In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled Monday that Canada and Mexico can slap more than $1 billion in tariffs on U.S. goods in retaliation for meat labeling rules it says discriminated against Mexican and Canadian livestock.
At issue were U.S. labels on packaged steaks and other cuts of meat that say where the animals were born, raised and slaughtered.
The WTO has previously found that the so-called "country of origin" labeling law put Canadian and Mexican livestock at a disadvantage. It ruled Monday that Canada could impose $780 million in retaliatory tariffs and Mexico could impose $228 million.
"We are disappointed with this decision and its potential impact on trade among vital North American partners," said Tim Reif, general counsel for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The labels are supported by some U.S. ranchers and by consumer groups. They are opposed by meatpackers who say they require costly paperwork.
The WTO's decision shifts responsibility to Congress, which is considering working a repeal of the labeling law into a massive year-end spending bill.
Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, said Monday that he will look for "all legislative opportunities" to repeal the labeling law. "We must prevent retaliation, and we must do it now before these sanctions take effect," Roberts said.
More like get rekt consumers. Why shouldn't meat be labeled by country of origin? I want to know if my beef is american or foreign, especially if any of the processing is taking place in China.
are you for real? as long as the meat is objectively the same, labeling is simply protectionism using ridiculous 'consumer' bias.
What does it mean for meat from two different cows to be "objectively the same"?
We had this thing between the US and EU with food and how people in the EU want stuff that's genetically modified to be labeled and people said that's bullshit because there's no difference. What's the difference that makes labeling beef from Canada cool but at the same time makes labeling GM not cool?
I think if the people want GM labeling they should have it.
Markets are increasingly just places where the producers (sharks) take the consumers (guppies) for as much as they possibly can, leveraging greater information, obfuscation about source and manufacturing conditions, and the power of ever larger corporate structures with the additional resources that implies.
yea like the organic industry lol enjoy your consumer surplus at whole foods
On December 09 2015 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: Though this is gonna sound kind of stupid, but I took like 3 classes on negotiations while in business school. There was quite a bit of game theory, social psych, etc. involved as well as semi-practical application-- simulated scenarios and the like.
Trump's approach looks kind of okay, but generally it's not sustainable.
First,there are generally two big factors you want to consider: long-term and short-term. Trump's way is a not terrible way to get short-term gains-- you come out good on the terms of the deal by essentially browbeating the guy on the other side of the table. But then you have to consider long-term things, like relationships. Maybe we get a wall out of Mexico. Okay. Mexico is now pissed at us. They'll retaliate in all sorts of ways and make our lives that much more difficult. Who knows, maybe they sue us over agricultural regulations.
Second, people catch on. It's the classic boy who cried wolf effect. You can say something extreme and then let the compromise be what you actually want. That's not gonna work more than a couple times.
There's a bunch more, but that's a couple of the more salient points about Trump's negotiating strategy. I'll bet the vast majority of stuff in his business is done by other people anyways. You know who actually is a good negotiator? Warren Buffet. He doesn't have charisma or whatever like Steve Jobs, but he knows how to bring people together, get what he wants, and create value.
Oh yeah, I count as Trump audience cuz I think he's hilarious. I won't vote for him though. Viewership and media exposure =/= support. I mean, Floyd Mayweather is great for the PPV people. Doesn't mean that tons of people hate his guts.
Dude, really? You think you know better than Trump in negotiation skills? It's nice you took a college class but that doesn't make you an expert or better than someone with a proven record, especially Trump's record.
On December 09 2015 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: Though this is gonna sound kind of stupid, but I took like 3 classes on negotiations while in business school. There was quite a bit of game theory, social psych, etc. involved as well as semi-practical application-- simulated scenarios and the like.
Trump's approach looks kind of okay, but generally it's not sustainable.
First,there are generally two big factors you want to consider: long-term and short-term. Trump's way is a not terrible way to get short-term gains-- you come out good on the terms of the deal by essentially browbeating the guy on the other side of the table. But then you have to consider long-term things, like relationships. Maybe we get a wall out of Mexico. Okay. Mexico is now pissed at us. They'll retaliate in all sorts of ways and make our lives that much more difficult. Who knows, maybe they sue us over agricultural regulations.
