IBDaMann
Well-known member
Canada and Israel caved immediately. That's great news for Americans and very bad news for America-HATERS such as yourself.
Trump imposes tariff on 180 countries, exempts Russia, Belarus, Cuba and North Korea.
- Thread starter Poor Richard Saunders
- Start date
Hey moron, do you want them put on double secret sanctions?
Shouldn't you be clearly stating what you are claiming about all farmers? You don't get to have your argument entered into the discussion without ever expressing your argument.
Or do your rules not apply to you?
At this point your post is summarily dismissed since it violates the rules you laid out.
Trump's tariffs are far bigger than just money. It represents discord and disharmony across the globe.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otuT90ffpA0
America had gotten closer to several nations with Biden. Now that work is trashed.
America had gotten closer to several nations with Biden. Now that work is trashed.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
I'm mostly waiting to see results. The same went with Biden and the economy. Biden's early economic policies saw inflation take off at nearly 1% per month. I'm not seeing that with Trump so far. In a month or two of tariffs, we'll have some results to discuss. Right now, all we have, for the most part, is a lot of speculation and the markets reacting to that rather than actual effects coming from actions taken.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
I'm not claiming anything about farmers. If you aren't either, then great! We're done.
Agreed
The rules apply to me as well.
My informational post does not violate any rules. Your pivot fallacy, however, amounts to a debate forfeit.
Congratulations on forfeiting the debate since your "informational post" was a pivot.
Pepe Escobar
Global Majority, rejoice! And step on the high-speed rail de-dollarization train.
Circus ringmaster Trump’s Tariff Tizzy (TTT), christened by himself as “Liberation Day”, is being largely interpreted around the world – Global North and Global South alike – as Slaughterhouse Day.
This de facto uncontrolled economic demolition gambit starts with the warped fantasy that launching a customs war on China is a bright idea. As bright as collecting a few trillion extra dollars in tariffs assuming the rest of the planet will be somewhat “encouraged” to sell to the Hegemon, while pretending that these tariffs will lead to the re-industrialization of the U.S.
The tragicomic mask of a self-appointed circus ringmaster of turbo-capitalism may be as pathetic as the European chihuahua rage boosting their “revenge” via Rearmament – with funds that they plan to steal from the savings accounts of unsuspecting citizens.
The indispensable Michael Hudson has configured the key problem. Allow me a little tweak: “Sanctions and threats are the only thing that the United States has left. It no longer can offer other countries a win-win situation, and Trump has said that America has to be the net gainer in any international deal it’s made, whether it’s a financial deal or a trade deal. And if America is saying, any deal we make, you lose, I win”, that Mafia extorsion gambit does not exactly reflect the Art of the Deal.
Prof. Hudson neatly describes Trump’s negotiation tactics: “When you don’t have very much to offer economically, all you can do is offer not to hurt other countries, not to sanction them, not to do something that will be against their interest.” Now, with TTT, Trump is actually “offering” to hurt them all. And they will certainly invest in all sorts of counter-tactics to “get away” from that “strategy” of American “diplomacy”
Global Majority, rejoice! And step on the high-speed rail de-dollarization train.
Circus ringmaster Trump’s Tariff Tizzy (TTT), christened by himself as “Liberation Day”, is being largely interpreted around the world – Global North and Global South alike – as Slaughterhouse Day.
This de facto uncontrolled economic demolition gambit starts with the warped fantasy that launching a customs war on China is a bright idea. As bright as collecting a few trillion extra dollars in tariffs assuming the rest of the planet will be somewhat “encouraged” to sell to the Hegemon, while pretending that these tariffs will lead to the re-industrialization of the U.S.
The tragicomic mask of a self-appointed circus ringmaster of turbo-capitalism may be as pathetic as the European chihuahua rage boosting their “revenge” via Rearmament – with funds that they plan to steal from the savings accounts of unsuspecting citizens.
