American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

In theory what you stated was great. In application it kind of fails against how the American system works. What you've described is more classic capitalism than late-stage capitalism IMO. What you've left out are your definition and discussion are the actual manipulations of the market put in place by the monopolies, the robber barons, and their paid for servants in Washington (and state houses around the nation). You're referencing a free- market mindset where supply and demand establish prices, which is clearly not the case in the United States. The government creates these trade barriers, where the costs are passed onto the consumer, then monopolies use those price increases to raise their prices and generate greater profits. Worse, the government then piles on "incentives" or subsidies to certain participants in the market which are derived directly from taxes, so the people take in the ass coming and going. That's late-stage capitalism, what we've seen in the economy, not what you've described (which was a great description of how the market should work - freely).



Can you point to any examples of these tariffs NOT being passed onto the consumer in the Trump era? Because every indication is those tariffs have been treated like a cost and then just passed onto the consumer to spike greater inflation.



That's some serious Utopian thinking. You still need to make your product affordable to consumers. If costs are at a certain level you can combat those forces by controlling others like regulations and labor. If spending one dollar controlling regulations and labor mean I make two dollars in additional profit and don't impact the cost of product to consumers, hence not impacting my market, then that's a great use of funds and still makes me more money. If I just accepted those forces and passed those costs of business onto the consumer I would quickly see me outprice my product and lose my market all together.

You have a lot of points there that I don't generally disagree with, but...

The fact that our late-stage capitalism monopolistic corporate overlords can just have the prices of things be whatever they like without competition getting in the way, that just further proves the point that actual costs often have only a vague connection to customer prices.

If a company can just raise the price of a product to cover the rising costs... why wouldn't they have already hiked those prices as high as they think they can before the costs hike? What is utopian is thinking they need excuses.

And yes, as you said there is a limit to raising prices which is that you start losing marketshare, but if that's the main limit, and you have a functional monopoly which is massively profitable as they tend to be, then you have a situation where prices are likely to be fairly separate from the costs. The consumer prices will always rise as high as they can go regardless of the costs, one way or the other.

We are however, not actually quite at that extreme yet, although that's thw direction the economy is heading towards.

Again, I have no particular love for Trump or his economic policy. I think he's a self-serving moron, and I don't expect him to make smart tariff decisions that don't hurt ordinary people. But that's because of who he is and what he cares about, not about tariffs as such.

The idea that tariffs or taxes or whatever always hurt customers is neoliberal corporate propaganda. Tariffs are not inherently good or bad, or harmless or harmful, and the argument against them should not be made in the way it has been made around this election cycle, where it's used as another tool to crap on Trump voters. No, they don't know how tariffs actually work, but they are no more clueless about that than people who make those "you will pay the price for any tariff" meme videos.

We could get further into the details of modern supply chains and complicated issues like "what does country of origin even mean these days" and the fact that multinational corporations can do so much to move cost of manufacturing around that tariff at one point might actually be almost completely offset by redefining internally what "the value" of that product is at that border.

But really my point is just that while I get that people hate Trump and his policies, just because Trump is for a thing doesn't mean thing inherently bad.

I just want people to remember that a lot of the time, keeping costs down does very little to keep prices down, and thus it shouldn't be used as the multipurpose argument against anything corporations don't like, which is what I see happening all the time. Not just with tariffs, but also labor costs, regulations and corporate taxes.

[Lanny_McDonald]

It's going to be worse than anyone can imagine.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Again, a big meh. Competition is one way to describe that. The only satellite internet provider, offering very high monthly prices, and really not much better than any normal broadband service.

Internerlt access only matters if it's actually affordable. Maybe Elon Musk and his coziness with the White House will provide discounted or free internet access to everybody. Although all internet traffic will be routed to twitters servers. Probably.

It's $50 for a Roam plan (50GB limit, $165 for unlimited).

https://www.starlink.com/us/service-plans

You've completely missed the point of Starlink if you're comparing them to normal broadband. That's not the use case of Starlink. It's so that people in rural areas, or campers, RVers, etc. have another option (or in a lot of cases only option) for high speed internet. I am astounded that anyone can try and portray this as a negative thing.

[Ozy_Flame]

50GB? Hah. For modern use that gets used in about one week. Read the fine print - you pay by the GB after you hit your limit. That's why they have unlimited plans the way they do. If you have 4K Ultra HD TV and you're streaming movies, that's about 7-10 GB an hour. Their unlimited plans go well into the hundreds, with their emergency broadband as high as $1000/month.

I also have Bell rural 5 mbps, and it's more reliable than Starlink. In fact, I use it as a baseline for reliability when Starlink can't provide service. In my rural area in the forest.

And I'm not sure why this is such groundbreaking stuff? Satellite TV - and even Internet-based satellite access - has been around forever, is this really that amaze-balls that we have to praise Elon Musk? Teledesic and HughesNet were first to the punch.

Again, big big meh.

