gatomontes99

All taxes are paid by the end user. I'm glad the left is finally acknowledging that. What sets tariffs apart from taxes is that they are unequal between competing parties. If you have a US car manufacturer and...let's say...a Chinese car manufacturer and we place a tariff on the Chinese manufacturer, the Chinese manufacturer has an additional cost to the final consumer. Now, we also need to talk about price elasticity when we talk about any tax (a tariff is a tax). The consumer will only pay a set amount for a given product. When the price is below that amount, the consumer readily buys the product. When the price is above that amount, the consumer is more hesitant. With that in mind, if a tariff drives the cost to the manufacturer to an amount that is higher than the consumers' tolerance, the manufacturer will have to use less expensive materials, labor or shipping to be competitive. If the cost is increased to what other manufactuers' costs are, then they are now on at equal cost and price to consumer. Since tariffs target foreign manufacturers, the domestic benefits are to domestic manufacturers, their employees and suppliers. So, if we put a 100% tariff on Chinese made electric cars than domesticly produced electric cars would benefit. The reason we have to do that is that China takes money from their citizens to give to the manufacturer so that they have a competitive advantage. Further, China suppress wages and plays games with the value of the Yen to create even larger advantages. This is why both Canada and the US put tariffs on Chinese made electric cars. Both countries did it with very liberal leaders taking up the cause. Blaming Trump or faulting Trump for championing that idea in 2016 and today is as hypocritical as it gets.

But we know what he will do because he did it the first time. Harris is lying about her positions on just about everything and mimicking Trump when she feels like he has the best answer. But the better question is when will you stop beating your kids?

Of course they mention mass deportation...YALL FU$%!NG LET IN EVERY CRIMINAL SOUTH OF THE BORDER!!!!! They both mention it because it is absolutely necessary to the safety of the American people. Did you miss the 75% OF ARRESTS IN NYC ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS???!!! One policy does not mean they are symbiotic. It means they are on the same page as that one policy. Meanwhile, Harris wants to drop oil prices by undoing the policies that her and Joe put into place. I don't believe her. I don't believe her for one second. She's going to keep doing things to drive up costs. She going to keep letting criminals, fentanyl and trafficked children to cross the border. She's going to continue using NGOs to censor ideas. She's going to continue to support Hamas, Iran and Russia. She's a train wreck.

Thank you. I so rarely use a laptop or desktop.

I see a lot of Xs there. This must be left wing fapping material. ____________________ https://www.forbes.com/sites/caileygleeson/2024/07/05/trump-disavows-project-2025-calls-some-of-conservative-groups-ideas-absolutely-ridiculous-and-abysmal/ Trump said in a Truth Social post he has “no idea who is behind” Project 2025, adding he disagrees with some of the project’s proposals for the next GOP administration and “some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” Trump went on to say: “Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.” ____________________

One thing we know for sure, libs now love them some Dick. I mean, they really love Dick. Like, Dick is all they can talk about. Getting Dick just made their day. Dick has redefined the D party.

Project 2025 is the Heritage Foundation. Those policies are their policies, and no one else. Trump has repeatedly denied that they are his policies. Meanwhile, Harris has called for price controls, open borders, defund police, bailing out blm, allowing blm to riot, etc. She's got bad policies and she's freaking stupid. She actually said Democracy was a danger to America. She said that. Look it up. Oh, it wasn't just a danger, it was the number one threat to America. And she's running around talking like she's some house slave from the 1800s and cooking food in a bath tub. She's a disaster.

He was also calling the use of EOs being a dictator, but that part wasn't important enough to matter either.

Maybe you should get a lesson on how to read for comprehension.

That logic is based on the racist belief that one is the lowest common denominator. She's not black. She's not Indian. She's mixed. ANY assertion to the contrary is racist.

He's never said he would be dictator. Why donyounkeep repeating that lie?

Innocent people say they didn't do it. Guilty people say you can't prove it.

Nice word salad

If there was no cheating, the democrats wouldn't be mad about stopping cheating.

What more proof do you need that there is a uniparty/blob/deep state...whatever you want to call it...that is pulling all the strings. This is why a Trump/Kenedy/Gabbard coalition is so troubling.

Wow. She really is bad at talking off prompter. Good thing she doesn't wear lace up shoes or her staff would have to help her tie her shoes.

Is it better to be like Republicans and ignore the person and embrace the policies or to be like Democrats and ignore the policies and the person to embrace the image?

Remember when Newsom promised reparations? Oh, he and all of Cali Ds were on board. They loved them some free handouts. Turns out, they didn't want to really do it. Reparations supporters plot comeback after bitter defeat in California Legislature But what they did do is give illegal aliens free money for a home. California lawmakers pass bill that could make undocumented immigrants eligible for home loans That bill was vetoed. But dont think blacks in Cali (and around the country) didn't notice where the D party alliances are.

Why? What did that gain you? Why don't you point to something that I said that indicated my sexual orientation. If we can be realistic, you have no idea if I'm female or male, straight or gay.

I don't do this often, but @CrakHoBarbie is clearly not here to have a reasonable conversation. You are blocked.

So far it is a one way problem. I even gave you an opportunity to drop the act and discuss the problem. If you really wanted to be civil you wouldn't have responded with name calling. But you did and then you asked me to be civil. Why? Why not just start? You could have addressed the issues I brought up. If you want to be civil, go for it. I'm not going to start name calling. As for all these studies you keep throwing up here: In Psychology And Other Social Sciences, Many Studies Fail The Reproducibility Test The reliability of psychological studies was being questioned when I went to school. It was finally studied about a decade ago. The problem with these studies is that they try to isolate and a behavior and a set of circumstances, but the mind is far to complex to isolate to a moment in time. You couldn't do it, could you?

You have a real problem with having civil discussians, don't you? Let's drop the name calling and the fake bravado and just discuss the topic. Let's start with the concept of misinterpretation of arousal: In psychology, misattribution of arousal is the process whereby people make a mistake in assuming what is causing them to feel aroused. For example, when actually experiencing physiological responses related to fear, people mislabel those responses as romantic arousal. The reason physiological symptoms may be attributed to incorrect stimuli is because many stimuli have similar physiological symptoms such as increased blood pressure or shortness of breath. There are numerous reasons why a man will get an erection. Anger, fear, and embarrassment are just a few. Eroticized rage is a fascinating concept. Emotional Triggers: Emotional triggers are stimuli that elicit strong emotional reactions. In the context of eroticized rage, certain emotions, particularly anger, may serve as powerful triggers for sexual arousal. Understanding and managing these triggers is crucial in therapeutic interventions. In other words, if you see something that makes you get angry, you might get an erection. Misinterpretation of arousal explains why a man who hates homosexuality would become erect when subjected to homosexual porn.

Wow. You really are insecure about your thesis. Why is that? FYI, I was talking about the H.E. Adams study.

This study is infamous. It was debunked because it was determined the men that reported homophobic feelings were acutely aware of their erection being monitored. It was the Streisand Effect for erections. Knowing they were being watched, they tried to prevent erection and that caused erection. It was termed misappropriation of erection and stands as a prime example of how a study can be inaccurate. We studied it in Psychology in college. It is a bit troubling that the study remains listed by the government without a note to indicate the study was determined to be inaccurate.