Total posts: 27,429
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Next time don't lie and say Tariffs will raise prices on everything. Including goods made solely in America for Americans (such as chicken). You don't get paid millions to lie about that.
Either you failed to read what you quoted, or you lied deliberately. Pick one.
Created:
Posted in:
We already learned this lesson during COVID. Companies don't give a shit about the greater good, they're about profits, full stop.
Your entire point was that tariffs don’t matter for goods that are made and consumed entirely in America, yet you dodged that and responded as if U.S. chicken is in direct competition with foreign imports. It’s not. The U.S. imports less than 1% of its chicken, so no matter how high a tariff is placed on foreign poultry, it has no impact on domestic pricing. Your argument would make sense in an industry with heavy import reliance, but for U.S. chicken and eggs, it’s completely irrelevant.
Your COVID example is another red herring. Supply chain disruptions during the pandemic weren’t caused by tariffs; they were caused by labor shortages, transportation breakdowns, and sudden demand spikes. Companies didn’t jack up prices because they suddenly had an epiphany about profit margins, they did it because production couldn’t keep up with demand. That had nothing to do with artificially shifting markets through tariffs and everything to do with the logistical chaos of a global shutdown.
Your lame argument boils down to a general “companies like profits” statement, which is true but meaningless in this context. Companies are always going to price their goods based on supply and demand, not just because a tariff exists somewhere in the economy. Your claim that U.S. farmers would randomly jack up prices just because foreign chicken is more expensive assumes a total misunderstanding of competition, market saturation, and consumer behavior, but hey, when derangement over Trump’s tariffs kicks in, market realities tend to fly out the window faster than an escaped rooster. 🐔 🍗 🐔 🍗 🍔 🍟
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
That will incentivize the US company to raise their prices to increase their profit margin,
Okay, kiddo, listen up! America makes almost all of its own chicken—like 99.67% of it. We only import a tiny little 0.33%, which is basically nothing. That means no matter how high tariffs get, they can't make American chicken more expensive, because we don’t need foreign chicken!
And if I think farmers can just charge whatever they want just because there’s say, a 1,000% tariff on Chinese chicken, that just shows how little one knows about economics. Prices are set by local competition, not price hikes from stuff we barely even import.
Alright, let’s break this down further. The United States produces nearly all of its own chicken—about 99.67% of it. That means we only import a tiny 0.33%, which is so small it’s practically irrelevant. No matter how high tariffs get on foreign chicken, they won’t drive up the price of American chicken because we don’t rely on imports.
The idea that tariffs on imported chicken would somehow make domestic chicken more expensive just doesn’t hold water. Tariffs only affect imported goods, and when nearly everything we eat is already made here, the impact is nonexistent. Anyone claiming otherwise is either confused or trying to push an agenda.
This misconception often comes from a general misunderstanding of how markets work. Prices aren’t set by tariffs on products we barely import—they’re set by supply, demand, and competition among domestic producers. Even if tariffs made imported chicken completely unaffordable, it wouldn’t matter because we already get our chicken from U.S. farmers.
But some people, especially those deranged by their hatred of Trump’s tariffs, ignore market realities in their rush to criticize. They want to paint every tariff as a disaster, even when it has zero effect on the vast majority of goods. The obsession with opposing tariffs blinds them to basic economics, leading them to make arguments that just don’t add up.
If I truly believed that American farmers could suddenly start charging whatever they wanted just because there’s a 1,000% tariff on foreign chicken, that would only prove how little I understand economics. Farmers compete with each other for customers, and competition keeps prices in check. No tariff will change that fundamental rule of the market.
The reality is, American chicken prices depend on feed costs, labor, transportation, and overall market conditions, not foreign trade policies that barely touch the industry. So when someone starts panicking about chicken tariffs, they’re missing the bigger picture.
Tariffs might matter in other industries, but when it comes to American chicken, they’re irrelevant. Ignoring this reality just because of political bias against Trump’s tariffs is not an excuse to abandon basic economics. Markets don’t work the way some people wish they did, and pretending otherwise doesn’t make it true. So put down the remote, touch some grass, and maybe have a nice basket of American chicken. Or 2!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
no serious economist ...
