|
|
Post by porgyman on Jan 26, 2017 18:12:16 GMT -5
Because, I don't feel that ultimately it is at the expense of Americans. If they paid more for their defense costs, would it help us? In theory yes....if all of those savings were rolled into the American economy. However, if we don't provide the needed military support to Europe, we will pay far more in the future. So my answer is more of a long term thing.... The greatest threat to Europe is already there. Middle eastern migrants. And they didn't have to invade or occupy. The door was opened for them. Migrants are draining the economies of European countries. However, Russian tanks would inflict far more damage. |
|
|
|
Post by flushingjet on Jan 26, 2017 18:22:09 GMT -5
They have to get through the 1/8 mile wide 50' deep frito-n-piranha filled moat first LOL. Since the proposal today was to levy a 20% tax on Mexican imports (which the White House has backed off on later in the day), perhaps we can just fill it with all of those Mexican avocados as well? After all, I'm not going to pay 5 bucks for an avocado. Then maybe they can all just make guacamole for everyone!  You know I really hate the facile argument that cheap fruit 'n' veg come at a fair price, we pay far too much for it in tax dollars when you begin to factor in the theft of social services. My neighborhood where i live is 1/2 overrun by low skilled disease ridden parasites that sponge off my taxes, drive down wages, dumb down and corrupt the language and culture. The work ethic ostensibly possessed by many is nice, but the output still sucks. These uninvited pests have no interest in assimilating or even becoming citizens unless they are bestowed citizenship with a magic wand, (which isnt anywhere in any part of the Constitution or the US Civil Code, so spare me the anchor bastard crap, that is a lib construct) ultimately these pukes vote for more vampiric socialism. Where I used to live is more of the same, but from Red China. America was prosperous enough to tolerate a small % of illegals on the margins but not the tsunami from all the benighted corners of the earth meant to wreck and diminish our nation in every way. Mexico in particular is no great ally, they have petro dollars and industry, let them be a good neighbor, stop sending or being a middle man for the human detritus they don't want around, let them police their country just like they police their southern border. Tax the Western Union remittances 25-40% going out to Villa Alegres far and wide and their cheesy imports until they cry "Tio!" images2_zpsf1aa2a2d |
|
|
|
Post by Ff2 on Jan 26, 2017 18:23:26 GMT -5
Do you really think Russia is going to gain control of Europe? I think that would be more of an indictment of Europe than Russia. If anything, Trump will make Europe strengthen itself by forcing them to adhere to NATO requirements. And that would lessen the likelihood of Russian aggression. Russia just wants to be heard. They want a place at the table. Putin wants to look like he is a player on the world stage. He is much more predictable than China, N Korea or Iran. Having a functional relationship with Russia will benefit us. You dont think Russia likes to take land? |
|
|
|
Post by flushingjet on Jan 26, 2017 18:32:42 GMT -5
Why is it that when someone asks you, VTN, or anyone from the left a question you refuse to answer? Because quite frankly, I was dumbfounded by your response. However, let me try to respond. Your question is why should we worry about defending Europe or Sweden, etc. at the risk of harming Americans. Correct? Short answer. There is a reason why 2 world wars, a cold war, and continuing conflict takes place. European countries all are great places. However, they lack one thing. Land mass. Which brings with it natural resources. Thus, when a country like Germany decides to invade Poland. Or a country like Russia invades Uzbekistan, or the classic example of Japan and China, it is not because they dislike the people there. It is to gain land mass and access to natural resources. Why should we care? If Russia was to gain control of all of Europe, they would overnight become the pre-eminent world power. With immense natural resources (think North Sea oil in addition to organic Russian reserves). Now, strategic military importance. Lets say that we give up on Europe. First country to feel the effect? Israel. Why? Because without access to military installations in Europe, they are sitting ducks. And speaking of sitting ducks....we would be in the same position. Except it would be from a strategic economic standpoint. Because if I was Mexico (and even Canada), I would tie my fortunes to Russia and/or China. Which would then cause YUGEEEE (to quote Trump) issues here. This is why it is important to care about and protect Europe. Are you bitonti? Because this ^^^ was Bitonti-ish in a spectacularly simplistic fashion. |
|
|
|
Post by Big L on Jan 26, 2017 18:38:48 GMT -5
Wouldn't a 20% tariff on Mexican imports mean Mexican goods will cost 20% more, which means we'd be paying for that wall, no?
|
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 26, 2017 18:40:26 GMT -5
Do you really think Russia is going to gain control of Europe? I think that would be more of an indictment of Europe than Russia. If anything, Trump will make Europe strengthen itself by forcing them to adhere to NATO requirements. And that would lessen the likelihood of Russian aggression. Russia just wants to be heard. They want a place at the table. Putin wants to look like he is a player on the world stage. He is much more predictable than China, N Korea or Iran. Having a functional relationship with Russia will benefit us. You dont think Russia likes to take land? Of course they do. Just like we like to spread democracy and capitalism. But I think Putin can be reasoned with. And like I have said a million times I would rather have them as a frenemy than have them allied with China. Russia + China + a nuclear Iran is a threat to us. We can deal with each of them individually. |
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 26, 2017 18:46:36 GMT -5
Wouldn't a 20% tariff on Mexican imports mean Mexican goods will cost 20% more, which means we'd be paying for that wall, no? Yes, assuming they just raise the price of goods in an attempt to pass the burden onto the consumer. But if we are serious about American jobs and balancing our trade then we do have to entertain things like taxing imports to level the playing field. Many countries in the world do this. It is not a radical idea. I think taxing the money Mexican immigrants send back is a much better way. Current estimates put that number at $25 billion a year. I think it is much higher. |
|
|
|
Post by flushingjet on Jan 26, 2017 18:58:04 GMT -5
Wouldn't a 20% tariff on Mexican imports mean Mexican goods will cost 20% more, which means we'd be paying for that wall, no? Nope the import tariff tax is paid to US Customs by exporters Importers pass it on but you as consumer are not forced to buy Theyre meant to depress consumption of foreign goods as well Good thing I just stocked up on some Sol and Mexicoke. The Mexican Chips Ahoy! made there sold here with cheap sugar blow. |
|
|
|
Post by flushingjet on Jan 26, 2017 19:05:43 GMT -5
Because, I don't feel that ultimately it is at the expense of Americans. If they paid more for their defense costs, would it help us? In theory yes....if all of those savings were rolled into the American economy. However, if we don't provide the needed military support to Europe, we will pay far more in the future. So my answer is more of a long term thing.... The greatest threat to Europe is already there. Middle eastern migrants. And they didn't have to invade or occupy. The door was opened for them. I was just there a whole bunch of times. I don't think people here realize the borders between contiguous EU states are gone, just like driving from NY to CT. I think theres a picture of the torn up Germany-Netherlands checkpoint in one of my "In ________, bitches!" travelogues. Germany and France already had a substantial # but they made their way on to Benelux, Nordics, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Jan 26, 2017 19:24:28 GMT -5
Really my question was more of why you feel it's important to protect Europe at the expense of Americans. Obviously Europe feels it's defense is important, thus the creation of NATO. All NATO signees agreed to pay 2% of their GDP to fund its own defense. They aren't living up to their obligations. Over time we have picked up the slack but we can't afford to do it anymore. And thanks for sticking around. Because, I don't feel that ultimately it is at the expense of Americans. If they paid more for their defense costs, would it help us? In theory yes....if all of those savings were rolled into the American economy. However, if we don't provide the needed military support to Europe, we will pay far more in the future. So my answer is more of a long term thing.... So you admit that if they met their obligations it would help Americans. That's all I wanted. All Trump is doing is bringing the issue to the table to get NATO to live up to its obligations. I don't believe for a minute that if the choice was America leaves NATO or they pay what they agreed to, they would choose to have America leave. |
|
|
|
Post by porgyman on Jan 26, 2017 19:24:51 GMT -5
Wouldn't a 20% tariff on Mexican imports mean Mexican goods will cost 20% more, which means we'd be paying for that wall, no? Yes, assuming they just raise the price of goods in an attempt to pass the burden onto the consumer. But if we are serious about American jobs and balancing our trade then we do have to entertain things like taxing imports to level the playing field. Many countries in the world do this. It is not a radical idea. I think taxing the money Mexican immigrants send back is a much better way. Current estimates put that number at $25 billion a year. I think it is much higher. How will you tax people that have already been rounded up and deported? |
|
|
|
Post by southparkcpa on Jan 26, 2017 19:41:27 GMT -5
I've always wondered why you have -21 reps...... He spits rather then swallows. I thought he took it up the ass?  ? |
|
|
|
Post by vin on Jan 26, 2017 19:54:13 GMT -5
Because quite frankly, I was dumbfounded by your response. However, let me try to respond. Your question is why should we worry about defending Europe or Sweden, etc. at the risk of harming Americans. Correct? Short answer. There is a reason why 2 world wars, a cold war, and continuing conflict takes place. European countries all are great places. However, they lack one thing. Land mass. Which brings with it natural resources. Thus, when a country like Germany decides to invade Poland. Or a country like Russia invades Uzbekistan, or the classic example of Japan and China, it is not because they dislike the people there. It is to gain land mass and access to natural resources. Why should we care? If Russia was to gain control of all of Europe, they would overnight become the pre-eminent world power. With immense natural resources (think North Sea oil in addition to organic Russian reserves). Now, strategic military importance. Lets say that we give up on Europe. First country to feel the effect? Israel. Why? Because without access to military installations in Europe, they are sitting ducks. And speaking of sitting ducks....we would be in the same position. Except it would be from a strategic economic standpoint. Because if I was Mexico (and even Canada), I would tie my fortunes to Russia and/or China. Which would then cause YUGEEEE (to quote Trump) issues here. This is why it is important to care about and protect Europe. Are you bitonti? Because this ^^^ was Bitonti-ish in a spectacularly simplistic fashion. Wow. Now there's a name I haven't heard/seen in awhile. |
|
|
|
Post by porgyman on Jan 26, 2017 20:01:18 GMT -5
Because quite frankly, I was dumbfounded by your response. However, let me try to respond. Your question is why should we worry about defending Europe or Sweden, etc. at the risk of harming Americans. Correct? Short answer. There is a reason why 2 world wars, a cold war, and continuing conflict takes place. European countries all are great places. However, they lack one thing. Land mass. Which brings with it natural resources. Thus, when a country like Germany decides to invade Poland. Or a country like Russia invades Uzbekistan, or the classic example of Japan and China, it is not because they dislike the people there. It is to gain land mass and access to natural resources. Why should we care? If Russia was to gain control of all of Europe, they would overnight become the pre-eminent world power. With immense natural resources (think North Sea oil in addition to organic Russian reserves). Now, strategic military importance. Lets say that we give up on Europe. First country to feel the effect? Israel. Why? Because without access to military installations in Europe, they are sitting ducks. And speaking of sitting ducks....we would be in the same position. Except it would be from a strategic economic standpoint. Because if I was Mexico (and even Canada), I would tie my fortunes to Russia and/or China. Which would then cause YUGEEEE (to quote Trump) issues here. This is why it is important to care about and protect Europe. Are you bitonti? Because this ^^^ was Bitonti-ish in a spectacularly simplistic fashion. Bitonti? Hell no. And glad that you enjoyed my explanation. I know my audience. Keeping it simple for a bunch of simpletons. |
|
|
|
Post by Big L on Jan 26, 2017 20:10:22 GMT -5
Wouldn't a 20% tariff on Mexican imports mean Mexican goods will cost 20% more, which means we'd be paying for that wall, no? Nope the import tariff tax is paid to US Customs by exporters Importers pass it on but you as consumer are not forced to buy Theyre meant to depress consumption of foreign goods as well Good thing I just stocked up on some Sol and Mexicoke. The Mexican Chips Ahoy! made there sold here with cheap sugar blow. .....so then the only people who will be paying for the wall will be US citizens who decide to buy Mexican products? Maybe Leader meant to say tax exports to Mexico? |
|
