The GOP is a Death To The American Economy Cult.

I can see Republicans' just not caring a whole lot about sending millions of illegals to camps. History shows people love wishing their enemies into the cornfield.

But deliberately destroying our nation's economy? That will affect every Republican, personally.

"Our Country will boom, but we have to get rid of the Biden Overhang.' This will take a while, has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARIFFS."

Our President is a madman.
That's a feature, not a bug.

"We've yet to see how Trump's actions will ultimately succeed or fail."

We've been seeing how he succeeds or fails his whole life.

But you're right. Maybe this time will be different!

"I suspect Trump may have used bankruptcies as part of a "business plan" rather than showing how poorly he managed companies."

Tell us what business plan involves deliberately bankrupting companies, BillJohnson.
You made the claim. So explain what you mean.

"Regardless, democrats ran a candidate who had nothing to offer except perhaps her willingness to be controlled by the same powers who controlled Biden."

Do those powers have a name?

"democrats also used COVID as a political weapon."

How?
Trump was President, how did Democrats do that?

'During Trump's first term, they leveraged the pandemic to strangle the economy"

How?
Give us some examples where Democrats did this.
Why didn't the President stop them?

"condition the public toward government dependency"

The public is already dependent on the government.

Roads? Government.
Police? Government
Running water? Government.
Money? Government.

"It will never cease to amaze that Americans basically just got bored of having the best lives on the planet"

Using BillJohnson as an example: The problem is the Gays get to live the good life too. That is unacceptable.
The only way to keep Gays and other Minorities from leading the good life Good Life is to take the Good Life away from all Americans.
And that's exactly what Republicans voted for in 2024.

Snoofy,
Your questions are overly simplistic and not worth the effort of a serious response.
#43 | Posted by BillJohnson

^
My questions are perfectly matched to the tenor of your statements.
The reason you can't answer the questions is because you cannot put into words exactly what you mean.

So instead you turn tail and run.
Like you have been doing your entire life.
It feels like the right thing to do, because it's so natural for you and you've done it so many times.
It's actually one of your trademark moves here! To announce that the questions are stupid and that you will not be answering them.

"This was Bernie Sanders commenting back in 2015. It would appear that Trump was paying attention."

I missed the part where Bernie Sanders said crippling tariffs is the solution to wealth inequality.
Could you highlight that part for us No, you can't, because you're full of ---- as usual.

Where were you during the pandemic?
Obviously not paying attention.
#51 | Posted by BillJohnson

Where was Trump?
Obviously not paying attention to Democrats that "leveraged the pandemic to strangle the economy".
Your words, as usual, prove to be indefensible.

"You and Dan both have painfully myopic viewpoints."

But you can't say why.

"Driving was great. Hardly any cars on the roads for a few months."

Why did Trump let the economy collapse to the point that there were very few cars on the road?

"As you've seen many times on this site, ideologues are more than willing to suffer for their beliefs."

I've been saying that as long as I've been here.
Republicans are the type to spend an extra million dollars to pursue the death penalty.
Republicans are the type to deport agricultural workers and then wonder why crops are rotting on the vine.

But you still haven't pointed out where Bernie says we need massive tariffs.
The reason you can't point it out is because Bernie would never say something that stupid.
The reason you can't point it out is because Bernie is not an ideologue who is willing to make others suffer for his beliefs.

Unless, of course, you're the kind of weasel who says raising the capital gains tax and Social Security withholding leads to genuine suffering among the wealthy.
Which of course is exactly the kind of weasel you are.

Anything else or are you done with your drivel drive-by and it's back to drinking for you?

"Yeah of course, it is used in a rational way within the context of a broad, sensible trade policy. It is one tool that is available,

Everybody knows that, --------.
It's why we don't sell Chinese made cars in America.
Come back when you're ready to have a conversation above an eighth grade reading level.

"Maybe Trump was trying to out-Bernie Bernie?"

Can you express that sentence without using the word Bernie, so that we might have a clue what you're trying to say?
No. You can't.

"Maybe Trump was trying to out-Bernie Bernie?"

Maybe MadBomber is trying to out-stupid MadBomber.

"Walk me through why those tariffs-Bernie's tarrifs-would have been a good thing."

"There is no "rational" way to use tariffs."

Sure there is.
Protectionist tariffs are used to protect niche industries.
What your saying is no different than saying
"There is no "rational" way to apply a tax."

"They are a way to achieve a desired ideological outcome at the expense of consumers. "

Tariffs are absolutely not at the expense of consumers, when the tariffs protect a nation's economic livelihood.
Let's circle back on why you've never complained about the tariffs on Chinese cars.
Why haven't you cried your little eyes out that Chinese cars are not available in the Untied States?
Why isn't any politician saying we must end the tariffs on Chinese cars because these tariffs come at the expense of American consumers? (It's because you're wrong to make that claim.)

"For most of us, opposition to Bernie is rooted in the conventional understanding that restrictions to free markets suppress wealth creation and economic growth."

