Shots And Chasers!!!!!!

I’ve got a few pages up that I that would be good for posting, but, just haven’t gotten around to it.  Well, as disjointed they may seem, here they are!



Trump: “Now the cars are made in Mexico, and you can’t drink the water in Flint”

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) September 14, 2016

Little Chaser …..

2015 motor vehicle production
China: 24.5M
USA: 12.1M
Japan: 9.3M
Germany: 6M
S Korea: 4.6M
India: 4.1M
Mexico: 3.6M

— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) September 14, 2016

So, yes, it’s a great line that has a grain of truth & will resonate, but it’s simply wrong. In other words, classic Trump.

— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) September 14, 2016

Bigger chaser …….

Ford shifting all U.S. small-car production to Mexico

The fact that we’re losing auto production to Mexico is irrefutable.  The fact that the “American” companies are moving jobs there to sell those very same cars to the US is simply unacceptable. 

Here are the cold hard facts.  In many ways “American” companies enjoy many extravagances most other nations wouldn’t imbue.   While Ford didn’t receive the “bailout money”, they did and still receive some other generosities.  It wasn’t Mexico who bailed out the US auto industry.  It isn’t Mexico who provides competition protection for the US auto industry.  For instance, when a nation engages in unfair practices against an American industry, it’s our government who provides the arguments in the WTO and the various other bodies.  But, their headquarters are only in the US.  Or, in the act of moving from the US.  If Ford doesn’t want to build small cars in the US for US consumption, then they can go screw themselves. 

I challenge any diehard “free trader” to argue how good it is for the US to have a cheaper car to buy while we have less workers with gainful employment here.  This isn’t good for America nor the American people.  If they wish to move to Mexico, then, out they go, and let Mexico worry about them.  All the while they can pay a tariff for the ability to access the largest market in the free world.  More on this later …..

Shot ….

Hispanic activist Tony Yapias has been a vocal opponent of Donald Trump, as evidenced by this story from June:

Yapias, the director of Proyecto Latino de Utah, said Trump’s rhetoric is contributing to hatred against Latinos, so the advocate organized the rally against the front-runner Friday night. Yapias said the rally — attended by about 150 people, mostly of Hispanic descent — was about showing Trump that Latinos in Utah will not put up with his hate speech.

Tony’s brother James Yapias called for Trump to apologize to “all of our children” for referring to Mexicans as rapists and criminals during the campaign.

Chaser ……

From Fox 13:

Well-known Hispanic activist Tony Yapias was charged with rape after he allegedly assaulted a woman who ended their four-year relationship a few months ago.

Yapias, 50, known as Adolfo Tony Yapias-Delgado, was formally charged in the 3rd District Monday with rape, a first-degree felony and evidence tampering, a class A misdemeanor.

Yapias is the director of Proyecto Latino de Utah.

The Davis County Attorney’s Office is handling the case.


Look, I’ve loved ones who are Hispanic.  I can’t count the people I know who are Hispanic.  They are people like any one else.  There are good ones and bad ones.  Trump’s argument is that we shouldn’t simply let anyone in who wants to be in.  Why in the world would anyone argue against stopping rapists and drug dealers and human traffickers into this country.  Are all illegals rapists and whatnot?  Of course, not.  Most are trying to escape such animals.  Why let the rapists, human traffickers, drug dealers, and murderers in?  I believe, as Yapias demonstrates, we have enough, already.

Shot ……

Trump to make statement on ‘birther‘ controversy| …

Chaser ……

This morning, the press was informed that Donald Trump would address the “birther” issue, so the media showed up in droves to cover his speech. However, Trump had a few other things to get out of the way first:

Trump: I’m gonna discuss the Birther thing.
(media sets up cameras)
Trump: Nah, just kidding, here’s 8 straight hours of folks praising me.

— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) September 16, 2016

Trump opening the mic to war heroes to talk about a real & serious issue: national security. Media got punked by pushing silly birther issue

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 16, 2016

Trump starts off with a riff on how great Trump hotel in DC is. The complete fusion of his business and his campaign.

— Chris Cillizza (@TheFix) September 16, 2016

Nicely done, Donald.  Nicely done.  Media is madz!!!!!! 

Addendum:  I had thought to write a post about the recent polls and Trump’s surge.  But, in view of this weekends events of the stabbings in Minnesota and the bombs in the east, the would be dated. 

