Errors and Escalations
Plus: Trump vows a costlier trade war, Elon Musk's brain implant, and more...

The drone attack that killed three Americans at a military outpost in Jordan on Sunday occurred amid confusion about the approaching craft, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.
"The enemy drone approached its target at the same time a U.S. drone was also returning to base," the paper reported, leading to "some confusion over whether the incoming drone was friend or foe." It was not friendly and the attack left 40 American troop members wounded in addition to the three killed.
The three soldiers killed were Sgt. William Jerome Rivers, Specialist Kennedy Ladon Sanders, and Specialist Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, the Pentagon reported Monday.
The attack risks dragging the U.S. further into the chaos that's engulfed much of the Middle East in the months since Hamas' October attack on Israel. As Reason's Robby Soave detailed on Monday, some hawkish Republicans have unsurprisingly used Sunday's attack to call for greater bloodshed.
So far, the Biden administration seems to be resisting those calls.
"We do not seek another war. We do not seek to escalate," John Kirby, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said Monday. "But we will absolutely do what is required to protect ourselves, to continue that mission, and to respond appropriately to these attacks."
Despite (or perhaps because of) those assurances, the continued presence of American troops in the region might unintentionally tilt toward escalation.
"The attacks underscore how much these residual U.S. deployments have entailed costs and risks far out of proportion to any positive gains they can achieve," argues Paul Pillar, a fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. Pillar writes that the ongoing presence of American troops in the Middle East creates the risk of escalation and is "a needless vulnerability that ought to be ended sooner rather than later."
Former President Donald Trump wants a huge tax increase on imports from China—which means, of course, that American individuals and businesses buying those goods will foot the bill.
"Privately, Trump has discussed with advisers the possibility of imposing a flat 60 percent tariff on all Chinese imports," The Washington Post reported on Sunday. That would be a significant escalation of Trump's first-term trade wars, which saw the average tariff on imports from China climb from about 3 percent to more than 12 percent (due to a variety of changes Trump imposed, including hiking tariffs on steel, aluminum, solar panels, and many industrial and consumer goods imported from China). Studies show that Americans paid roughly 93 percent of the tariff costs, despite Trump's repeated and ongoing claims that higher tariffs are a way of extracting payments from China.
Trump's plan for 60 percent tariffs on goods from China "would harm U.S. farmers, manufacturers, and consumers (especially those with low incomes); upend supply chains and impose significant costs as businesses deal with resulting fragmentation; and create a world in which the United States is increasingly left behind on the global stage," writes Erika York, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation. "It would be an abomination."
Previously, the former president floated the idea of imposing a new 10 percent tariff on all imports to the U.S., regardless of the country of origin. Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Trump's chief rival for the GOP nomination, hit back against that idea during a Monday appearance on CNBC:
Donald Trump wants to tax every American with a 10% across-the-board tariff, costing families an average of $2,600 a year. They're already paying skyrocketing prices thanks to Biden and Trump's inflation. We can't afford this. pic.twitter.com/TQEj19tc1H
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) January 29, 2024
It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
Elon Musk claims his company successfully implanted a device inside a human brain.
The first human received an implant from @Neuralink yesterday and is recovering well.
Initial results show promising neuron spike detection.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 29, 2024
Neuralink gained approval from the Food and Drug Administration to begin human trials last year. The company's website says it is recruiting candidates for a first clinical trial of a device that "is designed to interpret a person's neural activity, so they can operate a computer or smartphone by simply intending to move—no wires or physical movement are required."
Musk has a history of exaggeration and his claims about Neuralink should be treated skeptically until confirmed by doctors and others connected to the company's work. If true, however, this could be a very big deal, as Neuralink's tech has tremendous potential to allow individuals with physical disabilities to interact with the online world, and communicate more easily in the physical world as well.
Scenes from Virginia: One of the arguments for building a new arena and luring Washington's basketball and hockey teams across the Potomac River is that the development will generate new economic activity and tax revenue in Virginia. But the proposed legislation authorizing the project would allow the stadium authority to keep all the tax revenue generated by the new development:
https://twitter.com/kristoncapps/status/1751634768557420672?t=r4IcgCefDU-U3nEP7yM7eA&s=19
So taxpayers will subsidize the arena's construction with money that could be used for actual public needs, and then the new tax revenue generated by the arena (which could also be used for public needs) will be kept by the corporate entity that owns the arena. Huh, can't imagine why there's so much local opposition to that arrangement.
QUICK HITS
- If you're dreading a potential rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, you're hardly alone: a new Morning Consult poll finds Trump leading despite getting just 44 percent of the popular vote, while a Reuters/Ipsos poll finds a majority of Americans think both Trump and Biden ought to avoid running again.
- A former IRS contractor has been sentenced to five years in prison for leaking Trump's tax returns.
- Plastic consumption tripled in New Jersey after the state banned plastic bags.
- The New York Times investigates whether taking edibles is safer than smoking weed.
- Virginia might finally repeal a law that effectively prohibits cocktail bars.
- Amelia Earhart's long-lost plane may have been located.
- Innovations in unexpected places: a beer glass that fills from the bottom?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Innovations in unexpected places: a beer glass that fills from the bottom?
Where have you been?
Drinking out of a can like an insect eating monkey.
I drink most of my beer out of these.
https://shop.eskimojoes.com/collections/drinkware/products/set-of-4-assorted-cups
They are cheap, dishwasher safe, large enough for more than a beer, durable, droppable, colorful (see it's easy to tell who's is who's), difficult to accidently tip over, mostly fit in cup holders, they are the best cups on the planet.
Drinking out of plastic cups? Are you some kind of animal?
It's the way I was raised!
I’m paid $185 per hour to complete the task using a laptop. I absolutely didn’t think it was conceivable, but my dependable buddy convinced me to give this straight forward chance after a Month she made $26,547 in just 4 weeks working on it. Visit the following page to find out additional
instructions———>>> http://Www.Bizwork1.com
I stole one of these (fitting, considering what it's advertising) and still have it:
Pisswasser
Grand Theft Novelty Drinkware
Next time someone says, "this beer tastes like piss," you can reply, "yes, it's piss water brand beer."
You do know this is a mostly Libertarian Comment section and even those who aren't might not cotton to such, right?
This is a weird link as new news we've had it at the golf courses here for about 4-5 years with the beer they fill it and a magnet pops underneath to seal it up.
Sounds like a turbotap with more cost and more points of failure.
Those have been around for at least 10 years. Maybe more.
Is this like butt-chugging or filling a hot water bag enema with beer? That could prove dangerous.
2014 called and wants its breaking news back …
Also interesting: The judge in the Trump defamation trial was a long-term mentor of Carroll's attorney and this info did not come out until after the trial.
By any means necessary. Ethics and rule of law do not apply to anyone persecuting Trump.
The biggest problems in the NYC trials have been judges pre judging facts in cases involving "conservative" entities. It isnt just Trump but also the reason Fox settled. The judges are disallowing defense against claims. Happening in D.C. federal courts as well.
Happened to Alex Jones, also, for what it’s worth. But that was Connecticut.
Alex Jones is even more fucked up. Judge told him to hand over discovery, Jones did. Judge demanded all of it. Alex said it was all of it. Judge again demands more, Alex says he handed over everything. Judge declares Jones didn't hand over everything and ruled against him.
Legtists claim Jones didn't show up to trial, but that was only for the 2nd trial for the amount owed. The first trial the Judge declared him guilty without evidence.
You're just angry that he lost a defamation case, since you think defamation should be legal.
Are you telling him what he thinks?
He made it clear in the article about Giuliani's defamation case that he doesn't think such laws should be on the books. Considering how he lies about people all the time I can understand why.
First... cite?
Second defamation costs should be based on the harm or costs of the defamation, not used to destroy political enemies.
But again you have no principles and support state abuse against said enemies. Meh.
Second defamation costs should be based on the harm or costs of the defamation, not used to destroy political enemies.
Ok, sorry. You oppose defamation laws when used against people you like.
You truly are incapable of comprehension even when small words are used. Amazing
Honestly can't cite a single defamation case I've actually ever supported. Maybe the false rape claims that caused sports teams to fire players. About it.
In those cases the trials were used to expose the truth such as on the Trevor Bauer case. And he only asked for 1 dollar.
Been busy the last couple weeks. Good to see sarc’s still an unprincipled retard.
Do you have a citation and a link to Jesse saying as much?
And do you think it's good to railroad someone in a defamation case the way Trump, Fox, and Jones were railroaded?
Honest question sarc. Are you able to read and comprehend small words?
Or is your first impulse to just be against people you hate, even when it means supporting state abuses?
sarcasmic 4 weeks ago
Flag Comment Mute User
I’m saying that some people are so despicable that I’d rather disagree with them then have something in common with them.
sarcasmic 4 days ago
Flag Comment Mute User
It’s getting to a point where the people involved and their defenders are so unlikeable that I’m finding it difficult to care.
sarcasmic 1 month ago
Flag Comment Mute User
While the latter would make me smile simply because I despise the asshats who defend the buffoon, libertarians should be pushing for more, not less, ballot access.
Last one said in defense of kicking Republicans off the ballot.
Your lack of principles has been very consistent. Your hatred of people is stronger than your ideals.
Yes, you are a despicable person who makes it very difficult to agree with anything you say because that would mean being like you.
Thanks for another bookmark.
Youre doing well again today buddy.
While I find it difficult to credit despicable people, I still do it.
You never have and never will.
If you did then you'd start by crediting Biden for these tariffs you're defending.
But you can't because you're so overwhelmed by hatred.
No self awareness.
No self awareness.
I give credit to Trump where credit is due. No one on your team can or will give credit to Biden for anything, even continuing the Trump policies that were defended with accusations of derangement.
Which one of us is self aware?
Which one of us is self aware?
Well, we know it sure as hell isn't you.
I honestly can’t help youre a moron sarc. My thoughts on tariffs are consistent and clear. Only you, shrike, and Jeff seem to not be able to understand it, but it is probably your shared anger towards me. Meh.
Also as shown this morning, you continue to project your own behaviors onto me.
"Thanks for another bookmark.
Youre doing well again today buddy."
He DOES like SPB. Maybe you should post kiddy porn to win his respect?
Fair.
"Yes, you are a despicable person who makes it very difficult to agree with anything you say because that would mean being like you."
Self-reflection not really a gift of yours, is it sarc?
So obviously you're sticking to your principles of never agreeing with anyone you dislike even if that person you dislike says something that is in line with what you like and might actually agree with. Somehow that sounds a bit petty to me. If Jesse said the sky is blue tomorrow, would you instantly try to claim the sky is pink just to be contrarian?
I have no love for Alex Jones, but that trial really was outrageous.
Yeap. Libertarians are generally against abusive actions of the state and courts. The trial was absurd. The judgment amount even more absurd.
Except for The One True Libertarian®. He seems to be just peachy with abusive courts when it's someone he doesn't like.
You’re just angry that he lost a defamation case, since you think defamation should be legal.
Since the justice system is clearly going in only one direction here, and with clear conflicts of interest and/or malice aforethought (based on the same specious logic that got Jones deplatformed from social media sites in the first place), it's a bit rich for you to use this line of argument considering your peacocking about the "moral high ground."
"You’re just angry that he lost a defamation case, since you think defamation should be legal."
You're just happy that one of your political enemies was denied the right to a fair trial. Any "libertarian" that was once in you has been long, long gone.
Defamation is a tricky wicket to me, given my stances on freedom of speech.
How common is this judges deciding on the facts before there is even a trial thing? It seems absolutely outrageous, but it's the first time I've really heard of it and I have no idea how common it is.
