Cannonpointer » 20 Aug 2025, 8:03 am » wrote: ↑ That is your opinion - and it may or may not be true.
But the very construction of that opinion validates my argument that his choice of media was a response to your snarking over"his" media.
But it didn't stop the hersteria.
to this point, it's looking good.and it may or may not be true.
But the very construction of that opinion
It's pretty clear you are lousy at following directions.Blackvegetable » 20 Aug 2025, 8:05 am » wrote: ↑ to this point, it's looking good.
Cue the fat kid in the shock collar...
Only if you choose to.Cannonpointer » 18 Aug 2025, 10:35 pm » wrote: ↑ So, let me understand AI's argument.
Trump is peeved at Brazil, so I need to pay more for my coffee.
That about capture your copy-paste?
Simpleton, your sources lie just as much if not more.Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2025, 6:33 pm » wrote: ↑ Since AI told you it has nothing to do with economics, why this kruginator krying jag?
It's a lot faster than going through Congress.Cannonpointer » 18 Aug 2025, 10:34 pm » wrote: ↑ Tariffs are first and foremost a tool for raising money from the pockets of consumers.
It helps if the bulk of those consumers are dumb enough to support the hand of the federal government reaching directly into their pockets.
Buyer's remorse?Cannonpointer » 18 Aug 2025, 11:27 pm » wrote: ↑ It was.
You gave the counter argument.
I find it weak and contrived - but there are two things that have to be taken into account:
1. I don't run the country - just my mouth; and
2. I don't know everything that goes into decisions like these.
THAT SAID, we are not protecting Americans with these tariffs. And that is what Trump promised the tariffs would be about. Indeed, the tariffs on Mexico and Brazil are going to be brutal to consumers, and I do mean brutal. And they protect zero American workers. And I suspect they will blow up in our face. No matter how big you are, no matter how much you have to spend, if you are more trouble than you are worth, people will find a work-around.
No matter how much cheese is down a hole, if there are gators down that hole, people will decide the cheese ain't worth it. I believe - and I might be underestimating America's importance in the global market, but I BELIEVE - that even the USA can be written off. And I believe that the formula for predicting that write-off is blood simple: The minute our market is seen as more trouble than it is worth, other countries will stop doing business with us. And I think we are straddling that line. We are making the world so unpredictable that we are incentivising a hard, hard road for our trade partners. No one WANTS to stop doing business with us. But openly using our financial leverage to interfere in other nations' internal affairs gives every nation on earth a strong incentive to rely on our consumer market as little as they can get away with and to forge new trade alliances as quickly as they can.
There are a lot of emerging markets out there. Giving producers an incentive to push the development of those markets is not in our long term interests.
Trump promised to use tariffs to right wrongs on behalf of American workers. And the two tariffs I have mentioned, against Mexico and Brazil, are doing nothing of the kind. They are an unnecessary hardship on American consumers who are ALREADY being asked to reach in their pockets for the legitimate tariffs that we actually voted for.
Not sure what you mean by this.^ Are you suggesting that if I don't like paying the tariff, I can stop drinking coffee?
It sure is. It's kind of a "strong man" way of raising taxes on cheering dummies.
With that Kackling Kunt Kamel-uh in the wings?
Cannonpointer » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ It sure is. It's kind of a "strong man" way of raising taxes on cheering dummies.
And I have to say, I think I'd do the same thing in his place.
I mean, if the dummies are gonna cheer for it, why not?
Higher profits generally drive a company stock price. I prefer them to go up.Cannonpointer » 20 Aug 2025, 7:41 am » wrote: ↑ There was no "must go." Are these your words to him?
He went to CNN because you **** on what you called "his" media. So he used "yours," ya sniveling bitch.
Now you're dealing with the actual issue - not whining like a bitch over his selection of media. You're a wee dervish, are ya not?
Let's deal with the actual issue, then, while you're walking off the fact that he dick-slapped you with CNN.
Going from 22 to 28 will only affect middle class wage earners. The wealthy are not taxed on income, by and large. They're taxed on cap gains if they are taxed at all. So it's just more of the reagan-clinton democrat party's assault on the middle class.
So, EVERYBODY needs to use a little common sense and walk it off and give coach 110% next time and tell their story walking and take their malarky on the hop.
We've covered this...*Beekeeper » 20 Aug 2025, 9:33 am » wrote: ↑ Admitting defeat must really be a hard pill for you to swallow.
Bye!! Don't let that door hit you in the arse on your way out!!
But you also consistently vote for Supply Side Hucksters and are mystified that deficits, and the debt, rise precipitously as a consequence.Fuelman » 20 Aug 2025, 9:55 am » wrote: ↑ Higher profits generally drive a company stock price. I prefer them to go up.
It's a dog eat dog world and I'm getting cynical enough to not care who gets trampled along the way.
What a dick I am!
Seems to be working just fine and putting money in my pocket.Blackvegetable » 20 Aug 2025, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑ But you also consistently vote for Supply Side Hucksters and are mystified that deficits, and the debt, rise precipitously as a consequence.
Try this simple exercise..
Model a company with one input.
At current prices, it earns 25%.
Increase the price of its input by 50%..
What happens to the earnings?
Now raise the tax on earnings by 25 %, or even 50%.
Beginning to see the difference?
Be less credulous.Fuelman » 20 Aug 2025, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑ Seems to be working just fine and putting money in my pocket.
Yes, it has been a record or one of the strongest earnings seasons on record for S&P 500 companies, with aggregate earnings rising 11% year-over-year, far exceeding expectations. The high frequency of earnings beats and strong guidance from many companies, including the Magnificent 7, suggest continued growth and an exceptional performance for the period. Key highlights of the 2Q 2025 earnings season:Record Earnings Beats:A high percentage of S&P 500 companies beat their earnings estimates, with some analysts calling the frequency of these beats a record. Surpassing Expectations:Aggregate S&P 500 earnings surged by 11%, almost tripling the consensus expectation of 4%. Strong Guidance:58% of companies in the S&P 500 increased their full-year 2025 guidance, a significant increase from the first quarter. Resilient Performance:Companies were able to blunt the impact of tariffs and benefit from a weaker dollar, leading to strong results. Mega-Cap Tech Success:The Magnificent 7 (excluding Tesla) showed exceptional growth, with EPS increasing by 26% year-over-year, outperforming consensus estimates.
Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2025, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑ Has FOX told you?
It makes no sense, right?
C'mon, Idiots....find the courage to admit it...
Yea....Level 0.16....that's it.Vegas » 20 Aug 2025, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑ Are you seriously starting a thread about us not buying **** coffee from Brazil? You dumb pos.
You will get a participation trophy if you ever get the ball sack to answer a question.Blackvegetable » 20 Aug 2025, 10:33 am » wrote: ↑ Yea....Level 0.16....that's it.
Here's your participation ribbon.