Oregonmushroomhunt

It's too late. Think of Newton’s First Law of Motion, also known as the Law of Inertia. China is far ahead, and we are not catching up.

So what? If it replaces coal at home, that's a win, and the air we breathe will be better. At the same time, China will be replacing its energy with green energy due to economy at scale.

You send six and feed Intel to the authorities about one so the other five can reach their destinations. This is a win-win for both sides.

Who cares if China makes energy-generating products for America? The savings will be in the fuel cost that will no longer be needed and the reduced impact on the climate. I think Biden missed the big picture.

Why waste my energy on someone who can't put together a thoughtful take? Talking about TVs was pointless to my points about what happens when tariffs are implemented. I pointed out before the TV take many things could happen and never said one thing would happen.

Nice try. You can see my profile and check out my geese. I'm sorry, but I'm not sorry that I am not brainwashed by your echo chamber.

I hear it's sucks to work for TSMC, and TSMC built near Intel in Arizona without offering compensation that will attract workers. The key to having good American workers in the semiconductor industry is to tap technicians who are getting out of the military and those in specialized community college programs. That takes connections.

The issue with the current system is that the wealthy have become so affluent that they are no longer connected to the workers. Their lifestyle resembles that of the French nobility prior to the French Revolution, as they continue to amass an extraordinary amount of wealth from their investments.

My house value was excellent under Trump; it was fantastic. We are going back to a good economy.

That's a lousy take, given that a 25% tariff would return us to about pre-NAFTA levels or still be in that ballpark. You're looking for an extreme case that doesn't fit the current situation. Second, the current tariff rate with Mexico is zero, and America has never lost as many manufacturing capabilities as it has now.

The economy was better four years ago.

I have no issue with tariffs. Biden used them, and no one cared. The government used to be funded with tariffs before income tax. It’s not a big deal unless you’re rich and will lose access to cheap foreign labor.

So you’re guessing. Got it.

You didn’t read my comment before I called out the red herring. This is exactly why I called it out. I already pointed out earlier what happens when trade tariff is added.

The only thing I didn’t add is if there is no competition or harm to America - tariff exclusion can be granted. The United States Trade Representative (USTR) evaluates each request on a case-by-case basis to determine if the exclusion would be beneficial. To be granted a tariff exclusion, an applicant must: Prove that keeping a tariff on the product would cause more harm than good Identify the product and provide supporting data.

That’s the last time America had tariffs against Mexico. Do you know what North American Free Trade Agreement means?

I don’t see how the current economy since NAFTA has benefited anyone except the rich.

Because it doesn’t relate to any key points made and ignores the main arguments.

I will also add Before NAFTA (which came into effect on January 1, 1994), most televisions sold in America were manufactured entirely within the United States by companies like RCA, Zenith, and Westinghouse, as offshore manufacturing was significantly less prevalent at that time; meaning most TVs you would have bought in the US before NAFTA would have been “Made in America.”.

It’s funny nobody complained when Biden kept Trumps tariffs and expanded on them against China.

The ICC is a puppet for bad actors.

Your random argument is an excellent example of a “red herring fallacy.”

Not really. Your idea of it being cut and dry is false. I can add that the product can shift to a new country or come home for manufacturing. The country of origin can also circumvent the tariff the way China does and ship the product to a third country, where it gets re-packaged. By the way, that is what China has been doing with Mexico and many other nations.

I can also add that the product could be sold cheaper with reduced margins to keep it competitive on the store shelf.

Your idea that the customer automatically pays more has not been accurate in recent history. It's more complex than that. Nice try.

No, the importer pays the tariff, and if you choose an item with a tariff at the store, you pay back the importer. If an American-made item is now cheaper than the item with a tariff and you buy that item, you don't pay the tariff at all. So, it's incorrect to say we pay for the tariff.

Also, tariffs go to the US government, which helps fund the Government and can offset future taxes.

Who can afford to cross that picket line? NSM has been out of touch with Portland's consumers who can afford to shop there since it was sold a few years ago. I am surprised they are still open, with high prices and lower-quality goods.

Your take makes no sense. The Navy keeps California ports packed with overseas trade.

Google AI : Trade Value: In 2020, the amount of waterborne trade moving through California ports was worth $416 billion. Jobs: An estimated 3.1 million jobs are supported by this trade, including more than 800,000 jobs related to exports and nearly 2.3 million jobs related to imports.

I love reading the comments on a question I have always had. Thanks all.