‘Simply Untrue’ Demise of TPP Helps China

[jimnyc]

Yups :)

-----

Scott Paul: ‘Simply Untrue’ Demise of TPP Helps China; ‘Rules That Disadvantage American Manufacturing’ Don’t Make Us Stronger

President Scott Paul of the Alliance for American Manufacturing appeared on Tuesday’s Breitbart News Daily to discuss the letter his organization sent to President Donald Trump, offering suggestions on how to “advance Mr. Trump’s shared goal of revitalizing America’s manufacturing sector.”
“This election was a lot of things to a lot of people, but I think a really sharp analysis is that the working-class voters in the industrial heartland felt really left behind economically. That was a big piece of it,” Paul told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow. “I think Trump, in a lot of ways, spoke to those concerns. You look at the actions on Day One, withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership as an example of that. Rebuilding America, another good example of that. And, quite honestly, just having a belief in manufacturing, which is scorned by mainstream economists and others who really look at it as a backwards part of the American economy, and part of our past, rather than part of our strong future.”

“So we laid out – and we’re nonpartisan – ways in which we can be helpful on trade policy, on infrastructure, on this idea of ‘Buy American, Hire American,’ and indicated that we were very eager to work with the President, with the Congress, to achieve some of these objectives,” he said. “We bring together some manufacturers, one of whom was sitting with Trump yesterday morning, United States Steel, as well as the steelworkers union. Trump met with labor leaders yesterday afternoon, and it kind of shows the breadth of the appeal of this type of populist, but effective, economics.”

Marlow asked for Paul’s take on what globalist economic theorists have gotten so wrong, leading to the ruinous state of American manufacturing, which led Trump to memorably compare shuttered U.S. factories to “tombstones in a graveyard” in his inaugural address.

“It’s tricky because we’re so imbued with this economic philosophy of the Invisible Hand and the free market. In a textbook that looks really awesome, I suppose, but we live in the real world, in global competition,” Paul replied.

“America has always forged the kind of economy we want to have,” he argued. “It goes back to our founding, when Hamilton looked at the kind of plantation-based agriculture and said we need to be aggressive. We need to be competitive. We need a manufacturing base. We don’t want to depend on Britain and France to arm ourselves or to supply our manufactured goods. It will be awesome for our nation.”

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2017/01/24/scott-paul-simply-untrue-demise-tpp-helps-china-rules-disadvantage-american-manufacturing-dont-make-us-stronger/

[Black Diamond]

Wrecking ball. I am loving this. What a difference one person can make. :)

[fj1200]

How does closing off the world to American manufacturing make us stronger?


The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) levels the playing field for American workers and Americanbusinesses, leading to more Made-in-America exports and more higher-paying American jobshere at home. By cutting over 18,000 taxes various countries put on Made-in-America products,TPP makes sure our farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and small businesses can compete—and win—in some of the fastest growing markets in the world. With more than 95 percent ofthe world’s consumers living outside our borders, TPP will significantly expand the export ofMade-in-America goods and services and support American jobs.
...
TPP helps support U.S. manufacturing by:• Eliminating all foreign taxes in the form of tariffs on U.S. manufacturedgoods exported to TPP countries, including rates as high as 70 percent onautomobiles in Vietnam.• Preventing other TPP countries from maintaining, expanding, or creatingnew trade barriers to American manufacturers as they eliminate tariffs.
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Benefits-for-US-Manufacturing-Fact-Sheet.pdf

[jimnyc]

Wrecking ball. I am loving this. What a difference one person can make. :)

Hell, even his approval ratings when up since the inauguration, up 7 since his inauguration. Must be those massive protests from the women who didn't vote for him anyway.... And even his approval ratings for his speech was quite high. Then he already kicks in like 5 promises in his first few days in office. But wait, we need to sit back and be ever so worried about his prior tax returns! LOL He's already head and shoulders above what I was used to, and what I had expected. Kinda cool when things get done.

Just a great bonus, that one top of the ball getting a great head start in rolling... that his start pisses many off, and I get to have a little enjoyment.

[NightTrain]

How does closing off the world to American manufacturing make us stronger?


https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Benefits-for-US-Manufacturing-Fact-Sheet.pdf

Where did anyone say they were going to close off the world to American manufacturing?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Hell, even his approval ratings when up since the inauguration, up 7 since his inauguration. Must be those massive protests from the women who didn't vote for him anyway.... And even his approval ratings for his speech was quite high. Then he already kicks in like 5 promises in his first few days in office. But wait, we need to sit back and be ever so worried about his prior tax returns! LOL He's already head and shoulders above what I was used to, and what I had expected. Kinda cool when things get done.

Just a great bonus, that one top of the ball getting a great head start in rolling... that his start pisses many off, and I get to have a little enjoyment.

One can sit back and judge Trump by how loud he makes he dem/lib moon-bats scream!
I am loving it, and just think, its only just begun!
Just imagine the kind of frothy, slobbering at the mouth, these scum are going to be in by
this time next year!!!! :beer: :clap::clap: :beer: :saluting2:
I just wonder how many of those tree hugging America hating leeches are gonna find a tree and SHORT ROPE BY THEN (and not to hug) rather to dangle from..--GOOD TIMES-- :dance::dance::dance:--TYR

[fj1200]

Where did anyone say they were going to close off the world to American manufacturing?

Apologies, my phrase. We just don't get the benefit of countries eliminating tariffs under TPP.

[pete311]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

[NightTrain]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

:popcorn:

[aboutime]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.


Spoken like a true Anti-American asshole petey. If you are so convinced your prediction is true. You should be on the next plane, bound for Beijing, China. Where not even YOU will have the right to make a total fool of yourself, as you do here.

[Black Diamond]

Spoken like a true Anti-American asshole petey. If you are so convinced your prediction is true. You should be on the next plane, bound for Beijing, China. Where not even YOU will have the right to make a total fool of yourself, as you do here.
He'd have to learn mandarin Chinese.

