Don't know about you guys but 99% of the time on my phone I'm using the desktop version of a page. I hate mobile site design with its tons of empty space and enormous fonts.
I can't stand the web while using my phone either. The weird thing is, the sites I have control over look the same on either phone or tablet or desktop.
And I'm no dummy, but sure as hell not a hotshot. Fully functional web pages.
Can you imagine taking your son to the ballpark on Bobblehead Night, and you paid $90 for two tickets, $35 to park, another $50 on two hotdogs, two beers, a couple of cokes and maybe a bag of peanuts and some jackoff tells you you're getting a "virtual bobblehead" added to your "Ethereum wallet", whatever the fuck that is?
Just to refine the point a little (since I can't stand those people) I'll ask them if putting on their seat belt means the SJW plans on driving drunk or watching a movie on their phone while behind the wheel. Or....maybe they're just taking reasonable precautions because an unlikely event can be disastrous, not because it's a sign of guilt or not being able to control themselves.
I'm a little surprised that it was an Asia Argento who put some breaks on the #MeToo witch hunt, instead of another Duke Lacrosse incident blowing up in their faces.
The Keillor travesty, the bad date with Aziz Ansari, and the Woman who likes to collect photos of 12 year old boys and fuck them. This is not an anomaly. There will be more to come. I do think that society now understands the nature of the movement, and many of it's adherents, so that is fortunate.
For some strange reason, there are people who cannot grasp the simple concept of risk versus reward, and cannot understand that it is not fear.
Ask em if they put their seat belts on when they get in the car. It's not because they're planning on getting in an accident, but on the 1% chance (or whatever) that they might get in an accident that day. SJW's are thick but they'd have a hard time failing to see the logic in the comparison.
Excellent analogy. What happened here is that the accusation became the conviction. So while there wasn't a large chance of being accused, the results were ruinous if you were. So why interact other than what is absolutely necessary? The problem is that you don't know, and the woman has the rest of her life to decide if she wants to destroy you.
It's dreadful, really. Women and men in weaker positions getting all uppity and refusing to just shut up like good little peons.
Any professor that would house a student is just asking to lose their career.
You've certainly demonstrated we live in the age of wild fearmongering.
You're completely missing the point. Ol Olsoc isn't saying that sexual misconduct is acceptable or that people should remain silent about abuse against them when it happens.
And make no mistake, I am saying that if someone is a victim of sexual misconduct, there are appropriate venues like the legal system and the police.
For some strange reason, there are people who cannot grasp the simple concept of risk versus reward, and cannot understand that it is not fear.
A good example is if I get up in the morning and there has been an ice storm the evening before, I do a RvsR analysis. I like going out to breakfast. I wake up slowly, and enjoy a few cups of coffee to get my mind ready for the day That is the reward part. But I don't want to drive on glare ice. I could wreck or be run into by another. So I brew a few cups at home.
But I am in no way afraid of the ice. No fear. Only understanding that there can be problems when Ice is in the picture.
This is what the people who are all agog about #metoo do not understand. Men who would never dream of abusing any women are mentally doing this RvsR analysis, and deciding that avoidance is preferable to highly public destruction. I've been seeing this lately. The ladies are chasing off the wrong people.
While the men who are the problem will continue doing what they do.They won't miss a beat.
It's dreadful, really. Women and men in weaker positions getting all uppity and refusing to just shut up like good little peons.
Any professor that would house a student is just asking to lose their career.
You've certainly demonstrated we live in the age of wild fearmongering.
Make no mistake, for prudent men, it isn't fear. It is a simple risk versus reward analysis. You start off with the risks. Some pretty simple things can destroy your career, and there will be no chance to defend yourself. I use the winking as sexual harassment example quite often. You have to second guess anything that you say. The rewards? It is rather difficult to find any - can you?
The problem is not that people should be punished for unwanted sexual imposition upon another. That is established law. That is not what #metoo is about.
#metoo is trial and conviction by social media, but with a bent on destroying males.
Do you want to know what is dreadful? One of the founders and leaders of the #metoo movement, Asia Argento, turns out to be everything the movement claims to be against. This lady was enjoying fucking an underage lad by the name of Jimmy Bennett, and was collecting nude pictures of the lad since he was 12 years old. Her late boyfriend Anthony Bourdain gave her 350,000 dollars to settle a lawsuit against her for her fun with the boy. Now of course, Argento claimed that she was the victim of the boy, but as photos and texts have surfaced, sorry, no. She did enjoy fucking the child. She is what she is.
