3/15 Primaries - "I can't believe it's not Bernie! ®" Edition, Paid for by Hillary for America
1,278 replies, posted
The rational behind people who support donalds trade policy is that once importing becomes extremely expensive, it will allow for American business to spring in and fill in the demand for these products at a cheaper price than importing. This will bring jobs back to the US (it will be more profitable to manufacture in the US again as opposed to manufacturing in Mexico, China, or Vietnam if TPP goes through) in their opinion and the people who have opted out of looking for jobs will be able to find manufacturing jobs again. Which in theory might happen but I'm only slightly skeptical.
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;49946336]This is a stupid statement and a pretty bad generalization. It has more to do with people who are older generally are willing to take less risks than younger people, mostly due to them having more assets and personal responsibilities than younger people. Going for someone with a name and history in politics is more appealing than a no name from left field.[/QUOTE]
It's how advertising works, John. Brand Familiarity influences how likely you are to get noticed and more likely to provoke some thought on "should I or shouldn't I" in the thoughts of the consumers than a product you have literally heard nothing about. Hillary Clinton is the quintessential market-brand candidate, and that's why she has such an advantage despite having terrible ideas, terribly policies, terrible consistency, and being a consummate liar.
[QUOTE=Durandal;49946832]The rational behind people who support donalds trade policy is that once importing becomes extremely expensive, it will allow for American business to spring in and fill in the demand for these products at a cheaper price than importing. This will bring jobs back to the US (it will be more profitable to manufacture in the US again as opposed to manufacturing in Mexico, China, or Vietnam if TPP goes through) in their opinion and the people who have opted out of looking for jobs will be able to find manufacturing jobs again. Which in theory might happen but I'm only slightly skeptical.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, I agree with the claim as well. The reason China has so many manufacturing jobs that we don't is because buying from the Chinese is a hell of a lot cheaper than from a US company.
[QUOTE=Durandal;49946832]The rational behind people who support donalds trade policy is that once importing becomes extremely expensive, it will allow for American business to spring in and fill in the demand for these products at a cheaper price than importing. This will bring jobs back to the US (it will be more profitable to manufacture in the US again as opposed to manufacturing in Mexico, China, or Vietnam if TPP goes through) in their opinion and the people who have opted out of looking for jobs will be able to find manufacturing jobs again. Which in theory might happen but I'm only slightly skeptical.[/QUOTE]
Read my second and third posts on this page; I addressed why this won't work at all.
Apparently y'all just assumed I meant dump all trading partners and go totally isolationist lol
[QUOTE=wystan;49946934]Apparently y'all just assumed I meant dump all trading partners and go totally isolationist lol[/QUOTE]
You made a statement saying "They need us more than we need them" which is distinctly not true, and implies that you think that american trade by nature of being american, is of higher value and that you don't need anyone else.
What were you implying or are you going to stick with your trademark and patented vague non answers?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49946686]Why do you guys actually think America can generate everything it needs internally without other nations involved at all? Why do you think you can be economically independent when that's just not how the world works anymore?
How little do you guys actually know about the supply chain of industry that keeps you afloat?[/QUOTE]
Actually if it weren't for the Chinese willing to utterly destroy the environment, the US supplied much of the world's rare earth metals that are indespensable for modern electronics, and our indigenous electronic component manufacturers produced tons and tons of stuff used here before that stuff was again moved somewhere where they didn't have to worry about the environment. Much of the basic components and resources needed to run the world could be made in the US, it's just India and China are fine with companies just pouring caustic solvents down river and melting people's skin off
[QUOTE=wystan;49946934]Apparently y'all just assumed I meant dump all trading partners and go totally isolationist lol[/QUOTE]does your mind reset after every post n forget all context of the proceeding posts or
[QUOTE=wystan;49946934]Apparently y'all just assumed I meant dump all trading partners and go totally isolationist lol[/QUOTE]
Ignoring the fact that dumping or seriously restricting some partners costs us trade with the rest of our partners (which I outlined earlier on this page), I'm happy to see the backpedaling has begun. :ok:
Not backpedaling, what I meant is that we are such an important and stronger trading partner, that we would certainly have some bargaining power and if we had to twist their arm a little bit it would work.
