Donald J. Trump (For everyone else)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
They are, but they were in the first term as well.
And they were by Bush as well.
65-23 disapproval of Bush in Germani in august 2001
Basically europeans in particular are far to the left of americans so they are repulsed by any republican en masse. What is "center-right" in europe is a moderate democrat in the USA.
People are not all like you Luciom .
People can hate for different reason then a left or right arguments .
Sounds crazy I know but it’s true .
Now if you want to promote that gwb and trump are stellar example of competent and smart people , fine .
But I suspect many people just dislike incompetence and idiot , regardless they are right or left .
People are not all like you Luciom .
People can hate for different reason then a left or right arguments .
Sounds crazy I know but it’s true .
Now if you want to promote that gwb and trump are stellar example of competent and smart people , fine .
But I suspect many people just dislike incompetence and idiot , regardless they are right or left .
Montreal my claim is that if the president was Rubio or De Santis, the approval rate in Europe would be almost the same as Trump approval rate.
I don't know if rococo agrees, but I am curious about his opinion about it.
what I know is that almost everyone in this forum would dislike Rubio or De Santis ig he dislikes Trump and viceversa.
ofc they would dislike it a tad less, doesn't matter though, you either are pro or against at the end
Montreal my claim is that if the president was Rubio or De Santis, the approval rate in Europe would be almost the same as Trump approval rate.
I don't know if rococo agrees, but I am curious about his opinion about it.
what I know is that almost everyone in this forum would dislike Rubio or De Santis ig he dislikes Trump and viceversa.
ofc they would dislike it a tad less, doesn't matter though, you either are pro or against at the end
Again look what characters you present….
Mind as well add Palin , Ted Cruz ?
again, we get all this talk about tariffs without any supporting evidence that they are fundamentally bad and latch onto a few outliers while ignoring that the fastest growing economy in the history of the world did it with the most tariffs on earth - but of course we can discard that info because tariffs are bad durrr
Furceri D, Hannan SA, Ostry JD, Rose AK. Are tariffs bad for growth? Yes, say five decades of data from 150 countries. J Policy Model. 2020 Jul-Aug;42(4):850-859. doi: 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2020.03.009. Epub 2020 Apr 12. PMID: 32834234; PMCID: PMC7255316.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
ABSTRACT
The empirical evidence on the growth effects of import tariffs is sparse in the literature, notwithstanding strong views held by the public and politicians. Using an annual panel of macroeconomic data for 151 countries over 1963–2014, we find that tariff increases are associated with an economically and statistically sizeable and persistent decline in output growth. Thus, fears that the ongoing trade war may be costly for the world economy in terms of foregone output growth are justified.
CONCLUSION
Our results show that tariffs have persistent adverse effects on the size of the pie (GDP). How do our results map the macroeconomic effects of the current trade war? On one side, global trade, industrial production, and growth have either dropped or slowed, due to global trade tensions, tariffs, and trade policy uncertainty (IMF, 2019a, IMF, 2019b). In particular, global growth has slowed from around 3.8 percent in 2017 to 2.9 percent in 2019. On the other hand, economists—those who believe that tariffs have small macroeconomic effects—point out that the tariff effects have not been catastrophic. The trade war has not resulted in a 2008-type global crisis. And, according to IMF pre-COVID-19 projections, global growth was expected to gradually pick up in 2020 and 2021. Where is the persistent output-effect?
Policy responses, particularly accommodative monetary policy stance in key advanced and emerging markets, go a long way to solving this puzzle. The IMF estimates that global growth in 2019 and 2020 (their pre-COVID-19 projections) would have been 0.5 percentage point lower in each year without monetary stimulus. Without such stimulus, therefore, it seems likely that a global recession would have been in the realm of possibility in 2019. The risk of escalated trade tensions going forward, notwithstanding the China-US Phase 1 agreement, in an environment where macro policy space is more limited than before, also does not portend small global macroeconomic effects from tariffs going forward. This round of trade tensions has also brought to the fore the damaging effects of trade policy uncertainty on business confidence and investment decisions. There are also related to supply chain disruptions, which will cumulate over time and might intensify if trade peace is delayed. All this highlights the risk of more damaging first and second round effects going forward. These risks highlight the likelihood of large macroeconomic effects going forward, and should dispel the notion that tariff increases are costless.
Haha yeah. Trump also signed what at the time was supposed to be a huge awesome trade deal with Mexico and Canada just a few years ago. Anything that requires across the board tariffs should have been addressed then. The tariffs are arbitrary nonsense.
at least when they go deregulated free market tactics there is a good chance of a fun party before it all implodes. This way is no fun at all!
It’ll be fun if you’re in a position to benefit from the swampy corruption. Some of the stuff is insane, self dealing with no ethics enforcement on an unprecedented scale.
again, we get all this talk about tariffs without any supporting evidence that they are fundamentally bad and latch onto a few outliers while ignoring that the fastest growing economy in the history of the world did it with the most tariffs on earth - but of course we can discard that info because tariffs are bad durrr
what country are we talking about?
and correlation doesn’t equal causation, this is actually a very bad argument anyway unless you can find some causal link between those tariffs and economic growth. for all we know the tariffs prevented an even faster or greater rise in the putative country you are referring to
USAID employees being directed to shred all their docs and given instructions on how to prioritize putting stuff into “burn bags”.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/11...
Must be the last gasps of this international crime agency to protect its deep state secrets.
