Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks, 1 day ago
    Guess I need to go buy a few gallons of olive oil.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  2 weeks, 1 day ago
      If it comes from an EU country, but they get to pick and choose their targets. The countries that don't be nice, get hurt. No one seems to understand, this is equitable given that the EU has subsidized Airbus for 20 years, allowing them to undercut Boeing.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago
        Olive oil imported (94% of total US use) is mostly from Italy(50%) and Spain (25%). Us gets about 74% of its olive oil from those 2 countries and another 14% from other Mediterranean countries.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
          Well, I guess the Olive Oil market is going to get a beating then, if they apply it to that, although there is probably a lot of ties between cooperation in investigating the deep state vs application of tariffs.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 1 day ago
        Statism does not justify more statism. Lower EU interest rates for Airbus does not justify higher US taxes on Americans.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  2 weeks, 1 day ago
          HMMMM...".In June of 2010 the WTO ruled in favor of the United States on 80% of the total alleged subsidy amounts, and in May of 2011 a WTO appellate panel upheld all of the key findings of the earlier panel. The WTO ruled that Airbus had received $18 billion of illegal subsidies, including $15 billion of launch aid. Airbus-sponsor governments were given until December of 2011 to remove the harmful effects of all illegal subsidies. On September 22, 2016, the WTO confirmed the European governments not only failed to meet the compliance deadline to remedy $17 billion worth of past subsidies provided to Airbus, but that an additional $5 billion in illegal launch aid has since been provided to support the A350. In a last ditch effort, the EU appealed that ruling. The WTO rejected the appeal in May 2018, opening the door for the U.S. Government to initiate the WTO process for imposing tariffs on European exports to the United States to mitigate these violations."

          15 Billion of Launch Aid, seems a bit more than "lower interest rates"....

          It cascades, when they have lower costs because the EU chooses to steal money from their people to "redistribute" to Airbus, that allows them to undercut Boeing. The result is an artificial market, and those costs are masked and inserted in other things. The net effect is increased costs for every member of the society in increased taxes, prices fees etc. So, how does higher tariffs on EU products equate to higher taxes on Americans?


          http://www.boeing.com/company/key-org...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
            Trump's higher tariffs are taxes imposed on American consumers. That is what a tariff is and how a tariff tax is imposed. This has been understood by conservatives for a long time. Prior to Trump conservatives opposed tariffs. See W.M. Curtiss, The Tariff Idea, Foundation for Economic Freedom, 1953. https://fee.org/resources/the-tariff-...

            The mechanism for the EU "subsidies" in this case has been lower interest rates. According to the article you linked to: "The WTO's ruling said the EU subsidized Airbus by giving it preferential treatment on interest rates."

            Market distortions created by government subsidies do not disappear by imposing more taxes. Statism does not justify and is not cured by more statism.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by mccannon01 2 weeks ago
              So, what's your solution to "market distortions" created by other governments? I'm talking the whole gambit here (subsidies, currency manipulation, regulations preventing US goods from competing, virtual slave labor, etc.). One can praise the "free trade" ideal, but as soon as a "market distortion" is forced by another government then you no longer have free trade. What is your solution?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 weeks ago
                Trump uses Tariffs as scare tactics or at least to show them a little pain and hoping they'll become woke in a hurry.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                  His tariffs are taxes punitively imposed on American consumers.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week, 5 days ago
                    What have you bought lately that felt PUNITIVELY Priced?

                    The Theory behind absorbing these is based on all things being equal. When ONE side effectively tariffs your goods, to promote their sellers...

                    In reality. Lets use higher labor costs to pick CA vegetables if all were legal. Yep, the consumer would have to absorb higher prices. NET effect is a WIN, because we don't have to provide BILLIONS in healthcare, food stamps, housing, etc. etc. etc.

                    So, it is a LOT more complicated than "OMG we will pay more". I will GLADLY PAY MORE temporarily to get an even playing field!

                    Where is the COURAGE in Conservatives these days?

                    Apparently the tariffs don't seem to be hurting European people as much as American Producers!
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  1 week, 5 days ago
                      Tariffs enacted on our side should not be an impact on an American producer, retaliatory ones imposed will be, though. If the EU does do that, they will have legitimatized the whole WTO system and so companies that have been "punished" by the WTO and EU (Microsoft and Intel come to mind) should be able to sue them.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  Zero 1 week, 3 days ago
                        That's not true at all.
                        The company I work for buys lots of aluminum. Tariffs have made aluminum much more expensive. That has hurt our business.

                        How can you have read Rand and not be opposed to tariffs.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 week, 3 days ago
                          Aluminum prices have dropped steadily all year long. A year ago the index was at 93 today 83 that is down over 11%.