[QUOTE=Sableye;49946964]Actually if it weren't for the Chinese willing to utterly destroy the environment, the US supplied much of the world's rare earth metals that are indespensable for modern electronics, and our indigenous electronic component manufacturers produced tons and tons of stuff used here before that stuff was again moved somewhere where they didn't have to worry about the environment. Much of the basic components and resources needed to run the world could be made in the US, it's just India and China are fine with companies just pouring caustic solvents down river and melting people's skin off[/QUOTE]
metals like Tantalum are not found in the US in large abudancies. 1/3 the global supply comes from Australia. That's a hard limit to trade that requires you to interact with other countries. Modern day electronics simply don't function without Tantalum and you're not going to get a industry worth out of american mines because the material isn't here.
[editline]16th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=wystan;49946979]Not backpedaling, what I meant is that we are such an important and stronger trading partner, that we would certainly have some bargaining power and if we had to twist their arm a little bit it would work.[/QUOTE]
So with trading partners, you just want to push them away to the point where they no longer want to trade with you because you don't give them fair deals and your own american exceptionalism blinds you to the fact, we don't actually need you?
I really wish people were just all around better. I love enjoy that everyone has a voice and is able to be heard with their vote. I like that people can easily educate themselves on any candidate with a quick search on the internet. But all the attacks on character and such for who you're voting for is just so childish. Voting Trump means you're a racist bigot, voting Hillary means that you're a status quo sheep, and voting Bernie means you're a lazy millennial who doesn't want to work for anything. I mean the history of American Politics has always involved slander and overall childish attitudes but it is just overwhelming at this point. People apparently cannot be educated on candidates if they have if a different opinion on who to vote for than you, and their morals and believes are almost always wrong instead of worth compromising with. I wish this country could just compose itself like adults for once instead of this.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49947003]metals like Tantalum are not found in the US in large abudancies. 1/3 the global supply comes from Australia. That's a hard limit to trade that requires you to interact with other countries. Modern day electronics simply don't function without Tantalum and you're not going to get a industry worth out of american mines because the material isn't here.
[editline]16th March 2016[/editline]
So with trading partners, you just want to push them away to the point where they no longer want to trade with you because you don't give them fair deals and your own american exceptionalism blinds you to the fact, we don't actually need you?[/QUOTE]
That's what Trump wants, fair deals. And considering Canada and US have the largest trade relationship in the world, I think we both do need each other, so by no means do I want to cut ties or something absurd.
[QUOTE=wystan;49947022]That's what Trump wants, fair deals. And considering Canada and US have the largest trade relationship in the world, I think we both do need each other, so by no means do I want to cut ties or something absurd.[/QUOTE]
He wants to get rid of NAFTA, so he wants our trade deals to be imbalanced for US favor. We won't take those deals, and it will hurt us, but it will hurt you just as much, perhaps more, because you won't find a partner if you rip up every trade agreement that aims at fair deals.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/gkTie10.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=wystan;49946979]Not backpedaling, what I meant is that we are such an important and stronger trading partner, that we would certainly have some bargaining power and if we had to twist their arm a little bit it would work.[/QUOTE]
Man, it's obvious that you made a statement you couldn't support, and so you're trying to weasel out of it rather than fessing up that you didn't -quite- understand the gravity of the things you're talking about. So now we've downgraded to "arm-twisting," whatever the hell that means. Do you think our trade partners are stupid? Around 2003, Bush tried to impose a tariff on imported steel. The WTO ruled against us, and a bunch of countries in Latin America threatened to boycott our citrus products. The economic impact would have mainly hit Florida, a swing state, right before election season. Bush cancelled the tariff plan.
If bullying our trade partners was easy or even feasible, we'd be doing it whenever and however possible. Our current policies aren't a product of friendliness or concern for the developing world. Successive Democratic and Republican administrations have set up our policies to the best effect which could be reasonably achieved within their means.
