-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Watch: CNN Cuts Tulsi Gabbard Off as She Lays Out the Inconvenient Facts of the Russia Hoax
- By eclipsenow
- American Politics
- 722 Replies
You know - you come in and attack my position on Trump or something - and then we end up how I don't know what you stand for.
I guess if you refuse to ever contribute your opinions on actual sources I refer to - I'll never know! Good on you - always directing the conversation back to me not knowing what you think. Nevertheless, you're happy to attack those who dare to point out some inconsistency within Trumpism. But I don't know what you think!
But you're always defending Trumpism, or attacking those who point out inconsistencies with Trumpism. But again - I don't know what you think!This is where our conversation usually ends. Fine. I don't know what you think.
Nevertheless - the CIA specialist I have contributed stands. His testimony contradicts Gabbard's. Gabbard is wrong. Trumpism is wrong. Trump is deflecting attention from the Epstein files by his ridiculous song and dance about Obama being a traitor. And MAGA are falling for it as usual.
But - I don't know what you think!
Now - please reply that I don't know what you think - and then we're done here. It's the rule when talking with you. It's the formula.
It's also pretty much the same top 3 rules Trump applies:
1. Flood the zone.
2. Attack the 'ignorance' of others about his own mystifying intentions.
3. AKA: distract, distract, distract.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Trump Tariffs work in less than three days!
- By eclipsenow
- American Politics
- 194 Replies
Do you have a source for that?
We would need to see what these same economists have said recently.
And as long as they flatter his ego - and don't threaten him.
Like Brazil - daring to enact the rule of law against another President that attempted to steal an election for the right.
When exactly did the Congress hand over authority to the President to use tariffs however he wished, especially to punish other nations that the President had personal opprobrium with?
Colour me leftist and continually disgusted.
Colour most of the world that way as well.
Colour post-WW2 allies mostly that way as well.
No - you look it up - I have linked to the 7.
I could be wrong, but you appear to be avoiding clear thinking about basic economic theory to do with tariffs by throwing in the smoke-screen of "I don't know what the SPECIFIC DETAILS of every tariff will be!"
The specifics are not necessary. The general rule was established centuries ago by Adam Smith, and is still relevant today. Where would you disagree with the following?
Adam Smith opposed tariffs
Adam Smith opposed tariffs. He believed that free trade was the most powerful driver of economic growth. He believed that tariffs, particularly those intended to protect domestic industries, ultimately harm both the economy and consumers by limiting competition and increasing prices. Adam Smith opposed tariffs on the following five grounds:
1. Tariffs undermine free markets and natural liberty
Adam Smith believed that a free market was an extension of natural liberty. Specifically, he described free markets as “an obvious and simple system of natural liberty.” He did not favor the landowner, the factory owner, or the worker, but rather all of society. He was opposed to any and all self-defeating economic forces, especially those preventing the full operation of the free market and undermining the wealth of nations.
2. Tariffs inhibit consumer choice and raise consumer costs
By allowing foreign goods to enter the market, Adam Smith believed that consumers gain access to a wider variety of goods at lower prices, leading to an elevated degree of consumer welfare and wellbeing. Tariffs reduce both consumer advantages.
3. Tariffs undermine a competitive environment
Free trade, Adam Smith believed, also creates a competitive environment that incentivizes businesses to innovate and improve efficiency, further driving economic growth. Tariffs have the opposite effect.
4. Tariffs distort prices
Adam Smith argued that tariffs distort market prices, stifle innovation, and reduce the productivity of an economy, ultimately leading to lower overall prosperity.
5. Tariffs, retaliation and trade wars
Adam Smith recognized that retaliatory tariffs could sometimes force other countries to lower their own tariffs but also warned that such actions could easily escalate into trade wars, harming everyone.
Specifically on this issue – and I make no apologies for quoting his thoughts in full – Adam Smith stated:
“There may be good policy in retaliations of this kind, when there is a probability that they will procure the repeal of the high duties or prohibitions complained of. The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconveniency of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods. To judge whether such retaliations are likely to produce such an effect, does not, perhaps, belong so much to the science of a legislator, whose deliberations ought to be governed by general principles which are always the same, as to the skill of that insidious and crafty animal, vulgarly called a statesman or politician, whose councils are directed by the momentary fluctuations of affairs. When there is no probability that any such repeal can be procured, it seems a bad method of compensating the injury done to certain classes of our people, to do another injury ourselves, not only to those classes, but to almost all the other classes of them.”
Conclusion
In my view, the fundamental function of the United States economy until recently and for most of its history exemplifies the application – perhaps compared to any other country in the world – of the teachings of Adam Smith. That is, in all likelihood, the reason for its astonishing economic success.
We all need to remember that, beyond anything, Adam Smith was a philosopher and acute student of human nature.
He recognized that, to a greater or lesser extent, we are all motivated by self-interest. Personally. Professionally. Financially.
Let’s assume that tariff supporters are motivated by the best intentions. But ultimately, intentions don’t matter – especially if they can lead to seriously stalled growth, and even that might be an understatement.
According to recent commentary from Blackrock – the U.S. based investment management company – “We expect tariffs to lower growth and boost inflation globally. Our Fundamental Fixed Income team, for example, has lowered its 2025 GDP growth expectation to 0% and raised its core inflation expectation to 3.8%.”
There was a recent discussion between CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Bridgwater Associates founder Ray Dalio, and the Editor-in-Chief of The Economist, Zanny Minton Beddoes.
During that discussion Ms. Minton Beddoes referred to recent tariff policies as a huge “self-inflicted wound” on the U.S. economy.
Based on the evidence of Adam Smith’s stated views on tariffs, expressed 300 years ago and still widely admired and emulated today, it’s hard to disagree with that judgment.
What would Adam Smith say about tariffs?
Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) is widely considered to be the father of modern economics. His thinking played a pivotal role in popularizing the concept of supply and demand. His published work, particularly The Wealth of Nations – available online – introduced the idea of the "invisible hand". This...
Upvote
0
my chart updates
- By Douggg
- Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum
- 27 Replies
Update to the 7 years chart. I noted the background of the Little horn's movement to becoming the Antichrist.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
How to Mourn the Grief of Intangible Losses?
- By timewerx
- Requests for Christian Advice
- 13 Replies
“get that back and make everyone who took it away from me pay!” which is sin nature loaded. It’s like sitting in front of God and being like a little child shouting “noooo! Give me that back! Evil unbelievers stole my toy!”.
The only difference between us is I lost a lot more but I have no desire to avenge my losses.
Because I know for certain I'm mostly to blame for it. I think it's karma mostly. I have caused mischief in the past acting completely on my own. It's not just some sins where I looked at person with hate or cussed, got drunk, got angry at someone unreasonably, canceled people. I did way worse.
I've actually cast it out of my mind all those guilt most of my life and at some point, I felt like I deserve a lot more and feel like I've received injustice. It's a terrible feeling! But now in my forties, the guilt of past mischief is coming back to me and now feel like I deserve all of it.
I suppose some guilt helps but now I have an overdose of guilt so I know which one is worse. The feeling of losing things unjustly or the feeling that I deserve even worse.
You could take accountability but don't blame yourself too much because that's also bad. The blame is not entirely on you when bad things happen because we do live in an evil world.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
a “dagger through the heart of climate-change religion”
- Current News & Events (Articles Required)
- 47 Replies
That's not global mean temperatures. That is, to accurately measure the rise or fall in Earth's temperature, we need to average the temperature over the Earth for an entire year. Here's that data:
Notice that several independent agencies came up with data that very closely agree.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
