RE: USA: Tariffs are TAX [eng/срп] САД: Царине су ПОРЕЗ
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
"Tariffs will certainly cause a large number of unforeseen effects that will lead to the complete collapse of the current global economic model..."
Ok. I can see how you can come to that conclusion. It's certainly possible that through the unforeseen and unknown effects of tariffs such things could come about, or could even be planned and made to happen. If there is indeed a plan to bring about WWIII in this way, this is exactly what could happen.
However, the Trump tariffs aren't the sudden eruption of tariffs into existence. All the countries that have been assessed more than the 10% base tariff have tariffs on American exports now. The US hasn't had a trade surplus in 50 years, and many of these tariffs on American exports are far larger than the 10% to 50% tariffs Trump is levying. Canada has a 250% tariff on American milk, for example. These many and outrageous tariffs didn't cause the end of the global economic system.
Other countries that don't levy such tariffs on America neither break the global economic system. So, neither outrageous tariffs nor none at all break the economic system. Then, why would Trump's tariffs break the economic system? Not for any fundamental reason due to the effects of tariffs, nor using the threat of tariffs to persuade countries to cease tariffing US exports, since no tariffs doesn't cause collapse either.
Yesterday 70 countries called the White House and stated they were ready to talk about eliminating tariffs on US exports. That doesn't sound like the end of the world to me. It doesn't even sound like a bad thing. In fact, it sound great for the Americans that produce those products, and the people that buy them. It sounds great for everyone concerned - except those whose jobs were being protected by those tariffs and the rich men that profited by putting those people to work in those protected industries - but a few less rich rich men aren't going to collapse the global economy either.
I don't think the tariffs will cause WWIII, anymore than the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand caused WWI. Cecil Rhodes and Colonel House conspired long and hard to cause WWI, and the assassination was a convenient news event they blamed all the consequences of their machinations on. I see that Trump is using the threat of tariffs to convince other countries to drop their tariffs on American exports, and that will be good for the economy, of the world, and of America. I see that the US national debt is an horrific financial burden that will destroy America and the global economy it drags down with it if it isn't paid down, and a 10% tariff on exports to America will help pay it down without impoverishing Americans under a debt burden comparable to a $100k mortgage for every man, woman, and child in the country.
The only other realistic alternative method to pay it down would be that chosen by Zimbabwe in the 1980s, or by Germany after the Treaty of Versailles, and hyperinflation that would reduce the value of the dollar to a trillionth of a penny, and that wouldn't be good for America, Americans, or anybody in a world where the US dollar is the reserve currency. I'm against hyperinflation as a route to paying down the national debt, and would much prefer that Americans simply become wealthy enough to pay it in strong dollars that the world is happy to be using as it's reserve currency, and that will take a strong economy where America is a productive powerhouse such as has never been seen before in history. It'll take that kind of production because no one has ever paid down a $37T debt before.
I'm not even hinting that the tariffs might do that, but American innovation in space, AI, genetic engineering, agriculture, and much more could well do that, and an even playing field in international trade will be necessary for that to happen. So the tariffs aren't going to make the sky fall. If the sky falls it will be because evil men planned it to fall.
Thanks!
The problem is, @valued-customer, you believe what Trump said about ‘the other countries tariffs’ – and that is not true at all. That is a bunch of hogwash that you simply didn’t try to check.
Nobody said that tariffs will cause the war – they are the first step, preliminary phase that leads to war. And the USA does not have any cards (as Trump would say) except the threat with war. It’s a desperate act that cannot end well for the USA, and maybe for the great part of the World as well.
Tass points out that most countries are offering to quickly negotiate away their tariffs. They don't want a trade war with the US. Is Tass a Trump mouthpiece? By citing Tass am I failing to check Trump 'hogwash'?
You clearly state that tariffs cause war - and directly contradict yourself - but tariffs are a perennial force in international markets, and so is war. There isn't a time in our lives that war wasn't ongoing somewhere in the world, nor has there ever been a time when there were no tariffs.
Trump didn't birth tariffs into existence. You're claiming Trump's imposition of tariffs will cause war and collapse, and completely ignoring all other tariffs you call 'a bunch of hogwash'.
The US is the second largest exporter on Earth. It's not without cards.
IMG source - Yandex.com
What I said was "...the countries that have been assessed more than the 10% base tariff have tariffs on American exports now." Tass affirms that claim. Either Tass is MAGA 'hogwash', or your assertion is false. Either way, I have demonstrated your mischaracterization of my comment as just believing Trump's statements without checking is wholly false.