Second, people catch on. It's the classic boy who cried wolf effect. You can say something extreme and then let the compromise be what you actually want. That's not gonna work more than a couple times.
There's a bunch more, but that's a couple of the more salient points about Trump's negotiating strategy. I'll bet the vast majority of stuff in his business is done by other people anyways. You know who actually is a good negotiator? Warren Buffet. He doesn't have charisma or whatever like Steve Jobs, but he knows how to bring people together, get what he wants, and create value.
Oh yeah, I count as Trump audience cuz I think he's hilarious. I won't vote for him though. Viewership and media exposure =/= support. I mean, Floyd Mayweather is great for the PPV people. Doesn't mean that tons of people hate his guts.
Dude, really? You think you know better than Trump in negotiation skills? Negotiation and deal making is what Trump is. It's nice you took a college class but I don't think that makes you better that someone with a proven record, especially Trump's record.
His super not impressive record of not making much more money that just investing? He inherited his fortune and managed not to lose it. Huge feat.
On December 09 2015 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: Though this is gonna sound kind of stupid, but I took like 3 classes on negotiations while in business school. There was quite a bit of game theory, social psych, etc. involved as well as semi-practical application-- simulated scenarios and the like.
Trump's approach looks kind of okay, but generally it's not sustainable.
First,there are generally two big factors you want to consider: long-term and short-term. Trump's way is a not terrible way to get short-term gains-- you come out good on the terms of the deal by essentially browbeating the guy on the other side of the table. But then you have to consider long-term things, like relationships. Maybe we get a wall out of Mexico. Okay. Mexico is now pissed at us. They'll retaliate in all sorts of ways and make our lives that much more difficult. Who knows, maybe they sue us over agricultural regulations.
Second, people catch on. It's the classic boy who cried wolf effect. You can say something extreme and then let the compromise be what you actually want. That's not gonna work more than a couple times.
There's a bunch more, but that's a couple of the more salient points about Trump's negotiating strategy. I'll bet the vast majority of stuff in his business is done by other people anyways. You know who actually is a good negotiator? Warren Buffet. He doesn't have charisma or whatever like Steve Jobs, but he knows how to bring people together, get what he wants, and create value.
Oh yeah, I count as Trump audience cuz I think he's hilarious. I won't vote for him though. Viewership and media exposure =/= support. I mean, Floyd Mayweather is great for the PPV people. Doesn't mean that tons of people hate his guts.
Dude, really? You think you know better than Trump in negotiation skills? Negotiation and deal making is what Trump is. It's nice you took a college class but I don't think that makes you better that someone with a proven record, especially Trump's record.
His super not impressive record of not making much more money that just investing? He inherited his fortune and managed not to lose it. Huge feat.
While I am not a Trumpeter, you (and other critics on this point) forget to account for how he just lives large all the time with private jets and other vanity projects/bullshit. Of course, he is no Warren Buffet when it comes to investing, but Warren Buffet wouldn't be Warren Buffet if he burned cash at Trump rates. This, like his bankruptcies, is a point of criticism that you only bring up if you don't understand how money works.
The reason Trump sucks is because his policies are dumb on principle, and wouldn't work in fact.
On December 09 2015 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: Though this is gonna sound kind of stupid, but I took like 3 classes on negotiations while in business school. There was quite a bit of game theory, social psych, etc. involved as well as semi-practical application-- simulated scenarios and the like.
Trump's approach looks kind of okay, but generally it's not sustainable.
First,there are generally two big factors you want to consider: long-term and short-term. Trump's way is a not terrible way to get short-term gains-- you come out good on the terms of the deal by essentially browbeating the guy on the other side of the table. But then you have to consider long-term things, like relationships. Maybe we get a wall out of Mexico. Okay. Mexico is now pissed at us. They'll retaliate in all sorts of ways and make our lives that much more difficult. Who knows, maybe they sue us over agricultural regulations.
Second, people catch on. It's the classic boy who cried wolf effect. You can say something extreme and then let the compromise be what you actually want. That's not gonna work more than a couple times.
