Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 457: Unlimited Tariff Works

(+) Yeah! (+)

It's just so blatant honestly. Like how none of this actually hurts China and just weakens us geopolitically.

Like this dude is a stooge for Russia and China and it's so obvious

Ackman back to praising Trump rofl

I'm curious what the volume is on these squeezes since they seem pretty fast for the billionaires to really make a lot of money off it. Trumpcoin for example had a much longer pump & dump.

Nah It does hurt China. It just hurts us a ton too. Tariffs are negative sum; Trump loves them because his worldview is that all interactions are zero-sum (whereas free trade actually benefits both parties).

LordoftheMorons posted...

Nah It does hurt China. It just hurts us a ton too. Tariffs are negative sum; Trump loves them because his worldview is that all interactions are zero-sum (whereas free trade actually benefits both parties).

it's like ganon-ciding when you're down a stock

that's a smash bros reference

also I may not be 100% here due to cold medicine

colliding posted...

it's like ganon-ciding when you're down a stock

that's a smash bros reference

also I may not be 100% here due to cold medicine

no i'm a ganondorf main and it's absolutely like ganon-ciding when you're down a stock. keep cooking.

If this really ends up at most of the world being at a 10% tariff rate and China alone being subject to massive tariffs, this is going to hurt China dramatically and not going to hurt the US very much at all. The US exports so little to China that it hardly matters what tariffs they put on US goods. The China -> US goods flow is one of the largest in the world and there's no real way for China to replace that income. The US can replace those goods by buying from other countries.

It's just chaos. Who knows what Trump will do. It changes so much from one day to the next.

All of life is a meme/pump and dump now.

You can thank social media addiction, anxiety, and jealousy. You know what of you know when.

Taken from another board:

It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it. The eyeless creature at the other table swallowed it fanatically, passionately, with a furious desire to track down, denounce, and vaporize anyone who should suggest that last week the ration had been thirty grams. Syme, too - in some more double complex way, involving doublethink - Syme would swallow it. Was he, then, alone in the possession of a memory?

Raka_Putra posted...

That goes well with your signature.

Thanks. Can't wait to replay Bravely Default on Switch 2.

...

Ignoring the fact that it's probably going to cost us all a finger.

red_sox_777 posted...

The China -> US goods flow is one of the largest in the world and there's no real way for China to replace that income. The US can replace those goods by buying from other countries.

The US already has replaced a ton of Chinese imports with other countries in Asia and Latam. And China has a ton of other buyers too. Notably, products that really need to go from China to US can now go through Vietnam, just like it always worked. But now with "just" a 10% tariff, which might even be less than the Trump 1.0 tariffs (which Biden kept)?

The Chinese tariffs were never the most important ones, it was the massive global tariffs that amounted to a weighted 40% average of all imports. That's what surprised people, because it's so obviously harmful.

So I started a citizenship application back in November but stopped just before the end of the application to verify something and never went back to it.

Today I am doing the application again and the amount of information they are now asked for and the questions they are asking is way more intensive than it was back in November.

Like this 'Moral Character' section is extremely extensive and over the top and I am fairly certain it did not exist when I was doing it back in November. To me it looks like they are looking for any reason to decline the application. I have a clean history but I would be very worried if I was answering he's to even one of these questions. I'll keep going because who knows what else may come up

Oh hey, I got to one where they can potentially fuck me.

"Are you a male who lives in the US at any time between your 18th and 26th birthdays?"

I moved here to the US 1 month before I turned 26.

"Did you register for the Selective Service?"

No. Because I didn't know I had to.

It then says I should provide a status information letter with my application because I said no. And the link it provides goes to a 404 link.

Edit: As I am over 31 I do not have to provide the status information letter but presumably I am now at the whim of the USCIS who could decline my application based on me not registering when I should have.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/1ede0602.jpg
Re: Tariffs

LordoftheMorons posted...

Apparently the house might vote later today to remove its ability to cancel the tariffs until September like they did earlier with the Canada/Mexico ones

Welp, this did happen:
https://twitter.com/repdonbeyer/status/1910063965415334100?s=46

Got a message from the union that the paycheck withholding has effectively stopped. I signed up for their e-dues. I don't know if that'll matter much because I'm still a probationary hire.

I'm not a fan of these games.

Uglyface2 posted...

Got a message from the union that the paycheck withholding has effectively stopped. I signed up for their e-dues. I don't know if that'll matter much because I'm still a probationary hire.

I'm not a fan of these games.

Govt? I'm surprised there are any probationary hires left.

Okay, today we are fairly close to a circuit breaker level for the market. We are at -6.03% and the first circuit breaker is at -7%.

healthy market

SaveEstelle posted...

healthy market

The healthiest

the tariffs on china are actually 145% so that probably spooked everyone again

I did find it a bit weird that the market had such a big rally after the pause announcement because sure, it meant we were walking back an unprecedented catastrophe but we were still firmly in unmitigated disaster territory with the global 10% and comical 145% China tariffs.

I get - to an extent - some relief that we weren't going to have like 50% tariffs on all of Asia but it wasn't a full backpedal! Though I suppose Wall Street now thinks, maybe rightly, that Trump will blink at all future confrontations on this but idk and I don't think he knows either.

Some gains again. S&P a bit beneath a 5% loss.

Its a real stable economy because were run by a real stable genius

The market didn't even reverse all the losses since Thursday last week though. It seemed like a pretty normal reaction to the news. I don't think the market expects tariffs with China to stay anywhere near these levels. There's usually some escalation followed by negotiation and settlement.

If you follow the news too closely and trade in reaction to it with someone like Trump at the helm, I think you probably get wrecked. Like, if you sold stocks after the tariff announcement on Thursday and bought them after the pause announcement yesterday, you're doing way worse than someone who hasn't looked at the news in a week.

Definitely agree there.

Oh, I'm not in the market or anything and I don't think I'd have tried to time it really if I had been given how "time in the market beats timing the market" and all that - I'm just commenting on what I'm seeing lol. It isn't helping shake me of my "it's all vibes now and not reflecting reality" feeling though!

Listen up, liberals:

*Crashes stock market*

To be serious though, the Republicans and their spokespeople going anti-capitalist over the last week has been hilarious. Only trouble is instead of redistribution theyre just making everybody poor.

LightningStrikes posted...

To be serious though, the Republicans and their spokespeople going anti-capitalist over the last week has been hilarious. Only trouble is instead of redistribution theyre just making everybody poor.

That is usually what happens when a government tries to equalize wealth. It's easy to destroy wealth and hard to create it, so if you are going to equalize you generally go for destruction.

But also Trump has been talking about these policies since the 80s and certainly the whole time he's been in politics since 2015. The Republican economic orthodoxy has been on the way out for years.

I'm pretty sure a few billionaires made a LOT of money yesterday

If Trump didn't personally make a ton of money this past week in the market I'll be disappointed. To my understanding, it would be completely legal. It's not insider trading because foreknowledge about trade policy is not inside information of a corporation. It doesn't violate the STOCK Act because the president is not a member of Congress.

FFDragon posted...

I'm pretty sure a few billionaires made a LOT of money yesterday

https://tinyurl.com/3zpc9rxs

Trump Media closed up 22.67%, soaring twice as much as the broader market, a stunning performance by a company that lost $400 million last year and is seemingly unaffected by whether tariffs would be imposed or paused.

Trumps 53% ownership stake in the company, now in a trust controlled by his oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., rose by $415 million on the day.

Trump Media was bested, albeit by only two-hundreds of a percentage point, by another Trump administration stock pick Elon Musks Tesla.

HeroicCrono posted...

That is usually what happens when a government tries to equalize wealth. It's easy to destroy wealth and hard to create it, so if you are going to equalize you generally go for destruction.

Yeah thats why the greatest income and wealth equality is in the nordic countries, because theyre so poor! Wait a minute, that doesnt sound right.

But also Trump has been talking about these policies since the 80s and certainly the whole time he's been in politics since 2015. The Republican economic orthodoxy has been on the way out for years.

Trump has been a Republican for a much shorter span than that. However, there is actually a form of right wing economic orthodoxy that uses tariffs, specifically what Lutnick prescribes to of using them to pay for massive tax cuts. Essentially just using them as supercharged VAT. So there is the question of is it on the way out or are they just still doing it but really poorly so?

Not the onion.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2eeggyppzo

Trump signs order to 'make America's showers great again'

Donald Trump is going to "make America's showers great again" by easing rules restricting water flow, the White House says.

The US president is ordering the energy secretary to rescind a change introduced by Barack Obama that restricted multi-nozzle showers from discharging over 2.5 gallons of water per minute overall.

This served "a radical green agenda that made life worse for Americans", the White House said, as Trump criticised the "ridiculous" amount of time he says it takes to wet his hair in the shower.

Consumer and conservation groups have previously argued that changing the rules is wasteful and unnecessary.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Not the onion.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2eeggyppzo

Good. Why was the government regulating water flow in showers to start with? This kind of authoritarianism is really bad politically and hopefully the Democrats will wake up to how many votes it's costing them. Their gas stoves ban idea was also extremely unpopular.

LightningStrikes posted...

Yeah thats why the greatest income and wealth equality is in the nordic countries, because theyre so poor! Wait a minute, that doesnt sound right.

Has there been a sudden change in policy by any of their governments to achieve that though?

If your hair is natural and not filled with product, it really doesn't take long at all.

HeroicCrono posted...

Good. Why was the government regulating water flow in showers to start with? This kind of authoritarianism is really bad politically and hopefully the Democrats will wake up to how many votes it's costing them. Their gas stoves ban idea was also extremely unpopular.

I wouldn't call it authoritarian. There are valid reasons for the government to regulate consumer goods. The shower thing just doesn't seem like a good policy.

Regulating water I could see in areas where wealthy people like millionaires waste a massive amount of it watering their lawns and filling their pools especially if theres water issues going on where you might need the water for more important things

HeroicCrono posted...

Good. Why was the government regulating water flow in showers to start with? This kind of authoritarianism is really bad politically and hopefully the Democrats will wake up to how many votes it's costing them. Their gas stoves ban idea was also extremely unpopular.

Do you collect, maintain and store your own supply of clean water?

Because if so, go ahead and waste as much of your own water as you want. But otherwise you can recognize that you live in a society and policies that actually prevent unnecessary waste can be a good thing.

Also we've had a 2.5 gallons per minute federal standard since 1992.

Some people tried to get around that limit by adding extra nozzles and pumping out 2.5 gallons per minute per nozzle. That's what Obama clarified. You don't need to be showering with 5.0 or 7.5 gallons of water per minute.

We've been getting by just fine for 33 years without needlessly making changes just to allow people to be pointlessly wasteful.

The tariffs are starting to show up in Trumps approval rating; hes down to -5 in Nate Silvers tracker.

You know, it takes a really long time to get your hair wet when you don't have any water left because we wasted it all.

But I guess that's just bad policy to actually enforce a limitation that doesn't cost anybody anything unreasonable. Gotta read the room and realize Americans are completely incapable of thinking of any consequences of their actions for the future, and for anyone who might not be exactly themself.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Also we've had a 2.5 gallons per minute federal standard since 1992.

Some people tried to get around that limit by adding extra nozzles and pumping out 2.5 gallons per minute per nozzle. That's what Obama clarified. You don't need to be showering with 5.0 or 7.5 gallons of water per minute.

We've been getting by just fine for 33 years without needlessly making changes just to allow people to be pointlessly wasteful.

I wonder if people are attributing lower-flow shower heads to the policy, then. Most people presumably aren't measuring the water flow themselves.

Did we get a chance to vote on it? I don't recall this being in Obama's campaign platform. Did our elected representatives in Congress get a chance to vote on it? If not, then this is authoritarian and antidemocratic and overturning it is good.

paperwarior posted...

I wonder if people are attributing lower-flow shower heads to the policy, then. Most people presumably aren't measuring the water flow themselves.

I'd wager most people experiencing flow issues are doing so as a result of the infrastructure involved and not the shower head itself

If you install a high flow shower head into a house that has low water pressure it's not going to magically fix that.

HeroicCrono posted...

Did we get a chance to vote on it? I don't recall this being in Obama's campaign platform. Did our elected representatives in Congress get a chance to vote on it? If not, then this is authoritarian and antidemocratic and overturning it is good.

It seems to me that putting multiple shower heads together is a technicality meant to avoid following the law passed by Congress, and the Executive is within its rights to narrow the definition when enforcing it.

HeroicCrono posted...

Their gas stoves ban idea was also extremely unpopular.

That never existed, like most controversies, but it doesn't really matter.

In fact, if everyone knew about induction and how it existed, it wouldn't be unpopular at all. Anytime you talk about induction, people still think of the shitty wire stove at your grandma's. Any thinking person can be convinced that induction is more effective, and gas is directly dangerous. Gas appliances are definitely our generation's asbestos. We don't even need any more studies on it, we know it's bad. We just need to accept it.

But yeah, Trumpism is most likely to ban gas stoves and other products. Authoritarianism's only tools are taxation (already happening) and rationing, and when we hit disasters with supply soon enough, the rations will come out without a second thought. You'd better have a few dozen tanks of propane in your garage for your gas stove when that happens.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I'd wager most people experiencing flow issues are doing so as a result of the infrastructure involved and not the shower head itself

If you install a high flow shower head into a house that has low water pressure it's not going to magically fix that.

We had a similar experience, though. The original shower head was subpar and we bought a replacement with higher flow. I couldn't say whether the old one was actually allowing 2.5 gallons or not, though. There's no state limit here beyond the federal one.