THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

Again, painting with a wide brush. MAGA is more than Trump. I don't think of Trump anymore when I hear that slogan. In fact, I don't even pay attention to the man as much as some of you do.

You gotta get out of CA bro. Go travel to other states.

Well let me ask: is MAGA, to you, a malleable list?

In other words, if I think a lot more legal immigration makes America great and that if you’re healthy and want to work, you can come in, can that be MAGA alongside someone who wants a wall and to significantly further restrict legal immigration?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaboChris]

"Just remember a vote is a tacit endorsement, at minimum, of the MAGA view on democracy."

I could easily apply your own words to trade with China which I'm against. Every person on this board should say FUCK CHINA.

Communists human rights violators who unleashed a global pandemic that brought the world to its knees and they're our number 1 trading "partner"?

You may not be a Communist but you like cheap commie products.

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

"Just remember a vote is a tacit endorsement, at minimum, of the MAGA view on democracy."

I could easily apply your own words to trade with China which I'm against. Every person on this board should say FUCK CHINA.

Communists human rights violators who unleashed a global pandemic that brought the world to its knees and they're our number 1 trading "partner"?

You may not be a Communist but you like cheap commie products.

Trading with the Chinese people is not trading with the CCP, nor is it an endorsement of the CCP. One has nothing to do with the other. Countries don’t trade. Individuals do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fudd]

It breaks my heart that so many of my fellow countrymen/women/people fawn over a treasonous would be tyrant. I can tell you what the father of our country and his founding brothers would think of him and his supporters.

It breaks my heart when people vote for would be socialists. I assure you that the founding fathers would be just as sad seeing how they did what they did to get away from king George.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MD 5150]

Trading with the Chinese people is not trading with the CCP, nor is it an endorsement of the CCP. One has nothing to do with the other. Countries don’t trade. Individuals do.

Please explain how the U.S. trades with China and not have the CCP involved.

[CaboChris]

Please explain how the U.S. trades with China and not have the CCP involved.

Yeah, that was a head scratcher. I guess the CCP is the biggest "individual" in the country in that case.

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

I didn’t say governments don’t involve themselves or aren’t involved. But at its heart, if i buy from here in California a book that is sold by Amazon in Kentucky, California didn’t trade with Kentucky. That doesn’t change even if states heavily involved themselves. We might say “US trade with Canada” but that’s just a convenient shorthand.

Further, government isn’t wholly synonymous with a nation-state, either. Even if the CCP disappeared tomorrow, China would be the same nation of people.

So when we have cellphones made by Foxconn, the largest private employer in China, come to the US, at its heart it’s the people of Apple and the people of Foxconn making a deal, not the US and China.

Extreme poverty in China has dropped precipitously as it has traded with the world and become much more of a market economy, with private enterprise and prices based upon market forces and not CCP desires. While Xi has very recently, post trade war, made overtures towards more public control of private enterprise, it still exists.

In fact, this is a great example of how people trade with each other and governments tend to open markets when they do so and people prosper. We’ve only seen a reversal of this trend with US restricting markets and the Chinese government retaliating by doing the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NDL]

delete

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

Since you deleted I will delete.

[CaboChris]

I didn’t say governments don’t involve themselves or aren’t involved

So tell me how the CCP involves themselves cuz Communist regimes seem to have a lot of sway and aren't the most benevolent partners to have in the world.

Again, so I'll put it this way...it's foolish for American "individuals" to have as their biggest trading nation...Chinese "individuals for the simple fact that Communism is opposed to everything we (America) stand for and vice versa.

As for Chinese poverty. Is that our concern?

Is the CCP our enemy? If yes, then the people are by association. That's my opinion.

[CaboChris]

I have to say this because it's mind-blowing to me.

NEVER in my 50 years have I ever heard that countries don't trade with each other.

Only individuals. What's the point of treaties and trade agreements. Why do our governments make a show by sending representatives?

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

So tell me how the CCP involves themselves cuz Communist regimes seem to have a lot of sway and aren't the most benevolent partners to have in the world.

Again, so I'll put it this way...it's foolish for American "individuals" to have as their biggest trading nation...Chinese "individuals for the simple fact that Communism is opposed to everything we (America) stand for and vice versa.

As for Chinese poverty. Is that our concern?

Is the CCP our enemy? If yes, then the people are by association. That's my opinion.

