- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 27,656
- Reaction score
- 12,050
- Location
- Over the edge...
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Anyone who lacks understanding in context makes moronic posts.Anyone that laughs about Islam is severely out of touch with reality.
And it's a Republican president-elect who's talking about banning imports.
I mean, which is it? Do Republicans approve of market interference or not?
'What is 'Protectionism'
Protectionism refers to government actions and policies that restrict or restrain international trade, often done with the intent of protecting local businesses and jobs from foreign competition. Typical methods of protectionism are tariffs and quotas on imports and subsidies or tax cuts granted to local businesses. The primary objective of protectionism is to make local businesses or industries more competitive by increasing the price or restricting the quantity of imports entering the country.'
Read more: Protectionism Definition | Investopedia Protectionism Definition | Investopedia
No, what Trump is proposing is the EXACT definition of protectionism.
As for Smoot-Hawley?
[qute]'Unemployment was at 8% in 1930 when the Smoot–Hawley tariff was passed, but the new law failed to lower it. The rate jumped to 16% in 1931, and 25% in 1932–33.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot–Hawley_Tariff_Act#Coincident_economic_events
If he is I think that would be innecessary and unwise.
But I doubt if trump will ban saudi oil
So if Trump really tells the Sauds to stick it, will it mean much to the US economy?
Trump: We Are Banning Saudi Oil From America – InvestmentWatch
Considering the recent announcement of a huge oil deposit in Texas, probably not:
https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-estimates-20-billion-barrels-oil-texas-wolfcamp-shale-formation
It's about time we began boycotting a country which kills people for leaving islam
Ok fine
Thats islam
What should our immigration policy be for muslims since they are so violent?
Surely we dont need people like that in America
Sweet! Get ready for $5/gallon gas.
I'm a protectionist but not an isolationist.
Many trumpsters like me want better trade deals, smarter trade that is good for America not a total cutoff of trade with the rest of the world.
So if trump solemnly promised to cut off saudi oil imports - and Im not sure he did - but if he did I release him from that promise because in my opinion it would be a mistake.
But this isn't about you;
this is about Trump and his commitment to his campaign platform.
For a candidate that ran an insurgent populist campaign that promised to stand up to "global financial interests", Trump is increasingly and suspiciously entangled in the system he maligned and promised to dismantle.
In light of such entanglement, his ardent supporters will have to pardon the rest of us, as we remain unsold on his brand.
well, do we just let them die in syria? where else do they have to go?
the odds of coal ever being a major source of fuel are done in the US.
It already is a major source of fuel in the United States. Coal produces roughly one-third of this country's electricity.
It could be half or three quarters as well as a majotr export commodity
It could be but I'm not sure why we'd want coal to be a higher share of our energy. It's a dirty source of energy from end to end, and no amount of coal industry propaganda will ever change that. Do we need more of this (the result after a coal ash retention pond a few miles from me burst):
View attachment 67210516
And I'm not aware of any barriers to exporting coal other than economic (price, transportation costs, etc.).
Dams have failed as long as men (and beavers) have been building them
Of couse the coal industry must be held to reasonable standards just like everyone else.
I give the environmentslists credit for demanding clean coal technology and now coal burning is very clean.
We need to tale advantage of this abundent natural resource
But the point is this retention pond was believed to be a "reasonable standard" until it failed. That's the waste that used to go out as air pollution and deposited over millions of square miles, so it's an improvement, but it's still not 'clean' by any stretch. Neither is mining for coal 'clean' - they lop off mountain tops and forever ruin the landscape.
Bottom line is I'm not opposed to burning coal, but it's a necessary evil, and the less of it we burn going forward the better IMO. When it comes down to it, I'd much prefer nuclear to coal, even with the knowledge that we'll almost surely have a nuclear 'disaster' like Japan at some point in this country.
Yes, humans do make mistakes
Which epa employee inspected the dam and signed off on it as safe?
If he screwed up he should be fired
But if this was an unavoidable act of Nature then too bad.
That's missing my point by a mile. Bottom line is burning coal is a dirty business, from end to end, mining to dealing with the pollution pulled out of the scrubbers. Yes, there was a unusually string of heavy rain days before the Kingston pond failed, but the pond had leaked for years, needed constant maintenance, and the toxic waste doesn't turn into fertilizer over time, so the point is this waste would have to be dealt with long after we're all dead, and our kids are dead, with or without this failure. The lining under some of these ponds (some aren't lined at all) will eventually fail, and surprise, it will be future taxpayers in 2050 or 2080 or whenever most likely on the hook for a Superfund Round III style cleanup after nearby residents all over the country near these old toxic waste storage sites complain about heavy metals and other pollutants in their drinking water.... Etc.
Point is who was or wasn't at fault is beside the point - burning coal produces a LOT of pollution at every step and I see no reason to encourage its use, especially not when we have cleaner alternatives.
There is an argument against every form of energy known to man
Even green windmills kill birds and are so ugly that rhe elites from teddy kennedy to donald trump dont want them anywhere near their property
Yes they take the tops off mountains but those are not sacred monuments to Mother Nature
The vegetation will return in an altered form and it might even produce some flat land for humans to live on someday
Dams have failed as long as men (and beavers) have been building them
Of couse the coal industry must be held to reasonable standards just like everyone else.
I give the environmentslists credit for demanding clean coal technology and now coal burning is very clean.
We need to tale advantage of this abundent natural resource
Sweet! Get ready for $5/gallon gas.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?