Community Stories

Hey you 'muricans ... get those Swiss watches pronto [tariffs and international trade]

Dsloan
Posts
3,418
Likes
22,758
The Father The Father
Holy moly. If all you guys got in room together I hope you all have knee pads as you gobble each other.

1 (1).webp
 
watchyouwant
Posts
5,436
Likes
9,293
M'Bob M'Bob
I just love this thread.

We all were just itching for years to jump into the thick of politics, but anytime we got near, the thread was shut down. But allowing this civil and important discourse has been SO interesting and cathartic. So thanks to the moderators for providing the outlet.

Secretly, I fear, however, that the passion and enthusiasm demonstrated here denotes a sad world political climate, and bumping the interest in watches down quite a bit. Maybe hobbies tend to thrive when folks are happier about daily life, and more confident in a stable world economy.

There are Collectors for Kalashnikov AK 47 ...
 
Dsloan
Posts
3,418
Likes
22,758
M'Bob M'Bob
Maybe hobbies tend to thrive when folks are happier about daily life, and more confident in a stable world economy.
I, for one, have an easier time burning through my disposable income when I'm not terrified about the state of the world. It's also fun to buy watches to celebrate life being good.

I've also noticed lately: other forums / subreddits that are typically very strict about political discussions getting quite lenient, which I think is a sign of just how dire the situation is. That said, I get temporarily banned from the Bogelheads subreddit for saying "hey, I'm still auto-buying index funds in my IRA but I did also load up my basement with emergency supplies and we're exploring options to off-shore some resources if we need to leave in a hurry." Those index investors are very strict.
 
CBM1590
Posts
988
Likes
3,815
Fascinating read that I’ve stayed out of except to “peace-make” about a week ago. The views expressed, not only from Americans, but those from all over the world, sum up the differences in viewpoints quite well.

As to the Electoral College reform/elimination points, that’s a hard pass from me. It would eliminate every rural vote in this country. We would no longer be separated by inherent differences of opinion, but also divided along distinct urban vs rural lines. (Please don’t miss the fact that the citizenry in urban centers eat and depend on what is produced in the rural ones).

And to tie into the tariff issue, we’d all pay more to import more food if that becomes necessary.

IMG_5541.webp
 
Dan S
Posts
21,842
Likes
49,556
CBM1590 CBM1590
Fascinating read that I’ve stayed out of except to “peace-make” about a week ago. The views expressed, not only from Americans, but those from all over the world, sum up the differences in viewpoints quite well.

As to the Electoral College reform/elimination points, that’s a hard pass from me. It would eliminate every rural vote in this country. We would no longer be separated by inherent differences of opinion, but also divided along distinct urban vs rural lines. (Please don’t miss the fact that the citizenry in urban centers eat and depend on what is produced in the rural ones).

And to tie into the tariff issue, we’d all pay more to import more food if that becomes necessary.

IMG_5541.webp
There are various perspectives that one could take on this, but here is a different take. The only states that had any realistic input into the last presidential election were:

Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin
Arizona
North Carolina
Georgia
Nevada

These are sunbelt and industrial states for the most part and I wouldn't say that they predominantly reflect the rural/urban divide you mention, but others can decide for themselves.

One thing that is clear, is that if the compact went into effect, every vote in the country would count equally, and candidates would be motivated to campaign even in deep red and blue states. This is one of many efforts gaining traction (e.g. open primaries with ranked-choice voting) to counter the current electoral system, which polarizes the country by making it almost impossible for centrist candidates.

As you probably know, farmers are amongst the most likely to be hurt by the trade war. IIRC, China buys a significant amount of soy, wheat, and corn.
Edited:
 
Dan S
Posts
21,842
Likes
49,556
Warren Buffett weighed in yesterday:

“Trade should not be a weapon. I do think that the more prosperous the rest of the world becomes, it won’t be at our expense, the more prosperous we’ll become, and the safer we’ll feel, and your children will feel someday.”

Trade and tariffs “can be an act of war,” added the legendary investor. “And I think it’s led to bad things. Just the attitudes it’s brought out. In the United States, I mean, we should be looking to trade with the rest of the world and we should do what we do best and they should do what they do best.”

Edit: Not so surprising given his history, but Charles Koch was also very critical in an award speech two days ago.
Edited:
 
pdxleaf
Posts
5,415
Likes
18,885
The Father The Father
Holy moly. If all you guys got in room together I hope you all have knee pads as you gobble each other.

