Forget it….

[ILisBest]

Nobody cares. Trump's tariff policies will have the biggest impact on the 2026 elections. Trump reduces barriers to trade MAGA will be looking good. If there is a recession with high prices then MAGA is screwed. It's the economy which will matter the most unless there is a foreign policy crisis.

One of your first likes from me in awhile. I am glad you have calmed down to see things might not be as dire as the MSM wants to portray.

I will predict that stock buying opportunities will be ripe before the 9th this month.

 

[JeffT818]

Contractor/ Employee the gravy train is over. You should be glad.

So, you want Trump to only fire Democrats?

The government is too big. A little of all types of voters will be swept up in the clean up. This is why all the previous POTUS never tackled these problems. They are not clean fixes, including the trade cleanup.

My only point is that people sometimes vote against their own best interests. If you were a federal employee and wanted to keep your job, you should have voted Democratic in the last election. It is comical that MAGA voters are crying about losing their federal jobs. Were you not paying attention to Trump?

 

[BigWill]

Why are Republicans so convinced that the Democrats cheat in their own primary elections?

Because the Democrats don't nominate the biggest idiot in the room. Perhaps Rs should take notes instead of hurling accusations.

Then again, the loony lefties also think Dems cheat. The conspiratorially minded may just think alike.

Cheating in their OWN elections ?

Let's look so far back as their OWN Presidential primaries for the LAST election.

Biden Wins ALL Democratic primaries, they VOTE !

Harris is appointed Presidential candidate having won NOT ONE VOTE !

 

[Uncoach]

 

[BigWill]

US stock futures plummet in the wake of Trump's tariffs announcement

The reaction to Trump's sweeping tariffs announcement didn't take long to hit the U.S. stock market, with Dow Futures plummeting over 1,000 points by Wednesday evening.

abcnews.go.com

Welcome to the Trump economy!

Bought APPL puts yesterday afternoon @ 3:30 @ approx $ 5
Sold them AM before 10 am @ $ 19

That's $ 1,400 PER contract into my 401 !

Thank you , President Trump !

Under my Mantra of "Don't be a Piggy", those APPL puts are $ 20 + , now !

 

[bucshon]

My only point is that people sometimes vote against their own best interests. If you were a federal employee and wanted to keep your job, you should have voted Democratic in the last election. It is comical that MAGA voters are crying about losing their federal jobs. Were you not paying attention to Trump?

Disagree. They sometimes vote against what others arrogantly believe SHOULD be “their own best interest”. Voters get to decide for themselves what is important to them. (Conservative and liberal ideologues both try to tell voters what they should most care about).

 

[Uncoach]

And they were and are wrong.
When voters are voting against common sense policy, you have to ask yourself why they are doing that… TDS is real and party tribalism is real and have certainly contributed to certain people actually voting for a party that doesn’t share their policy outlook.

The problem with party “tribalism” isn’t the people. It’s the money involved. It used to be you could vote for someone and they would go to Congress and some times go against their own party, which made them electable in the first place. The Dems are so in lock step in voting, there are very few who cross over. Ex- Chuck Schumer got in hot water with his own party. Then you have Republicans that some of the neocons have no common sense and align with Democrats and then you have the Republican groups that don’t understand you have to compromise a bit to get most of what you need. If anyone strays too far from partyline, however, the RNC/DNC as well as the congressional campaign apparatus of each party may withhold money and primary the candidate.

 

[Uncoach]

 

[BigWill]

My only point is that people sometimes vote against their own best interests. If you were a federal employee and wanted to keep your job, you should have voted Democratic in the last election. It is comical that MAGA voters are crying about losing their federal jobs. Were you not paying attention to Trump?

Do you mean the 400,000 Federal workers that lost their jobs , under Clinton ?

OR

The 75,000 Federal workers that chose the deferred compensation/RIF in Oct, 2025 ?