And yet, for all of this, there are people who are buying her side of the story, despite the evidence. To make this truly interesting, she has decided to keep the last payment of the money she took from Bourdain for herself, rather than pay the boy she sexually abused.
Sorry, angry person. There are many of us who are more concerned about our careers than destruction of it for some lame reason, or coming up against a sexual predator sociopath. And taking in a student is an incredibly bad idea. There is no upside to it. That is my point. What upside is there to me, a middle aged man, to take in a 18 year old? There are some pretty obvious downsides in an era where winking at a woman is sexual harassment. Years ago, my wife and I took in students, they even had class meetings in our house. Now? no way. It isn't fear, it is merely avoiding situations of possible compromise.
Is it likely? No, most people are pretty nice. But when there is no upside, and only downside, you take the prudent approach.
Fuck you, Boomer. Your generation inherited prosperity and freedom. You stumbled into wealth despite your personal uselessness. And what did you leave for future generations? A bankrupt financialist police state.
Now you have the gall to lecture us on how we need to just try harder? Go play in traffic! Better hope your "free market" retirement plan doesn't implode. Or you can enjoy eating dogfood in your golden years.
Cool story bro. Better check out your history. Keep on spouting the rhetoric of failure. Many people had the same sad story while we were growing up. Many people always will. And just like those people you've bought into it. If you think you can't succeed, you are correct.
But it isn't all gloom and doom. You have people to blame for your failure before you even fail.
Exactly how do you plan to make that happen in a short enough time frame to actually make a difference? The primary tool for working class people to effect higher wages are unions and those have been pretty steadily declining in power with no obvious end in sight. And frankly given how fast Google has grown their work force I don't see any realistic way for wages of many professions to keep up even if there were a strong union presence. In a global economy there are limits to how high you can raise the wages of a machinist or a janitor or a teacher in comparison to a high paid tech worker.
So you want Google to strike the tent and leave? Will that fix the problem by driving out high paying jobs? Here's the trick, and it isn't very popular.
I've done well financially. I've adapted my skillset to the job at hand, and learned new skills as they were needed.
Told ya it wasn't popular.
Many or most people want to get their first training, get their job, and remain in that career, if not in the same workplace for their entire life. I've worked with so many people that have the "not my job" attitude, and it has bit them in the backside every time. I've seen people laid off because they refuse to do anything other than the job description, I've seen older workers forced into retirement when they refused the management path and tried to work at the same level they were hired at for over 20 years. One co-worker refused to learn digital photography because the Darkroom and film photography was the hot trade. That didn't work out too well for her.
And there will always be those people - not a thing can be done about it. Human inertia. We see it here in the States. "Grandpa was a Coal Miner, Daddy was a Coal Miner, I'm a Coal Miner, and all of my children will be.... Wait, they shut the mine down? A new mine 200 miles from here? But we're Coal miners, and this is the town we live in, not some dman place 200 miles from here!" But they have to realize they are part of their own problem. But this is apparently Google's fault, not theirs. Maybe some makework programs sponsored by the German Government will help?
Meanwhile after retirement, I just took on a very lucrative part time job using a skillset I didn't even have 10 years ago. Luck favors the prepared.
Currently, the gentrification process is 1) upgrade buildings then 2) import gentry. I would propose that we 1) Upgrade the people in-place then, 2) upgrade the buildings. Lets invest in the people that already live somewhere and then let them upgrade their buildings. Give that rundown neighborhoods tend to have rundown schools we owe these residents a lot for failing to invest in them while they were young.
A lot simpler to move to an area where they actually want you. If the fine citizens of Germany feel that they have to storm a business and occupy it, it is unquestionable that they do not want that business to be there. I would shut the offices as soon as I could relocate, and make no bones about the reasons that German police do not provide security, that the German people do not want us there, and that the entire local business infrastructure is in danger of the citizenry deciding that the building need blown up or just break into the server rooms and destroy the servers. Because now the protesters have learned that they can take over the HQ any time they feel like it.
Perhaps if Germany has places they have allowed to become slums, Germany needs to provide the wonderful housing and high paying jos these people deserve.
that's the least the government can do. Regardless, Google leaving should have the desired effect upon rental rates, and the citizens will be happy.