There's a bunch more, but that's a couple of the more salient points about Trump's negotiating strategy. I'll bet the vast majority of stuff in his business is done by other people anyways. You know who actually is a good negotiator? Warren Buffet. He doesn't have charisma or whatever like Steve Jobs, but he knows how to bring people together, get what he wants, and create value.
Oh yeah, I count as Trump audience cuz I think he's hilarious. I won't vote for him though. Viewership and media exposure =/= support. I mean, Floyd Mayweather is great for the PPV people. Doesn't mean that tons of people hate his guts.
Dude, really? You think you know better than Trump in negotiation skills? Negotiation and deal making is what Trump is. It's nice you took a college class but I don't think that makes you better that someone with a proven record, especially Trump's record.
His super not impressive record of not making much more money that just investing? He inherited his fortune and managed not to lose it. Huge feat.
He inherited a million dollar loan from his father which he later repaid and turned that money in hundreds of millions of dollars which turned into billions later on. He did not inherit his father's $250 million until the late 1990s, well after he had already built his empire, and that 250 million was divided among quite a number of people (5 siblings among others). Yes there was a point in his business career when he built himself up into a billionaire and then lost a lot of that money but he came back from it, which itself is a positive, not a negative.
This video covers his life and business career quite well, shows the good and the bad:
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush responded to a poll promoted by Donald Trump -- which showed the billionaire holding on to 68 percent of his supporters if he ran as an independent -- by floating the theory that the GOP frontrunner's candidacy might be a false flag operation planted by Hillary Clinton.
The tweet may have been in jest, and otherwise Bush has been one of the more vocal critics among the 2016 field of Trump's hardline stances that including banning Muslims from entering the U.S. (Republican National Committee Chair Reince Priebus -- who persuaded Trump to sign a loyalty pledge to the GOP -- said he didn't agree with the Muslim ban, but refused to criticize Trump further.)
But others on the right have speculated since early on in Trump's White House run that the GOP frontrunner's candidacy was a ploy by Democrats to rile Republicans.
Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said over the summer that there was a "small possibility" that Trump was indeed a Democratic plant.
Trump swiftly shot down the theory:
"Believe me -- from Hillary's standpoint, the one person she doesn't want running against her is Donald Trump," he said at the time.
On December 09 2015 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: Though this is gonna sound kind of stupid, but I took like 3 classes on negotiations while in business school. There was quite a bit of game theory, social psych, etc. involved as well as semi-practical application-- simulated scenarios and the like.
Trump's approach looks kind of okay, but generally it's not sustainable.
First,there are generally two big factors you want to consider: long-term and short-term. Trump's way is a not terrible way to get short-term gains-- you come out good on the terms of the deal by essentially browbeating the guy on the other side of the table. But then you have to consider long-term things, like relationships. Maybe we get a wall out of Mexico. Okay. Mexico is now pissed at us. They'll retaliate in all sorts of ways and make our lives that much more difficult. Who knows, maybe they sue us over agricultural regulations.
Second, people catch on. It's the classic boy who cried wolf effect. You can say something extreme and then let the compromise be what you actually want. That's not gonna work more than a couple times.
There's a bunch more, but that's a couple of the more salient points about Trump's negotiating strategy. I'll bet the vast majority of stuff in his business is done by other people anyways. You know who actually is a good negotiator? Warren Buffet. He doesn't have charisma or whatever like Steve Jobs, but he knows how to bring people together, get what he wants, and create value.
Oh yeah, I count as Trump audience cuz I think he's hilarious. I won't vote for him though. Viewership and media exposure =/= support. I mean, Floyd Mayweather is great for the PPV people. Doesn't mean that tons of people hate his guts.
Dude, really? You think you know better than Trump in negotiation skills? Negotiation and deal making is what Trump is. It's nice you took a college class but I don't think that makes you better that someone with a proven record, especially Trump's record.
His super not impressive record of not making much more money that just investing? He inherited his fortune and managed not to lose it. Huge feat.
