Tariffs

[kallend 1,623]

airdvr

***Hi airdvr,

Quote

if you don't take the time to read the article

I took the time read far enough to conclude that it is nothing but horsepuckey. Just like when I read Ron's link to the point where it also is nothing but horsepuckey.

If you choose to believe this type of stuff, that is your choice; good luck with that type of thinking as you continue thru life.

Jerry Baumchen

Hehe...keep up with the arrogance. You would be so lucky to have my life...I know I am.



Why no response to me, when I provided concrete proof that my crystal ball was better than those of any of the Neo-Cons.

I was also better in predicting the last recession ("the R word") than any of the righties on here.

Maybe I should change my username to Cassandra.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

So much winning.
www.axios.com/us-trade-deficit-highest-decade-china-trade-war-9106a6b2-367f-4df1-a641-ece500976d19.html

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

Problem here is the original topic of this conversation was the Dow.

Point was easily debunked. Dow performs better under Democrat presidents than Republican presidents for the last 6 presidents at least.

Should also note that since Trump's tax plan went into effect the DOW is down 2,000 points or over -7%.

Republicans are bad for economic performance and generally bad for stock returns.

[airdvr 197]

SkyDekker

Quote

Problem here is the original topic of this conversation was the Dow.

Point was easily debunked. Dow performs better under Democrat presidents than Republican presidents for the last 6 presidents at least.

Should also note that since Trump's tax plan went into effect the DOW is down 2,000 points or over -7%.

Republicans are bad for economic performance and generally bad for stock returns.

And once again you miss the point. If you only look at the numbers in the drop it looks bad. When you consider the % of the drop not so much. My point is that it seems to be OK when considering gun violence in Chiraq...

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[SkyDekker 1,122]

[email]

airdvr

***

Quote

Problem here is the original topic of this conversation was the Dow.

Point was easily debunked. Dow performs better under Democrat presidents than Republican presidents for the last 6 presidents at least.

Should also note that since Trump's tax plan went into effect the DOW is down 2,000 points or over -7%.

Republicans are bad for economic performance and generally bad for stock returns.

And once again you miss the point. If you only look at the numbers in the drop it looks bad. When you consider the % of the drop not so much. My point is that it seems to be OK when considering gun violence in Chiraq...

Look up, already showed you that % increase in the dow under Clinton and Obama beats % increase in dow under Trump, Bush, Bush and Reagan.

Again, DOW percentage increases more under D president than R president for the last 6.

[airdvr 197]

SkyDekker

[email]******

Quote

Problem here is the original topic of this conversation was the Dow.

Point was easily debunked. Dow performs better under Democrat presidents than Republican presidents for the last 6 presidents at least.

Should also note that since Trump's tax plan went into effect the DOW is down 2,000 points or over -7%.

Republicans are bad for economic performance and generally bad for stock returns.

And once again you miss the point. If you only look at the numbers in the drop it looks bad. When you consider the % of the drop not so much. My point is that it seems to be OK when considering gun violence in Chiraq...

Look up, already showed you that % increase in the dow under Clinton and Obama beats % increase in dow under Trump, Bush, Bush and Reagan.

Again, DOW percentage increases more under D president than R president for the last 6.

Wow...I'm not disputing that.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[normiss 622]

Yet when Trump talks about the numbers, brags about the numbers, he never uses percentages.

[billvon 2,400]

>And once again you miss the point. If you only look at the numbers in the drop it
>looks bad.

True. When you just look at the objective facts it looks bad. But if you look at a source like FOX News, they can supply any needed justification for disregarding that feeling.

Again, I am reminded of all the people here who, in 2008, kept saying that there was no problem with the economy, and that Bush was doing a great job protecting it.

[airdvr 197]

billvon

>And once again you miss the point. If you only look at the numbers in the drop it
>looks bad.

True. When you just look at the objective facts it looks bad. But if you look at a source like FOX News, they can supply any needed justification for disregarding that feeling.

Again, I am reminded of all the people here who, in 2008, kept saying that there was no problem with the economy, and that Bush was doing a great job protecting it.

Haha...you think W was responsible? Please

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[billvon 2,400]

>Haha...you think W was responsible?

Thank you for proving my point.

[tonyhays 86]

TPP-11 now in effect, to the detriment of U.S. farmers.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/us-farmers-helpless-as-tpp-boosts-aust

"Japan is generally a market where we seek to maintain our strong 53 per cent market share, but today we face an imminent collapse," US Wheat Associates President Vince Peterson told a public hearing held by the US Trade Representative earlier this month.

