"We have a $1 trillion trade deficit with China. Hundreds of billions of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem, I'm not going to make a deal," he said. "I'm willing to make a deal with China,
but they have to solve this surplus. We have a tremendous deficit problem with China ... I want that solved."
...
"A deficit is a loss," he said. "We're going to have surpluses, or we're,
at worst, going to be breaking even. But China would be the worst in the group because the deficit is so big, and it's not sustainable.
"I was elected on this," Trump added.
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=253101
Yes, He Was, And I Voted FOR It
Karl Denninger
2025-04-06 20:57
And I knew what it would mean to compressing P/Es too -- because unlike
so many others I'm not ****ing stupid.
"We have a $1 trillion trade deficit with China. Hundreds of billions
of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem,
I'm not going to make a deal," he said. "I'm willing to make a deal
with China, but they have to solve this surplus. We have a tremendous deficit problem with China ... I want that solved."
...
"A deficit is a loss," he said. "We're going to have surpluses, or
we're, at worst, going to be breaking even. But China would be the
worst in the group because the deficit is so big, and it's not
sustainable.
"I was elected on this," Trump added.
Indeed.
I, and everyone else, can choose where my capital goes. I can choose to
put it into the stock market which for the last two decades and more has
been an "investment" in raping the people of the United States up the ass >when it comes to jobs and cost of living.
Or I can put it in Treasuries, where until recently because of the
deliberate policy of the US Government I earned nothing -- but now I do
earn something.
I give a **** about the future of the country -- including my daughter's >future in this country.
I voted to put a stop to this financial rape.
I voted to end the exploitation of people and the environment "over
there", at the same time destroying jobs for Americans, so stock prices
would go up and a handful of rich dickheads would obtain another billion >dollars by stomping on everyone else's necks, dicks and*****.
Yes, I knew damn well that doing this would collapse P/Es. So what? I
don't have to be in those assets. I can be a greedy cocksucking piece of >**** and stomp on my kid's future or I can get out, sit back and watch >everyone whine when their kid's futures are better but they are pissed
that they can't screw their own offspring, and everyone else's offspring,
up the ass anymore.
Further, when the blow-ups really get going (and I believe they will -- >"Margin call gentlemen!") I can capitalize on your past, current and
forward stupidity when you're forced to puke up things at pennies on the >dollar, and since I not only wasn't involved in you doing the stupid and >malicious thing in the first place, and in fact warned people that this
was unsustainable and therefore would end in tears, I have exactly zero >responsibility toward OR empathy for you when you have to puke it up and,
if its something I can use, I might buy it for that nickel or dime on the >dollar -- if I think its purdy.
Yeah, I voted for this -- and I will not apologize for that either.
Unlike the first time Trump was President and in his first re-election >attempt, both of which I sat out (by voting for "Cthulhu" - literally)
this time I did vote for it.
It was the right thing to do and if you're bent that now some of what you
got by ****ing other Americans is disappearing (and not very much of it
so far), and you were too ****ing stupid to be happy with what you
already had and take the profits, thinking you had some right to continue
to screw others forevermore, boo hoo **** you.
Oh by the way, I ALSO voted for an end to the financial******served upon >Americans from both the medical industry and illegals as well.
And you damn well ought to be for that as well, or I now have two more >reasons to call you a cocksucking piece of **** and exclude you from my
life and any other aspect of anything in our society that I can manage to >come up with and do.
I will continue to INSIST that I get what I voted for in that regard as
well.
You don't like my opinion?
I don't care.
You stupid **********s already expressed that I should be thrown in a >concentration camp or be killed outright by starvation or whatever other >means of exclusion you could dream up because I refused to take your
stupid ****ing (and now known dangerous) shots so if you think I give a
**** that you dislike this opinion well, here's where my give-a-****
meter currently stands:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=18077
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=253101
Yes, He Was, And I Voted FOR It
Karl Denninger
2025-04-06 20:57
And I knew what it would mean to compressing P/Es too -- because unlike
so many others I'm not ****ing stupid.
"We have a $1 trillion trade deficit with China. Hundreds of billions
of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem,
I'm not going to make a deal," he said. "I'm willing to make a deal
with China, but they have to solve this surplus. We have a tremendous deficit problem with China ... I want that solved."
...
"A deficit is a loss," he said. "We're going to have surpluses, or
we're, at worst, going to be breaking even. But China would be the
worst in the group because the deficit is so big, and it's not
sustainable.
"I was elected on this," Trump added.
Indeed.
I, and everyone else, can choose where my capital goes. I can choose to
put it into the stock market which for the last two decades and more has
been an "investment" in raping the people of the United States up the ass >when it comes to jobs and cost of living.
Or I can put it in Treasuries, where until recently because of the
deliberate policy of the US Government I earned nothing -- but now I do
earn something.
