(04-30-2025 07:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:13 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-29-2025 03:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-29-2025 02:46 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  You mean like during the past four years? Yeah, totally noticed that.

Exactly.

Curious though, did you notice the pandemic? The three stimulus bills...two of which trump signed? The global inflation? The $5 gas caused by trumps awful OPEC+ 2020 deal?

They were passed in both chambers of Congress with bipartisan support.

As for everything else, I thought you said POTUS has no influence on energy prices a while back. So what changed? Oh, yeah. Trump's in office again.

Typical LeftWingTom.

Dude, either your memory or your comprehension...or both...sucks ass.

What I said mostly...as you clearly don't understand the actual issues I've explained time and time again in great detail...was that presidents don't control the daily price fluctuations of gas at the pump. But yes, a president signing a deal to cut the production of oil by 10 million barrels per day to start, for 2 years, will of course effect gas prices.

And of course, we all know the bills were passed by congress...and I agree they were needed...but that doesn't change the FACT that these spurred inflation after the pandemic waned. Same with the one Biden signed.

sounds like Tom is having another mangina flareup.

People who received the full amount from those covid handouts got $3,400 and that was not as many people as one would think only 1 in 3 families got the full amount. That is not spurring the sort inflation that we experienced. Joe-Covid-Check did not spend all his dough on TVs and computers. Those had nothing to do with inflation.


Inflation came from Energy and Food price escalation which had nothing to do with those stimulus checks, overextended lock downs kept ports closed adding to supply demands.

(04-30-2025 10:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 07:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:13 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-29-2025 03:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Exactly.

Curious though, did you notice the pandemic? The three stimulus bills...two of which trump signed? The global inflation? The $5 gas caused by trumps awful OPEC+ 2020 deal?

They were passed in both chambers of Congress with bipartisan support.

As for everything else, I thought you said POTUS has no influence on energy prices a while back. So what changed? Oh, yeah. Trump's in office again.

Typical LeftWingTom.

Dude, either your memory or your comprehension...or both...sucks ass.

What I said mostly...as you clearly don't understand the actual issues I've explained time and time again in great detail...was that presidents don't control the daily price fluctuations of gas at the pump. But yes, a president signing a deal to cut the production of oil by 10 million barrels per day to start, for 2 years, will of course effect gas prices.

And of course, we all know the bills were passed by congress...and I agree they were needed...but that doesn't change the FACT that these spurred inflation after the pandemic waned. Same with the one Biden signed.

sounds like Tom is having another mangina flareup.

People who received the full amount from those covid handouts got $3,400 and that was not as many people as one would think only 1 in 3 families got the full amount. That is not spurring the sort inflation that we experienced. Joe-Covid-Check did not spend all his dough on TVs and computers. Those had nothing to do with inflation.


Inflation came from Energy and Food price escalation which had nothing to do with those stimulus checks, overextended lock downs kept ports closed adding to supply demands.

It wasnt just those checks. The January 2021 bill that got passed paid people not to work. So you have products in short supply because you pay people not to work, and people have excess money to spend because they are being paid not to work.

You also had Pete Buttplug screw up the ports with additional regulations.

This was predicted when they passed that bill. And inflation took off the moment money from that bill started getting printed.

And Mangina Boy likes to keep blaming Trump for the high gas prices under Biden*, but the gas prices follow the exact same inflation chart.

(04-30-2025 12:05 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 10:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 07:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:54 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:13 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  They were passed in both chambers of Congress with bipartisan support.

As for everything else, I thought you said POTUS has no influence on energy prices a while back. So what changed? Oh, yeah. Trump's in office again.

Typical LeftWingTom.

Dude, either your memory or your comprehension...or both...sucks ass.

What I said mostly...as you clearly don't understand the actual issues I've explained time and time again in great detail...was that presidents don't control the daily price fluctuations of gas at the pump. But yes, a president signing a deal to cut the production of oil by 10 million barrels per day to start, for 2 years, will of course effect gas prices.

And of course, we all know the bills were passed by congress...and I agree they were needed...but that doesn't change the FACT that these spurred inflation after the pandemic waned. Same with the one Biden signed.

sounds like Tom is having another mangina flareup.

People who received the full amount from those covid handouts got $3,400 and that was not as many people as one would think only 1 in 3 families got the full amount. That is not spurring the sort inflation that we experienced. Joe-Covid-Check did not spend all his dough on TVs and computers. Those had nothing to do with inflation.


Inflation came from Energy and Food price escalation which had nothing to do with those stimulus checks, overextended lock downs kept ports closed adding to supply demands.

It wasnt just those checks. The January 2021 bill that got passed paid people not to work. So you have products in short supply because you pay people not to work, and people have excess money to spend because they are being paid not to work.

You also had Pete Buttplug screw up the ports with additional regulations.

This was predicted when they passed that bill. And inflation took off the moment money from that bill started getting printed.

And Mangina Boy likes to keep blaming Trump for the high gas prices under Biden*, but the gas prices follow the exact same inflation chart.

Tom says no - it's trumps fault. He's rubber you're glue whatever you say bounces off him and sticks to you!