Judges have always had limited ability to judge on the facts. This is generally used in civil suits or facts that are clear and concise. But in the last few years it has been expanded to pre judge against even facts under contention. Often to remove avenues of defense the judge doesn't want raised to the juries. Its use has exploded the last few years.
As an example.
For the Fox defamation case the settlement came 24 hours after the judge stated his declaratory facts he had judged prior to trial. If I remember correctly it disallowed Fox to bring up statements made by democrats on 2015 regarding voting machines and didnt allow them to introduce findings of vulnerabilities on the machine found by the government.
When there’s a fact in dispute, judges aren’t supposed to weigh in at all, that’s for the presentation of the case. Judges can issue rulings of law in cases where the facts are in agreement. For example, an undisputed fact might be “Defendant X made statement Y.” Those are usually agreed upon in this kind of civil action.
The defense should then be allowed to argue that statement Y is substantially true, or that the Claimant suffered no damage, or that if the claimant was damaged, the statement was inconsequential to the damages. Trump was basically disallowed from making any of these defenses, and was summarily ruled to be at fault.
The takeaway here is that you probably shouldn't rely on Jesse for legal analysis...
And to top that, E. Jean Carroll is now trying to figure out how to spend that $83 million.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bizarre-outburst-e-jean-carroll-goes-full-price-right-over-how-shell-spend-trumps-money
Does that sound like a victim or a victimizer?
She is the same one who said she thinks rape is "sexy".
A quote, mind you.
Well, that does seem to be true for a lot of women. Rape fantasies aren't coming from men for the most part.
As much as women state they want a soft, compassionate, enlightened man who treats them like an equal partner,and devoid of so called toxic masculinity, that isn't how we evolved. The so called patriarchy didn't develop because men are evil or in a secret cabal to subjugate women. I know someone will bring up matriarchal societies, first they tend to be as matriarchal as they would lead you to believe. Secondly they pretty rare. Thirdly they tend to be more primitive type cultures and often smaller societies (not always).
Has she considered a Dead Sea mud bath for starters?
🙂
😉
...a majority of Americans think both Trump and Biden ought to avoid running again.
You, the American voter, are irrelevant to all of this.
Peace and prosperity with a side of humorous mean tweets or constant war and poverty with a side of unrelenting persecution of the American public. I can see why the media keeps "finding" uncertainty.
A former IRS contractor has been sentenced to five years in prison for leaking Trump's tax returns.
Rachel Maddow hardest hit.
People ignore that he did not leak JUST Trump's taxes.
He leaked THOUSANDS of people's taxes.
Five years is nowhere near enough. If you're going to insist people hand over sensitive info about themselves, you'd best show you're determined to protect it.
At least he didnt text from out of state to someone at J6. That's worth 22 years.
I hear the death penalty is warrented for trespassing.
Only if you are unarmed on public property.
They knocked over a fence. That is unforgivable.
Here is the video of the Ashli Babbitt shooting:
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/capitol-shooting-that-led-to-ashli-babbitt-s-death-captured-on-video-99180613572
You can literally watch the mob batter down the doors and windows of the US capitol. Babbitt was the first one through the window, which is when the officer shot her, but if she had not been stopped she would have been the first of many. If you try to lead a mob through the window of any building that you and your friends have just finished shattering, The people guarding that building are entirely within their rights to repel you by force, including by shooting you. If this had been a Target in downtown Minneapolis, you would be nominating the officer for a medal.
And the guards behind that barrier right near her?
They did not see the threat.
Meanwhile, the murderer has a history of problematic behavior covered up by his badge.
You mean the guards whose position had been overrun and were trying not to provoke the mob that had them surrounded?
Please tell me you are not seriously trying to argue that the people charged with guarding the building were watching armored doors and windows get systematically broken through and were OK with it.
"You mean the guards whose position had been overrun and were trying not to provoke the mob that had them surrounded?"
See folks, pure supposition is all these guys have left to justify the actions of Pelosi's stormtroopers that day.
Fucking fascist.
If you go into a public building and there’s a barricaded door, and you then see someone start bashing in the glass to get through, would you assume that they’re absolutely allowed to do that if they’re not immediately stopped?
Look, she shouldn’t have been shot, but stop acting like what she was doing was “okay,” because three outnumbered officers with limited equipment didn’t stop the crowd.
First, the surge of people forward didnt occur until the cops deployed gas and used crowd control ammunition.
Once inside there was almost zero violence. One smashed window does not rise to use of weapons. You see in the videos majority of protestors walking around without a hint of violence.
The justification for the response was nonsense. The cops could have started removing people. Stop defending the shooting.
Mob breaks down doors and windows to try to prevent the certification of an election.
Mother's Lament: The people defending the building (and those of us arguing that they had a right and responsibility to do so) are fascist.
I mean, I don't think any of the people involved were fascists. The mob were angry and stupid and gullible, but they genuinely believed that the election had been stolen and they got carried away trying to right what they saw as a great wrong. The people defending the building were simply doing their job. They were ill prepared and under, but they were still guarding the US capital while the election was being certified. Everybody knows (or at least they ought to) that those guards are authorized to use force, including deadly force, to defend the building.
Ashli Babbitt death was a tragedy, but it was not a crime.
There are less than a dozen people in that hallway lol. Videos exist of people walking through the hallways following guide ropes for fucks sake.
You have issues.
Is this your version of "mostly peaceful?"
Note that you have not actually disagreed with any of the facts that I pointed out. The guards were surrounded and outnumbered. (At one point you can see them flinching away from shattering glass, which does not look like they were calmly accepting the mob's actions)
The crowd was actively breaking down the door and windows (The fact that people elsewhere in the building might have been doing something else is irrelevant, other than to note that none of those people got shot).
Babbitt was in the process of climbing through the window when the guard shot her.
None of these facts are in dispute, and you sound exactly like a BLM riot apologist when you try to dance around them.
Believe the final count was 4 broken windows a few knocked over guide ropes. Want to do the math for the BLM riots where cops didn't shoot anybody?
It was pure supposition on your part and now you alter what I said to misrepresent me as well.
You guys really are pieces of work.
Watch the video. You can literally see officers flinching away from the shattered glass. The fact that they are surrounded and outnumbered is equally visible. There is no way to watch that video and come away believing that the officers were giving permission, tacit or otherwise, for what the mob was doing.
But please, even if they were cheering the mob on, please explain to me how that constitutes permission to break through armored doors and windows in the United States Capitol building to get closer to the voting floor.
I'll wait.
People flinched due to noise?? How many flinched due to firing the weapon? Should have shot back at the cop apparently.
There are two cops with machine guns who immediately show up after she’s shot. Why weren’t they controlling the mob?
Because there were rioters all over the building and they were busy elsewhere until they responded to a report of shots fired.
Almost no one denies that the police bungled their response to the protest. There should have been 10 times as many police officers present. Unfortunately, they did not, and so they could not mount a strong defense everywhere at once.
It's hard to see what Babbitt was doing. Did she have a weapon or battering ram? Why didn't the cop shoot one of the two who actually were battering the glass? Were they identified or prosecuted?
When the camera swings after the shot, you can clearly see Babbitt fall backwards out of the window.
When she was shot she was climbing through it.
If this had been a Target in downtown Minneapolis, you would be nominating the officer for a medal.
Well, he would be protecting those "cheap goods" you value, so you'd likely be doing the same thing.
I probably wouldn't go so far as a metal, but mobs are dangerous. Mobs that have escalated to breaking into buildings considerably more so.
I don't think target typically arms their nightwatchman, but if one of them had been armed and one of them had shot the first member of the mob through the window, I would have considered it justified. Just as I do here.
I realize you think that was some sort of gotcha, but all you are proving is that I have a morally consistent position on rioters and you do not.
I realize you think that was some sort of gotcha, but all you are proving is that I have a morally consistent position on rioters and you do not.
LOL, please. Considering the center-right sat on its hands during the Floyd riots, you're hardly one to be wagging your stubby finger at anyone regarding "morally consistent position."
And now we've gone to ad hominem, and at hominen directed at people who aren't even me at that.
Besides, we both know I'm right. Riots need to be put down hard, even if they are politically adjacent to causes that the left favors (BLM).
Even if they are politically adjacent to causes that the right favors (Stolen Election).
And now we’ve gone to ad hominem, and at hominen directed at people who aren’t even me at that.
Um, there was no ad hominem in RRWP's comment. Jeffy, is this one of your socks? It sure as hell sounds like you.
"Considering the center-right sat on its hands during the Floyd riots, you’re hardly one to be wagging your stubby finger at anyone regarding 'morally consistent position.' "
He is saying my argument is wrong because I (or at least the people he hallucinates are similar to me) lack the moral authority to make it.
That is textbook ad hominem. He is attacking my credibility rather than attacking my argument. (Technically, he's attacking the credibility of other people, but since he seems to have them confused with me, it still falls within the rhetorical device)
BLM riots killed 22 people. How many were shot by cops?
If you're arguing that the police should have been much more aggressive in putting down the BLM riots, I am 100% in agreement with you.
I'm arguing for what your standard is for opening fire. Apparently it is one broken glass and people walking around in a building.
Did you see in that video the 3 cops within 5 feet of her unconcerned? You think armed cops can't hold off about a half dozen people in the hallway?
Three officers, outnumbered, surrounded, and flinching away from the shattering glass do not constitute permission to break windows and break into a building, particularly not the US Capitol.
I am a little surprised that this needs to be pointed out.
Are you sure you watched the specific video as well as the other videos from inside the Capitol? You seem to be repeating J6 Committee narratives without introspection.
I literally posted the video up above. It's about a minute long. It shows exactly what I have been describing in my posts above.
Since we are discussing whether Ashli Babbitt's shooting was justified, that is the relevant video to reference.
We can argue about other parts of the riot another time. Until then, let's confine ourselves to the question at hand.
The video that shows under a dozen protestors nearby, officers unconcerned on her side of the door, while claiming the mob was threatening in other areas of the building not shown in the video but shown in video you are misrepresenting.
It's funny you bring up Jan 6th - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/former-irs-contractor-sentenced-5-years-prison-leaking-trump-tax-recor-rcna135908
"“You can be an outstanding person and commit bad acts,” Reyes said. “What you did in targeting the sitting president of the United States was an attack on our constitutional democracy,” she added.
Reyes compared Littlejohn’s actions to other recent attacks and threats against elected officials as well as to Jan. 6 defendants she has recently sentenced. She described his actions as a deliberate, complex, multiyear criminal scheme, but said she believed he “sincerely felt a moral imperative” to act as he did."
I'm sure she went easy on the Jan 6 defendants before her since they "sincerely felt a moral imperative" to act as they did.
/sarc
Five years is nowhere near enough. If you’re going to insist people hand over sensitive info about themselves, you’d best show you’re determined to protect it.
The center-right thinks it's okay for American citizens to have their personal info compromised as long as the Bad Orange Man is ultimately hurt along with them, too. These are the same people that happily sink billions into useless wars for countries that aren't even our nominal allies, after all, but simply run by our puppets for the purpose of graft.
"which means, of course, that American individuals and businesses buying those goods will foot the bill."
Or buy it elsewhere?
Reason doesn’t understand the economic idea of supplier shifts.
Protectionism doesn't work..... 🙁
I agree.
But ignoring other actors anti free market behaviors also doesn't work.
Protectionism doesn't work. But we must do it because China bad.
Exercising the Justin Trudeau "If you resist your Third World adversaries, they win" line of argumentation, I see.
Our Third World adversaries who we must prevent from... check notes… providing us with cheap goods.
How to say "I'm not actually a libertarian" without saying "I'm not actually a libertarian."
