, but in my eyes, that's too simplistic a description. He is not any different than any other head of state he meets. They all want the best deal for their country. He's simply doing it differently than past administrations.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:48 PM   #28
Clocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6 View Post
However, changing how we conduct negotiations on trade is a must if we are to see any new direction in our account deficit or even a change in attitudes among our trade partners.

Countries don't trade, businesses and consumers trade. No one trades if they don't find it in their own self-interest. Why does the federal government have to negotiate regulation of how companies and individuals operate in their own self-interest?

Trump and supporters take a very narrow view, looking at only one side of the accounts. A trade deficit, by definition, means a capital surplus. That means foreign investment flowing into this country, creating jobs in the areas we are good at.

Neither Trump nor any of his supporters ever discuss our YUGE capital surplus or why it is good for the country.
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
Clocker is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 12:57 PM   #29
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
Trump and supporters take a very narrow view, looking at only one side of the accounts. A trade deficit, by definition, means a capital surplus. That means foreign investment flowing into this country, creating jobs in the areas we are good at.
A trade deficit is an outflow of domestic currency to foreign markets. How you construe that to mean a capital influx into this country is beyond me. Our money being taken out of America doesn't require it to come back in the form of investment. Conversely, if there were a trade surplus, there would be an inflow of foreign currency into this country which would find its way more than likely into domestic investments.

Unless I read your post incorrectly, I think you have it backwards. No wonder we don't agree.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-18-2018, 01:02 PM   #30
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker View Post
Countries don't trade, businesses and consumers trade.
However, countries negotiate the platforms and rules by which businesses and consumers may trade with one another. It may be in the best interests of the company executives and shareholders to have high revenue growth today at the expense of corporate technology draining over the next 10 years, but is that in the national interests? I have seen it firsthand, and it was known at the time the deal was made. When it comes to personal enrichment, executives often dress up a pig and call it their date. Technology protections have to be made at the national level because executives seem incapable of fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.