You got it 180.

Screenshot_20250503_120444_Chrome.webp
 
pdxleaf
Posts
5,415
Likes
18,885
Trev Trev
Probably one of the worst US presidential candidates I can recall. She did OK during scripted interviews and when a teleprompter was present, but anything off-script her behavior often deteriorated in to incoherent rambling and irrelevant anecdotes. Sometimes incapable of answering even basic questions. It was pretty discouraging to watch and I genuinely felt embarrassed for the Democrats. They had a chance to start fresh and fumbled so hard that no amount of campaign money, media + celebrity support could save them, even against Trump.
dsio dsio
Much as I want to resist offering any input, she was mediocre at best and surrounded be some of the worst advisors ever. On tv in Australia I remember seeing she had been endorsed by Liz and Dick Cheney and was doing a tour with one of them and wondering who is that going to motivate?

Which Trump voters are sitting there going "Well I'm not down for any of her policies but if the guy who mistook his hunting buddy's face for a pheasant thinks she's cool count me in", and which Democrats are going to be energised by having the Iraq war guy on their side?

It'd be like an Australian candidate saying "Hey we got Eddie McGuire on our side, go Collingwood"

Well, it's probably time to follow Dennis's example.

A head in a jar would be a better candidate than Trump.

Trump is an empty sack of a human who is a useful tool for others to manipulate. He doesn't know what he is signing when he signs the executive orders and exhibits clear signs of dementia. In his case, the signs are harder to see because he's always been that way, at least according to what his family says about him.

As to comparing him to Kamala and Hillary, we may not like all their policies but those two were light years ahead in their knowledge, experience, accomplishments, and character.
 
pdxleaf
Posts
5,415
Likes
18,885
Justify this.
Screenshot_20250503_123928_Chrome.webp Screenshot_20250503_124032_Chrome.webp


I don't understand why Trump got elected but it sure as shit wasn't because Kamala and Hillary weren't good candidates.

I mean, WTF!
 
pdxleaf
Posts
5,415
Likes
18,885
Yep, Trump's just another politician who is equally bad.

Screenshot_20250503_124555_Chrome.webp Screenshot_20250503_124643_Chrome.webp
 
pdxleaf
Posts
5,415
Likes
18,885
Tariffs, yep, that's the big problem. Wish I had your problems.
 
CBM1590
Posts
988
Likes
3,815
Dan S Dan S
The only states that had any realistic input into the last presidential election were:

Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin
Arizona
North Carolina
Georgia
Nevada
Agree with your point. You and I are essentially saying the same thing given that each of those states were largely divided by rural vs urban votes…Trump just made more inroads into the urban vote than expected (or Harris lost more of the urban votes than expected, depending on your point of view).
 
Dan S
Posts
21,842
Likes
49,556
CBM1590 CBM1590
Agree with your point. You and I are essentially saying the same thing given that each of those states were largely divided by rural vs urban votes…Trump just made more inroads into the urban vote than expected (or Harris lost more of the urban votes than expected, depending on your point of view).
So you think that rural votes should weigh more heavily than urban votes? 😵‍💫

I guess it's normal to have a bias that aligns with one's own interests, and the Republicans are fighting for the electoral college because it benefits them (i.e. Bush and Trump 45). But I personally think each vote should be weighted equally. The original justification for the electoral college seems very out of date today.
 
CBM1590
Posts
988
Likes
3,815
Dan S Dan S
So you think that rural votes should weigh more heavily than urban votes? 😵‍💫
Never said nor implied that. However, if people are comfortable allowing the major metropolitan areas of this country to decide the presidency, so be it (that’s what going to the popular vote will do to most elections). I’m not.

Edited for clarity
Edited:
 
Dan S
Posts
21,842
Likes
49,556
CBM1590 CBM1590
Never said nor implied that. However, if people are comfortable allowing the major metropolitan areas of this country to decide the presidency, so be it. I’m not.
You are denying it, but that is de facto the same thing as saying the rural votes should count more than urban votes. I don't see any other way to interpret your comments. You may not realize this, but that sounds like a dog-whistle.

As you probably know, the electoral college was originally created to benefit the southern states in the context of the 3/5 rule.
Edited:
 
49 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...