scourge165

I Wrestled a kid who beat me 10-0 in Greco back in the day and then I came back and beat him 7-6 in Freestyle(probably a bit lucky). He just had these legs that were cartoonishly big. Talked about how he had a Gym in his barn, he was home schooled and he Wrestled and Farmed. Best to beat me? Varner. Just a hammer everywhere. He hit me with a Footsweep(I remember thinking WTF did he just do tha...and I was turning).

Am I really giving you too much credit in expecting you to realize I misspoke and said I don't really watch much wrestling other than the B1G that closely and then saying except for Okie St(and then subsequently other NON-Big 10 teams)?

This is where I'd jump in and point out that Trump's tariffs have not yet gone into effect...and yet, what's happening? Congress passed Smoot-Hawley in May of '29. That's...JUST before "Mid 1929." Beyond that, I've already had the discussion, debate. Unemployment went from ~1% at passage to 12% by the end of the year to 15% within 7 months and inflation...well, that actually went to -10% as there was nobody to buy goods and the US was hit with reciprocal tariffs. But alright... I believe if you do not implement Smoot-Hawley, my Grandparents would have grown up in a VERY bad recession. Probably worse than the housing recession. -I think it's indisputable that Smoot-Hawley made things exponentially worse. What I hope any reasonable person could at the VERY least understand is that saying it had a "negligible" effect is objectively false and absurd and that it was VERY bad. And not only replicating that, but surpassing it, is just a terrible idea.

Yeah...I would expect 50 countries have called(and in that they're likely including the whole EU). But you see it with Vietnam. They don't have a coherent trade policy to start with. Vietnam going to 0% isn't good enough. And of course people are just regurgitating his or other MAGA talking points. When you're in a cult, it's not easy to admit...you're in a cult. I mean, you seriously have people saying 32000 isn't that bad because...Biden was at 32000. That's a lot of what you're dealing with. Just mindless nonsense like that. They don't know any better. You have the "we'll see what happens," MAGA because...they don't want to believe anyone is really this dumb. And then you have the 'Tariffs don't matter anyway,' MAGA which is a rare bird, seldom seen, but I don't even know how to reconcile that any longer. Oh, and the "but Bernie wanted..." while omitting Bernie proposed 1/11th of the tariffs on ONE Country.

Because I don't get to watch the ACC much during the season and as a result I'd forgotten about how good Vince Robinson looked? Guess not...

I saw the kid early in the year and he looked awesome...but to be honest... I don't really watch the B1G that closely outside of maybe Okie State. Edit-Eh, that's not true. Iowa State, UNI...I guess I just don't see the ACC enough. I'm not paying for the ACC Channel or whatever it may be.

5X...upset as a Soph, but definitely a stud.

Yeah, this is nothing. Again, the commerce secretary are on here talking about how tariffs aren't going anywhere, that Vietnam's offer isn't good enough. Remember, they just made these numbers up. Also remember the people who voted him in, they believed Trump when he said the OTHER Countries pay the tariffs.

He genuinely doesn't understand how the markets work or how to read a basic chart. It's MUCH more...relaxing to just put him on ignore and then if you want to see what he said...you can, but you can pass over most of it, but arguing that 32,000 ISN'T a disaster because the market has been at that number before is...astoundingly stupid. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/live/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-futures-plunge-as-trump-tariff-rout-set-to-escalate-220537788.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

Oh...yeah, I hope people didn't think we'd reached the bottom. This...isn't actually about Nvidia, but listen to Dan Ives...arguably the biggest bull out there. You can also look at what happened in the Japanese Markets. Trump has caused irreparable, irreversible harm, even if we cancel these tariffs almost immediately.

The way he writes and how unhinged he is, I'd bet money it's LBJ. It's the 6-7 posts responding to the same post with partially thought out sentences like he's in a rush to get it out there. It's not the quantity, it's that he doesn't seem to actually care about what he's arguing about, he just wants to do it. I don't think there are a ton of things worth really arguing this strongly over. The potential economic ruin of the US is atop the list. Lets hope this is a more dramtic version of 2018. I don't believe it will be, but...lets hope. It WOULD be nice if any of this was being done legally and went through Congress(which would NOT pass these tariffs). But we've eliminated more guardrails.

Yeah...they hit every market hard Jimmy. Please read what you post and if you have something to add to it...actually do so. "Trade has dwindled." Great. It's significantly higher than what it is between many other Countries on the list as I'd JUST pointed out. Can you address that(just say no...or don't...honestly, I probably won't read it).

Cool. That's literally what Trump said on Air Force One and he's made it VERY clear he has no plans to back away from the tariffs as implemented, but...because I used Politico? And I don't know what you're talking about the funding other than the bogus USAID story, but it's a moot point, you can listen to Trump saying it, you can listen to the Commerce Sec saying it...whoever you'd like. It's just the hate at Politico. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-urges-americans-hang-tough-tariffs-plan-markets-tumble

Ok, people say this, but you'll need to actually articulate where I 'reworte' history? I never said Bernie wanted a public option and if you'll recall, Obama had 60 Democrats. He caved LONG before there was ANY vote and never offered a pubic option. What I said was a Universal option became moot when Obama didn't include a Public Option in the ACA despite a public option being WILDLY popular and...roughly ~75% of Americans in favor of it(it could have been 77%, it could have been 71%, I don't recall the exact number, but it was over 70%). Why didn't it get included? Because...Obama needed the Health Insurance industry on it. In the 1970s, ~97-98 cents on the dollar from your Health Insurance Premiums went towards medical costs. By the time the ACA came around, it was about 73-74%. A public option where the Govt, again, in one of the few areas they're actually MORE efficient than the Market, that would have gutted Health Insurance Companies and they would have had to drop their rates and become more competitive. In order to facilitate this, I think it would have been wise for the public option to cut off their "profits" at 10%. You use that to service the debt and you bring down insurance costs. What's just fact is the ACA did NOT have a public option, I NEVER said that was Bernie's end goal(it was most certainly his goal back then, but I didn't even say as much) and without the public option, you're not going to jump to a single payer system. There are the steps you would need. But yeah, no re-writing history. I gave a very simple recounting of events. This happened(or didn't in this case) and as such, this is unrealistic at this point. Like driving a car from point A to point B, but you're upset I didn't describe all the scenery along the way.

