Trump's steel tariff


#321

It could be if I was doing that, I suppose, but I’m equivocating self proclaimed experts with self proclaimed experts, and even genuine experts who actually do know what they’re talking about are proved wrong often enough. Like the so called ‘expert’ wildlife biologists who will (or would, anyway, I don’t waste my time on them any more) tell you eastern timber rattlers only grow six and half feet long. I have personally killed 3 nearly eight feet long, and one eight and a half. South of here, they’re even bigger, but the textbooks say six and a half, so the not-so-unusual specimens can be ignored if not outright denied. (Maybe they’ve updated the textbooks… but I doubt it)

Expert doesn’t mean infallible. Rare doesn’t mean non-existent. Unusual doesn’t mean impossible.
General trends have all kinds of exceptions.

Y’all make all the confident predictions you want. Me, I’ll wait and see. Maybe he gets lucky. Maybe he has intelligence on the political and economic conditions in China that gives him an ‘ace in the hole’ for winning concessions with meaningful benefit. Maybe it’s an unmitigated disaster. Maybe a dinosaur killer smacks us all into oblivion and none of it matters.

I have never liked Donald Trump. I have always considered him conceited, arrogant and vain, with all that implies. I have never approved of his cavalier attitude towards relationships with women in general and marriage in particular. He comes across to me as the worst kind of huckster… and yet I find myself thus far satisfied with the product he has provided. Not by any means perfect, it is far better than I expected.


#323

No, you’re comparing analysis of polls, which are known to have sampling errors, with analysis of Economic history, which has not. even. once. produced an example of tariffs making an economy better.

This isn’t unknowable, this isn’t complicated. Taxes hurt economies. Taxes which intentionally galvanize trading partners and make businesses utenable, hurt even worse.

Invalid; economics happens because of emergent consumer choices, not experts.

It’s experts, like Peter Navarro, who Trump is listening to, to intercede in the economy. To deny consumers are making the right choice.

Which is complete and utter bull. No expert knows the market better than it knows itself.

Knowledge in the economy, by its very definition, is dispersed. Trump and his advisers couldn’t tell a gas station attendant in Ohio how to make better choices in their work, so it’s a damn joke for them to try it with the whole economy.


#324

BS. For over a CENTURY the U.S. supported itself entirely with tariffs and excise taxes. You want to improve our economy? Easy…REPEAL the 16th Amendment.


#325

And had a Navy so small the Chileans could threaten us.

Government spending was <3% of GDP.

Income taxes are necessary to support the Government bulwark; to include the military.

Tariffs didn’t make our economy strong; we just had a lack of everything else that weakens it today. No Regulation registries 1,000s of pages long, a gold-backed currency, and a strong immigration rate.


#326

That must be how we sent an entire FLOTILLA of battleships, painted white, on an around-the-world. show of force, huh? And CHILE could threaten us? Nonsense…as usual.


#327

Which we only built, because:

image

We acceded concessions to them in 1882, 1885, 1888 and narrowly avoided war in 1890 in what was known as the Baltimore incident, which is when we finally turned the tables.

Pays to give history more than just a passing glance.