"Must consooooooooooooooooooooooooome."
When China removes tariffs, we can do the same thing. And if you legitimately believe China isn't an adversary, you're even more retarded than I thought.
He seems to be heedlessly retarded.
Of course China is our adversary, you dimwit.
That doesn't mean we can't benefit from trading with them, or that we need to copy their stupid protectionist policies. (China not being noted for their brilliant economic policies, Deng's brief ascendancy aside)
Of course China is our adversary, you dimwit.
Is that why you're desperate to keep consoooooooooooooming from them, you slack-jawed waste of carbon molecules?
That doesn’t mean we can’t benefit from trading with them, or that we need to copy their stupid protectionist policies.
"If you resist your adversaries, they win." And considering the "benefit" of trading with them has led to their ascendancy as a near-peer adversary, those "cheap goods" you salivate for are pretty much nothing but magic beans at this point.
You do realize that that horse has bolted the barn, right?
As long as Deng's reforms were in place, China was always going to be on a trajectory to be a near peer power, regardless of whether the US traded with them or not. The only question was whether they were going to trade with us, and make us richer too, or just trade with everybody else.
Now that Xi Xinping thought is the law of the land, they are very likely to follow the typical Latin American trajectory, and fade back into stagnation for a while, but that is going to be the result of bad internal policies, not US tariffs.
But we have to allow them to push costs onto domestic markets out-of pure ignorance?
If you are talking about things like quality control failures or general unreliability, those are issues best dealt with by the market and by individual firms, not by some heavy-handed government intervention. Just like for every other product, let consumers decide who they trust to fulfill their needs, and let firms decide how best to source their products. Local knowledge producing the best results.
If you're talking about industrial espionage, tariffs won't do anything to prevent that.
If you are talking about export subsidies, those are effectively a subsidy for the American consumer, so while tariffs could counteract them, it would be by making goods more expensive, which is hardly a good thing in itself.
And his ignorance is shown. China issued a crack down due to tariffs targeted against that espionage.
Your entire thesis this morning seems it is okay for other people to steal then sell you cheaper things from that theft. Truly libertarian.
You do realize that that horse has bolted the barn, right?
Yeah, the same thing is said about a lot of government programs. Funny how that's always the excuse for why they can't come to an end or change in any fashion.
As long as Deng’s reforms were in place, China was always going to be on a trajectory to be a near peer power, regardless of whether the US traded with them or not. The only question was whether they were going to trade with us, and make us richer too, or just trade with everybody else.
The relationship started long before Deng was even in charge. If Nixon and Kissinger had had any sense, they'd have let the Soviets and Chinese cannibalize each other.
Those adversaries that increase supply chain risk (see covid distuptions) and increase domestic costs from actions such as theft. The latter dwarfs the costs you use cry about regarding tariffs. Which is a strange supplication to your ignorance on global trade.
And tariffs are what, magic pixie dust that will somehow make China better behaved?
Russia spent the entire entirety of the Cold War stealing our industrial secrets, and we barely traded with them at all. A tariff barrier would reduce China's economic footprint here, but not eliminated, and it certainly wouldn't reduce their incentives to steal things. That would require punishing them for specific bad behavior with seizures, targeted tariffs, or selective embargoes. Slapping a mercantilist tariff on everything achieves none of that.
Plus, supply chain risk is a problem, but it is a problem everywhere we do business abroad (and I've had supply chain problems with items produced in California). It's also something that individual companies have the responsibility to mitigate. Traditionally, libertarians are not in favor of broad-based government solutions to problems that can and should be taken care of at the level of the individual firm.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/five-things-to-know-about-chinas-promised-crackdown-on-intellectual-property-theft-2019-11-25
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2021-02/26/c_139769631.htm
Ignorance is the trait i most often see from the part time bumper sticker libertarians here. Mostly used to justify bad actors in other countries for some reason.
I might be out of the loop here, do you mean like IP theft or something?
State sponsored corporate espionage for starters. Couple years back a bunch of Chinese Nationals were caught going into farmers fields and digging up GMO seeds, which they then sent back to China to reverse engineer. The literally were going into the fields after planting and digging up the seeds. So trespass and literal theft.
Mostly these were test plots, so the seeds hadn't been approved for general use yet. China was also banning the importation of any crops produced by American GMOs, while literally stealing seeds so they could produce their own GMO crops with our products.
It is one of the pieces of theft as mentioned by soldier medic. But the secondary cost in the increase security costs of business to counter state sponsored theft. This leads to increased domestic costs and a reduction on spending on things like research and development. The security costs of business protecting from corporate espionage is once again much larger than the costs of tariffs.
Most of the no tariffs ever crowd ignores this. They advocate harming domestic companies by ignoring anti market actions from China. No different from legalizing fences of stolen property simply because a thief can sell stolen product cheaper.
Corporate espionage is corporate espionage. Weather done by China or not. I would think that Monsanto would still pay for security of it's experimental GMO patents regardless.
The US investigates domestic espionage.
For state relations they mostly do not, it is generally handled in the trade market or appeals to WTO. China has a long history of ignoring WTO decisions, hence trade restrictions from those actions.
When growing foundational seeds or field level trials, you're talking tens of thousands if not more acres across multiple states, with multiple different contractors (these aren't Monsanto owned field at this level, they're contracting with actual farmers by this point most of the time). No, security is practically impossible.
Also, a lot of the GMO crops aren't developed by the big guys they're developed by smaller biotech companies that then sell them to the big guys. So they have even less resources and rely even more on contracted farmers. Both the farmers and the biotech companies are harmed when China steals seeds from a farmers field. How would you secure 100,000 acres spread across three counties, all larger than Hawaii, because that is one of the contract farmers we used to work with when I worked for Montana State Extension.
Then that is where you are going to have to convince the people who support Trump that there is no societal benefit to protectionism.
A large part of Trump's support comes from people who used to be working class Democrats (the Dems have largely deserted them politically) who do believe in protectionism. Trump's base is not the GOp of 30 to 40 years ago.
Amazing that people still don’t get this simple fact.
At this point I just assume they don’t understand because they don’t want to. It’s hard to demonize people you understand. See my response to sarc below.
That doesn't factor into Boehm's calculus.
Or buy it elsewhere?
At a higher cost...but it's a government imposed minor inconvenience for your own good.
This concern trolling attempt brought to you by the same people pushing constant increases to minimum wages, mandatory benefits, energy shut-downs and expansive largesse through the welfare state. They can fix those priorities first before I give a shit what those lying marxists say about anything.
OK, dismiss my point as concern trolling and enjoy the calming cognitive dissonance of opposing costs imposed by marxists and favoring those imposed by Trump.
Well, the right decision would be to decouple from China entirely and end the 50-year strategic mistake begun by the Nixon administration and every other one since, but there's too many opportunities for bribes and money-laundering by the Optimates to actually make that come to pass.
If China does end up pushing our shit in during a no-kidding conflict, these same people will just become the regime's obedient commissars in the aftermath, anyway. They've certainly proved the last generation or so that they have no problem imposing their Global World Order techno-dystopian fever dreams on everyone "for your own good."
It's actually funny because in Marx's day, the argument against Marx or the proletariat in favor of free trade was that the increased productivity of comparative advantage would cause greater demand and produce greater need for wages. Interestingly, whether you agree with Marx or not, the pretense of greater productivity causing greater demand has been dropped in favor of blind "Jesus Christ is Free Trade, and Free Trade is Jesus Christ." even if you aren't free trading with Jesus Christ, you're trading with a Communist Dictatorship.
The problem is that Marx wasn't an economist or a philosopher, he was ultimately a theologian. It's really immaterial as to what a True and Honest Marxist would actually believe based on his writings, because what he really provided was a secularized Judeo-Christian worldview that divided mankind's history into a fake Oppressed/Oppressor duality, similar to God and Satan, and incorporated Hegel's belief that contradictions needed to be smoothed away to achieve a "higher" truth, but in the materialistic sense, where the Great Evil was western bourgeois capitalism, and the Great Good was communism.
It's why today's marxists aren't so much concerned about economic questions, as they are whatever particular issue can be framed in that false duality to advance the communist revolution. It's why the issue is never actually the issue--shibboleths such as "whiteness" or "systemic racism" or "right-wing extremists" or "trans genocide" are really all just avatars for the western bourgeois capitalism they hate.
That was kinda my point. Especially across borders, you can reframe Marx teachings however you like.
The issue is that the once well-defined, academic conception of free trade has been hollowed out in favor of free trade as religious doctrine.
Who cares if you *know* the US government is flushing taxpayer dollars down the toilet on EVs and if you *know* China is doing the exact same thing? As long as they're both flushing money down the toilet together and shipping each other lithium and subsidized EV technology, only good economic things can come of it!
Yeah, "free trade" has really been treated more like a totemic phrase, rather than an honest assessment of the consequences of that "most favored nation" relationship with China over the last 40 or so years.
It seemed like a good idea at the time, because the Optimates stupidly thought that "rock n roll and blue jeans" would make China the Far East version of the US, but their optimism has been shown to not be warranted in the slightest by actual events.
The issue is that the once well-defined, academic conception of free trade has been hollowed out in favor of free trade as religious doctrine.
OK. You've made this claim to dismiss opposition to tariffs. Care to back it up with evidence that this is the case; that there is really no reason to oppose Trumps idea other than blind faith?
I could as easily dismiss your argument as cultist following of Trump, but I won't. I acknowledge that there are reasons like JesseAz commonly points out to favor tariffs and assume you are making your case in good faith.
I would start by pointing out just about every so called 'free trade' agreement, NAFTA, the Pacific trade pact, the Eurozone, isn't actually free trade but managed trade, with slightly less regulations than without those agreements.
Yeap. People seem to ignore this fact about "free trade" agreements.
Further, there has almost never been a true free trade society in history, especially modern history. The closest was probably the Dutch Republic during the late pre-modern, early modern period, but even then, there were restrictions (especially of the spice trade). The Hanseatic League also had freer trade within the league but definitely managed trade outside the league. Imperial England was more a mercantile society than a true free trade society. In fact, I would argue we have never moved past mercantilism, as much as we pretend we're free trade. Because trade almost always is managed to some degree by the state. The Dutch Republic was the closest we've ever come, and it still fell short.
Thanks. It seems you are more educated on the history of trade than I am and I appreciate the information. I don't disagree with any of what you wrote, but I'm not sure I'm getting your point.
Is it that since we've never had free trade, we don't really know how/if it works?
Or is that free trade doesn't work because it's impossible to achieve?
Or something else?
A little of both. We don't truly understand free trade, and realistically, it probably will never be achieved. It's game theory. While true free trade would likely benefit both parties, party A can actually receive benefits of party B allows free trade but Party A restricts import trade from Party B. This would disadvantage Party B (less markets or harder markets for its goods) while benefitting Party A (free access to Party B's markets while decreasing competition for Party B's goods in Party A's domain). Party B has two options, accept the state as it is, which likely makes its producers less competitive which in turn will cause it's producers to reduce or go out of business, reducing it's economic viability, or retaliate against Party A. The lie that's been sold to the west is that we can replace manufacturing based economy with service based economy. A service based economy benefits a much smaller portion of the people than a manufacturing based or a mixed base economy. Additionally, a service based economy tends to be less stable and more susceptible to shocks than a manufacturing based society. So, while average income and buying power has increased, people are less financially secure than in the past.
