I can't wait for leftists to tank the economy tomorrow

[Tbird19482]

We certainly shouldn't pay any attention to you tards.

And you MORONS are cheering on what could end up being a Deep Recession / or a depression , you call that being smart and we should listen to you ,
Again IF Trump puts his tariffs on it will NOT be the exporting countries paying it they will just pass them on to the Consumer and the price of just about everything you buy will be going up.
You cried about inflation under Biden a lot of it was caused by COVID the " inflation " ( Trumpflation ) that will come from these tariffs is being caused on PURPOSE.
All I can say to you morons enjoy paying 20/30/40% more for the things you buy everyday.

 

[Diogenes]

Prove he didn't. You don't accept books if they don't fit your propaganda agenda.

When someone makes a claim—especially a positive or assertive one (e.g., "X is true" or "Y exists")—the burden of proof typically falls on them to provide evidence or reasoning to support it. This principle is rooted in logic and debate traditions, often summarized as "he who asserts must prove." The idea is that without evidence, a claim is just an opinion or speculation, and it’s not reasonable to expect others to disprove something that hasn’t been substantiated first.

For example, if I say, "There’s a dragon living in my basement," it’s on me to show you the dragon (or at least some convincing evidence, like scorch marks or scales), rather than demanding you prove there isn’t one. Expecting others to disprove an unproven claim is a fallacy known as "shifting the burden of proof." It’s like saying, "Prove I’m wrong," when the real question is, "Why should anyone believe this in the first place?"


@Grok

 

[Diogenes]

And you MORONS are cheering on what could end up being a Deep Recession / or a depression , you call that being smart and we should listen to you ,

I don't want you to "listen", crybaby.

I want you to cry.

Again IF Trump puts his tariffs on it will NOT be the exporting countries paying it they will just pass them on to the Consumer and the price of just about everything you buy will be going up.

If.

Tell me, did the Trump tariffs that braindead Biden kept in place cause you to cry like this, crybaby?

The Biden administration retained most of the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on Chinese imports, which were initially enacted in 2018 and 2019 under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. These tariffs targeted approximately $370 billion worth of Chinese goods annually, covering a wide range of products from consumer items like clothing and electronics to industrial components such as steel, aluminum, and specialized manufacturing parts. Here's a breakdown of the key Trump tariffs Biden kept in place:

1. Section 301 Tariffs on Chinese Goods:
   • Starting in 2018, Trump imposed tariffs on over $300 billion of Chinese imports in multiple phases, with rates ranging from 7.5% to 25%. These included:
     • List 1: 25% tariffs on $34 billion of goods (e.g., machinery, electrical equipment) effective July 2018.
     • List 2: 25% tariffs on $16 billion of goods (e.g., chemicals, plastics) effective August 2018.
     • List 3: 10% tariffs on $200 billion of goods (e.g., consumer goods, food products), later raised to 25% in May 2019.
     • List 4A: 15% tariffs on $112 billion of goods (e.g., apparel, footwear), reduced to 7.5% in January 2020 after the U.S.-China "Phase One" trade deal; Biden retained this reduced rate.
   • Biden kept these tariffs largely intact after a mandated four-year review by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) concluded in May 2024. The review found that China’s trade practices (e.g., intellectual property theft, subsidies) had not improved, justifying their continuation.
2. Section 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum:
   • Trump imposed 25% tariffs on steel and 10% tariffs on aluminum imports from various countries, including China, in March 2018, citing national security concerns under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
   • While Biden modified some of these for allies (e.g., replacing tariffs with tariff-rate quotas for the EU, Japan, and UK in 2022), the tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum remained in place. In fact, Biden later increased rates on certain Chinese steel and aluminum products (e.g., from 7.5% to 25% in May 2024) as part of a broader tariff hike.
3. Section 201 Tariffs on Solar Panels and Washing Machines:
   • Trump enacted tariffs on solar panels (starting at 30%, declining annually) and washing machines (20%-50% based on import quotas) in January 2018 to protect U.S. manufacturers.
   • Biden allowed the washing machine tariffs to expire in February 2023 but retained the solar panel tariffs, though they were scaled back over time per the original schedule (e.g., down to 15% by 2021). In May 2024, he raised tariffs on Chinese solar cells from 25% to 50%, building on the Trump-era framework.

