Tariffs...what to make of them.

Dan Walters

February 9 at 10:33 AM ·
Ron Howard has summed up what many of us believe. Including me....
“I'm a liberal, but that doesn't mean what a lot of you apparently think it does. Let's break it down, shall we? Because quite frankly, I'm getting a little tired of being told what I believe and what I stand for. Spoiler alert: not every liberal is the same, though the majority of liberals I know think along roughly these same lines:
1. I believe a country should take care of its weakest members. A country cannot call itself civilized when its children, disabled, sick, and elderly are neglected. PERIOD.
2. I believe healthcare is a right, not a privilege. Somehow that's interpreted as "I believe Obamacare is the end-all, be-all." This is not the case. I'm fully aware that the ACA has problems, that a national healthcare system would require everyone to chip in, and that it's impossible to create one that is devoid of flaws, but I have yet to hear an argument against it that makes "let people die because they can't afford healthcare" a better alternative. I believe healthcare should be far cheaper than it is, and that everyone should have access to it. And no, I'm not opposed to paying higher taxes in the name of making that happen.
3. I believe education should be affordable. It doesn't necessarily have to be free (though it works in other countries so I'm mystified as to why it can't work in the US), but at the end of the day, there is no excuse for students graduating college saddled with five- or six-figure debt.
4. I don't believe your money should be taken from you and given to people who don't want to work. I have literally never encountered anyone who believes this. Ever. I just have a massive moral problem with a society where a handful of people can possess the majority of the wealth while there are people literally starving to death, freezing to death, or dying because they can't afford to go to the doctor. Fair wages, lower housing costs, universal healthcare, affordable education, and the wealthy actually paying their share would go a long way toward alleviating this. Somehow believing that makes me a communist.
5. I don't throw around "I'm willing to pay higher taxes" lightly. If I'm suggesting something that involves paying more, well, it's because I'm fine with paying my share as long as it's actually going to something besides lining corporate pockets or bombing other countries while Americans die without healthcare.
6. I believe companies should be required to pay their employees a decent, livable wage. Somehow this is always interpreted as me wanting burger flippers to be able to afford a penthouse apartment and a Mercedes. What it actually means is that no one should have to work three full-time jobs just to keep their head above water. Restaurant servers should not have to rely on tips, multibillion-dollar companies should not have employees on food stamps, workers shouldn't have to work themselves into the ground just to barely make ends meet, and minimum wage should be enough for someone to work 40 hours and live.
7. I am not anti-Christian. I have no desire to stop Christians from being Christians, to close churches, to ban the Bible, to forbid prayer in school, etc. (BTW, prayer in school is NOT illegal; *compulsory* prayer in school is - and should be - illegal). All I ask is that Christians recognize *my* right to live according to *my* beliefs. When I get pissed off that a politician is trying to legislate Scripture into law, I'm not "offended by Christianity" -- I'm offended that you're trying to force me to live by your religion's rules. You know how you get really upset at the thought of Muslims imposing Sharia law on you? That's how I feel about Christians trying to impose biblical law on me. Be a Christian. Do your thing. Just don't force it on me or mine.
8. I don't believe LGBT people should have more rights than you. I just believe they should have the *same* rights as you.
9. I don't believe illegal immigrants should come to America and have the world at their feet, especially since THIS ISN'T WHAT THEY DO (spoiler: undocumented immigrants are ineligible for all those programs they're supposed to be abusing, and if they're "stealing" your job it's because your employer is hiring illegally). I believe there are far more humane ways to handle undocumented immigration than our current practices (i.e., detaining children, splitting up families, ending DACA, etc).
10. I don't believe the government should regulate everything, but since greed is such a driving force in our country, we NEED regulations to prevent cut corners, environmental destruction, tainted food/water, unsafe materials in consumable goods or medical equipment, etc. It's not that I want the government's hands in everything -- I just don't trust people trying to make money to ensure that their products/practices/etc. are actually SAFE. Is the government devoid of shadiness? Of course not. But with those regulations in place, consumers have recourse if they're harmed and companies are liable for medical bills, environmental cleanup, etc. Just kind of seems like common sense when the alternative to government regulation is letting companies bring their bottom line into the equation.
11. I believe our current administration is fascist. Not because I dislike them or because I can’t get over an election, but because I've spent too many years reading and learning about the Third Reich to miss the similarities. Not because any administration I dislike must be Nazis, but because things are actually mirroring authoritarian and fascist regimes of the past.
12. I believe the systemic racism and misogyny in our society is much worse than many people think, and desperately needs to be addressed. Which means those with privilege -- white, straight, male, economic, etc. -- need to start listening, even if you don't like what you're hearing, so we can start dismantling everything that's causing people to be marginalized.
13. I am not interested in coming after your blessed guns, nor is anyone serving in government. What I am interested in is the enforcement of present laws and enacting new, common sense gun regulations. Got another opinion? Put it on your page, not mine.
14. I believe in so-called political correctness. I prefer to think it’s social politeness. If I call you Chuck and you say you prefer to be called Charles I’ll call you Charles. It’s the polite thing to do. Not because everyone is a delicate snowflake, but because as Maya Angelou put it, when we know better, we do better. When someone tells you that a term or phrase is more accurate/less hurtful than the one you're using, you now know better. So why not do better? How does it hurt you to NOT hurt another person?
15. I believe in funding sustainable energy, including offering education to people currently working in coal or oil so they can change jobs. There are too many sustainable options available for us to continue with coal and oil. Sorry, billionaires. Maybe try investing in something else.
16. I believe that women should not be treated as a separate class of human. They should be paid the same as men who do the same work, should have the same rights as men and should be free from abuse. Why on earth shouldn’t they be?
I think that about covers it. Bottom line is that I'm a liberal because I think we should take care of each other. That doesn't mean you should work 80 hours a week so your lazy neighbor can get all your money. It just means I don't believe there is any scenario in which preventable suffering is an acceptable outcome as long as money is saved.”
Ron Howard
HAPPYorSORRYnot_readingjpg.jpeg
 