An honest man, when shown he is wrong, either ceases to be wrong, or ceases to be honest. You have previously shown me I was in error, and I changed my mind as a result. It's your turn.
That does not mean Trump’s data are correct. They want to negotiate because they want to evade a clash with a bully, not because Trump was right.
Also, Trump has started tariff war during his first POTUS tenure, with his economic henchman, Peter Navarro. It is a crisis of his own fabrication.
Please find a quote. There is no such statement. Tariffs do not cause a war – they are preparation for war – first step. Can you differ these things?
You obviously do not understand the problem: As an exporter, USA needs a market, and tariffs are closing markets. Besides, as an exporter, USA exports the goods produced in other countries, like China. USA does not have production capacity any more. The main Trump’s aim of the tariffs is to re-industrialize USA. And that means they will need at least ten years and completely reformed education.
Show me where I said 'Trump is right.' I'm not going to repeat myself for a third time, but you're putting words in my mouth I didn't say. I already quoted myself to show you I didn't say what you're accusing me of saying.
No. The first step of starting a car is putting a key in the ignition. That is starting the car. They're not different things. The first step of starting a war is starting a war.
You're not even answering my comment. You're answering a comment you're writing yourself as the embodiment of opposition to your narrative and putting my name on it.
This all-round wave of tariffs will lead to a further loss of image for the USA. Pandora is out of the box and both the US and Europe are on the decline in power and meaning. The rest of the world sees it that way, if you listen to the murmurs and the constantly repeated messages from other countries outside Europe and the States.
The Empire is dying and unfortunately people don't realize that a dying giant has an impact on the rest of the world and should be allowed to shrink gracefully, so as the rest must not suffer along. The malice and unfortunately also the resentment of other states and cultures are justified, but this does not solve the problem.
The past cannot be revived and every story that has begun has a moment of unrepeatable opportunity.
It is the tone that makes the music and although the informed know and see that the USA is desperate but cannot admit it - they are not used to it - they are deprived of pardon. It is a tragedy that people allow themselves to be vengeful when it is often the case that they actually mean the governments. Or else the wire-pullers.
I do not think that the increase in tariffs will have the intended effect in the long term. Economic growth or a stable economy cannot be enforced if the kennel itself is considered weak.
I think I've stated to you before that the NWO has infiltrated into governments of the West Young Global Leaders, trained for the purpose by the WEF, to betray their people and degrade governance so that the NWO can offer to save the day.
If you don't recall me saying this to you specifically, I can dig into my catalog and show that I have been saying it for years. The list of problems, censorship, lawfare, degrading politics to the level of banana republics, mass immigration of unvetted and unassimilable hordes from countries that have suffered military destruction - by the countries accepting the migrants, BlackRock forcing corporations to use ESG phony Green New Deal programs to get business financing, state, regional, and municipal governments turning public areas into shantytowns, and letting migrants run wild without enforcing legal restraints against robbery, rape, and murder, while imprisoning indigenous people that have the temerity to raise the alarm, DIE replacing >90% of qualified hiring with minorities that have no other qualifications than their victim status, and much more, are being deliberately imposed across the West.
The tariffs aren't causing economic collapse. They're just adding fuel to the fire, and are also a tool to loot the markets that insiders informed of when they're being applied and when they're being withdrawn just used to grab ~$300B by frontrunning Trump's announcements. The Nordstream II terrorist attack required the use of highly trained Navy divers, something the Ukraine doesn't have, and the investigation didn't reveal who did it - it covered it up. Then, after Germany lost it's access to inexpensive reliable gas, it shuttered it's nuclear plants, making the lack of power for industry impossible to solve, causing it's manufacturing base to close down and flee for the US and China.
They're having exactly the intended effect. It's just not the effect they've convinced us they're producing. None of this is accidental, or stupidity. It's deliberate, intentional treason. The enemedia is screeching that the tariffs are destroying the economy, but all the stuff I just listed has done that already, and the enemedia sold all of it to us like a high class whore on a corner to eager schoolboys. The Western Liberal order - it's communities, families, and people - is being hunted down, hog tied, and handed over to the NWO on a platter by traitors with names and addresses.
We aren't helpless victims. History is bursting at the seams with examples of angry mobs of peasants armed with pitchforks and torches stringing up their traitorous overlords, tarring and feathering them, and sticking their heads on spikes. In 1672 the Dutch ate their Prime Minister, Johan De Witt.