This is why Republicans hate Trump. He's just as vague as you are, assuring everyone, "don't worry about it. I know what I'm doing and it's gonna be great," and guys like you just eat it up without an ounce of critical thought or research.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49947037]He wants to get rid of NAFTA, so he wants our trade deals to be imbalanced for US favor. We won't take those deals, and it will hurt us, but it will hurt you just as much, perhaps more, because you won't find a partner if you rip up every trade agreement that aims at fair deals.[/QUOTE]
You're implying he'll throw out provisions of NAFTA that benefit us in terms of Canada, which would be disastrous and anyone with a brain would see that. We are not in deficit with Canada, quite the opposite is true actually. Why? Canada has comparable labor and environmental laws to the US, we don't need anything to "level the playing field" with them because jobs aren't going there in the first place. Jobs are going to Mexico and China (supposedly), because they can get away with paying their workers nothing and don't give a single fuck about the environment. If TPP is passed American labor and manufacturing will then have to compete with Vietnam and other similar countries. So Jobs go there because its cheaper to manufacture shit there because labor is cheaper. I doubt we'll isolate ourselves from Australia or Europe either because like Canada (correct me if I am totally wrong) their labor and environmental laws are comparable with the US and won't need any fucking around to "level the playing field". The main concern is the emerging economies that don't have such regulations and thus can compete better labor wise.
Disclosure: I'm not a Trump supporter by any stretch I'm hoping for a Bernie win. (who is also against NAFTA, TPP, and other such deals)
It seems weird for people who have said they support sanders in the past, attacking Trump on his trade policy which is more or less the same as Sanders.
[QUOTE=Saxon;49944602]Hilary is status quo and bipartisan, people in this country also hate change of any kind. That's how bush got reelected in 04'
I've accepted that this country isn't ready for someone like Sander's, at least not until the baby boomer generation fades[/QUOTE]
I think the statement that "people hate change of any kind" is just... Incorrect. I mean that was literally Obama's campaign slogan in 08, and the desire to mix up the system is why Trump is doing so well and why a self described anti establishment socialist has done so well against Clinton.
Honestly even if Bernie loses he's already shown that a pretty substantial segment of the population is ready to go further to the left than you would traditionally expect in American politics. If his campaign was smarter about pushing his economic message through a more social lens, he would be more successful. If he could get minority votes, for instance, by more strongly advocating for his position that marijuana be legalized and millions of black men be released from prison, he would do quite well I think.
Frankly he's already done incredibly well going from near nobody status before his campaign began to giving Hilary Clinton, one of the major leaders of the Democratic party, a proper run for her money
im convinced that wystan is the character from memento at this point. he certainly seems to have the same memory and thought process
[QUOTE=wystan;49946979]Not backpedaling, what I meant is that we are such an important and stronger trading partner, that we would certainly have some bargaining power and if we had to twist their arm a little bit it would work.[/QUOTE]
But it literally wouldn't. If trading is unprofitable, then people [I]will not do it.[/I] Think on the small scale. If I can grow coffee beans for 13 dollars a pound, or trade for them for 10 dollars a pound, I'm going to trade for them, right? But if suddenly it costs 14 bucks a pound to trade for them, even if I'll have to buy the land to grow them, I'm going to start growing them myself, even if I was previously buying coffee beans from the most powerful coffee company on the planet. What are they going to do, threaten me if I stop buying from them?
