Chip Sylverne
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
- Messages
- 5,895
- Display Name
Display name:
Quit with the negative waves, man.
China 25% tariffs
- Thread starter Briar Rabbit
- Start date
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
I think you made also moved a decimal point with regards to S. Korea.
Under a free trade agreement, the U.S. would drop its 2.5% tariff on auto imports from South Korea. In turn, South Korea would phase out its 8% levy on American cars.
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'll check that out. Sorry, I was thinking cars when Ir replied.
Chip Sylverne
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
- Messages
- 5,895
- Display Name
Display name:
Quit with the negative waves, man.
The problem with the new South Korean treaty is that even though they'll reduce the tariff for US cars, US cars don't meet their safety standards, so market penetration is very poor, and not likely to improve.
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
The "Chicken Tax" was a direct response to a European tax on American imports. So I will give you credit for one thing: I can no longer say that LBJ NEVER did anything I agree with.
I'm not sure how big the American light truck market was at the time, so I don't know how big an impact that had.
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
As long as the safety standards are the same for domestic and imported trucks, then I have no problem with that. That is a competitive issue. Not an artificial government made roadblock.
But there still exists the anti-American bias in many countries where it is considered unpatriotic to "Buy American", so even with no tarrifs and free trade, we will still be at a disadvantage. Our solution is to build better trucks.
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
Tariffs address the end result rather than the causes. I'd rather see real changes in the areas of rampant IP theft, prison labor, child labor, and product adulteration, as opposed to simply slapping a tariff on Chinese imports and pretending that we've done something useful.
Rich
Rich
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Why does the guy who is making sense always feel the need to STFU?
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
The only way to fix that is for the Chinese people to over throw the commies.
From the Financial Times:
The US dollar’s position as the dominant global reserve currency has been resented by other countries for decades. The perception that the US wields outsized influence was encapsulated back in 1971 when John Connally, Richard Nixon’s Treasury secretary, told European finance ministers: “The dollar is our currency, but it’s your problem." Whenever a financial innovation looks like it might have a chance of dethroning the mighty dollar, there is always a flurry of excitement.
All eyes this week have been on the threat of a possible trade war between the US and China. But commentators have suggested China’s new renminbi-denominated oil futures contract, launched last week, could also be seen as a sign of international tensions over shifting economic relationships.
The US dollar’s position as the dominant global reserve currency has been resented by other countries for decades. The perception that the US wields outsized influence was encapsulated back in 1971 when John Connally, Richard Nixon’s Treasury secretary, told European finance ministers: “The dollar is our currency, but it’s your problem." Whenever a financial innovation looks like it might have a chance of dethroning the mighty dollar, there is always a flurry of excitement.
All eyes this week have been on the threat of a possible trade war between the US and China. But commentators have suggested China’s new renminbi-denominated oil futures contract, launched last week, could also be seen as a sign of international tensions over shifting economic relationships.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
What if the people are also commies
So the people that brought us kia and daewo say our cars arnt good enough
Ba ha ha ha
But legit, their cars are probably safer, I mean most all of the Korean cars I've driven can't get out of their own way, guess it's hard to do too much damage with a gutless econo box.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
They are not all commies, but they have been disarmed and ruled with an iron fist..... similar to what the left is trying to do here.
JOhnH
Touchdown! Greaser!
Except for damage to the occupants, since they can't get out of anybody else's way either.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Oh now be nice. The left thinks that iron fist part never happens. Of course all of human history doesn’t back that up in the slightest, but hey, they believe more government means we’ve “evolved” and human utopia is nigh.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Plus you have to define which left you’re talking about...
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Plus you have to define which left you’re talking about...
Nope, the "true political spectrum" part of that graph is crap. I've heard the anarchists and libertarians for that matter and the ones I've heard are hardly conservative, anyone who thinks anarchy is a solution isn't thinking.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Anarcho-tyranny is a paleoconservative concept used in critiquing modern "social democracy." Samuel Francis argued that the problems of managerial state extend to issues of crime and justice. In 1992, he introduced the word “anarcho-tyranny” into the paleocon vocabulary.He once defined it this way: “we refuse to control real criminals (that’s the anarchy) so we control the innocent (that’s the tyranny).”