I'm fine with a free market. We do not have a free market. Trump wants a free market.
Punitive tariffs an protectionism and paying some of those hurt by it with Tax money is now a free market?
Your ideas are intriguing, I would like to sign up for your newsletter.
I have this ideaThat having sex with women will turn them into virgins. Your insights of how things that were once socialist and anticompetitive in nature now being the path to the free market shows us that we can indeed engage in sex with women and turn them into virgins.
Trumpite? I didn't vote for the SOB. He's an <expletive deleted> embarrassment. The only thing more embarrassing is the "Riot until we overturn the results of the election" gang. Though a lot of the hard-core Trumpunists come close.
I don't think I have ever posted anything positive about Trump.
In my sarcasm, there is one bit of seriousness. Dan Coats is the likely perp. Lawrence O'Donnell has a pretty good analysis of who he believes it is, and the argument is pretty sound. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Coats is in his last Government job,
Anyhow, sorry for using your post as the springboard for my traditional Friday night fun rant. I'm a baaaad boy. But it's all in fun and to troll Dear Leader's sycophants.
As a free trade supporting fiscal conservative, I would love to see a realignment in American politics. I have recently heard some of my liberal friends saying tariffs and subsidies are bad, just because Trump supports them, and they ignore the fact that Bernie advocated the same dumb policies.
If the Democrats can combine social tolerance with sensible economic policies, and the Republicans can concentrate all the stupidity into one party, that would be wonderful.
In the meantime our agricultural customers will figure out new supply chains and by food from somewhere else. By the time the tariffs are lifted the customers will have new suppliers and the market will have to slowly rebuild itself.
Meanwhile, the $billions set aside to compensate farms won't count for very much at all once spread around evenly. It's like when I was laid off and I got unemployment insurance that amounted to about $350 a week, which wasn't much of a compensation.
There will be a few particular agribusiness that will get the overwhelming majority of the money.
This will start out to be a double hit on the taxpayers, but do not fear, The modern Republican party will simply allow the wheels to fall off, as they claim that trillions of dollars added to the deficit don't mean a thing, and perhaps the resulting inflation caused by this endless printing of more money will work out really well.
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader
As is the $1.2 Billion bailout to farmers hurt by his tariffs. Our tax dollars at work people, brought to you by "trade wars are easy to win" Trump and the "bailouts are bad", "smaller government is good" Republicans.
My guess is that the Democrats will have to come in and clean up the mess that the children made. If you study the political and financial history, you will see this often happens.
I'm fine with buying less shit from China, or paying more for what I actually do need to buy (from elsewhere or from China when necessary).
It ultimately means China gets less of US money. A lot less. It's China who loses here, not the US. The US is hundreds of billions in trade deficit to China. China has far, far more to lose in this game of chicken.
China can end it all now if they just agree to one simple thing. Fair trade. If China doesn't like the tariffs and restrictions they can get rid of the same exact tariffs and restrictions they impose on us, and poof, we reciprocate.
So are you now a socialist? You do not believe in the free market or supply and demand? Funny how conservatives have almost overnight become believers in Keynesian economics. Just like Nixon did.
With Tariffs, it is a direct admission that you cannot compete, therefore must put artificial Taxes on other's products to artificially make them cost more.
Elimination of anyhing resembling a free market, anti competitive tariffs, and taxes. The Republicans inch toward socialism and eventually communism.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know about you guys but 99% of the time on my phone I'm using the desktop version of a page. I hate mobile site design with its tons of empty space and enormous fonts.
I can't stand the web while using my phone either. The weird thing is, the sites I have control over look the same on either phone or tablet or desktop.
And I'm no dummy, but sure as hell not a hotshot. Fully functional web pages.
Can you imagine taking your son to the ballpark on Bobblehead Night, and you paid $90 for two tickets, $35 to park, another $50 on two hotdogs, two beers, a couple of cokes and maybe a bag of peanuts and some jackoff tells you you're getting a "virtual bobblehead" added to your "Ethereum wallet", whatever the fuck that is?
While we are having videos, we need les crypto-bobbleheads and more Sausage races. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Everyone had a good time, except for the poor chorizo.
Just by the way - I am challenging our resident Social Justice Warriors to give us a good defense of poor Asia Argento. Anyone? Accept the challenge?