Which restrictions are those?
The ones where Chinese illegal immigrants can't legally work in the United States for a quarter an hour?

For most of us, opposition to Bernie is rooted in the conventional understanding that restrictions to free markets suppress wealth creation and economic growth. Trump is going to show us whether that is true or not.
#65 | Posted by madbomber

We're already seeing it.

"I wonder if a person needs a bit of larceny in them to effectively deal with all the bad players around the world don't play fair."

You support larceny by your President.
You support a criminal in the White House.
You think Trump is a criminal, but it's okay, because his crimes are good for America.

How very believable that you think all this!

"The ones where markets do not determine value, but rather they are set by a ministry within the government."

So you're saying it would create wealth if essentially all Americans lost their jobs, replaced by -------- working for pennies on the dollar.

For whom would this create wealth, and for whom would this destroy wealth?

"Which do you think has more appeal to consumers? Lower or higher costs?"

Does one of them cost me my job?

"How does it benefit me to be forced to pay more than market value for something?"

You get to have a job.

When you suggest that "Markets" determine value, what does that mean?

Does it mean individual purchases choose how much they're willing to pay for something?
If so, just say individuals.

I don't see how "markets" are even part of the discussion.
What is a market other than an individual purchasing something?
Why use the term "markets" when what you really mean is just called shopping?

"Does one of them cost me my job?"
Do I as a consumer give a ----?
#96 | Posted by madbomber

Well I guess that's up to you, Rational Actor.
But most consumers cut spending when they lose their job, owing to not having as much money to spend, owing to losing their job.

"If your job is contingent upon the government rigging the markets to make sure you have a job, you should probably be looking for another line of work."

Why?
The government gave you your military career.
How long did it take you to follow your own advice?

"Like I've said before. Trump is the US's Hugo Chavez."

Trump isn't the US's Bernie Sanders any more? That's cute.
Trump can be whoever you don't like that you need him to be, did you know that about you?

"That's because the rich are the ones who knowledge and investment benefitted consumers"

You're telling us it benefits consumers when they lose their jobs.
Can we see the math?

"That's because the rich are the ones who knowledge and investment benefitted consumers."

That's beside the point.
Capitalism doesn't exist for the benefit of consumers.
You are thinking of Socialism or Communism with that line of reasoning.

"And USans will happily pay more for the goods and services they consume because the goods and services they consumer are produced by US workers."

No they won't.
They haven't been doing that for fifty years, so I'm not sure why you assert they will suddenly change their ways.

Why do you assert American consumers will happily pay higher prices for American made goods?
Which economic school of thought even supports this notion? North Korea?

"For at least a decade USans have been told that it is best for manufacturing to come back to the US."

Might as well nuke China then, and destroy their factories. That would get the American people what they said want, right?

I know you're being stupid on purpose, because it's what you do, but:
Destroying the nation's ability to import is not a cost-effective way to bring manufacturing back to the US.

As we have already seen, it lowers GDP, which is really saying something considering imports are already not computed in GDP. So now, we have less imports, and less GDP. This is the opposite of what you promised was going to happen.

It sounds like you don't understand American businesses import raw materials, or perhaps more properly raw materials and intermediate stage products, and turn them into finished goods.

"Capitalism doesn't exist for the benefit of consumers."
"Capitalism doesn't exist without consumers. At least not in the market sense."

No economic system exists without consumers.
There'd be no need for production otherwise.
You're again choosing to miss the point.

Why do you insist on being so stupid in these discussions? It's like you're trying to dilute your own value.

" And if they're not, it becomes clear that progressive economic policies espoused by those who resemble Bernie Sanders would be no more successful than those promoted by Donald Trump."

No, they'd be vastly different, because the scale of what Bernie Sanders might have ever proposed is nowhere near the large scale of what Donald Trump is currently doing to tariffs.

I don't know why you need to insist things like scale and proportion don't matter.
Actually I do know why.
Tt's because you can't find any other way to make Trumps failure really be Bernie's Fault and Hugo Chavez's fault, instead of being the Republican Party's failure. Your daddy probably voted Republican so you're stuck defending it for emotional reasons you'll never unpack or something dumb like that.

"If you want to create high paying manufacturing jobs in the US, then yes. You nuke Japan again, and add in Europe and China for good measure."

Let's do it then. Surely it will bring even more people into the Middle Class, and that's got to be good, right?

"Systems where there are no consumers. There are just citizens whose needs are provided for by the government based on what the government determines they need."

You're making a distinction without a difference.
Socialism is when the workers own the means of production.
There would be no need to produce anything if there is nobody to consume anything.

"Consumption in the market sense, yes"

What other sense exists?
???

"The expectation was that workers go to work, produce stuff, but in many cases not value from the benefit of the goods they produced."

That same expectation holds true in Capitalism.
You're not saying anything about Socialism that isn't true in Capitalism.

"That's because the rich are the ones who knowledge and investment benefitted consumers."

What do you mean, benefitted consumers?
Give us an example of how a rich person's knowledge and investment benefitted you, through your own choices as a consumer.