January 20th 2025 - Donald Trump is BACK!

[MemeFan]

Yes, a crime DOES exist for it. I even outlined what crime and where its definition is found. Try to keep up, please.

Name it.

So you're fine with America allying with Muslim Jihadis who murdered Americans on 9/11?
Well thank you for confessing you like seeing Americans get murdered. Given your other posts I'd say that was a given, but never mind.

If terms of deal are mutually beneficial, yes, why not? For example, they may be willing to export alive Osama bin Laden to US court in excharge for humanitarian needs.

Or would your solution be no Osama bin Laden while Pakistanis and some Gulf monarchies help fellow Muslims?

Nothing in this is even remotely, tangentially related to anything you are replying to.

Oh yes, it's. All states are very fine gentlemen with mafia heart.

A treaty is a covenant. Once signed it is binding. We are commanded by Christ "let your yes be yes and your no be now," and to prove a willingness to break a signed covenant is to declare that one considers lying to be acceptable. If you consider yourself qualified to rescind the Commandments, take that up with their Author.

No treaty is covenant without blood sacrifice as per Gary North.

For example, you are new secretary. Previous secretary has signed off that she and all future secretaries will provide "sexual services" on demand. Since previous secretary has signed off thousands of documents, you have found out these terms after signing.

By your own moral code, you must now provide sexual service. After all, something written can't be broken by all inheritors.

So you acknowledge that empathy is evil? Then you are calling Christ a liar.

I didn't say that. I said being emphatic can be abused by others.

I have pointed out that a president is openly working with enemies who have sworn the extinction of America, and that makes me the same as the Pharisees who forbade the saving of lives? Yeah, try again, kid. And of course, this is followed up with the classic "something something just mention CNN and pretend you've said something pithy" tactic. If CNN is some kind of new-age Croatian slang for "my first doctoral degree was in Constitutional Law and the second was in International Law," then yes.

Gentleman and Sir are established social convention for calling someone my age. Behave as adult.

What you and Pharisses have in common is "sticking to written documents" including situations where some "mental flexibility" would be beneficial for mankind. You would make perfect Lady No, it's Impossible in some state bureaucracy.

4-Chan chatrooms.

What's that?

And with THAT, I will do as I said I would do earlier and smilingly walk away to leave those on this thread to continue groping in darkness.

Seems you have choosen to grope in darkness. Zero interest in trying to understand world better because I already know enough.

EDIT: Clarification

 

[steve]

 

[paterfamilias]

View attachment 10605

Something something suspended habeas corpus something or something

 

[Mark C]

Presented without comment, other than to note some contrast:

Watch: Military Academy Goes Wild When Trump Official Reveals Plans for Jesus Painting That Biden Admin Hid

Duffy's comment drew raucous cheers from midshipmen and thus provided further evidence that America's modern Christian revival continues.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

"In a clip posted Tuesday to the social media platform X, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy received enthusiastic and prolonged applause from midshipmen at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy when he insisted that a painting of Jesus Christ, relegated to the basement by officials in former President Joe Biden’s administration, must return to its former place of honor.

“Let’s bring Him up!” Duffy thundered. One could barely hear the secretary’s words over the audience’s raucous cheers."

 

[steve]

Presented without comment, other than to note some contrast:

Watch: Military Academy Goes Wild When Trump Official Reveals Plans for Jesus Painting That Biden Admin Hid

Duffy's comment drew raucous cheers from midshipmen and thus provided further evidence that America's modern Christian revival continues.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

"In a clip posted Tuesday to the social media platform X, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy received enthusiastic and prolonged applause from midshipmen at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy when he insisted that a painting of Jesus Christ, relegated to the basement by officials in former President Joe Biden’s administration, must return to its former place of honor.

“Let’s bring Him up!” Duffy thundered. One could barely hear the secretary’s words over the audience’s raucous cheers."

I feel two kinds of ways.
I’m going to leave it at that.

 

[FollowingHim]

I absolutely just answered those in the other thread but I’ll recap here;

First off none of these accusations are true. These are crazed , emotive rantings. Trump Derangement Syndrome is real and you have it. It’s possible that it was a mental break brought on by reading a dozen different languages. The human mind can only hold so much information and you seem to have filled yours with a world record amount of linguistics.

Trump is not a traitor, Democrats since Clinton have been. It is perfectly acceptable for countries to leave treaties. It is perfectly acceptable for presidents to realign or even leave alliances.

Trump is going to isolate Russia and get Ukraine the best deal possible. This Russian obsession of the left is psychotic. It’s Bernie who was in the Soviet’s pockets just like it was Walz who was in China’s.

Trump isn’t a religious leader. He’s a secular leader and he’s the best choice we had. I happen to think he was the best choice we’ve had since Eisenhower but even if that’s not true he was still the best choice in this election and so it was my duty as a Christian to vote for him.

He got Roe overturned. He supports religious liberty. He opposes the trans lunacy and he doesn’t want to take my guns. He’s dreamy.

Agree with everything except Russia-Ukraine. Won't comment anymore.

I actually even agree with @The Revolting Man on that this time. As he said, Trump will get Ukraine the best deal possible. It won't be a very good deal, and many people who have spent the last few years cheering for Ukraine will be extremely upset about it and struggle to accept that there wasn't a better one available, but it will still be the best deal possible under the present circumstances.

There really isn't any need for longwinded anti-Trump ranting here. There's enough of that on the rest of the internet. Of course he's flawed, being human, and I disagree with lots of details of what he's doing, but those details can be discussed calmly in the context of the fact that he's also doing a lot of good.

Here's a good example of this blend of good and bad. His tariffs are good for the USA. His rhetorical justification for them is full of lies and designed for a political purpose - to make the US domestic audience think everyone else is treating them terribly and these tariffs are not Trump's fault, but the fault of others. For instance, Trump claimed New Zealand puts 20% tariffs on US exports, which is a bald-faced lie as we are famous for having essentially no tariffs on anything since the 1980s, the average on US exports to NZ is actually 1.9%, far lower than the average 3.4% tariff the US already places on imports from NZ. In this case a truly "reciprocal" tariff policy would actually mean reducing US tariffs! And on close investigation the rhetoric is similarly false for most countries (many do apply tariffs but nowhere near as high as claimed by Trump). These lies about international trade barriers are designed to make the US domestic audience think that NZ (and everywhere else) is treating the US badly, so putting a tariff of 10% on all imports is actually a "reciprocal" response to this fictitious bad treatment, making Trump their saviour from those nasty foreigners. I have no respect for rhetoric that is based on falsehoods. But I would have absolutely no problem with it if he'd just honestly said "to benefit US industry and raise revenue we're applying a 10% tariff on all imports". Done. The policy is good for the USA, the rhetoric is bad. That's typical Trump - but also typical of most politicians. They often lie to deflect blame from themselves and attract credit to themselves. There will be short-term pain to US consumers from this policy, and it is in Trump's interest to encourage voters to blame others for that pain rather than him, to retain their votes. But in Trump's case the underlying policy is still good, which is what matters most in the end.

 

[steve]

@FollowingHim I hear you and you are technically correct that a lot of the 20%ers did not have anywhere near that level of tariffs.
From what I’ve read, there are a lot of policies that countries have put in place that have created unreasonable trade imbalances. These policies have affected trade in the same ways that tariffs would have. Rather than listing all of the details of the situations, they just made the catch-all category of claiming the 20% tariff. So it was technically a lie while being realistically true.
These claims, true or false, are bringing everyone to the table. And, as you have seen, they were just a negotiation tactic and and the threatened tariffs never went into effect.

What has happened is that Chy-na has been isolated due to their inability to lose face and may very well be in the process of being defeated without firing a single shot.

Personally, I don’t like that level of deception but if it can prevent war….. I don’t want the ends to justify the means


I don’t claim to have a handle on all of this, I just understand some of it due to what I have come across.

 

[FollowingHim]

From what I’ve read, there are a lot of policies that countries have put in place that have created unreasonable trade imbalances. These policies have affected trade in the same ways that tariffs would have. Rather than listing all of the details of the situations, they just made the catch-all category of claiming the 20% tariff. So it was technically a lie while being realistically true.

No, even that is a distortion, for two reasons.

Firstly, the 20% was simply calculated from the trade deficit - taking into account only physically imported and exported goods, and ignoring services. The USA imports more goods than it exports - but exports more services than it imports. Personally, I can't think of any goods I regularly buy from the USA, but I buy plenty of services (email hosting for instance). The same goes for many people and entire countries. For NZ, we have a 20% trade deficit if you take into account only physical items - but once you take services into account that drops to about 6%. As it's never going to be exactly zero, it's always going to be slightly one side or the other, 6% is essentially nothing. We import about as much from the USA as we export to it.

Secondly, the differences that exist aren't actually caused by trade barriers in most cases. Take Bangladesh for instance. Trump's figures for Bangladesh were very high, can't recall the exact number, but Bangladesh truly does sell far more to the USA than it buys from it. But why is that? Quite simply, because people in Bangladesh are too poor to afford US goods. Things made in the USA and other Western countries are generally quite expensive, because of our high labour costs etc, things made in India or China are far cheaper. I can't think of a single US export that a poor Bangladeshi would actually even think about buying, except maybe some internet services (again services, not goods, see above), but can think of plenty of Chinese goods they'd buy.

Compounding this is that the US doesn't actually manufacture many things specifically designed for export markets, US manufacturing is aimed at domestic markets, and some is then exported also if a foreign country happens to be interested in that same thing. Asian manufacturing by contrast is specifically aimed at export - they make things that the USA and other Western countries want to buy, that locals aren't that interested in (e.g. tacky Christmas decorations). As a result, I can't even think of many American goods that I want to buy - maybe I'd buy a John Deere tractor if I ever became rich, might buy some scientific gadget for work, we do buy some books from the USA occasionally, but for regular everyday things I'm not buying US products. I drive Japanese-made vehicles, wear Chinese-made clothing and carry a Chinese-made cellphone. So part of the difference is just product mismatch to markets - and not just to poor countries.

So the differences that do exist are largely completely natural consequences of the choices people make. They are usually not created by artificial trade barriers, they are not a hostile act against the USA, they just exist for very logical reasons. So they can't be fixed by changing trade barriers either.

 

[MemeFan]

I actually even agree with @The Revolting Man on that this time. As he said, Trump will get Ukraine the best deal possible. It won't be a very good deal, and many people who have spent the last few years cheering for Ukraine will be extremely upset about it and struggle to accept that there wasn't a better one available, but it will still be the best deal possible under the present circumstances.

This assumed Zelensky and EU oligarchy wants peace and not WW3 to restore their supremacy over world and Trump can force his will over these madmen.

Here's a good example of this blend of good and bad. His tariffs are good for the USA. His rhetorical justification for them is full of lies and designed for a political purpose - to make the US domestic audience think everyone else is treating them terribly and these tariffs are not Trump's fault, but the fault of others. For instance, Trump claimed New Zealand puts 20% tariffs on US exports, which is a bald-faced lie as we are famous for having essentially no tariffs on anything since the 1980s, the average on US exports to NZ is actually 1.9%, far lower than the average 3.4% tariff the US already places on imports from NZ. In this case a truly "reciprocal" tariff policy would actually mean reducing US tariffs! And on close investigation the rhetoric is similarly false for most countries (many do apply tariffs but nowhere near as high as claimed by Trump). These lies about international trade barriers are designed to make the US domestic audience think that NZ (and everywhere else) is treating the US badly, so putting a tariff of 10% on all imports is actually a "reciprocal" response to this fictitious bad treatment, making Trump their saviour from those nasty foreigners.

1. They aren't reciprocal per usual definition (same as other states's tariffs). Trump, per my info, has changed his mind at last moment.

2. Enemies finding. Trump is enemy of globalists and globalists will refuse deals with Trump. Just look at EU. First instinct is retaliation.

3. USA provides security for most of world. Trump decided "customers" should pay for service. If state wants US protection, then can send money directly to US Treasury.

Standard mafia modus operandi, except minus threat of beating first before deal.

 

[MemeFan]

No, even that is a distortion, for two reasons.

Firstly, the 20% was simply calculated from the trade deficit - taking into account only physically imported and exported goods, and ignoring services. The USA imports more goods than it exports - but exports more services than it imports. Personally, I can't think of any goods I buy from the USA, but I buy plenty of services (email hosting for instance). The same goes for many people and entire countries. For NZ, we have a 20% trade deficit if you take into account only physical items - but once you take services into account that drops to about 6%. As it's never going to be exactly zero, it's always going to be slightly one side or the other, 6% is essentially nothing. We import about as much from the USA as we export to it.

Secondly, the differences that exist aren't actually caused by trade barriers in most cases. Take Bangladesh for instance. Trump's figures for Bangladesh were very high, can't recall the exact number, but Bangladesh truly does sell far more to the USA than it buys from it. But why is that? Quite simply, because people in Bangladesh are too poor to afford US goods. Things made in the USA and other Western countries are generally quite expensive, because of our high labour costs etc, things made in India or China are far cheaper. I can't think of a single US export that a poor Bangladeshi would actually even think about buying, except maybe some internet services (again services, not goods, see above), but can think of plenty of Chinese goods they'd buy.

Compounding this is that the US doesn't actually manufacture many things specifically designed for export markets, US manufacturing is aimed at domestic markets, and some is then exported also if a foreign country happens to be interested in that same thing. Asian manufacturing by contrast is specifically aimed at export - they make things that the USA and other Western countries want to buy, that locals aren't that interested in (e.g. tacky Christmas decorations). As a result, I can't even think of any American good that I want to buy - maybe I'd buy a John Deere tractor if I ever became rich, might buy some scientific gadget for work, but for regular everyday things I'm not buying US products. I drive Japanese-made vehicles, wear Chinese-made clothing and carry a Chinese-made cellphone. So part of the difference is just product mismatch to markets - and not just to poor countries.

So the differences that do exist are largely completely natural consequences of the choices people make. They are usually not created by artificial trade barriers, they are not a hostile act against the USA, they just exist for very logical reasons. So they can't be fixed by changing trade barriers either.

Check CABM:

Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

The CBAM will initially apply to imports of certain goods and selected precursors whose production is carbon intensive and at most significant risk of carbon leakage: cement, iron and steel, aluminium, fertilisers, electricity and hydrogen.

taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu

So easier export to EU requires obedience of climate change ideology. And since EU is big market, many businesses outside will follow EU rules.

So regulation without representation.

 

[FollowingHim]

This assumed Zelensky and EU oligarchy wants peace and not WW3 to restore their supremacy over world and Trump can force his will over these madmen.

He'll still get them the best deal possible. You're right that they may reject it, but that's a separate question.

 

[MemeFan]

He'll still get them the best deal possible. You're right that they may reject it, but that's a separate question.

They have already rejected.

 

[FollowingHim]

So easier export to EU requires obedience of climate chance ideology. And since EU is big market, many businesses outside will follow EU rules.

So regulation without representation.

Nothing new there, it's no different to how California has driven emissions rules for vehicles and power tools for many years. Every manufacturer in the world has been making vehicles to meet Californian emissions standards, so they can sell the same vehicle everywhere. So even a vehicle made in Japan and sold to New Zealand is compliant with irrelevant Californian standards, because it's the simplest approach.

 

[steve]

No, even that is a distortion, for two reasons.

Firstly, the 20% was simply calculated from the trade deficit - taking into account only physically imported and exported goods, and ignoring services. The USA imports more goods than it exports - but exports more services than it imports. Personally, I can't think of any goods I regularly buy from the USA, but I buy plenty of services (email hosting for instance). The same goes for many people and entire countries. For NZ, we have a 20% trade deficit if you take into account only physical items - but once you take services into account that drops to about 6%. As it's never going to be exactly zero, it's always going to be slightly one side or the other, 6% is essentially nothing. We import about as much from the USA as we export to it.

Secondly, the differences that exist aren't actually caused by trade barriers in most cases. Take Bangladesh for instance. Trump's figures for Bangladesh were very high, can't recall the exact number, but Bangladesh truly does sell far more to the USA than it buys from it. But why is that? Quite simply, because people in Bangladesh are too poor to afford US goods. Things made in the USA and other Western countries are generally quite expensive, because of our high labour costs etc, things made in India or China are far cheaper. I can't think of a single US export that a poor Bangladeshi would actually even think about buying, except maybe some internet services (again services, not goods, see above), but can think of plenty of Chinese goods they'd buy.

Compounding this is that the US doesn't actually manufacture many things specifically designed for export markets, US manufacturing is aimed at domestic markets, and some is then exported also if a foreign country happens to be interested in that same thing. Asian manufacturing by contrast is specifically aimed at export - they make things that the USA and other Western countries want to buy, that locals aren't that interested in (e.g. tacky Christmas decorations). As a result, I can't even think of many American goods that I want to buy - maybe I'd buy a John Deere tractor if I ever became rich, might buy some scientific gadget for work, we do buy some books from the USA occasionally, but for regular everyday things I'm not buying US products. I drive Japanese-made vehicles, wear Chinese-made clothing and carry a Chinese-made cellphone. So part of the difference is just product mismatch to markets - and not just to poor countries.

So the differences that do exist are largely completely natural consequences of the choices people make. They are usually not created by artificial trade barriers, they are not a hostile act against the USA, they just exist for very logical reasons. So they can't be fixed by changing trade barriers either.

Thank you, your information is more detailed than mine.

But at the end of the day you won’t be paying 20% and Chi-nah will still be isolated.
Some of the negotiations cancel China’s ability to transship through other countries.

 

[Mark C]

The general unstated common denominator in about a half-dozen of the above posts is included under "non-tariff barriers." Things that the Globalist Tyranny has put into place (Kalifornia CO2/PC/BS is a great example, so are EU speech and censorship mandates, international DEI mandates, and the use of USAID to force international LGBTQ-BS) to mandate behavior, destroy economies, and generally just mess with the lives of people and nations.

The problem with declaring what is being done to be a "lie" is that the tariff numbers don't reflect all the very real damage that has been done, which was designed to be INTENTIONALLY obtuse and opaque.

NZ and Australia, for example, IIRC, were about as anti-rights when it came to the Covid BS of any countries on the planet. Did that have direct effects on world "psyche"? I certainly noticed it, and saw the fear generated. Were the effects measurable and quantifiable economically? That's tougher. Canada's trucker crackdown was a bit more obvious. But the effects of all of them were "globally negative."

That is absolutely true for the climate BS, whether it's openly admitted or not. And the LGBTQ BS persists, albeit with less pressure from the US Deep State, at least for now.

What I have been impressed by, from Trump et al (and to a MUCH greater extent that I expected) was how the 'pressure' is directed at a level of WTO/WEF/BIS/USAID/EU totalitarian evil in a "wholistic" sense. Almost like "striking at the root."

And, furthermore: The target really does - in a tariff sense - seem to be China and the CCP. A term - that I love - I heard used by the brilliant Ed Dowd is "encirclement." And he called what the new administration is doing there 'brilliant' himself. I can't help but agree.

 

[OttoM]

The way I see the tariffs - it’s another tax on the people. I don’t get a single penny from those tariffs. We already have an inflation tax, state income tax, federal income tax, payroll tax, bridge toll tax, sales tax, property tax, and even car tax/yearly registration.

If Florida can fund itself with no state income tax, and they are floating the idea of removing property tax (which likely will be offset by an increase in sales tax), then why can’t this be done in the federal level? I’ll tell you why - they’re addicted to easy money and love to spend it. Trump’s AI investment ($500 billion) dwarves all the savings done by DOGE ($150 billion by next fiscal year).

Cut off the spending. Cut off state and federal income tax. Cut off property tax and replace it with a one time tax when you purchase it. Offset the deficit by an increase in sales tax - with exemptions on certain things like food, drinks, and baby items. It’s the rich that like to spend on expensive clothing, watches, tv’s, etc. So a higher sales tax is an easy way to get the rich to pay their fair share. The more you’re able to spend on non-essentials - the more you pay in tax. On the federal level - they can fund themselves through tariffs. But no federal taxes. We are getting RIPPED off - paying a tariff tax and federal tax. The cheap labor from china benefited me - I was able to buy stuff for much cheaper than before. The tariff means I’ll likely pay way more + still paying federal income tax. Terrible deal for the people - great deal for the government that likes to spend like there’s no tomorrow.

I don’t see manufacturing coming back into the USA either. Why would any corporation want to deal with the bureaucracy in the USA and pay much higher wages; when they can simply go to Vietnam or some other country and pay a few bucks an hour for labor?

 

[Mark C]

If Florida can fund itself with no state income tax, and they are floating the idea of removing property tax (which likely will be offset by an increase in sales tax), then why can’t this be done in the federal level?

Sorry, but here's where the error creeps in.

Florida can't print currency out of nothing. The 'feds' can, and do. They don't NEED ANY TAX of any kind, except to perpetuate the fraud. IOW, 'taxes' convince the rubes that they are 'paying' for something, when in fact it could simply be printed. But then, people would suspect what would be obvious.

I’ll tell you why - they’re addicted to easy money and love to spend it.

Close, but it's not "money," it's fiat. But they are 'addicted.'

Trump’s AI investment ($500 billion) dwarves all the savings done by DOGE ($150 billion by next fiscal year).

Ultimately, immaterial. The AI 'investment' isn't (directly) funded by money printing, just corporate entities.

DOGE cut off the funds to much - by no means ALL - of the Evil that was subverting the world. That's why it was the first step.

And the "Magic Money Machines" (over 50 by one late estimate I've seen) not only "print" (write checks) out of nothing, but aren't even "logged" as official debt; they're pure inflation.

 

[Mark C]

I don’t see manufacturing coming back into the USA either. Why would any corporation want to deal with the bureaucracy in the USA and pay much higher wages; when they can simply go to Vietnam or some other country and pay a few bucks an hour for labor?

Hence the tariffs. They can't SELL into the world's biggest market if they still aren't competitive on these shores.

The real issue is trust. If the "non-tariff barriers" (including those erected by the anti-US Deep State Regime) are truly being dismantled, they'll have motivation.

Meanwhile, tariff "encirclement" by Trump will give Vietnam, and others who cooperate, a big competitive "leg up" on the CCP, and help "bridge the gap" for US consumers while domestic manufacturing hopefully/eventually comes on-line.

 

[MemeFan]

The way I see the tariffs - it’s another tax on the people. I don’t get a single penny from those tariffs. We already have an inflation tax, state income tax, federal income tax, payroll tax, bridge toll tax, sales tax, property tax, and even car tax/yearly registration.

Issue is never taxes, always spending. Without control of spending only available tax system is one getting as money as possible from population.

If Florida can fund itself with no state income tax, and they are floating the idea of removing property tax (which likely will be offset by an increase in sales tax), then why can’t this be done in the federal level? I’ll tell you why - they’re addicted to easy money and love to spend it. Trump’s AI investment ($500 billion) dwarves all the savings done by DOGE ($150 billion by next fiscal year).

Spending being primary problem here.

Cut off the spending. Cut off state and federal income tax. Cut off property tax and replace it with a one time tax when you purchase it. Offset the deficit by an increase in sales tax - with exemptions on certain things like food, drinks, and baby items. It’s the rich that like to spend on expensive clothing, watches, tv’s, etc. So a higher sales tax is an easy way to get the rich to pay their fair share. The more you’re able to spend on non-essentials - the more you pay in tax. On the federal level - they can fund themselves through tariffs. But no federal taxes. We are getting RIPPED off - paying a tariff tax and federal tax. The cheap labor from china benefited me - I was able to buy stuff for much cheaper than before. The tariff means I’ll likely pay way more + still paying federal income tax. Terrible deal for the people - great deal for the government that likes to spend like there’s no tomorrow.

Ideal tax should be neutral which means not favouring any industry or group.

What most people don't understand is that poor require non-food items also. So if you don't tax food, well non-food item will become expensive. Also economic development will cause for poor spending more money on non-food item which means effective tax rate on poor willl raise.

Also, difference in tax rates between product create bribery and other corruptive activities. Why do you think US candy have flour inside? No tax for product where flour is ingredient. Keep tax rate same and avoid such stupidities.

I don’t see manufacturing coming back into the USA either. Why would any corporation want to deal with the bureaucracy in the USA and pay much higher wages; when they can simply go to Vietnam or some other country and pay a few bucks an hour for labor?

It will come back. It's not labor cost problem since shipping over Pacific costs 3X more than labor cost savings by using cheaper labor. It's regulation causing deindustrialization, taxes and dollar as reserve currency.

Deregulation is being fixed. Check zero-based regulation.

 

[FollowingHim]

The general unstated common denominator in about a half-dozen of the above posts is included under "non-tariff barriers." Things that the Globalist Tyranny has put into place (Kalifornia CO2/PC/BS is a great example, so are EU speech and censorship mandates, international DEI mandates, and the use of USAID to force international LGBTQ-BS) to mandate behavior, destroy economies, and generally just mess with the lives of people and nations.

The problem with declaring what is being done to be a "lie" is that the tariff numbers don't reflect all the very real damage that has been done, which was designed to be INTENTIONALLY obtuse and opaque.

NZ and Australia, for example, IIRC, were about as anti-rights when it came to the Covid BS of any countries on the planet. Did that have direct effects on world "psyche"? I certainly noticed it, and saw the fear generated. Were the effects measurable and quantifiable economically? That's tougher. Canada's trucker crackdown was a bit more obvious. But the effects of all of them were "globally negative."

That is absolutely true for the climate BS, whether it's openly admitted or not. And the LGBTQ BS persists, albeit with less pressure from the US Deep State, at least for now.

What I have been impressed by, from Trump et al (and to a MUCH greater extent that I expected) was how the 'pressure' is directed at a level of WTO/WEF/BIS/USAID/EU totalitarian evil in a "wholistic" sense. Almost like "striking at the root."

And, furthermore: The target really does - in a tariff sense - seem to be China and the CCP. A term - that I love - I heard used by the brilliant Ed Dowd is "encirclement." And he called what the new administration is doing there 'brilliant' himself. I can't help but ag

You can't just hypothesise that everything is due to mysterious non-tariff trade barriers that must exist somewhere in the mist. This is a vague statement of faith. I was focusing on tangible reality, and when you look at the facts you find much of the trade imbalance either does not exist in the first place and has been exaggerated, or exists for reasons other than trade barriers.

The trade deficit exists because the US is the world's money printer, printing the main currency of global trade. You want the world flooded in US dollars so people use them for trade and as a reserve, so must spend more than you receive back. The deficit is therefore created by the USA itself as a tool to make it the centre of the world economy. It's not anyone else's fault, it's your own deliberate act.

And there are good reasons for it. You get tangible goods from the world and in return give little bits of paper from a money printer. This arrangement has greatly benefited the people of the USA, practically speaking. The problem is that all that money printed becomes debt (e g. when it is handed back to the USA by being invested in US Treasury bonds), and that is building up. It will never be paid off, but the day of default must be delayed as long as possible to maintain the illusion on which the whole world economy rests.

To send more money and receive more stuff, it is essential that stuff you'd want to buy be made offshore. Hence globalisation of industry - it's been a necessary part of the whole system. You can't get China to buy their oil from Saudi Arabia in US dollars unless you buy so much stuff from China that they have dollars to spare to send to the Saudis. So factories making goods for the USA must be located in China.

Yes, it's an unsustainable system. But don't for a minute think that it harms the USA. The system has been designed to benefit the USA. Because tangible goods are real, and money is fake - you get the real stuff and the rest of the world is left holding fake paper debt that will never be repaid.

Trump's actions to reign this in will help to keep the system ticking along for a few more years, by reducing the deficit. But that does mean a reduction in the amount of tangible goods received from the rest of the world - a reduction in tribute to the global hegemon if you want. US living standards will decline, it is inevitable, when cheap imports reduce and you can buy fewer things.