Poor Big Rich Companies

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am no expert , I am sure we have treaties , but in this case I am in Trumps corner TARRIFF [/quote]

Oh my, you really think you can afford a trade war right now?

With your major lenders, no less?

Adorable.

[/quote]

When our imports exceed our exports , I think it would be good for America. I will not vote Trump , but he says the same thin
[/quote]

It would not even be a good thing if the rest of the world took it in silence.

Since it wont and since you are 1,6 trillion in the hole each year that need to be financed, it would sink you.

[/quote]

22

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]666Rich wrote:
+1, thats why China will not devalue their currency. They have us by the balls. Plus, its rather hypocritical to ask them to do so when we have the Fed printing billions of dollars. I wouldnt believe any “get tough on China” rhetoric from anyone.[/quote]

I disagree, we have them by the balls…

If we just decided we’re not paying back shit and they can kiss our asses if they do not like it then China’s economy is done and so is China.

If you borrow $100 dollars from the bank, the bank owns you. If you borrow $100,000,000,000,000 from the bank, you own the bank.[/quote]

Hardly, they would need around 3 years to refit their factories to produce for the domestic demand and if their regime survives this they are golden.

They could also stop trying to keep their currency artificially low which would be a benefit and their main competitor would crumble.

They do not need you, you need them, plus, if you devalue your currency anyway, they could decide to crash your currency for you, when it is most convenient for them.

23

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am no expert , I am sure we have treaties , but in this case I am in Trumps corner TARRIFF [/quote]

Oh my, you really think you can afford a trade war right now?

With your major lenders, no less?

Adorable.

[/quote]

When our imports exceed our exports , I think it would be good for America. I will not vote Trump , but he says the same thin
[/quote]

It would not even be a good thing if the rest of the world took it in silence.

Since it wont and since you are 1,6 trillion in the hole each year that need to be financed, it would sink you.

[/quote]
[/quote]

Well I agree with him that the US should not pay for other nations defense systems or worse be their defense and I also agree that the US is no longer respected.

That however has been that way for quite a while, you just dont laugh in a bullies face as long as he can still harm you.

China has no need to fear the US, neither has Russia, the EU or Japan and did I mention that India is developing intercontintal missiles that only make sense if they wish to be able to target the US? Lets see how deferrent they will be when they have them.

There is a reason why they are doing this and it is the same why Iran wants at least the technology to be able to assemble buclear warheads fast if they need arises, which is the the US is highly unpredictable and will become even more so when the empire falls apart.

As for its points that the US should impose tariffs unilaterally, well that should go over well with all the nations that were forced to open their markets by the US via the WTO and the World Bank.

I can only imagine what would happen when the US suddenly imposes tariffs just because the mood strikes them, in violation of treaties it pressuresd other nations to sign.

To put it into a nutshell, forget it, you dont have the pull anymore and if you try to do it anyway you will probably lose the little goodwill you still have.

24

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am no expert , I am sure we have treaties , but in this case I am in Trumps corner TARRIFF [/quote]

Oh my, you really think you can afford a trade war right now?

With your major lenders, no less?

Adorable.

[/quote]

When our imports exceed our exports , I think it would be good for America. I will not vote Trump , but he says the same thin
[/quote]

It would not even be a good thing if the rest of the world took it in silence.

Since it wont and since you are 1,6 trillion in the hole each year that need to be financed, it would sink you.

[/quote]
[/quote]

Well I agree with him that the US should not pay for other nations defense systems or worse be their defense and I also agree that the US is no longer respected.

That however has been that way for quite a while, you just dont laugh in a bullies face as long as he can still harm you.

China has no need to fear the US, neither has Russia, the EU or Japan and did I mention that India is developing intercontintal missiles that only make sense if they wish to be able to target the US? Lets see how deferrent they will be when they have them.

There is a reason why they are doing this and it is the same why Iran wants at least the technology to be able to assemble buclear warheads fast if they need arises, which is the the US is highly unpredictable and will become even more so when the empire falls apart.

As for its points that the US should impose tariffs unilaterally, well that should go over well with all the nations that were forced to open their markets by the US via the WTO and the World Bank.

I can only imagine what would happen when the US suddenly imposes tariffs just because the mood strikes them, in violation of treaties it pressuresd other nations to sign.

To put it into a nutshell, forget it, you dont have the pull anymore and if you try to do it anyway you will probably lose the little goodwill you still have.