[QUOTE=Jacam12SUX;49942443]it's hilarious and a bit worrying that there are actually people in this thread who support Trump. stockholm syndrome sure is a wacky thing.[/QUOTE]
I just love posts like this that aren't actually bringing anything to the discussion, it's just people making themselves feel good and gaining brownie points with likeminded people by setting themselves atop a high horse they built for themselves
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;49947374]I just love posts like this that aren't actually bringing anything to the discussion, it's just people making themselves feel good and gaining brownie points with likeminded people by setting themselves atop a high horse they built for themselves[/QUOTE]
the irony is this post is just that as well
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;49946621]If I get sick I take money out of my HSA which I dumped a large amount of money into[/QUOTE]
Are you covered with normal insurance?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49944889]I'm 20 and I've dipped into the 37% (the lowest bracket) a couple of times. Of course iget something else entirely for my money, so yeah.[/QUOTE]
we will not
no matter how much we pay
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;49946779]Actually I do, my dad is diabetic and has to have dialysis as well due to his smoking shot his kidneys. I never said I didn't want full coverage, however I don't want to pay the premiums that are required since I am trying to get a house. Using an HSA for someone in their mid 20's is fine, and a good way to avoid having to pay that stupid *don't have healthcare* tax. Once I get a house agreement and start living in it, I will re look into getting a personal plan, or just get my work to pay for it(or find a job that will pay for it).[/QUOTE]
That is an assload of assumptions based on very little.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49947407]the irony is this post is just that as well[/QUOTE]
Not really because I'm not taking a stance at all, I don't support any candidate (and even if I did my opinion would not be relevant because I'm not even from the US) but it's clear that there is an anti-trump bandwagon and that talking garbage without actually saying anything is alright as long as it's about Trump. And I also find it worrying that, given a choice between Hillary and Trump, some people would actually vote Hillary. Trump is a moron, but that woman is fucking [I]dangerous[/I]
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;49948410]Not really because I'm not taking a stance at all, I don't support any candidate (and even if I did my opinion would not be relevant because I'm not even from the US) but it's clear that there is an anti-trump bandwagon and that talking garbage without actually saying anything is alright as long as it's about Trump. And I also find it worrying that, given a choice between Hillary and Trump, some people would actually vote Hillary. Trump is a moron, but that woman is fucking [I]dangerous[/I][/QUOTE]
no trump is fucking dangerous, hillary has at the very least had 30 years of government experience and has an actual staff of experienced people who have worked around government, and has an actual platform. Trump is a fucking egotistical megalomaniac who wants the presidency just to have it as a trophy
[editline]16th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;49946621]If I get sick I take money out of my HSA which I dumped a large amount of money into[/QUOTE]
HSA is not a bright coverage strategy, it may cover day to day doctors bills and some stuff, but if you were on any expensive daily medicine it would be eaten up, and if you are stuck in the hospital for any length of time, forget that covering it either, unless you're dumping exorbitant amounts of money into one
[editline]16th March 2016[/editline]
seriously, a bottle of lamictal costs over 1000$ for 1 months worth of pills, its widely prescribed for all sorts of things, without actual insurance coverage you'd be fucked
[QUOTE=27X;49947626]That is an assload of assumptions based on very little.[/QUOTE]
How is me basing what I have been told and am subjected to bias?
I am told someone with a degree makes far more than someone without it, they are more likely to buy a home early, and such.
I am 25 have been making a meager 75-85k/yr since 23, drive an early 2000's BMW, and work +40 hours a week. I can only imagine when I see Bernie supporters in college with pursuing degrees make, I mean given what common core and NCLB told me and the DoE projections. You guys must be making a lot!
[editline]17th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sableye;49948448]
HSA is not a bright coverage strategy, it may cover day to day doctors bills and some stuff, but if you were on any expensive daily medicine it would be eaten up, and if you are stuck in the hospital for any length of time, forget that covering it either, unless you're dumping exorbitant amounts of money into one
[editline]16th March 2016[/editline]
seriously, a bottle of lamictal costs over 1000$ for 1 months worth of pills, its widely prescribed for all sorts of things, without actual insurance coverage you'd be fucked[/QUOTE]
I'm taking that gamble till I afford my house and a new BMW/Lancer. I never said it wasn't a gamble.
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;49948572]How is me basing what I have been told and am subjected to bias?
I am told someone with a degree makes far more than someone without it, they are more likely to buy a home early, and such.
I am 25 have been making a meager 75-85k/yr since 23, drive an early 2000's BMW, and work +40 hours a week. I can only imagine when I see Bernie supporters in college with pursuing degrees make, I mean given what common core and NCLB told me and the DoE projections. You guys must be making a lot!
[editline]17th March 2016[/editline]
I'm taking that gamble till I afford my house and a new BMW/Lancer. I never said it wasn't a gamble.[/QUOTE]
Jesus christ you made another post just full of assumptions?
What do you do that you earn that much?
I've earned about 30k year (salaried) for the last 8 years (about 20k for the first 3 or so of those years), since I was 22. I own no car, live in a small apartment, and can't afford any medical expenses after my last trip to the hospital wiped out my $6k savings. I also can't afford health insurance. I have no degree.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.