In one of his last essays, he explained the concept:
What we have in this country today, then, is both anarchy (the failure of the state to enforce the laws) and, at the same time, tyranny—the enforcement of laws by the state for oppressive purposes; the criminalization of the law-abiding and innocent through exorbitant taxation, bureaucratic regulation, the invasion of privacy, and the engineering of social institutions, such as the family and local schools; the imposition of thought control through “sensitivity training” and multiculturalist curricula, “hate crime” laws, gun-control laws that punish or disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens but have no impact on violent criminals who get guns illegally, and a vast labyrinth of other measures. In a word, anarcho-tyranny.
Francis argues that this situation extends across the U.S. and Europe. While the government functions normally, violent crime remains a constant, creating a climate of fear (anarchy). He says that “laws that are supposed to protect ordinary citizens against ordinary criminals” routinely go unenforced, even though the state is “perfectly capable” of doing so. While this problem rages on, government elites concentrate their interests on law-abiding citizens. In fact, Middle America winds up on the receiving end of both anarchy and tyranny.
The laws that are enforced are either those that extend or entrench the power of the state and its allies and internal elites … or else they are the laws that directly punish those recalcitrant and “pathological” elements in society who insist on behaving according to traditional norms—people who do not like to pay taxes, wear seat belts, or deliver their children to the mind-bending therapists who run the public schools; or the people who own and keep firearms, display or even wear the Confederate flag, put up Christmas trees, spank their children, and quote the Constitution or the Bible—not to mention dissident political figures who actually run for office and try to do something about mass immigration by Third World populations.
Francis argued that anarcho-tyranny is built into the managerial system and cannot be solved simply by fighting corruption or voting out incumbents. In fact, he says that the system generates a false “conservatism” that encourages people to act passively in the face of perpetual revolution. He concludes that only by devolving power back toward law-abiding citizens can sanity be restored.
In one of his last essays, he explained the concept:
What we have in this country today, then, is both anarchy (the failure of the state to enforce the laws) and, at the same time, tyranny—the enforcement of laws by the state for oppressive purposes; the criminalization of the law-abiding and innocent through exorbitant taxation, bureaucratic regulation, the invasion of privacy, and the engineering of social institutions, such as the family and local schools; the imposition of thought control through “sensitivity training” and multiculturalist curricula, “hate crime” laws, gun-control laws that punish or disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens but have no impact on violent criminals who get guns illegally, and a vast labyrinth of other measures. In a word, anarcho-tyranny.
Francis argues that this situation extends across the U.S. and Europe. While the government functions normally, violent crime remains a constant, creating a climate of fear (anarchy). He says that “laws that are supposed to protect ordinary citizens against ordinary criminals” routinely go unenforced, even though the state is “perfectly capable” of doing so. While this problem rages on, government elites concentrate their interests on law-abiding citizens. In fact, Middle America winds up on the receiving end of both anarchy and tyranny.
The laws that are enforced are either those that extend or entrench the power of the state and its allies and internal elites … or else they are the laws that directly punish those recalcitrant and “pathological” elements in society who insist on behaving according to traditional norms—people who do not like to pay taxes, wear seat belts, or deliver their children to the mind-bending therapists who run the public schools; or the people who own and keep firearms, display or even wear the Confederate flag, put up Christmas trees, spank their children, and quote the Constitution or the Bible—not to mention dissident political figures who actually run for office and try to do something about mass immigration by Third World populations.
Francis argued that anarcho-tyranny is built into the managerial system and cannot be solved simply by fighting corruption or voting out incumbents. In fact, he says that the system generates a false “conservatism” that encourages people to act passively in the face of perpetual revolution. He concludes that only by devolving power back toward law-abiding citizens can sanity be restored.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
They aren't commies, not anymore. Very much capitalist over there, although some resources, such as land, are government controlled. People there work for a company and most of them are owned by people or shareholders as they are over here.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Nothing about that graph suggested anarchy was a solution to anything. It simply pointed out the reality of left and right. And the top graph is the two-party cult system we currently “enjoy” and are taught.
CC268
Final Approach
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 5,532
- Display Name
Display name:
CC268
I vote DenverPilot for king of America...he can surely fix this!!!!