Governments can insert themselves in a myriad of ways. We consider our market “free,” yet we have taxes, tax breaks, regulations, subsidies, social program employment taxes, trade quotas, tariffs, etc. Not all that dissimilar from glossing over all that to call our system “free market capitalism,” we gloss over the fact that the major growth in the Chinese economy over the last 30+ years has been a result of embracing freer markets, privatization, and freer enterprise. It’s now one of the most open markets in the world (Xi’s apparent turn from this amidst our trade war with them, not withstanding).

There’s no great, simple analogy, but let’s say you buy things from California. You very much disagree with the Democratic supermajority and how California controls, regulates and taxes it’s people. Is your purchase an endorsement of Gavin Newsom/Democrat policies, despite major government involvement in California’s industry? Of course not. You may vehemently not want your state to to be like California, but it’s beneficial to both California AND Nevada to not restrict commerce across those borders. And if Nevada cut off trade with blue states it dislikes, there’d be some seen benefits, but it would overall hurt the economies of Nevada and all those other states.

But to whether the Chinese our our “concern,” they don’t have to be. If I’m good at growing veggies and you’re good at meat and milk, we are both better off if I send you veggies in exchange for meat and we are both worse off if we don’t. That said, when I think of America, I think “all men are created equal” with certain innate rights by virtue of being born. So if by helping us be better off we make others in way worse situations better as well, well that’s a moral no-brainer.

What I don’t want is for our relationship with China to be more like our relationship with North Korea or Japan. And co to using to trade makes it less likely either side engages in behavior that we feel we need to go to war for, and at the same time has made us better off and those people freer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lovemachine97(Version 2)]

I have to say this because it's mind-blowing to me.

NEVER in my 50 years have I ever heard that countries don't trade with each other.

Only individuals. What's the point of treaties and trade agreements. Why do our governments make a show by sending representatives?

Trades are transactions. So if I make cookies for my neighbor and she gives me fresh tomatoes from her garden in exchange, that’s a trade. If I go to the grocery store and give them US dollars in exchange for food, that’s a trade. If I go on Amazon here in California and give them US dollars in exchange for a tablet that ships from Kentucky, that’s a trade. All done by individuals. California didn’t trade with Kentucky for that tablet.

Recently, CA put restrictions on some foods, like bacon. To be sold in California, the living situation of the hogs has to met certain requirements that only 4% of hog farms meet. So in order for, say, Costco to buy bacon made outside of California for its California stores, it has to be from a complying farm. That’s a trade restriction but it’s still a private group of individuals (Costco) trading with the farm in question.

If a country’s default position is no imports or exports, that’s a restriction on individual behavior. I want to buy soybeans from South America and America will arrest me if I do it (hypothetical example). A trade deal to allow for imports/exports with another country would simply mean dropping restrictions to let those individuals start trading with each other.

So if you buy a Samsung phone, yes, a trade deal allowed it to happen under certain conditions. But America didn’t trade with Korea. An American company traded with a Korean company (and then you traded with that American company.)

Countries may set the parameters but that starts as restrictions over its own people. The countries didn’t actually do the trading.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VH1986]

It breaks my heart when people vote for would be socialists. I assure you that the founding fathers would be just as sad seeing how they did what they did to get away from king George.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Founding Fathers may be sad but they would accept the people's choice and not attempt a coup.

[CaboChris]

Trades are transactions. So if I make cookies for my neighbor and she gives me fresh tomatoes from her garden in exchange, that’s a trade. If I go to the grocery store and give them US dollars in exchange for food, that’s a trade. If I go on Amazon here in California and give them US dollars in exchange for a tablet that ships from Kentucky, that’s a trade. All done by individuals. California didn’t trade with Kentucky for that tablet.

Recently, CA put restrictions on some foods, like bacon. To be sold in California, the living situation of the hogs has to met certain requirements that only 4% of hog farms meet. So in order for, say, Costco to buy bacon made outside of California for its California stores, it has to be from a complying farm. That’s a trade restriction but it’s still a private group of individuals (Costco) trading with the farm in question.

If a country’s default position is no imports or exports, that’s a restriction on individual behavior. I want to buy soybeans from South America and America will arrest me if I do it (hypothetical example). A trade deal to allow for imports/exports with another country would simply mean dropping restrictions to let those individuals start trading with each other.

So if you buy a Samsung phone, yes, a trade deal allowed it to happen under certain conditions. But America didn’t trade with Korea. An American company traded with a Korean company (and then you traded with that American company.)

Countries may set the parameters but that starts as restrictions over its own people. The countries didn’t actually do the trading.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A country like China I want restrictions. They have no standards. The UK? Trade should be the equivalent of open borders.