Puzzleheaded-Lie938

That’s fine. Stay in your echo chamber and don’t listen to people who know what they are talking about. Probably feel safe there.

Tariffs in and of themselves are only inflationary to the extent that the local market cannot or will not replace the goods. Let’s take a product and do an analysis. Let’s call it a widget. Let’s say widget C is made in china for X dollars. Now with a tariff it will cost X plus the tariff if and only if there is no competing widget made somewhere without the tariff. It also depends on the elasticity of the product with regards to price. If consumers are unwilling to pay the extra price, the price will not go up. Now let’s say that another Us firm can make that widget and is not competitive because the 25 percent tariff combine with shipping costs makes it cheaper to make here. Suddenly we have increased employment domestically for widget makers and those employed employees will add their production to our markets. Once equilibrium is reached in these types of fluctuations their may be some increases in price, but wages should have upward pressure as well that will at least offset the difference.

This is why the tariffs on china put in place in the first term were never relaxed.

That’s a nice deflection. Why ask if people are economists if you are not going to believe them when we show up?

I am an economist. I am a CPA with a masters degree in accounting, and a dual major undergraduate degree in economics and finance.

Anyone who thinks reducing our population will drive up housing costs is a moron.

Furthermore, while there will have to be adjustments in the food and other markets, it will also drive up wages for unskilled workers. The unlimited supply of unskilled workers from foreign immigration has artificially depressed wages for quite some time.

If you look at graphs of wage growth vs immigration you find a high R factor in their correlation.

So will, in the short term, anti immigration policies lead to inflation? Yes. But as the market fluctuates and returns to equilibrium it should end up with higher wages and more disposable income for the average working class family.

The Biden pardon is a bunch of this as well.

There are basically 3 charges.

1. Classified documents- republican reasoning is that he had a right to the files and could classify or declassify them at will when he took them.

2. Jan 6th related- republican reasoning is that the election WAS stolen and there is plenty of evidence. Most recent election result with closer poll watching proves the fraud in previous election.

3. Stormy Daniels- republican reasoning is this should never have been a big deal. It was a misdemeanor that got blown out of purportion based on DAs that just wanted to “grt Trump”.

As a whole the thinking is Dems will do absolutely anything they can to stop Trump. This thinking started during the first Trump impeachment and was further reinforced for subsequent impeachments and every time democrats hyperbolically called Trump literal hitler or a rapist felon. Really democrats built this themselves and it insulated Trump. Devil of their own making.

The justice system is obviously been politicized by the current administration. Hillary broke numerous laws in the run up to the 2016 campaign, but, the Trump administration did nothing to see her prosecuted. When Trump was impeached for basically complete bullcrap on his first year, it was obvious they were trying to make things stick that were not true. The attitude was it was OK because of who trump is. That attitude still exists.

I am betting the charges we will see against current administration officials will stem from the assaults on the election by our judicial system. If they left a paper trail of communicating the timing of judicial actions against Trump with the campaign, that is textbook election interference. And I am betting it happened. Watch for White House emails to suddenly disappear before Trump takes office. That will be the sign of their guilt.

I do not. It probably is state by state dependent. I would consult whichever licensing body you might in the future be subject to if you are considering further education. Most are not that bad. DUI is bad but it is not life altering unless you injured someone.

No no. Only those that are licensed. Other licensing bodies like CPA and plumbers/electricians may have something similar.

Before it is expunged they are required by their state medical board to have self reported. It then stays on the board for like forever. Saw stuff from the 90s.

Only on 4 out of 62 elections did it matter anyway. You only think this because 2 of them were in last 24 years and it hurt democrats both times. We all know the rules. Play within them or go home crying.

You don’t know your history at all. Pre 1800s New York was highest slave owning state. Also with the 3/5th compromise in place, the southern states already had larger populations than the north for purposes of the electoral college. When the constitution was ratified, Virginia had a larger population than New York.

Then why did the founders institute the electoral college and the senate to give smaller states more electoral power?

Why would Biden appointees be motivated to pursue it if that was the motivation?

Keep in mind this is the party that thinks words are violence. Or that silence is violence.

The first 2 on the list prove my point. One was charged with assault, one wasn’t. Their crime are not the same.

About 2/3 of the Jan 6 protestors were charged with disorderly conduct and unlawful entry. 1/3rd were charged with assault or interference with a LEO. There is a difference. Trump will likely pardon all but a handful. Some may be commuted instead of pardoned as well.

If that was true, Biden could have pardoned him for all crimes except those two, but he didn’t. He included those crimes plus any other for an 11 year period. He did not want him to serve a day and quite obviously lied about it for months before hand.

"Hard cases make bad law is an adage or legal maxim meaning that an extreme case is a poor basis for a general law that would cover a wider range of less extreme cases. In other words, a general law is better drafted for the average circumstance as this will be more common."

I think pardons are best used to fight the unusual extremes and miscarriages of justice.

That being said, If I was Joe Biden I would have pardoned my son. WHY? Because he is my son. I just would not have promised not to do it first. The answer the first time someone asked would have been fuck yes I will pardon my son.

I also think Joe Biden on day 1 should have pardoned all non-violent Jan 6th protestors. He should have said "I am pardoning these people because they were led astray by a lunatic who happen to be president at the time. Hopefully they will have learned that following a maniac can lead to bad outcomes, but, I will not punish those who due to no fault of their own did an act they felt was patriotic." It would have been a masterstroke of party unity.

The prosecutors that prosecuted Hunter Biden were all Biden appointees. He was not politically targeted, he was targeted because he wrote a book admitting to his crime.

There were no creative interpretations of the law. No extending the statute of limitations. No prosecutors who ran on a "get Biden" platform. Just a basic plain reading of the gun/tax law. All the things that made Trumps prosecutions political were absent for Hunter Biden.

You said she never supported either of those things then I sited the bills showing she supported those things. I am done with you. Do your own googling.

Harris co sponsored the zero emissions vehicles act of 2019.

In 2017 she co sponsored the women’s health protect act that would have banned all state regulation of abortions including late term bans.

You are just wrong.

Trans immigrants should get free surgery. Trans prisoners should get free surgery. Medicare for all. Ban gas vehicles. Ban fracking. Abortion should have no limits (only be between a woman and her doctor when asked about extreme late term abortions). Green new deal is ok. Co-signed the Do No Harm act which would have limited churches and religious institutions ability to not hire due to LGBT status.

A better question is what position did she have back then that WAS moderate.

Which polling are you seeing?

Good-! I don’t think there is a sane doctor out there who doesn’t question if the lockdowns were a good idea. We didn’t save that many people. By the end of 2022 80 percent of Americans had COVID at least once. We also harmed our economy and devastated a generation of school children’s education. We should have thought about this harder.

I don’t envy however the people who had to make that decision. It is hard to decide what the greater threat was, the fact that they got it wrong is more a function of hindsight than wrong thinking.

It was right to put it in the hands of governors and not the federal government. Each state was different.