We don't need to file our teeth to points. We can just fill our prisons with traitors instead of angry mothers that spoke out at school board meetings, and we should.
Everything you have described here is familiar to me. I meant that the tariffs will not have the effect that Trump seems to have intended. And which the uncritical supporters consider to be correct. We should first clarify among ourselves what premise we are starting from with Trump.
My assessment of him is that he actually believes in what he is ordering and that he seems to think that the dominance of the USA over the rest of the world to date still gives him certain means of power, which he is using. On the one hand, he does not want to give up this power, but on the other, it is contradictory that he seems to be accelerating what he is trying to stop.
Tariff warfare as a tool loses its meaning when the reality is such that this means of pressure has the opposite effect. The governments that, like Russia or China, have prepared for trade to be used as a weapon are finding other means of circumvention and joint agreements, they are where the US has been since the 1940s: on the rise.
Regarding these governments, I would like to ask you if you think they are following the same NWO agenda?
I do. The NWO is conquering the world, not just some part of it. The mechanisms of action the NWO applies necessarily depend on controlled opposition. They fund both sides of every war and therefore always are allied with the winner, and this same principle applies to all political contests, because they donate to every campaign of candidates that are acceptable to the NWO. We see that candidates that are not acceptable to the NWO are prevented from standing for election, as Calin Georgescu and Marine le Pen demonstrate. In Germany the AfD has now become the most popular political party, and there has been discussion lately of banning the AfD, because it is not acceptable to the NWO.
By these means the NWO advances it's agenda to rule the world through the social credit score technocratic mechanisms that are incrementally advanced one piece at a time by the various political parties and candidates that are funded by the NWO.
I see. What you are saying is that no matter who has political or economic importance, they should always be guided by NWO agenda. In other words, all those in power are only there because they are NWO “agents”?
So the controlled opposition is what might also be called bread and games to keep people busy, distracting them from other, more fruitful activities? That they keep their fingers crossed for their favorites and so on ... I know what you mean, but on the other hand I think humanity is good for surprises. But I'm not naive enough to think that there are heroes anywhere.
Yes.
Yes. We have agency to choose our actions. We can act to produce wealth, such as food, air, water, or a home. We can also doomscroll and rant about whatever we see on our fondle slabs. Doing that doesn't produce any wealth, so we must negotiate with those that can provide us wealth to attain it, and this is done by most of us for almost all the wealth we require to live. Mechanisms that enable us to acquire specie for which wealth can be exchanged, money, such as jobs paying wages or salaries, and thereby exchange our money for wealth. Centralization has concentrated possession and title to wealth in the hands of usurists, because of the magic of compound interest.
For millennia in order to attain to wealth it has been necessary to have factories and collective labor to produce bronze spears and horses. Pools of capital are necessary to acquire these expensive factories and pay collectives laboring. Since the advent of agriculture centralization has enabled tech to advance, and enable greater productivity to such centralized production. But today the decentralization of means of production is the primary advance of productivity in every industry. Smaller and smaller factories requiring less and less labor to produce wealth have today resulted in table top means of producing almost all the wealth necessary to modern civil society. Circuits can be printed on recycled PET from beverage containers using inks based on graphene oxide and metal particles. Solar panels can be printed at home using an ordinary inkjet printer.
Because centralization enables overlords to parasitize the collective production of the labor force, individual production of modern goods and services do not supply overlords with any parasitized wealth. Because this is happening across all fields of industry, the centralized production that overlords depend on for their wealth and power is deprecated, because individuals are increasingly choosing to make what they need themselves. Because the increase in productivity depends on basic physical laws, there isn't a way to capture the increase in productivity that overlords can exert. Less and less of the wealth that exists is created via centralized production that overlords parasitize for their power over us.
Eventually just by choosing to create our wealth instead of buying it with wages humanity will become immune to collective political control. Mao pointed out that 'power comes from the barrel of a gun.' meaning that whoever had the biggest, best armed gang had the power. But means of securing ourselves from violence is also technology that is increasingly decentralized. Modern security technology increasingly prevents gangs of armed thugs from having power to control us.
Decentralization is freedom. Every individual that makes their own wealth, rather than working for overlords to buy wealth from them, is that hero that frees themselves and each of us from our benevolent masters.