"Frankly, this is because of provisions negotiated by (former US president Barack Obama's administration) for our benefit under the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

"Our competitors in Australia and Canada will now benefit from those provisions, as US farmers watch helplessly."

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

[normiss 622]

Farm bankruptcies on the rise

[Phil1111 910]

American farmers brace for more pain as Pacific trade deal kicks in without the US
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/31/cptpp-american-farmers-set-for-pain-as-pacific-trade-deal-kicks-in.html

"If the U.S. had stayed in TPP, the country’s real income would have increased by $131 billion annually, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Now, “the United States not only forgoes these gains but also loses an additional $2 billion in income because US firms will be disadvantaged in [CPTPP] markets,” the think tank said in a February report.

Trump has repeatedly said joining the pact would not have been good for his country. The venture, according to the president, would have damaged U.S. manufacturing, added to the trade deficit and sent American jobs overseas.

If the CPTPP’s roster of participants grows, the pressure on U.S. goods overseas would likely keep rising."

So US farmers will start, as of today, losing $133 billion dollars a year to participants of the treaty. trump and the republican congress just passed a massive $867 billion dollar farm bill. Those US taxpayer funded subsidies will be eaten up in just 6.5 years. That $867 billion subsidy? Just tack it onto the current US $21 trillion net debt.

A TPP without the U.S. would be a better deal for Canada
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/a-tpp-without-the-us-would-be-a-better-deal-for-canada/article36363710/

The detailed modelling and analysis shows that Canada's welfare gains would improve to $3.4-billion under TPP11, compared with $2.8-billion under the original. Real GDP gains would improve to 0.082 per cent from 0.068 per cent. Big winners would be Canadian agriculture and agri-food, as these sectors would no longer be competing with their U.S. counterparts in the TPP11 markets.

Every country in the TPP benefits without the US as a participant. In addition the focus that competition brings to the marketplace will make subsequent US admission to the treaty. Especially hard for US farmers and manufactures.

Oh well. For farmers and trump supporters. Decisions have consequence.

[kallend 1,623]

normiss

Farm bankruptcies on the rise

Enough with the winning!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ryoder 1,384]

kallend

***Farm bankruptcies on the rise

Enough with the winning!

2018 was the worst for stocks in 10 years
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/31/investing/dow-stock-market-today/index.html

Winning!

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Phil1111 910]

ryoder

******Farm bankruptcies on the rise

Enough with the winning!

2018 was the worst for stocks in 10 years
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/31/investing/dow-stock-market-today/index.html

Winning!

National debt jumps $1.2 trillion in fiscal year 2018
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/national-debt-jumps-1-2-trillion-in-fiscal-year-2018

Thats an increase of $9,523.00 for every single family in the US

Winning!

[rifleman 61]

Still winning!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ5e5uOgpK4&ab_channel=Hotels.comEurope

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[yoink 321]

Phil1111

*********Farm bankruptcies on the rise

Enough with the winning!

2018 was the worst for stocks in 10 years
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/31/investing/dow-stock-market-today/index.html

Winning!

National debt jumps $1.2 trillion in fiscal year 2018
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/national-debt-jumps-1-2-trillion-in-fiscal-year-2018

Thats an increase of $9,523.00 for every single family in the US

Winning!

I’d love to hear rush’s twisted logic on this one given that the deficit was one of his major criticisms of the previous administration. Some how it will be Obama’s fault, I’m sure.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Lying was one of his main objections to Hillary Clinton.

Lying is also why he blindly supports Trump.

[billvon 2,400]

Trump a year ago: "Trade wars are good and easy to win."    A little while after that he said "When you’re almost 800 Billion Dollars a year down on Trade, you can’t lose a Trade War!”  Almost $800 billion!  Unbelievable!  I mean, when there is that much imbalance, pretty much anything you do is going to make it better.  Right?

Today that almost-$800 billion is looking pretty good.  The trade war has pushed our trade deficit to $891 billion.  It's closing in on a cool trillion dollars.  And, of course, US farmers and manufacturers are still being crushed by those tariffs.

Are you sick of all the winning yet?

 

 

====================

U.S. Posts Record Annual Trade Deficit

The shortfall grew last year despite President Trump’s aim to reduce it

By Paul Kiernan and Josh Zumbrun WSJ

Updated March 6, 2019 6:59 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—The U.S. trade deficit in goods hit a record in 2018, defying President Trump’s efforts to narrow the gap, as imports jumped and some exports, including soybeans and other farm products, got hammered by retaliation against U.S. trade policies.