They probably get skipped over for aid like FEMA did the homes displaying Trump signs.
Weren't all the trumpers attacking FEMA after the nitwit spread a bunch of false claims about FEMA? I'd stay away from those houses too.
 
LOL as Lewis Black once said (about Dick Chaney and Haliburton) IS ANYBODY FUCKING HOME HERE?

The State Department was planning to buy $400 million worth of “Armored Tesla” later this year, according to its 2025 procurement forecast, a document outlining projections of anticipated contracts, which was published in December. But after reports emerged on Wednesday of the potential for conflict of interest given Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s prominent role in the Trump Administration, the document was updated, removing mention of Tesla and changing the line item to “Armored Electric Vehicles” instead.

As of late Wednesday, both versions of the 2025 procurement forecast remained available on different State Department webpages. The earlier version that mentions Tesla also lists the planned procurement under NAICS Code 311999, an industry code for miscellaneous food manufacturing, while the newer version, which says it was modified at 9:12 p.m., Feb. 12, lists the revised “Armored Electric Vehicles” procurement under NAICS Code 561613 for “Armored Car Services.” No other changes were made in the document, which contains 319 other line items.

https://time.com/7221880/state-depa...orecast-tesla-armored-electric-vehicles-musk/

I mean after musk spent 250m on trump, I guess 400m isnt a bad ROI.
 
Today is going to be the Department of Education two things how this hurts NJ is we will be paying more in property taxes next if you have children in special education which I had a daughter in early intervention all the way up to 20 or 21 in high school. This will hurt the working families, the cost of special ed is around 30k per year per student. All these cuts are to give billionaires and the top 1% a tax cuts. If you didn't know that for every dollar sent to DC NJ gets back around 72 cents and some of red states get up to or more than a $1.44. Thats all I am saying.
 
As of late Wednesday, both versions of the 2025 procurement forecast remained available on different State Department webpages. The earlier version that mentions Tesla also lists the planned procurement under NAICS Code 311999, an industry code for miscellaneous food manufacturing, while the newer version, which says it was modified at 9:12 p.m., Feb. 12, lists the revised “Armored Electric Vehicles” procurement under NAICS Code 561613 for “Armored Car Services.” No other changes were made in the document, which contains 319 other line items.

https://time.com/7221880/state-depa...orecast-tesla-armored-electric-vehicles-musk/

I mean after musk spent 250m on trump, I guess 400m isnt a bad ROI.

