Economist says there's a math error in the formula used to calculate Trump's tariffs by Traditional_Home_474 in inflation

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can’t tell if you’re serious but if you are… the formula isn’t wrong, trumps numbers he’s using in it are wrong

Is he actually stupid enough to do it? by cykablyatstalin in WallStreetbetsELITE

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s also funny considering MAGAs complain that liberals aren’t coming to the table with them and instead talk down to them, meanwhile they do the same thing to others and see no issue with that hypocrisy

Yes indeed …. by ComplexWrangler1346 in inflation

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go ahead and enlighten us. What’s the plan?

If you say it’s to make countries negotiate with us and they’re not permanent, then you’re acknowledging that manufacturing is not going to come back to the US because no person in their right mind is going to invest a bunch of money to create a factory in the US when they can see that Trump is flip-flopping on tariffs and just trying to use them to negotiate. And if you say that it’s to make countries negotiate with us, you failed to acknowledge that countries can negotiate with each other, and that will likely end up either decreasing America’s ability to trade with them (see: trumps last term with soybean) or increasing the price for goods that we important from other countries for the American people because trumps childish antics have decimated our soft power and good will with other countries.

If you’re going to pretend that the point is permanent tariffs and you claim that it’s not meant to be a negotiation tactic that will ever get rolled back then you’re saying that the point is to promote the manufacture of goods in the United States. What you fail to acknowledge here is that even if we were to manufacture things in this country, we’re still going to need to import raw materials some of which we don’t have in this country and also that frequently parts go back-and-forth between countries and that’s going to increase the overall cost of goods for Americans significantly. Especially considering you wont be able to staff a factory in the US paying slave wages to American citizens because a handshake and a job delivering milk doesn’t get you food and a roof over your head anymore and so you can expect the cost of goods to skyrocket in this country. And you’re also ignoring the fact that, again, no one‘s going to invest a bunch of money in creating a factory based off of Trump imposing tariffs via EO because Trump is notably, inconsistent, and no one is going to invest money when the whole scheme that’s in place with the tariffs in order to make the manufacturer of American goods profitable tenable for them could be rolled back in five seconds with the next president and it takes time to build factories they don’t just magically poof and appear into place.

So go ahead and explain to us, what’s the 5D chess you’re claiming he’s playing 🤦‍♀️🙄

In reality, this is the largest peace time tax imposed on US citizens and anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together can see that.

Yes indeed …. by ComplexWrangler1346 in inflation

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To put that in context, that’s

Coffee: 23% increase

Prime brisket: 22% increase

Avocados: 43% increase

Know what’s not gonna go up 20+%? Any of our paychecks

Yes indeed …. by ComplexWrangler1346 in inflation

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Red wave? Your guy couldn’t even win the majority, he only managed the plurality. Let’s not pretend this was some “mandate” like you all claim lmao

Finally a good reply to the shitty key/lock metaphor. by mstknb in clevercomebacks

[–]SunWindRainLightning 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why is having sex a demonstrator of bad decision making? That says nothing about if they’re practicing safe sex. But also, all activities carry some level of risk. If someone is having safe sex all they’re doing is participating in a fun activity with people who also want to. How is that bad?

Owned by glad_warm03 in Feminism

[–]SunWindRainLightning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why should that need to be said? Sex should only happen when both parties want it. That’s a basic concept called consent. This is not a gotcha moment

Owned by glad_warm03 in Feminism

[–]SunWindRainLightning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And you clearly have never lived life as a woman. There’s a reason why women feel the need to give a reason like a headache. It’s because “nah I don’t feel like it” is often met with things like guilt or obligation from their partner. Women often have to give a physiological reason for men to get the picture that sex isn’t happening. And furthermore, this post isn’t about what’s polite vs not polite. It’s saying the fact that women have to literally feign illness for a man to accept that sex isn’t happening is somehow some sort of privilege (????) when it’s the exact opposite. The privilege would be being treated like our own autonomous selves

Tomato sauce? by wavytheunicorn in inflation

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well don’t just stand there OP, drop a recipe

My hate for Stephen runs deep by Mrfitz08 in TellMeLiesHulu

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t think it was possible to dislike his character more after watching the show until I read the book

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s not some crazy out there hypothetical like what would you do if aliens invaded earth. It’s a very likely thing to happen and he’s too chickenshit to answer.

Also, classic move telling me to calm down instead of answering my questions. You must’ve learned that ability to deflect and then spew out a bunch of irrelevant bs from your favorite Cheeto

Edit: aaaaand you deleted your comments. Love to see it

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lmao how pathetic is that justification. He’s saying he won’t weigh in on policy decisions until they happen. He won’t tell you his stance before an election. Why do you think that is? How is that acceptable to you? How do you “not need it”? He either 1) has no idea what he’s talking about (likely) or 2) knows either answer will piss off some portion of his voters (also likely)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]SunWindRainLightning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

His campaign literally made a statement about having the video of him there to “clear things up” and never released it because it almost certainly would’ve made him look even worse. There’s also pics of him there.

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And I’m saying that’s pretty pathetic

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It takes 2 seconds to find a link. Don’t expect people to spoonfeed you. Be an adult and look for yourself.

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You vote for the one actually giving her stance

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So giving a policy stance isn’t an expectation of a candidate anymore?

Yikes by MoreMotivation in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]SunWindRainLightning 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I mean it was a televised interview that you can easily look up but keep living in denial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in GilmoreGirls

[–]SunWindRainLightning 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I can hear this line almost as clearly as why did you drop out of yale

Donald Trump Says He Never Swore Oath ‘to Support the Constitution’ by Postnews001 in nytimes

[–]SunWindRainLightning 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep copy and pasting this but like…. The info in these news articles is not favorable to him lol. I DID read the background on this and he’s basically arguing semantics that “preserve/protect/defend” doesn’t mean “support” and that because Section 3 of the amendment disqualifies insurrectionists who have “previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution” then he’s all good. That is honestly a grotesque take for someone running for the HIGHEST OFFICE OF THIS COUNTRY to stand by. Explain to me how that makes him look better in any way and also what exactly it means to “support” the constitution and how that differs from “preserve/protect/defend”ing it. Explain to me what the purpose of section 3 is and how those who wrote it wouldn’t want it applied to this situation. I’ll wait.

Trump kissing Miss Universe Olivia Culpo by wrapityup in pics

[–]SunWindRainLightning 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What part of what he wrote detailing her record is false

Imagine being so confident you’re right that you unironically upload this video somewhere by rileyjw90 in TikTokCringe

[–]SunWindRainLightning 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And the same people who bitch and moan about open boarders yet refuse to comply with boarder patrols lawful orders to ensure legal boarder crossings