Farm aid from Trump’s trade war has cost more than double the 2009 auto bailout (Page 9): Trade is the most serious problem we have and always has been.

Hug

straightUp wrote:

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that since the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, when the government first started to subsidize farmers and they've been subsidized ever since. There isn't a farmer alive today that can say he doesn't depend on the government.

The point Barracuda is making is that the subsidies have been increased (by a LOT) under Trump as a direct consequence of his trade tariffs and it's creating more debt for us.

I know you folks are being told that the tariffs will somehow fix the "unfair" trade advantage that you think the Chinese have over us, but so far that hasn't happened. Trump has NOT renegotiated ANYTHING with the Chinese yet. He slaps tariffs on Chinese imports to pressure them into renegotiation but Jinping just does the same thing back and says, "your move". Jinping knows Trump can't go toe to toe with him on this.

The U.S. imports $540 billion in goods from China and China only imports $120 billion from the U.S. THAT is why we have a trade deficit, not because of some "rules" that Trump is going to be able to renegotiate. You can't negotiate your way out of a $419 billion trade deficit. The only thing that can change a deficit that massive is if American people stop buying Chinese stuff and that isn't happening either.

The tariffs are supposed to discourage Americans from buying Chinese but last Black Friday has shown us that it's not working. Americans are just paying MORE for Chinese stuff now.

So now what?

The reason why previous presidents left it up to the market is because they know the government has no business dictating what Americans can buy. Jinping on the other hand, CAN dictate what the Chinese are allowed to buy because it's a c*******t government! Trump has been trying to dictate what Americans are allowed to buy... he banned Huawei and ZTC products for example, but he's not going to be able to push far enough to make a dent in the trade deficit without seriously violating the American principle of a free market.

So, it's a no win situation. Fortunately, it's not one of our bigger problems either. A better president would focus on more serious problems, but Trump doesn't know how to solve serious problems. All he knows how to do is "make deals".

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that sinc... (show quote)

Trade is the most serious problem we have and always has been.

Cuda2020

Hug wrote:

Barracuda2020, What could you possible know about clean air and clean water? You have probably experience some pollution in some major cities from the exhaust from vehicles that hasn't been carried out by the wind, but I am sure you have not experience dirty water and dirty air. You are an urban dweller that just hasn't lived long enough and has no idea what the rural environment is like. All you do is suck up propaganda.

Well that is what my business does we clean up fuel spills which forces me to know all the new and old hazmat regulations and that's all I'll say on that, but I also keep very well informed, why because the environment is important to me, I guess unlike you.

You live in a bubble hug, thinking that one's life only extends to the length of one's arm, fyi ...it goes much further, it can go all around the world by just learning and becoming informed, you should try it
but if you do you just might change your perspective and party.

If I were you I'd stop talking through your ass with your bias assumptions and accusations about me, you are constantly wrong in your efforts to invalidate my opinions, you would do a better job by supporting your own opinion with some facts which you haven't done yet, and that's because all your doing is parroting your handlers propaganda, be aware you are being their tool to divide this country. Job well done

I hope I wasn't nasty, I try so hard not to be after someone has insulted me.

Cuda2020

straightUp wrote:

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that since the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, when the government first started to subsidize farmers and they've been subsidized ever since. There isn't a farmer alive today that can say he doesn't depend on the government.

The point Barracuda is making is that the subsidies have been increased (by a LOT) under Trump as a direct consequence of his trade tariffs and it's creating more debt for us.

I know you folks are being told that the tariffs will somehow fix the "unfair" trade advantage that you think the Chinese have over us, but so far that hasn't happened. Trump has NOT renegotiated ANYTHING with the Chinese yet. He slaps tariffs on Chinese imports to pressure them into renegotiation but Jinping just does the same thing back and says, "your move". Jinping knows Trump can't go toe to toe with him on this.

The U.S. imports $540 billion in goods from China and China only imports $120 billion from the U.S. THAT is why we have a trade deficit, not because of some "rules" that Trump is going to be able to renegotiate. You can't negotiate your way out of a $419 billion trade deficit. The only thing that can change a deficit that massive is if American people stop buying Chinese stuff and that isn't happening either.

