Started By
Message
re: OT: Anybody think Abrams has a shot against Kemp?
Posted on 7/26/18 at 9:45 pm to rb
Posted on 7/26/18 at 9:45 pm to rb
Typical response of somebody who can't keep up with simple economic and trade policies. Insult and use Hillary to do it hahaha. ??????
So what your saying is you are for tariffs and you want to restrict free trade? That would make you a protectionist. Last time protectionists got their way we went into the great depression and Democrats surged and the result FDR.
Also here is a fun tip for you. As Trump rails against low-skilled immigration labor and to wall the U.S. off from global trade, Trump will have little choice but to accept low-skilled immigration as a result of large employer's necessity for them to make up for the loss of global divisonal labor.
So what your saying is you are for tariffs and you want to restrict free trade? That would make you a protectionist. Last time protectionists got their way we went into the great depression and Democrats surged and the result FDR.
Also here is a fun tip for you. As Trump rails against low-skilled immigration labor and to wall the U.S. off from global trade, Trump will have little choice but to accept low-skilled immigration as a result of large employer's necessity for them to make up for the loss of global divisonal labor.
3
Posted on 7/26/18 at 10:15 pm to NCdawgfan34
quote:
Trump will have little choice but to accept low-skilled immigration as a result of large employer's necessity for them to make up for the loss of global divisonal labor.
EXACTLY.
And they would be documented immigrants.
Didn't you say something about knowing how international trade works?
Posted on 7/26/18 at 10:30 pm to NCdawgfan34
quote:
Last time protectionists got their way we went into the great depression and Democrats surged and the result FDR.
It was our own central banking that caused the great depression (although protectionism did exacerbate the problem.)
But today all countries have monopoly money central banks.
So, what happens when countries who've used their monopoly money and freeloader-status granted by know-nothing american politicians to build up a pair of jacks now have to face off with Trump in a trade war when he's holding all four aces?
Which economies turn downward the fastest if they don't re-negotiate?
Hint: not america's. As much as you wish it would be. ha ha ha h aha ha
Posted on 7/26/18 at 10:49 pm to NCdawgfan34
We’ve been at a trade deficit with several countries for decades. No one likes Tariffs but Trump is using them as a negotiating tool. The goal is FAIR FREE trade. We’ve already begun to see his strategy work with the EU as they’ve already agreed to compromise with an eventual goal of zero tariffs from both sides. They’ve agreed to buy our farmers soybeans to make up for China retaliating. Trump has offered to have zero tariffs if other countries reciprocate. So far the ones who have refused have proven that the don’t really want FAIR FREE trade they just want to continue taking advantage of us. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. If we were to continue allowing countries to make billions off of us and widen the deficit without retaliatory action then we’d get nowhere. Tariffs are Trumps tool to force other countries to play fair.
Posted on 7/26/18 at 10:58 pm to FlexDawg
I think she has a puncher's chance. Black folks will be highly motivated to vote for her and will vote en masse. Many white folks who are middle of the road might be enticed by the idea of trailblazing with a black female Guv, and could vote for her. This actually happened with Obama.
Despite potential policy plans that typically wouldn't fly in a historically conservative state, she is likeable, experienced, well educated, and well spoken. She is not scary like say an Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi.
I live in Athens know Brian personally. He is a good guy and would be a competent governor. But I must admit I am intrigued by SA.
Despite potential policy plans that typically wouldn't fly in a historically conservative state, she is likeable, experienced, well educated, and well spoken. She is not scary like say an Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi.
I live in Athens know Brian personally. He is a good guy and would be a competent governor. But I must admit I am intrigued by SA.
Posted on 7/26/18 at 11:35 pm to NCdawgfan34
quote:
borrowing foreign money to pay for those tariffs
I don't follow this statement.
Can you clarify it for me?
Posted on 7/26/18 at 11:39 pm to miledawg
quote:
I think she has a puncher's chance
Ok. Maybe.
quote:
she is likeable, experienced, well educated, and well spoken
Are we talking about the same person? What ive seen is the same leftist rhetoric from her mouth.
quote:
But I must admit I am intrigued by SA.