[pete311]

Spoken like a true Anti-American asshole petey. If you are so convinced your prediction is true. You should be on the next plane, bound for Beijing, China. Where not even YOU will have the right to make a total fool of yourself, as you do here.

Would you prefer I have your blind positive patriotism that nothing we can do is wrong and the USA is #1 by God's decree? No, Rome went down, so can we.

[aboutime]

Would you prefer I have your blind positive patriotism that nothing we can do is wrong and the USA is #1 by God's decree? No, Rome went down, so can we.

I'd prefer...If you have nothing good, or honest to say. That you SAY NOTHING.
You have no idea what patriotism is, since you are incapable of having any yourself.
If you hate this country, and the constitution so much....YOU SHOULD LEAVE.

[pete311]

I'd prefer...If you have nothing good, or honest to say. That you SAY NOTHING.
You have no idea what patriotism is, since you are incapable of having any yourself.
If you hate this country, and the constitution so much....YOU SHOULD LEAVE.

blah blah blah, I liked you better when your posts were hidden. I never said I hated this country. Did you leave when Obama was in office and you bitched a storm?

[aboutime]

blah blah blah, I liked you better when your posts were hidden. I never said I hated this country. Did you leave when Obama was in office and you bitched a storm?


BULL! petey. You don't have to say you hate this country. Your words, and actions here do a perfect job of that, all by itself.

As for asking whether I left when Obama was in office. My name isn't WHOOPIE, or ROSY O. And No...I did not bitch a storm. You should show me where I did anything other than prove, or show how I identified EVERY LIE Obama told us.
You do remember when he said "YOU CAN KEEP YOUR OWN DOCTOR"? Don't you?
So. If you choose to accuse me of anything. GET THE FACTS, NOT THE LIES straight.

[pete311]

BULL! petey. You don't have to say you hate this country. Your words, and actions here do a perfect job of that, all by itself.

As for asking whether I left when Obama was in office. My name isn't WHOOPIE, or ROSY O. And No...I did not bitch a storm. You should show me where I did anything other than prove, or show how I identified EVERY LIE Obama told us.
You do remember when he said "YOU CAN KEEP YOUR OWN DOCTOR"? Don't you?
So. If you choose to accuse me of anything. GET THE FACTS, NOT THE LIES straight.

WRONG, now go fuck yourself. :salute:

[NightTrain]

WRONG, now go fuck yourself. :salute:

Ouch.

That wasn't nice.

[aboutime]

WRONG, now go fuck yourself. :salute:



Okay petey. I have to wait for you to move your head out of the way first.

[pete311]

Okay petey. I have to wait for you to move your head out of the way first.
that was a pretty good one!

[fj1200]

Trump's Scrapping of TPP Will Make America Poor Again (http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/23/trumps-killing-of-tpp-will-make-america)

Particularly hard hit will be low income households – you know those poor white working-class schlubs that this election was all about – who purchase foreign shoes and apparel at WalMart given that the agreement would have phased out U.S. tariffs most steeply on such items. But it will also affect manufacturers looking for cheap raw material, subverting Trump's core goal of rebuilding American manufacturing, while also limiting their ability to sell abroad given that the deal would have immediately eliminated all tariffs on US non-agricultural goods, and almost all agricultural goods.But that's not the only Trump goal this move will subvert.
In classic mercantilist vein, Trump believes that exports are good because that means you are selling things and imports are bad because that means you are buying things, not understanding that the whole point of exports is to import just as the point of production is consumption. If we keep selling goods but don't buy anything in return, what would be the point of earning all that money?
But even if exporting is Trump's goal, the TPP would have slashed to zero 18,000 tariffs that the partner countries currently impose on US exports, Mercatus Center's Dan Griswold has pointed out (https://madabouttrade.com/hillary-agrees-with-donald-on-tpp-and-why-they-are-both-wrong-b5712407f7ac#.9ujp7i14b). Americans, especially farmers, would have gained tremendous access to overseas markets.
The most bizarre thing about Trump's hostility to the TPP is that if it has a geo-political goal it is to balance China's growing influence in the Pacific, exactly what Trump wants. The deal, which included, besides the United States, Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile and Peru, pointedly left out China. Now China will cut its own deals with many of these countries with whom it already doesn't have one, basically isolating the United States in the region. (Let me hasten to add, I am not by any means in favor of restoring the 1990s neo-conservative demonization of China when The Weekly Standard had made opposition to Most Favored Nation status and isolation of the Middle Kingdom its signature issue. I'm just trying to point out the internal contradictions in the new president's policies.)

I thought we couldn't compete because other countries had higher tariffs than we do.

[fj1200]

Protectionism Was Costly in the Past, And The Future Won't Be Any Different (http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/23/protectionist-policies-were-costly-in-th)

The chart is based on a 1986 study published in the Institute for International Economics examined 31 case studies of protectionist trade policies in the United States. Across 19 different manufacturing sectors, the study found that the costs of protectionism outweighed the benefits, sometimes by a wide margin."I think it's a good reality check to demonstrate that even though protectionism might sound good in theory, and might in fact save some U.S. jobs, it will never pass an empirical cost-benefit analysis, which always shows that the costs to consumers are always greater than the benefits to producers, making us worse off on net," Perry said in an email interview.
A lot has changed since the 1980s, of course, but there's little reason to think that the basic rules of trade and economics have gone the way of Members Only jackets and Bananarama.
Not only does protectionism make all of us worse off, but the added costs are huge. When looking at manufacturing jobs, one area where Trump has focused, and updating the 1986 analysis to account for inflation, Perry concludes that it could cost as much as $500,000 per job saved.

Why does trump want us to pay more for cars?

[NightTrain]

Trump's Scrapping of TPP Will Make America Poor Again (http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/23/trumps-killing-of-tpp-will-make-america)




I thought we couldn't compete because other countries had higher tariffs than we do.

Who said that?

[NightTrain]

Protectionism Was Costly in the Past, And The Future Won't Be Any Different (http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/23/protectionist-policies-were-costly-in-th)




Why does trump want us to pay more for cars?

