251–260 of 390 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he wanted to highlight the bi-partisan support for the action.
I think he wanted to distract away from who's responsible for this action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Show me where I said that Most Chinese people lack the freedom to live and work where they choose. Most Americans have that freedom. So if it is handled here in the US then not only will there be less pollution but far fewer kids would be impacted.
If you really cared about Chinese people you'd let them in when they asked to immigrate here. That's enough conflating the protection of toxic industry with humanitarian concern. Stop pretending. Learn your history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act
No I wouldn't. That makes no sense at all.
You are the person who brought up kids dying. Either you care 10x more about American kids than Chinese kids or your original argument is garbage.
I don't mind if you do care 10x more about American kids - it's a byproduct of our nationalist culture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Show me where I said that Most Chinese people lack the freedom to live and work where they choose. Most Americans have that freedom. So if it is handled here in the US then not only will there be less pollution but far fewer kids would be impacted.
If you really cared about Chinese people you'd let them in when they asked to immigrate here. That's enough conflating the protection of toxic industry with humanitarian concern. Stop pretending. Learn your history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act
this seems to have an a lot packed in. it's not clear how advocating the departure of a minuscule amount of people from china is "helping chinese people" or otherwise demonstrating "care for chinese people".
> Stop pretending. Learn your history. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act
this seems to be getting really off the rails. this was repealed in the 40s. what's the relevance?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that materially change whether or not it does or doesn't make it more expensive to build products in America that rely on Chinese components?
I can't speak specifically to these new items, but just to give an example, many auto experts came out and said the steel and aluminum tarrifs would raise car prices, but so small it's a rounding error. Typically under $100 or $200 per car. Point being, people jump to conclusions without seeing the impact on the total cost of goods. Meanwhile dismissing the point, putting more capital into the pockets of US based com…
The effect on the final product may be minimal but the intermediate manufacturer of, e.g., the rails that hold the car seats in place may end up having to lay off half their workforce. If the product that makes up 80% of your business has a 15% margin and now your main raw material input rises in price by 25%, you could be in serious trouble.
I guess my earlier comment was too long, so let me provide a shorter version: this action actively harms anyone attempting to design, prototype, and manufacture electronic devices in the US. There isn't a single component in the projects I'm currently working on which isn't impacted by this. My cost of goods just went up by 25% across the board today in an effort to help "protect" American businesses. I don't feel li…
No decision is good for everyone. Unfortunately for you, this one isn’t
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something. In this case, doing something (a) does not harm China, as intended, as they are still the only viable place to purchase these items, yet (b) actively harms business in the United States, as we are paying the additional cost ourselves.
> (a) does not harm China, as intended, as they are still the only viable place to purchase these items, yet (b) actively harms business in the United States, as we are paying the additional cost ourselves. There's an important qualification: that's probably only true in the short or medium term . I believe the goal is that the higher cost would produce economic space for competitors to enter the market. Ironically,…
Exactly, except there is no long term because the following administration will undo all of what the current one has done.
I guess my earlier comment was too long, so let me provide a shorter version: this action actively harms anyone attempting to design, prototype, and manufacture electronic devices in the US. There isn't a single component in the projects I'm currently working on which isn't impacted by this. My cost of goods just went up by 25% across the board today in an effort to help "protect" American businesses. I don't feel li…
It only affected US manufacturers and left chinese finished good imports unaffected
But if you ever visit the Rust Belt, you'll quickly realize that entire local and regional economies have been shattered by the decline of US manufacturing and haven't yet recovered.
Donald Trump won the election in part by recognizing and promising to address this economic problem. This move is an attempt to do exactly that: Fix things by reversing the free trade policies that got us into this mess.
Almost everyone here seems united in saying that this attempt by Trump to cure our economic problems will only make the situation worse.
If you were the PoTuS, you want to help the Rust Belt become economically viable again, and you have both houses of Congress and the American people behind you, what would you do?
Bashing Trump's solution is all well and good, but what's the alternative? Do nothing and let the American heartland's economy rot for another 30 years?
Americans have been told that globalization was the key to prosperity. And yes, today we have wondrous cheap smartphones and all manner of goods made overseas. But if you ever visit the Rust Belt, you'll quickly realize that entire local and regional economies have been shattered by the decline of US manufacturing and haven't yet recovered. Donald Trump won the election in part by recognizing and promising to address…
I wouldn't lie and tell people we can force the world to give a damn about American cars like it was the 1950s all over again, because the world has moved on from that economy, and thanks to automation, even if we brought the factories back, there would be few if any jobs for human beings. We can't look back, we have to look forward, and prepare for the actual future. The coal mines aren't going to open, the days of lifetime employment at the steel mill or auto plant, two cars in every garage and a chicken in every pot are dead.
Beyond that, I don't know. It's a complex problem, but failing to recognize complexity, as the President seems to, doesn't actually make it simpler.