Trump is not offering peace in Ukraine

[attofishpi]

Just looking at the ASX200 (Oz top 200 listed companies) - all the gains made since this time last year have been wiped out.

Trump, wot a muppet. I didn't recall him stating he was going to tariff every nation!

[Atla]

Well then me punching my friends in the face can also be part of a strategy.

Indeed you are right: it definitely can.

Experience shows that it's not a good strategy.

According to the Atlanta Fed GDP estimate, the US GDP growth quickly went from +2.5% to -2.5% under Trump. (Obviously because you need to crouch before jumping really high, it's a strategy.)

[FlashDangerpants]

Just looking at the ASX200 (Oz top 200 listed companies) - all the gains made since this time last year have been wiped out.

Trump, wot a muppet. I didn't recall him stating he was going to tariff every nation!

It's one of the thing he made perfectly clear in the election campaign. He even said

To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is tariff, and it’s my favorite word

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newslett ... tiful-word

So if you are somehow taken by surprise, that's becuase you are an oblivious idiot.

[Alexis Jacobi]

The logic of “re-shoring”.

Note to the Forum

I will be offering a Zoom conference (at a reduced fee) for those among us “without the cards” to play at the game of life and certainly intellectually. If you or someone you know is operating a few cards short of a full deck (and has a bank account) by all means reach out! Wearing a bib and/or having a drool cup handy is mandatory.

[phyllo]

If "Canada has no cards" then the US can just stop buying stuff from Canada. Trade problems solved. Nobody is forcing the US to buy Canadian products.

BTW, if Canada imported more from the US than it exports to the US(as that gentleman claims) then there wouldn't be a trade deficit for Trump to complain about.

[FlashDangerpants]

The logic of “re-shoring”.

Don't skip the ads, watch them. Those ads are targetting the kind of idiot who is economically illiterate enough enough to buy that line of argument.

[FlashDangerpants]

Here's a 30 second lesson in economics some of you need to see again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuOHbyuanbY

[Alexis Jacobi]

The logic of “re-shoring”.

Don't skip the ads, watch them. Those ads are targetting the kind of idiot who is economically illiterate enough enough to buy that line of argument.

On Bitchute I keep getting an ad touting coconut oil. And another against oatmeal. But I love oatmeal! With milk, almonds, a bit of ghee, and maple syrup. Top-notch.

The medium is not the message. There are a dozen different venues where the video may be presented. Each with advertising.

The argument proposes that there are ways and means to cause manufacturing to return to the US. I have no way to assess whether that will work or not. But I can definitely tell you that there is a huge outcry and opposition to the very idea of turning things around.

Along related lines consider Glen Greenwald.

[FlashDangerpants]

The logic of “re-shoring”.

Don't skip the ads, watch them. Those ads are targetting the kind of idiot who is economically illiterate enough enough to buy that line of argument.

On Bitchute I keep getting an ad touting coconut oil. And another against oatmeal. But I love oatmeal! With milk, almonds, a bit of ghee, and maple syrup. Top-notch.

The medium is not the message. There are a dozen different venues where the video may be presented. Each with advertising.

The only way I would ever click any video link that came from you or Immanuel Can is via incognito mode so that I don't get my history filled up with all that shit. So I see the ads that come with the video not the ones that are targeted at me. The stuff targeted at that audience is something called Old Glory Bank, some guy 'visualising success', and something to do with edema, and now I have googled that condition and I'm not happy.

The argument proposes that there are ways and means to cause manufacturing to return to the US. I have no way to assess whether that will work or not. But I can definitely tell you that there is a huge outcry and opposition to the very idea of turning things around.

Along related lines consider Glen Greenwald.

Of course you can force manufacturing to occur wherever you are willing to do the forcing. Tariffs, quotas and other Communist notions are not a recent invention, it's just that you abandon market based capitalism when you pursue them, so you should stop fooling yourself about that and start worrying about how the markets - an opponent against which nobody has ever won a war - will react now that you are in opposition to them.

Brazil has operated a regime of trade barriers and import substitution oriented protectionism for decades, explicitly to promote their local manufacturing industry. Have you ever bought anything made in Brazil? Same goes for Argentina.

Colombia too I think. You live in Colombia if I'm not mistaken... have you ever bought anything made there? If somebody told you they recently paid for a "Colombian Washing Machine" how would you interpret that claim? I would likely assume they were talking about drugs, or something very dirty, a new variant of the Cleveland Steamer or the Boston Pancake perhaps, it would never occur to me that Colombia produced even simple consumer grade white goods.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Of course you can force manufacturing to occur wherever you are willing to do the forcing. Tariffs, quotas and other Communist notions are not a recent invention, it's just that you abandon market based capitalism when you pursue them, so you should stop fooling yourself about that and start worrying about how the markets - an opponent against which nobody has ever won a war - will react now that you are in opposition to them.

All of this remains to be seen. My interest is in clarification of policy positions (their purported purpose) and to counter “hysterical reaction”. The NYTs, which I read daily, is totally wrapped up in hysteria. So that “mood” is predominant.

Very hard to know whose analysis is fair & balanced.

[FlashDangerpants]

Of course you can force manufacturing to occur wherever you are willing to do the forcing. Tariffs, quotas and other Communist notions are not a recent invention, it's just that you abandon market based capitalism when you pursue them, so you should stop fooling yourself about that and start worrying about how the markets - an opponent against which nobody has ever won a war - will react now that you are in opposition to them.

All of this remains to be seen. My interest is in clarification of policy positions (their purported purpose) and to counter “hysterical reaction”. The NYTs, which I read daily, is totally wrapped up in hysteria. So that “mood” is predominant.

Very hard to know whose analysis is fair & balanced.

This all ends with me telling you I told you so, and reminding you that you are an economic illiterate and should have listened to me. Prepare yourself to hate that a lot.

[Alexiev]

It is quite possible you are right on a few things. Also possible that you are deranged. You said you’re from Oregon. Nevertheless you have wonderful taste in literature. What do you think of Korolenko?

I don't think much of Korlenko, because I've never read anything he wrote. Maybe I'll give it a try.

[Alexiev]

[
The only way I would ever click any video link that came from you or Immanuel Can is via incognito mode so that I don't get my history filled up with all that shit. So I see the ads that come with the video not the ones that are targeted at me. The stuff targeted at that audience is something called Old Glory Bank, some guy 'visualising success', and something to do with edema, and now I have googled that condition and I'm not happy.

[

I rarely click on video links. What's wrong with the written word?

[phyllo]

Of course you can force manufacturing to occur wherever you are willing to do the forcing. Tariffs, quotas and other Communist notions are not a recent invention, it's just that you abandon market based capitalism when you pursue them, so you should stop fooling yourself about that and start worrying about how the markets - an opponent against which nobody has ever won a war - will react now that you are in opposition to them.

All of this remains to be seen. My interest is in clarification of policy positions (their purported purpose) and to counter “hysterical reaction”. The NYTs, which I read daily, is totally wrapped up in hysteria. So that “mood” is predominant.

Very hard to know whose analysis is fair & balanced.

What "hysteria" is the NYT pushing?

[Alexis Jacobi]

What "hysteria" is the NYT pushing?

Good question. Do you read the NYTs? (I assume you do not). My assessment of the Times over the last 10 years is that it has become, in a manner of speaking, but also in a certain real sense, a sort of Maoist 'cultural transformation' organ of propaganda. This sort of statement is full of hot terms (like 'propaganda', like Maoist) but I believe it could be explained in reasonable terms.

The NYTs has utterly hated Trump since long before he became a candidate. I researched many articles. The NYTs and the New York 'intellectual establishment' generally truly hate the man. Their contempt and ridicule is not without some justification and indeed everyone is aware of the ridiculous side of the man. But there is more to the man than they allow. And a genuine news journal should carry on differently. One think that always seemed bizarre and suspect were the photos they selected in articles about Trump. Skewed angles, almost abstract, and the most unflattering possible. I have never seen anything similar published by the Times in all the years I have paid attention.

I cannot tell you how man adverse articles, opinion-pieces, and 'hit-pieces' have appeared over the years. In fact there was one reporter (6-7 years back, I forgot his name) who openly stated that 'given the danger' that Trump presented that it would be necessary and indeed justified to lie and/or to exaggerate in news reporting in order to cast him in a bad light. He defined ethical reporting in that sense. (I will go in search of the quote if you do not believe me).

My impression of the Ukraine/Russia war, and the US involvement in it, is that in the legacy media one cannot get the full story. One gets slanted perspectives. I have already expressed that I tend to put my *trust* (of a cautionary sort) in people like Meersheimer, Sachs and MacGregor (all available on YouTube). Glen Greenwald is also very objective. They provide a fuller picture. The necessary picture if one is to understand the origin of the conflict. One gets none of this from the Times.