Why don't you like American jobs?

[fj1200]

Who said that?

That is a common complaint and true in some cases.

[fj1200]

Why don't you like American jobs?

I love competitive, efficient American jobs.

[NightTrain]

I love competitive, efficient American jobs.

Me, too! :thumb:

[NightTrain]

That is a common complaint and true in some cases.

Clearly you were insinuating that someone here voiced that complaint. Who raised that concern and in what context?

[fj1200]

Me, too! :thumb:

Clearly you don't based on the evidence I posted.


Clearly you were insinuating that someone here voiced that complaint. Who raised that concern and in what context?

I was not.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

I predicted that China would eventually take over the Phillippines, in posts on this forum several years ago.
No asking what happen--obama happened.. wake up...
Your nappy times and soft-pink little security blankie sure makes you miss a lot, methinks.- :laugh: -Tyr

[NightTrain]

Clearly you don't based on the evidence I posted.

Explain how hundreds of thousands of American jobs exported to Mexico benefits America.

Not just the actual jobs, but the vast support infrastructure that enables the manufacturing jobs as well.


I was not.

Oh.

To whom were you referring, then?

[fj1200]

Explain how hundreds of thousands of American jobs exported to Mexico benefits America.

Not just the actual jobs, but the vast support infrastructure that enables the manufacturing jobs as well.

Your premise is not proven. Nevertheless comparative advantage. They gain, we gain.


Oh.

To whom were you referring, then?

People.


That is a common complaint and true in some cases.

[NightTrain]

Your premise is not proven. Nevertheless comparative advantage. They gain, we gain.

No, you didn't answer the question.

How is it advantageous to our economy to ship American jobs to Mexico along with the vast support infrastructure surrounding those efforts?


People.

Huh. Good to know.

[aboutime]

Okay. For everyone who thinks, or believes what Trump did with TPP will hurt us.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a secretive, multinational trade agreement that threatened to extend restrictive intellectual property (IP) laws across the globe and rewrite international rules on its enforcement.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement | Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp

You decide, honestly, with JUST THE FACTS.

Personal note: This TPP would have eventually removed portions of our U.S. Citizen rights by ignoring the constitution, and following Foreign demands, and laws created by members of the TPP. It would also have silently given away much of our U.S. Sovereignty on the signature of a foreigner.

[revelarts]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

Pete If Bernie had been elected he would have done the same thing with the TPP.
And Eizibeth warren is on board with it killing it as well. they both say it's a Jobs KILLER.
Hillary and Obama ...the wall st bought Dems... are the only ones that are for it.

So why do you think it's killing the TPP is bad?
I hope it's not just because Trump did it.

[Black Diamond]

Pete If Bernie had been elected he would have done the same thing with the TPP.
And Eizibeth warren is on board with it killing it as well. they both say it's a Jobs KILLER.
Hillary and Obama ...the wall st bought Dems... are the only ones that are for it.

So why do you think it's killing the TPP is bad?
I hope it's not just because Trump did it.
Or because Obama was for it.

[NightTrain]

Or because Obama was for it.

Where would you like your toaster shipped? We ran out of Buicks.

[BoogyMan]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

Were you not just trying to trash Trump for you not knowing he was against the TPP? Do you use both sides of the toilet paper???

[fj1200]

No, you didn't answer the question.

How is it advantageous to our economy to ship American jobs to Mexico along with the vast support infrastructure surrounding those efforts?

Your premise is still incorrect. Nevertheless yes I did. Comparative advantage. It is advantageous for the American consumer, i.e. everyone, to allow countries to engage in activities where they hold a particular advantage that allows them to produce a good more efficiently. We gain, they gain. This may help make the point: :)

The U.S. Lost 7 Million Manufacturing Jobs--And Added 33 Million Higher-Paying Service Jobs (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/10/19/the-us-lost-7-million-manufacturing-jobs-and-added-33-million-higher-paying-service-jobs/#6de2a95b4894)

... The truth is that America has lost some 7 million manufacturing jobs and added some 53 million jobs in services. This is just what happens with advanced economies--it's easier to increase productivity in manufacturing than it is in services, this is the heart of Baumol's Cost Disease. As it was easier to increase productivity in agriculture through mechanising it than it was in manufacturing. Thus, over time, the proportion of the workforce engaged in agriculture falls, so too does the proportion in manufacturing. And given that services (with a couple of small adjustments for mining, construction and utilities) is the name we give to all the rest of the economy therefore an increasing portion of the labour force ends up in services.

Further, of those 53 million new jobs some 62% of them were in higher paying occupations than those "high paying good jobs" in manufacturing we lost. Yes, really, 33 million higher paying jobs came along to replace those 7 million lost. Which does, when you look at those numbers properly, seem like rather a good deal.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y3JhesFrD4

US manufacturing is also at all-time highs. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/11/16/youre-not-going-to-believe-this-but-us-manufacturing-is-now-bigger-than-ever-before/#a1cef436e2c8) We just do it with fewer people.


Huh. Good to know.

I'm always here for ya man. :)

[NightTrain]

Your premise is still incorrect. Nevertheless yes I did. Comparative advantage. It is advantageous for the American consumer, i.e. everyone, to allow countries to engage in activities where they hold a particular advantage that allows them to produce a good more efficiently. We gain, they gain. This may help make the point: :)

The U.S. Lost 7 Million Manufacturing Jobs--And Added 33 Million Higher-Paying Service Jobs (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/10/19/the-us-lost-7-million-manufacturing-jobs-and-added-33-million-higher-paying-service-jobs/#6de2a95b4894)





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y3JhesFrD4

US manufacturing is also at all-time highs. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/11/16/youre-not-going-to-believe-this-but-us-manufacturing-is-now-bigger-than-ever-before/#a1cef436e2c8) We just do it with fewer people.



I'm always here for ya man. :)

So you contend that adding 40 million jobs isn't quite as good as 33 million jobs.