Based on the premise that decentralization means freeing oneself from the interests of the state and corporations, what we are currently seeing would be the struggle of intertwined power interests against the ordinary citizen. This battle is in full swing, but in terms of perception, it is a battle between the powers that be and is causing people to choose one side or the other. Without them realizing that this act alone already seals a kind of powerlessness which, because it revolves around taking a political stance, could be described as successful.
More than I have ever experienced in my lifetime, people hang on the lips of political figures and alternately cheer or demonize them. As for the act of individual self-sufficiency through decentralized means, as far as my own country and people are concerned, I am less optimistic about their ability (my own included) to make notable strides in that direction.
As we have already discussed, there must be a real low point in people's everyday lives that makes a virtue out of this need.
The idea that everything has to collapse first - healthcare, the social security and pension systems and more - in order to trigger a kind of decentralized revolution is frightening, even though it also contains an element of hope. It seems to me that historians are right when they say that the times that describe the demise of what was once familiar and taken for granted in the past also tell of the danger that accompanies such demises. In terms of freedom of expression and freedom of movement of the individual. But unlike in the past, technological progress has made it possible to create digital currency and thus a kind of basic income for people, which is a lure to subordinate themselves to whatever may come, as long as they continue to receive what they need to live. In other words: the use of decentralized production and innovation - through necessity - is not realized. Of course, I hope that this will not be the case. In the long term, as I see your vision of the future, decentralization will be the way of life and I have little desire to argue against it. So I won't.
I strongly agree, and strive to steer discussions that center on complaints about political agents and policies towards what we can personally do to insulate ourselves from those things, and how we can work together to disempower them and empower ourselves.
I confess I share all your concerns about what will drive people to secure themselves from malevolent powers. Perhaps I am a pessimist, but too often in history I see how people are driven by exigency to mob violence as a result of pernicous politics, and I would much prefer to simply thrive instead of suffering such exigent circumstances. I believe my efforts to encourage adopting such mechanisms do bear fruit from time to time, as I see people adopting them.
I appreciate very much your reticence to disabuse the zealous. You are wiser and kinder than I.
I unfortunately share that pessimism.
Just now I came back from the grocery and must tell you that the dumbness of my fellow people shocks me ever so often.
Waiting in line at the cashiers, there were three women, two before me, one behind me and the rest of the crowd. The old lady who was first, paid with her bank card and didn't get it that once in a while the automat requires to slip the card into it, instead of just scanning over it. She then did so, after the cashier told her but immediately withdrew it, before the system had time to process. She did it three times without learning. I then went and tried to help but she cried "I know!", obviously without knowing.
An old woman behind me was pulling a little hand-wagon but could not get through the narrow lane (she had not bought anything), since the woman in front of me (age around mid thirty) had a shopping cart, which she had to push forward to let her pass.
I told her: "When the other lady is done, you must push your cart forward, so she can leave."
But she already forgot - attention span about ten seconds long - and I had to remind her once again. She had put her shopping on the conveyor belt (only four things, what she needed the whole trolley for, a mystery, as there are small baskets) and gave her bottle receipt to the cashier first, whom she confused as if she had no other shopping and just wanted the money for the receipt.
When the matter was cleared up, she fumbled around in her wallet for 2.29 euros for ages and finally gave the coins. The registration already completed, she fished out more coins, which the cashier patiently accepted and then gave her back nine cents. When it was my turn and I had paid, she was once again standing in the middle of the aisle with her trolley, looking closely at her receipt.
This supermarket in particular has the dumbest customers (it is the cheapest one in this area), as it always turns out to be observed. I have now decided to go to the other stores and pay more, just for the sake of my (im)patience to watch these kinds of scenes. To my dismay, it's always my own gender who disturbs, needs extra attention, wants extra sausages, etc. etc. Guys mostly never do this kind of stuff. But maybe, I got biased. I don't know. I wonder, if I myself will behave in such helpless and annoying way when I enter a certain age. My mom outright refused to adapt to modern tech and left it to her children to support her in these modern kind of shopping and other experiences. Since she had six of us, she did well and we accepted her refusal to cope to everything new. At least, she admitted that she did not want to learn certain things and from my perspective, she had every right in doing so, after raising a family and taking care of us and my dad. But if you lack such family support, you become a nuisance for society.
Oh well, I am sorry to bother you with this personal anecdotes.
Cheers anyway, I am sure I could find examples of intelligence when moving around in more educated environments. Public space seems not to be such a place.
A cost of doing business we may not anticipate.
You do not bother me with your observations, but indeed have caused me to laugh in recognition of shared miseries, for which I am grateful.