I give a **** about the future of the country -- including my daughter's >future in this country.
I voted to put a stop to this financial rape.
I voted to end the exploitation of people and the environment "over
there", at the same time destroying jobs for Americans, so stock prices
would go up and a handful of rich dickheads would obtain another billion >dollars by stomping on everyone else's necks, dicks and*****.
Yes, I knew damn well that doing this would collapse P/Es. So what? I
don't have to be in those assets. I can be a greedy cocksucking piece of >**** and stomp on my kid's future or I can get out, sit back and watch >everyone whine when their kid's futures are better but they are pissed
that they can't screw their own offspring, and everyone else's offspring,
up the ass anymore.
Further, when the blow-ups really get going (and I believe they will -- >"Margin call gentlemen!") I can capitalize on your past, current and
forward stupidity when you're forced to puke up things at pennies on the >dollar, and since I not only wasn't involved in you doing the stupid and >malicious thing in the first place, and in fact warned people that this
was unsustainable and therefore would end in tears, I have exactly zero >responsibility toward OR empathy for you when you have to puke it up and,
if its something I can use, I might buy it for that nickel or dime on the >dollar -- if I think its purdy.
Yeah, I voted for this -- and I will not apologize for that either.
Unlike the first time Trump was President and in his first re-election >attempt, both of which I sat out (by voting for "Cthulhu" - literally)
this time I did vote for it.
It was the right thing to do and if you're bent that now some of what you
got by ****ing other Americans is disappearing (and not very much of it
so far), and you were too ****ing stupid to be happy with what you
already had and take the profits, thinking you had some right to continue
to screw others forevermore, boo hoo **** you.
Oh by the way, I ALSO voted for an end to the financial******served upon >Americans from both the medical industry and illegals as well.
And you damn well ought to be for that as well, or I now have two more >reasons to call you a cocksucking piece of **** and exclude you from my
life and any other aspect of anything in our society that I can manage to >come up with and do.
I will continue to INSIST that I get what I voted for in that regard as
well.
You don't like my opinion?
I don't care.
You stupid **********s already expressed that I should be thrown in a >concentration camp or be killed outright by starvation or whatever other >means of exclusion you could dream up because I refused to take your
stupid ****ing (and now known dangerous) shots so if you think I give a
**** that you dislike this opinion well, here's where my give-a-****
meter currently stands:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=18077
On 7/4/25 6:36, .../v]andrak|%... wrote:
Damn, man, $1 trillion a year is a hideous trade deficit.
How?
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys anything they want.
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
Rich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys anything they want.
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are for globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Just admit you're broke.
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:vt4pdm$3p6no$2@dont-email.me:
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are for globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
You're a fool if you believe it's the Democrats.
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote in news:MPG.42601b1d5feddc05989c53@usnews.blocknews.net:
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02============
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wroteRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Just admit you're broke.
I listened to Trevor Noahs latest episode and what stood out me was
this point (paraphrasing):
Wealthy people dont need democracy. They dont need rights because
they have money. Money gets you whatever you want and it isnt about
Black or white, red or blue. Its about the top and bottom but we have
been convinced to look elsewhere to figure out the problem. The
problem is and always has been that a few people have a lot of money
and get to live without concern for things like rights.
https://www.threads.net/@feministajones/post/DILNCB5s0Bf/i-listened-to- trevor-noahs-latest-episode-and-what-stood-out-me-was-this-point-p
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:vt4pdm$3p6no$2@dont-email.me:
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are for
globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
You're a fool if you believe it's the Democrats.
On 09 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some news:vt617f$rcmg$1@dont-email.me:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:vt4pdm$3p6no$2@dont-email.me:
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are for
globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
You're a fool if you believe it's the Democrats.
Nancy Pelosi.
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@
185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../vandrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote inRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys anything
news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
they want.
Just admit you're broke.
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container
ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now
to ship merchandise around the world.
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change
by legislation are futile.
--scott
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't.
Democrats love globalism.
In article <vt617f$rcmg$1@dont-email.me>, bax02in
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:vt4pdm$3p6no$2@dont-email.me:
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote
fornews:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:Rich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are
globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
You're a fool if you believe it's the Democrats.
How did they get so rich?
In theory yes.
However in practice it is anything but.
From the US perspective, the globalists want to bring us down to the level of poor, corrupt nations rather than building up those nations to reach
our standard of living.
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't.
Democrats love globalism.
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote in news:MPG.42605029a57b2320989c67 @usnews.blocknews.net:
In article <vt617f$rcmg$1@dont-email.me>, bax02in
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:vt4pdm$3p6no$2@dont-email.me:
On 2025-04-09, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote
fornews:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:Rich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Of course.