                          Market Analysis
                          Aluminum MMI: Global Demand Weakness Leads to Index Decline
                          by Belinda Fuller on SEPTEMBER 13, 2019
                          Style: Market Analysis Category: Metal Prices, Non-Ferrous Metals
                          The Aluminum Monthly Metals Index (MMI) dropped again this month, falling by one point to 83.

                          All but one of the prices tracked for the index dropped this month, with India’s primary cash price showing the biggest drop at 4.4%, followed by the LME primary 3-month price (down by 3.4%).
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  1 week, 3 days ago
                          "....forcing American manufacturers to adjust their supply chains."
                          That is the issue, businesses need to constantly review their supply chains, and when costs change and there is a cheaper source, switch.

                          ""The only tariffs that have been lifted, of all of the tariffs Trump has imposed, were the ones with Canada and Mexico as part of the (U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement). It really seems that a part of the overall strategy is that he really just likes tariffs," says Kimberly Ann Elliott,"


                          Note, the tariffs on aluminum from Canada and Mexico were lifted.
                          https://www.usnews.com/news/best-stat...

                          "The tariffs have created more supply, but demand is down and the economy is slowing down," says Bill Reinsch, the Scholl Chair in International Business at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I don't think there's anything (President Donald) Trump can do for steel beyond what he's already done, unless he gooses the economy up to 3% growth."
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  1 week, 3 days ago
                          Go read the whole thread, and you can see why. Lots of materials and products are manipulated by all parties. As Dobrien pointed out, aluminium has dropped, so if you are paying more, then something else is at play, I do not recall it being a China specific item, I thought most was local.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
                    Not true, they are imposed on imports only, the consumer has a choice: Buy import, or buy domestic (with no tariff).
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                      It is true that tariffs are taxes imposed on American consumers. Government tariffs cause higher prices on American consumption of imports targeted.

                      You always have a "choice" to do something else that is not taxed as much in the face of government coercion. That does not justify the coercion.

                      Today's conservatives are yesterday's "liberal" leftists, increasingly accepting and rationalizing collectivist-statist positions as "pragmatic" and now "acceptable".
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
                        Well, at least you are now seeing that there is no difference between the 2. We have been saying that for a couple years now. It is just the real Patriots came from the "conservative" philosphy side of things. That did not ever mean "conservatives" are all good people, defending the individuals rights. They were also called "RINOs" although that is a misleading label too, but is pointed in the right direction. There are very few real "conservatives" out in the open right now, but there were enough to get Trump elected.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                          No difference in what between what "2"?

                          "Real patriots" are individualists, not any kind of conservatism. There is no such thing as a "real conservative" -- conservativism, like liberalism, is an imprecise term. The conservative movement at an early point in time had a better understanding of economic principles than today, but was always philosophically hopeless

                          No "very few" "real conservatives" were enough to elect Trump. Trump is an anti-intellectual populist and nationalist who won a backlash against the corruption of the left in the form of the Clinton mafia. Much of that support was from a corrupted version of the 'tea party' turned populist-nationalist, and evangelicals, all anti-intellectually following the "man on the white horse", but the electoral support was broader than that.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
                            So then, you would have no one be President? You seem to have little grasp of the reality of politics today.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                              No one said there should be no president. Your comment shows no grasp of the reality of what you are reading here. Trump's anti-intellectual pragmatism and his chanting idolizers following the Pied Piper on the White Horse in the name of "reality" are not the standard of understanding politics.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week, 5 days ago
                                Thank you for pointing out WHY We NEED TRUMP!

                                When the left is in power, they corrupt EVERYTHING, the judges, the rules, the education system.

                                Then, when conservatives get power, they "Must follow the rules" so they look like proper conservatives.

                                And we get our Arses Kicked ALL DAY LONG! On the corrupted RINOs stick around. And they BEAT UP Other Non-Leftists with the Conservative Values.

                                Finally, just give me someone who is going to fight for the American PRODUCER, and the American People.

                                I will GLADLY PAY MORE to help Trump remove the Tariffs that DONT SEEM to be punishing Japanese people when we can't sell our cars there, etc. etc. etc.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                • Posted by  $  1 week, 5 days ago
                                  Well, you will be glad to know that is echoed on a lot of levels, in a lot of places, and what we hear in media is nothing near reality. Exactly what you posted is what I heard a couple people say on Lars Larsen today.
                                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                      • Posted by PeterSmith 2 weeks ago
                        "Today's conservatives are yesterday's "liberal" leftists"
                        Exactly. It's 2019 but the conservative movement is more and more looking like the democrats from 1919.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                          Conservatives argue from "tradition" as if that were the basis and starting point, but you don't have to go back to 1919 for what they are pushing today -- immigration union protectionism, censorship, tariffs, ...