[direwolf]

Those responses to AOC’a tweet are mindblowing. “Trump is real. He cares about the working class. He’s gonna get us the money. He’s an outsider. He lets men have a voice.”

Holy f***, American voters are dumb. Just completely brainwashed.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Itse

The idea that tariffs or taxes or whatever always hurt customers is neoliberal corporate propaganda.

Tariffs are not inherently good or bad, or harmless or harmful, and the argument against them should not be made in the way it has been made around this election cycle, where it's used as another tool to crap on Trump voters.

Sure, and guns don't kill people.

No, they don't know how tariffs actually work, but they are no more clueless about that than people who make those "you will pay the price for any tariff" meme videos.

You're right, we're just clueless and have no idea about how tariffs work, so please educate. As previously asked, can you point to instances of this being accurate? It seems that Trump's use of tariffs have been strictly as a punishment to other nations rather than having any economic design behind them (protectionism, development of industry or market, etc.), and as a result, the cost being passed to consumers and acting as a mechanism to kick inflation into gear. I'm interested in seeing this other side of Trump's approach to using tariffs that you obviously see and no one else does.

[Paulie Walnuts]

He lets men have a voice is wild.

Lots of incels that Gullfoss loves to post already posting your body my choice and telling women they won’t have a choice.

[Paulie Walnuts]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1856001742854656255

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

He lets men have a voice is wild.

This is how Gen Z is turning out. The absolute turn of Gen Z males to the right is going to completely wrench voting patterns in the Western world for decades to come. And it's a very complicated, nuanced social shift that involves social equality issues, influence of online media personalities, impressions of modern masculinity, economic uncertainty, identity politics and the constant search for easy answers and instant escapes from their personal challenges.

In many ways, it is turning out that what is old is new again - it happened with Reagan and Thatcher, the "silent majority" of the early 70's, and even in central Europe in the 20's and 30's.

[direwolf]

Miller is arguably the most evil sack of s*** in Trump’s inner circle. Things are gonna get really ugly down there.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by direwolf

Those responses to AOC’a tweet are mindblowing. “Trump is real. He cares about the working class. He’s gonna get us the money. He’s an outsider. He lets men have a voice.”

Holy f***, American voters are dumb. Just completely brainwashed.

But they voted for AOC too.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

He lets men have a voice is wild.

Lots of incels that Gullfoss loves to post already posting your body my choice and telling women they won’t have a choice.

It’s al just young uneducated men falling into the Jordan Peterson style rhetoric. It’s all bs but they can use it to justify their bad behavior and points of view. But unfortunately the dems need to find a way to reach these people.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It's going to be worse than anyone can imagine.

If it is, I wonder if we see a true breakup of the United States. California has already called special legislative sessions to "Trump-proof" the state (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/1...tance-00188526), but what happens when Trump starts passing federal laws like a national abortion ban? I don't see the heavily blue states just standing back and accepting it, they're going to push back and could eventually start talking about secession. And with a state like California that has a higher GDP than all but a few of the largest countries in the world, that wouldn't be an empty threat

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It's going to be worse than anyone can imagine.

Given that people have imagined the end of Democracy, the establishment of a Christian Caliphate, and global war. Im going to bet on not worse than imagined.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

If it is, I wonder if we see a true breakup of the United States. California has already called special legislative sessions to "Trump-proof" the state (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/1...tance-00188526), but what happens when Trump starts passing federal laws like a national abortion ban? I don't see the heavily blue states just standing back and accepting it, they're going to push back and could eventually start talking about secession. And with a state like California that has a higher GDP than all but a few of the largest countries in the world, that wouldn't be an empty threat

I can't see a national abortion ban or any other federal social laws. The whole point of reversing Roe v Wade was to de-federalize it and give it to the states. A national abortion ban would really be going to far the other way giving it back to the federal government, I can't see all republicans being on board, especially those in purple states. That's one way to lose the Senate in 2026 in a hurry.

Up in 2026
There's still Susan Collins in Maine,
The other Texas seat
North Carolina
Georgia
Iowa

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

But they voted for AOC too.

Which proves it's not about policy or beliefs, it's about personality. Both Trump and AOC are loud public figures that "push back" against the status quo. Nothing else matters beyond that perception

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

Given that people have imagined the end of Democracy, the establishment of a Christian Caliphate, and global war. Im going to bet on not worse than imagined.

Okay, maybe it's going to be just as imagined, just with more Elon Musk!

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://twitter.com/user/status/1856001742854656255

I mean, just so we're clear here, this is actually talking about me since I immigrated here and am now a citizen. A white male, in his 40's, who is highly educated and is in the profession class. I am this exact description, but I'm not feeling directly threatened by that policy.

So, you have to ask yourself, why don't I feel threatened?

[activeStick]

Sorry, what is his reasoning for removing citizenship from citizens who were at one time, immigrants? Like, this would include Melania, Elon, etc. etc.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Okay, maybe it's going to be just as imagined, just with more Elon Musk!

The ironic part is if Elmo gets into the White House, does that make Twitter state-sponsored media?