Just to refine the point a little (since I can't stand those people) I'll ask them if putting on their seat belt means the SJW plans on driving drunk or watching a movie on their phone while behind the wheel. Or....maybe they're just taking reasonable precautions because an unlikely event can be disastrous, not because it's a sign of guilt or not being able to control themselves.
I'm a little surprised that it was an Asia Argento who put some breaks on the #MeToo witch hunt, instead of another Duke Lacrosse incident blowing up in their faces.
The Keillor travesty, the bad date with Aziz Ansari, and the Woman who likes to collect photos of 12 year old boys and fuck them. This is not an anomaly. There will be more to come. I do think that society now understands the nature of the movement, and many of it's adherents, so that is fortunate.
Ask em if they put their seat belts on when they get in the car. It's not because they're planning on getting in an accident, but on the 1% chance (or whatever) that they might get in an accident that day. SJW's are thick but they'd have a hard time failing to see the logic in the comparison.
Excellent analogy. What happened here is that the accusation became the conviction. So while there wasn't a large chance of being accused, the results were ruinous if you were. So why interact other than what is absolutely necessary? The problem is that you don't know, and the woman has the rest of her life to decide if she wants to destroy you.
Why take off the seat belt?
We live in the age of #metoo.
It's dreadful, really. Women and men in weaker positions getting all uppity and refusing to just shut up like good little peons.
Any professor that would house a student is just asking to lose their career.
You've certainly demonstrated we live in the age of wild fearmongering.
You're completely missing the point. Ol Olsoc isn't saying that sexual misconduct is acceptable or that people should remain silent about abuse against them when it happens.
And make no mistake, I am saying that if someone is a victim of sexual misconduct, there are appropriate venues like the legal system and the police.
For some strange reason, there are people who cannot grasp the simple concept of risk versus reward, and cannot understand that it is not fear.
A good example is if I get up in the morning and there has been an ice storm the evening before, I do a RvsR analysis. I like going out to breakfast. I wake up slowly, and enjoy a few cups of coffee to get my mind ready for the day That is the reward part. But I don't want to drive on glare ice. I could wreck or be run into by another. So I brew a few cups at home.
But I am in no way afraid of the ice. No fear. Only understanding that there can be problems when Ice is in the picture.
This is what the people who are all agog about #metoo do not understand. Men who would never dream of abusing any women are mentally doing this RvsR analysis, and deciding that avoidance is preferable to highly public destruction. I've been seeing this lately. The ladies are chasing off the wrong people.
While the men who are the problem will continue doing what they do.They won't miss a beat.
We live in the age of #metoo.
It's dreadful, really. Women and men in weaker positions getting all uppity and refusing to just shut up like good little peons.
Any professor that would house a student is just asking to lose their career.
You've certainly demonstrated we live in the age of wild fearmongering.
Make no mistake, for prudent men, it isn't fear. It is a simple risk versus reward analysis. You start off with the risks. Some pretty simple things can destroy your career, and there will be no chance to defend yourself. I use the winking as sexual harassment example quite often. You have to second guess anything that you say. The rewards? It is rather difficult to find any - can you?
The problem is not that people should be punished for unwanted sexual imposition upon another. That is established law. That is not what #metoo is about.
#metoo is trial and conviction by social media, but with a bent on destroying males.
Do you want to know what is dreadful? One of the founders and leaders of the #metoo movement, Asia Argento, turns out to be everything the movement claims to be against. This lady was enjoying fucking an underage lad by the name of Jimmy Bennett, and was collecting nude pictures of the lad since he was 12 years old. Her late boyfriend Anthony Bourdain gave her 350,000 dollars to settle a lawsuit against her for her fun with the boy. Now of course, Argento claimed that she was the victim of the boy, but as photos and texts have surfaced, sorry, no. She did enjoy fucking the child. She is what she is.
And yet, for all of this, there are people who are buying her side of the story, despite the evidence. To make this truly interesting, she has decided to keep the last payment of the money she took from Bourdain for herself, rather than pay the boy she sexually abused.
Sorry, angry person. There are many of us who are more concerned about our careers than destruction of it for some lame reason, or coming up against a sexual predator sociopath. And taking in a student is an incredibly bad idea. There is no upside to it. That is my point. What upside is there to me, a middle aged man, to take in a 18 year old? There are some pretty obvious downsides in an era where winking at a woman is sexual harassment. Years ago, my wife and I took in students, they even had class meetings in our house. Now? no way. It isn't fear, it is merely avoiding situations of possible compromise.