                          It's understandable that people who don't know the history and the proper principles could be mislead by today's widespread demagoguery, but you would think that on an Ayn Rand forum there would be more intellectual curiosity. Those influenced by conservativism mistakenly thinking that it is the philosophical basis of America don't have to stay that way.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                          • Posted by PeterSmith 1 week, 5 days ago
                            Many conservatives I speak with can have their positions summed up as, "we oppose socialism, we just want the state to centrally plan everything."
                            Then when I point out that is basically socialism they respond with something like "stop being autistic."
                            They just don't have any grasp of politics, because of no grasp of the more fundamental philosophical concepts and so are reduced to a childish level of Trump-good, democrats-bad.
                            They just can't see that Trump isn't all that different from democrats. They don't have the knowledge, the principles, nor the thinking skills to even begin.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by  $  1 week, 5 days ago
                              You must be speaking to a weird tribe of conservatives. My experience is 90% of the people I speak with are NOT wanting government to do anything but its expected responsibilities in providing serivces used by all. The do not endorse any social systems, engineering, dogma or restrictions. You need better samples.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                              • Posted by PeterSmith 1 week, 4 days ago
                                Galt's Gulch is a pretty good example of what I'm talking about. Objectivists and actual right wingers would never be downvoting any of my posts here.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                • Posted by  $  1 week, 4 days ago
                                  I am sorry you feel that way, I refrain from downvoting anyone, unless the post is really rude, I normally upvote every post in one of my threads, simply to recognize people to take the time to participate. However, you and ewv seem predisposed to adopting a specific position, and then beating it to the point of absurdity, as if the philosophical position over rides all reality. A lot of us believe in the basics of the Objective viewpoint, but have been trying to make it fit the current reality, and discuss things in that framework. We do not get completely dedicated to a specific view on an issue as to exclude all other logic, facts or arguments. For example, to claim that all tariffs are simply statist imposition of theft is unreal and illogical, since the country was founded on their use for 30 years, and it was the only source of government income. That is fact and will not change no matter what some may think. If they are used as weapons today, their excercise has to be viewed in that context, not simply as something bad. In a perfect world, there would be no government interferance or imposition, however, we are not in a perfect world, and Ayn Rand recognized that and her philosophy is a destination, not the current location. So, discussion on how something current can fit into it, or be changed to go that way, would be more welcome than just blanket statements that reality does not match Ayn Rand's philosophy. Many of us came to Ayn Rand through Atlas shrugged basically because we value freedom and individual responsibility and effort, and do not agree with government efforts to loot us to support their goals and aims.The downvoting is an expression of frustration with what appears to be a disconnect between the reality and the ideal, and the fact you seem to be locked into the ideal.
                                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                  • PeterSmith replied 1 week, 3 days ago
                            • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week, 4 days ago
                              I think you are misreading some people.
                              I for one want the state to be "Controlled Opposition". ie, as the drug companies poison actual research, the job of the govt is to tax them (10% tax on drugs), and provide that money as RESEARCH grants for OPPOSING points of view.

                              The problem we have, and I know because I am invested in a small biotech. Is that the novelty of the research GETS Federal Aid $$$ (Millions) to help pay for the research. But none of this gets paid back. And our goal is to simply get snatched up by one of the big players as we think we have something... So the richest companies are USING Fed $$ indirectly to fund their R&D. LMAO.

                              The govt should be more like Police than participants. Keeping the rules applied evenly, PREVENTING the Soros kind of interference we have.

                              Unfortunately, even our forefathers couldn't predict HOW the MONEY would be used to attack our politics and the people who run the various governmental schemes. They just knew it would!

                              .
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by  $  1 week, 4 days ago
                                Capt, you are assuming that "govt" is a neutral entity, and the reason you see "The problem we have, and I know because I am invested in a small biotech. Is that the novelty of the research GETS Federal Aid $$$ (Millions) to help pay for the research. But none of this gets paid back. And our goal is to simply get snatched up by one of the big players as we think we have something... So the richest companies are USING Fed $$ indirectly to fund their R&D. LMAO." is that all those pharmas are connected back tot he deep state, and if you go do a little diiging, you will find they connect through most major industry. Since Clintons and Obama were brought to be politicos, they specialized in that, other families do Pharma, Entertainment, Manufactured goods like clothing and furniture, and hard goods. They all connect, they all feed each other. This is the root of the whole "Feds pay for" crap, they just steal the money, and redistribute tot he families, who then send it to the big banks, feeding the banker families. That is why, without killing the deep state itself, it will never end.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by lrshultis 1 week, 4 days ago
                    Why is it that so many look at what is easily seen and do not look at what is not seen, i.e., the future consequences of the action, in the case of tariffs, the decrease in standard of living of the consumer and the increase of tax money for the government to mess things up?
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                Foreign governments can't stop us from freely trading within jurisdictions they don't control and statist countries cannot compete with free societies. Support freedom, not Trump's statism and his populist statist rhetoric rationalizing it.

