Trump calls Germans "very bad": threatens to end German car sales

[spookyturtle 9,466]

4 minutes ago, OriZ said:

That is exactly why I am against protectionsim. And I've explained before how trade deficit actually contributes to higher GDP,  whereas a surplus means lower domestic investment which translates to lower GDP.

I thought the idea of both parties was to lower GDP? 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

30 minutes ago, OriZ said:

That is exactly why I am against protectionsim. And I've explained before how trade deficit actually contributes to higher GDP,  whereas a surplus means lower domestic investment which translates to lower GDP.

It's kind of like when they  save an animal that has no chance of adapting to it's current world, they are actually keeping nature from working. Survival of the fittest,  evolution etc. 

 

JC penny biting the dust as an example.  If you had been in one in the last year or two, you would know why 

[OriZ 3,165]

32 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

It's kind of like when they  save an animal that has no chance of adapting to it's current world, they are actually keeping nature from working. Survival of the fittest,  evolution etc. 

 

JC penny biting the dust as an example.  If you had been in one in the last year or two, you would know why 

I got a nice jacket there last year...

[OriZ 3,165]

1 hour ago, spookyturtle said:

I thought the idea of both parties was to lower GDP? 

They're good at that!

[OriZ 3,165]

This illustrates it pretty well - the relationship is retained even going further back, but it's as far back as I could find chart wise(plenty of non charted data to support it though).

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOPGSTB

[Póg mo 1,749]

1 hour ago, IAMX said:

I agree about the stupidity of bailing out the car manufacturers.. but to the bold, I don't see how.. it makes an economy more and more reliant upon the government to hold that standard up. It's obvious government intervention in an economy doesn't fix things, only makes it worse.

 

If the idea is that an economy be decided by buyers and sellers, having the government dictate winners and losers is counterproductive.

Well, I think the idea to look a little further than the end of your 👃. Sometimes letting one industry collapse, can have wider consequences than just throwing a few thousand people out of work. Any opportunity to get at Unions I suppose.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 hour ago, jg121783 said:

I don't believe anything. I stick to what can be proven. And I certainly don't go by what some anonymous source for a publication who regularly lies says.

 

I have never posted from any of the sources you listed so your argument is a red herring. No the N.Y. Slimes (the toilet paper of record) does not meet my standards for truth. They were predicting a 95% chance of a Hillary win on election night right up until results came in. The Washington Compost is no better.

I dont know who but we had two Alex Jones posting yesterday.

[jg121783 3,921]

58 minutes ago, ccneat said:

I dont know who but we had two Alex Jones posting yesterday.

It wasn't me so my point still stands despite your attempt at a red herring.

[OriZ 3,165]

1 hour ago, Póg mo said:

Well, I think the idea to look a little further than the end of your 👃. Sometimes letting one industry collapse, can have wider consequences than just throwing a few thousand people out of work. Any opportunity to get at Unions I suppose.

More like thinking long term = realizing accountability is important for the future behaviour of these companies and that there will be better companies to hire those people instead.

[Póg mo 1,749]

Just now, OriZ said:

More like thinking long term = realizing accountability is important for the future behaviour of these companies and that there will be better companies to hire those people instead.

Sure, that is very easy for you to say. How about Wall Street accountability first, and we can talk about punishing blue collar workers. 

[IAMX 3,055]

23 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

Sure, that is very easy for you to say. How about Wall Street accountability first, and we can talk about punishing blue collar workers. 

As rich CEO's descend from their golden parachutes from the bailouts, anonymous member of the internet worries about the blue collar workers.

[Póg mo 1,749]

Just now, IAMX said:

As rich CEO's descend from their golden parachutes from the bailouts, anonymous member of the internet worries about the blue collar workers.

We shouldn't worry about them? Or do you only care about the rich? Donald Trump, everyone's favorite outsiderdoes not seem to mind his Goldman Sachs friends, funny how quickly he changed his tune there.

[IAMX 3,055]

4 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

We shouldn't worry about them? Or do you only care about the rich? Donald Trump, everyone's favorite outsiderdoes not seem to mind his Goldman Sachs friends, funny how quickly he changed his tune there.

Lets just put it this way, the CEO would have received no golden parachute (the reward for sucking at his job), company would have filed Chapter 11 to pay off their debts, and would still have working production. But sure, let Uncle Sam pay the rich guy's golden parachute.. we iz doing it for da workur.

Edited May 27, 2017 by IAMX

[OriZ 3,165]

1 hour ago, Póg mo said:

Sure, that is very easy for you to say. How about Wall Street accountability first, and we can talk about punishing blue collar workers. 

Turning this into punishing blue collar workers is exactly what "the left" likes to do(to borrow iamx's words, you left me no choice) because it makes it easier to ignore the real issue. This is not the issue at hand, so stick with the topic. Anyone who knows me knows I also don't support bailing out the banks. In fact, I support 0 bailouts whatsoever, wherever.

[OriZ 3,165]

47 minutes ago, IAMX said:

As rich CEO's descend from their golden parachutes from the bailouts, anonymous member of the internet worries about the blue collar workers.

smh.