Is it likely? No, most people are pretty nice. But when there is no upside, and only downside, you take the prudent approach.
Fuck you, Boomer. Your generation inherited prosperity and freedom. You stumbled into wealth despite your personal uselessness. And what did you leave for future generations? A bankrupt financialist police state.
Now you have the gall to lecture us on how we need to just try harder? Go play in traffic! Better hope your "free market" retirement plan doesn't implode. Or you can enjoy eating dogfood in your golden years.
Cool story bro. Better check out your history. Keep on spouting the rhetoric of failure. Many people had the same sad story while we were growing up. Many people always will. And just like those people you've bought into it. If you think you can't succeed, you are correct.
But it isn't all gloom and doom. You have people to blame for your failure before you even fail.
Let us know how that works out for ya
Right, let's get this straightened out. Just like we did with planet "Urectum".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Urectum hell - damn near killed him.
So, then is Santa Craws the Asian guy who gives presents to children at Christmas time?
Oh, we are both lucky we're pseudonymous tonight. But yeah, he is.
Let me get this straight.
It's for people who help during emergencies, and they need phone service and texts then.
At precisely the time when the networks are stressed out from overuse (oversubscribed is what we used to call this) and equipment failures.
From disasters. Like fires. And earthquakes. And floods.
So it WILL be throttled DURING THE EMERGENCY.
Making it ...
useless
The internet is not a reliable emergency communications medium. No matter how hard people want it to be. So yeah - you are right - Useless.
When did "Unlimited" start meaning we throttle speed or charge you more if you actually attempt to use what is promised?
Ajit Pai called, he said to shut up.
We live in the age of #metoo. Any professor that would house a student is just asking to lose their career.
Santa Cruz is in Silicon Valley?
No silly, Santa Cruz is the Hispanic guy that gives presents to children at Christmas time.
Exactly how do you plan to make that happen in a short enough time frame to actually make a difference? The primary tool for working class people to effect higher wages are unions and those have been pretty steadily declining in power with no obvious end in sight. And frankly given how fast Google has grown their work force I don't see any realistic way for wages of many professions to keep up even if there were a strong union presence. In a global economy there are limits to how high you can raise the wages of a machinist or a janitor or a teacher in comparison to a high paid tech worker.
So you want Google to strike the tent and leave? Will that fix the problem by driving out high paying jobs? Here's the trick, and it isn't very popular.
I've done well financially. I've adapted my skillset to the job at hand, and learned new skills as they were needed.
Told ya it wasn't popular.
Many or most people want to get their first training, get their job, and remain in that career, if not in the same workplace for their entire life. I've worked with so many people that have the "not my job" attitude, and it has bit them in the backside every time. I've seen people laid off because they refuse to do anything other than the job description, I've seen older workers forced into retirement when they refused the management path and tried to work at the same level they were hired at for over 20 years. One co-worker refused to learn digital photography because the Darkroom and film photography was the hot trade. That didn't work out too well for her.
And there will always be those people - not a thing can be done about it. Human inertia. We see it here in the States. "Grandpa was a Coal Miner, Daddy was a Coal Miner, I'm a Coal Miner, and all of my children will be.... Wait, they shut the mine down? A new mine 200 miles from here? But we're Coal miners, and this is the town we live in, not some dman place 200 miles from here!" But they have to realize they are part of their own problem. But this is apparently Google's fault, not theirs. Maybe some makework programs sponsored by the German Government will help?
Meanwhile after retirement, I just took on a very lucrative part time job using a skillset I didn't even have 10 years ago. Luck favors the prepared.
Currently, the gentrification process is 1) upgrade buildings then 2) import gentry. I would propose that we 1) Upgrade the people in-place then, 2) upgrade the buildings. Lets invest in the people that already live somewhere and then let them upgrade their buildings. Give that rundown neighborhoods tend to have rundown schools we owe these residents a lot for failing to invest in them while they were young.
