Election 2016 Thread

[pErvinalia]

Where would you get all your consumer products from??

Not NAFTA and free trade agreements. Consumer protection comes from a variety of sources, but not NAFTA and other free trade agreements. We have statutes both at the federal and state level regulating the sales of goods and services, finance, etc. We have state and federal agencies enforcing those laws, etc.

Put your reading glasses on. I said "products" not "protections".

Remember, the US needs China/Mexico more than the other way around. China and Mexico etc need the US and other large markets to keep growing at extraodinary rates, but they can largely sustain themselves by their own production. The US (and other Western nations) can't any more.

You tell me to "remember" that the US needs China and Mexico ore than the other way around, but that is an assertion you need to establish. China and Mexico rely very heavily on the US, and the US still has the capacity to send those countries down the shitter.

Well that's an assertion that you need to establish. There's no doubt that China and Mexico's economy would suffer if they suddenly lost the US market to sell into. But their very existence wouldn't be under threat, as they largely can make the stuff that they need to be self-sufficient to a certain standard. The US can't do that. The US mostly only makes high-tech stuff now. All the low tech and labour intensive stuff is made in Mexico/China/etc.

I acknowledge that the ability of the US and other western countries to do the things they should be able to do as a nation is declining. That's what I've been on about. The US manufacturing base is being depleted. Our industries are gone. We've gone information and service based economy, and we're relying a lot on military production and a few remaining major industries. This is not sustainable.

I agree.

[Forty Two]

Where would you get all your consumer products from??

Not NAFTA and free trade agreements. Consumer protection comes from a variety of sources, but not NAFTA and other free trade agreements. We have statutes both at the federal and state level regulating the sales of goods and services, finance, etc. We have state and federal agencies enforcing those laws, etc.

Put your reading glasses on. I said "products" not "protections".

Indeed, misread that. The problem here is that the inability to manufacture products here in the US is not healthy.

Remember, the US needs China/Mexico more than the other way around. China and Mexico etc need the US and other large markets to keep growing at extraodinary rates, but they can largely sustain themselves by their own production. The US (and other Western nations) can't any more.

You tell me to "remember" that the US needs China and Mexico ore than the other way around, but that is an assertion you need to establish. China and Mexico rely very heavily on the US, and the US still has the capacity to send those countries down the shitter.

Well that's an assertion that you need to establish. There's no doubt that China and Mexico's economy would suffer if they suddenly lost the US market to sell into.

We're agreed on that, then. I'm comfortable with "China and Mexico's economy would suffer if they suddently lost the US market to sell into. I think that is consistent with them "relying very heavily on the US," but if you don't agree, then we'll just agree on the point that their economies would suffer, "no doubt."

But their very existence wouldn't be under threat, as they largely can make the stuff that they need to be self-sufficient to a certain standard. The US can't do that. The US mostly only makes high-tech stuff now. All the low tech and labour intensive stuff is made in Mexico/China/etc.

Well, the question is, is it too late for the US to stem the tide of exiting manufacturing here in the US? If so, then we're fucked anyway, eventually. If not, we need to get on it and get it fixed. I am not sure if it's too late. You seem to be sure that it's too late.

I acknowledge that the ability of the US and other western countries to do the things they should be able to do as a nation is declining. That's what I've been on about. The US manufacturing base is being depleted. Our industries are gone. We've gone information and service based economy, and we're relying a lot on military production and a few remaining major industries. This is not sustainable.

I agree.

And, that's what Trump wants to fix, and what Hillary has denied is even a problem.

[Tero]

Trump wants no such thing. He wants to "renegotiate" some trick that will bring rust belt jobs back. Might as well block all trade.

[Forty Two]

Trump wants no such thing. He wants to "renegotiate" some trick that will bring rust belt jobs back. Might as well block all trade.

Funny, he has specifically stated that his idea is to: "Negotiate fair trade deals that create American jobs, increase American wages, and reduce America's trade deficit."

1. Withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has not yet been ratified.

2. Appoint tough and smart trade negotiators to fight on behalf of American workers.

3. Direct the Secretary of Commerce to identify every violation of trade agreements a foreign country is currently using to harm our workers, and also direct all appropriate agencies to use every tool under American and international law to end these abuses.

4. Tell NAFTA partners that we intend to immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers. If they don’t agree to a renegotiation, we will submit notice that the U.S. intends to withdraw from the deal. Eliminate Mexico’s one-side backdoor tariff through the VAT and end sweatshops in Mexico that undercut U.S. workers.

5. Instruct the Treasury Secretary to label China a currency manipulator.

6. Instruct the U.S. Trade Representative to bring trade cases against China, both in this country and at the WTO. China's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance to the WTO.

7. Use every lawful presidential power to remedy trade disputes if China does not stop its illegal activities, including its theft of American trade secrets - including the application of tariffs consistent with Section 201 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

Here is a copy of his speech on the topic, complete with citations. https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/DJT_Dec ... ndence.pdf

He's not referred to any "tricks" or magically bringing "rust belt" jobs back, etc.

Whatever you think of him, has really actually said anything here that you reasonably disagree with, if it were uttered by someone you didn't already loathe?

[Scot Dutchy]

The git(Trump) is a useless cunt. He could not negotiate a way out of a paper bag.

[Tero]

"Funny, he has specifically stated that his idea is to: "Negotiate fair trade deals that create American jobs, increase American wages, and reduce America's trade deficit."

Same trick. No country will sign it if it favors the US.