Yes, we get cheap shit from China, so we can buy more cheap shit, but our finances tend to be less secure. And there tends to be a corresponding decrease in the middle class, especially the blue collar middle class. As the middle class hollows out there is a corresponding diminishment of liberties. The poor tend to worry more about survival, the wealthy about power, but it's the middle class that tends to drive both economic and political liberty. The English Civil War was driven mainly by the "Middling" sort, a proto middle class made up of yeoman farmers, craftsman and shopkeepers. For as much as we consider (or rather are told) our founding fathers were the wealthy class, in English Society they actually belonged to the emerging bourgeois middle class of the time (and most were land wealthy but cash poor). It's because the Middling sort as early modern era England labeled them, have the economic resources to contemplate their standing in society, while not having enough political power by themselves to impact society (only by grouping together can they achieve political power).
That's where the west is now, we've largely hollowed out the middle class, as we've chased cheap trade goods in unbalanced trade agreements, promising to replace blue collar and related support jobs with a service based economy that has largely failed to replace those jobs. And we've seen a corresponding decrease in both economic and political liberty at the same time.
Further, there has almost never been a true free trade society in history
COVID, COVID regulation, tests, and vaccines were traded pretty freely. ESG mandates, like banning all ICEs by 2035 seems to be traded pretty freely. Several countries have adopted their own nitrogen bans, but I suppose those don't count because, while they ban the use of nitrogen both foreign and domestic, it's a domestic policy that doesn't extend beyond their borders, even if they're the second largest agricultural exporter in the world.
It's the same handwaving as Reason's "borders are just a figment of imagination" idiocy. They don't actually believe borders are imaginary, they just want to pretend everyone is always an unfettered good to allow the behavior they like everywhere and ban the behavior they don't like wherever they can. Then when you point out that people aren't always an unfettered good, you're the restrictionist, protectionist, supremacist, bigot monster.
Holy Crap. That's a lot of information. I appreciate the effort. I'll be chewing on this longer than this thread is alive. I'm interested though. Do you have any source suggestions or is this just stuff you pieced together over the years?
My previous post was for soldiermedic76.
QB, I can find the books again, but economic trade on a global scale has been modeled with game theory for a few decades now. They even have AI competitions where algorithms are submitted in economic trade theory. There are books on this, gave some to sarc a year or two back, but they exist. Think they are trying to rebrand the term now, just can't remember what they call it now.
But in the gaming scenarios the most conducive form of trading always comes from algorithms based on some description of tit for tat. Basically if actor A doesn't trade in a free market the correct reaction in the market is to then act against Actor A. If they become honest, they go back to trading with Actor A.
An example. Can't remember if this is one of them, just searched quickly.
https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691003955/game-theory-for-applied-economists
Thanks. I'll check it out.
JesseAZ
It's funny because I just watched a video a few days ago about the computer models that were tested to determine the best method to use in Game Theory, which was tit for tat. I'd always been in the free trade camp, but started wondering if that's wrong (or, at least, not always the right policy) after learning about the winning tit-for-tat strategy, and applying it to international trade. I'm still not convinced, but am moving in that direction. I'll need to study some more, same as Qicktown Brix, but the answer doesn't seem so simple as it once did when I was all for unrestricted free trade.
And soldiermedic76, I don't always agree with you (most of the time I do, though), but I appreciate your informed posts and obvious comprehensive knowledge of history and other subjects.
Mostly it's from extensive (hobbyist) study of medieval to early modern western history. With a little Roman and migration period history to truly understand the course of events and the evolution of the modern world. Once you start to understand the Holy Roman Empire, Plantagenet England and the emergence of the Magna Carta, the idea of common law and Germanic Constitutions, can you really understand modern world.
Well done! I have similar interests, but not to that level.
Jeffersonpaul, it would be a boring world if we all agreed all the time. Biologically speaking, living beings need some stress or conflicts to thrive (read some interesting about rodent studies were the rodents were provided what should be the perfect environment,free of stress and the population spiked briefly then began to crash, additionally, even as the population continues to shrink, the mice refused to reproduce).
One of the primary cases i point out was a Trump tariff initiated due to Chinas open support of corporate espionage. The tariffs cause China to actually crack down domestically on the theftd. Once they did the tariff was rescinded. It was an action to gender a freer market.
You’ve made this claim to dismiss opposition to tariffs.
That's not why I made the claim. Rather the opposite. Maybe I dismissed your low brow interpretation of them but that's more of an iss-you.
Marx wasn't inherently anti-free trade. He even supported it do a degree. What he didn't support was the lowering of trade barriers to the benefit of ownership and cost of workers. This was, as indicated, normally assuaged with promises of more and more efficient production producing more and more profitable labor, but today's free traders specifically don't make the claim and, as I indicated with EVs will actively advocate for the mutual flushing of goods, labor, and capital down the toilet because it means free trade, and free trade is good.
I could as easily dismiss your argument as cultist following of Trump, but I won’t.
You could, but I didn't say anything about Trump and that would be like you letting your mask slip and letting your TDS show. Otherwise, my point is just as cogent as to anything so trivial as ending all other metals tariffs to raise tariffs on China and your shift from Marx to Trump and from "Everyone who supports a tariff is a marxist" to "Is it that since we’ve never had free trade, we don’t really know how/if it works?" is just shifting the goalposts.
That’s not why I made the claim.
Deflection. Why you made the claim is irrelevant. Why don't you back up your claim instead of wasting so much pedantic effort deflecting and insulting the person that asked the question.
Let me simplify: You said "The...conception of free trade has been hollowed out in favor of free trade as religious doctrine.
Do you have any evidence to support that claim?
Chinas actions in the market also cause higher costs. I still don't get why we are supposed to ignore this fact.
China's actions impose costs. Solution? Add more costs!
Brilliant!
We don't need to ignore China's actions in the market, but is the proposed solution appropriate? Will there be unintended consequences? Will our cost of living increase?
It will kill fewer people than Lincoln did, that's for sure.
I mean the proposed solution actually caused China to act to reduce corporate espionage of China. So yes?
Also doesn't factor in the savings we will get being energy positive
So currently I pay about 20% more for domestic copper for my refrigeration lines (nearly 1 million feet last year). When the cost of foreign competitors increases, what do you think will happen to my price when 1. Domestics no longer have foreign pressure to keep the cost down 2. If other companies start buying domestic and yet supply hasn't increased?
But hey some lobbyist in Washington is making bank so why should I complain.
Seems like the proper decision would be to increase copper mining production here to make up for whatever tariffs might be imposed.
The real mistake here is that, yes, tariffs are a tax. It's how the government paid for its requirements for decades before the income tax was imposed. So if we can pay for government functions via tariffs, then income taxes should either be dramatically reduced or eliminated altogether via the repeal of the 16th Amendment.
It be great if we had more mines but it also takes building more refineries. Most copper is mined in Chile then sent elsewhere for processing. Trumps proposal does non of this. It just takes money from me and turns around and he gives it to farmers who are hurt by China's retaliation. Trump and his base's thinking on this is the same as the Dems and gas stoves - whats the big deal, you just change from gas to electric.
What's copper mined in Chile got to do with tariffs on China?
It was a reply to this comment from Red Rocks: Seems like the proper decision would be to increase copper mining production here to make up for whatever tariffs might be imposed.
Addon: My domestic copper is refined in America. Where the ore comes from is Chile mostly.
There's approximately 170 billion pounds of known mineable copper in the US, and we only take out about 3 billion a year at the moment. There's little reason to think we can't increase that, and reduce our need for raw ore from Chile.
We can probably increase it by quite a bit if we needed to. Remember, the US is also home to the world's largest deposit of native copper. Mining there only stopped due to the price of copper crashing in 1929.
I don't disagree. So we'll need to start deregulating mining and industrial plants. Need to build several power plants to increase energy capacity. You may need to build new transportation networks in order to connect the mines to refineries. Along with a hoard of new workers to fill all those new jobs (end welfare first). Then you may need to build new communities to house these workers near the new mines. 99% of which is going to take legislative action. It will take a decade at least to reshore a good portion of our industrial base. But given the regulatory hurdles it won't happen with a pen and a phone.
What Trump did the 1st time was tax imports and turned around and gave it to farmers impacted by his policy. Wealth transfers just make everyone poorer.
. So if we can pay for government functions via tariffs, then income taxes should either be dramatically reduced or eliminated altogether via the repeal of the 16th Amendment.
If this was the proposal, I'd be on board. Deregulation to reduce domestic prices would help to.
This has always been my preference for targeted tariffs due to actions of other actors. To fund away to send the fees to the markets impacted by the anti free market actions. Just difficult to do without fraud.
Even domestic lawsuits by the feds go to the treasury and not the businesses impacted.
Globalism is a mandate, a manifest destiny, unless someone places tariffs on Chinese goods, then, oddly, it blinks out of existence.
Almost like global travel and trade, which has been a thing since Magellan, is something distinctly different than Globalism; and Globalists like Boehm let the mask slip when they say things like that.
Plastic consumption tripled in New Jersey after the state banned plastic bags.
What does plastic consumption have to do with any plastic bag ban?
Plastic consumption tripled in New Jersey after the state banned plastic bags.
It’s the only thing people can afford to eat!
I think a majority of "My Strange Addiction" was filmed in NJ.
All of the stay-at-home people, relics from the Covid-era, still ordering DoorDash or similar delivery services, to their front porch, instead of going to the grocery store themselves.
ALL of those deliveries ALL come in brand-new 'reusable' bags now, due to the ban. Then they don't get re-used by the people that don't go to the stores themselves. Rinse repeat.
What does plastic consumption have to do with any plastic bag ban?
A lot. New Jersey banned not just plastic bags but paper bags as well. I found this out the hard way at a grocer while on a trip a year and a half ago. The only bags you can get there are "reusable" plastic bags that you have to pay for.
“Don’t care if it rains Or if it freezes, ‘Long as I got my Plastic cheeses!”
Back in college 38 years ago, I was singing this when I discovered a product called FormAgg in the grocery store. It was a cheese-like product made from cassein, which is the lumped-up result of milk mixed with vinegar.
My song turned to heaving when I actually tasted it! The cassein must have melded with the petroleum-based plastic of the packaging.
The product lived up to it’s name because it made me go *AGG!”
🙂
😉
they banned the bags because they wanted to reduce plastic consumption. the reusable plastic bags people are using (and not reusing) because of the ban actually use more plastic.
Why is it so damn hard to find the Roundup anymore? Why do I have to use a search engine to get there? And what have they done with Our Liz?
It is always under the 'latest' tab.
Much obliged on the tip. I'm so used to looking for "Roundup" and Liz' name, it throws me off to not see them.
She said last week that she was going to Berlin to get wasted or some shit like that.
https://reason.com/2024/01/22/so-long-to-the-man-in-lifts/
Oh, that's right.
Still, it would be great to see some X-Tweets or Intagrams of her live on the scene from the rathskeller enjoying some fine meisterbraus and schnitzel und spaetzel. Perhaps that will be when she returns.
Oooh, I know a couple of great places in Berlin for that purpose.
I've had problems finding the Roundup before, but then I discovered this link:
https://reason.com/tag/reason-roundup/
Now you don't have to search for it. (Why it's not always pinned near the top of the page, I don't know. But you'd think Reason would do that.)
Trump's plan for 60 percent tariffs on goods from China "would harm U.S. farmers, manufacturers, and consumers (especially those with low incomes); upend supply chains and impose significant costs as businesses deal with resulting fragmentation; and create a world in which the United States is increasingly left behind on the global stage," writes Erika York, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation. "It would be an abomination."
The Tax Foundation just outed itself as a leftist organization run by leftists.
Pour victimized sarc.
C'mon boy, defend those taxes. Explain how only leftists oppose high taxes. You can do it.
Why? I've been very clear in all my comments. I'm against protective tariffs. You've been told this dozens of times, but are too dumb to understand it. Why should I repeat a strawman you created based on your own stupidity?