The tariffs are supposed to discourage Americans from buying Chinese but last Black Friday has shown us that it's not working. Americans are just paying MORE for Chinese stuff now.

So now what?

The reason why previous presidents left it up to the market is because they know the government has no business dictating what Americans can buy. Jinping on the other hand, CAN dictate what the Chinese are allowed to buy because it's a c*******t government! Trump has been trying to dictate what Americans are allowed to buy... he banned Huawei and ZTC products for example, but he's not going to be able to push far enough to make a dent in the trade deficit without seriously violating the American principle of a free market.

So, it's a no win situation. Fortunately, it's not one of our bigger problems either. A better president would focus on more serious problems, but Trump doesn't know how to solve serious problems. All he knows how to do is "make deals".

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that sinc... (show quote)

Excellent points well made, now will they sink in

Good day to ya mate

Hug

Barracuda2020 wrote:

Well that is what my business does we clean up fue... (show quote)

Barracuda, I have personally watched the EPA destroy businesses and know folks that have been harmed by EPA. I despise the EPA socialist regulations, particularly in regards to small streams. Sorry, but that is the way it is.

Cuda2020

Hug wrote:

Barracuda, I have personally watched the EPA destroy businesses and know folks that have been harmed by EPA. I despise the EPA socialist regulations, particularly in regards to small streams. Sorry, but that is the way it is.

Sorry but that is simply the way "you "think" it is, again based by your personal experience, you speak speculatively nothing objectively based in fact.

Hug

Barracuda2020 wrote:

Sorry but that is simply the way "you "think" it is, again based by your personal experience, you speak speculatively nothing objectively based in fact.

Is personal experience not fact to me?

Cuda2020

Hug wrote:

Is personal experience not fact to me?

You have a good evening

Hug

Barracuda2020 wrote:

You have a good evening

Thank you Barracuda, and you have a good evening. Nothing personal on my part.

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Barracuda2020 wrote:

Ya know Jack I don't mind people themselves not be... (show quote)

I'm in no way an expert on all EPA issues. I have learned a bulk of the EPA regulations that were rolled back will have zero impact. The states have their own clean air/water regulations and in most of the roll backs the EPA (Federal government) was putting their nose into duplication of what the states were already doing.
My personal preference would be as our founders intended "The states oversee regulatory laws, not the federal government.
I have also learned that many states regulations on industry that once did pollute (such as Pulp mills) the water and air going out is cleaner than what is going in (Port Townsend in Washington state as an example).
Also much of our pollution in our rivers and lake's has nothing to do with industry and more to do will poor planning many years ago with farming run off and residential expansion on our lakes and rivers.
I can't argue that we don't have a problem with pollution of our waters. I think many of the solutions looked to in regulations have more to do with politics than actual solutions. Cutting the nose off to spite the face if you will, by enacting extremist actions (California banning thinning forest and the result has been multiple forest fires destroying millions of acres, residential homes/cities/towns and loss of life)
I firmly believe our law maker's have lost any ability to use thought processes and wisdom (Both parties) in addressing our issues. Regulations addressing rural area's are excellent examples of how mindless our lawmakers are.
The auto industry (something I am an expert on) has spent billions on R&D in order to meet "Extreme Regulations " and the consumer is burdened with unaffordable products, then we ask why their not flush with cash remember the decade plus when cars manufactured were junk? The paint would blow off, engines (mechanical) had major problems? The problem was regulations exceeded our technology.

It may surprise many the legal burden of evidence required to remove regulations. The media is packed full of false information, false research and flat out lies how Trump's deregulation will damage the environment and how Trump is pandering to the oil companies in deregulation's. It's not that simple....

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/opinion/cass-sunstein-the-t***h-about-trump-s-deregulation-record-gazette/article_0f3cb0e0-a3ca-5644-b8e7-c7ecd3b5001a.html

However it is of little challenge to put regulations in place by a political party for purposes of political agendas.

Jack

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

straightUp wrote:

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that since the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, when the government first started to subsidize farmers and they've been subsidized ever since. There isn't a farmer alive today that can say he doesn't depend on the government.

The point Barracuda is making is that the subsidies have been increased (by a LOT) under Trump as a direct consequence of his trade tariffs and it's creating more debt for us.

I know you folks are being told that the tariffs will somehow fix the "unfair" trade advantage that you think the Chinese have over us, but so far that hasn't happened. Trump has NOT renegotiated ANYTHING with the Chinese yet. He slaps tariffs on Chinese imports to pressure them into renegotiation but Jinping just does the same thing back and says, "your move". Jinping knows Trump can't go toe to toe with him on this.

The U.S. imports $540 billion in goods from China and China only imports $120 billion from the U.S. THAT is why we have a trade deficit, not because of some "rules" that Trump is going to be able to renegotiate. You can't negotiate your way out of a $419 billion trade deficit. The only thing that can change a deficit that massive is if American people stop buying Chinese stuff and that isn't happening either.

The tariffs are supposed to discourage Americans from buying Chinese but last Black Friday has shown us that it's not working. Americans are just paying MORE for Chinese stuff now.

So now what?

The reason why previous presidents left it up to the market is because they know the government has no business dictating what Americans can buy. Jinping on the other hand, CAN dictate what the Chinese are allowed to buy because it's a c*******t government! Trump has been trying to dictate what Americans are allowed to buy... he banned Huawei and ZTC products for example, but he's not going to be able to push far enough to make a dent in the trade deficit without seriously violating the American principle of a free market.

So, it's a no win situation. Fortunately, it's not one of our bigger problems either. A better president would focus on more serious problems, but Trump doesn't know how to solve serious problems. All he knows how to do is "make deals".

Peewee - farmers haven't been able to do that sinc... (show quote)

Recent news shows that the Chinese are losing trillions of dollars in present and future earnings and they now want to negotiate.
Seems Trumps increased aid to the farmers may just be to get them through until negotiations are final. If Trump succeeds with "balanced trade" it will mean tens of trillions over the next 30-40 years , which would also be the largest benefit todate to bring manufacturing back to American shores, millions of jobs and a much healthier environment for farmers.
We'll all know soon if Trump pulls it off.
I'm curious how the media will spin it if Trump succeeds.

Jack

Hug

jack sequim wa wrote:

I'm in no way an expert on all EPA issues. I have learned a bulk of the EPA regulations that were rolled back will have zero impact. The states have their own clean air/water regulations and in most of the roll backs the EPA (Federal government) was putting their nose into duplication of what the states were already doing.
My personal preference would be as our founders intended "The states oversee regulatory laws, not the federal government.
I have also learned that many states regulations on industry that once did pollute (such as Pulp mills) the water and air going out is cleaner than what is going in (Port Townsend in Washington state as an example).
Also much of our pollution in our rivers and lake's has nothing to do with industry and more to do will poor planning many years ago with farming run off and residential expansion on our lakes and rivers.
I can't argue that we don't have a problem with pollution of our waters. I think many of the solutions looked to in regulations have more to do with politics than actual solutions. Cutting the nose off to spite the face if you will, by enacting extremist actions (California banning thinning forest and the result has been multiple forest fires destroying millions of acres, residential homes/cities/towns and loss of life)
I firmly believe our law maker's have lost any ability to use thought processes and wisdom (Both parties) in addressing our issues. Regulations addressing rural area's are excellent examples of how mindless our lawmakers are.
The auto industry (something I am an expert on) has spent billions on R&D in order to meet "Extreme Regulations " and the consumer is burdened with unaffordable products, then we ask why their not flush with cash remember the decade plus when cars manufactured were junk? The paint would blow off, engines (mechanical) had major problems? The problem was regulations exceeded our technology.

It may surprise many the legal burden of evidence required to remove regulations. The media is packed full of false information, false research and flat out lies how Trump's deregulation will damage the environment and how Trump is pandering to the oil companies in deregulation's. It's not that simple....

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/opinion/cass-sunstein-the-t***h-about-trump-s-deregulation-record-gazette/article_0f3cb0e0-a3ca-5644-b8e7-c7ecd3b5001a.html

However it is of little challenge to put regulations in place by a political party for purposes of political agendas.

Jack

I'm in no way an expert on all EPA issues. I have... (show quote)

Great post, thanks Jack.

Seth

jack sequim wa wrote:

Recent news shows that the Chinese are losing tril... (show quote)

And the Democrats refuse to acknowledge any of it.