The indispensable Michael Hudson has configured the key problem. Allow me a little tweak: “Sanctions and threats are the only thing that the United States has left. It no longer can offer other countries a win-win situation, and Trump has said that America has to be the net gainer in any international deal it’s made, whether it’s a financial deal or a trade deal. And if America is saying, any deal we make, you lose, I win”, that Mafia extorsion gambit does not exactly reflect the Art of the Deal.
Prof. Hudson neatly describes Trump’s negotiation tactics: “When you don’t have very much to offer economically, all you can do is offer not to hurt other countries, not to sanction them, not to do something that will be against their interest.” Now, with TTT, Trump is actually “offering” to hurt them all. And they will certainly invest in all sorts of counter-tactics to “get away” from that “strategy” of American “diplomacy”
How Trump’s Tariff Tizzy is burning down the house
Global Majority, rejoice! And step on the high-speed rail de-dollarization train. Circus ringmaster Trump’s Tariff Tizzy (TTT), christened by himself as “Liberation Day”, is being largely interpreted around the world – Global North and Global South alike – as Slaughterhouse Day. This de facto...
www.unz.com
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
A clear illiteracy of English on your part.
That was my initial question. Tbird made a claim about some mystery group of farmers, refusing to actually identify any of them. At that point, I could only assume that he was making shit up.
That was my response to you after you linked to some words from a few individual farmers. At that point, I accurately noted that a few individual farmers do not speak for farmers in general.
That was my response to you after you didn't realize that a couple of "farm organization leaders" are likewise individuals (and are not farmers in general). A few individuals do not speak for farmers in general akin to how union bosses do not speak for union membership.
See above.
Never happened.
It's based on logic. A few handpicked individuals are NOT "farmers in general". That flawed assumption belongs to YOU.
You're still not making any meaningful point.
Poor Richard Saunders: "Sooooo there's a few green marbles in that bag."
gfm7175: "Okay."
Poor Richard Saunders: "That means that the majority of marbles in that bag are green."
gfm7175: "Ummmm, no it doesn't."
Poor Richard Saunders: "You're shifting goalposts! Grrrrrrr!!!!"
There's nothing for me to "show you" because you haven't made any meaningful point as of yet.
Last edited:
gfm7175: "Show me one green marble in the bag."
Poor Richard Saunders: " Here are several green marbles that are in the bag."
gfm7175: "None of those green marbles are a large green marble."
Poor Richard Saunders: "It appears you didn't look at the green marbles because 3 of them are large green marbles."
gfm7175: "Those green marbles don't represent all the marbles in the bag!"
That is the correct order of your positions on farmers translated to marbles and clearly is a movement of goalposts.
All farmers are individuals. Based on your statement here, you will never accept an individual as being representative of farmers because that individual is not all farmers. In other words, you have set a requirement that can never be met in order to always claim that any individual doesn't represent all farmers.
So let's make this clear in order for you argument to make sense - Name the representative of farmers that you would accept as representative of farmers. Until you can name who you think represents all farmers your argument is nothing but an attempt on your part to not accept any answer you disagree with.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Okay, let's review the ENTIRE conversation then. I typically don't do this, but I'm in a really good mood today.
TBIRD: "Farmers in a lot of red states are already saying this isn't what I voted for and that they might go bankrupt".
GFM: "Oh really?! Which farmers?
TBIRD: "Read the news. Farmers in NC, FL, and more"
GFM: "Which farmers? States are not farmers".
TBIRD: "Farmers in those states you stupid MFer"
GFM: "Which farmers "in those states"?
TBIRD: ** raises white flag ** ** tips king **
GFM: "Fine, I'll just conclude that you were making shit up again".
** TBIRD "tags out" of the ring, Poor Richard Saunders enters the ring **
PRS: "You must think they aren't farmers if they are in a state... [you'd also believe any stupid shit that Trump told you to believe]".
GFM: "Farmers in NC" means about as much as "the experts" or "sources familiar with the matter" means. Nobody has yet to identify any of these farmers for me. I suspect that's because these "farmers" that are being referenced do not actually exist."