I don't like broad protectionist tariffs. Full stop. I dont know how to simplify this to a point you would understand however.
If it was done due to an anti free market actions by China and done with notice to end that behavior I would have no issue with it. As Chinas anti free market actions also bear costs on consumers such as with theft and requiring increased security costs that go into costs of goods sold just like tariffs do.
I'm sorry you're a moron. I can't change that.
You're against tariffs but then you justify them. Sure buddy. Whatever you say.
Thank you for proving youre too stupid to understand.
Bet you think you're doing well again this morning. Lol.
Oh I understand just fine. You're a liar who claims to oppose protectionism as you justify protectionism.
"If you hurt your enemies, they win."
God damn you’re dense as a rock.
FYI: Leftists don't oppose high taxes.
Unless it's for their 'socialist' and 'communist' buddies.
sarcasmic, tariffs are nominally a bad thing. They raise cost for everyone across the board. I think we agree there.
What is the proper response of a country to documented anti-competitive behavior (like product dumping)? Are tariffs an appropriate response to anti-competitive behavior?
Product dumping is what protectionist call one country subsidizing its exports to another.
If China wants to spend their money to make my appliances cost me less, that is pretty much pure upside for me and for the US. It's a less efficient allocation of resources overall, but since those costs are born by the Chinese, complaining about it is a little bit like complaining that the sun does too good of a job of competing with domestic lightbulb manufacturers.
"Who cares if we get cheap goods off of free labor, it's just black people and Chinamen. Complaining about it is like complaining about a fundamental axiomatic truth like the sun rising. They just always will be exploited and there's nothing anybody can do about it, amiright?" - Heedless
If you want to prevent US businesses from doing business with slave owners, Then we should pass a law outlawing that.
Oh wait, we did: S.3578 - Slave-Free Business Certification Act of 2022
I'm still waiting to hear how tariffs, applied indiscriminately to ethical and unethical Chinese businesses alike are going to make China more free.
Let's be real though, you could give two shits about the conditions under which the Chinese labor. You favor tariffs for mercantilist economic reasons. The problem is that those reasons fall apart under any sort of close scrutiny, so you are attempting to deflect by screaming "racism."
How very woke you.
I didn’t say anything about slave owners.
Oh wait, we did: S.3578 – Slave-Free Business Certification Act of 2022
OK, it restricts trade, are you opposed? Or is this the sort of situation where you pretend you’re better than everyone else because you’re a classy $1000 paid whore not some cheap $20 hooker?
You favor tariffs for mercantilist economic reasons.
Ah, $20 hooker pretending to be a classy $1000 paid whore it is… and you favor “free trade” for foreign mercantilist reasons as well. It’s not like you’re busting up dockworkers unions, getting rid of pesky slave regulations, and chasing corrupt Chinese officials out of anywhere to allow *individuals* to ship stuff to and from China more freely. You’re acting on behalf of import/export businesses on both ends, while using the term “free” to make it seem like you care about individuals or are getting something for nothing.
To wit, yeah, I wouldn’t be the first American to toss tea in the harbor for pro-domestic, anti-foreign mercantilist reasons.
And the costs born by domestic companies that China steals from, no big deal, you got yours.
Simpleton style of economics and liberty.
The New York Times investigates whether taking edibles is safer than smoking weed.
Not safer for your hips. Am I right, uh, fellas?
I got neurolink installed. Not sure what the big deal is, has worked great besides this sudden urge to buy a Tesla.
No wonder they don’t bother advertising.
Are you telling us resistance is futile?
You will be assimilated.
No, resistance is voltage divided by current.
Ohm my goodness.
A shocking revelation
I'm in my "Quiet Place" meditating on this. Ooooooohm!
🙂
😉
Virginia might finally repeal a law that effectively prohibits cocktail bars.
Luring journalists away from cocktail parties???
Maybe Emma will finally be able to get a drink.
I hope not. Her positions are dumb enough without alcohol.
"Amelia Earhart's long-lost plane may have been located."
Can someone with internet savvy post a link to this un-paywalled? Thank you.
So this is what, the 14th time it has been found?
Yeah, this is a “stop me if you’ve this one,” sort of headline.
Next robby will tell us that researchers have made a new breakthrough in developing an effective iron oxide battery
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13013949/Amelia-Earhart-missing-plane-sonar-images-photos.html
I'm also not willing to turn off ad-blocker lol. But thanks anyway.
https://www.npr.org/2024/01/29/1227574179/amelia-earharts-lost-plane-howland-island
Imagine how much the navigator's life must suck that HIS death is never, ever mentioned. She wasn't flying solo.
Did she crash cuz bad directions or cuz woman pilot?
He the one who got her lost, so…..
He refused to stop and ask for directions.
He wanted to see how far under E they could make it.
"The drone attack that killed three Americans at a military outpost in Jordan on Sunday occurred amid confusion about the approaching craft . . . "
December 7th all over again?
(side note: the three killed by the drone were all black men from Georgia. Does this explain Biden ignoring them?)
That explains it alright.
At this point I'm just assuming it is a false flag op run by the US government and that is why they were specifically targeted.
Two were women.
But how great is our military that can't tell the difference between a drone they launched, with its own unique transponder and an enemy drone with a starting point in the middle of the Iraqi desert? Was the radar operator distracted putting on his makeup?
They were trained not to discriminate. Didn’t realize that didn’t apply to enemy aircraft.
Goddamn funny.
"Hey I googled drones ..."
"They're droning us!"
"Commander, you have no idea! I have to put up with these bitches going on and on about nothing every. single. da*BOOOOOOOM*."
look at Mr. Biologist here.
Amelia Earhart's long-lost plane may have been located.
Courtney Love found it!
...a beer glass that fills from the bottom?
Country singers everywhere lament.
how'm I gonna get the tear in the bottom?
It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
And who has a grasp of our founding history on par with Nikole Hannah Jones. No Taxation without Representation.
The country was run off tariffs specifically for many years.
...and if they vote for him, they have representation.
Article 1 Section 7 of our Constitution says your argument is specious at best.
Congress passed a terrible bill that they have had years to repeal and opted not to.
Sucks, but that is life.
Not good for the narrative when even AP is saying how bad the NYC fraud trial against Trump is. Even calling it as standing outside of history of legal interpretation.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-2ee9e509a28c24d0cda92da2f9a9b689
Will AP care when POTUS Trumps businesses are stripped from him?
Or will they report that theft with undisguised glee?
Saw an article where they were hoping this was the beginning of his slide into bankruptcy.
How the Reasonistas can watch this happening a be cool with it certainly raises questions about their claims to be libertarian.
You still have questions about that?
Yeah but I don’t like you so I’m good with it.
— sarc
It's the law. How would you propose to change it?
In a bit of irony, Mexico is worried about illegal immigration on its southern border.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2821198/mexico-increasingly-concerned-invaded-immigrants-mccaul/
I still do not get why Biden does not offer Mexico the identical Southern border policy that Mexico itself has.
Sadly, I didn't take a picture of it, but I was in Playa del Carmen last week and saw a laminated sign (in English) stuck to the back side of some traffic sign saying "Live in Mexico! Call this number to gain residency."
I don't know if it was aimed at tourists or immigrants from further south.
Probably tourists as it's in English and in Playa del Carmen. Mexico gets fairly persnickety about those from farther south wanting to move to Mexico.
End Wokeness
@EndWokeness
Ilhan Omar tells a crowd of Somalians that her top priority is to put Somalia first and expand its territory
.
"The US government will do what we want, nothing else. They must follow our orders. That is how we safeguard the interest of Somalia." (Video)
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1751735862369346026
Who the fuck voted for this poisonous person?
Somalis living in MN.
Retarded barbarians. Like Damikesc said.
Lillian Omar deserves to be deported back to Somalia where she would be tortured and killed.
He father ran a Marxist reeducation camp. We didn't offer amnesty to the people that ran concentration camps
Isn't expanding territory oppressive colonizing?
It’s only bad when white oppressors do it.
Something something Benjamins.
Speaking of the squad,
Meet the Anti-Semitic Spiritual Guru on Cori Bush's Payroll
Nathaniel Davis, who claims he's 109 trillion years old and that Jews control the world, has received $137,000 from Bush since 2020
https://freebeacon.com/democrats/meet-the-anti-semitic-spiritual-guru-on-cori-bushs-payroll/
He claims he can summon tornadoes at will, cause earthquakes with his hate, and conduct blood rituals to bring ruin upon his enemies. An intergalactic master of psychic self-defense born 109 trillion years ago, his days, he says, are now spent tending to his crops and spreading anti-Semitic conspiracies.
Nathaniel Davis III also happens to be Rep. Cori Bush’s (D., Mo.) close friend and her highest-paid private security guard.
Davis has earned over $137,000 providing "security services" for Bush since 2020, according to FEC filings, the latest of which showed disbursements of $5,000 in Dec. 2022. Using dozens of social media posts, including photos and videos that show Davis with Bush, the Washington Free Beacon has confirmed that Davis is in fact a St. Louis, Missouri, spiritual guru known as Aha Sen Piankhy who teaches classes on how to read minds, summon mythical beings, and maintain urban gardens—to avoid having to buy food from the Jews.
I didn't know he was Jewish.
Oh, a friend for Herr Misek.
🙂
😉
So bizarre I had to fact check it. Seems she did really say that.
I think we've finally found some voters dumber than MAGAts. I bet they'll vote for her again.
The New York Times
investigatesmakes up a story on whether taking edibles is safer than smoking weed.FTFY, given their history, both generally and on marijuana specifically.
Yeah; I don't even believe the date on the top of the page in the NYT anymore.
It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
Bernie Sanders considering defection to the new GOP.
Not only do Republican voters rush to embrace a candidate who vows to hike their taxes, many of these voters defend those taxes by accusing anyone who opposes them of being a leftist. The irony...
You guys are going to have a rough time coping with the next few years.
The taxes you support are going to suck.
That’s not what I said, but thanks for lying. I’d be shocked if you said something truthful.
It's all sarc has left.
Trump - "No one needs 23 different imported deodorants"
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Why would you get a deodorant from China anyway? Do you really want a lead and arsenic content that high?
You mean with crowder exposing a child porn activists in black rock? Sbp must be upset about that
This is especially ironic as you’ve been against the Trump tax cuts because trump pushed for it. Even posting your ignorance on the Laffer curve portraying it as a Laffer line.
Your ignorance is amusing.
You also seem to have refilled your barn of straw to continue your almost exclusivr use of strawmen.
That's not what I said, but thanks for lying. I'd be shocked if you said something truthful.
Jesse lies.
Then he doubles down on the same lie.
You two are even using the same bald assertions. Truly best friends lol.
JesseAz: I oppose protectionism, and this is why we need protectionist taxes!
sarc: So you don't really oppose protectionism.
JesseAz: You're a leftist!
You'll white knight for a pedophile but hate anything JesseAz posts out of hand, even when it makes you look retarded. I think you need to take a walk and get out of your own head. Maybe stop drinking for a while.
I think he'd rather two-fist 40s instead.
sarcasmic 4 weeks ago
I’m saying that some people are so despicable that I’d rather disagree with them then have something in common with them.
His desire to troll and knee-jerk opposition to anything Trump has backed him into a corner.
That's why he'll claim that the guy who created the Abraham accords and has a Jewish daughter and grandkids is an anti-Semite because a Jewish guy gave him an analysis of Hitler's speeches, and in the next breath claim that it's morally wrong to say that the Nazis are "like vermin", because your "dehumanizing" them.
If he took a step back he'd realize how utterly insane he's become, but he can't do that because that would mean he's been played for a fool.