And this is why democrats want to keep the non elite down and are
globalism and a 2 class society. So ultra wealthy and poor.
You're a fool if you can't see this.
You're a fool if you believe it's the Democrats.
How did they get so rich?
tRump's Cabinet isn't composed of Democrats. Muskrat is not a Democrat.
some "rich" democrats may be millionaires, but damn few are billionaires.
Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in news:vt629r$rcmg$5@dont-email.me:
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote in
news:MPG.42601b1d5feddc05989c53@usnews.blocknews.net:
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02============
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wroteRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Just admit you're broke.
I listened to Trevor Noahs latest episode and what stood out me was
this point (paraphrasing):
Wealthy people dont need democracy. They dont need rights because
they have money. Money gets you whatever you want and it isnt about
Black or white, red or blue. Its about the top and bottom but we have
been convinced to look elsewhere to figure out the problem. The
problem is and always has been that a few people have a lot of money
and get to live without concern for things like rights.
https://www.threads.net/@feministajones/post/DILNCB5s0Bf/i-listened-to-
trevor-noahs-latest-episode-and-what-stood-out-me-was-this-point-p
"Only Little People pay taxes"
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container
ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now
to ship merchandise around the world.
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change
by legislation are futile.
--scott
pothead<pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods production.
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't.
Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container
ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now
to ship merchandise around the world.
On 09 Apr 2025, Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> posted some news:XnsB2BC853BAC362629555@185.151.15.160:have
Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in
news:vt629r$rcmg$5@dont-email.me:
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote in
news:MPG.42601b1d5feddc05989c53@usnews.blocknews.net:
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02============
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wroteRich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Just admit you're broke.
I listened to Trevor Noahs latest episode and what stood out me was
this point (paraphrasing):
Wealthy people dont need democracy. They dont need rights because
they have money. Money gets you whatever you want and it isnt about
Black or white, red or blue. Its about the top and bottom but we
to-been convinced to look elsewhere to figure out the problem. The
problem is and always has been that a few people have a lot of money
and get to live without concern for things like rights.
https://www.threads.net/@feministajones/post/DILNCB5s0Bf/i-listened-
trevor-noahs-latest-episode-and-what-stood-out-me-was-this-point-p
"Only Little People pay taxes"
"Only Stupid Little People pay taxes"
Every single person in the USA has the ability to reduce tax liability.
On 09 Apr 2025, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted some news:vt704i$7vo$1@panix2.panix.com:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>>Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container
ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now
to ship merchandise around the world.
Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods production.
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not
going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change
by legislation are futile.
--scott
One good war will change that. We are not all friends.
Brandon Dickenbacher <bdickenbacher@maga2028.com> wrote in news:vt7h76$bhb $15@toxic.dizum.net:
On 09 Apr 2025, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted some news:vt704i$7vo$1@panix2.panix.com:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>>Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container
ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now
to ship merchandise around the world.
Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods production.
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not >> going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change
by legislation are futile.
--scott
One good war will change that. We are not all friends.
Good wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did we get out of those, again?
Brandon Dickenbacher <bdickenbacher@maga2028.com> wrote in news:vt7g5s $bhb$11@toxic.dizum.net:
On 09 Apr 2025, Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> posted some news:XnsB2BC853BAC362629555@185.151.15.160:
haveBaxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in
news:vt629r$rcmg$5@dont-email.me:
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote in
news:MPG.42601b1d5feddc05989c53@usnews.blocknews.net:
In article <vt4p4h$3p2kh$2@dont-email.me>, bax02============
_spamblock@baxcode.com says...
Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> wrote in
news:XnsB2BB5510BEAEC629555@ 185.151.15.160:
=?UTF-8?Q?.../v]andrak|=e2=89=a1...?= <jfwaldby@gmail.com> wrote >>>>> > in news:m5kjpgFfft9U1@mid.individual.net:Rich people don't need democracy - they got money and money buys
Democracy is the first step on the way to socialism.
And your preferred alternative is........?
anything they want.
Just admit you're broke.
I listened to Trevor Noah?s latest episode and what stood out me was
this point (paraphrasing):
Wealthy people don?t need democracy. They don?t need rights because
they have money. Money gets you whatever you want and it isn?t about
Black or white, red or blue. It?s about the top and bottom but we
to-been convinced to look elsewhere to figure out the ?problem?. The
problem is and always has been that a few people have a lot of money
and get to live without concern for things like ?rights?.
https://www.threads.net/@feministajones/post/DILNCB5s0Bf/i-listened-
trevor-noahs-latest-episode-and-what-stood-out-me-was-this-point-p
"Only Little People pay taxes"
"Only Stupid Little People pay taxes"
Every single person in the USA has the ability to reduce tax liability.
Sure, people living paycheck to paycheck
can invest in race horses and overseas accounts
and deductable private jet expenses. Just like
the wealthy who pay no taxes at all.