PRS: "LOL [you didn't yet respond to Trump putting tariffs on uninhabited islands]. Each of these stories cites at least one farmer.
GFM: "Why would I feel compelled to respond to that fact?" So apparently the point that TBIRD is trying to make is that an individual farmer here and there speaks for farmers in general?
PRS: "ROFLMAO ... [the article also mentions a couple other individuals, heads of farming organizations even, and those heads speak for farmers in general]"
GFM: "No they don't, and so?"
PRS: [YOU'RE MOVING GOALPOSTS!!!!! RAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!]
That's basically where we are right now. Neither Tbird nor you have made any sort of valid or meaningful point about these supposed "farmers in red states" who are supposedly saying "this isn't what I voted for". Your links showed a few individual farmers expressing various concerns that they have, but nothing about "I didn't vote for this". Even if you stretch the expressed concerns into meaning "I didn't vote for this", you're still facing the fact that a few individuals are not "farmers in general".
I see no reason to believe that "I didn't vote for this" is a popular sentiment amongst "farmers in red states" (or even farmers anywhere in the USA for that matter).
Last edited:
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yes, and those individuals are all a part of the group [farmers], of which Tbird and yourself are claiming now has a large subset consisting of [farmers who "didn't vote for this"]. (Whatever "this" means).
What didn't these farmers vote for? Which farmers are regretting voting for Trump because of that?
Correct. One individual farmer does not speak for millions of other farmers.
I didn't set up logic.
See above. Farmer A can only speak for Farmer A; he doesn't speak for Farmer B. Sure, Farmer C could speak directly to Farmers A & B, agree with them, and then accurately express their shared concerns, but Farmers A-C are not Farmers D-Z.
You still haven't showed me any farmer who enthusiastically voted for Trump in 2024 but is now already having massive regrets after a few short months, stating "this isn't what I voted for". I see no reason to believe that a "this isn't what I voted for" sentiment is popular amongst "farmers in red states", or even amongst any other group of Trump voters for that matter.
Tbird (and now you) claim that this sentiment exists in a significant manner... I'm simply saying, "show me these people".
Until you can show me {all sorts of farmers everywhere} who supposedly hold an "I didn't vote for this" sentiment, after strongly supporting him just a few short months ago, Tbird's argument (that you tagged in for) remains dead on arrival.
HINT: Trump was VERY open about his policy plans, including his widespread usage of tariffs (as both a negotiating tool AND as a tool to "level the playing field" regarding trade). In fact, he's held that very same viewpoint since at least the early 80s (there's video of him expressing it in a very similar manner back then as he expresses it today).
There's no reason for any rational adult to believe that those "farmers in red states" were somehow duped regarding Trump's views on tariffs and trade. His views on those things have been consistent for longer than I've been alive.
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
He also imposed tariffs on two islands near Antartica that have no human inhabitants. Only penguins.
White House explains why Russia not included in Trump's new tariffs
Trump is calling his tariff policy "kind reciprocal," saying he could've been much harsher on US trading partners.www.newsweek.com
Of the 180 countries, including U.S. allies, that are now being hit with retaliatory tariffs, Russia isn't on the list.
Belarus, Cuba and North Korea, other countries that face US sanctions, also weren't hit with reciprocal tariffs.
So Trump imposes a 20% tariff on NATO countries but exempts Russia. Can any one that supports Trump explain that?
Trump also imposed tariffs on Ukraine while exempting Russia.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Axios Wednesday that Russia was left off because U.S. sanctions already "preclude any meaningful trade." However, the U.S. still trades more with Russia than with countries like Mauritius or Brunei that did make Trump's tariffs list.
- Even remote island territories like Tokelau (pop. 1,500) in the South Pacific and Svalbard (pop. 2,500) in the Arctic Circle — territories of New Zealand and Norway, respectively —were listed for tariffs.