                Conservatives used to know that, as illustrated by the Curtiss book from the 1950s on tariffs and some recent articles from the Heritage Foundation.

                If someone does not want to buy imports from businesses in another country then he can choose not do it. We can't control foreign governments taxing their own citizens but can educate foreign citizens to oppose their own statism. Taxing American citizens with punitive tariffs is an additional injustice from our own government.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
                  "Someone does not want to buy imports from businesses in another country then he can choose not do it. " And that is it, your 1950's book is not relevant to today, because back then there was not the complex web of taxes, fees, and the siphoning off of money to feed the deep state projects like widespread socialism, designed to make everyone dependent on the state. The need to skim that money off, (in China and in the EU) to support their other "programs" is a driving force behind it. Trumps statements of the US being the worlds piggybank is absolutely true, His imposition of tariffs is just equalization of pressures. Many, many US products have been taxed , or "ffes or licences, or whatever) for 20-30 years now, to protect markets. China did it for 30 years with currency manipulation and theft of IP and state subsidy supports. You can either have a free market with 0 fees and taxes, or not. It cannot be a partial deal. The EU imposes a 20% end user tax on everything, making products more expensive overall. They also impose "Trade Defense Measures" against importers, rooted in politics.

                  https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/acc...

                  They also are imposing 7.5 billion in tarrifs on US products in retaliation of Trumps imposition. Trumps impositions are based on a WTO ruling, which the EU is a member of, yet they ignore that.
                  https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2...

                  So, they were found guilty of illegally providing support to Airbus, and the WTO gave the US 7.5 billion in compensation, and when the US imposes the compensatory tariffs, you get all weirded out and cry foul?

                  Illogical.

                  While tarrifs in and of themselves are a negative thing, basically manipulation and looting, the moment one country uses them, or subsidies or any artifical support, it is doomed to a spral cascade of everyone else doing it. It can either be 0 tarrifs and supports, or a free for all, and the 0 idea will never work when people vote politicians in based on their percieved protection of their constituents, even when it is detrimental overall.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                    The 1953 FEE book is an example of how conservatives used to know better than to promote tariffs. The principles, the economics and politics are the same and so are the fallacious arguments for tariffs, including the "equalization of pressures" statism. The Curtiss book addresses principles, not pragmatist appeals to range of the moment events.

                    There are still conservatives writing about this today who know better, but not from the more extreme Trump followers who emotionally cling to his demagogic sales pitches.

                    Claiming that opposition to tariffs as punitive taxes on the innocent is 'out of date' because of increasing "complexity" is a very old fallacy of the left and unprincipled pragmatism from long before the 1950s. Classical liberal economists like Von Mises addressed that fallacy long ago.

                    Socialism is worse today in this country. In most of the world in the 1950s it was worse then, in the more extreme form of growing totalitarian communism in much of the world. Today's increase in collectivism and statism here is not an excuse for more of it promoted to solve problems caused by government with more government.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by mccannon01 2 weeks ago
                  Nice dodge. Just as I thought, you have no viable solution to foreign governments creating "market distortions" that favor themselves and slowly strangle selected American enterprises into oblivion and in the name of "free trade", which in reality is "unilateral free trade", the US government is to just stand aside and let its citizens get put in the unemployment line. Yes, tariffs are a tax on the citizenry, but a properly applied retaliatory tariff only negates the "market distortion" created by the foreign government, re-prices the goods to their normal level, and prevents the wealth difference from being siphoned off by the that foreign government - the wealth stays domestic.

                  Now, if a foreign enterprise practicing free trade principles without government induced "market distortions" can out perform and out price a domestic enterprise, then so be it and let the best producer take the profit.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • -1
                    Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                    There is no "dodge"; that kind of snide personal attack is non-responsive. Trump's demagoguery is not the standard here.

                    You have no moral right to impose taxes on innocent people to punish someone else. It does not "negate" statism; it adds to it. Taxes are what "siphons off" wealth. Nothing good comes from piling statism on top of statism.