In article <XnsB2BD571874737629555@185.151.15.160>,
noemail@aol.com says...
Brandon Dickenbacher <bdickenbacher@maga2028.com> wrote in news:vt7h76$bhb >> $15@toxic.dizum.net:
On 09 Apr 2025, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted some
news:vt704i$7vo$1@panix2.panix.com:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't.
Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container >>>> ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now >>>> to ship merchandise around the world.
Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods
production.
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not >>>> going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change >>>> by legislation are futile.
--scott
One good war will change that. We are not all friends.
Good wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did we get out of those, again?
13 people killed and 80 billion of equipment left behind.
On 4/10/25 10:09, Skeeter OG wrote:
In article <XnsB2BD571874737629555@185.151.15.160>,
noemail@aol.com says...
Brandon Dickenbacher <bdickenbacher@maga2028.com> wrote in news:vt7h76$bhb >> $15@toxic.dizum.net:
On 09 Apr 2025, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted some
news:vt704i$7vo$1@panix2.panix.com:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>>>> Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container >>>> ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now >>>> to ship merchandise around the world.
Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods
production.
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not >>>> going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change >>>> by legislation are futile.
--scott
One good war will change that. We are not all friends.
Good wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did we get out of those, again?
13 people killed and 80 billion of equipment left behind.
Incorrect: 64 killed ... and $80B worth of gear transferred away
because transport & airlift had been constrained since 2018.
-hh
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
In article <vt94qu$3k013$4@dont-email.me>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
On 4/10/25 10:09, Skeeter OG wrote:
In article <XnsB2BD571874737629555@185.151.15.160>,
noemail@aol.com says...
Brandon Dickenbacher <bdickenbacher@maga2028.com> wrote in news:vt7h76$bhb >>>> $15@toxic.dizum.net:
On 09 Apr 2025, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) posted some
news:vt704i$7vo$1@panix2.panix.com:
pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Republicans do not support globalism, at least most of them don't. >>>>>>> Democrats love globalism.
Globalization is the result of a technological advancement. Container >>>>>> ships and automated loading and unloading make it incredibly cheap now >>>>>> to ship merchandise around the world.
Globalization is an attempt to own and control all facets of goods
production.
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
You can support it or not support it, it doesn't matter because it's not >>>>>> going to go away. Attempts to reverse or advance technological change >>>>>> by legislation are futile.
--scott
One good war will change that. We are not all friends.
Good wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did we get out of those, again?
13 people killed and 80 billion of equipment left behind.
Incorrect: 64 killed ... and $80B worth of gear transferred away
because transport & airlift had been constrained since 2018.
-hh
Joe screwed the poosh on that deal.
You IDIOT! It does the very opposite. The more people and places you
have involved in a given production, the more diverse control is.
THAT'S the point.
You don't want all your cars produced in three or six countries. You
want it spread around. Fifty, no, seventy countries with can
factories.
How is anybody going to lock control of the auto industry given that?
I firmly believe that they think like they do because they simplyYou clowns are so stupid it is ridiculous. You look so silly
trying to pound in pitons as you slide down the Matterhorn.
don't understand the system.
You can get a bigger piece of the pie, or you can get a bigger pie.
Americans negotiated the trade before Trump and those negotiations
were working - and still are.
They have worked all across the planet. We enriched the planet. We
utterly defeated communism.
Why would anybody throw all that away?
usa 1st wrote:it
On 10 Apr 2025, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> posted some
news:dc1hvj5h3akldbuue0uci1b4c3t2gvrrdr@4ax.com:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2025 19:51:23 -0700, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On 9/4/25 16:40, pothead wrote:
In theory yes.
However in practice it is anything but.
From the US perspective, the globalists want to bring us down to
the level
of poor, corrupt nations rather than building up those nations to
reach our standard of living.
You are so stupid, it is comedy gold. Even with your awe
inspiring business being a Quick Mart, you had to deal with
Korean candies.
Indeed.
The global poverty level has been decreasing for decades as Pax
Americana has limited conflict and provided an umbrella under which
wealth.can be resolved. We have had the tools we needed to give poorer
countries the help they need. Running trade deficits with poor
countries (like Zimbabwe and Lesotho) allows them a ready market for
goods they produce thus affording them the opportunity to EARN
theRunning trade deficits allows us to distribute our currency across
issuesplanet thus putting us in control of trade.
It's not our responsibility to be the global welfare ATM. Those
countries can't even maintain a local electrical infrastructure by
themselves even with advanced hand-holding. They are lucky to have
power 8 hours a day.
Most of the home refrigerators don't work because the electrical
therecause them to fail within months or a couple years. They just sit
beforeas kitchen storage after that.