I had also a thought to try and elucidate on the various polls and their methodologies.  Not all of them do it the same.  In fact, none of them do it the same!   It’s pretty maddening.  But, by the same token, I couldn’t tell you which one is better than the other.  There are exceptions.  Some are just awful.  Almost all of them are weighted in some way or another.  That is to say, the polls don’t entirely trust the respondents.  For instance, let’s say you’re a young, uneducated Black man.  You’re polled, and you state that you certainly will vote, that you’re registered as a Dim, but, fully intend to vote for Trump.  It will not be entirely reflected in the poll.  Why?  Because history has demonstrated that young Black men tend not to vote, if they do, they typically will ultimately pull the trigger for the Dem candidate.  The same can be said for Hispanics.  Old White guys, OTOH, are believed in such instances, even if they really have no intention of voting.  Why?  Because they typically do.  So, all polls are skewed/weighted to the direction of what history has told us about the various demographics of the vote. 

I would, and have, railed against such skewing/weighting.  The problem being the last two elections demonstrated that there is some validity in such skewing/weighting of the polls.

Lat, this is why the LA Times poll doesn’t make any sense. 

Further, one should take great caution into reading of any poll concerning “minorities”.  The sample data simply isn’t large enough.  A typical poll polls about 1000 people.  Depending upon the geography, Blacks make up a small percentage of the population.  A true poll would poll people consistent with the population makeup.  So a poll of 1000 people would poll about 100-150 Black people, about 200 Hispanics …. and about 50 Asians.  The LA Times does about 3000 people, so triple that.  Are 450 Blacks indicative of the whole in the US?  I don’t care how random you are, it’s simply not.  It’s beyond irksome to me, to begin with.  The polls treat these people as homogenous.  They’re not, nor more than White people are homogeneous. 

For the polls, I look at it as giving a sense of direction, while realizing there are ceilings and floors.  Yes, in a sense, that is “weighting”, as well.  But, let’s not kid ourselves.  We all know, without a shadow of a doubt, the floor for Hillary isn’t as low as the floor for Trump.  Why?  Because the Dims could run Hannibal Lector/Jeffory Dahlmer and still a good 50% of the Dims would vote for him.  It isn’t that way for Repubs.   So, for any Repub, especially so for Trump, the floor is lower than Hillary.  But, then, there’s the “enthusiasm” factor.  People can tell you that they support one or the other.  But, there’s no real way to gauge their enthusiasm.  A Lib media type recently made this observation …….. (paraphrasing)  Trump supporters will turn out hell or high water.  And, I firmly believe that.  Will a Hillary supporter if it’s raining?  Will they stand in line for her?  Not like Trump supporters do for Trump.  This has already been demonstrated.   

After this weekend’s events, I firmly believe the race is Trump’s to lose.  As I stated earlier, the debates will tell the tale.  The Dims have made a fatal mistake in painting such a horrible caricature of Trump that all he has to do is appear like a human being, capable of grasping concepts.  Then, he wins.  IOW, they set the bar so low he can’t help but look better than they projected.  All he has to do is to do it. 

Sometime later, I’ll give a states breakdown, because it isn’t popular vote which matters.  It’s the states. 

That’s all I got for today!  What do you think?

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

105 Responses to Shots And Chasers!!!!!!

  1. Latitude says:

    …knocked it out of the park!

    the polls don’t entirely trust the respondents…remember when Reuters poll showed Trump ahead by 17?
    And even though it’s was the same exact poll Reuters had been using for years, and telling us how accurate it was……they didn’t believe it!
    …so they changed it to show Hillary ahead

    The polls treat these people as homogeneous. exactly…but so does the media, politicians, and liberals
    500 black trash riot and burn a city = black’s are oppressed
    Really?….what were the other 49,999,500 doing??

    • suyts says:

      Exactly. But, remember, their “weighting” turned out to be correct on the last 2 elections. The media and politicians have a huge part in this. But, I think, if things stand as they are, Trump will upend this dynamic.

  2. Lab Guy says:

    Part of the issue with the car manufacturing is that these smaller cars are no longer that profitable for the big 3 or other companies. The bureaucrats at the Dept of Transportation and EPA continue to make cars more costly with their yearly fatwas for safety and emissions standards that contradict each other. Americans like a comfortable vehicle.

    I wish the politicians would address the number of laws, regulations, and taxes at the city, county, state, and federal level that make business more difficult than necessary. Nabisco and Lifesavers left the US because of the sugar lobby; their raw product was more costly there than Canada or Mexico. Or how about the FDA shutting down vape shops with their fatwa to require the in house mixes to be approved for the reasonable cost of $250k per mix? I don’t smoke or vape, but hey, let us have more unemployed people and a lower tax base without any real discussion.

    Here are some links. Anyone want to be money that the states with a higher percentage of cash welfare payments are the least business friendly? Anyone?

    The Number of People Per State That Receive Some Form of Cash Welfare

  3. philjourdan says:

    And back to bickering!