Yeah, we lived through 4 years of those "serious economists"
We are seriously over their bullshit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Bro is literally defending decades of blanket EU tariffs and then pretends Trump has no reason or rhyme to fight back.
Punitive Tariffs are an integral part of negotiations.
If EU is willing to fight Trump 4 years and risk permanently losing the market share of products they enjoy a comparative advantage over right now (mostly due to the unfair tariffs), so be it. America is a pretty resilient and innovative country, there is not much we cannot home grow here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
If I have bread and mayo and you have ham and cheese, we both win by giving each other half of what we have.
If I have to give you 2 pieces of ham for 1 cheese because of tariffs, that's how people like Trump get elected.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
EU has always had a flat tariff on all goods from America. How is that remotely fair.
Help me out here chatzie!
Ohhh, okay, little fella! Listen up! So, the big kids over in Europe? Yeah, they made a rule that every time America wants to sell them toys, candy, or, I don’t know, tractors, America has to pay them extra money first. But guess what? When Europe wants to sell stuff to America, they don’t have to pay as much! 😲 That means Europe gets to play the game on easy mode while America has to carry a big, heavy backpack full of rocks. And when America says, “Hey, that’s not fair!” Europe just shrugs and says, “Too bad! Those are the rules!” And America, instead of taking its ball and going home, just sighs and keeps playing anyway. Kinda silly, huh?
Ohhh, buddy, it gets even sillier! 😲 So, Europe is really, really big—like a giant kid on the playground who tells everyone what to do. Because it has so many countries all working together, it can boss around smaller places and even America sometimes! If a company wants to sell things in Europe, they have to follow Europe’s special rules, even if those rules don’t make sense. And if a country does something Europe doesn’t like? BOOM! Europe says, “No more trade for you!” and makes them play alone. 😡 It’s like the biggest kid on the swings telling everyone, “If you don’t play my way, you can’t play at all!” And since nobody wants to be left out, they just nod and go along with it. Kinda sneaky, huh? 😏
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The alternative to bread and circuses is manufactured outrage. I'll be happier knowing the weak minded are out there posting selfies at a concert instead of burning Teslas and standing with a Country they were told to stand with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Don't forget that one of his college students said that he was the dumbest professor he ever had. No, No, I'm not talking about FLRporn.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
What I said was correct. Tariffs have zero effect on goods made completely in America and purchased by Americans. (like chickens and eggs)
When talking heads say it will raise prices on everything, they are lying to promote an agenda.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Because Canada won't drop their tariffs among other things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Tariffs will raise the price by exactly zero on every good produced by Americans...in America.
DoubleR is just lying again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
lol, porn doesn't motivate me nearly as much as it does you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Yep. Government doesn't need all that hired help.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
Biden would print money and use that to subsidize tickets.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I aint waiting around for America to start taking care of Americans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I won't shed a tear for traitors buying foreign shit.
Enjoy being forced to support Americans.
Created:
Posted in:
In the end, I think combatting the ticket scalpers will give the working class a chance to enjoy the things usually reserved for the upper-middle class. What do you guys think?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
AI is fairly useful as a bullshit sniffer. Simply input the bullshit talking point, and it will correctly identify the bullshit almost all of time. So when you say something as erroneous as "America got most of its land through force" or "America protects the sovereignty of all other nations"
It can easily reprint thousands of pages of recorded history at a snap to debunk all your gaslighting of history.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Democrats appeal to the old and often childless populations. Malthusians.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
Policy vision is what winners run on. Policy details are what the losers use as ammunition.
What was the policy vision for Democrats?
Well first it was "hope and change"
Then it was "expanded rights for lgbtq and undocumented"
People rejected all those visions once they found out the true cost of spending billions of dollars on government red tape and the true cost of destroying title 9 for women and the true cost of a declining American wage.