 

[BigWill]

Obama and Biden did nothing on trade other than gradually see the US erode into more and more debt and our manufacturing base and intellectual property go elsewhere (and no flowers for Bush, Clinton et al as they were just as bad on trade). 36 trillion in debt and an economy with enormous trade deficits says the patient is not healthy. Academic economists say you do not have to balance the budget but I was an econ major at Illinois and I disagree. A trillion dollars annually in interest payments is just one reason why they are wrong.

You can argue about Trump's methods to try to solve things but I find it hard to believe anyone thinks we don't have a problem. At least Trump is trying something. The downside is countries join together to fight the tariffs and at least Canada is trying to get this going.

Canada has a purchase contract for the DELIVERY of F-35's for $ 88 Billion !

Bye the way: The Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Force on the way to the Western Indian Ocean to lend support to the Truman has Stealth F-35 II C 's as part of it's plane loadout !

Stealth to this plane is a metal sized golf ball at 30,000 feet ! The electronic and munitions available is too lengthy to post here !

 

[bucshon]

Herbert Hoover sharply increased tariffs in 1930. That really worked out well.

Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act | History, Effects, & Facts | Britannica

Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, U.S. legislation passed on June 17, 1930, that raised import duties to protect American businesses and farmers, adding considerable strain to the international climate of the Great Depression. Learn about the development and effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in this...

www.britannica.com

Completely different circumstances. Not really relevant to today’s global economy and trade practices.

 

[Uncoach]

I love it!!

 

[dtrain79]

Growing up in a Democrat union family in the 60’s/70’s, I remember when Democrats were protectionists. They were the champions of workers in the manufacturing and energy sectors. Now, they are siding with Wall Street and the multinational corporations. It’s stunning.

In 1980, the GOP vision of free market economics began carrying the day in US economic policy. While Ronald Reagan attracted many "working people," he was probably the most aggressive free trader ever to sit in the Oval Office.

While it's harder to find statistics going back to 1980, it's pretty easy to find them since 1990. Since 1990, the US economy - which has been the lynchpin of the international trading system and is less regulated generally than Europe - has massively outpaced virtually every Western economy in terms of growth. Despite the dramatic growth of Third World economies since 1990, the US is actually a larger share of the world's economy today than it was 35 years ago (26% versus 25%). GDP growth in the US - which directly benefits workers with higher incomes - has dramatically outpaced GDP growth in what were "economically peer" nations in the late 20th century, countries such as the UK, France, and Germany. While the American middle class has declined, the majority of that decline - roughly 2/3s of it - has seen people leave the middle class upwardly.

None of the above is debatable. It seems weird that Rs have run away from the success of their economic project, but sadly it appears to me that it may have to do more with changes in voter preferences due to social issue sorting than it does about economics.

There have been losers from globalization, of course, but it's odd that the current debate in the US focuses only upon them (and seems to ignore solutions like enhancing and encouraging mobility from struggling places to burgeoning ones). And even if the tariff policies are Shangri-La and bring back oodles of manufacturing, what is the guarantee they go to the "right places" that were deleteriously impacted by globalization? I keep wondering if any has thought about this. (And I'm leaving out of the discussion the issue of whether government efforts to revitalize things like defense capacities, shipbuilding, and certain pharmaceutical/technological items, as I think that targeted topic is generally a good question for increased public debate).

I am not a Democrat, and probably will never be one. But if the GOP is becoming an anti-trade party despite this country being one of the biggest trade-related winners, I sure as hell hope the other party defends the global trade system.

I also think it's worth considering the topic of mobility in the US. Historically, if things are down here, moving was a pretty good answer. Why has that changed and is it good?

 

[JeffT818]

Disagree. They sometimes vote against what others arrogantly believe SHOULD be “their own best interest”. Voters get to decide for themselves what is important to them. (Conservative and liberal ideologues both try to tell voters what they should most care about).

If government workers voted for Trump based on what they felt were their best interests then obviously having a government job was not that important to them. If having a government job was subordinate to other interests then don't cry about losing your job. It wasn't that important to you in the first place.

 

[BigWill]

In 1980, the GOP vision of free market economics began carrying the day in US economic policy. While Ronald Reagan attracted many "working people," he was probably the most aggressive free trader ever to sit in the Oval Office.