A lot simpler to move to an area where they actually want you. If the fine citizens of Germany feel that they have to storm a business and occupy it, it is unquestionable that they do not want that business to be there. I would shut the offices as soon as I could relocate, and make no bones about the reasons that German police do not provide security, that the German people do not want us there, and that the entire local business infrastructure is in danger of the citizenry deciding that the building need blown up or just break into the server rooms and destroy the servers. Because now the protesters have learned that they can take over the HQ any time they feel like it.
Perhaps if Germany has places they have allowed to become slums, Germany needs to provide the wonderful housing and high paying jos these people deserve. that's the least the government can do. Regardless, Google leaving should have the desired effect upon rental rates, and the citizens will be happy.
Google perhaps should consider some other place to set up camp. :-)
That will indeed bring the rents down
Are you a retard? (Yes, you are.)
U mad Bro?
I'm fine with a free market. We do not have a free market. Trump wants a free market.
Punitive tariffs an protectionism and paying some of those hurt by it with Tax money is now a free market?
Your ideas are intriguing, I would like to sign up for your newsletter.
I have this ideaThat having sex with women will turn them into virgins. Your insights of how things that were once socialist and anticompetitive in nature now being the path to the free market shows us that we can indeed engage in sex with women and turn them into virgins.
Whoo Hooo! this is great! Oh Frabjous Day!
You think I am mentally challenged? Dood!
Trumpite? I didn't vote for the SOB. He's an <expletive deleted> embarrassment. The only thing more embarrassing is the "Riot until we overturn the results of the election" gang. Though a lot of the hard-core Trumpunists come close.
I don't think I have ever posted anything positive about Trump.
In my sarcasm, there is one bit of seriousness. Dan Coats is the likely perp. Lawrence O'Donnell has a pretty good analysis of who he believes it is, and the argument is pretty sound. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Coats is in his last Government job,
Anyhow, sorry for using your post as the springboard for my traditional Friday night fun rant. I'm a baaaad boy. But it's all in fun and to troll Dear Leader's sycophants.
As a free trade supporting fiscal conservative, I would love to see a realignment in American politics. I have recently heard some of my liberal friends saying tariffs and subsidies are bad, just because Trump supports them, and they ignore the fact that Bernie advocated the same dumb policies.
If the Democrats can combine social tolerance with sensible economic policies, and the Republicans can concentrate all the stupidity into one party, that would be wonderful.
True, Republicans are pretty tolerant......
In the meantime our agricultural customers will figure out new supply chains and by food from somewhere else. By the time the tariffs are lifted the customers will have new suppliers and the market will have to slowly rebuild itself.
Meanwhile, the $billions set aside to compensate farms won't count for very much at all once spread around evenly. It's like when I was laid off and I got unemployment insurance that amounted to about $350 a week, which wasn't much of a compensation.
There will be a few particular agribusiness that will get the overwhelming majority of the money.
This will start out to be a double hit on the taxpayers, but do not fear, The modern Republican party will simply allow the wheels to fall off, as they claim that trillions of dollars added to the deficit don't mean a thing, and perhaps the resulting inflation caused by this endless printing of more money will work out really well.
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader
As is the $1.2 Billion bailout to farmers hurt by his tariffs. Our tax dollars at work people, brought to you by "trade wars are easy to win" Trump and the "bailouts are bad", "smaller government is good" Republicans.
My guess is that the Democrats will have to come in and clean up the mess that the children made. If you study the political and financial history, you will see this often happens.
Yeah, I was really surprised Trump froze government wages. Not the way to convince people that the economy is red-hot.
There are others who need that money more. And we all know who they are.
I'm fine with buying less shit from China, or paying more for what I actually do need to buy (from elsewhere or from China when necessary).
It ultimately means China gets less of US money. A lot less. It's China who loses here, not the US. The US is hundreds of billions in trade deficit to China. China has far, far more to lose in this game of chicken.
China can end it all now if they just agree to one simple thing. Fair trade. If China doesn't like the tariffs and restrictions they can get rid of the same exact tariffs and restrictions they impose on us, and poof, we reciprocate.
So are you now a socialist? You do not believe in the free market or supply and demand? Funny how conservatives have almost overnight become believers in Keynesian economics. Just like Nixon did.
With Tariffs, it is a direct admission that you cannot compete, therefore must put artificial Taxes on other's products to artificially make them cost more.
Elimination of anyhing resembling a free market, anti competitive tariffs, and taxes. The Republicans inch toward socialism and eventually communism.
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader