• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trade War with Europe

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Trade War with Europe! Here we come!

From the Guardian, here: Trump threatens car tariffs after EU sets up £2.5bn of levies on US

Excerpt:
The upshot of it all is that trade between the US and EU will suffer - or, we can hope so.

Hope so? Howzatt?

Because when export-businesses are reduced by shenanigans such as Trump has manipulated then TopManagement begins to scratch its head and ask itself, "Why the hell did I give this dork so much money to become PotUS??!??"

What Americans have not yet grasped is that the unlimited funding of election campaigns has put all governance - Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches - in the hands of the Replicant Party.

Donald Dork was not elected PotUS by the American electorate. Hillary was. He lost the popular vote. He was nonetheless made PotUS by the Electoral College that (abracadabra!) made him PotUS. It is understandable that Europeans should scratch their heads in amazement.

How the hell does an Electoral College refuse the winner of the popular-vote and elect the loser. Whatever happened to democracy in America?

Well, the historical reason for this asinine outcome (which has elected 5 illicit presidents in the history of the US) goes back a long, long way. In fact, the original Constitution contains the formulation of an Electoral College that, instead of counting vote across the expanse of the 13 original states - a map of which is here - reports to Congress the result of the popular-vote.

Howzatt? The year is 1796 and vote counting across those original states is hazardous at best. There were no major interlinking roads. So, the Electoral College (EC) was "concocted" to assure that state-votes for the presidency could be delivered to Congress (then in the town of Philadelphia) by means of EC-representatives in each state.

What history teachers fail to tell students of American history is that the popular-vote in some states had no relation (in terms of numbers of EC-voters) with the original popular vote. The southern-states, less populated than the northern-states, used the EC to get more "voting power" in the selection of the American president.

Whyzzat? Because they feared that the northern-states would outlaw slavery without which the major source of income to the landed gentry of farming cotton would become impossible.

And thus the EC-mechanism throughout the history of the US has produced 5 presidents that lost the popular-vote but were elected nonetheless by the EC!

They are:
Elections dates:

  • 1824: John Quincy Adams.
  • 1876: Rutherford B. Hayes.
  • 1888: Benjamin Harrison.
  • 2000: George W. Bush.
  • 2016: Donald Trump.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ummm...

Is this thread about a trade war with EU, how screwed up the EC is or just another piss and moan about Trump thread?
 
Mycroft said:
Ummm...

Is this thread about a trade war with EU, how screwed up the EC is or just another piss and moan about Trump thread?
Click to expand...

Yes, because the 10% EU tariffs (on US auto imports) in place before the evil Trump 20% tariffs (on EU auto imports) were fair, just and necessary. You see, the EU having 4X the auto tariff rate as that of the US was fine but the US raising its auto tariffs to 2X the rate that of the EU tariff rate is proof that Trump, made possible by the EC, is evil. Free (and fair?) trade is when your tariff rates are higher than theirs are yet, when that situation gets reversed, its a 'trade war' because the EC gave the world Trump.
 

Meanwhile..... German automakers want to deal with Trump over tariffs. :lamo

https://jalopnik.com/german-automakers-want-to-make-a-deal-with-trump-to-end-1826997044
 
This, apparently, is an anti-free market thread as well as Trump-hating thread.


Someone explain to me why the US needs to trade with countries who are highly protectionist in their trade like China and federations like the EU.
If the US can find substitute countries that offer the same goods to the US at a lower price or buys the goods the US sells at US prices, why isn't it incumbent on the US (and free-trade) to find those more advantageous countries for American trade? Who says the US needs to trade with its military allies? Who says the US needs to be in trading alliances?

Why isn't anyone espousing free trade for the US?

If Trump's tariffs create a dearth of supply of goods from other countries, that just means more jobs for Americans as America supplies itself with most of its needs. It means America sells to itself and other less tariff-laden countries.

It's not like the supply and demand of the US is chopped liver compared to the rest of the trading world.
America's natural resources aren't chopped liver either.
 
Last edited:
Trade War with Europe
Click to expand...

a dumb move, just like most of the orange king's policies. when we have a sane congress (and that might take a while,) they need to remove / seriously curtail the president's ability to unilaterally start trade wars and real wars. we have to take into account that partisan fools might again elect a megalomaniacal asshole with a third grade intellect.
 

