The Real timschochet

Even if you were right about this ( you’re not ) you fail to realize that Trump’s tariffs aren’t meant to be a temporary penalty designed to bring about fairer trading practices. If that was the case he wouldn’t install them on every country regardless of what their current trading practices are. He means for these to be permanent.

That’s fine. But I’m providing you logic and facts to back up my claim: you provide nothing in return.

I don’t mind being called a neoliberal. Call me whatever floats your boat. I think it’s funny though that you acknowledge all the terms have changed but still call Kamala a Communist and somehow fail to see the contradiction. Whatever you want to call me, or her, here is what I know: a 10-20% tax on all imports will be an economic catastrophe of such proportions that all your criticisms against Kamala get thrown out the window. It’s like saying “I don’t like broccoli, so give me poison instead please.” It makes all of your arguments a joke.

Here are the sad facts- from a very conservative source: https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-biden-tariffs/ Your analysis is lazy and your decision is stupid, no offense.

You think Trump’s previous tariffs made the economy better?

And it’s so incredibly hypocritical for Trump supporters to call Kamala’s plans Communism while ignoring the elephant in the room which is Trump’s tariffs which are a much worse form of price control, and far more leftist and socialist than anything Kamala is proposing. It’s such a flaw in their argument that one can’t take them seriously.

There are several in Africa, Asia, a couple in Latin America. Never in the USA and price controls won’t make that happen either, which is why your terminology is demonstrably false. You can call price controls a form of progressive, even leftist politics that you disagree with. But you can’t call it Communism or socialism without being deliberately disingenuous.

But it’s the same flaw in all the arguments of this kind- however more expensive Kamala might or might not make things, Trump’s tariffs will be FAR worse. You can’t escape this basic truth no matter how much you (and others) try to ignore it.

I will answer this: Though you didn’t ask, a socialist country is where the means of production is owned and controlled by the government. A communist country is a socialist country combined with an authoritarian (usually totalitarian) dictatorship. There are very few truly Communist countries left. Not even China is really one, since there is a lot of privately owned industry there. The best (worst?) example of a Communist country is North Korea.

No it isn’t. It may very well be a bad idea, but it’s not Communist. Unless you think Richard Nixon was a Communist. It’s irrelevant anyhow because she won’t ever get it passed.

You’re lying to yourself. You know about all the previous statements Trump has made and you’re pretending he never made them. You like his ideas so you’re going to tell yourself it simply isn’t true.

Of course they do. Socialism is awful and leads to evil outcomes, Communism is even worse. The problem with this approach is that Kamala is neither.

Ah you’re in the @Cdub100 club, right?

Most likely Ukrainians operating independently. But I have no idea. All I know is that Hersh says whatever the Russians tell him to .

This argument will no doubt do as well with voters as the Communist one. Well done!

Also per Frank Luntz: trying to label Kamala a Communist over her plan to stop price gouging is a complete political disaster for Trump. It’s just going to lose him votes: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/politics/video/donald-trump-communist-claims-kamala-harris-luntz-digvid-lead

Wrong again. Why don’t you start telling us what YOU think and why, and stop misrepresenting what I think?

You’re wrong but I’m not going to waste time arguing with you about tariffs in general. All you need to know is that imposing them on ALL countries without limitation, and 60% on China, will destroy our economy and most likely lead to World War III.

No. He wasn’t, sorry.

She seems to understand the free market, when it comes to trade, far better than her opponent. As for the rest of it damn you guys are silly.

First off if I’m up early it’s for work, not because I’m obsessed with posting here. Had an emergency this morning at one of the shopping centers. Second- Biden’s tariffs, and his refusal to remove Trump’s old tariffs, were terrible decisions and they have really hurt the economy. But all of this is NOTHING compared to what Trump is preparing to do for the next 4 years. He wants 10-20% tariffs on ALL countries, not just a few. He wants 60% tariffs on China, which might as well be a declaration of war. The dude is seriously crazy on this subject. And if elected he has the power to do this- Congress can’t stop him. And no sane person can support this, or support him. So be critical of Kamala’s economic plans all you want, but there is really no rational alternative to voting for her:

But she rejects Trump’s tariff proposals and that alone makes her the better choice, hands down.

This might not last. I am reading a TON of outrage about this. Maybe the military are finally fed up with his sh!t, as well they should be. There has never been a President, or even prominent person in this country, as disrespectful to the military as Trump has been. Not even Jane Fonda.

No I understand it great. You didn’t contradict what I wrote. It allows people who already own the house to keep their taxes low. That allows for further investment. (What is basically allowed for was for older parents to give money to their adult kids to be able to afford down payments on new housing. And it allowed people looking to upgrade to better housing the money to do so.)

Don’t be too obvious