I believe it was an offer and they'd be foolish to do so without any agreement in place. But this was a big issue during the campaign. Remember Trump threatening to fire Powell and Powell saying...flatly, 'he doesn't have the authority,' and then there was backlash against Trump and he promised he wouldn't do it. This is the way he is doing it. He's trying to force inflation up by pulling the rug out from the US economy, force the US TOWARDS a recession thinking he can time it with the Fed cutting back down to 2% and then...put the rug back in place and...nobody will notice. But this is 90% about the interest rates on the 10 year.

Right...so...again, these countless videos that are like...half-way getting there. Now merge these with Pelosi, Bernie, McCain, Schumer talking about tariffs to China and they make some sense, right? What's really absurd is the notion that this starts in 1999 under Clinton when anyone who's taken just US History(which should be everyone) knows it was Nixon in the late 70s who "re-opened" China and manufacturing started leaving for China two decades before. But ok, yet AGAIN we have an argument for why we needed a tougher trade deal with China. Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the European Union, the UK and our strongest allies? The reason there was...?

LOL...right. Because if you're a Trump supporter, America was in such bad shape before he came along. Strongest Economy in the World...strongest recovery from Covid. GDP growing, Inflation coming down toward 2%...but America wasn't great before? I thought this was the greatest Country in the World. I didn't know that wasn't the case until Trump told me it wasn't.

Ok...then Trump is lying. What do YOU think the point is? The 10 year, right? So...how do you get to what Trump wants to go? https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/04/trump-tariffs-never-change-stock-market-china-030780

You've seen him talk about wanting to have Military type parades where we roll out tanks and missiles down the roads?

Lets not forget the transfer of 4 death American Soldiers from overseas. Just IMAGINE if Obama did that. Just the idea that you'd put blanket tariffs and then you aren't there to receive 4 fallen servicemen. But hey, he did wear a tan suit.

No, he's said he would not. He's specifically said it doesn't matter and there is nothing they can do, the tariffs are here to stay. Now we know what Trump says vs what he actually does are very different and with what appears to be coming in tomorrows markets, he may start walking these back, but no, he hasn't used other countries actual tariffs for ANYTHING. He just made up the "tariffs" they put on us. He's ALMOST certainly not walking any of these tariffs back until the fed has cut....150 basis points.

China is at 2.2%. The goal isn't to get the tariffs DOWN, he wants all trade deficits gone like a trade deficit is an inherently bad thing. Exactly. And if you look at the Japanese markets, tomorrow is going to be a....VERY bad day again.

Ok...this isn't a referendum on Sanders and I wasn't arguing for any of his policies...though...as I've said, I think here is plenty of an argument for targeted tariffs. I also think there's a pretty strong argument on a National Healthcare System. It's the one thing we actually run rather efficiently. But that became moot when Obama didn't include a public option.

Jimmy...I wonder sometimes if you're just dumb or playing dumb...and alas, I've found my answer. That was a Tweet FROM TRUMP saying if the SPX drops 1000 points in a single day, the President should be impeached. How is that MY hypocrisy? Is that just a word you saw one of us use and now you're using it? Almost all you've done is repeated one particular MAGA supporters Tweets, usually without understanding the context. Now...this is a silly idea to me, but if the man himself said that, I think it's worth pointing out it's dropped about 4000 points in two days. But do prey tell how this is MY hypocrisy? And AGAIN, Bernie and McCain proposed 5-10% tariffs on China. We put 54%. So not only is what Bernie proposing her a TARGETED tariff vs one Nation, it was ~1/11 of what Trump ACTUALLY did. (I will say, each time I see, 'you have chosen to ignore this user,' or whatever and I click "show me this post," it feels like they get dumber and dumber. One more time for your benefit.

Ok...I feel like my post was pretty on point. We exported ~600 Million to Russia in 2023. The United States has TWO Countries that are substantive threats. China and Russia. Russia, we KNOW tried daily hacks, they used misinformation, they're the more guilty of this than anyone(I'm not saying they fixed an election...but they try to influence them). Now...given the fact that they didn't over look a tiny Island Nation nor a Island with ZERO Humans on it, how do you justify Russia? Sanctions? You can try. It's SUPER disingenuous given China's effective tariff rate is 2.2 and ours was 1.5 and we put 54% on them. That and we literally will not allow them to buy the MOST valuable resource for the next economic revolution, Nvidia's H100/H200 and ESPECIALLY now the B100 or B200 Blackwell GPUs. So it's not Free Trade(which Republicans and conservatives and capitalists, at least laisse faire capitalists have STRONGLY advocated for in this Country) on our part, but I could see how you'd arrive at putting some tariffs on China. I DON'T see how you justify NOT doing it with Russia. Not only that, but you want to see out a Country that violated OUR LAWS(we are still a part of Nato and they have shot into Nato allies)....but Trump wants MORE trade with them and less with everyone else? Make this make sense? https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2025/03/30/trump-wants-more-trade-with-russia-but-less-with-everyone-else/ But again, I don't get how you leave off...Russia, and that they're only 1% of our trade isn't a strong argument against doing so.