Sorry, Didn't mean to imply that it's not based on historical performance. it is. But it's a "future performance" value and not actual present day.
and a lot of people get burned by choosing wrong
One of the original intentions of NAFTA was to move some manufacturing to Mexico and prop up their economy to reduce imigration. Instead some companies moved directly to China. Others also moved to Mexico first then moved to China. Both Bush and Clinton are responsible. Bush for NAFTA and Clinton for allowing China in the WTO. My point is that both Democrats and Republicans did this. Your post seems only to blame Clinton. The Congress of both parties also went along with both.
You’re basing your favor off of who’s campaign shirts are made in America and how speedily they expedited their shirt to you? Lawlz. That’s how the socialists hook their fish. Make themselves look like the good guys by expediting your campaign shirt to your porch and then after they’re voted in you’re paying 70% taxes. You lost all your credibility with that one sounds like we got an emotionally driven liberal here. Also the fact that you support someone who wants to decriminalize illegal immigration, excuse student debt and give free healthcare to all? Yeah you really lost it on that one. What about those of us who actually worked and paid off our debts, Pocahontas? Ya gonna reimburse us for all the money that we had to pay? How ya gonna do it? Oh yeah, be taxing the middle class to death, literally. Then you’re gonna give illegal aliens free healthcare whilst we got Americans rotting on the streets (and primarily in socialist cities)? Yeah, nice dude. People just don’t get it. Ya either let businesses be businesses, or ya try to play the hero like the insane socialists do and kill off the very people complaining about unfairness (middle-class) in the first place. “Impoverish them all,” says the socialist. Don’t give them a chance to work their way up in the world based off their own industry. Also, it’s good we finally got a president with the balls to stand up to China. If we didn’t we’d all be speaking Chinese within the next decade. The tariffs were a necessary evil. I know that they can hurt the people, but China can hurt the people a lot more with their unfair trade and theft. China is listening now and they are negotiating with America, something that lefties don’t like to mention. Also, consider the fact that Trump was able to leverage those tariffs to get stuff done. We obviously have a VERY powerful economy right now to be able to take the hit on tariffs and STILL have the highest GDP we’ve ever had in history. I mercifully will not mention all the other economical statistics that make people like you go red in the face every time you hear them.You sound like you'd be a better judge of whether Trump would be the Rs' best option, rather than getting out there in the weeds on which Democrat might best be suited to take him on in 2020. Have you wondered whether some other actual Republican or conservative might suitably challenge Trump and serve Americans better than Trump with his MAGA schtick and erstwhile pandering to the top 1%? It crosses my mind once in a while.
LOL anyway my Warren t-shirt just landed on my back porch yesterday. I liked the colors and the slogan so I got one even though it's early days in the Dems' primary season and I'm liking to listen for awhile longer to all the ideas. Always wise to finish the brainstorming sessions before starting to winnow for feasibility and political will to implement... but I liked that shirt so I got one.
I didn't expect the t-shirt to show up for about a week and a half. It only took three days. Anyway her t-shirt says Warren "has a plan for that". Interestingly, the shirt was made in the USA by union workers. Maybe she really does have a plan for this, that and who knows what else for America. Her campaign offices sure executed well on the ship-t-shirt plan.
Shall we venture to discuss whether Liz Warren would slap a tariff on Apple for moving the supply chain back to China? It might be fun to ask her. Don't forget Trump's actually closer to the Dems on trade than he is to free-traders in the GOP. Elizabeth Warren has said in the past that tariffs can play a role in a rethink of US trade policy and that she's not opposed to tariffs on countries that don't play by the rules.
But see the main difference between Trump and someone like Warren is that he figures tariffs are sort of a tool for conduct of his brand of irregular warfare when some corporation or another head of state has done something to tick him off... whereas Warren's talking rationally about tariffs being deployed along lines of WTO stipulations where they can be a measure applied in event of product dumping shown to cause economic harm, etc.
Look at Trump threatening now to slap a tariff on French wine (again) over a potential digital tax on US tech companies (the same outfits Trump has criticized and threatened to sue, even while criticizing the EU for bringing antitrust suits against those same US tech companies). Go figure. The man is all over the place on tariffs. On again, off again, trust me this time you'll feel the lash!
Tariffs are Trump's equivalent of, as Francis Urquhart used to say in the British version of House of Cards, "putting a bit of stick about". It would not surprise me to discover that there are corporations that would rather deal with someone like Warren who proposes to use tariffs more as already outlined in the WTO agreement, i.e., reasonable in certain circumstances.
Why should anyone be surprised if Tim Cook pays no mind to Trump's tariff threat and goes about the MacPro production and supply chain management as per Apple's best take on the proper course of action for the company? One cannot count on Trump to stick to a plan from one day to the next lately. A publicly traded company is responsible to its shareholders and consumers and so must make decisions now about events months and years down the road. There's no percentage in trying to adapt one's business model to the rantings of a guy like Trump who'll be ranting about something else tomorrow. As others have noted, the tariff's probably already figured into MacPro pricing; it would be the prudent thing to assume.
Sorry, Didn't mean to imply that it's not based on historical performance. it is. But it's a "future performance" value and not actual present day.
it's based on speculative assumption that trends will continue in the direction they were going.
But that's entirely the stock game
Here’s my reply.
You’re the first source I’ve ever seen say that our growth was below 3%. Even never-trumpin CNN has coughed up figures over 3%.
Have you looked at wage growth, inflation deceleration, unemployment? What bout tax cuts? Facts...
The whole article talks about how the job market is doing excellent, consumer spending is high, and the Dow and nasdaq just reached an all-time high. More facts.
Yes. Look at how aggressive they are with EV cars and how the US is going all it can to stop the EV revolution.
what else is new.