                    Trump's demagoguery is not economic, let alone moral, argument. Foreign governments do not "strangle into oblivion" a free society and do not create "unemployment" outside their own countries. Wealth must be produced before being traded; it is not "siphoned" -- or as Trump calls it "stolen" and "ripped off" . There is no basis for demanding that wealth remain "domestic". We pay for what we acquire through imports. We produce what someone else pays us for or we have no money to buy anything. Foreign statism cannot compete with a free society.

                    Conservatives (including Milton Friedman) used to understand the economic principles of this issue before following Trump the Pied Piper on the White Horse for an ex-tea party movement that has morphed into a militantly emotional and intolerant populist nationalism.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 6 days ago
                      The "dodge" comment was not a personal attack. It was an assessment of your response style. You still haven't offered your solution.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • -2
                        Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                        A "dodge" is an evasion. That is a personal attack. There is no magical, out of context political "solution" to what people do to themselves in other counties. Increasing taxes on Americans is not a substitute. There is also no magical, out of context political "solution" to the statist problems in this country -- the politics of a society depends on the basis philosophical premises widely accepted. Changing the kind of government here or anywhere else requires changing the ideas accepted within the culture. That is not an evasion.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 6 days ago
                          Your response to my query to ascertain what your solution was to the problem was a nicely written (hence "nice") avoidance (or evasion as you just put it) to the query (hence "dodge"). Therefore my response "Nice dodge" referred to your response, not to your person. If you wish to apply my response to yourself, then that is for you to deal with. You still haven't addressed the query as to what your solution would be.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • -2
                            Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                            Evasion is dishonest and immoral. You got a straightforward answer to your post, not a "dodge" or "avoidance", which is your personal attack. There are no anti-intellectual, unprincipled political "solutions" ignoring the cultural basis for the politics of a country.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 6 days ago
                              You still haven't answered the question. Evasion may not be dishonest or immoral, but could be applied if you just don't know the answer and wish to avoid feeling embarrassment by admitting you just don't know. Your not straight forward answer to the query indicates you know what you don't like, but you offer nothing to solve the problem. I figure you just don't know. Nice dodge.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • -1
                                Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                                I do not "dodge" and am not evading what you claim I "just don't know". Stop the personal attacks. You have no political control over other countries. There are no magical political "solutions" for what you don't like about the internal affairs of other countries. That is not a "dodge". There is nothing to "dodge". Your wishful thinking is not the standard.

                                You have no right to punish innocent American citizens with high taxes to try to impact foreign countries. Defending the rights of the individual is not a matter of what I "don't like". There is no excuse for conservative statism.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
                      "You have no moral right to impose taxes on innocent people to punish someone else. It does not "negate" statism; it adds to it."

                      That seems like a false premise, The United States was founded on import duties, it funded the government for many years, until the War of 1812 almost bankrupted the country and then the Civil War. While all taxes are a form of looting, elimination of them is not in the cards, because of TANSTAAFL. If you will have any form of government, you will always have to pay for it somehow. The only question is in what form?
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • -1
                        Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
                        This country was founded on the rights of the individual, not taxes. You are promoting a big increase in taxes on the innocent in order to punish someone else. It isn't even a pretense to raise money to pay for something. It is thoroughly anti-American. This is an example of conservatives as embracing leftist, collectivist, statist policies. It couldn't be any more opposed to the principles of Atlas Shrugged.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 6 days ago
                          Tariffs & import duties were virtually the only taxes at the beginning of the Republic until the whiskey tax.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  1 week, 6 days ago
                            Exactly, study the War of 1812 and the difficulties they had and how one loan from a banker kept the country going. But then, he too, was probably a statist...seems the only label being used.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • -1
                              Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                              Employing conservatives' statist, collectivist premises to excuse imposing new high taxes on the innocent in this country in the name of punishing foreign governments is vicious injustice morally inexcusable, not a mere "label". Concepts have meaning. This is an Ayn Rand forum, not a place to promote unprincipled pragmatism and anti-intellectual statism while denouncing principles as "fantasy" and concepts as meaningless "labels".
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by  $  1 week, 6 days ago
                                You do have a passion to use labels and propaganda, don't you? If you had a nickle for every "statist" "collectivists" etc you would be very wealthy. You should consider that your intense need to label is indicative of some deep issues with authority? You are acting just like the same liberals you decry, using the same tired arguments and passionate appeals to emotion. Try using logic, please.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • -1
                            Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                            So what? The country was not "founded" on taxes or any kind of taxes. It was founded on the rights of the individual. Whatever kinds of (minimal) taxes were used in the 18th century to fund government is not an excuse to impose new high taxes on innocent Americans to punish some foreign country (and not even to fund government spending). Promoting tariffs for that citing the kinds of taxes used in the 18th century is the worst kind of conservative rationalization from "tradition" without regard to proper principles.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 6 days ago
                              My response here was not to question the motives in the founding of the country, but to point out tariffs and import duties were part of the founding process and, therefore, cannot be dismissed out of hand as being "anti-American". What taxes were placed on what and why by the founders and who, if anyone, was "punished" by such practices would have to be explored on a case by case basis. You still haven't offered your solution to the problem.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • -1
                                Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
                                Tariffs were not part of the "founding process" of this country. Nor are conservative appeals to "tradition" a valid argument.

                                Your promoting punishing innocent Americans with high taxes in order to control and manipulate behavior is a statist violation of rights and most certainly is anti-American. The use of tariffs for government interference in favoring selecting industries with coercive protectionism was an early example of the anti-individualist trend described by historian Arthur Ekirch's The Decline of American Liberalism.

                                There is no political "solution" to economic conditions that you don't like. Demanding such a political "solution" to impose what you want in the economy is a statist false premise. Refusing to give you what does not morally exist, rejecting your false premises, is not a "dodge".

                                Ayn Rand once observed that conservatives and liberals differ only in that each wants to coercively control what it believes to be most important. That used to mean liberals controlling the economy and conservatives controlling personal and social behavior. Now both want to control both realms.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago in reply to this comment.
    "There is no political 'solution' to economic conditions that you don't like. Demanding such a political 'solution' to impose what you want in the economy is a statist false premise. Refusing to give you what does not morally exist, rejecting your false premises, is not a 'dodge'".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mccannon01 1 week, 5 days ago
      I have made no demands to frame what your solution might be, political or otherwise. You've wasted a lot of verbiage not saying what your solution to the problem may be. With all that avoiding, evading, deflecting and dodging you still haven't answered the question. I figure you just don't know and have nothing to offer.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago in reply to this comment.
    You have been answered in full. Your responses are increasingly personal attacks. "I do not 'dodge' and am not evading what you claim I 'just don't know'. Stop the personal attacks. You have no political control over other countries. There are no magical political 'solutions' for what you don't like about the internal affairs of other countries. That is not a 'dodge'. There is nothing to 'dodge'. Your wishful thinking is not the standard.

    "You have no right to punish innocent American citizens with high taxes to try to impact foreign countries. Defending the rights of the individual is not a matter of what I 'don't like'. There is no excuse for conservative statism."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  exceller 2 weeks ago
    "cheese, olive oil, fruit juice, jelly, seafood, wine, and textiles."

    Well, that will basically hurt the French and the Danes, both fully ripe for getting their nose broken on cheese and wine import.

    As for fruit juice: would anyone tell me why do we need to import fruit juice? We have plenty of orange trees in CA and FL.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago
      Olive oil imported (94% of total US use) is mostly from Italy(50%) and Spain (25%). Us gets about 74% of its olive oil from those 2 countries and another 14% from other Mediterranean countries. As you said, France is probably most affected by wine tariff.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  2 weeks ago
        There are domestic sources for Olive oil and wine, so no big deal. As the argument with ewv says, it can only go two ways: 0 tariffs/supports/subsidies, or 100% free for all. What we see now is the free for all getting up to speed. They will occasionally get to a point of subsidence, but someone always thinks they can slip something in. Canada did it with lumber, and the price of plywood went from 25.00 a sheet to 50.00. It never, ever is good for consumers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago
          US grown olive oil will require about a 200%-400% tariff to be price competitive with Italian olive oil. That is probably the main reason that 94% of olive oil used in the US is imported. It is a big deal.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  1 week, 6 days ago
            Freedom, I can understand it is a big deal to ssome, as it is a specific group dedicated to it's use. My point is the market is not huge, so the impact is not an issue that will reach critical mass. Moreover, I am not sure we will see many tarriffs on consumers, I am betting Airbus will get the lions share, along with critical technical areas. That also assumes Trump actually imposes them, he tends to gather weapons and then use the threat of use to negotiate. Not much different from nuclear weapons, but the same technique. I really think he will knock down more trade barriers than create, it will just be ugly for now, because the deep state has built such a complicated mess, to make it more manipulative.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 1 week, 6 days ago
              In Arizona there are olive tree's, and olives, everywhere. I would love to see them being used for something other than littering the ground. Far too few taking advantage of this resource.
              https://www.queencreekolivemill.com/

              But yes, I agree, Trump likes to remind folks that we carry the bigger stick as they approach the negotiating table. I for one think its about damn time.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • -1
          Posted by ewv 2 weeks ago
          What we see now is Trump's penchant for "trade wars", not a "free for all". I advocate capitalism, which includes free trade under objective law protecting the rights of the individual, not a "free for all", which is a false alternative to conservative statism.