With that sort of environment, what goods could they possibly produce
that anyone would want?
Americans negotiated the trade before Trump and those negotiations
were working - and still are.
No they were not. The USA has been bearing the cost of funding for
those agreements for decades and getting nothing but insults and
increased funding disbursement requests in return.
We should have let Germany have France and burn it to the ground
background,we stepped in.
They have worked all across the planet. We enriched the planet. We
utterly defeated communism.
Fantasy idealism. Do you know why previous treaties were ended?
Probably not. It all boils down to the money moving in the
wereor the absence thereof. Treaties have funding requirements. Most are
not paying, or they pay a mere pittance.
Why would anybody throw all that away?
Because it's time. 1 trillion by itself is an incredibly unfathomable
number for most. We cannot continue down this road. All Democrats
todoing is ballooning this kind of debt with no end in sight. Spend!Barack Obama. He didn't fire a single worker and worked meticulously
Spend! Spend! That's all they were doing and not thinking about it.
Who's the real enemy here?
avoid bearing a scandal.
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
When I was learning about airplanes, one of the design principles
was dynamic stability. Planes are designed to fly straight and
level until they run out of fuel. Winds that start a yaw or roll
or pitch change the flight surfaces orient to create a matching
counterforce. The remaining question is how stable. You want the
pilot able to overcome the flight surfaces and move the plane
where they want it to go.
usa 1st wrote:
On 10 Apr 2025, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> posted someBarack Obama. He didn't fire a single worker and worked meticulously to avoid bearing a scandal. All the red tape today is Obama's call for
news:dc1hvj5h3akldbuue0uci1b4c3t2gvrrdr@4ax.com:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2025 19:51:23 -0700, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On 9/4/25 16:40, pothead wrote:
In theory yes.
However in practice it is anything but.
From the US perspective, the globalists want to bring us down to
the level
of poor, corrupt nations rather than building up those nations to
reach our standard of living.
You are so stupid, it is comedy gold. Even with your awe
inspiring business being a Quick Mart, you had to deal with
Korean candies.
Indeed.
The global poverty level has been decreasing for decades as Pax
Americana has limited conflict and provided an umbrella under which it
can be resolved. We have had the tools we needed to give poorer
countries the help they need. Running trade deficits with poor
countries (like Zimbabwe and Lesotho) allows them a ready market for
goods they produce thus affording them the opportunity to EARN wealth.
Running trade deficits allows us to distribute our currency across the
planet thus putting us in control of trade.
It's not our responsibility to be the global welfare ATM. Those
countries can't even maintain a local electrical infrastructure by
themselves even with advanced hand-holding. They are lucky to have
power 8 hours a day.
Most of the home refrigerators don't work because the electrical issues
cause them to fail within months or a couple years. They just sit there
as kitchen storage after that.
With that sort of environment, what goods could they possibly produce
that anyone would want?
Americans negotiated the trade before Trump and those negotiations
were working - and still are.
No they were not. The USA has been bearing the cost of funding for
those agreements for decades and getting nothing but insults and
increased funding disbursement requests in return.
We should have let Germany have France and burn it to the ground before
we stepped in.
They have worked all across the planet. We enriched the planet. We
utterly defeated communism.
Fantasy idealism. Do you know why previous treaties were ended?
Probably not. It all boils down to the money moving in the background,
or the absence thereof. Treaties have funding requirements. Most are
not paying, or they pay a mere pittance.
Why would anybody throw all that away?
Because it's time. 1 trillion by itself is an incredibly unfathomable
number for most. We cannot continue down this road. All Democrats were
doing is ballooning this kind of debt with no end in sight. Spend!
Spend! Spend! That's all they were doing and not thinking about it.
Who's the real enemy here?
poverty in the USA. His orders and bills keep the poor poor because
they have to report low income as possible to get their benefits.
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
When I was learning about airplanes, one of the design principles
was dynamic stability. Planes are designed to fly straight and
level until they run out of fuel. Winds that start a yaw or roll
or pitch change the flight surfaces orient to create a matching
counterforce. The remaining question is how stable. You want the
pilot able to overcome the flight surfaces and move the plane
where they want it to go.
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:vte4f8$smub$4@dont-email.me:
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
When I was learning about airplanes, one of the design principles
was dynamic stability. Planes are designed to fly straight and
level until they run out of fuel. Winds that start a yaw or roll
or pitch change the flight surfaces orient to create a matching
counterforce. The remaining question is how stable. You want the
pilot able to overcome the flight surfaces and move the plane
where they want it to go.
An airplane without power becomes a glider.
A helicopter without power becomes a brick.
A helicopter without power becomes a brick.
On 12 Apr 2025, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> posted some news:vte4f8$smub$4@dont-email.me:
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
That's why we put Trump in charge. Because when he speaks, liberals
listen.
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. With
the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they didn't
qualify for some anymore.
Harry Bristol <hbristol@redchecks.com> wrote in news:vtes56$g7ou$5 @news.mixmin.net:
On 12 Apr 2025, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> posted some news:vte4f8$smub$4@dont-email.me:
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage
society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
That's why we put Trump in charge. Because when he speaks, liberals listen.
Indeed.
No one else utters as many stupid gaffes
as Trump. Electric boats, Hannibal Lector,
Haitians eating dogs, for and against Tesla,
for and against Tiktok, for and against
teleprompters, for and against tariffs, even
his own staff can't work with him.
Skeeter OG wrote:
In article <XnsB2BFD206F2FF9629555@185.151.15.190>,
noemail@aol.com says...
"you know the thing"
Harry Bristol <hbristol@redchecks.com> wrote in news:vtes56$g7ou$5
@news.mixmin.net:
On 12 Apr 2025, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> posted some
news:vte4f8$smub$4@dont-email.me:
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
Conservatives love globalization when it
crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and
promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage >>>>>> society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller.
"Light" is relative.
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
That's why we put Trump in charge. Because when he speaks, liberals
listen.
Indeed.
No one else utters as many stupid gaffes
as Trump. Electric boats, Hannibal Lector,
Haitians eating dogs, for and against Tesla,
for and against Tiktok, for and against
teleprompters, for and against tariffs, even
his own staff can't work with him.
Joe Biden
Conservatives have trouble hitting the mark on Joseph Biden because they summarily dismissed him for 4 yrs as "Sleepy Joe." But what about Biden?
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. With
the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they didn't
qualify for some anymore.
That is the reason for minimum wage: to make all salaries high
enough no business gets the government to help pay.
% wrote:
Mandrake the Perihelion wrote:
Skeeter OG wrote:
In article <XnsB2BFD206F2FF9629555@185.151.15.190>,
noemail@aol.com says...
"you know the thing"
Harry Bristol <hbristol@redchecks.com> wrote in news:vtes56$g7ou$5
@news.mixmin.net:
On 12 Apr 2025, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> posted some
news:vte4f8$smub$4@dont-email.me:
On 12/4/25 2:33, Governor Swill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 12:31:16 -0700, Siri Cruz wrote:
On 10/4/25 6:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:"Light" is relative.
      Conservatives love globalization when it >>>>>>>>>> crushes unions and increases profits. Why do
you think they are all in a rush to ship their
manufacturing overseas?
Nearly free markets are the best way to allocate resources and >>>>>>>>> promote free enterprise. This why Reagan pushed it.
His failure is truly free markets are self destructive and damage >>>>>>>>> society. We want nearly free with a light hand on the tiller. >>>>>>>>
Yes. And when smart people are in charge, it is dynamic.
That's why we put Trump in charge. Because when he speaks, liberals >>>>>> listen.
  Indeed.
  No one else utters as many stupid gaffes
as Trump. Electric boats, Hannibal Lector,
Haitians eating dogs, for and against Tesla,
for and against Tiktok, for and against
teleprompters, for and against tariffs, even
his own staff can't work with him.
Joe Biden
Conservatives have trouble hitting the mark on Joseph Biden because
they summarily dismissed him for 4 yrs as "Sleepy Joe."Â But what
about Biden?
he's pardoned
He never committed a crime.
I have zero felonies on record and I didn't even expunge any to get that
way.
Unlike the President and his cronies, I am the wise man who obeys the
law even without threat of recrimination. Civil penalties slide off of
me like a rapier blade off an oilskin cloak.
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. With
the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they didn't
qualify for some anymore.
That is the reason for minimum wage: to make all salaries high
enough no business gets the government to help pay.
This is actually kind of messy, and it gets worse in places where the
cost of living is extremely high. There are folks in the bay area of California who are making what would be considered high wages in the
midwest, but who cannot afford an apartment.
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.republicans,talk.politics.guns,misc.immigration.usa,
I don't think the solution is in establishing a minimum wage so much
as it is in making basic necessities affordable in the first place.
But as it is, the minimum wage in most places in the US is not really
useful because so many low-wage jobs are exempted.
--scott
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. With
the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they didn't
qualify for some anymore.
That is the reason for minimum wage: to make all salaries high
enough no business gets the government to help pay.
This is actually kind of messy, and it gets worse in places where the
cost of living is extremely high. There are folks in the bay area of California who are making what would be considered high wages in the
midwest, but who cannot afford an apartment.
I don't think the solution is in establishing a minimum wage so much
as it is in making basic necessities affordable in the first place.
But as it is, the minimum wage in most places in the US is not reallyIn most places in the U.S., the minimum wage is no issue because the average *market-determined* wage is higher than the minimum. In addition, 31 states have
useful because so many low-wage jobs are exempted.
