Comments by "" (@grokitall) on "Occupy Democrats" channel.

Actually if you look at the mandatory filings for trump media group, it is a lot higher than six. That is not counting the number of companies which he forced into chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
2
This is because all of the car companies except the American ones design for the world market, which includes the USA, Europe, etc wheras the us makers design for the home market conditions only, which result in gas guzzling tanks that nobody else wants or can afford which have to be extensively modified to sell outside the us which makes the price even higher.
2
@annoyedaussie3942 yes, they have a deficit, but if you cut off electricity, fossil fuels, and minerals, they would not be buying so much stuff from Canada, and they would have had a surplus, until the orange buffoon decided to insult the entire country and trigger the boycott America movement. Of course they also would not be buying stuff due to the extra inflation, the job losses, etc but that is due to trump not understanding how to use tarrifs, and what the consequences are, but what do you expect from someone who can even lose money from owning a casino.
1
@PolarBearPredator you mean a car you can drive down our streets and park over one which makes it hard to do both? Absolutely. If you had to pay realistic prices for fuel, the cars you buy would be different as well, but don't worry, Donald is working on that for you.
1
@rukhsanalenherr9904 no, make it a 100% tariff on fossil fuels, while you look for other customers, and the American consumers can find out what it is like to have to pay real world prices for fuel.😮
1
Yes, the European coal commission, whose stated aim was to prevent Germany and France from ever going to war again. This then morphed into the European economic community, whose stated aim was ever closer union. Now we have the European Union, whose unstated aim is the united States of Europe, but has no idea how to get from here to there within the current agreements.
1
Not quite. Battery farming has just been redefined to have a higher minimum standard, while those who could not meet it went out of the business.
1
To quote from babylon 5, only an idiot starts a war on 2 fronts, only the head of the kingdom of idiots starts a war on twelve fronts. So far trump has started a trade war with all the countries in the EU, with Canada and Mexico (his closest trading allies), with China, and has threatened to sieze Canada, Greenland, Panama, Mexico, and a number of others. He is also trying to sell out Ukraine to Russia over the interests of the EU. He has also declared war on the poor and ill in the us, as well as anyone who is not white, male, straight and evangelical Christian fanatics, as well as the educated, who actually generate the wealth in modern America. Oh and also the us military, legal profession, law enforcement, and the civil service. Not to mention anyone who has ever had any dealings with the us government. Not a bad level of idiocrasy for his first month in office.
1
Targeted and well thought out tarrifs can work in the short term to provide breathing room for local industries struggling to adapt quickly enough to changing conditions, which need to be stated from day one to have specific end conditions. These tarrifs have nothing in common with the trump tarrifs except the name, as trumps tarrifs are pure protectionism, which has never worked.
1
@erosgritti5171 the us and UK have a first past the post system which has a number of vulnerabilities. Other countries have some form of proportional representation and coalition government, which has different vulnerabilities. Others have dictatorships which have their own issues. None of them are fundamentally better in principle, but in practice, dictatorships tend to not work very well. As to the other two, the jury is still out as to if one is fundamentally better than the other in practice, but we are getting better data as to where these systems get it wrong so that the question can be looked at properly.
1
@vallejomach6721 yes they have multi party systems, and with it they have weak coalition government which is apt to fall apart at any time is someone raises the wrong issue. The UK has a 2 party first past the post system, which is vulnerable to weak oppositions, and really sidelines the votes of any group trying to become the third party, and if it successfully transitions to a three party system, it would change to have the above mentioned problems of coalition government's. Benign dictatorships tend to be the most stable, with strong government, right up until they are not, and all dictatorships tend to get really unstable at transition time, due to the lack of a good system for choosing the next dictator. This applies to pure monarchies as well. Constitutional monarchies tend to have evolved from pure monarchies, with a gradual devolution of power, but have the advantage when done well of preventing the slide into becoming a banana Republic. As I say, each system has it's flaws, and it's strengths, but currently we don't have the evidence to determine which is best, only some evidence from history which clearly states that some systems especially dictatorships are much worse than others. Yes America currently has a part of it's population trying to subvert the system, but all systems are subject to this in one form or another, and it will either get a lot better or a lot worse in the next decade or so, but it is too early to tell which way it will go. What we do know is that the actions of trump and maga have made it a lot weaker than it used to be. I am not particularly promoting or defending any particular system, and am mainly only criticising dictatorships for their catastrophic failure modes. This alone I think makes them one of the weakest and least suitable systems out there, but for the rest it is swings and roundabouts.
1
As to the EU not buying American products, there are valid reasons. The EU and others don't want gm food grown there because as of yet there is not enough data to show that it is safe, and they know that once it is released, you cannot put it back in the bottle. They don't buy us cars because unlike every other manufacturer in the world the us car industry only designs cars for the local market rather than for the world market. If you had European conditions, you would not want to pay a lot more (due to the level of changes needed to meet EU standards) for something that you cannot park, and which is too big to go through a lot of European streets. This is before you consider that us engines have not improved fuel consumption since just after ww2, while everyone else has basically halved it. Also us engines are inherently bigger capacities, and thus would use more fuel in any case. All this before you even get to the point that unlike in the us, the cost of fuel is not kept artificially low in the rest of the world. There are other us products which don't sell well in the EU, either due to not reaching EU quality standards, or because they want to shove American products onto other markets without considering if those other markets have the same values. If you do not make what your potential customers want, of course they are not going to buy it, and thus you will have a trade deficit.
1
@RoxyRebel actually, it is not just in the EU and UK you can't insure it. There has recently been coverage of a guy in the us who bought one, only for the insurance company to stop doing cybertruck insurance. He can't sell it easily because he has not had it a year, and musk imposes a penalty for selling too soon. He can't drive it because no insurance company will provide insurance for it in his state, so he just has this large metal brick which is a liability.
1