          It is also not true that no intervention at all is the only possibility other than rampant statism. We have a mixed system. It is becoming more statist because of the widely accepted 'pragmatist' statist premises implementing collectivist-altruist premises. Getting government interference out of the economy is a very long term goal that depends on first changing the culture to become individualist based on reason and egoism. In the meantime, advocating more statism and punishment of the innocent for government policy is exactly the wrong approach.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  exceller 2 weeks ago
        As for me, I prefer California wines for French.

        Many CA Chardonnays and Cabernets are of way higher quality than the French.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago
          Yes, I agree, CA wines are much better value than imports in most cases. It's about the only thing I miss by not living in CA. I'd be at Silver Oak and Groth every month if I was nearby.
          The Italians keep the best they make at home, imo; I was astounded by the fantastic table wines when I was in Italy. The best from Australia are consumed quickly in Oz by "friends" of the small wineries. The French wines I have enjoyed most were very expensive and not affordable for me.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  exceller 2 weeks ago
            Right on. Fully agree.

            I tried very expensive French wines when I was in France, a long time ago. Tell you frankly, I wasn't that much impressed. I got a headache after but it may have been due to other factors.

            Yes, Silver Oak Cabs! Heavenly! When I lived in Sonoma, I learned to appreciate the Sonoma wines - Sonoma and Napa are very chauvinistic about their regions. Would you believe that Sonoma Market (an exclusive private supermarket where I used to shop) did not carry Napa wines? I was flabbergasted when first went there asking for my favorite wine that happened to be made in Napa, and the guy educated me that they don't carry Napa wines only from Sonoma and he was happy to show me his best selection. I wasn't disappointed.

            I don't have much experience with Italian, the ones available here are third rated and I did not drink much wine when in Italy. I am not particularly eager for Chianti.

            Yes, I agree about the Aussies. In Sidney I had the chance to try some heavy red ones. Delicious! New Zealand is right up there with some silky whites.

            About the French: I think the fame of French wines is all in the past. Sure they made excellent wines in the past, but it doesn't mean others did not catch up to them. Grgich Hills won the Grand Prize with its Chardonnay in Paris many years ago, stunning the French. I had the chance to visit his boutique vinery and meet the owner when I moved to CA. It was an out of world experience to taste his Chardonnay! Then he ruined it by experimenting with all kinds of things and now the Grgich Chardonnay is a sour, unpleasant product you try to forget. Only its price stayed the same, not the quality - in the stratosphere.

            Speaking of other countries, when traveling in Europe I tried Hungarian wines. Absolutely great experience! They had a wine production before WW2 which the communists managed to drive to the ground like many other branches of the economy but they recovered after 1990. Now they make some of the best whites in Europe.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by freedomforall 1 week, 6 days ago
              On Sonoma - My first visit to the "wine country" in CA was on a business trip that included a visit with a cousin living in Mountain View in '83 (iirc.) My cousin's boyfriend picked us up in his Jensen Healy convertible and I rode crouching down behind the seats from Mountain View to Chateau Souverain and back with many tasty stops along the way.
              Thanks for sharing your experience in Budapest. I hope I'll be able to visit there sometime.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago
              My good experience with wines in France was in '91. Although my preference is for Cabernet Sauvignon, due to limited time we tasted in regions of Champagne and Burgundy (in Beaune.) The tasting in Beaune was done in a cave/tunnel underground with a bottle of wine placed on a empty barrel every so often along the path through the cave. The first bottles were of the taste and spit quality, but quality improved as we went along. After about 20 wines we came to a larger cave where 5 wines were available to taste - the best of the available wines. We tasted all 5, and went back to the one that was superior (in our opinion.) As it happened we and 2 other English speaking couples (one Canadian, one Australian, one American) all decided on the same favorite wine. After finished 2 bottles, we all went to dinner together that night and stayed until the restaurant owner had to close. We all were so delighted to be able to speak English again after a week of nothing but French.
              In my trips to Australia I bought wine throughout the trips and found a retailer in Sydney that would ship it back to the US for me (when I bought 2 cases from his store, too.)
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  exceller 2 weeks ago
                I know what is feels like being able to speak English again!

                The French got over their obsession with their language, demanding that foreigners speak it if wanted to be considered for attention a long time ago, They made room for English, even the clochards on the street.

                I'd love to share your wine tasting experiences around the world.

                I'd like to add my own, from Budapest Hungary.

                Whenever in the country for my consulting projects, I stayed at the Hilton in Buda. If you ever visited the country, this would provide you with a delightful experience in tradition and wine tasting.

                https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractio...