Plus he’s a drunken idiot so even if he did take a step back it wouldn’t do him any good.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Umm...
sarcasmic 3 months ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
Yeah, I’m talking about a guess about future tax cuts, which has nothing to do with today (there’s your lie). I’m also not saying that all tax cuts cut into revenue. The Laffer curve is backed up by real evidence. However the Republican mantra is that all tax cuts increase revenue. If that was true than 0% taxes would maximize revenue, which is absurd
Nobody who understands what a curve and a local maximum is would make such a dumb assertion as you did.
My point was that if all tax cuts are good, then a zero rate would be optimal. Reductio ad absurdum.
You, being the liar that you are, claim that by that statement I opposed Trump's tax cuts.
You couldn't tell the truth if someone put a gun to your head.
“My point was that if all tax cuts are good, then a zero rate would be optimal. Reductio ad absurdum.”
Lmao.
He doubles down on being retarded. I mean what the fuck.
So youre describing a line. Not a curve.
For as long as the government has money to fund all sorts of shit that I think the government shouldn’t be funding, taxes are too high. Get back to me when we rollback the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security, the ATF, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, Project Head Start, The Higher Education Act, The Federal Transit Administration, The Food Safety and Inspection Service, and the Department of Labor, and then we can stop to re-examine whether we still need to cut taxes.
I'm guessing he provides no quote for a single person who said a 0%tax rat would increese revenue
Of course not. Why provide any citation and link when a mere assertion can do the job?
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Nikki Haley, Trump's chief rival for the GOP nomination
Should read
Cunt rag Haley, a snake in the grass anti American globalist who is a ccp worker.
Reminder: Koch supports Haley.
Musk has a history of exaggeration and his claims about Neuralink should be treated skeptically until confirmed by doctors...
Like the experts in the public health field?
How dare you?!
OK, now I'm only 50% sure it isn't a troll from Elon to get Public Health Experts to refer to Neuralink as a conspiracy and recommend we all wear homemade foil hats.
"It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are."
Yes, I am sure that is the one and only thing they are basing their votes on.
I get the impression that many Trump voters are so economically ignorant that they think taxes on Chinese goods are taxes on China. As in China pays them. Maybe I'm wrong, but the GOP is so anti-tax that it seems absurd that they'd intentionally vote to have their own taxes increased.
There are sources for most goods that are not China and if there is not, that needs to change pronto.
Sources with a competitive disadvantage, or they'd be used already. It's going to increase prices and cost jobs. But that's ok because... China!
That disadvantage being not being supported by State money? I understand your reflexive leftist need to defend commies but at least try to understand things beyond bumper sticker level.
He can't. His entire thought process and economic understanding is based on out of context quotes, headlines, and book titles.
I'm a leftist because I oppose tax hikes? Wow.
That disadvantage being not being supported by State money?
If China is going to subsidize our purchases, why is that a bad thing for us? Or did I misunderstand?
Where do the subsidies come from? A large portion of those subsidies are funded by corporate theft from domestic suppliers. But fuck those guys right. You get yours.
How does corporate theft fund subsidies? I acknowledge corporate theft is a problem, but it seems separate from subsidies.
Let me start simply.
Is research and development a cost on an accounting balance sheet that feeds into costs of goods sold?
"I understand your reflexive leftist need to defend commies"
But don't you dare say communists (or Nazis) are "like vermin". That's dEhUmAniZinG language and Sarcasmic won't stand for it.
Yes, not being slave labor-driven is an economic disadvantage for plenty of companies. You have a point there.
Sarcasmic: Slavery had its benefits we do not pay enough attention to!
Agreed. Find more sources, but according to the story:
"Previously, the former president floated the idea of imposing a new 10 percent tariff on all imports to the U.S., regardless of the country of origin."
Prices almost certainly will be paid by US consumers, no matter where we import goods from. It doesn't seem like a win.
Not sure how that makes him any different or unusual in US history. Tariffs are how the US government traditionally raised money, going back to the Continental Congress, and even Washington's Tariff Act of 1789, mandating a 5% tariff on all imports.
Before there was an income tax and before post-Industrial Revolution global trade.
10% flat tariff is a really really stupid idea supported only by the economically ignorant. I will credit JesseAz with enough economic sense not to think it's a good idea.
It imposes costs on US consumers and will inevitably lead to a reduction in US exports as other countries erect tariff barriers against the US.
I prefer consumption taxes, including tariffs, to income taxes.
Have always said this.
But again, I also don't believe in ignoring bad actors in a market while screaming free trade in ignorance.
I prefer consumption taxes, including tariffs, to income taxes.
There are respectable arguments on both sides. However, Trump was not talking about a consumption tax but specifically an import tariff, so only foreign goods would be FAPP taxed. I doubt you would favour a "consumption tax" where only imports were taxed. And as I already noted, this would lead to the penalising of export-orientated companies as other countries inevitably impose tariffs on US goods, which would not occur if there were a consumption tax on all goods, domestic and foreign.
I also don’t believe in ignoring bad actors in a market while screaming free trade in ignorance.
China is indeed a bad actor in some areas, though its ongoing subsidies of its industries is in the long-term likely to be disastrous. And of course the US is likewise a bad actor in some areas, which is why it is on the receiving end of so many WTO disputes - though bilaterally vs China it wins more than it loses.
As a side issue, I note that Trump has evidently little understanding of international trade, else he would not have claimed that the US's trade deficit was due to bad deals and negotiations. Any trade policy he comes up with is hence unlikely to be informed. Relative to him, you're a fucking Nobelist.
Yes, but there was no income tax then.
Maybe there should be no income tax now.
This is the way.
Third strawman of the day. Hope you have it on auto subscribe.
Meanwhile you will intentionally ignore all costs born on Americans from democrat pushes on regulations from energy to cars to everything else.
Your only concern is your dislike of other people.
Meanwhile you will intentionally ignore all costs born on Americans from democrat pushes on regulations from energy to cars to everything else.
THE RED HERRING DID IT!
Fucking idiot.
I mean you could prove me wrong by showing me a criticism in any of the regulatory articles or even criticize it now. But you won't.
Because again your concern is attacking those you hate, not being principled.
Because again your concern is attacking those you hate, not being principled.
lol speak for yourself.
Point proven =)
So that's your latest excuse? Tariffs are good because of regulations pushed by Democrats? Weak. Even for you.
You understand how stupid your comments are when I clearly stated yet again my thoughts just above right? But your stubborn reliance on strawmen is noted.
At least you and shrike can live in your world of enemies and ignorance. Meh.
Again. I can’t help youre a moron.
Keep defending tax hikes and saying anyone who opposes them is a leftist.
“I get the impression that many Trump voters”
Imagine spending every day for almost a decade arguing with Trump supporters and still having to go off your own impressions of what they think? You’d have to be either very dumb, very drunk, or very dishonest. Probably a combination of all three.
Criss capps statement is extreamly flawed. Why would it bother you that tax money wouldn't go to socialist schools? They are the worst return on investment we have in society today.
How could you not tell your own drone versus an enemy drone? Wouldn't your command center notice this and also you'd have communication back and forth to control it that wouldn't register with the foreign drone, this story seems like its covering up something.
Seriously, the Iranian drones wear turbans
I had the same thought.
Cite you having a thought?
Tinfoil hat - The drone was allowed to attack, facilitating a US response. Defense contractors' unite!
this is the answer, Didn't they use the same play book in Vietnam and DEC 7 1941 and this has been the case with most mass shooters most were known well in advance to be nuts and yes even 9/11 was probably allowed to happen. I didn't used to believe that but i do now based on all the other lies our government gives us
This is right out of the playbook. Nothing increases a president's approval ratings like a new war with dead American soldiers.
Not that surprising. Unless they're in an active battle zone where everything that's not an identified friend is automatically a foe, lots of stuff shows up on radar that's neither, and they likely had a very short time to make a decision.
Shot down civilian airliners are often the result of assuming that everything unidentified is a threat.
You could ask Iran about shooting down Iranian airliners...
Dude, beer glasses that fill from the bottom have been around since at least I was in university
NEW YORK, Jan. 30, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index® rose in January to 114.8 (1985=100), up from a revised 108.0 in December. The reading was the highest since December 2021, and marked the third straight monthly increase. The Present Situation Index—based on consumers' assessment of current business and labor market conditions—surged to 161.3 (1985=100) from 147.2 last month.
Turns out record low UE, low energy prices, record stock market highs, higher JOLTS, and wage growth is making its way to the average John Doe.
BUT MAH SPITTIN' TOBACKY!
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
.....gee, inflation did not make an entry here. Weird.
Imagine that! How odd.
Remember: SPB2 dislikes Biden. He says he does so all of the time. Just ask him.
SPB2 has his tongue jammed so far up Biden's ass it makes Sleepy Joe's lips move.
Fuck Biden.
It is the mind-numbing stupidity of partisan Trump-tards who insist the economy sucks and it was glorious when Fatass was president that I hate.
Biden needs to get out of the race now because he might lose to that fat lying orange piece of shit.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
"who insist the economy sucks"
It does.
You and Joe are abnormally fond of children in inappropriate ways, so your love of him is understandable.
Gross....but understandable.
No, dipshit. The economy is better now than at any single time of the Dotard's regime.*
* The Fed has pushed interest rates higher. Obviously low interest rates are better.
Only if you're in the "elite". For the rest of us, Biden's economy sucks dead penguin balls.
https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Them-vs-Us_CTUP-Rasmussen-Study-FINAL.pdf
Yeah, $1400 checks made lazy low-lifes love Fatass Donnie.
You sound like one of these elite assholes when you talk like that. My guess is that you're either elite from one of those school/backgrounds, you work for government, or are just a stupid simp.
He thinks if he supports the "elite" he is "elite." Jeff does the same. Neither are. Both below average.
Ah, the quintessential difference between 'elite' and 'elitist'.
Like the vast majority of corporate journalists, who by and large undertook the least rigorous field of study available in higher education (and that's saying something!), and think that belonging to the second group gives them membership to the first. As is so often shown, they are wrong, yet again.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
The comment about children not denied, I’ll note.
The asshole turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
(CNN)“I think it’s very important to note that this is an incredibly volatile time in the Middle East,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Monday, before adding: “I would argue that we have not seen a situation as dangerous as the one we’re facing now across the region since at least 1973, and arguably even before that.”
Blinken's cognitive decline is about as bad as his boss. He's completely forgotten:
1979 Iranian Revolution
1980 Hostage Crisis
1980-1988 Iraq-Iran War, over 1M casualties
1982 Invasion of Lebanon, including Sabra and Shatila, and the attack on US Embassy that killed 241.
1990-1991 Iraqi invasion on Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
1991 US invasion of Iraq
2001 9/11 attack, perpetrators based in Middle East
2003-2011 US invasion and occupation of Iraq
2010-2012 Arab spring with uprisings just about everywhere
2011-present Syrian Civil War
2014-2020 Libyan Civil War
2014-2019 ISIS captures huge swathes of Iraq and Syria
2014-present Yemeni Civil War
Cut him some slack on Afghanistan, maybe not considered Middle East.
Oh wait
2005 Gaza, resulting in Israeli withdrawal
2006 Gaza
2008-2009 Gaza
2014 Gaza
2020 US bases bombarded by Iran after Soleimani assasination
Remember when Reagan pulled out of Lebanon when the shit got too real? Yeah. Me neither.
Trump claims credit for record-high stock market under Biden
.
“THIS IS THE TRUMP STOCK MARKET BECAUSE MY POLLS AGAINST BIDEN ARE SO GOOD THAT INVESTORS ARE PROJECTING THAT I WILL WIN, AND THAT WILL DRIVE THE MARKET UP,” Trump wrote in an all-caps missive on Truth Social.