While I am not a Trumpeter, you (and other critics on this point) forget to account for how he just lives large all the time with private jets and other vanity projects/bullshit. Of course, he is no Warren Buffet when it comes to investing, but Warren Buffet wouldn't be Warren Buffet if he burned cash at Trump rates. This, like his bankruptcies, is a point of criticism that you only bring up if you don't understand how money works.
The reason Trump sucks is because his policies are dumb on principle, and wouldn't work in fact.
I agree and I'm not impressed with his buisness record when compaired to his peers of similar wealth. Trump has never been impressive about any aspect except getting people to put his bad hair in camera and pay him for it. The man is a YouTube comment section running for president.
On December 09 2015 11:27 Slaughter wrote: As if Trump has a brag worthy history in business?
Considering he's one of the biggest and most well known real estate developers in the world, I would think so. It's hilarious how some of you people talk about Trump's career as if he's a nobody who never accomplished anything. It's like a peasant calling out the status of a king, so to speak. LOL.
On December 09 2015 11:27 Slaughter wrote: As if Trump has a brag worthy history in business?
Considering he's one of the biggest and most well known real estate developers in the world, I would think so. It's hilarious how some of you people talk about Trump's career as if he's a nobody who never accomplished anything. It's like a peasant calling out the status of a king, so to speak. LOL.
He is a run of the mill silver spoon superstar who is only known because he takes any chance to place himself into the spotlight. I mean congrats I guess on not squandering the massive advantages he had but he is basically like the Kardashians of the business world
Trump played the game of life on beginner mode. Most of us are playing it on hard.
The CEO of my company started off pretty average. He's built and sold 3 companies, and that's made him a billionaire. My parents' generation started from nothing. One uncle is an architect who designs skyscrapers for the Saudis. Another one got 2 PhD's from CalTech, his MBA from HBS and is now a partner at a top venture capital firm. A guy I know's dad has been on the shortlist for the Nobel twice. Imagine if guys like that started off with a million bucks.
On December 09 2015 11:44 ticklishmusic wrote: Trump played the game of life on beginner mode. Most of us are playing it on hard. So no, not particularly impressed.
More like tutorial, not only did he get spoon fed the money, he got spoon fed the connections, credibility, and access among other things.
They are really turning into a whole family of folks born on home plate thinking they hit a home run (while dad shouts about his grand slam while no one was on base).
Speaking of Trump and money, he spent this morning ranting about "how many other checks are out there written to terrorists" in reference to the California couple, turns out it was just a relatively standard loan. The guy should be a joke (even the party is of that opinion) yet the party sat on their hands when they could of done the right thing years ago so now they are getting pounded by that joke and the folks they empowered over the last 8 years.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled Monday that Canada and Mexico can slap more than $1 billion in tariffs on U.S. goods in retaliation for meat labeling rules it says discriminated against Mexican and Canadian livestock.
At issue were U.S. labels on packaged steaks and other cuts of meat that say where the animals were born, raised and slaughtered.
The WTO has previously found that the so-called "country of origin" labeling law put Canadian and Mexican livestock at a disadvantage. It ruled Monday that Canada could impose $780 million in retaliatory tariffs and Mexico could impose $228 million.
"We are disappointed with this decision and its potential impact on trade among vital North American partners," said Tim Reif, general counsel for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The labels are supported by some U.S. ranchers and by consumer groups. They are opposed by meatpackers who say they require costly paperwork.
The WTO's decision shifts responsibility to Congress, which is considering working a repeal of the labeling law into a massive year-end spending bill.
Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, said Monday that he will look for "all legislative opportunities" to repeal the labeling law. "We must prevent retaliation, and we must do it now before these sanctions take effect," Roberts said.
More like get rekt consumers. Why shouldn't meat be labeled by country of origin? I want to know if my beef is american or foreign, especially if any of the processing is taking place in China.
are you for real? as long as the meat is objectively the same, labeling is simply protectionism using ridiculous 'consumer' bias.
What does it mean for meat from two different cows to be "objectively the same"?
