Stupid Shit in Bogota

[JjBee62]

This is a term that they used to teach in junior high growing up in California John Birch country.

It means "There is no such thing as a free lunch".

Think of all the things that Trump has promised us are free.

The tax cut would pay for itself based on the Laffer curve. Trump gave Arthur Laffer a Medal of Freedom. Of course, deficits keep risng in a good economy.

The trade war would pay for itself because China pays the tariffs. Even if the China is paying the tariffs, which I don't believe, all the money is being transferred to our farmers who are probably the most competitive in the world. The farmers need free markets not a bailout.

And, of course, the wall. Mexico will pay for the "great big beautiful wall. " I just don't trust the guy. He reminds me of a snake oil salesman.

It's "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. " Coined by Robert Heinlein in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" in 1966. Author Larry Niven also used it frequently.

Yes. I know it's grammatically incorrect.

No free lunches in Colombia either, but I've found a lot of cheap ones.

[GeneHickman]

Corporate stooges or politicians who saw little political upside to confronting a difficult problem? We've been able to import deflation for almost a quarter of a century now. That's a pleasant thing for the guy in charge.

Yes sir, all while many categories of workers accounting for a substantial number of people lost their livelihoods and meaning in life and turned into meth and opioid addicts and the ranks of welfare recipients swelled and budget deficits widened. Doesn't sound like a well thought out plan to me. If you already had money sure it was a god send, but that's not most of middle America.

We now have a population that's out for retribution on the capitalistic class, and that's not a good thing. Once again the last 3 were corporate stooges and as you said did the most politically expedient thing.

Not to mention the US bulked up its geo political rival in the process.

[Combo]

US trade deals were championed by the Corporate elites in order to take advantage of the wage arbitrage everyone knows existed and still exists since in the 90's. You see post WW2 Unions and other representatives negotiated stong labour protections and wages, and the elites were not satisfied. They got the best of both worlds, market access and cheap and compliant labour. They ommitted to think about intelectual property theft, weakened US budgets and national trade imbalances. These globalists got a shock with the Trump election and still trying to undo it. FYI I share some of your concerns about Trump as well, but I don't trust the others at all. I think the prior 3 presidents were all corporate stooges.

Corporate stooges or politicians who saw little political upside to confronting a difficult problem? We've been able to import deflation for almost a quarter of a century now. That's a pleasant thing for the guy in charge.

[GeneHickman]

This is a term that they used to teach in junior high growing up in California John Birch country.

It means "There is no such thing as a free lunch".

Think of all the things that Trump has promised us are free.

The tax cut would pay for itself based on the Laffer curve. Trump gave Arthur Laffer a Medal of Freedom. Of course, deficits keep risng in a good economy.

The trade war would pay for itself because China pays the tariffs. Even if the China is paying the tariffs, which I don't believe, all the money is being transferred to our farmers who are probably the most competitive in the world. The farmers need free markets not a bailout.

And, of course, the wall. Mexico will pay for the "great big beautiful wall. " I just don't trust the guy. He reminds me of a snake oil salesman.

US trade deals were championed by the Corporate elites in order to take advantage of the wage arbitrage everyone knows existed and still exists since in the 90's. You see post WW2 Unions and other representatives negotiated stong labour protections and wages, and the elites were not satisfied. They got the best of both worlds, market access and cheap and compliant labour. They ommitted to think about intelectual property theft, weakened US budgets and national trade imbalances. These globalists got a shock with the Trump election and still trying to undo it. FYI I share some of your concerns about Trump as well, but I don't trust the others at all. I think the prior 3 presidents were all corporate stooges.

[Combo]

When asked by CNN's Brianna Keilar if he would use tariffs to cut a deal with China during his own presidency, Sanders said that he would.

"Yeah of course, it is used in a rational way within the context of a broad, sensible trade policy. It is one tool that is available," he said. "You're looking at somebody, by the way, who helped lead the effort against permanent normal trade relations with China and (North American Free Trade Agreement). ".

If you don't think that Bernie Sanders is a nut case who would lead the United States to ruin, I can't help you.

IMO the choice between Trump and Sanders / Warren is a god-awful choice.

Anyway probably best to return to discussing chicas.

[Big Boss Man]

This is a term that they used to teach in junior high growing up in California John Birch country.

It means "There is no such thing as a free lunch".

Think of all the things that Trump has promised us are free.

The tax cut would pay for itself based on the Laffer curve. Trump gave Arthur Laffer a Medal of Freedom. Of course, deficits keep risng in a good economy.

The trade war would pay for itself because China pays the tariffs. Even if the China is paying the tariffs, which I don't believe, all the money is being transferred to our farmers who are probably the most competitive in the world. The farmers need free markets not a bailout.