"White House rolls back plan to double tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium, officials say"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cly412xw...
JFC he goes up and down faster than a yoyo
Also, I lolled about this news where he was intending to promote a plan for "growth" to a roundtable of CEOs and business executives. In his opening remarks.... "Tariffs having 'tremendously positive' impact, says Trump"
then....
"Media appeared to have been asked to leave roundtable event"
God damn Trump is an idiot.
Tariffs
"Tariffs are good for the economy! Make America great again!"
Rollback
"Art of the deal!"
Tariffs
"Tariffs are good for the economy! Make America great again!"
Rollback
"Art of the deal!"
Tariffs
"Tariffs are good for the economy! Make America great again!"
Rollback
"Art of the deal!"
jfc
How do you know when it's getting bad? When r/conservative starts to wonder wtf.
If you want more US manufacturing jobs lol at considering steel tariffs and havimg to be told that's a really bad idea.
Art of the Deal
I do not believe for a second that you believe that creating significant uncertainty about tariffs of a large magnitude can ever be good at anything at all for society.
If he had implemented clear tariffs, standing by them, you could theoretically claim we have to wait to see first and second order effects.
But it's 100% certain that doing this embarassing dance of put the tariff / remove the tariff / threaten the tariff / and so on is just terrible for the economy.
One theory being postulated is that Trump is intentionally creating a recession to help his billionaire buddies. Or, if you're pro-Trump, he's creating a recession to bring interest rates down so MAGA's can finance Teslas or whatever Trump tells them to like.
JFC I fully to expect the next news we hear is that Trump has put everyone on double secret probation. What an utter bellend.
This level of utter idiocy is not sustainable for 4 more months, never mind about 4 years. The US stock market will tank sooner rather than later, and the smart money will end up going to places with some actual consistency and reliability in business. And investment will similarly move away from the US.
I would hope the GOP would start to see how damaging this man is, and bite the bullet and act against him, even though it might mean electoral carnage? But maybe I don't quite fathom how debased that party is, not sure.
One theory being postulated is that Trump is intentionally creating a recession to help his billionaire buddies. Or, if you're pro-Trump, he's creating a recession to bring interest rates down so MAGA's can finance Teslas or whatever Trump tells them to like.
Yeah, that is a thought. I personally don't buy it though. I think that Trump made his money and has his TV persona and that he not really about getting richer or having his buddies get richer, not that he'd be sad if that was an unintended outcome.
I believe he actually thinks he is going to go down as one of greatest Presidents ever, and that he will be on Mt. Rushmore, and there will be statues, and his face will be on currency, etc. He has such a huge ego that what he wants more than $ is power, influence, and some legacy as a world leader.
what country are we talking about?
and correlation doesn’t equal causation, this is actually a very bad argument anyway unless you can find some causal link between those tariffs and economic growth. for all we know the tariffs prevented an even faster or greater rise in the putative country you are referring to
the only time I read a paper that convinced me tariffs could be good for the economy, it was about south Korea when they tried to develop domestic manufacturing in the catch up phase to the rest of the world after the Korean war.
I can't find the literature now but it was convincing, in the sense that without tariffs, foreign competition was too developed and finely tuned to ever allow manufacturing to become strong domestically, and that was a time when developing manufacturing was literally the only way to develop your economy at all.
but for developed countries, especially those at the economic frontier, I never ever read a single paper that made any positive ECONOMIC point pro tariff in aggregate.
plenty of non-economic reasons can be used to justify tariffs (usually in bad faith but not exclusively), but not economic ones for developed countries
This level of utter idiocy is not sustainable for 4 more months, never mind about 4 years. The US stock market will tank sooner rather than later, and the smart money will end up going to places with some actual consistency and reliability in business. And investment will similarly move away from the US.
I would hope the GOP would start to see how damaging this man is, and bite the bullet and act against him, even though it might mean electoral carnage? But maybe I don't quite fathom how deba
Massie might be the only Republican who isn't a complete coward. The rest of them are either absolutely on board with everything Trump does that's stupid, or they call him Hitler one moment and then kiss his ass the next.
They will never bite this bullet. The GOP will only go back to the regular horrible people who aren't utterly demented morons after Trump dies.
the only time I read a paper that convinced me tariffs could be good for the economy, it was about south Korea when they tried to develop domestic manufacturing in the catch up phase to the rest of the world after the Korean war.
I can't find the literature now but it was convincing, in the sense that without tariffs, foreign competition was too developed and finely tuned to ever allow manufacturing to become strong domestically, and that was a time when developing manufacturing was literally the
Kicking away the ladder by: ha-joon chang.
Also see Alexander Hamilton's thoughts on infant industries.
It was about development economics. It doesn't apply to the USA and Canada and their trade relationship.
Yeah, that is a thought. I personally don't buy it though. I think that Trump made his money and has his TV persona and that he not really about getting richer or having his buddies get richer, not that he'd be sad if that was an unintended outcome.
I believe he actually thinks he is going to go down as one of greatest Presidents ever, and that he will be on Mt. Rushmore, and there will be statues, and his face will be on currency, etc. He has such a huge ego that what he wants more than $ is po
Perhaps, but his meme coins were straight-up cash transfers (bribes?) to his wallet. No other reason to start a scam coin except to cash in.
People who aren't psychopaths have a hard time understanding how extremely extremely wealthy people could still want more money. Nevertheless, most of them do.