EDIT: And why do you always come down on the side of producers when it comes to information asymmetries? Source is always linked to quality. Amazon for example has so much garbage-tier shit parading as the real deal and its often impossible to know what it is before you buy. Obfuscating the source just further fetishizes the commodity market, and in the age of big data, further reduces the possibility of consumer surplus, since sellers know everything about buyers and buyers know nothing about sellers.
this is ridiculous. if the quality is different then your technical standards should be able to distinguish the meats from each other.
it's not about information it is about being able to command market power through biases.
here we have a marxist standing up for one of the most oppressive industries in international trade, rekting them third worlders with subsidies and regulation.
Here we have a liberal market evangelist arguing for less information in the market. How are "biases" not information? Who are you to decide what information is relevant and what information is not when consumers are buying a product? Is this fascist capitalism?
Increased arsenic or other environmental pollutants that make it into the feed or soil in China? Do you think the meat is getting tested in a mass spec before it's brought to market? You seem to think that every apple or potatoe or cow or pig is identical to every other. China is currently one of the most polluted places on earth and is shipping it's meat across the ocean on massive oil-guzzling boats. But for some reason you don't think a person here should be able to easily find the origin of their foods.
The irony is that you are opposed to this labeling regulation and then make fun of the bourgeois prices at Whole Foods, but you are basically forcing everyone who wants to know where their food comes from to shop at Whole Foods. Americans are free to label their meats right? They are free to send their meats to Whole Foods at massively marked up prices so that people can buy local.
Your parting shot about "rekting ithem third worlders with subsidies and regulation" is a bit of a mystery to me. I didn't know that Marx was a market liberalizer opposed to protectionism.
You guys should watch that documentary linked on this page. Most of you know trump from the apprentice I guess but he has been around for way longer.
I do admire the guy, he doesn't smoke drink or do drugs,he has been working his ass off all his life and he expanded his fathers business in a huge way. So many rich kids throw their life away. Talking down his achievements in life is only making yourself look silly.
And ya the republicans,they only got themselves to blame. Putting up people like cruz. As a European liberal I rather see trump win then cruz. You know why I like trump, because when I see him I see an honest man. And that is incredibly rare these days in politics. It is so rare that I am willing to vote for the first honest man I see no matter if I agree with his politics or not.
Trump doesn't beat around the bushes and our feminized populace can't handle it. But policy-wise, he's not too different from his competitors. Yeah he goes over the top sometimes but he corrects himself and moves forward. He doesn't need an army of speech writers and pollers to tell him what to say.
It's just a shame that it's a Republican candidate who's passionate about what he believes in and speaks his mind without reservations and it's not a Democrat.
replace objective with physical ot whatever. already identified key issue, what is bias and what is information. or in other words not all information is worth protecting, or produce better decisions if consumers are stupid or biased. does origin labeling of this sort show a welfare impact in meat quality chosen.
On December 09 2015 13:33 Deathstar wrote: Trump doesn't beat around the bushes and our feminized populace can't handle it. But policy-wise, he's not too different from his competitors. Yeah he goes over the top sometimes but he corrects himself and moves forward. He doesn't need an army of speech writers and pollers to tell him what to say.
It's just a shame that it's a Republican candidate who's passionate about what he believes in and speaks his mind without reservations and it's not a Democrat.
That's his appeal you got it.
SALISBURY, MD—Repeating identical comments he had made in June, July, August, September, and twice in November, increasingly nervous local man Aaron Howe responded to Donald Trump’s call to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. Monday by once again stating this would be the end of the Republican frontrunner’s campaign, sources confirmed. “Well, that’s it—you just can’t say those kinds of things and expect to be taken seriously any longer,” said an anxious Howe, his voice quavering slightly as he spoke aloud the very same words he had previously uttered in reaction to remarks about Mexicans, women, the disabled, former POW John McCain, and a number of other targeted parties. “That’s the final nail in the coffin right there. There’s no way he’s coming back from this one.” At press time, a visibly tense Howe was steadily amassing the angst and exasperation that would be unleashed in his seventh expletive-filled exclamation of the year when he catches sight of the newest set of GOP poll numbers.
Speech writers arnt nessecary when you just make shit up as you go. The constitution, facts, stats, personal history, US history, science. All of these thing are a matter of perception and Trump is an expert in all these fields in his view.
EPT