And, of course, the wall. Mexico will pay for the "great big beautiful wall. " I just don't trust the guy. He reminds me of a snake oil salesman.

[Big Boss Man]

When asked by CNN's Brianna Keilar if he would use tariffs to cut a deal with China during his own presidency, Sanders said that he would.

"Yeah of course, it is used in a rational way within the context of a broad, sensible trade policy. It is one tool that is available," he said. "You're looking at somebody, by the way, who helped lead the effort against permanent normal trade relations with China and (North American Free Trade Agreement). ".

If you don't think that Bernie Sanders is a nut case who would lead the United States to ruin, I can't help you.

[GeneHickman]

And you do realize that Chinese girls wouldn't be assembling your iPhones and everything, for the same reason? The trade deficit is the direct result of this and it has the stabilizing effect of levelling the playing field.

Hugo Chaves thought that his will is stronger than market forces. The troll in the White House is the same. Venezuelans think they don't have to do anything much besides squeezing the juice out of their soil and getting dollars for it. Americans think they can stay rich by filing patents and seeking rent on them.

The thing is, many people in the US have come to believe that when god created the world he made (white) americans as lords and everybody else as servants. They will not accept a levelled playing field and cannot understand that the american century is coming to an end. They think a war is necessary to preserve the status quo. So far it's a trade war.

The USA had a winning streak until 1945 that makes them believe that war is the solution for every major problem. However, in reality wars are not "good and easy to win". In war there are only losers. Look at the state if the British empire in 1945 compared to 1914, after they had "won" two monstrous wars against the upcoming power of the day.

What worries me is that people have short memories and today more and more politicians and their followers are talking like they did before 1914. Saying that they want to make their country great again, and implying that they are happy to sh $t on everybody else to achieve it.

There are plenty of things to rightly criticize about China today or imperial Germany then, but that doesn't mean that war is the best or only way to make the world better.

Gene, please do me a favour and try and put yourself in the shoes of a Chinese.

Still doesn't mean the US has to do China any favors by trading with them. Sans access to the US and to a lesser extent the EU market, China would never have been able to rise as quickly. I frankly would have far preferred US corporates outsource their manufacturing to democratic countries whose rise is less concerning to me. And finally I definitely don't agree with your view that innovation should not be rewarded. Its the only way the human race progresses.

The chinese tend to have a greater ability to tolerate an authoritarian regime than most americans and for certain I can.

[Madra Bid Dog]

I've had great success with SA in the US finding young hotties. Latin, even conservative Muslim girls (hijab and all) that go crazy with a romp in bed. I'm Hispanic myself and know the culture but would like to know your experiences with SA in Colombia. I'm not looking for a girlfriend-hell I got plenty in Colombia, I'm just looking for NSA companions for a few days when I'm in town. I mostly travel to Bogota.

[JjBee62]

China is a geopolitical rival and a communist state at that. They are an autocratic form of gov't at the end of the day. Their regional activity has not been peaceful, be that rhetoric directed at Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, South China sea etc.

Has the US regional activity always been peaceful? Asking for Argentina, Nicaragua, Honduras, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic.

Japan on the other hand is a democracy, and furthermore post WW2 has a pacifist constitution. So completely different kettle of fish. Anyway, I know this is not a board for this, but despite disagreeing on many other things, on this issue, I think Trump has it right. If there was a Democratic transition in China I would be a lot more open about it all.

Japan didn't have much say in all that. The US occupied Japan from the end of the war until 1952, replaced all government ministers with our puppets and prohibited them from having armed forces. They became our trading partner because they didn't have a choice.

They profited immensely from the arrangement. Having the US pay for their national defense allowed investment in infrastructure.

And, just like China, there were lots of issues with intellectual property theft and counterfeiting of US brands. They almost destroyed the US guitar makers by copying and improving their designs, often at the same factories where they were making guitars for Fender and Gibson. Then there was the entire home electronics industry. And let's not forget the automotive industry.

South Korea has done the same thing. They profit at our expense, but we allow them to do it, because our companies are still profiting from the arrangement.

If you take your technology to another country, because you want to cut your labor costs and boost your stock price, you're accepting those issues. They're figured in to the decision.

What Trump fails to understand is that it all comes back around. In the end the free market balances out. All those Japanese automakers now have factories throughout the US. Not just the car factories, but all the other factories, assembling all the little parts. The jobs we lost came back. The revenue we lost came back.

[JjBee62]

And a significant percentage of mongers are fans of other politicians. Not sure what the point is.

Stay tuned to the thread and you may figure it out.

Don't worry, I won't make you work that hard.

In my experience, Trump supporters tend to take any criticism of Trump personally. The responses tend to be a bit emotional.

If the criticism is clearly deserved, they'll invoke "what aboutism. " Trump's infidelity = "what about Clinton?" Trump's immigration policy = "what about Obama?

However, supporters of other politicians, once again, in my experience, tend to be more open to discussion. They are more likely to agree their politician hasn't been perfect. You can debate with this group.

[Arcangel]

You all do realize we would have zero chance with these beautiful chicas if there was not a delta in the purchasing power of our currencies right?

And you do realize that Chinese girls wouldn't be assembling your iPhones and everything, for the same reason? The trade deficit is the direct result of this and it has the stabilizing effect of levelling the playing field.

Hugo Chaves thought that his will is stronger than market forces. The troll in the White House is the same. Venezuelans think they don't have to do anything much besides squeezing the juice out of their soil and getting dollars for it. Americans think they can stay rich by filing patents and seeking rent on them.

The thing is, many people in the US have come to believe that when god created the world he made (white) americans as lords and everybody else as servants. They will not accept a levelled playing field and cannot understand that the american century is coming to an end. They think a war is necessary to preserve the status quo. So far it's a trade war.

The USA had a winning streak until 1945 that makes them believe that war is the solution for every major problem. However, in reality wars are not "good and easy to win". In war there are only losers. Look at the state if the British empire in 1945 compared to 1914, after they had "won" two monstrous wars against the upcoming power of the day.

What worries me is that people have short memories and today more and more politicians and their followers are talking like they did before 1914. Saying that they want to make their country great again, and implying that they are happy to sh $t on everybody else to achieve it.

There are plenty of things to rightly criticize about China today or imperial Germany then, but that doesn't mean that war is the best or only way to make the world better.

Gene, please do me a favour and try and put yourself in the shoes of a Chinese.

[Mr Enternational]

And finally to end on a mongering point. You all do realize we would have zero chance with these beautiful chicas if there was not a delta in the purchasing power of our currencies right? They are not hanging with us because they find our 60 yr old weenies and 40 inch guts and balding heads sexy. No matter what they tell you! Lol

People have said that I am nuts for thanking god for poverty and that I am not in it, but I have no problem admitting why my bread is buttered the way it is.

[GeneHickman]

And a significant percentage of mongers are fans of other politicians. Not sure what the point is.

I think it's a matter of approach. You may be correct about a problem with our trade with China. But the way Trump has approached it hasn't been sensical. He's let it become an ego match, which isn't going to work with Xi who faces no electoral / political pressure for basically the rest of his life.

I hate to say it, but I don't think there is any approach that will work with the Chinese communist party. If there was, why didn't the 3 previous presidents do it? US corporate cheiftains have been had, and they and the liberal media which endorsed it, now need someone to blame. Trump provides that perfect excuse. The reality is this "confrontation on trade" should have happened under, Bubba, Dubbya, or under Obama, and all of them passed the buck. Shame on them. The longer it was left to be tackled the tougher the solution was going to be. I know some of y'all can't see any good in what trump does, but on this singular issue he is dead right to be tacking it IMHO. And like I said, I don't see the method as relevant as Xi will not respond irrespective. The may U turn before the recent summer escalation is a case in point.

And finally to end on a mongering point. You all do realize we would have zero chance with these beautiful chicas if there was not a delta in the purchasing power of our currencies right? They are not hanging with us because they find our 60 yr old weenies and 40 inch guts and balding heads sexy. No matter what they tell you! Lol

[GeneHickman]

I, for one, can only give you a partisan answer. I fundamentally believe that free markets will lead to better outcomes than government-controlled markets. A tariff is a government-intervention in a market, plain and simple.

Free competitive markets are a core liberal tenet. "Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism (free markets), democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech. ".

Trump was writing the same things about Japan in 1987 and I believe he was wrong about the outcome then as he is now. "For decades, Japan and other nations have been taking advantage of the United States," Trump wrote. (See attached).

Let me not disagree or agree with you on that philosophy and instead present another angle. Even if you are correct, there is the small matter of national sovereignty and borders, and different forms of government.

The system you espouse works well Within a group of states with similar if not same legal frameworks and democratic tenets. Version 1.0 was the United States, each of the 50 states developed and there were some equalizing mechanisms.

China is a geopolitical rival and a communist state at that. They are an autocratic form of gov't at the end of the day. Their regional activity has not been peaceful, be that rhetoric directed at Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, South China sea etc.

Japan on the other hand is a democracy, and furthermore post WW2 has a pacifist constitution. So completely different kettle of fish. Anyway, I know this is not a board for this, but despite disagreeing on many other things, on this issue, I think Trump has it right. If there was a Democratic transition in China I would be a lot more open about it all.