We shouldn't have lost the 7 million (debatable number, but let's go with it) in the first place.

[fj1200]

So you contend that adding 40 million jobs isn't quite as good as 33 million jobs.

We shouldn't have lost the 7 million (debatable number, but let's go with it) in the first place.

Oh geez. Actually we added 53 million jobs. The contention is that we gain and they gain and seems to have been proven out over time.

But I'm curious; have you always held this protectionist viewpoint?

[NightTrain]

Oh geez. Actually we added 53 million jobs. The contention is that we gain and they gain and seems to have been proven out over time.

But I'm curious; have you always held this protectionist viewpoint?

I'm for retaining and creating American jobs. Why are you against this common sense concept?

[fj1200]

I'm for retaining and creating American jobs. Why are you against this common sense concept?

Where did I say that? I'm not for retaining and creating American jobs at a cost to the consumer that is higher than our gains from producing goods.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/timworstall/files/2017/01/jobprotectionism.jpg?width=960

[NightTrain]

Where did I say that? I'm not for retaining and creating American jobs at a cost to the consumer that is higher than our gains from producing goods.

Where did Trump say that he wouldn't negotiate better trade deals with our trade partners?

[fj1200]

Where did Trump say that he wouldn't negotiate better trade deals with our trade partners?

A. I don't believe it.
B. Why discard an agreement that already has tariffs going to zero?
C. Do you think a "better deal" would be free trade?

[NightTrain]

A. I don't believe it.

Neither does Petey, Bully, Gabby, Madonna, Micheal Moore, Obama, Schumer, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Rosie, DeNiro, Lena Dunham, Mark Ruffalo, Ashley Judd, Abortion Barbie, Bernie, Johnson and Hellary.

You're in good company. :smoke:


B. Why discard an agreement that already has tariffs going to zero?

Are you proposing that a trade deal comprises entirely of tariffs?


C. Do you think a "better deal" would be free trade?

I think the prudent thing to do is wait to see what Trump proposes in replacement. Don't you think this would be wise before running around proclaiming the sky is falling?

[fj1200]

Neither does Petey, Bully, Gabby, Madonna, Micheal Moore, Obama, Schumer, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Rosie, DeNiro, Lena Dunham, Mark Ruffalo, Ashley Judd, Abortion Barbie, Bernie, Johnson and Hellary.

You're in good company. :smoke:

I'm pretty sure none of those folks are in my company. Bernie and hrc were both against TPP; enjoy the celebration party. ;)

This guy is my company: ;)

As Top White House Economist, Kudlow Would Defend Free Trade and Drive Liberals Crazy (http://www.weeklystandard.com/as-top-white-house-economist-kudlow-would-defend-free-trade-and-drive-liberals-crazy/article/2006105)

Are you proposing that a trade deal comprises entirely of tariffs?

No. Tariffs, IP protections, etc. One big better deal is better than 12, for example, to replace TPP especially not including China.


I think the prudent thing to do is wait to see what Trump proposes in replacement. Don't you think this would be wise before running around proclaiming the sky is falling?

Prudence, and a whole bunch of links, has shown free trade to be better. Rarely are big government programs for the better and those against them have generally been proven correct. I like where I am. :)

[NightTrain]

Where did Trump say that he wouldn't negotiate better trade deals with our trade partners?


A. I don't believe it.


Neither does Petey, Bully, Gabby, Madonna, Micheal Moore, Obama, Schumer, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Rosie, DeNiro, Lena Dunham, Mark Ruffalo, Ashley Judd, Abortion Barbie, Bernie, Johnson and Hellary.

You're in good company. :smoke:

I think the prudent thing to do is wait to see what Trump proposes in replacement. Don't you think this would be wise before running around proclaiming the sky is falling?


I'm pretty sure none of those folks are in my company. Bernie and hrc were both against TPP; enjoy the celebration party. ;)

That's not what I said. I helpfully provided quotes to steer you back on course. You're welcome.

Trump has said repeatedly that he will negotiate better trade deals than what 0bama struck. I think, given his track record, that pretty much any deal 0bama came up with can be easily improved upon, and the man we elected has said dozens of times that he would improve upon it.

So the illustrious thinkers I named above don't believe - as you do - that Trump can improve it. See the grouping there?

Can you spot the common underlying belief that all of those people share with you?

Hint : one hybrid word recently invented and trends on twitter.


This guy is my company: ;)

As Top White House Economist, Kudlow Would Defend Free Trade and Drive Liberals Crazy (http://www.weeklystandard.com/as-top-white-house-economist-kudlow-would-defend-free-trade-and-drive-liberals-crazy/article/2006105)




No. Tariffs, IP protections, etc. One big better deal is better than 12, for example, to replace TPP especially not including China.



Prudence, and a whole bunch of links, has shown free trade to be better. Rarely are big government programs for the better and those against them have generally been proven correct. I like where I am. :)

I find your faith in 0bama's dealmaking prowess disturbing.

Prudence dictates that we see what is put on the table before criticizing. That way we can compare and THEN make fact-driven comparisons. Wouldn't you agree?

[Gunny]

Neither does Petey, Bully, Gabby, Madonna, Micheal Moore, Obama, Schumer, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Rosie, DeNiro, Lena Dunham, Mark Ruffalo, Ashley Judd, Abortion Barbie, Bernie, Johnson and Hellary.

You're in good company. :smoke:



Are you proposing that a trade deal comprises entirely of tariffs?



I think the prudent thing to do is wait to see what Trump proposes in replacement. Don't you think this would be wise before running around proclaiming the sky is falling?

Okay. I'm LMAO at this one. WHO the f- is "Abortion Barbie"? :laugh:

[NightTrain]

Okay. I'm LMAO at this one. WHO the f- is "Abortion Barbie"? :laugh:

Erick Erickson coined that one for Wendy Davis, the Democrat Texas Senator that ran for the Govnah's Mansion and was soundly defeated.

