Trump is the chaos president, and I like it!

[Bucky]

I think Trump is a kind of guy that thrives on conflict. I really love it.

We need to shake things up in America. I really like the removal of globalist Gary Cohn. Cohn is a failure. He failed at becoming the CEO of Goldman Sachs. He failed at becoming Trump's chief of staff or the next Federal Reserve Chairman.

It is time to appoint Peter Navarro as Cohn's replacement.

This is what Trump's agenda was and is. "Make America great again." In the 60's and 70's, we had so much more manufacturing jobs. At one time 25% of Americans were factory workers. Now? Maybe 8%.

Trump's agenda has been always to revitalize those lost jobs that have gone to Germany, Japan, South Korea, China, etc.. Those countries have an unfair advantage. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing 50-80% tariffs imposed, particularly on China.

People argue we would start a trade war. That is hysterical. Countries like China have been ripping us off for so long, they would have too much to lose to engage in a war with the world's biggest consumer. How can you compete with a country that pays its factory workers quarters and provides inhumane working conditions? Is that fair? That wouldn't happen in the United States.

Factory jobs are the key folks. It was the reason why we won WW2. Brainless free traders think only tax cuts and deregulation will work.

 

[spud_meister]

Can you call yourself a progressive while supporting a regressive president and his regressive policies?

 

[calamity]

Trump is the Bizarro president. No more, no less.

 

[Bucky]

Can you call yourself a progressive while supporting a regressive president and his regressive policies?

WHO IS PETER NAVARRO?

 

[Aristaeus]

I think Trump is a kind of guy that thrives on conflict. I really love it.

We need to shake things up in America. I really like the removal of globalist Gary Cohn. Cohn is a failure. He failed at becoming the CEO of Goldman Sachs. He failed at becoming Trump's chief of staff or the next Federal Reserve Chairman.

It is time to appoint Peter Navarro as Cohn's replacement.

This is what Trump's agenda was and is. "Make America great again." In the 60's and 70's, we had so much more manufacturing jobs. At one time 25% of Americans were factory workers. Now? Maybe 8%.

Trump's agenda has been always to revitalize those lost jobs that have gone to Germany, Japan, South Korea, China, etc.. Those countries have an unfair advantage. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing 50-80% tariffs imposed, particularly on China.

People argue we would start a trade war. That is hysterical. Countries like China have been ripping us off for so long, they would have too much to lose to engage in a war with the world's biggest consumer. How can you compete with a country that pays its factory workers quarters and provides inhumane working conditions? Is that fair? That wouldn't happen in the United States.

Factory jobs are the key folks. It was the reason why we won WW2. Brainless free traders think only tax cuts and deregulation will work.

Of course it would start a trade war. Other countries have already threatened to retaliate with tariffs of their own, so that is a trade war. Tariffs on steel and aluminium will cost US jobs in industries which use steel and aluminium. It will cost far more jobs than those saved or created in steel mills.

And Cohn wasn't removed, he resigned. Anyway, I thought Trump only hired the best. Isn't that what he said? If he's as big a failure as you claim, what does that say about the person who hired him?

 

[Carjosse]

He is one of many politicians that seem to forget that the world changes and America needs to change with it. Trying to go back to some point in the past never has and never will work, you can only move forward but Trump and Trump supporters do not seem to understand that. US leaders need to realize that the West has moved on from manufacturing and is now a knowledge economy, northern Europe has learned that but America has not.

There will always be a cheaper worker, the US needs to find a different advantage.

 

[Bucky]

Of course it would start a trade war. Other countries have already threatened to retaliate with tariffs of their own, so that is a trade war. Tariffs on steel and aluminium will cost US jobs in industries which use steel and aluminium. It will cost far more jobs than those saved or created in steel mills.

Do you get it???

Over the last 40 years our trade deficits have been growing and growing. We import more goods than we export.

The result: Demand in the United States decreases and moves overseas. This results in massive debt.

I love this tariff because it will lead to:

*rising income
*employment
*gdp

 

[Aristaeus]

Do you get it???

Over the last 40 years our trade deficits have been growing and growing. We import more goods than we export.

The result: Demand in the United States decreases and moves overseas. This results in massive debt.

I love this tariff because it will lead to:

*rising income
*employment
*gdp

How on earth will it lead to rising employment when companies which buy steel have to pay 25% more for the steel? Less profits or no profits at all will lead to redundancies. Even the republican party and conservative economists are calling this foolish.

 

[Bucky]

He is one of many politicians that seem to forget that the world changes and America needs to change with it. Trying to go back to some point in the past never has and never will work, you can only move forward but Trump and Trump supporters do not seem to understand that. US leaders need to realize that the West has moved on from manufacturing and is now a knowledge economy, northern Europe has learned that but America has not.

There will always be a cheaper worker, the US needs to find a different advantage.

How do you compete with a country like China that ignores labor laws, abuse workers, and pay them pennies?

"Knowledge economy"

?????

Have you ever been to Kentucky or Pennslyvania?

 

[Bucky]

How on earth will it lead to rising employment when companies which buy steel have to pay 25% more for the steel? Less profits or no profits at all will lead to redundancies. Even the republican party and conservative economists are calling this foolish.

Didn't these same companies just receive a gigantic tax break?

Boo hoo. Two tears in a bucket.

 

[Fletch]

How on earth will it lead to rising employment when companies which buy steel have to pay 25% more for the steel? Less profits or no profits at all will lead to redundancies. Even the republican party and conservative economists are calling this foolish.

Interesting that you recognize that when it comes to an arbitrary increase in the cost of material, but conveniently forget it when it comes to an arbitrary increase in the cost of labor

 

[Aristaeus]

Interesting that you recognize that when it comes to an arbitrary increase in the cost of material, but conveniently forget it when it comes to an arbitrary increase in the cost of labor

Is anyone advocating for a 25% pay rise for all workers? Nope, didn't think so. And yes, a 25% pay rise for workers would lead to some people losing their jobs, just like a 25% tariff will result in some people losing their jobs.

edit: why do you think the Republican party and conservative economists are all wrong when they say this would be a disaster?

 

[Mycroft]

How on earth will it lead to rising employment when companies which buy steel have to pay 25% more for the steel? Less profits or no profits at all will lead to redundancies. Even the republican party and conservative economists are calling this foolish.

Instead of companies paying 25% more for the steel they use, they will pay 10% more for the steel they use when they buy it from US steel companies. Those US steel companies don't have the production capacity to supply the demand, so they'll expand to meet it.

That expansion will lead to rising employment. And rising wages. And rising Americans engaged in spending. And rising GDP. And a more secure US. And...well, you get the picture.

The cost? Slightly higher prices. You might decide to buy an American car instead of a BMW or a VW...at least, until the European auto industry's crying and threats get through to their leaders.

btw, the big losers will be the Chinese. They will have to drastically reduce THEIR steel production because they won't be able to dump it on the world market at ridiculously and artificially low prices. Heck, they might even decide to tell their slaves...NK...to scrap their nuke program to get Trump to ease off on the trade war.

 

[Fletch]

Is anyone advocating for a 25% pay rise for all workers? Nope, didn't think so. And yes, a 25% pay rise for workers would lead to some people losing their jobs, just like a 25% tariff will result in some people losing their jobs.

edit: why do you think the Republican party and conservative economists are all wrong when they say this would be a disaster?

And raising the minimum wage to $15 from $8 is less than a 25% raise? If you would oppose that on the same grounds that you oppose the tarriffs, you would at least have the virtue of being consistant.

 

[Aristaeus]

Instead of companies paying 25% more for the steel they use, they will pay 10% more for the steel they use when they buy it from US steel companies. Those US steel companies don't have the production capacity to supply the demand, so they'll expand to meet it.

That expansion will lead to rising employment. And rising wages. And rising Americans engaged in spending. And rising GDP. And a more secure US. And...well, you get the picture.

The cost? Slightly higher prices. You might decide to buy an American car instead of a BMW or a VW...at least, until the European auto industry's crying and threats get through to their leaders.

btw, the big losers will be the Chinese. They will have to drastically reduce THEIR steel production because they won't be able to dump it on the world market at ridiculously and artificially low prices. Heck, they might even decide to tell their slaves...NK...to scrap their nuke program to get Trump to ease off on the trade war.

It will not lead to rising employment, and there isn't a single economist, including conservative economists, who say it will.

Glad you admit that the US steel industry doesn't have the production capacity to meet the demand. How long does it take to build a steel mill (presumably they'd have to import steel, lol), and how long does it take to train up all these new steel workers, and what happens in the mean time?

 

[Oborosen]

Can you call yourself a progressive while supporting a regressive president and his regressive policies?

I think that would make him a regressive himself as well... because I can bet that a third of people on this site. Don't really line up with their projected lean.

 

[Carjosse]

How do you compete with a country like China that ignores labor laws, abuse workers, and pay them pennies?

"Knowledge economy"

?????

Have you ever been to Kentucky or Pennslyvania?

By not trying to focus your economy on manufacturing jobs. By focusing on providing either high quality and high-skill manufactured goods with a primary focus on high-knowledge services and industries.

 

[HowardBThiname]

Can you call yourself a progressive while supporting a regressive president and his regressive policies?

What's regressive about bringing jobs back to the US?

 

[americanwoman]

I think Trump is a kind of guy that thrives on conflict. I really love it.

We need to shake things up in America. I really like the removal of globalist Gary Cohn. Cohn is a failure. He failed at becoming the CEO of Goldman Sachs. He failed at becoming Trump's chief of staff or the next Federal Reserve Chairman.

It is time to appoint Peter Navarro as Cohn's replacement.

This is what Trump's agenda was and is. "Make America great again." In the 60's and 70's, we had so much more manufacturing jobs. At one time 25% of Americans were factory workers. Now? Maybe 8%.

Trump's agenda has been always to revitalize those lost jobs that have gone to Germany, Japan, South Korea, China, etc.. Those countries have an unfair advantage. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing 50-80% tariffs imposed, particularly on China.

People argue we would start a trade war. That is hysterical. Countries like China have been ripping us off for so long, they would have too much to lose to engage in a war with the world's biggest consumer. How can you compete with a country that pays its factory workers quarters and provides inhumane working conditions? Is that fair? That wouldn't happen in the United States.

Factory jobs are the key folks. It was the reason why we won WW2. Brainless free traders think only tax cuts and deregulation will work.

I'll believe it when all the closed down factories open up and those towns around them become towns again and when Donald Trump stops profiling off those inhumane Chinese factories and makes all his products in the US.

 

[Casper]

What's regressive about bringing jobs back to the US?

Problem is it will result in a loss in jobs not an increase and that this is Not the way to negotiate trade agreements. Trump is alienating our main trading partners using such methods, he said he was going to renegotiate our trade deals, he done nothing of the sort and ha shown no sign of doing so, in the end the US will be the loser and it will be hard to ever regain our place in the world markets.

 

[haymarket]

Trump is the Bizarro president. No more, no less.

Bizarro at least had a clunky charm about him with that unusual way of speaking and that chiseled face. Trump, on the other hand, has no charm of any kind about him and is simply repulsively sickening.

 

[KevinKohler]

It will not lead to rising employment, and there isn't a single economist, including conservative economists, who say it will.

Glad you admit that the US steel industry doesn't have the production capacity to meet the demand. How long does it take to build a steel mill (presumably they'd have to import steel, lol), and how long does it take to train up all these new steel workers, and what happens in the mean time?

So what you're saying is, it's going to be really hard, so...we shouldn't do it.

That's what this argument boils down to.

 

[HowardBThiname]

How on earth will it lead to rising employment when companies which buy steel have to pay 25% more for the steel? Less profits or no profits at all will lead to redundancies. Even the republican party and conservative economists are calling this foolish.

The massive sell-off of our steel to China a couple of decades ago resulted in exorbitant prices here for steel, which resulted in higher commercial construction costs across the board. By increasing the price for other countries to buy steel, we can ensure that we get a better price for it.

 

[Captain Adverse]

WHO IS PETER NAVARRO?

This is EXACTLY right.

Many who are arguing against the President's efforts to strengthen the US economy by such methods tend to forget that China, despite making "nice-nice" over the last 30 years is a controlled economy, NOT a "free market" like our nation.

The points made by Mr. Navarro in that PBS video are spot on to anyone who has been observing the trend in Chinese economic expansion at the expense of a US decline in production capability and other economic losses.

We keep hearing people say "we are a service economy now" as if this was a good thing. It isn't, because a service economy is at the mercy of a production economy...once production is controlled by outside nations the service economy becomes dependent on them.

A dependent is one who is controlled and must follow the guidance of the controller. IMO China's long-term goal is to manipulate production, currency, and other economic factors to eventually bring the U.S. to it's knees and replace us as the No. 1 power in the world in ALL areas. To break us by using our own "profit above all else" (Greed is good) economic ideology against us.

We would be better served to accept more expensive goods produced HERE, because it means jobs and income produced here, as well as less dependency on the good will of a nation like China whose goal is to dominate us socially and economically.

 

[Aristaeus]

So what you're saying is, it's going to be really hard, so...we shouldn't do it.

That's what this argument boils down to.

Well you shouldn't do it because it'll start a trade war, cost jobs, and create higher prices for consumers.