I'm willing to listen to any politician and give him/her a chance. But there is nothing intriguing about the impressions I have from the debates and her commercials.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 5:53 am to miledawg
quote:
Many white folks who are middle of the road might be enticed by the idea of trailblazing with a black female Guv, and could vote for her.
Just no. Were you alive this past 8 years? This will not happen. We all saw how that “trailblazing” turned out.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 8:00 am to miledawg
LINK
Stacey Abrams financial disclosure shows she’s $200,000 in debt, and part of that debt comes in the form of back taxes including about $53,000 to the IRS.
$40,000 still owed from 2015, and $13,000 still owed from 2016.
Abrams says she would have loved to have paid her taxes, but “other priorities interfered.”
Your modern Democrat party, ladies and gentlemen!
Stacey Abrams financial disclosure shows she’s $200,000 in debt, and part of that debt comes in the form of back taxes including about $53,000 to the IRS.
$40,000 still owed from 2015, and $13,000 still owed from 2016.
Abrams says she would have loved to have paid her taxes, but “other priorities interfered.”
Your modern Democrat party, ladies and gentlemen!
Posted on 7/27/18 at 8:36 am to meansonny
quote:
”borrowing foreign money to pay for those tariffs “
I don't follow this statement. Can you clarify it for me?
Our tariffs are hurting certain American industries. So to ease the pain of that burden, they are getting federal subsidies.
America doesn’t have any money though. We are Trillions in debt. (with a capital T and plural) And foreign countries, mainly China, own large amounts of this debt.
So when Trump gives money that we don’t have to farmers, he puts it on the credit card. A credit card that exists because foreign countries are willing to buy our debt. Thus making it “foreign money”.
Now......This sad depressing dangerous infuriating situation is a fact in everything the federal government does. Whether subsidizing farmers in Trumps tariff strategy or with any penny they spend on anything. Including the entire commie platform of the American left. So I’m not sure why the they suddenly want to make it an issue on subject of tariffs.
They’re basically trying to insult conservatives by comparing them to themselves. So while conservatives are being hypocrites on this issue somewhat, the whole talking point troll job here is an admission of the foreign debt foundation their entire commie platform is built on. Woo hoo
LINK....
Posted on 7/27/18 at 8:38 am to miledawg
quote:
Despite potential policy plans that typically wouldn't fly in a historically conservative state, she is likeable, experienced, well educated, and well spoken. She is not scary like say an Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi.
I quit.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 9:34 am to Jefferson Dawg
Posted on 7/27/18 at 9:40 am to meansonny
quote:
I'm willing to listen to any politician and give him/her a chance. But there is nothing intriguing about the impressions I have from the debates and her commercials.
Totally agree.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 9:42 am to Jefferson Dawg
The news about the farmers/Agg "bailout" has been very misrepresented.
First of all, our government has been giving around $20 BILLION PER YEAR in subsidies to our farmers for a long while.
When final subsidy numbers come out, they're not going to show us giving our farmers/Agg $32 billion ($20B norm + $12B bailout). They're still going to show around $20 billion. Meaning this "bailout" was nothing more than a PR stunt claiming credit for something that was already going to happen, tariffs or no tariffs.
Which is actually a smart move by Trump and Purdue, IMO.
Second, this soybean "retaliation" from China wasn't really a retaliation. China already stated in 2016 they planned to buy less of our soybeans because they struck a deal with Brazil who has a more friendly currency exchange as the Real has dropped in value against the Dollar quite significantly.
LINK
First of all, our government has been giving around $20 BILLION PER YEAR in subsidies to our farmers for a long while.
quote:
LINK
The federal government spends more than $20 billion a year on subsidies for farm businesses. About 39 percent of the nation's 2.1 million farms receive subsidies, with the lion's share of the handouts going to the largest producers of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice.1
The government protects farmers against fluctuations in prices, revenues, and yields. It subsidizes their conservation efforts, insurance coverage, marketing, export sales, research, and other activities. Federal aid for crop farmers is deep and comprehensive.