Key Context:

• Biden’s decision to retain these tariffs marked a shift from his 2020 campaign rhetoric, where he criticized Trump’s tariffs for raising costs for American consumers. However, his administration kept them after concluding they provided leverage against China’s trade practices and supported domestic manufacturing goals.
• By March 2024, U.S. Customs data showed that over $233 billion in tariff revenue had been collected from these Trump-era tariffs, with more than half ($144 billion) collected under Biden, reflecting their ongoing enforcement.

In short, Biden retained the vast majority of Trump’s Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods, kept the Section 232 tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum (with some increases), and maintained the solar panel tariffs from Section 201 while letting the washing machine tariffs lapse. This continuity reflects a bipartisan shift toward protectionism.

@Grok

You cried about inflation under Biden a lot of it was caused by COVID the " inflation " ( Trumpflation ) that will come from these tariffs is being caused on PURPOSE.

What "inflation under Biden was caused by COVID", crybaby?

All I can say to you morons enjoy paying 20/30/40% more for the things you buy everyday.

Are you claiming to be a clairvoyant crybaby?

If prices go up, I will enjoy reading your whining posts, crybaby.

 

[Tbird19482]

I don't want you to "listen", crybaby.

I want you to cry.



If.

Tell me, did the Trump tariffs that braindead Biden kept in place cause you to cry like this, crybaby?

The Biden administration retained most of the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on Chinese imports, which were initially enacted in 2018 and 2019 under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. These tariffs targeted approximately $370 billion worth of Chinese goods annually, covering a wide range of products from consumer items like clothing and electronics to industrial components such as steel, aluminum, and specialized manufacturing parts. Here's a breakdown of the key Trump tariffs Biden kept in place:

1. Section 301 Tariffs on Chinese Goods:
   • Starting in 2018, Trump imposed tariffs on over $300 billion of Chinese imports in multiple phases, with rates ranging from 7.5% to 25%. These included:
     • List 1: 25% tariffs on $34 billion of goods (e.g., machinery, electrical equipment) effective July 2018.
     • List 2: 25% tariffs on $16 billion of goods (e.g., chemicals, plastics) effective August 2018.
     • List 3: 10% tariffs on $200 billion of goods (e.g., consumer goods, food products), later raised to 25% in May 2019.
     • List 4A: 15% tariffs on $112 billion of goods (e.g., apparel, footwear), reduced to 7.5% in January 2020 after the U.S.-China "Phase One" trade deal; Biden retained this reduced rate.
   • Biden kept these tariffs largely intact after a mandated four-year review by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) concluded in May 2024. The review found that China’s trade practices (e.g., intellectual property theft, subsidies) had not improved, justifying their continuation.
2. Section 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum:
   • Trump imposed 25% tariffs on steel and 10% tariffs on aluminum imports from various countries, including China, in March 2018, citing national security concerns under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
   • While Biden modified some of these for allies (e.g., replacing tariffs with tariff-rate quotas for the EU, Japan, and UK in 2022), the tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum remained in place. In fact, Biden later increased rates on certain Chinese steel and aluminum products (e.g., from 7.5% to 25% in May 2024) as part of a broader tariff hike.
3. Section 201 Tariffs on Solar Panels and Washing Machines:
   • Trump enacted tariffs on solar panels (starting at 30%, declining annually) and washing machines (20%-50% based on import quotas) in January 2018 to protect U.S. manufacturers.
   • Biden allowed the washing machine tariffs to expire in February 2023 but retained the solar panel tariffs, though they were scaled back over time per the original schedule (e.g., down to 15% by 2021). In May 2024, he raised tariffs on Chinese solar cells from 25% to 50%, building on the Trump-era framework.

Key Context:

• Biden’s decision to retain these tariffs marked a shift from his 2020 campaign rhetoric, where he criticized Trump’s tariffs for raising costs for American consumers. However, his administration kept them after concluding they provided leverage against China’s trade practices and supported domestic manufacturing goals.
• By March 2024, U.S. Customs data showed that over $233 billion in tariff revenue had been collected from these Trump-era tariffs, with more than half ($144 billion) collected under Biden, reflecting their ongoing enforcement.

In short, Biden retained the vast majority of Trump’s Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods, kept the Section 232 tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum (with some increases), and maintained the solar panel tariffs from Section 201 while letting the washing machine tariffs lapse. This continuity reflects a bipartisan shift toward protectionism.

@Grok




What "inflation under Biden was caused by COVID", crybaby?