And what's the vision for Democrats today? Same as yesterday.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
And simply in terms of the species and societies, prosperity is variously defined.
Scientifically, there is nothing various about the definition. Luddites and Malthusians hold the majority stock in extinction theories, yet ironically they are the very ones going extinct due to their lack of progress. It's only natural that they gather moss because their stones refuse to roll.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
Did Trump win on policy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The Chinese definitely have the cultural edge. Americans and UKers lost all sense of what it meant to look out for their fellow country-man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
He focused instead on the fact that the journalists were all democrats, as if that in and if itself proves some kind of liberal bias, which I wouldn't even argue depending on how you're defining liberal.
If that was the only metric, we could say they are just run of the mill left leaning.
Sadly, the stories they run prove they are radicalized Democrats, not the normal ones.
What's ironic is that the only time it becomes an issue is when the administration decides to inject politics into an organization like this, which is exactly what Trump is doing.
It's hardly ironic. It's expected when the left loses a culture war so badly that the president will be obligated to remove the government soldiers of the losing side of that culture war.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Biden didn't have a problem serving under Obama's third term...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
."AI OverviewAnnex territory, in a political context, means to incorporate a territory into the domain of a city, country, or state, usually by force or without permission."The context we are talking about makes clear which usage of the term applies here, and it's just stupid to hold onto some fantasy notion that Canadians are anything but vehemently against joining the US.
I will just toss yet another silly argument over to chat GPT...
Hay chatzie, care to explain?
In U.S. history, most of the land was gained through purchases and agreements. Only sometimes has the U.S. used force to take over new territory. One peaceful example was the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, when the U.S. bought a huge piece of land from France for $15 million, which doubled the country’s size. The U.S. also bought Florida from Spain in 1819 through a treaty called the Adams-Onís Treaty, and in 1867, the U.S. bought Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million. There was also the Gadsden Purchase in 1854, where the U.S. bought a small piece of land from Mexico to complete its southern border.
However, the U.S. didn’t always gain land peacefully. Sometimes, it used force or war. The U.S. fought the Mexican-American War. When the war ended in 1848, the U.S. took not only Texas but also California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. In Hawaii, the U.S. helped businessmen overthrow Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893, and later, in 1898, the U.S. officially annexed Hawaii. Even though most native Hawaiians didn’t want it, the U.S. still took over.
The U.S. also used force against Native Americans. The government made treaties with tribes but often broke them and forced Native Americans onto reservations. The U.S. Army fought battles with many tribes, using violence to take their land. After the Spanish-American War in 1898, the U.S. gained Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. Even though this was through a treaty, it came after the U.S. had defeated Spain in the war.
The U.S. sometimes added new land by letting the people who lived there vote to join. One example is Texas. A long time ago, Texas was its own country after it broke away from Mexico in 1836. For almost 10 years, it was independent, but many Texans wanted to join the U.S. In 1845, they had a vote, and most people said yes. So, Texas became the 28th state. This was a peaceful and democratic way for Texas to join.
Another example is Hawaii. Even though the U.S. had taken control of Hawaii in 1898, it didn’t become a state right away. In 1959, the people of Hawaii had a vote, and almost everyone said they wanted to be part of the U.S. So, Hawaii became the 50th state. Around the same time, Alaska also had a vote. The people there chose to join the U.S., and Alaska became the 49th state. These are examples of how some places became part of the U.S. because the people voted for it.
So, while the U.S. mostly bought a lot of its land peacefully, there were also some times when it used war, force, or unfair deals to expand its territory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Gotta love uncensored AI.
yep. It doesn't care about your partisan slants.
It will just tell you the history of the annexation of Texas as if you had the mind of a child.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
And that's why most intelligent Democrats have already left the party. They know now that they are being useful tools for corporate media who will exaggerate for shock value and destroy any serious Democrat candidate.
And that's why most intelligent Democrats have left corporate media.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Just letting you know exactly why your party is suffocating, and who you are allowing to suck up all the oxygen.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
While you guys get trolled in circles over dumb stuff like this, it leaves no room for you guys to talk about rebuilding your own party. Go ahead and keep getting trolled.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Or forced prosperity despite Luddites and Malthusians.