When final subsidy numbers come out, they're not going to show us giving our farmers/Agg $32 billion ($20B norm + $12B bailout). They're still going to show around $20 billion. Meaning this "bailout" was nothing more than a PR stunt claiming credit for something that was already going to happen, tariffs or no tariffs.
Which is actually a smart move by Trump and Purdue, IMO.
Second, this soybean "retaliation" from China wasn't really a retaliation. China already stated in 2016 they planned to buy less of our soybeans because they struck a deal with Brazil who has a more friendly currency exchange as the Real has dropped in value against the Dollar quite significantly.
LINK
This post was edited on 7/27/18 at 9:44 am
Posted on 7/27/18 at 10:20 am to Jefferson Dawg
Decent explanation from Jeff problem is he is assuming I'm a dirty liberal when I am and have always been a consistent conservative and am calling out the hypocrisy of the Trumpsters on these issues. They are acting like liberals and hailing liberal policies. Thus is why I am calling a spade a spade and they want to call me a spade when really I'm a more true conservative than they are themselves. My allegiance is to conservative policies and principles not human beings claiming to be a Conservative when they actually aren't bearing the fruits of a conservative. This is what pisses them off...
This post was edited on 7/27/18 at 10:51 am
Posted on 7/27/18 at 10:21 am to meansonny
quote:
I'm willing to listen to any politician and give him/her a chance. But there is nothing intriguing about the impressions I have from the debates and her commercials.
Thus far, I'd agree. She seems like a really poor choice for the Dems... If they had the benefit of hindsight, you have to think they might have chosen differently knowing who is now going to be representing the Reps. Kemp comes across as a nutjob, but he likely will have no problem winning this election. That it's not Cagle is a win either way IMO.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 10:24 am to miledawg
quote:
she is likeable, experienced, well educated, and well spoken. She is not scary like say an Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi.
quote:
But I must admit I am intrigued by SA.
Intrigued by a woman who uses race as a weapon?
Posted on 7/27/18 at 10:30 am to Jefferson Dawg
quote:
Our tariffs are hurting certain American industries. So to ease the pain of that burden, they are getting federal subsidies.
America doesn’t have any money though. We are Trillions in debt. (with a capital T and plural) And foreign countries, mainly China, own large amounts of this debt.
So when Trump gives money that we don’t have to farmers, he puts it on the credit card. A credit card that exists because foreign countries are willing to buy our debt. Thus making it “foreign money”.
Now......This sad depressing dangerous infuriating situation is a fact in everything the federal government does. Whether subsidizing farmers in Trumps tariff strategy or with any penny they spend on anything. Including the entire commie platform of the American left. So I’m not sure why the they suddenly want to make it an issue on subject of tariffs.
They’re basically trying to insult conservatives by comparing them to themselves. So while conservatives are being hypocrites on this issue somewhat, the whole talking point troll job here is an admission of the foreign debt foundation their entire commie platform is built on. Woo hoo
LINK....
I have a different take than your explanation (I don't know if you are answering my question or if that is your view on any government program so long as we are in deficit spending).
Tariffs are revenue to the government. Subsidies are an allocation of resources from the government to individuals or businesses. If you correlate the two, you do not have to stand on the premises that we are borrowing money (or that foreign and domestic agencies are investing money) to provide these subsidies.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 10:32 am to BeefDawg
quote:
When final subsidy numbers come out, they're not going to show us giving our farmers/Agg $32 billion ($20B norm + $12B bailout). They're still going to show around $20 billion. Meaning this "bailout" was nothing more than a PR stunt claiming credit for something that was already going to happen, tariffs or no tariffs.
Not necessarily disagreeing, but is there any link that you've seen that confirms this? The only way I'd seen it reported is as "additional 12B"... of course, that does imply that "reporting" is accurate.
Also, not sure if the 20B number may be specifically referencing more recent figures, but CRS shows over the past 20 years, we've averaged about 16B in farm subsidies annually FWIW.
Posted on 7/27/18 at 8:16 pm to Rex Feral
Well we know she doesn’t pay her taxes
Page 4 of 7
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News