[/quote]

I have to agree to a point , I do not think Trumps approach is the best < I just think a little of his thinking could be a good thing. America is too compliant , always ready to help. We need some strings on that

25

[quote]orion wrote:
They do not need you, you need them, plus, if you devalue your currency anyway, they could decide to crash your currency for you, when it is most convenient for them.

[/quote]

How would they “crash our currency for us”?

The Federal Reserve owns almost seven times as much U.S. debt as China. Domestic private investment owns twice as much as China.

Japan owns more than China, by a small margin though.

I don’t know where this notion that “China owns the U.S.” comes from, but it’s faaaaaaaarrrrrr from reality.

26

[quote]skaz05 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
They do not need you, you need them, plus, if you devalue your currency anyway, they could decide to crash your currency for you, when it is most convenient for them.

[/quote]

How would they “crash our currency for us”?

The Federal Reserve owns almost seven times as much U.S. debt as China. Domestic private investment owns twice as much as China.

Japan owns more than China, by a small margin though.

I don’t know where this notion that “China owns the U.S.” comes from, but it’s faaaaaaaarrrrrr from reality.[/quote]

“The Federal Reserve owns almost seven times as much U.S. debt as China”, yeah well, there you have it.

Mwuahahaha…

Anyway, by not buying any more of your debt and selling the debt they have?

If they do that hard and fast the Fed will own allmost all of your debt and that will of course do you a world of good.

27

A tariff would be a terrible idea…trade restrictions are never the answer
there still is a pervasive mercantilist philosophy engrained in peoples minds and it really is foolish–with trade everyone benefits (or else people wouldn’t trade…duh) artificially restricting trade via tariffs or quotas merely makes for more economic inefficiency and hurts the country as a whole.

28

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
A tariff would be a terrible idea…trade restrictions are never the answer
there still is a pervasive mercantilist philosophy engrained in peoples minds and it really is foolish–with trade everyone benefits (or else people wouldn’t trade…duh) artificially restricting trade via tariffs or quotas merely makes for more economic inefficiency and hurts the country as a whole.
[/quote]

I believe what you stated is called Theory

29

its common sense… people only trade if it benefits them. Will a tariff benefit some? Certainly.

However, its net effect is to hurt the economy of the country.

Secondly, mercantilism is a completely flawed and misguided way of viewing trade. It just doesn’t work, in theory or in the real world.

30

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
its common sense… people only trade if it benefits them. Will a tariff benefit some? Certainly.

However, its net effect is to hurt the economy of the country.

Secondly, mercantilism is a completely flawed and misguided way of viewing trade. It just doesn’t work, in theory or in the real world.[/quote]

Most people do not know what mercantile means , how can the logic be considered as logical by everyone , Maybe out of the people that care or know maybe %30 subscribe to that theory.

I personally understand it and I believe that it is taught in economic classes, but I believe the way it works is much simpler . America is the largest macro market in the world . The people as a whole (NOT PER CAPITA) are the weathiest. What are we getting besides cheap goods in return for our wealth that we are exporting by the boat load. IMO we are getting poorer.

31

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
its common sense… people only trade if it benefits them. Will a tariff benefit some? Certainly.

However, its net effect is to hurt the economy of the country.

Secondly, mercantilism is a completely flawed and misguided way of viewing trade. It just doesn’t work, in theory or in the real world.[/quote]

Most people do not know what mercantile means , how can the logic be considered as logical by everyone , Maybe out of the people that care or know maybe %30 subscribe to that theory.

I personally understand it and I believe that it is taught in economic classes, but I believe the way it works is much simpler . America is the largest macro market in the world . The people as a whole (NOT PER CAPITA) are the weathiest. What are we getting besides cheap goods in return for our wealth that we are exporting by the boat load. IMO we are getting poorer.[/quote]

No, actually over 90% that know or care share this “theory”.

The other 10 are of course wrong.

Also, you get goods and services, they get soon to be worthless dollars.

So in fact you are getting richer, unless of course you assume that a dollar has value in and of itself.

It takes a special kind of ignorant to complain if you get cheap goods and the other side gets your inflation.

32

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
its common sense… people only trade if it benefits them. Will a tariff benefit some? Certainly.

However, its net effect is to hurt the economy of the country.

Secondly, mercantilism is a completely flawed and misguided way of viewing trade. It just doesn’t work, in theory or in the real world.[/quote]

Most people do not know what mercantile means , how can the logic be considered as logical by everyone , Maybe out of the people that care or know maybe %30 subscribe to that theory.