[Brian Peacock]

The Democrats hired agitators to go to Trump rallies and start fights.....http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... hey-hire-/

Like no other political organisation has ever shilled their opponents, eh?

[Hermit]

To create American jobs would involve Apple, Intel, General Motors among many other American corporations to source their products from factories located in the USA. Somehow I don't think he'll find much cooperative spirit from said corporations for his endeavour. They source their products from factories outside the USA precisely because doing so maximises their market share and profitability.

[pErvinalia]

Where would you get all your consumer products from??

Not NAFTA and free trade agreements. Consumer protection comes from a variety of sources, but not NAFTA and other free trade agreements. We have statutes both at the federal and state level regulating the sales of goods and services, finance, etc. We have state and federal agencies enforcing those laws, etc.

Put your reading glasses on. I said "products" not "protections".

Indeed, misread that. The problem here is that the inability to manufacture products here in the US is not healthy.

Remember, the US needs China/Mexico more than the other way around. China and Mexico etc need the US and other large markets to keep growing at extraodinary rates, but they can largely sustain themselves by their own production. The US (and other Western nations) can't any more.

You tell me to "remember" that the US needs China and Mexico ore than the other way around, but that is an assertion you need to establish. China and Mexico rely very heavily on the US, and the US still has the capacity to send those countries down the shitter.

Well that's an assertion that you need to establish. There's no doubt that China and Mexico's economy would suffer if they suddenly lost the US market to sell into.

We're agreed on that, then. I'm comfortable with "China and Mexico's economy would suffer if they suddently lost the US market to sell into. I think that is consistent with them "relying very heavily on the US," but if you don't agree, then we'll just agree on the point that their economies would suffer, "no doubt."

But their very existence wouldn't be under threat, as they largely can make the stuff that they need to be self-sufficient to a certain standard. The US can't do that. The US mostly only makes high-tech stuff now. All the low tech and labour intensive stuff is made in Mexico/China/etc.

Well, the question is, is it too late for the US to stem the tide of exiting manufacturing here in the US? If so, then we're fucked anyway, eventually. If not, we need to get on it and get it fixed. I am not sure if it's too late. You seem to be sure that it's too late.

I acknowledge that the ability of the US and other western countries to do the things they should be able to do as a nation is declining. That's what I've been on about. The US manufacturing base is being depleted. Our industries are gone. We've gone information and service based economy, and we're relying a lot on military production and a few remaining major industries. This is not sustainable.

I agree.

And, that's what Trump wants to fix, and what Hillary has denied is even a problem.

If the flow of jobs offshore from western nations was to be reversed, or at least significantly slowed, it would need to be a long gradual process, I'd expect. That way there won't be a massive shock to any economies.

[rainbow]

To create American jobs would involve Apple, Intel, General Motors among many other American corporations to source their products from factories located in the USA. Somehow I don't think he'll find much cooperative spirit from said corporations for his endeavour. They source their products from factories outside the USA precisely because doing so maximises their market share and profitability.

...and is indeed what Trump's own companies do.

[Sean Hayden]

Plenty of work for mericans, problem is they're too good for it. Instead of learning something useful like welding, electrical, plumbing, construction etc, they learn to stack blocks for 20k a year at a liberal arts college. -useful idiot gentleman!

[pErvinalia]

Seth's back!

[Forty Two]

To create American jobs would involve Apple, Intel, General Motors among many other American corporations to source their products from factories located in the USA. Somehow I don't think he'll find much cooperative spirit from said corporations for his endeavour. They source their products from factories outside the USA precisely because doing so maximises their market share and profitability.

...and is indeed what Trump's own companies do.

Right, because the way it's set up, it's attractive for the companies to set up in low wage low regulation countries. The idea is to make it less attractive to do that, and at the same time, make it more attractive to set up in the US.

[Forty Two]

If the flow of jobs offshore from western nations was to be reversed, or at least significantly slowed, it would need to be a long gradual process, I'd expect. That way there won't be a massive shock to any economies.

I don't disagree, but a journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step.

[Forty Two]

The Democrats hired agitators to go to Trump rallies and start fights.....http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... hey-hire-/

Like no other political organisation has ever shilled their opponents, eh?

Tu quoque?

We have confirmed, admitted evidence they did it. Combine that with all the other shenanigans they've pulled, and it's just massive fraud after massive fraud. Donna Brazile giving Hillary Clinton debate questions in advance. The Democratic National Committee and Debra Wasserman Schultz colluding with the Clinton campaign against Bernie Sanders, all while lying to the people by saying they are being neutral and fair. http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-p ... democracy/ Wasserman Schultz resigns from DNC chairperson position and is immediately hired by Hillary Clinton to work on her campaign. The media collusion with the Clinton campaign where they gave the Clinton camp editing rights on stories.

Concerned Sanders would win Nevada, Sen. Harry Reid, the former Senate Majority Leader and most powerful elected official in Nevada, as it later emerged, arranged a plan with owners of Las Vegas casinos, where many caucuses were being held, and other employers, to ensure Clinton would win. The Nevada caucuses were then rigged with massive voting irregularities such as casino owners orchestrating which workers would be allowed to vote and, in clear intimidation, openly monitoring how they voted.

Vote tampering also occurred in other states, most recently in Arizona where on election day, polling locations were sharply cut forcing many voters to stand in line for up to five hours in the heat, with some leaving before casting a vote. http://www.salon.com/2016/03/30/10_ways ... t_partner/