                I hate to use this link for its commercial push, just to provide a background.

                The thing to concentrate on is the Faust Wine Cellar that has been set up in the 13the century remains of the Dominican Monastery as the foundation of the Hilton.

                https://www.danubiushotels.com/en/our...

                At any rate, we have had a superb time there. It is an experience you pay anything to have.

                Descending on the steps into the belly of the building, you are surrounded with evidence the past 800 years before your time.

                Then you find present state delights like the best Chardonnays and Cabs.

                You can't want more than that from life!
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by PeterSmith 1 week, 3 days ago in reply to this comment.
    "I am sorry you feel that way, I refrain from downvoting anyone, unless the post is really rude"
    Well someone does downvote me. By the hundreds. And only a triggered leftist would be doing that given what I post.
    "However, you and ewv seem predisposed to adopting a specific position"
    Yes it's called "Objectivism." It should be the position the majority of posters here share, but alas the majority of posters here are politically illiterate leftists, of the conservative variety.

    "A lot of us believe in the basics of the Objective viewpoint, but have been trying to make it fit the current reality"
    No that's not true. Most of you do not support Objectivism and are militantly opposed to it's ideas. Again, just look at my downvotes.
    Most of you here do not understand it and are trying to make it fight with your incorrect understanding of reality.

    "For example, to claim that all tariffs are simply statist imposition of theft is unreal and illogical"
    It is absolutely real and logical. It can be no other way if you understand the fundamentals.

    The rest of your points are equally 180 degrees wrong.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by PeterSmith 2 weeks, 1 day ago
    Another leftist policy from a leftist government.
    Why is nobody slamming this on what is meant to be an Objectivist forum?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  1 week, 6 days ago
      Because most of us understand reality and do not live in a land of philosophical fantasy. We know where the rubber meets the road, and that, while you may live in the clouds of fantasy and perfection in your utopian society, we have to deal with the real world full of evil and malice.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • -1
        Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
        Principles are not "living in a land of philosophical fantasy" in the "clouds of fantasy and perfection in your utopian society", which is a personal attack as an ignorant smear.

        Advocating more leftist government is not "understanding reality", it is unprincipled Pragmatism with collectivist criteria creating more "evil and malice" -- such as imposing new high taxes on innocent Americans for price controls in the name of punishing a foreign country. Proper principles are required for understanding and living in reality. Pragmatism does not "work".
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  1 week, 6 days ago
          Call it what you will, truth is often denied by the ignorant and unwilling to change.You are incredibly biased, prejudiced and as much a radical as the same leftists and statists you decry. Thats ok, we live in a free country (for now). Your obsessive dedication to strict interpretation and your dogma just makes your rabbit holes only big enough for you. Well Peter is probably down there in front or behind, but ok. You should spend the same effort you spend on condemning peoples discussions in learning the difference between debate and pontification.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 week, 6 days ago
          I see a pattern here every time someone disagrees with you it is a snide personal attack or ignorant smear. Try being a bit more creative.
          Trump is trying to get a fair and balanced foreign trade. You think you have all the answers in your objectivist mind. People get tired of a self imposed know it all. We have allowed China to devastate our manufacturing base. Trump is returning much of it to the US. Record low unemployment and rising wages have been a result. All while fighting off a coup.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • -1
            Posted by ewv 1 week, 6 days ago
            Stop your personal attacks. An unprincipled ends-justifies-the-means pragmatist accusation of Peter of "living in a land of philosophical fantasy" in the "clouds of fantasy and perfection in your utopian society" is a snide personal attack and an ignorant smear, and so is your latest personal attack on me.

            Rejecting statism (and pragmatism) on an Ayn Rand forum is and should be routine, not an excuse for militant conservative resentment with "you have all the answers in your objectivist mind" and "people get tired of a self imposed know it all". If you don't like Ayn Rand's philosophy you are welcome to post somewhere else.

            Trump has been infatuated with statist tariffs since the 1980s. "Fair and balanced" trade in the mind of a statist is not economic freedom, and neither are his "solutions" of nationalist trade wars with higher taxes punishing innocent Americans.

            The "pattern" here is rejection of militant statist conservatives routinely and stubbornly promoting the violation of rights of the individual. Especially on a forum for Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason and individualism it should be no surprise that such statism is and should be rejected and denounced.

            That was Peter's point, for which he is savagely 'downvoted' into oblivion in order to 'hide' all of his post by militant, anti-Ayn Rand conservatives, and which evidently went over the heads of the same anti-intellectuals who maliciously corrupt the purpose of this forum and militantly attack with seething resentment anyone who dares to defend the rights of the individual on an Ayn Rand forum.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo