U.S. farmers say Trump’s US$12-billion China-tariff bailout not enough, may affect their mid-term votes

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-24T19:02:38.628Z

dantes:

I have the perfect solution for dealing with China.

Be better than them.

Trump hasn’t dealt with China. He’s only made it worse.

But of course you would say that.

dantes · 2018-09-24T19:37:09.729Z

Is the trade deficit going up or down?

Is a rising trade deficit better or worse?

SottoVoce · 2018-09-24T21:45:13.466Z

I’ll answer.

tradingeconomics.com

United States Balance of Trade - June 2022 Data - 1950-2021 Historical - July...

The trade deficit in the US narrowed by $1.1 billion to a five-month low of $85.5 billion in May of 2022, compared to market forecasts of $84.9 billion, as exports hit a record high while soaring prices and slowing domestic demand weighed on imports....

Doesn’t look good.

Cratic3947 · 2018-09-24T23:22:58.213Z

Notice the dems take China’s side.

I guess they don’t care about intellectual property. But, I guess we already knew that too…

Cratic3947 · 2018-09-24T23:25:18.853Z

mobiusptc:

It would have entirely removed tarrifs in Korea Japan, and other Pacific countries, would have increased trade between us and them and formed a unified body to counter the Chinese unfair encroachment.

As for the second point GOP has been in control and they wouldn’t let Obama do anything, like some small insignificant appointment for ambassador to Bahamas much less SCOTUS nominee or TPP

If Japan or Korea want free trade, they are free to negotiate with the US by themselves.

tnt · 2018-09-24T23:26:49.789Z

A bedrock of fiscal conservatism - according to Sean Hannity and Fox news - is shrinking the deficit, and hopefully someday, the debt.

mobiusptc · 2018-09-24T23:27:29.952Z

Which is irrelevant to your assertions that democrats had no plans on China. TPP was specifically created against the encroachment of China and gave smaller countries much more power to deal with it…they continued on without the US…

tnt · 2018-09-24T23:30:01.212Z

The tax cuts are exactly what exploded the deficit and debt. He had control over that. He did that.

Trump has 100% control over the trade wars - he started them. Why would you say he doesn’t have control over them?

Trump choose to engage in a race war, and then HE CHOSE to bail out the farms. That is a socialist redistribution of wealth that he had control over. Why would you suggest he didn’t?

Cratic3947 · 2018-09-24T23:32:26.757Z

mobiusptc:

Which is irrelevant to your assertions that democrats had no plans on China. TPP was specifically created against the encroachment of China and gave smaller countries much more power to deal with it…they continued on without the US…

OK, they had a plan to let them rip US off. Very large so they could hide lots of stuff.

You’ll be glad to know Trump just signed a free trade agreement with S. Korea…

Samson_Corwell · 2018-09-25T00:20:45.697Z

Cratic3947:

Notice the dems take China’s side.

I guess they don’t care about intellectual property. But, I guess we already knew that too…

Intellectual property is big government.

ImRightYoureWrong · 2018-09-25T00:45:43.054Z

peek-a-boo:

With only 51 votes in the Senate, there really isn’t anything Trump could do to decrease the debt in a meaningful way.

Hahahahaha give me a break

dantes · 2018-09-25T00:54:08.037Z

Sone people have never heard of reconciliation.

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-25T01:48:02.683Z

tnt:

A bedrock of fiscal conservatism - according to Sean Hannity and Fox news - is shrinking the deficit, and hopefully someday, the debt.

Yep! In a perfect world where the GOP had a 60 vote Senate majority, we might make some progress in that direction. However, failure to move the needle in today’s toxic partisan atmosphere doesn’t mean Trump isn’t a fiscal conservative.

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-25T01:49:09.903Z

tnt:

The tax cuts are exactly what exploded the deficit and debt. He had control over that. He did that.

Trump has 100% control over the trade wars - he started them. Why would you say he doesn’t have control over them?

Trump choose to engage in a race war, and then HE CHOSE to bail out the farms. That is a socialist redistribution of wealth that he had control over. Why would you suggest he didn’t?

You are simply regurgitating a LW talking point.

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-25T01:50:11.878Z

ImRightYoureWrong:

Hahahahaha give me a break

Soooooooooo………….

you’re one of those magic wand persons.

dantes · 2018-09-25T01:50:13.195Z

How many votes did it take to pass tax cuts?

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-25T01:50:51.443Z

dantes:

Sone people have never heard of reconciliation

Well sure they have. That’s how they got the tax cuts passed.

peek-a-boo · 2018-09-25T01:52:49.904Z

dantes:

How many votes did it take to pass tax cuts?

Couldn’t make them permanent for the middle class without 60 votes. And the budget required 60 votes as well. Without DEM support there would have been no budget for Trump to sign.

dantes · 2018-09-25T01:58:54.094Z

Sure they could make them permanent with reconciliation. If they chose to make that a priority, which they didn’t.

The biggest reason is that reconciliation rules require deficit reduction. It’s a powerful tool that they could use to reduce the deficit, but somehow have decided not to.

They don’t need 60 votes to cut the deficit.

Axxowiz · 2018-09-25T02:03:57.475Z

What was the alternatives Hillary or Sanders? Trump is not many republicans first pick but we are happy to have two Supreme Court justices when he is gone. We probably don’t agree with the Supreme Court picks, but we both would agree the Supreme Court would be differently looking if Hillary had been president.

Trump only won because of the insane size of crowded GOP primary. Was there like 5 democrats running? The GOP had so many they had to have a second debate. Jeb, Rubio, Cruz, Christie and others were vote splitting refusing to leave until it was to late and Trump has it locked.

If it has been let’s say Rubio, Trump, and Cruz we probably would not have a president Trump. Ego’s of the gop primary candidates allowed the biggest ego candidate in history to win.