While it's harder to find statistics going back to 1980, it's pretty easy to find them since 1990. Since 1990, the US economy - which has been the lynchpin of the international trading system and is less regulated generally than Europe - has massively outpaced virtually every Western economy in terms of growth. Despite the dramatic growth of Third World economies since 1990, the US is actually a larger share of the world's economy today than it was 35 years ago (26% versus 25%). GDP growth in the US - which directly benefits workers with higher incomes - has dramatically outpaced GDP growth in what were "economically peer" nations in the late 20th century, countries such as the UK, France, and Germany. While the American middle class has declined, the majority of that decline - roughly 2/3s of it - has seen people leave the middle class upwardly.

None of the above is debatable. It seems weird that Rs have run away from the success of their economic project, but sadly it appears to me that it may have to do more with changes in voter preferences due to social issue sorting than it does about economics.

There have been losers from globalization, of course, but it's odd that the current debate in the US focuses only upon them (and seems to ignore solutions like enhancing and encouraging mobility from struggling places to burgeoning ones). And even if the tariff policies are Shangri-La and bring back oodles of manufacturing, what is the guarantee they go to the "right places" that were deleteriously impacted by globalization? I keep wondering if any has thought about this. (And I'm leaving out of the discussion the issue of whether government efforts to revitalize things like defense capacities, shipbuilding, and certain pharmaceutical/technological items, as I think that targeted topic is generally a good question for increased public debate).

I am not a Democrat, and probably will never be one. But if the GOP is becoming an anti-trade party despite this country being one of the biggest trade-related winners, I sure as hell hope the other party defends the global trade system.

I also think it's worth considering the topic of mobility in the US. Historically, if things are down here, moving was a pretty good answer. Why has that changed and is it good?

MANY Corporations are moving to Texass as a result of President's Trump's trade policies.

Shine up your resume and you shouldn't have to move !

 

[JeffT818]

Completely different circumstances. Not really relevant to today’s global economy and trade practices.

If Trump's aims are to negotiate better trade deals, then he has a reasonable chance of success.

If Trump's aims are truly protectionism and bringing jobs back, then this is what will happen.

Global trade will decrease substantially with an ongoing trade war.
Prices will increase substantially.
Unlike organic inflation which spurs consumption, price increases caused by tariffs will reduce consumption. People will put off making large purchases in the hopes that the tariffs will be reversed.
There will be a prolonged bear market. 40% of the S&P 500 sales are to foreign markets. Earnings will suffer for a period of time.
Companies will not make heavy capital investments in steel mills and aluminum smelters based on a presidential executive orders. Legislation would be needed to give some semblance of permanence
Ultimately, if jobs are returned to the US then prices will remain high and quality will decline due to decreased competition. Think of the poor quality of US autos in the 1960s and 1970s. The only reason they improved was due to foreign competition.
Widespread protectionism will be extremely harmful to this country. Targeted protectionism for industries vital to national security are a different matter.
In the end, protectionism will never work for Trump, all the pain will be felt during his term with little in the way of benefit. If he continues down this road he will be stopped when the Dems turn congress blue in 2026.

 

[BigWill]

Completely different circumstances. Not really relevant to today’s global economy and trade practices.

Don't blame Uncle Ewing !

His post at Assistant Secretary of Treasury under Hoover, had him running the Secret Service and the IRS until he resigned !

 

[JeffT818]

Trump approval falls to 43%, lowest since returning to office, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

President Donald Trump's approval rating fell to 43%, the lowest since his return to office, as Americans soured on his tariff moves and his administration's handling of information about a military strike in Yemen, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found. The three-day poll, which closed on Wednesday...

ca.news.yahoo.com

 

[Uncoach]

In 1980, the GOP vision of free market economics began carrying the day in US economic policy. While Ronald Reagan attracted many "working people," he was probably the most aggressive free trader ever to sit in the Oval Office.

While it's harder to find statistics going back to 1980, it's pretty easy to find them since 1990. Since 1990, the US economy - which has been the lynchpin of the international trading system and is less regulated generally than Europe - has massively outpaced virtually every Western economy in terms of growth. Despite the dramatic growth of Third World economies since 1990, the US is actually a larger share of the world's economy today than it was 35 years ago (26% versus 25%). GDP growth in the US - which directly benefits workers with higher incomes - has dramatically outpaced GDP growth in what were "economically peer" nations in the late 20th century, countries such as the UK, France, and Germany. While the American middle class has declined, the majority of that decline - roughly 2/3s of it - has seen people leave the middle class upwardly.

None of the above is debatable. It seems weird that Rs have run away from the success of their economic project, but sadly it appears to me that it may have to do more with changes in voter preferences due to social issue sorting than it does about economics.

There have been losers from globalization, of course, but it's odd that the current debate in the US focuses only upon them (and seems to ignore solutions like enhancing and encouraging mobility from struggling places to burgeoning ones). And even if the tariff policies are Shangri-La and bring back oodles of manufacturing, what is the guarantee they go to the "right places" that were deleteriously impacted by globalization? I keep wondering if any has thought about this. (And I'm leaving out of the discussion the issue of whether government efforts to revitalize things like defense capacities, shipbuilding, and certain pharmaceutical/technological items, as I think that targeted topic is generally a good question for increased public debate).

I am not a Democrat, and probably will never be one. But if the GOP is becoming an anti-trade party despite this country being one of the biggest trade-related winners, I sure as hell hope the other party defends the global trade system.

I also think it's worth considering the topic of mobility in the US. Historically, if things are down here, moving was a pretty good answer. Why has that changed and is it good?

Reagan was such an aggressive free trader, he placed quotas on Japanese automobiles.

In 1980, Japanese automakers were trouncing Detroit’s “Big Three” in the American car market. After decades of intensive state support, Japanese firms had developed the world’s most efficient production processes and made the highest-quality cars. Without the time and resources to retool, American automakers risked bankruptcy and mass layoffs. President Ronald Reagan negotiated a quota on Japanese imports that stemmed competition for four years, bought Detroit time to retool, and spurred massive foreign investment in a new manufacturing base in the South that created hundreds of thousands of American jobs.

The Import Quota that Remade the Auto Industry | American Compass

An American Compass case study of how a voluntary export restraint on Japanese autos saved the U.S. automotive industry.

americancompass.org

Reagan also placed tariffs on Japanese goods.

Reagan slaps sanctions on Japanese goods - UPI Archives

President Reagan slapped punitive tariffs today on selected Japanese imports, including articles ranging from computers to rotary drills and color television...

www.upi.com

And then removed a portion

Reagan Lifts $51 Million in Japan Tariffs : Reagan Eases Japan Tariffs as Summit Opens

President Reagan, in a gesture of harmony at the opening of the annual seven-nation economic summit, today announced the partial lifting of U.S. sanctions on Japanese electronics goods.

www.latimes.com

 

[Uncoach]

MANY Corporations are moving to Texass as a result of President's Trump's trade policies.

Shine up your resume and you shouldn't have to move !

Many are moving to Texass because Gavin Newsom and California policies stink. It isn't always about Trump. Illinois is losing corporations and it isn't because of Trump. It's because Illinois is run by anti-business loons.

 

[JeffT818]

Reagan was such an aggressive free trader, he placed quotas on Japanese automobiles.

The Import Quota that Remade the Auto Industry | American Compass

An American Compass case study of how a voluntary export restraint on Japanese autos saved the U.S. automotive industry.

americancompass.org

Reagan also placed tariffs on Japanese goods.

Reagan slaps sanctions on Japanese goods - UPI Archives

President Reagan slapped punitive tariffs today on selected Japanese imports, including articles ranging from computers to rotary drills and color television...

www.upi.com

And then removed a portion

Reagan Lifts $51 Million in Japan Tariffs : Reagan Eases Japan Tariffs as Summit Opens

President Reagan, in a gesture of harmony at the opening of the annual seven-nation economic summit, today announced the partial lifting of U.S. sanctions on Japanese electronics goods.

www.latimes.com

In 1988 Ronald Reagan Explained Why We Should Be Thankful for Trade

“Back in 1776, our Founding Fathers believed that free trade was worth fighting for."

www.uschamber.com

Clearly describes which side Reagan was on in his own words. As a bonus, tells us to beware of people like Trump!

Just one reason I was a Reagan Republican and am a Never Trumper.

 

[Uncoach]

In 1988 Ronald Reagan Explained Why We Should Be Thankful for Trade

“Back in 1776, our Founding Fathers believed that free trade was worth fighting for."

www.uschamber.com

Clearly describes which side Reagan was on in his own words. As a bonus, tells us to beware of people like Trump!

Just one reason I was a Reagan Republican and am a Never Trumper.

LOL. Quoting words and not actions. Reagan, unlike you, had common sense and realized free trade has its limits.

 

[John Kay]

Another concerning development here is your curious attraction to my master debating prowess…

There’s been a striking shift in the dialogue on this thread since I joined and garnered all your attention. It seems there’s far less flaming, fewer personal insults, and fewer immature attacks, replaced by much more actual discussion.

You’re welcome—no thanks needed.

 

[bucshon]

Growing up in a Democrat union family in the 60’s/70’s, I remember when Democrats were protectionists. They were the champions of workers in the manufacturing and energy sectors. Now, they are siding with Wall Street and the multinational corporations. It’s stunning.

 

[JeffT818]

LOL. Quoting words and not actions. Reagan, unlike you, had common sense and realized free trade has its limits.

Reagan clearly was a free trader who pragmatically used quotas on a limited basis. Only you would ignore Reagan's own words. You and Trump have a great deal in common; ignoring facts that don't fit your argument.
Noticed you didn't mention Reagan's description of Trump. It was spot on. Continue to worship the orange clown who has enacted tariffs around the world including uninhabited islands. His staff must have gotten the list from Wikipedia. If Trump is really turning into a protectionist, it will be interesting to see how long he will let the country burn before he gives up. Maybe when his approval ratings are below the Dems. That will make him mad.

 

[JeffT818]

View embedded media

Nobody is against tariffs against China. Hardly anybody thinks putting tariffs on the entire world is a good idea.

 

[dtrain79]

Reagan was such an aggressive free trader, he placed quotas on Japanese automobiles.

The Import Quota that Remade the Auto Industry | American Compass

An American Compass case study of how a voluntary export restraint on Japanese autos saved the U.S. automotive industry.

americancompass.org

Reagan also placed tariffs on Japanese goods.

Reagan slaps sanctions on Japanese goods - UPI Archives

President Reagan slapped punitive tariffs today on selected Japanese imports, including articles ranging from computers to rotary drills and color television...

www.upi.com

And then removed a portion

Reagan Lifts $51 Million in Japan Tariffs : Reagan Eases Japan Tariffs as Summit Opens

President Reagan, in a gesture of harmony at the opening of the annual seven-nation economic summit, today announced the partial lifting of U.S. sanctions on Japanese electronics goods.

www.latimes.com

Congrats to Uncoach for watching the Reagan speech where he discusses with the nation the putting of tariffs on Japanese automobiles, how the decision was highly specific and regrettably necessary due to Japan's actual violation of existing trade deals, and how much he loves free trade and hates tariffs.

I already was underwhelmed by your intellect, but if you think "Reagan liked protectionism because he did it once ," here's Ronnie telling you how badly you missed the mark.

"OVER THE LONG RUN SUCH TRADE BARRIERS HURT EVERY AMERICAN WORKER AND CONSUMER. ... THE WAY TO PROSPERITY FOR ALL NATIONS IS REJECTING PROTECTIONIST LEGISLATION AND PROMOTING FAIR AND FREE COMPETITION." Ronald W. Reagan

 

[dtrain79]

Nobody is against tariffs against China. Hardly anybody thinks putting tariffs on the entire world is a good idea.

Trump's China tariffs - which I generally but not wholly supported - were much more akin to the Reagan Japanese policy than what we saw yesterday.

And they were far more expansive than what Reagan did.

Bush Jr. hit Chinese steel imports with tariffs in connection with the dumping of product in the US market, likely to drive down price. That's probably the closest comp with Reagan, but I don't know if the Chinese were specifically violating a trade deal (as the Japanese were).

It's OK, guys. Trump rejects much of the Reagan legacy ... the party is different. You can't square their economic (or even social) ideologies. If you want to select Trump, feel free. It just seems lacking to me.

 

[dtrain79]

LOL. Quoting words and not actions. Reagan, unlike you, had common sense and realized free trade has its limits.

You really aren't very bright. Reagan's actions took place BECAUSE HE HAD A DEAL AND JAPAN VIOLATED IT. Is that what Trump just did?

If you are making an argument, you might want to at least understand basic facts in support of or against that argument. Trump's trade policies - correct or not - reject the Reagan/GOP legacy on the issue for generations. They also are a huge break from US policy as a world leader in free trade since post-WW2.

You may love this, and think it's great. Gotta be some argument somewhere in favor of that. But the argument that "Reagan did it" is profoundly misplaced and frankly stupid.

 

[dtrain79]

It always takes me about 10 posts to remember why I get no value out of this chain.

But before I depart for another couple of months, I hope DumbCoach has been tracking the continuation of the massive crime drop that began a couple of years back (when I pointed it out) and continues almost unabated to the present. Great news for America, and neither Trump nor Biden did anything to get us there (but the recession of Covid from impact on American life sure did).

Real-Time Crime Index | Nationwide Crime Data & Trends

Stay informed with the Real-Time Crime Index. Access up-to-date crime data and visualizations.

realtimecrimeindex.com

 

[tjfleck6]

This will be truly disappointing for those wishing for the economic demise of America.

Even Moses sees destruction despite past statements that the US is the envy of the world.

MAGA after years of intentional destruction requires a bit of pain. As a sportsman, there is an old expression for making gains

 

[stoneaxe27]

This will be truly disappointing for those wishing for the economic demise of America.

Even Moses sees destruction despite past statements that the US is the envy of the world.

MAGA after years of intentional destruction requires a bit of pain. As a sportsman, there is an old expression for making gains

View embedded media

Bo Snerdley and Fox trying to make the tariffs sound like a master stroke.

 

[rillaman]

It always takes me about 10 posts to remember why I get no value out of this chain.

But before I depart for another couple of months, I hope DumbCoach has been tracking the continuation of the massive crime drop that began a couple of years back (when I pointed it out) and continues almost unabated to the present. Great news for America, and neither Trump nor Biden did anything to get us there (but the recession of Covid from impact on American life sure did).

Real-Time Crime Index | Nationwide Crime Data & Trends

Stay informed with the Real-Time Crime Index. Access up-to-date crime data and visualizations.

realtimecrimeindex.com

Colorado murders up from last year, and still up almost 50% from 5 years ago. I guess we are one of the ugly outliers.

 

[JeffT818]

The simple math behind Trump’s tariffs

With the help of a large chart, the president unveiled his latest wave of tariffs on Wednesday, on what he called ‘Liberation Day’

www.the-independent.com

So Trump made up tariff rates, what a pud.

 

[tjfleck6]

Nobody is against tariffs against China. Hardly anybody thinks putting tariffs on the entire world is a good idea.

You have been constantly whining about the destruction of tariffs and now you want to put tariffs on China?

You just want to hurt the American people, Jeff, by putting tariffs on the number 1 country where we get stuff.

So, you were against the Trump tariffs but are now for Trump tariffs on the largest country.

Lots of people think we should raise tariffs on the countries around the world that are restricting our goods from having fair access.

Conveniently, you and Moses tout Reagan the 'free trader'. Free trade and fair trade go together. With so many countries, trade is not fair.

Thank God for Trump

Which countries are the nation’s biggest import partners?​

The nation’s largest goods import trading partners were China ($536.8 billion), Mexico ($454.9 billion), and Canada ($437.7 billion), making up more than one-third of America’s imported goods. Japan ($148.3 billion) and Germany ($146.6 billion) rounded out the top five.

The US imported $4 trillion in goods and services in 2022, the highest amount on record and nearly $300 billion more than 2021 after (inflation-adjusted). Of this, $3.3 trillion came from imported goods.[1]

 

[tjfleck6]

Congrats to Uncoach for watching the Reagan speech where he discusses with the nation the putting of tariffs on Japanese automobiles, how the decision was highly specific and regrettably necessary due to Japan's actual violation of existing trade deals, and how much he loves free trade and hates tariffs.

I already was underwhelmed by your intellect, but if you think "Reagan liked protectionism because he did it once ," here's Ronnie telling you how badly you missed the mark.

"OVER THE LONG RUN SUCH TRADE BARRIERS HURT EVERY AMERICAN WORKER AND CONSUMER. ... THE WAY TO PROSPERITY FOR ALL NATIONS IS REJECTING PROTECTIONIST LEGISLATION AND PROMOTING FAIR AND FREE COMPETITION." Ronald W. Reagan

View embedded media

Why don't you HATE tariffs that are being placed on US exports? The Train take is tariffs on US exported goods are just dandy, but how dare the US impose less than reciprocal tariffs on the offending countries?

 

[tjfleck6]

Congrats to Uncoach for watching the Reagan speech where he discusses with the nation the putting of tariffs on Japanese automobiles, how the decision was highly specific and regrettably necessary due to Japan's actual violation of existing trade deals, and how much he loves free trade and hates tariffs.

I already was underwhelmed by your intellect, but if you think "Reagan liked protectionism because he did it once ," here's Ronnie telling you how badly you missed the mark.

"OVER THE LONG RUN SUCH TRADE BARRIERS HURT EVERY AMERICAN WORKER AND CONSUMER. ... THE WAY TO PROSPERITY FOR ALL NATIONS IS REJECTING PROTECTIONIST LEGISLATION AND PROMOTING FAIR AND FREE COMPETITION." Ronald W. Reagan

View embedded media

FAIR AND FREE per Ronald Reagan.

Jeff claims to be a Reaganite as do you, but neither of you could vote for Trump who is seeking the "fair and free" competition that RWR speaks of.

Time for you to saddle up with Jeff and move to the Stonedax redoubt in Venice, FL.

 

[tjfleck6]

Bo Snerdley and Fox trying to make the tariffs sound like a master stroke.

But one example within 24 hours stone. Trillions of investment dollars are already rolling in to Arizona and the USA.

I get it, you are retired and doing fine. But, Ohio turned deep red thanks to being sold out by the Deep State. Go ahead and make fun of American auto workers being asked to work OT with added employees making more vehicles in the USA. It's great for Indiana and the supply hubs around Indiana.

 

[JeffT818]

FAIR AND FREE per Ronald Reagan.

Jeff claims to be a Reaganite as do you, but neither of you could vote for Trump who is seeking the "fair and free" competition that RWR speaks of.

Time for you to saddle up with Jeff and move to the Stonedax redoubt in Venice, FL.

Trump and Reagan have very little in common no matter how much you wish it so.

Reagan did not believe in protectionist policies and warned against people like Trump.

 

[dtrain79]

Why don't you HATE tariffs that are being placed on US exports? The Train take is tariffs on US exported goods are just dandy, but how dare the US impose less than reciprocal tariffs on the offending countries?

In fairness, I actually think you know that I'm against import duties imposed by other countries. Some of these are negotiated, and I'm all for negotiating them down further and further (or if not previously negotiated, opening up those discussions).

If Donald Trump wants to engage in talks with every major trading partner on how to mutually lower import duties - and should they fail then take retributive action - that's a reasonable plan.

He did nothing of the sort. He actually supports the tariffs. If you want to defend trade wars, that's cool. But at least identify it.