    #1 – WE DID NOT (not even Obama) “Bail” out the auto industry! Nice leftist talking point, that is just not true. Bankruptcy is not an end. It is the start of a new beginning. Why is Ford shipping small car production to Mexico? COST. There is no profit in small cars. And with the UAW getting constantly raising wages (while America does not) does not help. If not for the “bailout”, the wages would have been renegotiated, and lower (in line with every other segment of the economy EXCEPT the feds). But that was not allowed to happen. And money was stolen (yes, STOLEN) from Bond holders in order to make sure the Autoworkers continued to get high salaries.

    Small cars have no margins. So Ford has a choice. Abandon the market, or move production. They chose the latter.

    #2 – Do you remember EXACTLY what Trump said about raping? He never accused ALL illegals of being rapists (but the media did not tell you the truth). He said a lot of the women WERE being raped by illegals (and they are). When the media claimed he called ALL illegals rapists, his response (and this is classic and never reported now), he asked “So, do the illegal women just rape themselves?” He is still 100% correct! And he did not say “Mexicans” (again the media is not reporting what was said, but THEY said Mexicans), he said illegals from Mexico (which is where about 60% of the illegals enter from, but that 60% is from all over the world!)

    Did you find that story about Yapias in the MSM (outside of Fox)? Hell no! Did you find the story of the Idaho rape and the Fed Prosecutor’s assault on freedom of speech in the MSM? Hell NO! The MSM has a theme. And they are no longer pretending to be neutral. They have stated they are going to submarine the Trump campaign. The problem is, Trump knew that going in. He whined a little about it, realized that was not going over, so he abandoned it, and is getting his message straight to the people. Just as Reagan did. (having a mild battle with Gail Combs over that aspect – just a difference of opinion).

    #3 – Recently you said we had to “sway voters”, and I told you why it would not work. But informing voters does. My wife is what we would call “independent,leans left” (in the legal field). I know swaying her will not work. But informing her does! SHe was a “no way” Trump. Now she is undecided. Why? Just talk – about the terrorism, about the Idaho rape, and now about Yapias. “Did you hear about…”. No “she said, he said”. Just giving her the news that MSM will not. And of course I do not have to tell her “check out this site or that site”. There are enough sites that carry the stories. She is learning to check other sites for news. And while she may not vote for Trump, I do not think she is going to vote for Hillary now (maybe Johnson – but a few more weekends like this past one, and it may be for Trump).

    Trump plays to the voters. No one is going to love what he does. No one is going to say he represents their views (when pushed for honesty). But most will say they agree with an aspect or 2. And that is what it takes to win this year. So your final analysis I agree with. It is now his to lose. He has castrated the media. Now he just has to play to the voters.

    • Latitude says:

      She is learning to check other sites for news….

      You might want to point out to her how the MSM is editing Hillary…to try and keep her from looking stupid
      …and editing and twisting what Trump says…to make him look stupid

      Then ask her if she really wants to vote for the candidate they endorse

      • philjourdan says:

        Re: Editing Hillary. I found that even that does not work (pointing it out). As the retort is always a roll of the eyes and “there he goes again” look. However, when you find a video of the actual clip (easy these days) and play it, her natural curiosity wants to know what I am laughing about. So I show her. She sees it and learns herself.

        • Latitude says:

          Phil…this worked with a relative of mine…..she’s a hard core liberal

          I made a list of all the people, news, organizations, rap artists, hollywood stars,………everything I could find even Soros and Koch….huge list
          Made sure to include things she can’t stand too…..

          Emailed it to her…told her all these things do not want you to vote for Trump

          Took her a few days…emailed me back to say she’s thinking it over

        • philjourdan says:

          Lat, now that was downright unfair! LOL! Very good!

        • Latitude says:

          She called last night and admitted she’s voting for Trump

    • Yes, any ‘swaying’ is dependent upon the balance of emotion/reason within the person themselves. The ‘cut off your nose to spite your face ‘ mentality of the NeverTrump movement, rejecting Trump to the point of giving yourself Hillary, is a clear sign of emotion being overly dominant in that person. Making swaying unlikely.

      • philjourdan says:

        You touched on something I had hoped you (as in the plural you) would pick up. I called her a “no way” Trump, not a Never Trump. And there is a distinction in my mind. The Never Trumpers are never going to like Trump, and only the bumbling of Hillary will “scare” them into voting for him, if at all. However the “no way” Trumpers are merely those who have been spoon fed their bigotry by the media. They trust the media and believe it. So they can be convinced, (but not forced either), merely by making the facts not available in the MSM available to them. Let them learn on their own.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Well, we have today’s media because of that dominance of emotion in much of the public. They need to feed that emotion: ‘a wall can only equal racism. etc.’ They trust and believe the media because they want to. It’s what they want to hear. They now reinforce each other. Back in the Reagan/Conservative era of dominance, there were many more ‘Breitbarts’ on TV. Reflecting a greater influence of reason-based thinking.