She infamously filibustered for 11 hours to stop the abortion ban in Texas, but it passed anyway.

She went to Hollywood for a fundraiser in 2014, and these life-sized posters were put up around town right before she arrived - and she hilariously freaked out :

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9653&stc=1

She absolutely hates the Abortion Barbie moniker... it's quite fitting!

[BoogyMan]

Pete If Bernie had been elected he would have done the same thing with the TPP.
And Eizibeth warren is on board with it killing it as well. they both say it's a Jobs KILLER.
Hillary and Obama ...the wall st bought Dems... are the only ones that are for it.

So why do you think it's killing the TPP is bad?
I hope it's not just because Trump did it.

He was posting about how Mr. Trump was going to do NOTHING about the TPP just the other day and now this? I think his cheese might have slid off his cracker.

[fj1200]

That's not what I said. I helpfully provided quotes to steer you back on course. You're welcome.

Trump has said repeatedly that he will negotiate better trade deals than what 0bama struck. I think, given his track record, that pretty much any deal 0bama came up with can be easily improved upon, and the man we elected has said dozens of times that he would improve upon it.

So the illustrious thinkers I named above don't believe - as you do - that Trump can improve it. See the grouping there?

Can you spot the common underlying belief that all of those people share with you?

Hint : one hybrid word recently invented and trends on twitter.

You're name name dropping people who have no relation to this thread or trade and I'm off course? :laugh: I'd be surprised if you disagreed with any of them on free trade. That sound you hear is you backing away from your ill-timed post. :beep: :beep: :beep:

Nevertheless I've been providing actual documentation of the benefits of free trade. You've posted nothing relevant in reply outside of, "but, but 7mm jobs," which I've already shown the folly of. There is no evidence that he can come up with something better than something that has been proven over decades if not centuries. But I'm always open to new information. Until then I'll chill with Kudlow and you can chill with Bernie.


I find your faith in 0bama's dealmaking prowess disturbing.

Prudence dictates that we see what is put on the table before criticizing. That way we can compare and THEN make fact-driven comparisons. Wouldn't you agree?

Prudence dictates that protectionism be criticized because it's track record is pretty awful. You don't seem to have much defense for it either. I do find it comical however that you find faith in a public official disturbing given your unofficial fanboy status.

FWIW, I have faith in free trade and liberty, not a government official. That is apparently where we disagree.

[NightTrain]

You're name name dropping people who have no relation to this thread or trade and I'm off course? :laugh: I'd be surprised if you disagreed with any of them on free trade. That sound you hear is you backing away from your ill-timed post. :beep: :beep: :beep:

Nevertheless I've been providing actual documentation of the benefits of free trade. You've posted nothing relevant in reply outside of, "but, but 7mm jobs," which I've already shown the folly of. There is no evidence that he can come up with something better than something that has been proven over decades if not centuries. But I'm always open to new information. Until then I'll chill with Kudlow and you can chill with Bernie.

I think what you've been providing is a neverending snark of anything Trump has done or proposed, regardless of the merits.


Prudence dictates that protectionism be criticized because it's track record is pretty awful. You don't seem to have much defense for it either. I do find it comical however that you find faith in a public official disturbing given your unofficial fanboy status.

Fair enough. You continue your support of 0bama's deals and I'll take Trump's deals.

I'm good with it. :thumb:

[fj1200]

I think what you've been providing is a neverending snark of anything Trump has done or proposed, regardless of the merits.

It's amazing how wrong you can be. There are many trump things I've not said one word on. I've said previously I'll support what is conservative and oppose what is not. If you can point out where I've been amiss in that position I'd be very appreciative.


Fair enough. You continue your support of 0bama's deals and I'll take Trump's deals.

I'm good with it. :thumb:

If a lib is going to propose a conservative solution I'll certainly take the layup. Of course there is no basis upon which to rely on a trump deal in this regard. Every statement he makes points to protectionism which has an awful track record. Neither your defense of protectionism, nor criticism of free trade, has been very effective lately.

[NightTrain]

It's amazing how wrong you can be. There are many trump things I've not said one word on. I've said previously I'll support what is conservative and oppose what is not. If you can point out where I've been amiss in that position I'd be very appreciative.



If a lib is going to propose a conservative solution I'll certainly take the layup. Of course there is no basis upon which to rely on a trump deal in this regard. Every statement he makes points to protectionism which has an awful track record. Neither your defense of protectionism, nor criticism of free trade, has been very effective lately.

Very well, would you like to point out anything positive you've said about Trump?

[fj1200]

Very well, would you like to point out anything positive you've said about Trump?

Right now I just like how wrong you are. :thumb:

[NightTrain]

Right now I just like how wrong you are. :thumb:

No need to dance. Let's see your support, Slick!

[fj1200]

No need to dance. Let's see your support, Slick!

I'm not dancing. You're the one who hasn't really been right this whole thread. ;)

The hits just keep on coming.

[NightTrain]

I'm not dancing. You're the one who hasn't really been right this whole thread. ;)

The hits just keep on coming.

I think it's pretty clear who was right, but you are entitled to your delusions. :thumb:

Now then, let's get to the bottom of things.

Name JUST ONE thing you have supported Trump with on this board.

No need to nervously eyeball the noose; everyone knows what the correct answer is.

[fj1200]

I think it's pretty clear who was right, but you are entitled to your delusions. :thumb:

Now then, let's get to the bottom of things.

Name JUST ONE thing you have supported Trump with on this board.

No need to nervously eyeball the noose; everyone knows what the correct answer is.