STABLE GENUIS IS DREAMY HE-MAN GOD-LIKE DEAR LEADER!
The stock market is forward looking.
Yeah, forward looking to a soft landing, lower rates, low energy prices, higher GDP, bigger earnings, and manufacturing reshoring.
It doesn't give a fuck about the two old geezers running for POTUS.
The TDS-addled turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
It's not a wholly unreasonable conclusion, I remember gun and ammo sales being through the roof when everyone thought Clinton was going to win in 2016.
turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Do you dispute the quote?
Being as it's Turd, there's no link, so the whole thing is suspect.
I'm at the very least skeptical, without a link, date, or other source material.
https://thehill.com/homenews/4435862-trump-claims-credit-record-stock-market-biden/
turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
It's just a link, you fucking moron.
Have you taken your Droxy today, Sevo?
turd certainly is dishonest, but he’s got a heaping helping of stupid to go with his dishonesty. Stupid, lying, despicable steaming pile of lefty shit and proud to be!
The link he posted contained a link to the source, so it looks legit in this case. Just some typical bloviating by Trump.
Agreed. That's all it looks like to me, the typical bloviating blowharded stuff he's (in)famous for.
Must be the "stability" thing...
"But we will absolutely do what is required to protect ourselves, to continue that mission, and to respond appropriately to these attacks."
If the Iraqis are looking for a 'Yankee go home' solution, three dead soldiers and a few dozen wounded is not enough. In 1983 over 300 were killed in their sleep in Beirut. A few months later Reagan ordered the withdrawal of all US service persons remaining in Lebanon. Three dead, and the US response is the huffing and puffing of assholes like Kirby. Three hundred dead and it's Yankee gone home.
So, they failed?
If their goal was to provoke some huffing and puffing from stooges in the Biden administration, it was a great success. If they had something more substantial in mind, then 'try try again' is in the cards.
One proven way to stop these attacks, short of troop withdrawal, is to arrange a ceasefire in Gaza. The attacks have been a constant from Oct. (and before) till now. With the exception of a week in late November when, you guessed it, there was a ceasefire in Gaza. During this period there were no attacks by Syrian, Lebanese, Iraqi or Houthi militias on American interests.
"...One proven way to stop these attacks, short of troop withdrawal, is to arrange a ceasefire in Gaza..."
Scratch an antisemite, find an ignoramus.
Sevo, at least this one is in the open. It is the antisemites you do not see that are a problem.
"It is the antisemites you do not see that are a problem."
What problem? Less than enthusiastic support of the state of Israel or qualms about genocide, and you've got yourself a genuine antisemite.
Strawman, strawman, and you've got an antisemite trying to claim otherwise.
Like I said, a problem.
I tend to see them all as a problem.
They have been trying, for several years now. Drone attacks over bases in that region has been SOP for a half decade now, ever since drone swarms were used to attack Russian bases in Syria. So the bases typically use Phalanx systems and signal jamming to counter them.
It just happens that one finally got through this time.
If the US doesn't want her soldiers attacked, we already have the answer. After years of attacks, including the post Oct escalation, the attacks ceased entirely in late November with the ceasefire in Gaza.
Damn Jews, right asshole?
By all means skip over the crucial details: Beirut was an international peace-keeping force. Special Forces in the Middle East is an invasion of an unfriendly nation.
"Beirut was an international peace-keeping force. "
An especially violent and unwelcome one at that. You think maybe they should have stayed? Waiting, perhaps, for an attack resulting in thousands of dead US soldiers?
The US managed to evacuate Arafat and PLO leadership and militants from Lebanon to Tunis. Shortly afterwards, the massacres of Sabra and Chatila occurred, while the 'international peace keepers' did nothing to stop them. That's some idea of peace keeping you've got there.
No, I think they should never have been there in the first place. But a peace-keeping mission in a stable cease-fire is significantly different from an invasion of a hostile nation during a war. For the record, our troops should never have been in the Middle East either.
"For the record, our troops should never have been in the Middle East either."
Troops? Didn't you just go to the trouble to inform us they were an international peace keeping force?
I was trying to keep it short, but if you insist: neither our peacekeeping force in Beirut nor our Special Forces outpost in Jordan should have been there. We should not have occupied Saudi Arabia and then invaded Kuwait or Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait. We should not have interfered in the Iraq-Iran war or in propping up the Shah of Iran. We should not have declared Middle East oil to be a vital national interest, although there might be some excuse for the U.S. Navy or Coast Guard to protect U.S. or international shipping against pirates and missile attacks in the region.
"I was trying to keep it short"
You were quibbling over whether those killed in the ME were properly called troops or peace keepers. Anyway I appreciate your anti-interventionism and agree with it. (Except your approval of using the US navy as an international police force.)
This regime will not bring the troops home if 300 die though. They’re barely (and poorly) even pretending they care about dead Americans.
General Motors wows investors with quarterly revenue that’s about $4 billion above consensus
GM’s stock soars 9% after blowout earnings
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/general-motors-stock-soars-6-5-after-earnings-crush-estimates-a9aacf55
Thanks Obama for saving GM back in the aftermath of the Bushpig financial meltdown. You violated free-market principals in the process. But a GM failure would have crushed the supply chain and millions more jobs in the states.
It turns out TARP was a winning piece of legislation that made the taxpayer a nice profit. Too bad it took a meltdown to see it.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
SPB is NOT a Democrat. Just ask him. Sure, he spouts their talking points ad infinitum, but he is totes not one.
"Thanks Obama for saving GM"
Totally not a Democrat.
For a guy who swears he's not a corporatist he sure does like watching an arch-corporatist hand taxpayer money to businesses for free.
swears he’s not a corporatist
I'm pro-capitalism and pro-corporation. You don't know me at all.
You're a fascist for the Aryan/Christian Supremacy thing. I'm a free market capitalist (which you call a corporatist).
turd certainly is dishonest, but he’s got a heaping helping of stupid to go with his dishonesty. Stupid, lying, despicable steaming pile of lefty shit and proud to be!
Hahahahaha
Oh look at this, the racist Georgia Klansman who can't stop calling black men "lawn jockeys" and "shine boys", is calling the Canadian guy who isn't even considered white in Georgia an "aRyaN sUprEmaCiSt'. That's fucking rich.
And you're not a capitalist, you're a Keynesian corporatist who spends his days here lying about the relationship of Nazism to socialism. Also, I notice you said nothing about free markets. You didn't think even you could pull that off I suppose.
If you want people to believe otherwise, maybe stop shilling for fascists first.
But, Pluggo, on the other hand, you have this:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/great-job-biden-ups-plans-12000-layoffs-citing-higher-union-labor-costs
Keep on shilling, Pluggo.
> It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
You don't get it Reason, you're still thinking about the Old Republicans. The New Republicans, Trump and those who worship him, love themselves their taxes. They took the lesson from the Democrats and now promise to raise taxes on OTHER PEOPLE! See? When you levy new taxes on other people it's okay.
The New Republicans: Moar taxes, moar spending, moar gub'ment, make America Grate Again!
Well, we really don't have a choice between the most wonderful candidate ever and Trump, do we, steaming pile of TDS-addled shit?
Stuff your TDS up your ass. and then please, make the world a better place: Fuck off and die.
Sarcasmic already had a run at strawmanning regarding that particular section of the round up. You should get some tips from him.
"The New Republicans: Moar taxes, moar spending, moar gub’ment, make America Grate Again!"
I think the motivation here is resentment and fear of China. The taxes are meant to hurt China, putting little skin in the game, and letting American consumers pick up the tab.
the continued presence of American troops in the region might unintentionally tilt toward escalation.
"We have to be attacked over there so we aren't attacked over here!"
Unintentionally?
“The enemy drone approached its target at the same time a U.S. drone was also returning to base”
A very long time ago military organizations were faced with a difficult problem: “Identification, Friend or Foe?” or “IFF.” That problem was solved – also long ago – with electronic communications. I seriously doubt that a sophisticated Special Forces detachment did not have an almost automatic way to instantly tell whether an incoming drone was theirs or the enemy’s but whatever …
Aren't drones unmanned? It's a piece of hardware. Is it worth 3 dead Americans if it's ours?
Former President Donald Trump wants a huge tax increase on imports from China—which means, of course, that American individuals and businesses buying those goods will foot the bill.
I'm glad to see that Trump takes the NAP seriously.
Unlike Reason.
"The enemy drone approached its target at the same time a U.S. drone was also returning to base," the paper reported, leading to "some confusion over whether the incoming drone was friend or foe." It was not friendly and the attack left 40 American troop members wounded in addition to the three killed.
It's hardly surprising that when the command in chief doesn't know that he is president, similar confusion occurs throughout the ranks.
Even Democrats have had enough.
https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/article_cbfb1cd8-bf6b-11ee-87ef-8b88ffbb7ea2.html
Those are the less retarded members of the caucus, though. For the rest, what's going on is simply a matter of temporary inconvenience until they can get their Great Replacement project running full bore again.
Fetterman going off the reservation lately blows my mind. Never saw that coming.
Whatever meds he's getting or whatever treatment he got while at Walter Reed must have left him with some kind of YOLO attitude about politics. He's going to be the STEVE SMITH version of Tulsi if he keeps this up.
I saw your comment yesterday but did not respond.
Why is Fetterman doing this?
The dude contemplated suicide. Nothing would liberate a person from dogmatic bullshit like that. Plus he has FuckYou money.
turd lies. That's not a surprise to anyone who reads his constant stream of bullshit.
But it's becoming obvious that as Misek is too stupid to understand the concepts of "evidence" or "relevance", the concept of "honesty" is simply beyond turd's ken.
And that's why Republicans are blocking the legislation in the House: Democrats want to give Biden a victory (almost) everyone can support.
It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
(1) As Veronique keeps pointing out, we have a huge deficit, and according to her, taxes need to be raised.
(2) Consumption taxes are a much better way of raising money than taxing productive behavior (income, investments).
(3) These tariffs are on a single country, meaning that at most, they lead to a short term increase in prices as supply chains shift elsewhere.
(4) Voting for Democrats will lead to much higher spending and higher tax increases.
The "tariffs are taxes" arguments from Reason are disingenuous, self-serving propaganda.
Hell, I'd settle for a massive increase in tariffs if they repeal the 16th Amendment.
^^ newsletter.
Add in repealing the 17th as well. While we're at it, do we really need the 19th?
(the last one was a joke...or was it?)
The “tariffs are taxes” arguments from Reason are disingenuous, self-serving propaganda.
Especially given point 4, total sums, and actual globalist thinking and economic reality.
The whole premise of comparative advantage is that the products are desired or useful in their respective places. If the US and China are subsidizing EVs to the tune of billions in both places, then it's not a "free trade partnership" its a transnational grift and the same people who cheer on the globalism are the retards who cheer when Mexicans cross US borders, but boo and hiss when Russians cross Ukrainian borders or, before that, exercise free speech in America.
See the shorter version of your comment, by me below.
“(4) Voting for Democrats will lead to much higher spending and higher tax increases.”
You have to remember that we’re dealing with someone who’s baseline is “Democrats bad, Republicans much, much, worse.” and needs overwhelming reasons for supporting Republicans.
Does anyone seriously think POTUS Biden will do a damned thing in response to the killing of American servicemen? Biden is corrupt, and weak. A bunch of pissant camel jockeys in the desert just bitch-slapped him in front of the entire world.
And he just stands there like a stunod. American servicemen are under attack daily, and our president stands there mutely, looking like the village idiot.