          So, it’s not just the MSM doing this to them. They’re doing it to the MSM.

          Now, to your point, that doesn’t mean that none of them can be ‘woken up.’

        • DirkH says:

          eftinflagstaff says:
          September 20, 2016 at 10:11 am
          “Well, we have today’s media because of that dominance of emotion in much of the public. ”

          The part of the public that self-identifies as “female”.

        • Probably true to some degree. The mindset of the fairer sex is traditionally considered more emotional. And more men seemed to be rejecting their intended masculinity. But, feminity also can have the strength and capability to accept reality. I think it’s more likely what we’ve said many times before: we’re no longer raising children, we’re keeping them children. Regardless of their sex.

        • DirkH says:

          zerohedge had stats. Amongst women, HRC still leads 70:30 against Trump though very slowly fading.
          Another surprise was that Millenials favor Trump by a wide margin – the SJW’s are a tiny vocal minority. The millenials are saner than thought.

        • Whatever the SJWs numbers are, they’ve been powerful enough to control our media and government for the last eight years. Maybe that’s ending.

        • philjourdan says:

          No, the SJWs have not “controlled” anything. But they have had the same agenda as the media and government that past 8 years. The government is ending. The media will not.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          I think our government and media are usually just a reflection of us.

        • philjourdan says:

          I do not. That was the intent (at least government) of the founders, but it is not reality.

        • Latitude says:

          you know……I would say the practices and policies of our media and government…..created SJWs
          which came first?

        • philjourdan says:

          SJWs came first – we elected one president.

        • Latitude says:

          I don’t think so….I think Soros, news media, governments, etc created the SJW to advance their agenda

        • philjourdan says:

          I think they just made it a vocation and used what was there.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          The people in our media and government don’t suddenly land from Mars. The vast majority of them have lived here all their lives. They develop their ideologies and ways of thinking from being of us. They are ‘us’, as in overall America. When gov. and media lean a certain way, it means that way is already powerful within the public itself.

        • philjourdan says:

          No, I doubt that 1% are “us”. They are a special breed, that has taken control. We enabled them, but they are NOT a reflection of us. Unless your idea of the common man is a lying thieving POS. I think the common man is naive. He is honest and trustworthy. And easily led because he expects others to be the same. But the leaders are not.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Now, hopefully, us, and them, will soon be leaning back the right way.

        • DirkH says:

          leftinflagstaff says:
          September 21, 2016 at 8:49 am
          “The people in our media and government don’t suddenly land from Mars. The vast majority of them have lived here all their lives. They develop their ideologies and ways of thinking from being of us. They are ‘us’, as in overall America. ”

          No. Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse left Germany for the USA and refounded the Frankfurt School there. After WW2 H. and A. went back to Germany to brainwash the Germans, paid by OSS/CIA, refounding Frankfurt School in Frankfurt. Marcuse stayed behind and started brainwashing US academia, leading to 1968 Hippie revolution and resulting in the turn to Cultural Marxism by your academia. Today, your colleges are full of Marxists with tuition who want to destroy US capitalism and try to breed as many Marxist stormtroops as they can. Send your kid into the fangs of these people, pay 50k for it and get him back stupider than he was and more dangerous.

          They are not “of you”, they are an enemy army.

        • However it happened, it happened to people that live in America. Simply an impossibiliy for them to not be us. Like saying you’re not a German.

        • And absolutely agree that they are an enemy army. Your left leg infected with gangrene is still your leg.

        • And if you know me at all, you know what my next comment would be. 🙂

        • >>
          And if you know me at all, you know what my next comment would be.

          That your right leg infected with gangrene is still your leg?


        • Heh heh… More like: preservation demands you heal that left leg, or remove it. Fix the diseased tissue, or forcefully kill it.

      • The focus on rationality over emotion is supposed to begin around puberty. For everyone.

    • suyts says:

      I believe my “swaying” post included informing people.
      You can say a government mandated and supervised bankruptcy, which didn’t apply the current bankruptcy laws isn’t a bailout, but, I would call it exactly that. Further, the US did indeed “loan” GM $billions. And, sweetened the pot while supervising the sale of Chrysler.

      There’s no margin in small cars? The answer, then, is to do it better. I don’t blame Ford, but, Ford isn’t my problem nor my concern. The US and the American people are.

      • philjourdan says:

        Sorry, you misunderstood my bailout response. While the government gave them billions (of which 25b will never be recovered), they did them No favors. Like most government programs (if not all) it was a waste of money. A GM Bankruptcy would not have made them disappear. It would have allowed for an orderly restructuring, getting rid of the waste and bringing about a stronger company. That did not happen. So it was not a bailout, but the first hit of the crack pipe. Calling it a bailout insinuates that had it not happened, they would have gone the way of buggy makers. Not so.