Tell us, so you can be wrong. Yet again. :)

[NightTrain]

Tell us, so you can be wrong. Yet again. :)

I love watching you squirm. :coffee:

[fj1200]

I love watching you squirm. :coffee:

:laugh: It's amazing how nothing you've posted has been correct in this thread and you're trying to change the topic to cover. :laugh:

[NightTrain]

:laugh: It's amazing how nothing you've posted has been correct in this thread and you're trying to change the topic to cover. :laugh:

I don't think it surprises anyone that you can't answer a straight question. It shows weakness. :coffee:

[fj1200]

I don't think it surprises anyone that you can't answer a straight question. It shows weakness. :coffee:

Can't? Won't? It's that your grasping at straws that's so much fun. :)

[NightTrain]

Can't? Won't? It's that your grasping at straws that's so much fun. :)

Watching you desperately dance to avoid answering the question that shows your 100% #NeverTrump routine makes this coffee taste especially fine this morning.
Where have you supported anything Trump's done? Even one? :coffee:

[fj1200]

Watching you desperately dance to avoid answering the question that shows your 100% #NeverTrump routine makes this coffee taste especially fine this morning.
Where have you supported anything Trump's done? Even one? :coffee:

I supported his corporate tax plan ages ago. Your ignorance is fun. :) I blame on your Fanboi Sycophant Syndrome (FSS).

[NightTrain]

I supported his corporate tax plan ages ago. Your ignorance is fun. :)

You did? Link?


I blame on your Fanboi Sycophant Syndrome (FSS).

Au contraire. While I realize that you've found yourself in the same boat as Tailfins, and about as rational, applying labels because you're butthurt about trying to get a Cheech & Chong clone elected isn't doing you any favors.

I support a President that I was behind from the beginning dismantling the liberal insanity of the last couple of decades. I think it's a hell of a great start, and if he does something I don't like, I'll criticize him for it.

However, I've never expected anklebiters to see past their butthurt and actually say something like, "Hey! This is something I like!". Sadly, if you indeed are a conservative, you've said nothing like that since Trump took office even though he's taken very conservative action in his first week at a blistering pace.

[fj1200]

You did? Link?

I gotta admit, that is a tough one to search. This isn't the quote I was looking for but my searching skills are not the greatest here.


Did you notice when I said I liked trump's tax plan?

I also said I have no complaints about his cabinet but I haven't said that here. Would you like a signed affidavit from my parents, brother, or neighborhood folk? I'm also waiting to be happy about his SCOTUS appointment.


Au contraire. While I realize that you've found yourself in the same boat as Tailfins, and about as rational, applying labels because you're butthurt about trying to get a Cheech & Chong clone elected isn't doing you any favors.

I support a President that I was behind from the beginning dismantling the liberal insanity of the last couple of decades. I think it's a hell of a great start, and if he does something I don't like, I'll criticize him for it.

However, I've never expected anklebiters to see past their butthurt and actually say something like, "Hey! This is something I like!". Sadly, if you indeed are a conservative, you've said nothing like that since Trump took office even though he's taken very conservative action in his first week at a blistering pace.

I see you're name dropping again because you're behind the 8 ball. You must ignorantly think I expected Johnson to win; any time hrc loses I'm not going to complain. You could of course point out something I've said that is not conservative but I'm guessing you'll have a tough time given that you haven't supported anything conservative in this thread. The only thing liberal in this thread has been the big-government calls for free market intrusion and that hasn't come from me.

[NightTrain]

I gotta admit, that is a tough one to search. This isn't the quote I was looking for but my searching skills are not the greatest here.

I'm pretty good at it, and I didn't find it either.


I also said I have no complaints about his cabinet but I haven't said that here. Would you like a signed affidavit from my parents, brother, or neighborhood folk? I'm also waiting to be happy about his SCOTUS appointment.

Not necessary. I observe poster's habits and I'm usually very accurate with regard to what motivations are behind postings. My insight has been proven accurate in many staff discussions, and you can verify that with whomever you wish.


I see you're name dropping again because you're behind the 8 ball. You must ignorantly think I expected Johnson to win; any time hrc loses I'm not going to complain. You could of course point out something I've said that is not conservative but I'm guessing you'll have a tough time given that you haven't supported anything conservative in this thread. The only thing liberal in this thread has been the big-government calls for free market intrusion and that hasn't come from me.

Hey, vote for whoever you want, it's a free country. I voted for someone who knows what an Aleppo is.

And as far as your rhetoric that unrestrained free trade is good, you've been completely unable to answer the charge that we simply can't compete with peasants working all day for a couple of bucks due to the fact that they're a 3rd world country and the 8 year old girl forced to work is completely unethical by any standard and the companies doing such things should not be encouraged and rewarded.

[fj1200]

I'm pretty good at it, and I didn't find it either.

You must have missed this then when I told you directly:


I like his tax plan as I've stated before... But I agree, his tax plan would be a boost to our economy and make the necessity for a tougher trade stance unnecessary.

You didn't seem to doubt its veracity back then. :unsure:


Not necessary. I observe poster's habits and I'm usually very accurate with regard to what motivations are behind postings. My insight has been proven accurate in many staff discussions, and you can verify that with whomever you wish.

I guess it was a one-time epic fail on your part then. ;)


Hey, vote for whoever you want, it's a free country. I voted for someone who knows what an Aleppo is.

And as far as your rhetoric that unrestrained free trade is good, you've been completely unable to answer the charge that we simply can't compete with peasants working all day for a couple of bucks due to the fact that they're a 3rd world country and the 8 year old girl forced to work is completely unethical by any standard and the companies doing such things should not be encouraged and rewarded.

Do you mean compared to one who doesn't know what the nuclear triad is? :shrug:

I've also completely answered the charge. We will never compete on labor and I hope we never do. We compete based on our strengths. Please, read up on comparative advantage. It would save you from your ignorant repetition.

[NightTrain]

You must have missed this then when I told you directly:

I like his tax plan as I've stated before... But I agree, his tax plan would be a boost to our economy and make the necessity for a tougher trade stance unnecessary.

You didn't seem to doubt its veracity back then. :unsure:

Nicely done, FJ! Over a year ago, but you did finally find something. I'm proud of you. :clap:


I guess it was a one-time epic fail on your part then. ;)

No, I'm feeling like a bullseye was achieved as I watched your attitude deteriorate ever since Trump won the primary. Emotion driven politics does run rampant with some throughout the country.