Dav8or
Final Approach
Why would they do that? The current regime has lifted the people up and given them more than they ever had before. I read that there are more millionaires in China than there are in the US. Things are definitely getting better for the average Chinese and their country is getting stronger everyday. Why in the world would they revolt??
CC268
Final Approach
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 5,532
- Display Name
Display name:
CC268
Communism works if done correctly duhhh!!!
The party in the minority keeps tabs on the party in the majority. And with tw parties you always seem to have one with a majority.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I didn't suggest the graph suggested any solutions. I do think the anarchy label is depicted on the wrong end of the graph and I stand by my libertarian and anarchist comment.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
China is a hell hole, the commies tolerate "capitalism" because their ideas fail and they need the money, but people who have the means are itching to get out of there. It would be nice if the commies were over thrown, but I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
And suicide nets at all the sweat shops, gotta love technology
The country is so great all the workers are....falling for it
Nothing says quality of life like workplace suicide nets
Last edited:
denverpilot
Tied Down
No doubt. What does it have to do with what we’re taught our own Parties are? They’re certainly not right of center.
denverpilot
Tied Down
That’s the problem. We don’t need Kings. Nor should we desire them.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
I distrust anything I've been taught about politics and I distrust politicians even more. This country is in trouble, and the trouble mainly centers on politicians robbing us blind while people are whipped up into a frenzy without a clear thought in their head. So much bandwidth is consumed by non solutions for made up problems and complete misdirection from real problems. Some of the republicans are right of center, unfortunately they are not running things. People in this country need to start focusing on results, not intentions, many problems would be quickly solved if this happened.
denverpilot
Tied Down
I know of no Republicans who are right of center.
Your expectation that they’re there to “fix problems” is the first fallacy that we could address. But just look at the two parties and anyone can see that’s not profitable for either one.
I mean seriously? Weren’t we awfully close to having yet another Clinton/Bush race for the Presidency again? LOL.
The two Parties are a broken record, skipping and repeating.
They’re so cultish and cliche’d that one Party ran and supported the guy who said Guam might flip over as one of our 500 or so “leaders”. LOL. And both Parties do that.
There’s very little actual difference between the people wearing $1000 suits with blue ties on and those with $1000 suits and red ties on. They’re right next to each other on that bottom scale and significantly left of center.
Whenever you hear “bi-partisan” hold on. Your ass just paid for something else they all wanted to buy on credit.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nate, it's funny you think you know my expectations when I haven't stated any, at least relative to US politicians. The problem isn't the parties, they are a symptom, they would snap to in a heart beat if the stupid amongst us would spend a little time, educate themselves and hold the politician's feet to the fire. Instead they are focused on making up new pronouns, taking away civil rights and what the Kardashians are up to.
There are right of center politicians in congress right now, you just need to pay attention.
Dav8or
Final Approach
And suicide nets at all the sweat shops, gotta love technology
The country is so great all the workers are....falling for it
Nothing says quality of life like workplace suicide nets
Actually, those nets have a lot less to do with communism and more to do with capitalism, doesn't it?
denverpilot
Tied Down
There really aren’t. Name one who voted against growing government with the spending bill.
How about one who voted against the creation of DHS?
Any voting the military back down to Constitutional size?
Any who voted their own salaries lower?
Voted against ANY Federal power grab over the States?
Voted to disband FISA Courts?
Give me a break. This list of Federalist/Statist stuff they all vote for, constantly, could go on all night.
Just name one who says government does NOT have a solution for everything.
You won’t find one.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Don't see many of those on the wall street offices or on Microsoft
azure
Final Approach
Give it an hour or so, I'm sure it will be.
Hey, IBTL!
Edit: just noticed when you posted that. Maybe the MC is still asleep? (or at church)
bflynn
Final Approach
You said name one who thinks the government does not have the solution for everything - Rand Paul. There are others, but he is the clearest.
I agree that their record on right wing progressivism has been disappointing. But the Democrat record on left wing progressivism has been outright alarming.
There, if that doesn't get the thread locked, there must be something going on.
I agree that their record on right wing progressivism has been disappointing. But the Democrat record on left wing progressivism has been outright alarming.
There, if that doesn't get the thread locked, there must be something going on.