That's an option too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
stand up for the sovereignty of other nations around the globe..
oh....OK....chat gpt, is that correct?
Here’s a partial list of countries where the U.S. promoted or supported coups, threatening their sovereignty, often to install or protect pro-American regimes during the Cold War and beyond:
- Iran (1953) – The CIA-backed coup overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, who had nationalized Iran's oil industry. The U.S. reinstalled the pro-Western Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
- Guatemala (1954) – The CIA supported the coup against President Jacobo Árbenz, who was enacting land reforms that threatened United Fruit Company interests.
- Congo (1960) – The U.S. helped overthrow Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, who was leaning toward the Soviet Union.
- Dominican Republic (1963) – The U.S. backed the coup against Juan Bosch, the country’s first democratically elected president.
- Brazil (1964) – The U.S. supported the military coup that overthrew President João Goulart, installing a right-wing dictatorship.
- Chile (1973) – The CIA helped overthrow President Salvador Allende, a democratically elected socialist, replacing him with General Augusto Pinochet.
- Argentina (1976) – The U.S. supported the military coup that ousted President Isabel Perón, backing the right-wing junta during the Dirty War.
- Uruguay (1973) – The U.S. provided logistical support for the military takeover, aiding the junta that overthrew President Juan María Bordaberry.
- Indonesia (1965) – The U.S. assisted in the overthrow of President Sukarno, providing financial support and kill lists to the military regime led by Suharto.
- Honduras (2009) – The U.S. tacitly supported the coup against President Manuel Zelaya, who was pushed from power by the military.
- Haiti (2004) – The U.S. was involved in the removal of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, allegedly pressuring him to resign and facilitating his exile.
- Bolivia (2019) – While not a traditional coup, the U.S. supported the removal of President Evo Morales, who fled the country after allegations of electoral fraud, though his supporters saw it as a coup.
- Venezuela (2002) – The U.S. allegedly supported the attempted coup against President Hugo Chávez, though he was quickly restored to power.
- Panama (1989) – The U.S. invaded Panama to overthrow Manuel Noriega, effectively staging a coup through military force.
- Grenada (1983) – The U.S. invaded Grenada and ousted the Marxist government, installing a pro-American regime.
- El Salvador (1980s) – The U.S. supported the military government against leftist rebels, aiding government forces responsible for coups and atrocities.
- Nicaragua (1980s) – The U.S. backed the Contras, who attempted to overthrow the Sandinista government, effectively waging a proxy coup.
- Libya (2011) – The U.S. led NATO airstrikes to remove Muammar Gaddafi, backing rebels in what was effectively regime change.
- Ukraine (2014) – The U.S. supported the Maidan movement, which led to the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych, viewed by many as a U.S.-backed coup.
- Egypt (2013) – While not officially labeled a coup, the U.S. tacitly supported the military’s removal of President Mohamed Morsi, providing aid and political cover to the new regime.
✅ This partial list shows the U.S. has a long history of intervening in foreign nations, often undermining their sovereignty by backing or orchestrating coups, especially during the Cold War and into the 21st century.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
An annexation is by definition done by force genius.
I'll toss that silly argument to chat gpt.
A long time ago, Texas was its own country. It wasn’t part of the United States yet. The people who lived there were called Texans, and they had their own rules and leaders. But many Texans wanted to join the United States because they thought it would keep them safer and make life better.
The people of Texas had a big vote. When people vote, they make a choice together. The Texans voted on whether they wanted to stay their own country or become part of the United States. Most of the people voted to join the U.S., which meant they wanted Texas to be part of the bigger country.
After the vote, the leaders of Texas asked the U.S. government if they could join. The leaders in the U.S. had to think about it. Some of them said, "Yes, Texas should join!" but others said, "No, it might cause problems." People argued about it because they weren’t sure if it was a good idea.
In the end, the U.S. government agreed. They said, "Yes, Texas can become part of our country." The two countries made a deal. They signed papers to make it official. This is called annexation, which is a big word that means one country becomes part of another.
After Texas joined, it became a state in the United States. The people of Texas were now American citizens. They could vote in U.S. elections and follow the same laws. The U.S. flag added a new star for Texas, because each state gets its own star on the flag.
Even though Texas joined the U.S., some people were still unhappy about it. Mexico, which used to own Texas, didn’t like that Texas became part of the U.S. This made Mexico and the U.S. fight a war later on.
But in the end, Texas stayed part of the United States. The people of Texas got what they voted for—they became part of a bigger country, with more friends and more protection. 🌟
Moreover, Canadians have made crystal clear that they have no interest in becoming a US state..
When it finally gets framed as a choice for liberty and free speech, you will be surprised what people will choose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
I think Trump will officially cut the funding soon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Are you currently driving without a license too?
Created:
-->
@FLRW
The only sustainable solution is to embrace the biological instincts that ensured human survival for millennia, namely natural pair bonding, stable gender roles, and prioritizing fertility and child-rearing. These instincts drive the formation of strong families and generational continuity. Trying to replace them with atheistic social experiments like career-first feminism or gender-neutral parenting is just fighting biology, and biology always wins. No amount of ideology or social engineering can override the evolutionary drives that kept humanity thriving. In the end, societies that reject these biological fundamentals will inevitably face demographic collapse, while those that embrace them will continue to grow and flourish.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
And feminism tries to replace biological urges with societal urges on the pretext that only society dictated urges ('the patriarchy"). You already pointed out the limitations of that.
While they were able to survive for a while by lowering infant mortality, it's clear the societal atheists are heading toward biological extinction. Even handmaid's tale won't save them.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
The heart of the issue of liberals protecting criminals is this:
For most middle class white liberals (the loudest most vocal group) they will almost never first hand see the effects of criminality.
Their value system is mostly atheistic, and therefore, their value system must be contrived socially. Hence we see instant gratification through social validation. This is what passes as "civic duty" in a world that demands nothing from them but being a corporate cog and tax payer. Because state run media controls that social value system, the government class can effectively get people to be happy and compliant helping the government "dig and fill holes" by causing chaos and redistributing the wealth on the pretext of solving the chaos.
It's all in Orwell's books.
Created:
Posted in:
EU can barely convince the UK to play ball.
Created:
-->
@Shila
If Musk made 42 billion dollars of Teslas, the government would just steal another 42 billion from taxpayers to burn them up.
Created:
This is how government is designed. It's not about problem solving, it is all about the process.
42 billion dollars, zero results. Endless planning.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
A free press implies free from government coercion and corruption. Without fear of losing funding or favor of gaining funding. Federal funding ensures a coerced and corrupt media.
That may not exactly be the enemy of the people as Trump says it, but it is certainly the enemy of the free press.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Yeah, because most on the left don't think they're doing enough to combat the absurdity and atrocity that is the Trump administration.
OK! lets pray Tampon Tim, sets some more Tesla's on fire and hope to get enough High calorie women and Low testosterone men to change the world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
As is often pointed out, reality has a liberal bias.
So does corruption, fraud, waste, propaganda, and government cheese, apparently.
The reality is that the Democrat party is at 26% approval right now.
So being 100% Democrat like NPR isn't representative of any form of reality that matters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Everyone knows this, sorr
Yeah, pretty sure only Americans think American military protects all democracies and not just the ones USA likes.
And an annexation would be totally democratic if enough Canadians decide it would be nicer to live under liberty and free speech.
So yeah, go get your refund on that "global outrage" soda pop.
Created:
-->
@Shila
We can have even more towers annexing Russia.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
I am Ok with annexing Russia.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
or his utter lack of concern for global stability.
Lol, china and Russia and North Korea are not gonna launch nukes over US annexation of what would be the equivilent population of California.
Canada isn't the lynchpin for global security, and never will be. Wherever you got that idea from, you need to go back and ask for a refund, asap.
Created: