Not in forever that I can tell. I've tried, without success, to coax him out of retirement. Must not pay attention to SPS at all. Hopefully he hasn't liteally died.
Tater Tot….
- Thread starter L4Dawg
- Start date
There are only two ways manufacturing comes back in this country.
1. A national catastrophe that basically destroys our economy to the point that enough of our very
spoiled populace would be desperate enough to "lower" themselves to working in manufacturing .
2. We miraculously come up with a bi-partisan approach to immigration allowing enough people who want to come into this country for the right reasons and would like a chance to work in manufacturing.
I would hate to know it was my job to assemble a large, reliable group of American citizens to profitably manufacture a lo-tech product in this country right now.
Last edited:
Do you really not understand that eggs are expensive right now due to a flu outbreak causing product shortage and well as increased seasonal demand? They were barely over $2.50/dozen a year ago and the price will drop once production stabilizes with a replacement stock of healthy laying birds.
Also, you responded to my post about tariffs being a poor way to reshore jobs and ultimately just costing consumers more money with...a rant about egg prices.
Do you genuinely not realize how absurd and unrelated those things are?
Well, as usual, something good happens in Mississippi and the usual suspects, who are ALWAYS here, come here to shite on it. Some of you are some really miserable mother 17ers.
I know a lot of Trump voters and none that I know were driven to the polls because they wanted tariffs.
Now, the trade off that a threat of tariffs could bring is completely different. I could be wrong but I see this as a negotiating tactic done through the media. The media is actually helping with amplifying how bad the tariffs will be for not only the US but for the demand for foreign goods. That's the key point. If it happened broadly it would hurt the US but it could devastate countries like Mexico, Canada, etc. They know it and they won't call his bluff. They'll move towards him and he'll move towards them. At the end of the day the US has the leverage and at least for the next two years he can use it. If it works we get what people really voted for and if it doesn't your people will be better positioned to take back power.
When do you negotiate? When you have the leverage - Harvey Specter
Funniest thing about this whole grocery price craze the last few years, is that our fatasses definitely never stopped eating, whether at home or in restaurants. And more than ever before, by looking at the obesity rates. You'd think we'd have taken the hint and maybe....just maybe.....bought and ate LESS food?
I took that to mean just the comment about transitory.
That's a really long sarcastic rant, if the entire paragraph is sarcasm.
It baffles me. It also confirms that State grads/fans do actually reflect the "common man" in Mississippi. We are the People's University after all.
We've had an above average number of these econ dev press releases lately and the sentiment from most people (anecdotally here and on social media) has been the same.
"It's not really that good of a deal"
"Why won't 'they' put one of these in XYZ"
"The politicians will just grift the money away"
Same ole same ole. Complain about how MS is last in every category yet poopoo on development news of any kind. Another poster made the point, but it seems that the average Mississippian wants us to maintain the status quo.
The big reason people voted for him that I was referring to was...'The economy'.
As a whole, he promised to bring down the cost of goods and services, reduce inflation, increase exports, and hurt China by reducing imports.
These were all frequently repeated promises that he made. These were all things he promised to correct and blamed Biden for them being reasons why costs are high.
And based on exit polling, a shitton of people voted for him with the expectation that he follow through on his economy improvement promises.
It often amazes how MS is LA's bltch in dang near every aspect of life. They flood us to save their prize city, whip our assses in sports, come over and buy up all our land. How do we respond? Cheer for the Saints, spend all our money in their prize city, and tell the rest of the world about their culture and pretend we're a part of it. The south half of MS anyway. You could basically extend the northern LA line over to AL and there you have - Louisiana Lite.
It's almost like someone who is not a democrat might possibly deserve some credit for helping their community grow and prosper. We can't have that. **
Agree
Back to tariffs though, the threat to Mexico and Canada had nothing to do with the economy and everything to do with the border which next to the economy was a huge factor in getting people to the polls.
And the coonjuns killing all our deer! Their state motto should be, "If it's brown, it's down!" Dang oil field money buying leases!
Our demand and consumption rate has never been higher. Our economy is en fuego because we can't stop buying.
Seriously, if we want all of the needless SHIIITE we buy to cost less, don't buy it for a few months.
Did you really read my two paragraph response as a "rant about egg prices"? Sheesh.
1. During your complaint about tariffs, you mentioned as one of the reasons they were bad was because they would DRIVE PRICES SKY HIGH.
2. I found this ironic coming from the left since, you know, prices have been fairly high for a couple years now. I realize that you might disagree with my hot take that prices were high, because I sure heard a lot of democrats defending those prices as 'not inflation'.
3. Eagle was right. The whole first paragraph (two lines of text/4 sentences) was meant to be sarcastic. Hence the sarcasterisks. Did it read like something I would really say? LOL, that's my bad then. Those were sentiments I heard expressed from the left over the past two years in a quixotic effort to defend Joe.
Would you be for or against Trump doing what you listed above?
Do you consider those good and worthwhile goals that the US (and its president) should pursue? Or no?
I am just trying to get a feel as to whether you (not just you personally, @horshack.sixpack or others are welcome to answer as well) can see past your Trump hatred to pull for the country to do well? I remember Bill Maher at one time hoping out loud for the economy to tank so Trump wouldn't get credit for it... and I can't understand that mentality. I'm just wondering if that's still a general feeling or not.
Last edited:
Many Louisianans say there actually 3 Louisiana's . North Louisiana, South Louisiana and New Orleans.
Yep, his insane threat to immediately impose a 25% tariff on all products coming to the US from Mexico and Canada is supposed to start in 10 days...per Trump.Agree
Back to tariffs though, the threat to Mexico and Canada had nothing to do with the economy and everything to do with the border which next to the economy was a huge factor in getting people to the polls.
I am very interested to see what results are tied to the 25% Canadian tariff. How does the tariff end?
- How will the number of illegals that successfully cross from Canada into the US be tracked and what will that number be compared to?
- How long must these border crossing numbers be down before the tariff ends?
- What % must crossings be down to even 'qualify' for the tariff to end?
- How much less fentanyl needs to cross from Canada to end the tariff?
- How does the amount of fentanyl that is successfully crossed even get measured...if it isnt tracked when it crosses?
If specific and realistic numbers arent provided, then its all just a bunch of BS.
Regardless of whether numbers are provided or not though, if the tariff is real and expected to be put in place for a long time, then Canada will retaliate.
- In the end, Americans will pay more in the short term because everything coming from Canada costs more, and Americans as well as Canadians will pay more in the long term because counter-tariffs will just increase costs both ways.
That sure doesnt seem like a smart way to reduce costs for us commoners in the check-out line, but I barely got thru Econ classes at MSU so what do I know.
Well I do know I am buckled up and ready for the ride!
Prices can rise for a number of reasons. Two of those reasons are...
- Prices can rise because of tariffs. This is completely controllable by a government.
- Prices can rise because of inflation. This is partially controllable by a government and partially out of the government's control because we live in a global economy and companies across the world choose how to price their products based on profits, labor costs, etc.
I dont know why you would find it ironic that I pointed out the reality that tariffs tend to increase the cost of goods to end users, just because some people who are Democrats/liberals claimed some increased prices werent inflation.
Thats a really odd thing to view as ironic.
Agree but it's a big pass. Plus they have a good bit of oil money. Combined with the Cajun culture, it attracts people. And they had the good sense to locate their ONE (not two) big state university in their capital - thus insuring it thrives even if there are shltty parts.
What's our culture in the Sip? Travel baseball? Gossip? Friend groups? Pinelake? Exclusive huntin' cayumps?? To me, about the only true unique thing we have is the Delta Ag stuff. Everything else is something done better elsewhere.
I will admit, you are a very capable, relentless and thorough defender of anything you take up as a cause. I'm glad you're a State fan. We can use people like you on our side. Lord knows we need defending at times.
Clarification: what I find ironic is that some people are treating high prices as a bad thing now that DJT is taking over, when those same exact people thought high prices were not a big deal just last year, while JFB was in charge. That's the irony I was speaking of. I hope that makes sense.
Those things would be great except I don’t care much about hurting China. We are in a global economy no matter how we feel about it. Negotiating policies that are mutually beneficial is the best approach. However, if Trump focuses on anything but himself and his revenge tour I’ll take it as a positive. I’ve only heard senseless rhetoric so far.
I dont care if the stated cost of goods and services goes down. I care if the relative cost compared to wage averages goes up or down.
- If Trump's Administration improves this, then cool by me. I am able to understand its a complex issue with multiple factors.
I want inflation to be generally steady. I think I saw there were 16 of the 48 months under Biden where inflation was at a number I would generally say is 'ideal'.
- I dont blame Biden any more than I blame Trump for the high inflation we saw in 2021 and 2022. That was partly due to Trump's policies/views, partly due to Biden's policies/views, partly due to a Conservative majority Legislature, partly due to a Mixed party Legislature, and partly due to global economic realities.
If inflation stays low under Trump, then cool by me. I am able to understand its a complex issue with multiple factors.
Increasing exports is totally cool by me, in general. Again, this is more complex than just 'more = better'. I do think it is 17ing stupid to view exports and imports as something which need to balance. I do think it is 17ing stupid to view a trade deficit as inherently bad and something which needs to be 'fixed'. That is truly stupid and basic thinking.
- If Trump's policies increase exports without hurting the economy/jobs/inflation, then cool by me.
I dont really care about hurting China economically. I dont think the biggest economy in the world should be guided with the intention to hurt another nation's economy. That, to me, seems shortsighted and petty. That, to me, seems like an irresponsible way to govern.
- If the US economy grows stronger while the China economy grows at a slower pace under Trump, then cool by me.
We have far too many basic minded people, and far too much media panders to their basic minds. Its a damn shame because many then view childish fighting and playground threats as a good way to govern and run the largest economy that has ever existed.
Oh gotcha. Yeah well if I ever see someone claiming it was good then but bad now, I will pretty quickly view their position as stupid.
High inflation was an issue in 2021 and 2022- it is well documented as real and impactful.
Since we are talking tariffs here, which really are just a tax, where does that money go? Americans that have to pay 25% more for anything coming from Canada or Mexico...where does that extra 25% go? Talk about irony- anyone who rails against big government, or rails against government meddling in free trade/capitalism, or rails against high taxes...yet supports tariffs, which are the antithesis of those positions.
The idea is that, yes, it might raise the price on one good temporarily, but that long term the free market will correct this. It's not like the American market would simply say "oh darn, Mexico just raised it's price on this widget by 25%. I guess we'll all just have to accept it and prices on widgets are now high forever and there's nothing that can be done about it."
That's not how it works. Plan A (the 'negotiating tactic' part) would be for Mexico to say "hold on Mr. President, don't tariff that product - let's work something out, buddy"; but failing that:
Step 1: price goes up immediately on Mexican widgets.
Step 2: fewer widgets are being bought by US citizens.
Step 3: Mexico brings their widget bulk price down in an effort to get sales back up.
Step 4: Some guy outside Columbus, OH figures out how to make a widget, but this one has a cupholder.
Step 5: Several widget factories pop up all around the US, driving the cost down and providing jobs to local widgeters.
Step 6: Some people buy the US product; some people prefer the original classic version and are willing to pay a little more for that famous widget quality out of Tijuana. Both are okay choices.
Claiming government regulation and involvement(tariffs) is necessary for a long term free market plan to take place, is so disconnected from what a 'free market' is, that its tough to really begin explaining why its a bonkers comment.
Tariffs are a protectionist approach to economic management. They require government oversight and regulation. They reduce the free flow of goods and capital. They punish consumers.
They are inherently not a 'free market' approach.
To be very clear, we do not have a free market and have not had a free market economy in my lifetime. Citing a 'free market' as the long term beneficiary of government regulation is a wild concept to even process.
Tariffs are a protectionist approach to economic management. They require government oversight and regulation. They reduce the free flow of goods and capital. They punish consumers.
They are inherently not a 'free market' approach.
To be very clear, we do not have a free market and have not had a free market economy in my lifetime. Citing a 'free market' as the long term beneficiary of government regulation is a wild concept to even process.
I literally agreed with all of it except "hurting China" as a specific goal. You thought I would respond that way. Kudos. Sell consider selling your crystal ball technology.
Some people are inclined to believe that neither country is putting forth much of an effort to stop the flow of everything illegally crossing the border. Heck, some may be inclined to say the US hasn't put forth much effort recently. While I don't pretend to know exactly what he is thinking (I don't think anyone really knows) I don't think it's a science project of detailed numbers.
We've already seen the largest fentanyl bust in Mexico history occur after he started threatening. Mexico is also now breaking up the caravans although I don't agree with their approach. None of that was happening until he stepped up to the bully pulpit. Crossings will be extremely down you can bank on that with Homan in charge. Heck, Canada lost their head Finance leader and in short order Trudeau has decided to bail. Whether you agree that all that is good or bad I don't think you can disagree that most of it is a result of words said by Trump not actions taken. Hopefully, it's just him throwing the weight of the US government around and we don't get blanket tariffs.
What I do know is the talk right now is moving the needle....maybe not as much as we need but the needle didn't even exist over the last four years.
Agree on your point that we shouldn't put effort towards actually hurting another country's economy (Suttle difference from threatening) but make no mistake China has zero interest in mutually beneficial negotiations. That ship sailed with Xi.
TL
R we don't live in the same country, or world, that we lived in the last time we were a manufacturing power house and we will not ever live in that world again. subsidize chip fabs and pharmaceutical plants, etc. that impact national security and "free market" widgetsHere is where we've been:
- Most of our stuff that we bought was made in America.
- Industrialization and transportation efficiencies made it possible for factories to be anywhere (please don't be literal here) in the world.
- Industries noticed that places like Mexico and China are poor, with average income about 15% of what Americans make so they moved factories over there to take advantage of the fact that they could make it there, pay workers a pittance compared to here, save some money in lack of regulation and ship it back here all for way less than they could just get it from here.
- American companies started to do that. A lot.
- American consumers bought cheap stuff in spades, for decades, and are accustomed to that pricing model.
- Factories in America closed down. There are not enough left to produce enough widgets and they cannot be turned up in short order, nor is a company likely to do so when the driving forces is some executive order that does not establish any long term plan for protecting that investment (i.e. they know they will have to shut it down and lose all that investment as soon as the political winds change)
- Adding a tariff will have an immediate impact on prices for goods. There is practically nothing that you buy that doesn't have something in it that originates elsewhere. The US cannot produce the good to replace the things coming in from other countries and won't be able to for quite some time.
- None of the above even begins to touch on the supply of raw materials needed for these hypothetical US factories to hypothetically produce all of these hypothetical widgets. They can't wish those into existence. They have to come from somewhere, and in many cases, that somewhere is not here.
Last edited:
All of the above, plus probably other user fees.
The taxes are sort of secondary to controlling spending. I guess the caveat to that would be starve the beast probably does work at the state level. Everybody pays sales tax and cares about spending if they think it results in higher sales tax. If they think that they can tax somebody else, they get less concerned.
But without having looked in a lot of detail, I think the different phase out approaches that are out there are pretty reasonable. Phase it out based on growth in revenues, that way you don't cut so fast that you end up with a political backlash.
If you look at the other states that don't have a sales tax, they usually have some funding source that is helpful, like oil and gas (Texas/alaska), tourism (florida), or gaming/tourism (Nevada). Tennessee is probably the best comparison to us. Their average sales tax across the state is higher (although their statewide sales tax is lower) and their property taxes are from what I understand a good bit higher.
I would assume we'd keep our current sales tax the same and allow local political subdivisions to increase local sales tax to supplement a reduction in state support.
We're a little different because we have so much deadweight in the state. Telling all the towns in the delta to raise sales tax and increase property taxes doesn't do much for them (and I guess we'd maybe let their be county sales tax?).
I'd be fine if we could just hold the line on sales tax (it's efficient, in line with surrounding states, and is a tax that everybody pays, whether resident or non-resident, citizen or not), shift some more tax to use-based taxes (e.g., gas tax and EV assessment to fund roads), and try to hold the line on spending so that the income tax can be reduced (ideally by reducing the top brackets until we can get down to a 3% at least, then can start increasing exemptions if we still have more room to cut). That wouldn't be anything drastic and would hopefully get us where we need to be.
Could also maybe help by privatizing some of our state camp grounds. There are camp grounds all over in random places making money and the only state park that can cover its costs is the one down in Waveland (that may be dated info at this point).