I thought Rand Paul said he had the votes for this?

bwahahahahahahahahahaha

Europe is Preparing €50B Trade Offer for US President Trump

Quote:In what could be a major development for both nations, Europe is reportedly preparing a €50 billion trade offer for the US and President Donald Trump. Indeed, European Union (EU) trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič recently told The Financial Times that both sides are making “certain progress” towards a deal.

Since the Trump administration instituted a 10% baseline tariff on all countries, there has been a mad dash for nations to strike a trade deal with the United States. Now, the EU has emerged as nearing an agreement that would eliminate the import duty increase. Moreover, it should take another step toward balancing US trade.


In what could be a major development for both nations, Europe is reportedly preparing a €50 billion trade offer for the US and President Donald Trump. Indeed, European Union (EU) trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič recently told The Financial Times that both sides are making “certain progress” towards a deal.

Since the Trump administration instituted a 10% baseline tariff on all countries, there has been a mad dash for nations to strike a trade deal with the United States. Now, the EU has emerged as nearing an agreement that would eliminate the import duty increase. Moreover, it should take another step toward balancing US trade.


EU Preparing New Trade Deal to Eliminate US Tariffs
In early April, the United States announced the arrival of a new America-first tariff plan. Its purpose was to balance the country’s global trade, requiring all nations to come forth and negotiate a new agreement. Despite contention on both sides, the US and EU have made continued progress toward that very deal after meeting just weeks ago.

That could finalize into an agreement in the near future, as the EU commissioner has confirmed a proposal is at the ready. Indeed, Maroš Šefčovič confirmed that Europe is preparing a €50 billion trade deal for US President Trump that would eliminate the presence of the ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs.

Specifically, Brussels is proposing an increase in the purchase of US goods by €50 billion to address the “problem” in the two sides’ trade relationship. Speaking to the media, Šefčovič noted that his “ambition” is to still reach a “balanced and fair” deal with the United States.

“If what we are looking at as a problem in the deficit is €50 billion, I believe that we can really… solve this problem very quickly through LNG purchases, through some agricultural products like soybeans, or the areas,” Šefčovič added.

Altogether, he noted that the most important part of ongoing discussions is his belief that both sides “understand each other a little bit better.” That understanding could help a trade deal come to fruition sooner rather than later.

(04-30-2025 05:57 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I thought Rand Paul said he had the votes for this?

bwahahahahahahahahahaha

I think he did. But McConnell and a Dem Senator weren't able to make it to the vote for whatever reasons.

As much as Paul wants it to be, a tariff is not a legally defined tax, AFAIK.

(05-01-2025 06:37 PM)TripleA Wrote:  As much as Paul wants it to be, a tariff is not a legally defined tax, AFAIK.

And yet it has the effect of that. Im sure the legal definition will cure that.

(05-01-2025 07:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 06:37 PM)TripleA Wrote:  As much as Paul wants it to be, a tariff is not a legally defined tax, AFAIK.

And yet it has the effect of that. Im sure the legal definition will cure that.

I agree it has the same effect. Except that you can choose not to pay it.

(05-01-2025 07:30 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 07:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 06:37 PM)TripleA Wrote:  As much as Paul wants it to be, a tariff is not a legally defined tax, AFAIK.

And yet it has the effect of that. Im sure the legal definition will cure that.

I agree it has the same effect. Except that you can choose not to pay it.

In the normal sense -- absolutely. In the present sense, probably not.

(05-01-2025 05:58 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Yeah. Rand is wrong on this one and is pissed he lost

(05-01-2025 08:26 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 05:58 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Yeah. Rand is wrong on this one and is pissed he lost

Rand is not Ron and it frequently shows. Dad was willing to be against the grain in order to be true to his convictions. Rand likes his government money too much be like his old man.

(05-01-2025 05:58 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Im intrigued about the statement 'a law is not a law if it is only practiced against Trump.'

Last I saw Congress does have the full authority to impose and remove tariffs. Full stop. Paul is specifcally incorrect it is a tax -- but it absolutely is included in Art 1 Sect 8 Clause 1

It delegated to the President the power of some imposition. Which Trump drove a truck through by declaration of some bull**** emergency.

Im sorry this guy is bent out of shape for Congress trying to regain that control.

Just that action will put a crimp on China. They will have to find additional markets to absorb the losses. TEMU is like Amazon.

Gee...what a surprise...look what's at the bottom.

I know this is difficult for you, but think.

That was always going to be the initial response, but eventually, American consumers will adjust their habits and start buying US made products which will now become more competitive and more widely available. Which will then incentivize those producers ALREADY HERE to produce even more.

And those who don't move production here, and simply include the full tariffs in their product pricing, will eventually get their butts kicked in the market. Duh...

The WSJ has finally started informing their readers about the effect of the tariffs on other counties. Until now, they focused only on the USA.

"How Bad Is China’s Economy? The Data Needed to Answer Is Vanishing
Beijing has stopped publishing hundreds of statistics, making it harder to know what’s going on in the country"

https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china-ec..._lead_pos7

The media appropriately highlights tariff-related challenges in the USA but should also address the impact on other countries. Since tariffs aim to encourage fairer trade practices globally, reporting should include information about other nations' experiences.

(05-05-2025 08:38 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Gee...what a surprise...look what's at the bottom.

That was the entire point, dummy.