Wow this administration is f**ing batshit insane. I thought the tariffs would be on raw metals, not anything at all that happens to contain them.
It's reasons why this that I refuse to associate with Republicans in my daily life anymore. They are undeserving of respect or decency for how they continue to make our lives worse.
Do you think it will finally click after 2 more cycles, that's 8 years or so?
You will be your current age + 8, maybe you can then start saying "yeah man both sides suck, it is as if there is something above it that controls them both and we are made to support them as if we're supporting our favorite soccer team"?
For years, Democrats were generally aligned with labor, and broadly opposed to trade agreements -- remember that Hillary Clinton campaigned on rejecting the TPP [1], and it was unusual that Trump agreed with her, taking the issue away. Now, suddenly, the left is on the other side of the issue, because the current executive wants to restrict trade. It's nothing but realpolitik.
Also, not that long ago, it was the left that was advocating tariffs. For example, Obama in 2009 [2]. Admittedly nothing as sweeping or rushed as what is going on now, but still far from the party of free trade.
[1] https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/hillary-clinton-trade...
Biden, who actually walked a picket line, is probably among the most proworker presidents in American history (certainly in my lifetime) and that's sad because the bar is so low. Trump, and his litany of judges, are all very much anti-worker and pro big business. He is trying to dismantle the NLRB at their behest!
As far as Biden goes, you do realize that he didn't roll back the tariffs that Trump 1 put on China, right?
> Biden, who actually walked a picket line, is probably among the most proworker presidents in American history (certainly in my lifetime) and that's sad because the bar is so low.
I said, at the very top, that the Democrats were historically aligned with labor. They had no qualms about enacting trade barriers or opposing trade agreements in order to appease that constituency. It is only since -- well, this year, basically -- that they have become free trade evangelists.
It's realpolitik. Democrats see a wedge issue, and they're riling up the base to exploit it, regardless of the party's own historical actions.
Democrats still broadly align themselves with labor (the many people getting the stuff done)
Republicans still broadly align themselves with rich CEOs (the few people profiting off the backs of the labor).
It has been this way for at least 40 years.
Labor vs. Trade ≠ Tariffs vs. Free Trade — Democrats’ historic opposition to trade deals like NAFTA and the TPP was about protecting workers from job outsourcing and race-to-the-bottom standards. That’s not the same thing as imposing blanket tariffs as a blunt weapon in foreign policy. Conflating the two is lazy at best, dishonest at worst.
Obama’s 2009 tire tariffs were a narrow safeguard against China dumping, consistent with WTO rules, and widely viewed as a targeted response to an actual violation. That’s worlds apart from sweeping, across-the-board tariffs used as political theater.
And if it’s all “realpolitik” like you say, then your whole point collapses: by your logic, both parties shift based on circumstance — so stop pretending there’s some tidy ideological flip when the reality is far messier.
In regards to my ability to "realize" I suppose I'll keep myself to the facts. At present, I don't see a set of functional equivalency in each party's extravagances.
I'm not sure who is arguing against ever using tariffs in general. Obama's, like Trump's tariffs against China, they were at least planned and somewhat targeted for a specific purpose. The argument against Trump's tariffs this time around has always been they are capricious.
I guess I missed the part where you "countered" them. Saying "that's not true" is not an argument.
> You even gave up the point when admit Obama's tariffs were "nothing as sweeping or rushed as what is going on now".
I didn't "give up the point" -- I can admit when something is different in scale while still nothing the fundamental shift in historical stance.
Some more examples for you:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/13/politics/china-tariffs-biden-...
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/business/energy-environme...
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-steel-dumping-2014071...
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2017/0...
It makes complete sense for the left to oppose this. And it is completely consistent with position of "i want these smart selective predictable tariffs". It would not be consistent with what is happening now
You might want to tell labor. I just listened to an hour-long podcast with the Teamsters leader, where he revealed that over half of their members supported Trump in the most recent election:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/why-unions-went-for-tr...
OK, so we agree on the facts -- historically, the Democrats were aligned with labor, and opposed to trade. They had absolutely no qualms about opposing trade when they felt it was in their political interests to do so.
> Obama’s 2009 tire tariffs were a narrow safeguard against China dumping
I mean...you can attempt to diminish it in scale if you like, but the fact is that the left has historically been pro-labor and anti-trade, and the right has been pro-trade and anti-labor. Now the right controls the government, and they're clearly anti-trade.
They've flipped.
Clinton was VOCIFEROUSLY pro-TPP for quite a while, and "changed" her stance as the race with Trump tightened. I believe she was a bald-faced liar.
The Clintons were ur-Third Way democrats. Financialization of the economy and globalization were the stock-in-trade (puns intended) of 1990s-2010s Democrats (at the Federal level) until Bernie came along.
It is that they create problems, they pitch suboptimal solutions that will create the next crisis, and then they frame the crisis in a way that appeals to your emotions.
So no, it is not a tiresome both sides argument. It is that you are being led by people that don't care about you, that don't have your best interests in mind; they have their own agenda and you're just being swayed left and right as the zeitgeist allows.
And you're left cheering for your team because you think your team is better. But hey, the other team really bothched something up recently, so yay your team. And then we will get your team in power, they'll do some things you like while creating other problems and then pendulum will swing the other way, some will cheer for the other team and then swing back. And then before you know it, oops you're 64 years old now.
The most virtuous of us do not vote their own interest first, but rather the interest of justice and morality. The assumption that people should or will vote their own interest first & always is what the kids these days seem to call "mid" and "basic".
You are definitely right that the parties/political system does not make decisions in my favor (or really make decisions at all). Beyond just the crises, it's pretty clear that the "vested interests" in our economy have substantial sway in the outcomes regardless of how much of the discourse they try to avoid.
to be clear, I'm not in favor of the expansion of the executive power through executive orders under Obama, nor am I in favor of Trump using it. I think the democrats were short sighted in allowing the precedent and not expecting it to backfire. IMO, democracy is strongest when the motivation is to close loopholes as an exercise in disarmament, rather than the pyrrhic victories of escalation.
All that said, the recent escalations are alarming, and I hope that when I'm 64, the pendulum is still attached to swing. I understand the realpolitik of the situation, but I don't agree that I need to adopt such a fatalistic view of the whole situation that I won't care that people are making mistakes at all.
That being said, actual labor as in worked did not went for Republicans all that hard. It appears that way only if you restrict labor meaning to males of specific demographics.
It is not labor thing. It is gender resentment over not being on top of hierarchy thing.
The infantilizing thing is constantly project positive motivations on people who do the opposite.
They were literally looking forward to cause harm, they just thought it will harm only liberals, trans, stupid feminists and well ... anyone not them.