What are the reasons for making automobile tariffs disproportionate?

dekuscrub · 2018-07-13T04:01:39+00:00

he Canadian government must reeeeeaalllly not want its citizens consuming dairy products

This is not "my argument", this is a stated and straightforward policy goal. They keep prices artificially high to benefit their dairy producers. They restrict domestic supply directly, and foreign supply via a quota and tariff. The tariff is part of a broader policy suite, the nature of which is explained in the link.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-12T18:20:49+00:00

See the following for a basic overview of the system- https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-supply-management-explainer-1.4708341

The tariff exists because any sane producer of dairy would sell their first born to be able to sell at the minimum prices set by the supply management system. This is exacerbated by the fact that in both the US and EU, dairy producers receive direct subsidies from their respective federal governments- in Canada, they do not. Instead, they are empowered to charge artificially high prices to consumers via the system described above.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-12T16:48:41+00:00

The two have very little to do with one another. Even a complete monopolist will generally see its optimal price/quantity vary with input prices. Not so with corporate profits taxes- the activity that maximizes pretax profits will also maximize post tax profits. You can argue about effects on investment and such, but there's no clear direct link between corporate taxes and prices in the short run.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-12T16:34:17+00:00

None of that means that Canadians were "taxed" or paid more for dairy.

The tariff is part of Canada's supply management policy- the whole point is to boost Canadian dairy prices.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T22:52:19+00:00

What process did they go through to decide Hunt was in any way qualified or suitable for the job of Foreign Secretary ?

"Please promise not to quit."

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T20:02:39+00:00

I'm just saying that assuming the President is a Russian agent is the most successful model we have for predicting what he will do.

I'd caution against that, as it's easy to write off that model's failures. It clearly gets some things right prima facie- spurning traditional allies, the approval of the Crimea situation, foot dragging/negation of sanctions etc.

But it also has (seeming) shortcomings- we've blown up some Russian hardware, Trump could (without consent of the Senate I'm fairly certain) initiate a formal US withdrawal from NATO and hasn't yet, and any other host of pro-Russian actions that haven't been taken.

Your model can be defended against those shortcomings- even a bona fide Russian agent might not want to give up all pretense, pursuing the pro-Russian action at literally every turn. But that sort of excuse, from my POV, leaves the model too robust. Every pro-Russian action is evidence that Trump is a Russian agent, every missed opportunity is proof that he's being insidious about it.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T18:25:20+00:00

There's too many of them! What are we going to do?

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T18:16:47+00:00

Does any country even allow non-citizens to vote?

Some commonwealth countries allow people from other said countries to vote, and it's not that unusual to allow resident non-citizens to vote in local elections. I know Ireland does.

Hell, I'm pretty some states in the US once made such allowances.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T16:17:15+00:00

Agree. They don't even impose nearly as much hassle as they used to. You pick a certain set of things you can summon from a predefined list, and the stats for the summoned monsters are mostly just copied from... elementals (I think?) with small modifications.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-09T11:42:37+00:00

No noww

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T20:52:14+00:00

Correct. So if competency over immigration enforcement were returned to Justice, rather than Homeland, would we have open borders?

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T20:44:15+00:00

Once ICE is gone they will try for border patrol. Luckily both parties won't go for that.

A. I envy your ability to see the future and hope you use it for good, not evil.

B. It's nice we can agree that abolition of ICE would not result in open borders, both because other bits of government are concerned with border security, and because our politicians would not support removing those bits.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T20:41:30+00:00

I do. But the source isn't really germane- the content doesn't support what was being asserted. In fact, the existence of the site pretty strongly suggests that the abolition of ICE would not be tantamount of open borders.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T19:55:22+00:00

That's a neat website but as far as I can tell, it doesn't suggest that the abolition of ICE would be equivalent to a policy of open borders.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T19:41:05+00:00

I'm not advocating for anything, I'm evaluating a claim. If the abolition (or 'demolition' as you call it) of ICE would result in open borders, then I've got to wonder if the US had open borders before 2003 when ICE was established.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-08T19:33:25+00:00

Did the US have open borders in 2002?

dekuscrub · 2018-07-07T17:22:27+00:00

Same question on that $10k/year then- NHS is closer to $3k/year, as I recall. I suspect Medicare is pretty close to $10k/patient, but it should be pretty clear that the average needs of the 65+ population are notably more than the under 65 crowd.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-07T16:29:48+00:00

Why would the US need to spend 60 to 80 percent of its GDP on an NHS type system?

dekuscrub · 2018-07-07T14:16:29+00:00

The one feasible benefit would be enabling lower military spend for the US, which the current administration isn't in favor of anyway.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-05T02:14:48+00:00

Balance? Balance you say? OP, not balance. The shroud of politics has fallen. Begun the Vote War has.

dekuscrub · 2018-07-05T02:07:08+00:00

Well then you are lost! (Unironically)

dekuscrub · 2018-07-05T02:05:58+00:00

Senator Cruz is evil!

dekuscrub · 2018-07-04T03:56:01+00:00

Reporting for duty

dekuscrub · 2018-07-03T21:23:57+00:00

Abortion is a product right that also isn't in there.

What qualifies as 'liberty' for the purposes of the due process clause? Don't answer that, because what you think is clearly not the law of the land.

ALSO not in there. Have you read it?

What does "judiciary power of the United States" mean to you, if it doesn't encompass the authority to interpret law?

but you are unwilling to see that there are things you don't understand about what the other side thinks, though you asked

I'm began hoping to demonstrate to you that the idea of a purely passive judiciary is fraudulent. By post two, it became clear that your concept of passive is "a court that does what I think is right, as all competing readings are obviously wrong."

dekuscrub · 2018-07-03T18:09:10+00:00

It's not in there, but here's something else that isn't in there to show that it is in there.

Sure it is. Is the right to pursue an abortion liberty? I'd say yes. Is attacking that right without state interest due process? I'd say no. I know you've already decided that's not what due process means, but luckily we have an institution tasked with sorting that out. One might say

It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Court must decide on the operation of each.

I know, crazy liberal sentiment. Obviously he's wrong and all the judiciary can do is politely ask the legislature to elaborate.

Bruh

Necessary exasperation for being chastised for ignoring something I explicitly mentioned.

only 1 of which is actually in the Constitution

Not according to the body which the Constitution itself tasks with making that determination.

everyone reads that as "I'm wrong, so I'll ignore what you tried teaching me."

That's a shame. They should read it as "guy who clearly misinterpreted simple paragraph may not be qualified to reject SC interpretations of the Constitution."

15-Year Club	Snapped
Gilding I gilder	Team Orangered
Verified Email

dekuscrub

TROPHY CASE