Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/10/2020 7:57:39 AM
From: sylvester80	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

NBER report says American businesses and consumers are paying 'approximately 100%' of Trump tariff costs Adriana Belmonte Associate Editor Yahoo FinanceJanuary 9, 2020 finance.yahoo.com Fed study: Trump's tariffs led to job losses, higher prices President Trump made over 100 claims about China and tariffs in 2019, stating that Beijing was paying “tremendous amounts of tariffs.” However, new research from the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) found the opposite. “U.S. tariffs continue to be almost entirely borne by U.S. firms and consumers,” the NBER working paper stated. “Similarly, we also find that the substantial redirection of trade in response to the 2018 tariffs has accelerated.” The Trump administration has placed tariffs on $550 billion worth of imports from China, and China has slapped $185 billion worth of imports from the U.S. since the trade war between the two countries began in March 2018. On August 3, 2019, Trump claimed that “our consumer is paying nothing” in regard to the tariffs, but NBER stated that “approximately 100% of these import taxes have been passed on to U.S. importers and consumers.” American consumers and businesses paid at least $42 billion for the tariffs as of October 2019, according to an analysis from Tariffs Hurt the Heartland (THH). In October 2019, the trade war cost an additional $7.2 billion through tariffs, an $1 billion increase from October 2018. ‘Bad news for workers hoping that steel tariffs will bring back jobs’Trump has made several inaccurate claims about the tariffs on China: he’s said that the U.S. is taking in “billions” from China, that the money is being passed along to American farmers bearing the brunt of the retaliatory tariffs, and that the tariffs would boost blue-collar jobs in the U.S. A recent study from the Federal Reserve indicated that the tariffs have actually led to a loss of jobs, especially in manufacturing. “While the longer-term effects of the tariffs may differ from those that we estimate here, the results indicate that the tariffs, thus far, have not led to increased activity in the U.S. manufacturing sector,” the Fed study stated. Steel is one of the industries hit hardest by tariffs, with foreign firms preemptively lowering prices and American firms struggling to compete with the market reaction. Detroit-based company U.S. Steel was forced to lay off 1,545 employees back in December 2019, partially due to struggles from Trump’s steel tariffs. “The data show that U.S. tariffs have caused foreign exporters of steel to substantially lower their prices into the U.S. market,” NBER’s paper stated. “Thus, foreign countries are bearing close to half the cost of the steel tariffs. Since China is only the 10th-largest steel supplier to the U.S. market, these costs have been largely borne by regions like the EU, South Korea, and Japan.” Adriana is an associate editor for Yahoo Finance. She can be reached at adriana@yahoofinance.com. Follow her on Twitter @adrianambells.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/10/2020 8:22:13 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

Trump and his biased fanatic Cult says they're Trump's war powers. Just a day or so Trump's key advisors (Hannity, Gorka, Sarah Sanders, etc) were hyping Trump's power to go to war with Iran without Congressional approval. Now they think Iran has stood down and isn't going to retaliate for Soleimani's killing but they still support Trump's unilateral war powers.. that it maintains its role as a check and balance against other branches. Good idea. I support that too. Trump says he can do anything he wants and he can prevent Congress from investigating him and anyone from providing info to Congress. This is how you and I are different. I think Trump is doing a great job, but I also think the Presidency has arrogated too much power to itself in the war arena You hold contradictory positions.. You say Trump is doing a great job but claim you don't support what he's doing in the ME. I can hold both of those thoughts simultaneously, because I am a practical and nuanced person, whereas, you are a biased never Trumper, who would do anything to make Trump look bad, You are actually a based Trumper and you can hold contradictory positions. Anything to make Trump look good. Peace in the Middle East is not possible. Those tribes have been at war for thousands of years. To think the US will make a difference is hubris. So you agree Trump should withdraw totally. Unless he doesn't want to .. then he can do anything he wants. As to Iranian and NK nukes, I think we will eventually have to bomb the Iranian nuke facilities to the ground. They will never negotiate a proper deal with us and they will never live up to any deal they sign. OK, now you're for total war against Iran.. If thats your opinion, we should do it as soon as possible. Every day we delay, the greater the Iranian threat. Do you want to wait for them to nuke someone first? Maybe let them float a ship carrying an Iranian nuke to offshore Mar-A-:Lago. Then retaliate, right? Ir we're going to have to destroy their nuclear ability someday, why not do it now? As for NK, the key to them is China. If we can deal properly with China, then China will reign NK in. I doubt NK will ever give up their nukes. So that is already a done deal. NK is China. To think NK is a separate country is naive. NK is a pointy spear that originates in China. So we need to deal with China. That's a tempting idea to let China control them, but why haven't they so far? And what is going to make them control NK? They can use NK to annoy America and its allies like an attack dog on their leash.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/10/2020 8:25:23 AM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By rdkflorida2 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

Ken Dilanian?Verified account @KenDilanianNBC U.S. official tells me intel agencies expect Iran to further retaliate for the Suleimani killing, clandestinely. “If I were a U.S. ambassador, I wouldn’t be starting my own car for the foreseeable future," the source said.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/10/2020 8:58:56 AM
From: sylvester80	1 Recommendation Recommended By Wharf Rat Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

DOJ inquiry tied to Clinton, touted by Trump, WINDS DOWN WITH NO TANGIBLE RESULTS: report BY REBECCA KLAR - 01/09/20 09:05 PM EST 2,961 thehill.com A Department of Justice inquiry into Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation has effectively concluded without producing tangible results, The Washington Post reported Thursday. The investigation has not formally ended and no official notice has been sent to the Justice Department or lawmakers, but the the U.S. attorney tapped in November 2017 to look into the concerns raised by President Trump and allies has largely finished his investigation, according to current and former law enforcement officials that spoke to the Post. The investigation started after Trump and GOP allies in Congress raised concerns over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ties to a Russian nuclear agency and the Clinton Foundation. Huber was tapped by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to look into the matters. “We didn’t expect much of it, and neither did he,” one person familiar with the matter told the Post. “And as time went on, a lot of people just forgot about it.” People familiar with the situation told the Post that Huber’s work was largely done by the time former special counsel Robert Mueller filed his report last spring. Those people also told the newspaper that Huber would get involved only if other cases were not being handled. When Matthew G. Whittaker became acting attorney general after Trump ousted Sessions in November 2018, Whittaker reportedly tried to push Huber to be more aggressive in his work, according to the Post. Huber, however, felt he had looked at all he could and there was not much more to do, sources said. A representative for Huber referred the Post to the Justice Department, which declined to comment for the Post’s story. An official for the Justice Department was not immediately available for comment when contacted by The Hill.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/10/2020 10:36:18 AM
From: Sdgla	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB Mick Mørmøny RetiredNow Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

The Clinton email article was written by a criminal conspirator 2. In Dec 2017 right before the Texts were revealed, he did a story about Strozok to get ahead of it pic.twitter.com/2noO22Dmmw — Miz Donna⭐⭐⭐ (@mizdonna) January 10, 2020 Since everyone's hair is on fire because of this article, I want to take a moment and point out a few things to keep in mind. 1st. Who is the author of this article? Devlin Barrett What do we know about Devlin Barrett?https://t.co/oif09HgWXY — Miz Donna⭐⭐⭐ (@mizdonna) January 10, 2020

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1192343)	1/11/2020 3:46:54 PM
From: Taro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572771

Great! That said, now again as for the ME, we now have a strong state of Israel right in there, which in a way is fairly new compared to history. Leave the ME alone, and what happens? Sooner or later some state, most likely Iran, would take some action to erase Israel from the map. Most likely by dropping a recently developed or more rather, acquired nuke on them ... My guess being, that Israel would be well informed well ahead and, eventually, would have to hit Iran back with their own medicine. Whatever, a nuclear exchange would be the result ... In the ME only? Well, this is the big question and I don't think so, because since Iran could no longer hit back somebody else would and ... (ample room for further speculations).