I personally understand it and I believe that it is taught in economic classes, but I believe the way it works is much simpler . America is the largest macro market in the world . The people as a whole (NOT PER CAPITA) are the weathiest. What are we getting besides cheap goods in return for our wealth that we are exporting by the boat load. IMO we are getting poorer.[/quote]

No, actually over 90% that know or care share this “theory”.

The other 10 are of course wrong.

Also, you get goods and services, they get soon to be worthless dollars.

So in fact you are getting richer, unless of course you assume that a dollar has value in and of itself.

It takes a special kind of ignorant to complain if you get cheap goods and the other side gets your inflation.

[/quote]

90% of the people only care about who will win the basket ball game , another %9 care about who wins American Idol. I would love to see your documentation to back that statement up:)

33

What I don’t get is why liberals care so much about other people’s money. They earned it, you didn’t, get over it. If you know so much better what should be done with that money, you are free to do the same thing they do to earn it and spend that money how you see fit.

34

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What I don’t get is why liberals care so much about other people’s money. They earned it, you didn’t, get over it. If you know so much better what should be done with that money, you are free to do the same thing they do to earn it and spend that money how you see fit.[/quote]

They would if they could but they can’t - It’s called jealousy.

35

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What I don’t get is why liberals care so much about other people’s money. They earned it, you didn’t, get over it. If you know so much better what should be done with that money, you are free to do the same thing they do to earn it and spend that money how you see fit.[/quote]

They tend to focus how the pie is distributed rather than the overall size of the pie. I think many even sort of misapply physical laws (most are pretty materialist in their world view) to economics and sociology/anthropology/political theory and consciously or not, tend to think of wealth or the size of the economy as fixed, thus, the only way someone can better their position is at the expense of someone else. When they see a wealthy person with a net worth many times that of someone else (100x for example), they see the alternative as that many people (100 not so well off people) who could be twice wealthy.

36

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What I don’t get is why liberals care so much about other people’s money. They earned it, you didn’t, get over it. If you know so much better what should be done with that money, you are free to do the same thing they do to earn it and spend that money how you see fit.[/quote]

What I don’t get is one day the Democrats are in a higher tax bracket and the next day they are jealous of the money the Republicans earn , just don’t get that

37

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What I don’t get is why liberals care so much about other people’s money. They earned it, you didn’t, get over it. If you know so much better what should be done with that money, you are free to do the same thing they do to earn it and spend that money how you see fit.[/quote]

They tend to focus how the pie is distributed rather than the overall size of the pie. I think many even sort of misapply physical laws (most are pretty materialist in their world view) to economics and sociology/anthropology/political theory and consciously or not, tend to think of wealth or the size of the economy as fixed, thus, the only way someone can better their position is at the expense of someone else. When they see a wealthy person with a net worth many times that of someone else (100x for example), they see the alternative as that many people (100 not so well off people) who could be twice wealthy.
[/quote]

I understand the aspect of our economy that is not fixed , do you understand the aspect that is ?

38

I would rather be in the bottom 20% of earners in the US right now than in the top 20% 300 years ago.

Technological advancement allows for a better life across the board (there is a trickle down effect). Free trade allows for the fastest technological advancement. Therefore, free trade is the best way for improving everybody’s life.

39

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
I would rather be in the bottom 20% of earners in the US right now than in the top 20% 300 years ago.

Technological advancement allows for a better life across the board (there is a trickle down effect). Free trade allows for the fastest technological advancement. Therefore, free trade is the best way for improving everybody’s life.[/quote]

We agree about 300 nyears ago:) I would think it would be easier today to be in the bottom %10 now than the top %1 300 years ago.

We do how ever disagree on free trade. I am for fair trade , IMO free trade is some mythical Beast that no one has ever captured. Fair trade IMO is the best we can hope for

40

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]soccerplayer wrote:
I would rather be in the bottom 20% of earners in the US right now than in the top 20% 300 years ago.

Technological advancement allows for a better life across the board (there is a trickle down effect). Free trade allows for the fastest technological advancement. Therefore, free trade is the best way for improving everybody’s life.[/quote]

We agree about 300 nyears ago:) I would think it would be easier today to be in the bottom %10 now than the top %1 300 years ago.

We do how ever disagree on free trade. I am for fair trade , IMO free trade is some mythical Beast that no one has ever captured. Fair trade IMO is the best we can hope for[/quote]

LOL at using the word fair to denote complete control by one group of people who run things according to their own personal sense of fairness even if that means forcing people to do things against their will.