The deficit in goods grew 10% last year to $891.3 billion, the widest on record, according to Commerce Department data released Wednesday. U.S. trade gaps with China and Mexico, already the nation’s largest, reached new records.

========================

[nigel99 143]

On 12/6/2018 at 6:06 AM, airdvr said:

You believe what you want. Bottom line for me is there were/are WMD in Iraq. In 2003 I'm certain you possessed a crystal ball that told you SH would never use those in any way against us.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

At the time I heard someone say ‘of course we know Iraq has WMD we still have the receipts’ 

As others pointed out it was an ‘active’ program that was wrong

[billvon 2,400]

From MarketWatch:

Rising tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports will translate to an extra $831 in annual costs for the typical American household, according to new projections from Federal Reserve Bank of New York researchers.

From the NYT:

WASHINGTON — The United States and China are digging in for a prolonged trade war, with the Trump administration unveiling a new $16 billion bailout for farmers hurt by Beijing’s tariffs on Thursday . . .

The new program will make $14.5 billion in direct payments to producers, channeled through the Commodity Credit Corporation, a program that helps shore up American farmers by buying their crops. The payments will be made to agricultural producers for a wide range of products, from soybeans and cotton to chickpeas and cherries, in up to three tranches, beginning in late July or early August.

The government will also implement a $1.4 billion program to purchase surplus commodities affected by the trade war and distribute them to food banks, schools and other programs for the poor, as well as put another $100 million toward developing new export markets for American farmers.

That's another $115 per family in the US, for a total of $946 Trump cost per US family.

And our debt just hit $22 trillion.  A new record.

Are you sick of all the winning yet?

[normiss 622]

6 minutes ago, billvon said:

From MarketWatch:

Rising tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports will translate to an extra $831 in annual costs for the typical American household, according to new projections from Federal Reserve Bank of New York researchers.

From the NYT:

WASHINGTON — The United States and China are digging in for a prolonged trade war, with the Trump administration unveiling a new $16 billion bailout for farmers hurt by Beijing’s tariffs on Thursday . . .

The new program will make $14.5 billion in direct payments to producers, channeled through the Commodity Credit Corporation, a program that helps shore up American farmers by buying their crops. The payments will be made to agricultural producers for a wide range of products, from soybeans and cotton to chickpeas and cherries, in up to three tranches, beginning in late July or early August.

The government will also implement a $1.4 billion program to purchase surplus commodities affected by the trade war and distribute them to food banks, schools and other programs for the poor, as well as put another $100 million toward developing new export markets for American farmers.

That's another $115 per family in the US, for a total of $946 Trump cost per US family.

And our debt just hit $22 trillion.  A new record.

Are you sick of all the winning yet?

I was sick of it when his tax "cut" cost us an extra $12,000 last year.

[turtlespeed 212]

7 minutes ago, billvon said:

From MarketWatch:

Rising tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports will translate to an extra $831 in annual costs for the typical American household, according to new projections from Federal Reserve Bank of New York researchers.

From the NYT:

WASHINGTON — The United States and China are digging in for a prolonged trade war, with the Trump administration unveiling a new $16 billion bailout for farmers hurt by Beijing’s tariffs on Thursday . . .

The new program will make $14.5 billion in direct payments to producers, channeled through the Commodity Credit Corporation, a program that helps shore up American farmers by buying their crops. The payments will be made to agricultural producers for a wide range of products, from soybeans and cotton to chickpeas and cherries, in up to three tranches, beginning in late July or early August.

The government will also implement a $1.4 billion program to purchase surplus commodities affected by the trade war and distribute them to food banks, schools and other programs for the poor, as well as put another $100 million toward developing new export markets for American farmers.

That's another $115 per family in the US, for a total of $946 Trump cost per US family.

And our debt just hit $22 trillion.  A new record.

Are you sick of all the winning yet?

If it benefits us in the long run, its a good thing right?

[billvon 2,400]

5 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

If it benefits us in the long run, its a good thing right?

Sure.  Can't see how that deficit will benefit us in the long run, though - and historically, trade wars do not result in benefits for the protectionist country.  And at this point in our history, the most likely outcome from Trump's isolation of the US from trade is that a more open country - like China - will take world leadership in trade.  That is not a good thing for the US.