EPTI'm probably going to lose my job in manufacturing if this trade war continues or if there is any more escalations. We're already pretty hard on the edge with how expensive material costs are getting, if we can't sell products anymore either there is literally nowhere to go. There is probably another job out there I could find easily but it'll be a lot lower wage button presser and not the kind of fast changeover CNC work America does so well these days.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4894
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13828 Posts
I'm probably going to lose my job in manufacturing if this trade war continues or if there is any more escalations. We're already pretty hard on the edge with how expensive material costs are getting, if we can't sell products anymore either there is literally nowhere to go. There is probably another job out there I could find easily but it'll be a lot lower wage button presser and not the kind of fast changeover CNC work America does so well these days. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11432 Posts
Moving manufacturing to the US also doesn't seem to be an option as these capacities simply don't exist there. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13828 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:22 Simberto wrote: I like playing board games. Apparently these tariffs, if really implemented, will basically kill a bunch of boardgame companies. That would suck. Moving manufacturing to the US also doesn't seem to be an option as these capacities simply don't exist there. And the infrastructure to support the capacity doesn't exist here, on top of trying to make labor more expensive than it already is. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5445 Posts
No. On April 04 2025 04:57 KT_Elwood wrote: this is over when the world simply applies counter tariffs, making manufacturing leaving the US because they can't sell to anybody? 1) The world would never do that, sabotage their own economies that way, tariffs are an irrational inflationary tax that make products more expensive for their own citizens and the world are smarter than Blumpf obviously. 2) If Kekistan sells widgets to America, and America puts a 100% tariff on Kekistan, and therefore American manufacturing takes over widget production to make and sell widgets to Americans, no retaliatory tariff from Kekistan would affect Americans selling widgets to Americans. Because America runs a trade deficit, meaning they are a net importer, meaning net consumer, it is hard in general to retaliate against them as a country by putting a tax on something you don't buy anyway (in the aggregate). That's the whole point. Alcistan makes every wine and spirit known to man. America makes Budweiser. They trade with each other, Alcistan buying some Budweiser, but mainly America buys everything from Alcistan. If the US adds 100% tariffs and blows up the price of that alcohol to protect domestic Budweiser, a retaliatory tariff is not parity. Budweiser will lose some market share of Alcistan which is more than made up by their growth in the domestic market from substitution already. There are obviously specific companies and industries and fields that don't apply, where the US is a strong exporter, and mainly those would be cases of the countries shooting themselves in the foot if they retaliated, for example in the defense sector. I don't know that there's companies that can do what Lockheed Martin and the like are capable of - instead, countries that rely on those sectors should be looking to negotiate new deals. Not that your question was seriously wondering about this. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7870 Posts
They seem especially true with trump himself. It really feels like when other countries are hurting from what he does, it has to be a win for America. It’s such a miserable vision of the world i find it just so sad. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9110 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:28 Biff The Understudy wrote: The way i understand maga is that they are the world like a zero sum game. You win when others lose, you lose when others win. The idea of cooperation and mutual benefits seem totally absent from the thought of those people. They seem especially true with trump himself. It really feels like when other countries are hurting from what he does, it has to be a win for America. It’s just so sad. The entire identitarian right is like that, not just maga specifically. I've noticed that locally as well, their rhetoric isn't that when they'll be in charge everyone will be better off, it's not even that when they'll be in charge their specific group will be better off - but rather that when they'll be in charge the groups that they perceive as the source of their anger and frustration will be punished. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany861 Posts
Your future is to make something they need, and not something your fellow poorer 90% peers need. High quality luxury yacht interiors, private nuclear propulsion... this kind of stuff. Edit: "The right" at the core always assumes that you will do to them, what they would do to you given the chance. They don't trust in "mutual beneficial" because they need to see somebody else lose in order to make their Brain accept that they won. | ||
|
decafchicken
United States20008 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:28 Biff The Understudy wrote: The way i understand maga is that they are the world like a zero sum game. You win when others lose, you lose when others win. The idea of cooperation and mutual benefits seem totally absent from the thought of those people. They seem especially true with trump himself. It really feels like when other countries are hurting from what he does, it has to be a win for America. It’s such a miserable vision of the world i find it just so sad. This was purposely done by the party over decades of framing social services as communism and whatnot. Helping everyone is bad, everyone should help themselves *says the people at the top pulling up the ladder* | ||
|
Slydie
1913 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:33 KT_Elwood wrote: 50% of the consumer spending in the US is done by the 10% of wealthiest households. Your future is to make something they need, and not something your fellow poorer 90% peers need. High quality luxury yacht interiors, private nuclear propulsion... this kind of stuff. Edit: "The right" at the core always assumes that you will do to them, what they would do to you given the chance. They don't trust in "mutual beneficial" because they need to see somebody else lose in order to make their Brain accept that they won. US politics has become too much of a wrestling match of winning and losing. I do not think this is a left/right issue, the "left" loves to see Trumpers bleed and policies fail too. A surprise benefit of the tariffs is that they are actually very environmentally friendly! Oil prices dropped immediately, as the demand is expected to fall because of a slower economy with less transport of goods. If the general public believes it is worth it is a very different question. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16665 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:33 KT_Elwood wrote: 50% of the consumer spending in the US is done by the 10% of wealthiest households. Your future is to make something they need, and not something your fellow poorer 90% peers need. High quality luxury yacht interiors, private nuclear propulsion... this kind of stuff. Edit: "The right" at the core always assumes that you will do to them, what they would do to you given the chance. They don't trust in "mutual beneficial" because they need to see somebody else lose in order to make their Brain accept that they won. I think you are painting 'the right' with far too broad a brush. Check out Ben Shapiro's comments today. International trade is not viewed as a 'zero sum game' by a huge proportion of 'the right' tall foreheads. Shapiro is a Republican voter and a substantial portion of Republicans share his views expressed in the video above. Guys from 'the right' like Henry Hazlitt, Friedrich Hayek, etc etc view international trade and all trade thru the lens Shapiro presented today on his show. ~20% of the USA is libertarian and in the last election a lot of them voted Republican. They adhere to the theories espoused by guys like Hazlitt, Hayek etc. Trump will not be able to carry through fully with his grand years long tariff plan because Republicans will stop supporting him in this area. EDIT : I am wearing my Friedrich Hayek t-shirt today. Sexy women flock to me when I am wearing it. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany861 Posts
Will they support an actual impeachment and new general elections? Cross-Thread Nintendo has moved production from China to Vietnam to dodge western and especially Trump tariffs on China Now they are fucked again with the release of the new console, because Trump blanket tariffed the world. LoL. | ||
|
decafchicken
United States20008 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:49 Slydie wrote: US politics has become too much of a wrestling match of winning and losing. I do not think this is a left/right issue, the "left" loves to see Trumpers bleed and policies fail too. A surprise benefit of the tariffs is that they are actually very environmentally friendly! Oil prices dropped immediately, as the demand is expected to fall because of a slower economy with less transport of goods. If the general public believes it is worth it is a very different question. Hahaha the oil prices dropping was because OPEC used today to announce they were going in INCREASE oil production because they knew they'd have the most leverage today. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland24777 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:53 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I think you are painting 'the right' with far too broad a brush. Check out Ben Shapiro's comments today. International trade is not viewed as a 'zero sum game' by a huge proportion of 'the right' tall foreheads. Shapiro is a Republican voter and a substantial portion of Republicans share his views expressed in the video above. Guys from 'the right' like Henry Hazlitt, Friedrich Hayek, etc etc view international trade and all trade thru the lens Shapiro presented today on his show. ~20% of the USA is libertarian and in the last election a lot of them voted Republican. They adhere to the theories espoused by guys like Hazlitt, Hayek etc. Trump will not be able to carry through fully with his grand years long tariff plan because Republicans will stop supporting him in this area. EDIT : I am wearing my Friedrich Hayek t-shirt today. Sexy women flock to me when I am wearing it. Trump’s been able to follow through on a hell of a lot of things that such types ostensibly oppose, maybe this is the bridge too far, but remains to be seen. | ||
|
Vivax
21954 Posts
On April 04 2025 05:49 Slydie wrote: US politics has become too much of a wrestling match of winning and losing. I do not think this is a left/right issue, the "left" loves to see Trumpers bleed and policies fail too. A surprise benefit of the tariffs is that they are actually very environmentally friendly! Oil prices dropped immediately, as the demand is expected to fall because of a slower economy with less transport of goods. If the general public believes it is worth it is a very different question. This is a take I could get behind. Either Trump wants to lower the countrys demand by strangling the economy with tariffs, reducing the trade deficit and energy consumption (for consumers) alongside that, or he needs to economically beat down his citizens enough to make them accept him as the saviour. Aspiring dictatorships with strong male leaders usually fare best when the population is desperate. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16665 Posts
On April 04 2025 06:21 WombaT wrote: Trump’s been able to follow through on a hell of a lot of things that such types ostensibly oppose, maybe this is the bridge too far, but remains to be seen. Here is a nice analysis by a couple of very right wing guys. My views are congruent with this analysis. Trump will find some fake "victory condition" similar to the "emergency condition" of fentanyl coming from Canada. This fake "victory condition" will give Trump his reason for reducing/removing tariffs on some countries. The "emergency condition of fentanyl" that legally permits Trump to tariff Canada is being attacked by many American Republican politicians on many levels. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9110 Posts
On April 04 2025 07:07 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Here is a nice analysis by a couple of very right wing guys. My views are congruent with this analysis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlbiuj1olmY Trump will find some fake "victory condition" similar to the "emergency condition" of fentanyl coming from Canada. This fake "victory condition" will give Trump his reason for reducing/removing tariffs on some countries. The "emergency condition of fentanyl" that legally permits Trump to tariff Canada is being attacked by many American Republican politicians on many levels. I was thinking the same thing. He'll get some SEA countries that rely on fast fashion manufacturing to drop import taxes on paperclips or some shit and use that as proof that the tariff strategy "worked". | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16665 Posts
On April 04 2025 06:46 Vivax wrote: Aspiring dictatorships with strong male leaders usually fare best when the population is desperate. what happens in dictatorships with aspiring strong female leaders?  | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16665 Posts
On April 04 2025 07:17 Dan HH wrote: I was thinking the same thing. He'll get some SEA countries that rely on fast fashion manufacturing to drop import taxes on paperclips or some shit and use that as proof that the tariff strategy "worked". Trump is already angling that way by talking about all the "negotiation power" the tariffs give him. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/03/trump-tariffs-live-updates-stock-market-trade-war.html Giant megacorps are always "investing in the USA" on some level every week of the year. Trump's team will jam together some stats about "new investment in manufacturing infrastructure" that were prolly going to happen any way. THe BS stats will be coherent and deep enough to seem reasonable on a 6 minute segment of "Gutfeld!". And that'll be that. He'll point to the ending of "chicken tariffs" by Canada and say "we won"! | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland24777 Posts
On April 04 2025 07:17 Dan HH wrote: I was thinking the same thing. He'll get some SEA countries that rely on fast fashion manufacturing to drop import taxes on paperclips or some shit and use that as proof that the tariff strategy "worked". I think he might back down, I just don’t think it will be due to considerable grass roots pressure from his base. They’ve had years to exercise their principled bona fides, and haven’t, and crucially, Trump doesn’t really value their opinion any more than he values anyone else’s. He’s a gigantic, gigantic narcissist and it genuinely confuses me at this point when people can’t see that. It’ll be a shitshow for a bit, Trump will roll back some and claim he’s got the win, I can absolutely see that play. Which, incidentally will fuck up things yet further. If you went ‘Hm OK we have these tariffs for this guy’s term, minimum’ you can at least plan on the medium term. What do you do with Mr Capricious? Plan for the new tariff reality, or gamble on him backing down in some areas. And what areas will they be? I just don’t see if coming from Republicans pressuring Trump en masse as Jimmy seems to expect. | ||
|
Vivax
21954 Posts
On April 04 2025 07:22 JimmyJRaynor wrote: what happens in dictatorships with aspiring strong female leaders? I wouldn‘t know of a precedent. If you mean leaders and not dictators I‘d say VDL is doing alright. | ||
| ||
