February 3Feb 3 6 minutes ago, Paul852 said: We also got you to admit you will enjoy those higher prices so there's that lies. all lies. eggs are only $.25 a doz.
February 3Feb 3 1 hour ago, Kz! said: Free and fair elections check: Sounds about right. Every accusation is a confession.
February 3Feb 3 2 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: Trumpflation is on the rise. So much for the promise to get rid of it. i mean in a way he is getting rid of bidenflation and replacing it, soooooo, promise kept?
February 3Feb 3 Going to be interesting to see how far Rubio will go. He is the only one I. The cabinet who will have a line he won’t cross.
February 3Feb 3 5 hours ago, mayanh8 said: Trump thought he could wave a magic tariff wand and make every other country a slave nation. I mean I understand Mexico with immigrants and drugs even though a lot of citizens are mules and fueling the demand. But why Canada? I feel like there could've been a more diplomati way to resolve this instead of starting a trade war. Unfortunately the collateral damage is people that didn't vote for this. Here are some Magas with their simplistic response to trade war. These people really think you can spin up a manufacturing plant in a couple of months. No intelligent CEO is building a manufacturing plan for an orange clown that will be gone in less than 4 years.
February 3Feb 3 22 minutes ago, pisceschica said: I mean I understand Mexico with immigrants and drugs even though a lot of citizens are mules and fueling the demand. But why Canada? I feel like there could've been a more diplomati way to resolve this instead of starting a trade war. Unfortunately the collateral damage is people that didn't vote for this. Here are some Magas with their simplistic response to trade war. These people really think you can spin up a manufacturing plant in a couple of months. No intelligent CEO is building a manufacturing plan for an orange clown that will be gone in less than 4 years. im not saying dumbo is handling this right, but there is a TON of drugs coming in from canada and right down I81.
February 3Feb 3 1 minute ago, Alpha_TATEr said: im not saying dumbo is handling this right, but there is a TON of drugs coming in from canada and right down I81. Fair but there is still a better way of handling it besides making millions of people suffer further economically.
February 3Feb 3 Just now, pisceschica said: Fair but there is still a better way of handling it besides making millions of people suffer further economically. oh absolutely, but he is willing to tough it out on our dime.
February 3Feb 3 Just want to say I'm not exhausted yet, but it's starting to feel like Ground Hog Day. New term, same moron. So far, giving Elon Mush the US Treasury Checkbook is the best move ever! Seconded only by once again millions believing in yet another lie that he knows nothing of Project 2025, and it seems they have hit the ground running with it. We'll be Hungary 2.0 before the midterms, if there are any.
February 3Feb 3 Got to get some tariffs in place before asking congress for a big tax cut for the top 5%.
February 3Feb 3 6 hours ago, mayanh8 said: I can see the arguments for reform. But I think the government needs to be out of the business of providing retirement support to people who were perfectly fit and able to plan for it for 45 years altogether. Social Security is meant to be a security net when plans go wrong, not a full retirement plan. A spouse dies unexpectedly and leaves a widow with 3 kids starting over. An actual retirement plan is mismanaged and isn’t enough or someone never made enough money to build a plan in the first place. 5 hours ago, DrPhilly said: That's a nice thought but of course will never result in a populace that plans well for retirement. You can have the problem now or later. It is a choice to make and both choices suck. Realistically, someone planning to retire with a 401k or IRA will need around 800k saved at retirement. What percentage of working people right now do you think have or will have that when they reach retirement age? I’m guessing 25-30%.
February 3Feb 3 1 minute ago, MidMoFo said: Realistically, someone planning to retire with a 401k or IRA will need around 800k saved at retirement. What percentage of working people right now do you think have or will have that when they reach retirement age? I’m guessing 25-30%. I bet it's even lower than that.
February 3Feb 3 Just now, mr_hunt said: Hey, I generally try not to pry into anyone's personal political beliefs. But I just wanted to ask... how do you feel about Donald Trump? Approve? Disapprove? Be honest.
February 3Feb 3 17 minutes ago, Arthur Jackson said: Hey, I generally try not to pry into anyone's personal political beliefs. But I just wanted to ask... how do you feel about Donald Trump? Approve? Disapprove? Be honest. you're the donald trump of posting. hopefully that answers your question.
February 3Feb 3 — By David Honig The best, most cogent and elegantly simple explanation into the negotiating processes of the president, by Prof. David Honig of Indiana University. Everybody I know should read this accurate and enlightening piece... "I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don't know, I'm an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes. Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of "The Art of the Deal," a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you've read The Art of the Deal, or if you've followed Trump lately, you'll know, even if you didn't know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call "distributive bargaining." Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you're fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump's world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins. The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don't have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over. The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can't demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren't binary. China's choices aren't (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don't buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation. One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you're going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don't have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won't agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you're going to have to find another cabinet maker. There isn't another Canada. So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already. Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem. Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that's just not how politics works, not over the long run. For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here's another huge problem for us. Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it. From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn't even bringing checkers to a chess match. He's bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
Create an account or sign in to comment