I wouldn't vote for Bernie Sanders if he advocated Communism. Nobody would, except maybe a handful of people (literally). But he never would have been elected mayor, let alone made it to the House, then the Senate. Thankfully there aren't enough people buying your "Communist" delusions to deprive us of the service of Mr. Sanders -- a fantastic Progressive who will hopefully be our next president. Him or Warren, as this country desperately needs a Progressive president and definitely not a 2nd term of the corrupt, incompetent Russian asset.
Actually, the last thing America needs is a private-sector-aggrandizing, individualist fool to satisfy the control-through-incompetence anti-elites freaks.
So, what you're saying is that you oppose Dotard's efforts at pressuring the FED chair to lower interest rates? And you disagree with Dotard's meddling in the free market with tariffs? Interesting.
Since the market isn't free, and until the right laws are in place, yes, government intervention to counter existing government intervention is necessary. And if you want to have a market, tariffs should always be 10,000 percent on ALL imports.
That was someone else's mind you read. I never thought it was "fine when Obama proposed it". I have written on my blog (and other blogs) about my opposition to the TPP. You presume, because I hate the orange buffoon you worship, I must be a Globalist. Despite my many corrections of your false assertions.
In any case, you said the 10k percent tariff should apply to ALL imports, but (as per the article you link to) that is not what Obama proposed. What the article discusses are the Big Pharma protections the TPP contained. Protections that I strongly oppose.
BTW, Dotard put the SAME PROTECTIONS in his USMCA trade deal. As per The Hill, Big Pharma is the big winner of the USMCA. Their goal, btw, is to protect BIG PROFITS and not to protect domestic manufacturing. Proof Dotard is on the side of the oligarchs and not the "common man" (lie from his campaign and inauguration speech).
Trump wouldn't have to suck up to the Never-Trump Republicans if the handful of non-Globalist Democrats left in the Senate weren't attacking Trump 24/7. Perhaps then, Trump could make a worker-friendly/ protectionist trade deal. But you won't let him... and your whining about it are but crocodile tears.
No, I do not want to let Dotard put the same Big Pharma protections in his USMCA trade deal. Congress isn't going to vote on it. And I'm not aware of any worker-friendly/ protectionist trade deal being proposed by Dotard. If he has one he should use his bully pulpit to promote it. Instead he uses his rallies to soak up adulation from adoring idiots and his twitter account to attack people and whine about being held accountable for his impeachable offenses.
No deals can be made (even if Dotard proposed one, which he has not) because republics control the Senate (and Dotard's own party opposes him on trade). Hopefully there will be some action on trade under president Warren. I look forward to your commentaries concerning your support for President Warren's worker-friendly/protectionist trade deal proposals.
Warren is an honorary member of the Never Trump Republican Club in the Senate. Her idea of a worker friendly trade deal is a reauthorization of the Export-Import (Exim) Bank and a $20B loan guarantee for Boeing.
The goal of the profitable (makes money for the government) Export-Import bank is to "aid in the export of American goods and services". You're opposed to importing cheap foreign goods (costing American jobs) -AND- exporting goods manufactured here (in support of American jobs)???
The American Revolution was a revolt against British State mercantilism. That since WWII and the subsequent "Reagan years" America has adopted state mercantilism as a policy is a modern economic 'mistake'. It makes us no better than China as a trading partner.
No, they're too busy offloading our manufacturing surplus and colluding with the World Bank and IMF to manage their coup d'état in Bolivia. We need that Green New Deal!
25 comments:
Don't vote for kleptocrats like Dotard.
Rule by even Kleptocrats beats the hell out of being ruled by State Communists like Bernie.
...cuz in the communist state, EVERYONE ends up starving.
I wouldn't vote for Bernie Sanders if he advocated Communism. Nobody would, except maybe a handful of people (literally). But he never would have been elected mayor, let alone made it to the House, then the Senate. Thankfully there aren't enough people buying your "Communist" delusions to deprive us of the service of Mr. Sanders -- a fantastic Progressive who will hopefully be our next president. Him or Warren, as this country desperately needs a Progressive president and definitely not a 2nd term of the corrupt, incompetent Russian asset.