Do you mean compared to one who doesn't know what the nuclear triad is? :shrug:

I mean compared to one who can't name a foreign leader, or who doesn't know who Harriet Tubman was. The flappin' tongue bit on National TV was pretty awesome, though. :thumb:


I've also completely answered the charge. We will never compete on labor and I hope we never do. We compete based on our strengths. Please, read up on comparative advantage. It would save you from your ignorant repetition.

I'd say pulling your head out of your ass would save you a lot of static from virtually everyone you come into contact with on this board. Your circular logic grounded in semantics half the time, and the other half declaring everyone else as a simple idiot grew tiresome a couple years ago.

Your condescending attitude notwithstanding, I haven't seen you say anything like that. Waving your hand parroting "comparative advantage" that you picked up skimming a financial article doesn't get you anywhere. You continually blithely ignore the export of American jobs with the wages paid, the taxes on those wages, the maintenance and support of that effort, the infrastructure and delivery industries, the raw materials - all of it. 'Free trade good!' FJ grunts; 'everyone else say otherwise stoopid! Focus sell for $1,000 less and that good, stoopid! Comparative Advantage!'

Our strengths include making trade deals with countries that prevent 8 year old girls from making your Iphone, or a mexican peasant that makes a couple dollars a day building your Ford Focus. Yeah, the shareholders and CEOs are all about it - it is their job to utilize the trade agreements for maximum profits and I don't fault them for doing it; that's their job. That's where a strong leader should enter into play and tell them it's not okay to support such unethical and immoral exploitation of hapless peasants that harms the American economy and rewards those that do it.

We hold all the cards, and those that wish to play in the richest economy in the world need to do it by our rules. I have no problem with trading with Canada and Japan because they've got their shit together. China and Mexico, however, don't.

tl;dr

Completely unrestrained free trade bad.

[fj1200]

Nicely done, FJ! Over a year ago, but you did finally find something. I'm proud of you. :clap:

That was an interesting way to admit that you were wrong. As I had already told you that you were. :)


No, I'm feeling like a bullseye was achieved as I watched your attitude deteriorate ever since Trump won the primary. Emotion driven politics does run rampant with some throughout the country.

:laugh: You are ever so blind. trump is the epitome of emotion driven politics. My attitude is quite a happy one as it's very easy to argue logic driven conservative viewpoints over those afflicted with FSS. ;)


I mean compared to one who can't name a foreign leader, or who doesn't know who Harriet Tubman was. The flappin' tongue bit on National TV was pretty awesome, though. :thumb:

So yet another example of your off topic drivel falling flat. :laugh: You don't even cherry pick very well.


I'd say pulling your head out of your ass would save you a lot of static from virtually everyone you come into contact with on this board. Your circular logic grounded in semantics half the time, and the other half declaring everyone else as a simple idiot grew tiresome a couple years ago.

Your condescending attitude notwithstanding, I haven't seen you say anything like that. Waving your hand parroting "comparative advantage" that you picked up skimming a financial article doesn't get you anywhere. You continually blithely ignore the export of American jobs with the wages paid, the taxes on those wages, the maintenance and support of that effort, the infrastructure and delivery industries, the raw materials - all of it. 'Free trade good!' FJ grunts; 'everyone else say otherwise stoopid! Focus sell for $1,000 less and that good, stoopid! Comparative Advantage!'

Our strengths include making trade deals with countries that prevent 8 year old girls from making your Iphone, or a mexican peasant that makes a couple dollars a day building your Ford Focus. Yeah, the shareholders and CEOs are all about it - it is their job to utilize the trade agreements for maximum profits and I don't fault them for doing it; that's their job. That's where a strong leader should enter into play and tell them it's not okay to support such unethical and immoral exploitation of hapless peasants that harms the American economy and rewards those that do it.

We hold all the cards, and those that wish to play in the richest economy in the world need to do it by our rules. I have no problem with trading with Canada and Japan because they've got their shit together. China and Mexico, however, don't.

tl;dr

Completely unrestrained free trade bad.

It's amazing how you can completely ignore how every argument you've tried to put forth has fallen flat yet you're trying to call me out. Sad.

I've been thinking about your "charge" and how typically ignorant it is coming from you. Has Portugal taken all the jobs from Germany? No. Germany is running strong and Portugal sucks. Has Mexico taken all the jobs from the US or Canada? No (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nearly-5-million-us-jobs-depend-on-mexico-2017-01-27?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo). Plenty of US jobs depend on trade with Mexico. Has Mississippi taken all the jobs from Massachusetts? No. MA have uncountable advantages over MS.

I await more cherry picked examples from you as well as ranting about me and not about the topic.

[NightTrain]

That was an interesting way to admit that you were wrong. As I had already told you that you were. :)

I freely admit that I chuckled as you searched for a couple of hours yesterday trying to find something - anything - that wasn't sniping at Trump. You skimmed quite a few threads in that needle-in-a-haystack search.

Why the sour grapes? I even gave you an Attaboy for finding it.



:laugh: You are ever so blind. trump is the epitome of emotion driven politics. My attitude is quite a happy one as it's very easy to argue logic driven conservative viewpoints over those afflicted with FSS. ;)

Mmm... I'd say 'common sense', but I'm a more honest sort of person.


So yet another example of your off topic drivel falling flat. :laugh: You don't even cherry pick very well.

Given your behavior and demonstrated decision making process, I'd say your judgement of anything is suspect - but please do feel free to issue those gems! I enjoy them greatly.

And if you think that there isn't a large, juicy stash of idiotic shit that Johnson said in HD, think again. If you'd like me to be more thorough in outlining your intellectual giant's gaffes, I can certainly do that. I just assumed that rubbing your nose in it had been done enough, so I was brief.


It's amazing how you can completely ignore how every argument you've tried to put forth has fallen flat yet you're trying to call me out. Sad.

Again, that gets back to your opinions that what you think qualifies as 'falling flat' has any kind of weight.