How long before China moves on Taiwan?
The big problem is that we shouldn't have even been fucking around in there to begin with. Those service members got killed specifically because the Pentagon brass and Jim Jeffrey openly and proudly admitted they disobeyed a direct order from Trump to withdraw from the region, and Biden kept them in after he took office on Jeffrey's advice in particular.
The people upset about their deaths can take it up with those guys.
"The people upset about their deaths can take it up with those guys."
Three dead? Come on, nobody gives a shit. In a week the story will be as relevant as the dead SEALS story of last week.
Generally speaking, no. But I suspect their friends and family members might feel quite differently.
Are they friends of or members of the Biden family? I didn't think so. Nobody gives a shit. Even the 'Libertarians' posting here at Reason when presented with a proven measure to ensure their safety, ie a ceasefire in Gaza, dismiss the solution out of hand. Not only are we willing to sacrifice these 3 soldiers at the altar of the Israeli death cult, more will certainly join them.
"a proven measure to ensure their safety, ie a ceasefire in Gaza"
This is the type of thing trueman posts, expecting to be taken seriously.
Well, misconstrueman has admitted to posting nonsense previously.
Well, yes, the asshole certainly has:
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
"Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
During that week of truce in late November there wasn't a single attack on US interests by Iraqi, Lebanese, Syrian or Yemeni militias. You can't deny it. Kirby will sweep this inconvenient fact under the rug, but even he won't deny it.
Can you say 'anecdotal'? I can and if the asshole known as trueman had an IQ above two digits. he might. But....
Are they friends of or members of the Biden family? I didn’t think so. Nobody gives a shit.
Uh, that's the point, you obtuse commie.
No, the point is that you don't give a shit about a handful of GIs killed in Jordan, or the fate of a few dozen Jews held hostage in Gaza, let alone the Gazans themselves. It's all crocodile tears. I offer to you a proven measure to spare the lives of them all, ie a ceasefire, and you dismiss it out of hand, preferring more death and suffering.
"‘Libertarians’ posting here at Reason when presented with a proven measure to ensure their safety, ie a ceasefire in Gaza, dismiss the solution out of hand."
There WAS a ceasefire.
As late as early in the day, 10/7.
So...what happened?
"There WAS a ceasefire."
Israelis were killing Palestinians - women, children, journalists, medical staff, all the usual suspects - all through the year. If you were familiar with the Jenin refugee camp and followed the news, you would know this.
The ceasefire I'm referring to was in late November last year and continued for about a week. During this time Iraqi, Syrian, Lebanese and Yemeni militias refrained from attacking US interests. No Americans killed, no Americans wounded. I understand that this fact is inconvenient to you as it puts a damper on your despicable war mongering blood lust. But facts are facts.
Lying pile of antisemitic shit.
Wow, a week where the terrorists whose declared objective is the destruction of Israel and the West weren't attacking anybody!
How about they were simply taking time planning their next massacre, or screening to sneak into the US illegally?
"Wow, a week where the terrorists whose declared objective is the destruction of Israel and the West weren’t attacking anybody!"
If you prefer weeks where Americans are attacked, killed or wounded, weeks when no Israeli or Palestinian hostages are released, weeks when no missiles launched into Israel or occupied territories bombed, just say so. But you don't say so because you know deep down the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of your preferred choices.
The only policy that ensures the West's safety is the complete and utter destruction of Hamas. Coexistence with Hamas is not possible, by their own declarations.
Another group will pop up in its place, of course.
Even you know this...
"The only policy that ensures the West’s safety is the complete and utter destruction of Hamas"
You need to review those propaganda cue cards the Israels have supplied you with. Hamas is merely a cat's paw for Iran, the great Satan. The West's safety will only be ensured by the complete and utter destruction of Iran.
He is the village idiot.
https://twitter.com/TheFirstonTV/status/1750603779886477497
Little known fact. Earth Rider was a buddy of Korn Pop and they hung out with Joe when he had a lifeguard job on the Great Lakes. They ultimately bailed because Joe was always trying to get little kids to rub his leg hair. True story.
Neuralink's tech has tremendous potential to allow individuals with physical disabilities to interact with the online world
Is anybody else having trouble reading this in a sense that doesn't sound horribly, inhumanely cruel?
How so?
Mostly "the *online* world" part-
Good news is: You no longer suffer from locked-in syndrome.
Bad news is: You can only post to Twitter.
Good news is: We've restored your ability to speak.
Bad news is: Every time you say the letter "X" you mumble "formerly known as Twitter" under your breath.
I mean I obviously wouldn't deny willing participants, and maybe the ability to peruse Insta would be bitchin' for someone who is locked in, but the whole idea of "Sorry your legs got blown off and you can't run around with your kid but, on the plus side, we can graft a brain implant that allows you to check email and post to Social Media." sounds just horrible. And I say that as someone who thinks being a brain in a jar
wouldcould be cool.Try to imagine being trapped inside an immobile body. Any ability to interact with the outside world would be a reprieve from a living death.
See, that's where the cyber suit comes into play while removing all emotions from the subject.
"Delete! Delete!"
>>Try to imagine being trapped inside an immobile body.
Metallica did it for us.
Also Dalton Trumbo's Johnny Got His Gun (Metallica's muse for that idea.)
And then there's The Brain That Would Not Die, as riffed and parodied on Mystery Science Theater 3000.:
MST3K: The Brain That Wouldn't Die (FULL MOVIE)
https://youtu.be/xo64fnJP1qw?si=WoOmmzpur9AQVebQ
I dunno, if my options were sit around as a vegetable and do nothing but be left along with my cripplingly depressing thoughts, or do that but be able to browse some memes online, however dystopian that sounds, im absolutely taking the latter.
OK, so vegetative state, you aren't going to care either way.
Again, I understand not everyone's the same, but that sounds like ~20 min. before the crippling depression sets back in. Maybe with Youtube and Streaming it would be OK but, then if my voice box works, I've already got that shit mastered.
I meant vegetable as in sitting there not moving (you mentioned locked in), more in the loose-joking sense, than the more definitive vegetative state that some may use to imply brain death.
Any interaction > zero interaction, imo. Hope I never end up there.
Neuralink certainly makes you babble without even being installed in you.
Obviously, the plus side of this is that in a future add-on, Neuralink could hook up the brain to artificial limbs so the person is no longer "locked-in.". Duh huh!
depends on how creepy the brain slug is? pinchers and big eyes or more like a leech?
First you install the chip, then you need to be upgraded. Next thing you know, you're a Cyberman.
"Upgrading is compulsory."
Along the same lines:
Innovations in unexpected places: a beer glass that fills from the bottom?
Uh, I'm not exactly sure how a beer glass fills from the top, but it's either a way more impressive or way more disappointing innovation.
I'm sure I saw it on a Twilight Zone
A human agent fills it either way, Neuralink!
>>"some confusion over whether the incoming drone was friend or foe."
squarely at O's feet.
>>The attack risks dragging the U.S. further into the chaos that's engulfed much of the Middle East in the months since Hamas' October attack on Israel. As Reason's Robby Soave detailed on Monday, some hawkish Republicans ...
ya you two blaming the middle east on (R) is more lols than Seinfeld
>>The New York Times investigates whether taking edibles is safer than smoking weed.
still not certain we're meant to digest it in any quantity.
>>Nikki Haley, Trump's chief rival for the GOP nomination
lol if that's what your bosses still want you to call it
>>hit back against that idea
fringe interpretation
>>during a Monday appearance on CNBC:
if a former ambassador appears but nobody watches is it an appearance?
CNBC is the channel that plays on our office building's lobby TV, so it's still on air. Though, they could have been playing the same 20 minutes of footage on loop for the last several years, for all I know.
like the scene in The Game when CNBC starts talking to Michael Douglas
>>Plastic consumption tripled in New Jersey after the state banned plastic bags.
if consumption + New Jersey = Chris Christie is incorrect I don't know math.
and I'm no econ guy there are much smarter people here than me but I was led to believe China, Russia and Iran were all on the ropes until Brandon broke off the rudder and threw it in the ocean.
The first human received an implant from @Neuralink yesterday and is recovering well in the bathtub.
In exchange, his kidney is now being transported from the hotel in Mexico where the operation took place to a secret location where a recipient smoking Marlboros....
The truth is out there.
I want to believe.
upend supply chains and impose significant costs as businesses deal with resulting fragmentation; and create a world in which the United States is increasingly left behind on the global stage," writes Erika York, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation. "It would be an abomination."
Supply chains get upended all the time. Creative destruction and all that.
'Businesses deal with resulting fragmentation' aka competition bad if it threatens the big and established.
Democrat Cori Bush Criminal Investigation: What We Know
https://www.newsweek.com/cori-bush-investigation-what-we-know-1865338
Are all people named Bush stupid and/or corrupt?
1) She's a progressive democrat 'squad' member, so yes.
2) She's a democrat from St. Louis, so graft & corruption.
3) Remember what Sir Charles Barkley taught us after the Jussie Smollett incident: If you're going to do a crime, don't write a check.
The "Squad" is pure trash.
Pro-Hamas Tlaib = trash
Somalian Islamist Omar = trash
Cori Bush = ghetto trash
AOC = gets the "smoking hot" exemption and is my favorite big-booty Latina (coined by someone else)
Right. Somehow I suspect AOC is not your type and far too old, given your previous, deleted post.
You are lying.
How badly does turd lie?
Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2
April.20.2021 at 10:47 pm
“Ashli Babbitt attacked the USA much like the 9/11 hijackers did.”
That badly. turd lies.
barely as racist as usual are you slipping?
SHE RACHET!
You're deranged.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
turd certainly is dishonest, but he’s got a heaping helping of stupid to go with his dishonesty. Stupid, lying, despicable steaming pile of lefty shit and proud to be!
Her offense that's being investigated is that she hired her own husband as head of security for her campaign organization and is paying him a $100k salary.
Her defense is that:
1) He was the most qualified person for the job (after an extensive search, I'm sure)
2) He's being paid 'at or below market rates'.
3) The people investigating her are part of a 'vast-right wing organization'. (For the record, the people investigating her are the Biden DoJ.)
Seems to me to be very much like the Fanni Willis corruption debacle, without the adultery.
Additional detail: her husband wasnt actually licensed to provide security, so he couldn't legally provide it.
But I'm sure he provided some kind of 24/7 service for that money. You have to have very low self esteem and be in desperate need of money to sleep with that woman.
Are all people named Bush stupid and/or corrupt?
Yes, along with all people name Biden and all people named Clinton.
All people named Obama are probably too lazy to be corrupt.
Whoa, let's not be racist. An Obama politician can be just as corrupt as any Biden or Clinton politician. And he studied in Chicago - one of the best schools out there for this sort of work.
a question about the pic does B know where Lloyd Austin is yet?
Austin got the Neuralink implant, he's probably stuck in Pornhub.
when are you going to link to the revolver piece about the assassination attempt on our VP-elect?
Got a link?
https://revolver.news/2024/01/darren-beattie-revolver-latest-pipe-bomb-findings-have-set-the-internet-on-fire-not-done-yet/
etc...
Fedsurrection, lol. I like that.
It's definitely a bit weird to see Republican voters rushing to embrace a candidate who is vowing to hike their taxes, but that's where we are.
*facepalm*
It's not Boehm's concern trolling I mind, so much as the cheap sophistry.
Either fix the focus or turn the fucking projector off.
“The New York Times investigates whether taking edibles is safer than smoking weed.”
Is Linda Greenhouse still working there? This sounds right up her alley.
Will there be another Tax-Cut and De-Regulation Committee with a second Trump term too? I'm actually quite tired of Making China Great Again....