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they
didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the average wage that employers have to pay.
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they
didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on
Welfare.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study
by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top- employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting
food stamps?
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on >>Welfare.
Cite
In most places in the U.S., the minimum wage is no issue because the average >*market-determined* wage is higher than the minimum.
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
[Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on >>Welfare.
Cite
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they
didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the
average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on
Welfare.
============
Walmart and McDonalds are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study
by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top- employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting
food stamps?
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they >>>>> didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the
average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing non-career
jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be different? The major difference is they have to apply every month by a certain date or lose
their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study
by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top- employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting
food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different kinds of people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose motivation doesn't
enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone. Dependable kids working their way through college or trade school, parents and retirees making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense thanks
to Democrats. That era has ended.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense
thanks to Democrats. That era has ended.
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages >>>>>>> because they qualified for various forms of public assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they >>>>>>> didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the >>>> average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on
Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing non-career
jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be different? The major
difference is they have to apply every month by a certain date or lose
their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of
federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study >>> by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-
employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting
food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different kinds of
people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose motivation doesn't
enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone. Dependable kids
working their way through college or trade school, parents and retirees
making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense thanks
to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages >>>>>>> because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. >>>>>>> With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they >>>>>>> didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the >>>> average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on
Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing non-career
jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be different? The major
difference is they have to apply every month by a certain date or lose
their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of >>> federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study >>> by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday. >>>
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-
employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting
food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different kinds of
people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose motivation doesn't
enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone. Dependable kids
working their way through college or trade school, parents and retirees
making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense thanks >> to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he still single?
Is he still living at home?
-hh
In article <386740613.766608177.276769.recscuba_google- huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages >>>>>>>>> because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. >>>>>>>>> With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they >>>>>>>>> didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the >>>>>> average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on
Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing non-career >>>> jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be different? The major
difference is they have to apply every month by a certain date or lose >>>> their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of >>>>> federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study >>>>> by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday. >>>>>
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-
employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting >>>>> food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different kinds of >>>> people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose motivation doesn't >>>> enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone. Dependable kids >>>> working their way through college or trade school, parents and retirees >>>> making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense thanks >>>> to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he still single?
Is he still living at home?
-hh
Doesn't matter.
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <386740613.766608177.276769.recscuba_google- huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower wages >>>>>>>>> because they qualified for various forms of public assistance. >>>>>>>>> With the increases, it lifted many just over a threshold where they >>>>>>>>> didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They *increase* the >>>>>> average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart employees >>>>> (among others) don't earn enough to make a living and have to go on >>>>> Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing non-career >>>> jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be different? The major >>>> difference is they have to apply every month by a certain date or lose >>>> their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of >>>>> federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study
by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday. >>>>>
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-
employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees getting >>>>> food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different kinds of >>>> people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose motivation doesn't >>>> enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone. Dependable kids >>>> working their way through college or trade school, parents and retirees >>>> making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense thanks
to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he still single?
Is he still living at home?
-hh
Doesn't matter.
?Doesn?t matter??
I call bull. Because there?s means tests.
Look it up, Walt.
-hh
Governor Swill wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 15:13:31 -0600, Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com>Responding to an urgent need for revenue and a trade imbalance
wrote:
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he single? Does he have kids? Is the rent he pays a Fair
Rent for
the area? Does he pay utilities? Buy his own groceries?
Or are you just spinning yet more lies?
with England that was fast destroying the infant American
industries and draining the nation of its currency, the First
United States Congress passed, and President George Washington
signed, the Hamilton Tariff of 1789, which authorized the
collection of duties on imported goods. Customs duties as set by
tariff rates up to 1860 were usually about 80–95% of all federal
revenue. Having just fought a war over taxation, among other
things, the U.S. Congress wanted a reliable source of income that
was relatively unobtrusive and easy to collect. It also sought to
protect the infant industries that had developed during the war
but which were now threatened by cheaper imports, especially from
England.
The tariffs were 20-60% increase over the previous. By
comparison, Trump's tariffs were 25% increase.
Skeeter OG wrote:
In article <1759116049.766624698.189647.recscuba_google-It's right there on your screen. Look it up, Walt. Isn't that
huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <386740613.766608177.276769.recscuba_google-
huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com>
posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the
lower wages
because they qualified for various forms of public
assistance.
With the increases, it lifted many just over a
threshold where they
didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They
*increase* the
average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart
employees
(among others) don't earn enough to make a living and
have to go on
Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers
doing non-career
jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be
different? The major
difference is they have to apply every month by a certain
date or lose
their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of
beneficiaries of
federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps,
according to a study
by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office
released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top- >>>>>>>>
employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their
employees getting
food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got
different kinds of
people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose
motivation doesn't
enable them to do anything but operate a smart phone.