The last thing that America needs is another government aggrandizing and collectivizing fool to satisfy the control-through-incompetence freak elites.
Actually, the last thing America needs is a private-sector-aggrandizing, individualist fool to satisfy the control-through-incompetence anti-elites freaks.
...because the ever increasingly government directed economy of today is so much better than in ever was in the past.
So, what you're saying is that you oppose Dotard's efforts at pressuring the FED chair to lower interest rates? And you disagree with Dotard's meddling in the free market with tariffs? Interesting.
Since the market isn't free, and until the right laws are in place, yes, government intervention to counter existing government intervention is necessary. And if you want to have a market, tariffs should always be 10,000 percent on ALL imports.
I thought you favored reciprocal tafiffs. 10k percent is absurd - and would result in zero trade. 10k percent is not reciprocal.
It's not? You were fine when Obama proposed it...
That was someone else's mind you read. I never thought it was "fine when Obama proposed it". I have written on my blog (and other blogs) about my opposition to the TPP. You presume, because I hate the orange buffoon you worship, I must be a Globalist. Despite my many corrections of your false assertions.
In any case, you said the 10k percent tariff should apply to ALL imports, but (as per the article you link to) that is not what Obama proposed. What the article discusses are the Big Pharma protections the TPP contained. Protections that I strongly oppose.
BTW, Dotard put the SAME PROTECTIONS in his USMCA trade deal. As per The Hill, Big Pharma is the big winner of the USMCA. Their goal, btw, is to protect BIG PROFITS and not to protect domestic manufacturing. Proof Dotard is on the side of the oligarchs and not the "common man" (lie from his campaign and inauguration speech).
Trump wouldn't have to suck up to the Never-Trump Republicans if the handful of non-Globalist Democrats left in the Senate weren't attacking Trump 24/7. Perhaps then, Trump could make a worker-friendly/ protectionist trade deal. But you won't let him... and your whining about it are but crocodile tears.
No, I do not want to let Dotard put the same Big Pharma protections in his USMCA trade deal. Congress isn't going to vote on it. And I'm not aware of any worker-friendly/ protectionist trade deal being proposed by Dotard. If he has one he should use his bully pulpit to promote it. Instead he uses his rallies to soak up adulation from adoring idiots and his twitter account to attack people and whine about being held accountable for his impeachable offenses.
No deals can be made (even if Dotard proposed one, which he has not) because republics control the Senate (and Dotard's own party opposes him on trade). Hopefully there will be some action on trade under president Warren. I look forward to your commentaries concerning your support for President Warren's worker-friendly/protectionist trade deal proposals.
Warren is an honorary member of the Never Trump Republican Club in the Senate. Her idea of a worker friendly trade deal is a reauthorization of the Export-Import (Exim) Bank and a $20B loan guarantee for Boeing.
:P
The goal of the profitable (makes money for the government) Export-Import bank is to "aid in the export of American goods and services". You're opposed to importing cheap foreign goods (costing American jobs) -AND- exporting goods manufactured here (in support of American jobs)???
I'm against state assistance to export America's surplus production capacity aka mercantilism.
Why? Because you hate government so much you're willing to destroy the jobs of American workers rather than let it do something good for them?
No, because I'm against what happened to Bengal in 1770 and lead to the American Revolution.
England to Bengal: "Don't grow food, grow tea"...
The American Revolution was a revolt against British State mercantilism. That since WWII and the subsequent "Reagan years" America has adopted state mercantilism as a policy is a modern economic 'mistake'. It makes us no better than China as a trading partner.
Adam Smith's 1776 book "The Wealth of Nations" is a diatribe AGAINST mercantilism.
The Export-Import Bank isn't forcing exportation of goods needed here.
No, they're too busy offloading our manufacturing surplus and colluding with the World Bank and IMF to manage their coup d'état in Bolivia. We need that Green New Deal!
Post a Comment