        And Ford is doing EXACTLY that. It is cutting costs. It does not control the market so it cannot “raise prices”. Moving it to Mexico is cutting costs. That is what good businesses do. The government could easily keep them here. Cut regulations (a large part of costs), and stop preventing them from moving to lower costs states (see Boeing).

        In both cases our disagreements are surrounding government. What they do wrong, and what they do not do right. You seem to think they can fix things. I maintain (and history supports me) that they can only do more harm.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          I doubt James would ever say gov. is the answer to fix anything. i think his point is that bankruptcy should be allowed to see if they can recover on their own, not can they recover with billions more of our dollars.

        • philjourdan says:

          Having read him since almost the first, I agree with you. That is why I found his wording on the Auto bailout strange. It was not a “bailout” as that is essentially what bankruptcy is, but more a “boondoggle” of billions of public dollars. Now I expect liberals to run around crying that Obama saved GM (and I have seen the morons doing just that), but for anyone who understands markets like James, I am a bit surprised.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          And yes….regulations and too powerful of a worker’s union are part of the problem.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Really, ALL success or failure should be allowed to happen on it’s own. The patriotic would just believe that it should happen without Mexico’s help either.

        • We’re just criss-crossing our terminology. Differentiating ‘bailout’ from ‘bankruptcy’ because the normal bankruptcy doesn’t include a check for $$ billions from the government, our billions.

        • suyts says:

          I doubt James would ever say gov. is the answer to fix anything.

          Thank you, Leftin!!!! That’s exactly what I was going to write.

          @ Phil, I guess we’re even. I misunderstood your “Bail out” response, but, that’s probably because you misunderstood what I was stating in the original post.

          They’ve accepted our money, our gratuities, our breaks, and our support. Yes, ‘a hit from the crack pipe’ is apt. I was trying to say, I don’t have a problem with Ford moving to Mexico. I have a problem that while they’re moving to Mexico they’re still treated as a US company, still given all the protections and gratuities that we do. Sure, labor is cheaper in Mexico. I hope that remains so. If Ford wants to impress me, they can move lock, stock, and barrel to Mexico, and then try to make it in the real world. They’re trying to have it both ways, and it can’t be so, unless we’re to allow it. Heck, move them all out! Move their headquarters, all of the globalist corps, to some backwater 3rd world country, and let them take advantage of the cheap labor. Ford, GM, GE, MS ……. move them all out. Guaranteed, within the year we’ll have startups all across this nation fulfilling the needs of the American people.

          This is what NAFTA is about and all the other “free trade” agreements, this is what it’s doing. The people of the US, for today, anyway, can’t compete with the labor costs of these nations. Even without the unions, we can’t compete. Nor, do I ever wish to be in labor cost competition with Mexico, China, or Zimbabwe. This is why wages have remained stagnant in the US for a decade. We’re the largest market in the world. It’s well past time the US started using that economic advantage for the benefit of the US people. Again, I don’t blame Ford, but, Ford Motor Company isn’t my concern.

          Yes, 100% agree, we’re regulated to death, and, it’s costing us dearly.

          Sure, if you can’t, really, really, just can’t make a profit from selling US made small cars, then stop doing it. Or, as I stated earlier, do it better. But, for the US to allow this, it’s insanity. Ford probably would do it better, but, they don’t have to. All they have to do is move a few miles south, and then the only cost is the cost of the movement. There’s no cost exacted by the US nor the people of the US, other than the fact that there’s now less people able to afford the vehicles they’re now going to be making in Mexico. If this is allowed to continue, our children and grandchildren will be working for about 50 Pesos/hr.

        • philjourdan says:

          Do not take this personally, but now you are sounding like a liberal. Whining about “fair”. It is not “fair”!

          Sorry, fair is for liberals. My fair is not your fair. Fair is not an absolute. And while legal is not either (hence the need for lawyers), it at least tries to be. Ford did not make the rules. But Ford is going to use them for maximum advantage. To do any less is illegal! Why? Fiduciary responsibility to the stock holders!

          Stop whining about being “fair”. You do not like the rules? Change them. But do not expect companies, with a legal and fiduciary responsibility to follow them, to NOT follow the rules.

        • suyts says:

          Here’s an example of what I’m trying to state. …… Sam Walton.

        • suyts says:

          Heh!!! No, Phil, I won’t take it personally. But, no, I’m not talking about what is “fair” or what is not fair. And, again, I don’t hold anything against Ford. The question is, and should always be: Is this good for the American people? Is this good for America?

          That the rules should be changed? Well, I think I heavily implied that Yes, NAFTA and all the other free trade agreements should be rescinded.

          Going back to “fair”, what I’m specifically advocating is that the US take unfair advantage of her position and use it to the greater good of the American people. And, this is what I’ve advocated all along. We’re the world’s largest producer and have the most resources of any real energy source. We’re the world’s largest producer of food. WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO IMPORT ANYTHING! Why do we enrich foreign entities (many of which are antagonistic towards the US) while we cause Americans to lower their standard of living?

        • philjourdan says:

          Sorry Suyts, you are still not seeing the forest for the trees. Does moving production of cars to Mexico lose some jobs? Yes, for those making them. However, why would anyone make a car if no one was going to buy it? And if buying it requires more money because Ford refuses to lower the cost, who is that helping? Not the consumer – a much larger number of folks than the car workers. There is a very good article (actually many, but I will link to one – ) on how Tariffs hurt a lot more than they help.

          So when you say “what is good for America”, it may well be that Ford moving production of low margin cars to a cheaper labor pool is GOOD for America. To blindly go along with the Union propaganda is to ignore the fact that wealth does not appear out of thin air. And that trying to charge higher prices to keep production in America is not always the best course of action.

          Damming water is a difficult task as water will always find any flaws or holes. So it is with Companies. So the trick is not to berate them for finding the way, but to provide that the way remains in America. But the democrats will not allow that as that then is seen as corporate welfare (allowing companies to keep more of their money). By jumping on that bandwagon, you are merely parroting the nonsense of the left for a nice “feel good” position that is not supported by any evidence or history.

          NAFTA is not the problem. Government regulations are.

        • suyts says:

          Phil, thanks, I like Walter Williams and did read that, already. He happens to be wrong.

          And, I do agree, and did agree, we are too regulated. However, I don’t believe you’re seeing what I’m saying.

          Now, please don’t take this personal …..
          NAFTA was at it’s inception, and will always be a huge problem for the economics of the US. Let’s pretend, just for a moment, that Mexico and the US were unionized and regulated equally. Then, it simply comes down to wage competition, that is, the one’s asking the lower wage wins the jobs. In a sense, though, Mexico is regulated as much as the US, because the cars they’re going to import must meet the same standards the US imposes on the cars manufactured here. It’s a non-starter for the argument for free trade. It isn’t free trade if our production is held to a higher standard.

          There is plenty of historical support evidenced by history for protectionism. Did we have “free trade” agreements during the greatest economic booms in the history of our nation? (There were many). Of course we didn’t. We didn’t realize economic stagnation until we reached these idiotic agreements. But, even if the practical application of the agreements are flawed, as they are, the idealized notion of a “free trade” agreement is even more flawed. As I stated before, the US doesn’t need to import anything to fulfill the demands of the people. Using the auto industry as an example, the materials needed to build a vehicle can all be provided right here. A great example of what I’m stating is back in the 70s and 80s when we were exporting steel to Japan, so they could build cars to sell to us. Now, we know the value of the steel didn’t equal the value of the car. The car was worth more because of the value-added work put into to build the car. In essence, we exported wealth to Japan. This relationship could have almost worked, until Japan realized they could get cheaper steel from places like China, and still sell us cars. Now, tell me how that’s worked out for the US. Tell me how that’s worked out for the US people. Yea!!!! We get cheaper cars!!!! ……. But, sadly, we have fewer people who can afford said cars because we have fewer people working. Coal (used to make steel) mines are shut down, steel fab plants are shut down. Manufacturing plants are shut down. Why? Because free traders believe a cheaper car is better for the US. It is not. We’re simply exporting wealth and thwarting wealth creation in the US.

          As Dirk noted, the protectionism between Europe and Russia caused the Russians to do it better ….. as I alluded to re. the small cars.

          I can only reiterate what Ben Franklin had to say in this regard ….
          <blockquote>“To be thrown upon one’s own resources, is to be cast into the very lap of fortune; for our faculties then undergo a development and display an energy of which they were previously unsusceptible”</blockquote>
          This is what I’m stating. We’ve no need of anyone else. Can we and should we do it better? Absolutely. But, it will never happen unless it’s required.

        • philjourdan says:

          Sorry Suyts (and it is not personal), you are seeing the legs, but not the elephant. it is not the regulations on the specifications for the cars, it is the regulations on how to BUILD the cars. And there is a great deal of difference. While some are beneficial, most are just government bureaucrats justifying their jobs! You completely missed that point.

          Second, you blew it on the trade. You looked at the wrong end of the tunnel. You are trying to relate free trade with prosperity, neglecting all other factors. Instead, look at tariffs when implemented and see the results!

          Let’s start with 240 years ago. What was one of the factors that caused the Colonies to rebel? We all remember “taxation without representation” as that is cute and easy to understand (everyone understands taxes). But we forget about the forced Tariffs that the UK put on the colonies (forcing them to BUY from England instead of anywhere else or even making in house). That was also a major issue.

          Let’s fast forward 4 score and 7 years and where are we? The Civil war. While the official establishment line is that it was about slavery, the reality is that nothing was proposed about slavery until half way through the war. The real catalyst was the Tariffs the north imposed on goods from Europe to protect their industries! The South was suffering under them!

          Now fast forward another 70 years. Where are we? We are in a global depression. While there are many excuses on how it started, the reality is that Europe was recovering from a devastating war, and sought to “protect” their industrial base so they implemented Tariffs. America responded in kind. Trade ground to a halt, which of course had the OPPOSITE affect on the industries as they could no longer get the raw materials to produce, laying off workers, and falling profits.

          There are many other demonstrations where tariffs caused severe economic downturns (the roaring 90s,etc). Why you do not see the “spring” of “free trade” is that for the most part, those agreements (such as NAFTA) merely PREVENT a behavior that is not necessarily in effect at that time! What tariffs did we have between Mexico and Canada before NAFTA? Hardly any at all!

          That Tariffs cost way more jobs than they save is not in question. The empirical data proves it! So I fail to see how you “do not agree” with Dr. Williams unless you want to reject the facts.

          So what are you going to do with Ford? Penalize them for every car they make in Mexico and then ship to the US? I already told you their margins are small. So now you make them disappear. So what do they do? They get out of the market. How does that help ANYONE? And in the long run, it weakens Ford (so they may not survive another downturn), and employs no one. Indeed, more folks lose jobs as car sellers do not need as many folks to sell the cars, and auto mechanics lose jobs because there are no cars to repair (let alone the spare parts manufacturers).

          So once again, how does that help domestic workers? No jobs are better than some jobs? IN what reality?

        • DirkH says:

          ” WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO IMPORT ANYTHING! Why do we enrich foreign entities (many of which are antagonistic towards the US) while we cause Americans to lower their standard of living?”

          Building interdependence between regions was always part of the UN/NWO plan “to avoid war” (and to achieve world government eventually) by making it impossible for any nation to survive on its own.

          The free trade argument goes back to Ricardo. He made certain assumptions, then developed his theory based on them. These assumptions do not hold today. Therefore protectionism should be considered as a policy option.

          One important assumption is mobility of labor.
          Now does this hold internationally? What *IS* the mobility of labor in the Free Trade zone of US interstate commerce? 3 % a year. Meaning that after ONE GENERATION the entire population of any given state might have been replaced by a new one.
          And it’s probably the same within Germany which has 18 states as well.
          Can this work between nations? Well in the case of Germany that would be 2.5 million people migrating in and out every single year. A nation state and a souvereign people clearly becomes impossible. Meaning a constitutional state becomes impossible. The basis of the constitutional state is the constitutional assembly where the PEOPLE decide how they want to live (something that the Germans still have not been allowed to do – we have an Ersatz constitution imposed on us, still being under occupation obviously).

          So in the case of the USA that would be 9 million migrants every year migrating in and out.
          Vox Day made the case against Ricardian Free Trade.

          There should also be writings from him on his Vox Populi blog but I haven’t yet checked. And an e book he has out.

          Personally, I see the Lincoln era USA with its railroad building, at the same time the Bismarck led Reich with the same policies and today’s China as great examples of protectionism for Nation Building – oh and post-WW 2 Japan. They got VERY favorable conditions after the USA “beat them” (now why would THAT be? And, why would GERMANY of all nations get super favorable conditions after being *THE* enemy? Surprises in history… The official history of the 20th century is obviously best described as The Big Lie).

        • DirkH says:

          ” There is a very good article (actually many, but I will link to one – ) on how Tariffs hurt a lot more than they help.”

          Not that impressed as the author leaves out an important factor. A government can finance itself through taxes or through tariffs. He only addresses gifts to lazy steel workers – not the benefit to everyone through lower taxation.

        • philjourdan says:

          It was not meant to be a comprehensive dissertation. Just how protectionism hurts the country practicing it. Thinking of keeping everything in America because of a few jobs misses the fact that no one has a job without a demand for the product.

        • DirkH says:

          “It was not meant to be a comprehensive dissertation. Just how protectionism hurts the country practicing it. ”

          But it is important to get the financial impact right.
          Consider this: You want to play a computer game. You could buy one for 30 bucks or write it yourself for the equivalent of 30,000 bucks. And it would suck more. But, you learn how to write a game in the process. Which might give you future income.
          That’s what protectionism on a nation scale always did. It works so reproducibly well that the globalists absolutely want to prohibit it – to stay in control.
          Russia was forced by sanctions to ramp up its own food production. This will help them in the future. We forced them into protectionism which will only make them stronger.
          Ironically cutting business ties with Russia led to dramatic drops in prices for milk and cheese for German customers as there is overcapacity in our market.
          I’m not saying free trade is always bad. I’m saying it’s a continuum of policy options. A responsible politician would use this in a nuanced way instead of a passive-aggressive “my way or the highway”.

        • Maybe we shouldn’t build a wall. We’ll probably soon be sneaking into Mexico to work.

        • philjourdan says:

          The Day After Tomorrow? 😉

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          Might already be happening without our welfare programs.

        • philjourdan says:

          Yes, People go to Mexico to work, they come to the USA for welfare.

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          See my comment about allowing politicians to cause to reject Americanism. 😟

        • leftinflagstaff says:

          *cause us to reject

    • >>
      The MSM has a theme. And they are no longer pretending to be neutral.

      It’s extremely old news. They stopped pretending neutrality during Bush 43’s administration. It was obvious they were pretending long before that. And while pretending, the MSM would take great offense if anyone pointed out the pretense to them.

      It was even obvious during Nixon’s administration, although Nixon was pretending to be a conservative so the pretense went both ways.


      • cdquarles says:

        Old news. They weren’t neutral in Goldwater vs Johnson, either. Heck, one could say they’ve never been neutral, but you had enough differences in points of view that you could do compare and contrast to get some truth from them. Then the Progressive Movement happened. 😦

    • cdquarles says:

      Exactly right. It wasn’t that long ago that no automobiles were made in Alabama, though some were made in neighboring Georgia. Today, both states have automobile production going on (and South Carolina and Tennessee and ….)

      The American people need to wake up and realize that they don’t have a right to a job or an income. Both must be earned. Why are these jobs leaving, to the extent they are? BIG GOVERNMENT is why. Taxes, regulations (redundant), and pro-Union Boss bias plus anti-Business bias. Labor does not, of itself, provide value. Thinking of ways to meet needs, though, does provide value.

  4. Yeah, I think it’s the Dems year to stay home. Ignore the polls. Compare the Conventions and rallies. While they will vote for any ol’ Hannibal Lector, this one seems to have a ‘familiarity breeding contempt’ thing happening, even with them. And many preferred the other Hannibal, and feel he got shafted.

  5. Latitude says:

    What the hell is going on with her eyes???….watch this and look at what her eyes are doing

  6. Latitude says:

    Well…..I guess we can just call this a war on white people now

    Brother Of Man Shot By Cop In Charlotte: All White Cops, All White People Are “Devils”

    But it was a black cop who killed your brother,………..

  7. Jason Calley says:

    If Hillary had two heads she would have four faces.

  8. Ahhh yes. It appears that George H.W. Bush (Bush 41) is voting for Hillary. It’s one thing for a (so-called) Republican to not vote for the Republican candidate and give Hillary the advantage. It’s quite another thing to actually vote for Hillary. He lost his reelection by breaking his “No new taxes” promise. Now he’s joined the Democrats–how “Carter-isk.”

    Of course, who you say you are voting for and who you actually vote for may not be the same.


  9. Latitude says:

    Misogyny: ONE candidate has taken tens of millions from the most oppressive regimes on the planet, the regimes with “honor killings” and “stoning death for adultery”.

    Bernie, their other dem candidate got his rocks off writing about women’s rape fantasy. THAT is misogyny. One candidate has the first female campaign manager in history.

    Xenophobia: ONE candidate is married to an immigrant

    Racism: One candidate referred to young black men as super predators who have to be brought to heal.

    That candidate’s husband essentially called odimwit a waiter who a couple of years previously would have brought them their coffee.

    One candidate and her husband supported/passed the 3 Strikes law which blacks claim is responsible for mass incarceration.

    One candidate claims as her mentor Sen R Byrd (D) an actual member of the KKK. Her husband claims as his mentor Wm Fulbright an avowed racist.

    One party’s politicians kept black kids OUT of schools then and is keeping the IN FAILING SCHOOLS now.

    One candidate has endorsed school choice/vouchers which will benefit minorities and blacks primarily.

    one candidate distributed watered down meds to AIDS patients in Africa thru their ” charity” and made money killing people..

    One candidate stole 10’s of millions from Haiti

    One candidate has a rapist for a spouse

  10. DirkH says:

    Hollywood declares Holy War on Trump, calls him “Orange Muppet Hitler”.

  11. Me says:

    LMAO! Why aren’t I 50 points ahead of Trump? Bwaahahahaha! The MSM is trying their best but they can onlymake it look close! 😆

  12. DirkH says:

    Video: Time lapse of HRC’s eye movements, and text. a possible medical explanation related to her brain blood clot following her concussion.

  13. Me says:

    This is too funny! LMAO! Enjoy!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s