Why Trump is the candidate to fix trade

[VivaRevolution]

The American people actually dont disagree, if they did then the would go out of their way to buy american and boycott foreign goods and the whole problem would had never started to begin with.

July 2015
U.S. Polling Shows Strong Opposition to More of the Same U.S. Trade Deals from Independents, Republicans and Democrats Alike
Recent polling reveals broad U.S. public opposition to more of the same trade deals among independents, Republicans and Democrats. Though Americans tend to support trade, they oppose an expansion of status quo trade policies, complicating the push for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

https://www.citizen.org/documents/polling-memo.pdf

 

[VivaRevolution]

HendoHuaGOAT has officially lost it... after last night, the downward spiral has officially begun

Look, no one's saying "hey this is all roses for all US industry no matter what!!!!" What we're saying is twofold:

1) there are definitive benefits to opening up trade - specifically free trade where US goods are no longer taxed at uber rates in EM countries or Japan

2) the inevitability of low margin, medium skilled industry in the US to being priced out globally is undeniable. If we push big tarifs now, not only will other nations cry to the WTO and win the case against us in about 10 minutes but in the long run, we'd just end up subsidizing our inefficient domestic industries via higher cost, less choice and lack of competitive at home. Think for a moment about paying significantly more for a t-shirt because it was made in the US. Then extrapolate that to the larger picture and think about how much more expense is incurred domestically by US consumers to buy normal goods like that. In time, people just buy less of it because they don't want to pay the higher prices and guess what? Those industries become lazy, noncompetitive, zombies and have low cash flow and low growth but exist because foreign products can't compete here.

And your guys desperation to change the subject here is enlightening to anyone reading this.

You guys are desperate to change the topic to the merits of trade policy.

 

[VivaRevolution]

So what was the metaphorical goalpost that was moved?

You asking what the leverage was, me pointing to a prior post where I explained this, and you changing the subject away from what leverage we are talking about.

 

[ncordless]

Says the guy who can't read, and was caught in successive posts, making contradictory statements.

Me: This thread is about Trump's ability to change trade, not a discussion of trade policy.

You: You want to debate the merits of trade.

You: I never brought up the merits of trade.

Me: Then who the Fvck did?

You did. That's what's hilarious about it. And why you look so stupid. I have consistently stayed on the topic of why Trump is a bad agent for "changing trade." Namely, he's an idiot who doesn't understand what he is talking about. You responded with a statement that trade was bad and I should know better because even Hillary is against it. You brought up the merits of trade, not I.

AND . . . you still have not addressed the challenge to Trump being an effective agent to "change trade". Why is a fool about trade someone who will be effective changing it?

 

[Renard]

Don't worry, Trump will have tremendous trade deals. Believe him.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I have met everyone of the strawman arguments in here, and destroyed them.

China isn't part of TPP, so Trump is stupid.

My Response: posted an article showing China wanted to join TPP. No rebuttal.

Everything else in this thread has been people trying to get me to debate the merits of trade, which from the first post I said I was not interested in doing.

 

[VivaRevolution]

You did. That's what's hilarious about it. And why you look so stupid. I have consistently stayed on the topic of why Trump is a bad agent for "changing trade." Namely, he's an idiot who doesn't understand what he is talking about. You responded with a statement that trade was bad and I should know better because even Hillary is against it. You brought up the merits of trade, not I.

AND . . . you still have not addressed the challenge to Trump being an effective agent to "change trade". Why is a fool about trade someone who will be effective changing it?

After I attempted to correct you trying to move the debate to merits of trade, and you made the same argument again, I responded, where again I pointed out this was not the topic, but I did respond.

You are now playing this stupid little game, where you got me to respond to your point, despite my protests, and claiming that I am the one that brought this up.

The posts are in this thread. This isn't an issue where their is grey area. If I am wrong, quote my post, and prove it.

 

[Rod1]

July 2015
U.S. Polling Shows Strong Opposition to More of the Same U.S. Trade Deals from Independents, Republicans and Democrats Alike
Recent polling reveals broad U.S. public opposition to more of the same trade deals among independents, Republicans and Democrats. Though Americans tend to support trade, they oppose an expansion of status quo trade policies, complicating the push for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

https://www.citizen.org/documents/polling-memo.pdf

Indeed, they oppose trade on paper only, yet they keep buying cheap shit from other countries instead of buying America, corporations know that and move their factories overseas.

Plenty of companies have tried to market the "Made in America" brand and people simply dont give and effing F about it.

 

[7437]

Again, you want to go argue the merits of trade, feel free to go start your own thread. The battle for public opinion on this is over. You lost.

The topic is Trump being the candidate to fix trade.

Fix by being utterly wrong on basic principles. Yeah, thats likely.

 

[Rod1]

I have met everyone of the strawman arguments in here, and destroyed them.

China isn't part of TPP, so Trump is stupid.

My Response: posted an article showing China wanted to join TPP. No rebuttal.

Everything else in this thread has been people trying to get me to debate the merits of trade, which from the first post I said I was no interested in doing.

Actually we rebutted that article, but you went "I said no discussing anything about trade".

 

[ncordless]

I have met everyone of the strawman arguments in here, and destroyed them.

China isn't part of TPP, so Trump is stupid.

My Response: posted an article showing China wanted to join TPP. No rebuttal.

Everything else in this thread has been people trying to get me to debate the merits of trade, which from the first post I said I was no interested in doing.

Your article specifically said China wasn't part of the deal and had no definite plans to do a deal. There is a vague mention about possibly wanting to join TPP some day.

You are obviously ignorant about what it would take for China to join. They can't just unilaterally join TPP. If they did, then would be the proper time to address concerns about China.

Tell us genius. Since China is not a party to TPP, how could TPP address China currency manipulation in any way?

If me and Rod1 sign a contract stating that you won't make any more shitty posts, could that be enforced against you? If not, then how could an agreement that does not involve China be used to enforce its terms against China?

 

[VivaRevolution]

Actually we rebutted that article, but you went "I said no discussing anything about trade".

Where? Quote it.

Show me where you responded to the idea that China can join TPP at any point, and indicated they wanted to.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Your article specifically said China wasn't part of the deal and had no definite plans to do a deal. There is a vague mention about possibly wanting to join TPP some day.

You are obviously ignorant about what it would take for China to join. They can't just unilaterally join TPP. If they did, then would be the proper time to address concerns about China.

Tell us genius. Since China is not a party to TPP, how could TPP address China currency manipulation in any way?

If me and Rod1 sign a contract stating that you won't make any more shitty posts, could that be enforced against you? If not, then how could an agreement that does not involve China be used to enforce its terms against China?

OK cool, but your point was that China wasn't involved with this at all, and this made Trump an idiot for bringing it up......nope, and that article proves why. They want in.

Keep trying to muddy the waters though, it is cute.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

The meltdown continues...

 

[VivaRevolution]

Actually we rebutted that article, but you went "I said no discussing anything about trade".

You rebutted the article, while ignoring that the original point was that Trump is stupid for bringing up China with TPP.

That article proves that China is something to consider with TPP. They want in. You didn't rebut this point, you rebutted a ghost argument, which has been the status quo in this thread.

 

[VivaRevolution]

The meltdown continues...

LOL, the only meltdown I see here, is a desperate attempt to change the grounds of debate.

 

[Rod1]

Where? Quote it.

Show me where you responded to the idea that China can join TPP at any point, and indicated they wanted to.

Post #29 and no, China cant join the TPP at any point, it must first bind its industry by the rules established by the TPP which is what the US wanted to bind China to a set of rules.

 

[ncordless]

The fact of the matter is, that unless you support Ted Cruz, your candidate doesn't support TPP either.

Apparently Clinton is the real idiot. She worked on TPP for 5 years, and doesn't support it.

I mean, apparently you have a far better understanding than someone that worked on it for 5 years?

Walked right into that one didn't you?

I thought that wasn't the topic. You keep chiding people for talking about the merits of "trade". And here you are doing it rather than defending your central thesis. Explain to us why Trump, who obviously has no idea what he is talking about, is the best candidate to "change trade". Alternatively, explain why a dog catcher is better suited to perform a surgery than a doctor.

After I attempted to correct you trying to move the debate to merits of trade, and you made the same argument again, I responded, where again I pointed out this was not the topic, but I did respond.

You are now playing this stupid little game, where you got me to respond to your point, despite my protests, and claiming that I am the one that brought this up.

The posts are in this thread. This isn't an issue where their is grey area. If I am wrong, quote my post, and prove it.

here you go. You started talking about how TPP is bad because even Hillary doesn't support it, and that she knows more about the merits of trade than I do. I then used the words merits of trade to call you out on it.

Do you understand that a discussion about the merits of Trump as an agent of trade change is not a discussion on the merits of trade?

 

[VivaRevolution]

Fix by being utterly wrong on basic principles. Yeah, thats likely.

Fix by following the will of the people.

Of course like your RNC friends, you don't believe in that do you?

 

[VivaRevolution]

Post #29 and no, China cant join the TPP at any point, it must first bind its industry by the rules established by the TPP which is what the US wanted to bind China to a set of rules.

You can find the post number, but not quote it, GTFO!!

Don't describe to me what my words said, show them to me.