Are you claiming to be a clairvoyant crybaby?

If prices go up, I will enjoy reading your whining posts, crybaby.

GO FUCK YOURSELF ASSHOLE

 

[Diogenes]

GO FUCK YOURSELF ASSHOLE

I broke the forum crybaby @Tbird19482.

 

[EdwinA]

When someone makes a claim—especially a positive or assertive one (e.g., "X is true" or "Y exists")—the burden of proof typically falls on them to provide evidence or reasoning to support it. This principle is rooted in logic and debate traditions, often summarized as "he who asserts must prove." The idea is that without evidence, a claim is just an opinion or speculation, and it’s not reasonable to expect others to disprove something that hasn’t been substantiated first.

For example, if I say, "There’s a dragon living in my basement," it’s on me to show you the dragon (or at least some convincing evidence, like scorch marks or scales), rather than demanding you prove there isn’t one. Expecting others to disprove an unproven claim is a fallacy known as "shifting the burden of proof." It’s like saying, "Prove I’m wrong," when the real question is, "Why should anyone believe this in the first place?"


@Grok

Yet you never do, just cite something called 'Grok'. It's up to the revisionist to make their case when they dispute the orthodoxy already well covered, but of course when you're just parroting ideological nonsense you have to pretend 'Everybody Else' is suppose to waste time posting stuff the revisionists aren't going to read and just post more idiot assertions and demand more 'proof', i.e. just spamming Conspiracy theory rubbish.

 

[EdwinA]

And you MORONS are cheering on what could end up being a Deep Recession / or a depression , you call that being smart and we should listen to you ,
Again IF Trump puts his tariffs on it will NOT be the exporting countries paying it they will just pass them on to the Consumer and the price of just about everything you buy will be going up.
You cried about inflation under Biden a lot of it was caused by COVID the " inflation " ( Trumpflation ) that will come from these tariffs is being caused on PURPOSE.
All I can say to you morons enjoy paying 20/30/40% more for the things you buy everyday.

^^^lol triggered another idiot. Keep trying to import illegal aliens and supporting the Party of kiddie mutilators and groomers; MAGA is the least of your problems.

 

[Diogenes]

Yet you never do, just cite something called 'Grok'. It's up to the revisionist to make their case when they dispute the orthodoxy already well covered, but of course when you're just parroting ideological nonsense you have to pretend 'Everybody Else' is suppose to waste time posting stuff the revisionists aren't going to read and just post more idiot assertions and demand more 'proof', i.e. just spamming Conspiracy theory rubbish.

Claiming to have read something in a book isn’t automatically a valid argument—it’s just a starting point.

The strength of the argument depends on a few things: the credibility of the book (is it a reputable source or some random pamphlet?), whether you can accurately summarize what it says, and if it actually supports your point.

Anyone can say “I read it in a book,” but that doesn’t mean squat if the book’s nonsense or you’re misrepresenting it.

If you’re debating or making a case, the real juice comes from explaining why the book’s claim matters and how it holds up to scrutiny. Without that, it’s just name-dropping a title—weak sauce.



@Grok

 

[EdwinA]

Claiming to have read something in a book isn’t automatically a valid argument—it’s just a starting point.

The strength of the argument depends on a few things: the credibility of the book (is it a reputable source or some random pamphlet?), whether you can accurately summarize what it says, and if it actually supports your point.

Anyone can say “I read it in a book,” but that doesn’t mean squat if the book’s nonsense or you’re misrepresenting it.

If you’re debating or making a case, the real juice comes from explaining why the book’s claim matters and how it holds up to scrutiny. Without that, it’s just name-dropping a title—weak sauce.



@Grok

I gave you one of the best current sources for WW I history researched and written so far. You just don't want to read it, you just want to snivel about Democrats and pretend you have some points; you don't. Keep citing 'Grok', lol.


"And here is what bothers me so much about modern "scholarship." At what point did history become ethics? Why should we subvert the elusive search for facts to moralist concerns? So what if they are on or off the hook? If you want to be a preacher, go preach. If you want to save the world, go into politics. If you want to invent a world free of evil, take prozac. It was said in Ecclesiastes and it still is true today, people suck. They did then, all of them. They do now, all of us.History is the history of self-interested, competing, aggressive,selfish, murderous humans. At what point did it become a morality play? "-Dave WIlliams, George mason Univ.