Dependable kids
working their way through college or trade school, parents
and retirees
making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer
expense thanks
to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he still single?
Is he still living at home?
-hh
Doesn't matter.
?Doesn?t matter??
I call bull. Because there?s means tests.
Look it up, Walt.
-hh
What?
your name. Don't tell me it's Skeeter Origiaan Gangbanger.
Hello my name is SKeeter-Coward. What?
Siri Cruz wrote:
On 18/4/25 1:16, Mandrake the Perihelion wrote:
Governor Swill wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 15:13:31 -0600, Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com>Responding to an urgent need for revenue and a trade imbalance
wrote:
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he single? Does he have kids? Is the rent he pays a Fair
Rent for
the area? Does he pay utilities? Buy his own groceries?
Or are you just spinning yet more lies?
with England that was fast destroying the infant American
industries and draining the nation of its currency, the First
United States Congress passed, and President George Washington
signed, the Hamilton Tariff of 1789, which authorized the
collection of duties on imported goods. Customs duties as set by
tariff rates up to 1860 were usually about 80–95% of all federal
revenue. Having just fought a war over taxation, among other
things, the U.S. Congress wanted a reliable source of income that
was relatively unobtrusive and easy to collect. It also sought to
protect the infant industries that had developed during the war
but which were now threatened by cheaper imports, especially from
England.
The tariffs were 20-60% increase over the previous. By
comparison, Trump's tariffs were 25% increase.
Compare the income from exports then and now. And compare the collected
taxes on income then and now.
Less : Many :: 0 : 50%
Bob was dumbfounded by Jay Opho-otto. He demanded that there be a
writing contest in which several chapt3r 7 bankers fill out the wrecking >ball. Tice. What you say? Hit the road Jc and don't you hijack no
more. In his training, he knew that it was time to interrogate the
friends of the baby, yet all of it was behind a veil of superiority
complex in a guy who wasn't motherfucking real. He was not CATHOLIC
-hh wrote:
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <386740613.766608177.276769.recscuba_google-
huntzinger.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
Skeeter OG <invalid@none.com> wrote:
In article <vtmb1r$29s$3@toxic.dizum.net>,
tariffying@usa.org says...
On 14 Apr 2025, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> posted some
news:vtki2v$2qctt$1@dont-email.me:
Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote in
news:hAiLP.1811025$2zn8.541841@fx15.iad:
On 4/13/2025 11:25 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12/4/25 12:34, Think-It-Thru wrote:
The employees would actually make out better with the lower >>>>>>>>>>> wages because they qualified for various forms of public >>>>>>>>>>> assistance. With the increases, it lifted many just over a >>>>>>>>>>> threshold where they didn't qualify for some anymore.
Welfare programs are *not* a subsidy to employers. They
*increase* the average wage that employers have to pay.
ah, yes - Republiturd math. Never mind that most WalMart
employees (among others) don't earn enough to make a living and
have to go on Welfare.
That's how it works for low-skilled / low-paid workers doing
non-career jobs in other countries. Why should the USA be
different? The major difference is they have to apply every month >>>>>> by a certain date or lose their benefit for that month.
============
Walmart and McDonald?s are among the top employers of
beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food
stamps, according to a study by the nonpartisan Government
Accountability Office released Wednesday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top- >>>>>>> employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
============
If WalMart wages are so high, why are most of their employees
getting food stamps?
Unskilled workers don't rate premium wages. You got different
kinds of people working at Walmart. Undependable kids whose
motivation doesn't enable them to do anything but operate a smart
phone. Dependable kids working their way through college or trade >>>>>> school, parents and retirees making ends meet with an extra job.
An indirect subsidy is still a subsidy.
The US has been subsidizing most of the planet at taxpayer expense >>>>>> thanks to Democrats. That era has ended.
My son has worked for Walmart for a bit over 3 years. He
doesn't qualify for assistance. He bought his own car,
pays the payments and insurance and pays me rent and still
has money. I call bull.
Is he still single?
Is he still living at home?
-hh
Doesn't matter.
“Doesn’t matter”?
I call bull. Because there’s means tests.
Look it up, Walt.
I've found similar results. I know who I am. It took several rolls of
the die to achieve the result I was looking at with strong feelings of >sharpened steel. One whiff of that. I'll tell you more when we were
further along. Because Disney and stuff. Nobody's better than anyone
else, here. Look what they do to you. You must be joking if you think
you can opt out of the tests. You will need it at some point in your
life or you haven't hit bottom yet. I think we've all done that in the
2020s by now.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 43:41:23 |
| Calls: | 9,799 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,752 |
| Messages: | 6,189,715 |