Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: shawn Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: I Salute the Democrat Party Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 10:52:34 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 98 Message-ID: References: <1740118332-1263@newsgrouper.org> <4tfgrjdf7669fballc9l794usebd2eraf1@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 16:52:36 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c522e13f2e3ecc7fd34f3ad46835afbb"; logging-data="3639797"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+tUTQXDKn5M0tKMLNn1n3w/zPdX3y+XtQ=" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:j9nr4Lo8x+uWfQUquBZ+qLH0KkE= Bytes: 5454 On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 14:57:20 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" wrote: >shawn wrote: >>Fri, 21 Feb 2025 06:31:02 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman : >>>Ed Stasiak wrote: > >>>>>BTR1701 > >>>>>You've become the party of big business > >>>>Indeed. > >>>How are steel and aluminum tariffs not going to raise the cost of >>>manufacturing of almost everything? How does the consumer benefit? > >>Because it will bring steel production back to the USA. > >That doesn't make any sense. Tariffs dom't make domestic production the >low-cost producer. > >Did it work for China? Obviously not as they are still subsidizing those >industries, to the detriment of their own economy. > >IF they are doing something stupid, then the rest of the world might >take advantage. > >>Admittedly it will take a few decades for that to happen and only >>if future Presidents continue the pain on the consumers. And only if >>steel/aluminum production is cheap enough in the future to keep costs >>down. > >C'mon, shawn. You've just admitted that you are well aware that tariffs >don't magically turn domestic industry into the low-cost producer. I'm sorry that someone removed your sarcasm detector. I hope one day modern medicine can find a way to replace yours. ;) To make it plain I think Trump was full of BS from the first moment he started talking about tariffs. To him it seems like implementing a tariff automatically brings the jobs back or forces other countries to lower their costs. It doesn't work that way but too many people don't seem to understand that so Trump saying this is good for the country is enough for them. >>So the idea is we have pain now and for the rest of our lifetime to >>hopefully (Fingers crossed) it will bring down costs and provide jobs >>in the future. The far future. > >"Pain now and for the rest of our lifetime" means that we're the >higher-cost producer in the rest of the economy, and should be importing >finished goods from places not imposing tariffs on those inputs. > >In many cases, there simply won't domestic sources anyway. > >Let's take an obvious example of agricultural sugar from sugar cane and >sugar beets, two sets of growers that have been protected for years. >American candy manufacturers are still denied access to cheap sugar at >world prices. Chicago was once the candy-making heart of the United >States, with 24 major factories, the very last of which M&M/Mars closed >a few years ago. But this created the inferior substitution of high >fructose corn syrup, making the man who was once considered to be the >nation's biggest industrial welfare queen very very wealthy, Dwayne >Andreas. > >Despite decade after decade after decade protecting these two >agticultural products, America is still not the low-cost producer. > >>>>If you listen to NPR, they pretty much daily harp on >>>>the horrors of tariffs and how average working class Americans >>>>are going to get raped at the grocery store, all because Trump >>>>isn't letting China flood the U.S. with their products (all the >>>>while China tariffs the shit out of imported American stuff). > >>>They've denied their own consumers the benefits of world trade. Not the >>>problem of the rest of the world. > >>We provide tariffs on Chinese goods that we want to limit in this >>country like EVs. This is something that was happening before Trump. > >No shit. Trump is taking very bad ideas from the late 19th century and >turming them into domestic policy. > >>>>https://i.postimg.cc/Vv01p4LH/temp-Imageuk9-FBr.avif >>>>https://i.postimg.cc/HjGHg5rW/temp-Imagej9-Su-Zk.avif > >>>Why don't you demand a solution for bringing down domestic manufacturing >>>costs? The problem isn't isolating American consumers from world trade. >>>It's the sky high cost of land. > >>>Find a graph that makes this point, that land values began rising faster >>>than the rate of inflation starting in the late '70s/early '80s. You >>>think tariffs will solve the land problem, given that land values in > >>Trump may actually get it, but why should he care? It doesn't impact >>him or his friends. > >As a developer, it would have impacted him.