Weren't these put on the list in Nov '24 and the line item updated in Dec '24 by the previous administration? I didn't see that mentioned in the article anywhere. NY Times seems to have also left that out. Btw Fuck Dick Cheney lol
 
Weren't these put on the list in Nov '24 and the line item updated in Dec '24 by the previous administration? I didn't see that mentioned in the article anywhere. NY Times seems to have also left that out. Btw Fuck Dick Cheney lol
After trump or was it Elon got elected? And I Thought the DOGE boys were supposed to be routing out waste....we need 400 million in teslas?.....If they are $80,000 each, thats 5000 Teslas.... Please, explain to us how this is not a conflict of interest....im listening lol. Then space X got a 38.8M contract on monday.....LOL nothing to see here.
 
[
LOL as Lewis Black once said (about Dick Chaney and Haliburton) IS ANYBODY FUCKING HOME HERE?

The State Department was planning to buy $400 million worth of “Armored Tesla” later this year, according to its 2025 procurement forecast, a document outlining projections of anticipated contracts, which was published in December. But after reports emerged on Wednesday of the potential for conflict of interest given Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s prominent role in the Trump Administration, the document was updated, removing mention of Tesla and changing the line item to “Armored Electric Vehicles” instead.

As of late Wednesday, both versions of the 2025 procurement forecast remained available on different State Department webpages. The earlier version that mentions Tesla also lists the planned procurement under NAICS Code 311999, an industry code for miscellaneous food manufacturing, while the newer version, which says it was modified at 9:12 p.m., Feb. 12, lists the revised “Armored Electric Vehicles” procurement under NAICS Code 561613 for “Armored Car Services.” No other changes were made in the document, which contains 319 other line items.

https://time.com/7221880/state-depa...orecast-tesla-armored-electric-vehicles-musk/

I mean after musk spent 250m on trump, I guess 400m isnt a bad ROI.
LOL as Lewis Black once said (about Dick Chaney and Haliburton) IS ANYBODY FUCKING HOME HERE?

The State Department was planning to buy $400 million worth of “Armored Tesla” later this year, according to its 2025 procurement forecast, a document outlining projections of anticipated contracts, which was published in December. But after reports emerged on Wednesday of the potential for conflict of interest given Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s prominent role in the Trump Administration, the document was updated, removing mention of Tesla and changing the line item to “Armored Electric Vehicles” instead.

As of late Wednesday, both versions of the 2025 procurement forecast remained available on different State Department webpages. The earlier version that mentions Tesla also lists the planned procurement under NAICS Code 311999, an industry code for miscellaneous food manufacturing, while the newer version, which says it was modified at 9:12 p.m., Feb. 12, lists the revised “Armored Electric Vehicles” procurement under NAICS Code 561613 for “Armored Car Services.” No other changes were made in the document, which contains 319 other line items.

https://time.com/7221880/state-depa...orecast-tesla-armored-electric-vehicles-musk/

I mean after musk spent 250m on trump, I guess 400m isnt a bad ROI.
You have cherry picked nicely - but you left out that the article also notes no contract has been awarded and this was part of a procurement interest from the PREVIOUS administration. Trumps fast, but you think they received a bid in the last month and a half. GTFO.

I mean, the Tesla does seem to be the electric car of choice. Would this make Trump eco friendly vs a huge gas burning Arbams Tank?

You may want to check with the Brewery Dojo guy you listen too and see what he says.

Did you see this one in TIme?

IMG_6637.jpegIMG_6618.jpeg
 
[

You have cherry picked nicely - but you left out that the article also notes no contract has been awarded and this was part of a procurement interest from the PREVIOUS administration. Trumps fast, but you think they received a bid in the last month and a half. GTFO.

I mean, the Tesla does seem to be the electric car of choice. Would this make Trump eco friendly vs a huge gas burning Arbams Tank?

You may want to check with the Brewery Dojo guy you listen too and see what he says.

Did you see this one in TIme?

View attachment 255493View attachment 255494
I mean you can explain to me how your boy Elon being in charge of the slashing and burning of anything and everything in our goverment...that is in HIS opinion waste....WHILE also being the CEO of companies who receive billions in govt contracts is not a conflict of interest.....Please, im listening. LOL

200.gif
 
Back
Top Bottom