Trump does not tell the full story . ... America has 25% tariffs on EU pick up trucks, SUVS and big vans and see those tariffs on China China has responded by putting tariffs on cars made in America ... the cars Europe sells to China are manufactured in their US plants so to avoid Chinese tariffs they will have to build the cars in Europe and the US factories will have to lay off loads of American workers
 
Lafayette said:
B F D.

And meanwhile American builders are going to raise the prices of their cars because they have lesser competition from foreign builders.

Once again, Jack-'n-Jill America car-buyers are the losers. Thank you Donald Dork ... !
Click to expand...

Prove it!
 
Helix said:
... we have to take into account that partisan fools might again elect a megalomaniacal asshole with a third grade intellect.
Click to expand...

Hillary won the popular vote. Let's not forget HOW Donald Dork got elected due to the inherent unfairness of the Electoral College.

From here is why the EC-vote is distorted:

 
Lafayette said:
B F D.

And meanwhile American builders are going to raise the prices of their cars because they have lesser competition from foreign builders.

Once again, Jack-'n-Jill America car-buyers are the losers. Thank you Donald Dork ... !
Click to expand...

But meanwhile James'n'Joan car workers are the winners. Maybe some of them live in destitute cities like Flint.
 
Lafayette said:
Hillary won the popular vote. Let's not forget HOW Donald Dork got elected due to the inherent unfairness of the Electoral College.

From here is why the EC-vote is distorted:
Click to expand...

the EC has been the way presidential elections have been decided since the beginning, so she knew the rules of the game going in. i've generally supported the system for two reasons.

1. it helps flyover states and rural areas to have a voice.

2. it puts a safeguard in place in case voters fall for the pitch of a completely unfit and potentially dangerous candidate.

the 2016 election shows that electors are very hesitant to overturn the result even when a candidate is as obviously unfit for office as Trump, so it looks like #2 is unlikely to happen. given this, my support for the EC has slipped considerably. do i think that it will be eliminated within my lifetime, though? not really.
 
Sweden said:
But meanwhile James'n'Joan car workers are the winners. Maybe some of them live in destitute cities like Flint.
Click to expand...

Not if American drivers decide to change cars every 10 years instead of every 7 years because costs are too high compared to their earnings.

I am not insisting that I am right. Or wrong. Any market has myriad factors in action pushing it up, down or sideways. And more often than not even the best of economists are unable to prove the causes of such movements.

Except that higher prices are an important factor in diminishing demand but only if overall Incomes are stagnant or increasing only slightly. "Keeping up with Joneses" is a very potent societal-component driving Consumer Demand.

My real point is this: Donald Dork made some outrageously asinine promises to get where he is. And, coming out the Great Recession they obviously had resonance amongst many voters. Now, as PotUS, he is taking some even more asinine decisions to show how "I keep my word". Great!

We'll see where that gets him*. And the American consumer as well ...

*NAFTA is/was a real boon for the American worker. It allowed companies to keep producing cars at reasonable prices. Bringing in car-components from Mexico helped keep down costs and thus sell product. And replacing hand-work production in Mexico with robotics could keep those costs down - which is likely what the Mexican companies were about to do. (They aren't fools.) Now they'll think twice about whether the effort is worth the cost.
 

Oh Boy!Return to the 50's!
Let me get out my Leave it to Beaver DVD's
"Ward you were a little rough on the Beaver last night"
 
Helix said:
the EC has been the way presidential elections have been decided since the beginning, so she knew the rules of the game going in. i've generally supported the system for two reasons.

1. it helps flyover states and rural areas to have a voice.
Click to expand...

None of which justifies legitimately that the true popular-vote is the ONLY acceptable manner in which to have fair and honest elections.

Let's presume that you live in one of those states where 50 votes are the equivalent in the Electoral College of a hundred votes where I live in some other state. How am I supposed to feel about such a democracy?

If the roles were reversed, what would you think? That's the way the cookie crumbles?

Aint no way to run a democracy.

Helix said:
2. it puts a safeguard in place in case voters fall for the pitch of a completely unfit and potentially dangerous candidate.
Click to expand...

You have little regard for human intelligence. People are not fools. When it comes to voting in America, they are more lazy than elsewhere (see comparative national voter turnout here), but not dupes.


I beg to differ. Our democracy is diminished in three ways as any Civics Class should instruct its students:
*The vote for the Executive (PotUS) is biased by an unfair Electoral College, and
*The vote for the National Legislature is warped by Gerrymandering.
*The exaggerated use of TV commercials to swing voter sentiment.

Anybody with a sense of fairness and honesty should be indignant with such voting discrepancies in a supposedly "developed democracy" ...
 

Except no one with a brain believes Hillary was popular anything.

The only useful information to come from the Jill Stein recount was that democrats were stuffing ballot boxes in areas they have total over.

This makes it easy for them to get away with it, but its also how they get a fake popular vote yet not win any areas they would not have won anyhow.

In other words the EC prevents criminals like Hillary from stealing elections.

It was a brilliant move on the part of the Founding Fathers to put the EC in the Constitution.
 

i'm coming around to support it, as i said. if electors refuse to act as a buffer to prevent dangerous, unqualified candidates like Trump from taking office, then the EC is a lot less useful. i'm also not a fan of the primary system which gives a few states a lot of influence in picking a candidate while giving others almost none during most election cycles.

Lafayette said:
You have little regard for human intelligence. People are not fools. When it comes to voting in America, they are more lazy than elsewhere (see comparative national voter turnout here), but not dupes.
Click to expand...

i have little regard for tribal mob intelligence. the EC should step in when it's obvious that the person leading the mob is completely unfit for office, as Trump is. since it appears that they won't do that, i see little reason for keeping that buffer in place. giving up the "more votes equals a win" system doesn't really have enough benefits without that buffer.


i don't support gerrymandering, either, and would support banning it at the federal or even at the constitutional level.
 
Casca XV said:
Except no one with a brain believes Hillary was popular anything.
Click to expand...

Look- I am not a Hillary fan. I did NOT support her primary run in 2008 and I did not support her primary run in 2016 either. I did vote for her in November considering the terrible alternative.

But having said that - and somebody who is involved in local Democratic politics - it is a huge mistake and just plain actually wrong to deny that Clinton had very sold support in a broad swath of the party. African Americans - a major force in many states) really supported her in a large percentage in the primaries and women also made up her base. To pretend otherwise is just to give in to the long two decades of right wing hate against her and live in delusion.

This makes it easy for them to get away with it, but its also how they get a fake popular vote yet not win any areas they would not have won anyhow.

In other words the EC prevents criminals like Hillary from stealing elections.
Click to expand...

Unless you have factual evidence to introduce to support such a charge, its just delusional to say such things.
 

Maybe later. I can't post links with this tablet. But there are dozens of easy to find articles on the Jill Stein recounts.

Trump campaign rallys were filling sports stadiums while Hillary was leaving high school gyms mostly empty. Yet she was the popular one... Ya right.
 
Helix said:
the EC should step in when it's obvious that the person leading the mob is completely unfit for office, as Trump is. since it appears that they won't do that.
Click to expand...

The EC is a manipulative tool forced into the original Constitution of 1786 by the southern states. It was reformulated in 1812 (with the Electoral College) in the passage by Congress of the 12th Amendment.

Without a state-wide vote to recall the 12th Amendment nothing can be done. "They" (in this matter) don't exist. It is "we" who get to vote if ever a nationwide referendum could be mounted. And that alone has all the characteristics of a Mission Impossible.

We need simply, by law, stipulate that the Electoral College be constituted in number in "exact proportion" to the statewide popular-vote. Then assure (by law) ourselves that the statewide vote is not gerrymandered and remains purely an open vote of all citizens registered to vote regardless of address.

Then the "Electoral College" can all fancy-dress and report their results on a given post-election day to the HofR for all Americans to see on TV. Wow! What a performance!

Congress could do that. Methinks. Then we can all get back to worrying about other aspects of our voting procedure. For instance, why our percentage Executive (Head of state) vote is so low compared to other countries and does that not mean we need to make voting regulatory in the presidential election.

PS:
*Spending a lifetime in office, for instance, is yet another senseless facet of both Chambers of Congress. Enough is enough Playing-Politics as if it were a children's board-game.
*Worse yet is the amount of money that is spent on TV-commercials to swing votes because Americans spend more time watching the boob-tube than most other nations? (See infographic here.)
 
Last edited:

Go cast your caustic aspersions regarding Hillary down a toilet-bowl to get post-electoral relief.

This is a DEBATE* forum ...

*Look-up the word in a dictionary!
 

Did you vote in the last Presidential election? To which state did you apply and receive your ballot, if yes?

Did you pay any tax to that state? Perhaps your vote shouldn’t count as much as a taxpayer of that state.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…