 

[Diogenes]

I gave you one of the best current sources for WW I history researched and written so far. You just don't want to read it, you just want to snivel about Democrats and pretend you have some points; you don't. Keep citing 'Grok', lol.

So you say.

You do know that @Grok analyzed your interpretation of the work in question and deemed it a mischaracterization based on the published evidence, don't you?

 

[Into the Night]

I see you can't actually refute anything and just babble out the same rubbish repeatedly and hope it makes you look clever. It doesn't.

Won't work, Edwina. You simply don't understand price discovery.

 

[Into the Night]

Prove he didn't. You don't accept books if they don't fit your propaganda agenda.

Attempted force of negative proof fallacy. Pivot fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Most of them already have tariffs, they just call them something else, like VATS. I forget what Mexico calls theirs, but it's a tariff on imports nonetheless. They also facilitate Red China's scams on under-reporting imports worth over $800.

Any tariff charged by a foreign nation will have the same tariffs placed on their imports.

AI Overview
Learn more

When importing goods valued over $800 into the United States, you are subject to customs duties and taxes. Goods valued below $800 are generally exempt from duties under the "de minimis" rule, but this rule is subject to change and certain products may be ineligible.

Duty is not a tariff, Edwina.

 

[Into the Night]

And you MORONS are cheering on what could end up being a Deep Recession / or a depression,

You can't blame the economic depression that Democrats caused on Trump, Tball!

you call that being smart and we should listen to you ,
Again IF Trump puts his tariffs on it will NOT be the exporting countries paying it they will just pass them on to the Consumer and the price of just about everything you buy will be going up.

Domestic products have no tariff, Tball.

You cried about inflation under Biden a lot of it was caused by COVID the " inflation "

Inflation was not caused by Covid, Tball.

( Trumpflation )

Trump did not create nor control the Covid19 virus, Tball. Fauci did that.

that will come from these tariffs is being caused on PURPOSE.

Tariffs don't cause inflation, Tball.

All I can say to you morons enjoy paying 20/30/40% more for the things you buy everyday.

Domestic products have no tariff, Tball.

 

[Into the Night]

I broke the forum crybaby @Tbird19482.

Tball was already broken.

 

[Into the Night]

Yet you never do, just cite something called 'Grok'. It's up to the revisionist to make their case when they dispute the orthodoxy already well covered, but of course when you're just parroting ideological nonsense you have to pretend 'Everybody Else' is suppose to waste time posting stuff the revisionists aren't going to read and just post more idiot assertions and demand more 'proof', i.e. just spamming Conspiracy theory rubbish.

You need more conspiracies. The conspiracies you keep pushing keep coming true.

 

[Nordberg]

Rightys are idiots. If people decide not to buy things from some stores, they will buy them from others. The economy is intact. Stores that do not want to hire gays, blacks and LGBT will lose out. Stores that do will make out. The impact on the national economy is zilch.

 

[Diogenes]

Rightys are idiots. If people decide not to buy things from some stores, they will buy them from others. The economy is intact. Stores that do not want to hire gays, blacks and LGBT will lose out. Stores that do will make out. The impact on the national economy is zilch.

Are you sure you understand the premise of this thread, Nerdsperg?

 

[Into the Night]

Rightys are idiots.

Mantra 1a. Lame.

If people decide not to buy things from some stores, they will buy them from others.

So?

The economy is intact. Stores that do not want to hire gays, blacks and LGBT will lose out.

Go woke, go broke. It's a true saying, Sybil.

Stores that do will make out. The impact on the national economy is zilch.

Companies and stores that push the Woke agenda lose money, Sybil.

 

[EdwinA]

Claiming to have read something in a book isn’t automatically a valid argument—it’s just a starting point.

The strength of the argument depends on a few things: the credibility of the book (is it a reputable source or some random pamphlet?), whether you can accurately summarize what it says, and if it actually supports your point.

Anyone can say “I read it in a book,” but that doesn’t mean squat if the book’s nonsense or you’re misrepresenting it.

If you’re debating or making a case, the real juice comes from explaining why the book’s claim matters and how it holds up to scrutiny. Without that, it’s just name-dropping a title—weak sauce.



@Grok

lol I don't claim to have read it, I have read it; I have a hardback copy sitting about 5 feet away. You on the other hand only have some idiot spin you dug up on some search engine that spins rubbish.

Nobody 'debates' anything here, they just post mostly partisan spam, same as you, same as the left wingers, same as the GOP puppets.