I've been thinking about your "charge" and how typically ignorant it is coming from you. Has Portugal taken all the jobs from Germany? No. Germany is running strong and Portugal sucks. Has Mexico taken all the jobs from the US or Canada? No (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nearly-5-million-us-jobs-depend-on-mexico-2017-01-27?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo). Plenty of US jobs depend on trade with Mexico. Has Mississippi taken all the jobs from Massachusetts? No. MA have uncountable advantages over MS.

We're not talking about Portugal. Or Germany.

I never claimed that Mexico took all our jobs.

We're not talking about Mississippi or Massachusetts trade with each other.

I've already outlined my positions and they are correct - but I have enjoyed your attempts to further complicate the issue.


I await more cherry picked examples from you as well as ranting about me and not about the topic.

Rant? I didn't rant. My rants are lengthy affairs that usually involve their own threads and are seasoned with colorful uses of profanity.

What I outlined above is a quick observation that I think most on the board would agree with.

At any rate, FJ, my work in this thread is done. I'll not engage in any more of your buffoonery with getting in the last word as you've done countless times before regardless of the lack of standing you have in your games.

Cheerio!

[fj1200]

I freely admit that I chuckled as you searched for a couple of hours yesterday trying to find something - anything - that wasn't sniping at Trump. You skimmed quite a few threads in that needle-in-a-haystack search.

Why the sour grapes? I even gave you an Attaboy for finding it.

Sour grapes? I laugh mightily that you were wrong and I even told you that you'd be wrong but you charged ignorantly forward.


Mmm... I'd say 'common sense', but I'm a more honest sort of person.

You're quite lacking in the common sense lately. Those afflicted with fever rarely see it though. ;)


Given your behavior and demonstrated decision making process, I'd say your judgement of anything is suspect - but please do feel free to issue those gems! I enjoy them greatly.

And if you think that there isn't a large, juicy stash of idiotic shit that Johnson said in HD, think again. If you'd like me to be more thorough in outlining your intellectual giant's gaffes, I can certainly do that. I just assumed that rubbing your nose in it had been done enough, so I was brief.

Who claimed he was an intellectual giant? I'm pretty sure gaffe for gaffe trump will hang right in there. I can admit that Johnson shot himself in the foot repeatedly you can't do the same.


Again, that gets back to your opinions that what you think qualifies as 'falling flat' has any kind of weight.

I don't have an opinion of you falling flat, I have actual fact in your posting history from this very thread. :)


We're not talking about Portugal. Or Germany.

I never claimed that Mexico took all our jobs.

We're not talking about Mississippi or Massachusetts trade with each other.

I've already outlined my positions and they are correct - but I have enjoyed your attempts to further complicate the issue.

Actually we're talking about trade and I've provided examples of you being wrong. That's kind of the common thread we've got here; you being wrong and you arguing almost anything but trade here.


Rant? I didn't rant. My rants are lengthy affairs that usually involve their own threads and are seasoned with colorful uses of profanity.

What I outlined above is a quick observation that I think most on the board would agree with.

At any rate, FJ, my work in this thread is done. I'll not engage in any more of your buffoonery with getting in the last word as you've done countless times before regardless of the lack of standing you have in your games.

Cheerio!

Let me know when you would actually like to discuss the topic because I guess there is only so much wrong that you can be in any particular thread. I do hand it to you though you've been more wrong in this thread than you've been in other threads that discuss the benefits of free trade. :)

[jimnyc]

I freely admit that I chuckled as you searched for a couple of hours yesterday trying to find something - anything - that wasn't sniping at Trump.

We know what the atmosphere is when you have a republican / democrat election. Neither side is never fond of the other, nor their plans/agendas/stances. I see the same thing here and feel the same responses from some, and not just here.

The hoping and wishing that he will fail. The desire for him to fail. Some went "all in" against Trump in the desire that he would lose the primaries, and then perhaps the election. That didn't happen as we know.

So now it's difficult to get back into the game, knowing what one wrote and what stances were taken for so long. And the desire for him to fail continues. Watch many liberals here and elsewhere. Of course you'll never see anything positive about Trump, no matter what he does. Then you will see similar with some who bet against Trump, even if it aligns with any stance one may or may not have had prior to the primaries forward. Too late to say even something slightly positive now, after one bets the bank and their life against.

*NT's post had me thinking generally, not anyone in particular.

[Elessar]

The chinese president for the first time ever attended Davos econ summit and made a speech saying if the US is out, China is in. When China becomes top dog, you'll all be asking what happened.

Never a positive. Always a negative.

What kind of therapy animal do you cuddle up to?

[aboutime]

Never a positive. Always a negative.

What kind of therapy animal do you cuddle up to?



Elessar. Once again, as expected. Petey comes here to demonstrate how he so fully supports the success of any nation...other than the U.S. He almost sounds just like Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the DNC membership, with all of the Congressional Black Caucus members at the BLM convention for Socialist-Communist-Markist Month celebrations where everybody goes home with a MEDAL shaped like a Safety Pin.

[Black Diamond]

Never a positive. Always a negative.

What kind of therapy animal do you cuddle up to?
An Obama blowup doll.

[fj1200]

We know what the atmosphere is when you have a republican / democrat election. Neither side is never fond of the other, nor their plans/agendas/stances. I see the same thing here and feel the same responses from some, and not just here.

The hoping and wishing that he will fail. The desire for him to fail. Some went "all in" against Trump in the desire that he would lose the primaries, and then perhaps the election. That didn't happen as we know.

So now it's difficult to get back into the game, knowing what one wrote and what stances were taken for so long. And the desire for him to fail continues. Watch many liberals here and elsewhere. Of course you'll never see anything positive about Trump, no matter what he does. Then you will see similar with some who bet against Trump, even if it aligns with any stance one may or may not have had prior to the primaries forward. Too late to say even something slightly positive now, after one bets the bank and their life against.

*NT's post had me thinking generally, not anyone in particular.

Who wants him to fail? I imagine most people just want him to act in the countries best interest.