• 0 Posts
  • 60 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 28th, 2023

help-circle





  • I don’t know how we define “enough” in this scenario, but as you allude to: in the end the USA is just some 400 million people buying things from overseas. Absolutely those who buy the most, and that is what drives the economy in many countries. It is what has picked up countries in SE Asia from poverty to industrialization.

    Problem is that now when everything is more expensive in the US, the same people will stop spending. They might have spent the same money on products made in America, but those are precious few and just increased in price. So in effect everyone in America can now buy less for the same money and the industry capacity to produce what’s demanded doesn’t exist in short term. And in real estate, short term is 3-10 years.

    The rest of the world? Well, most of the world just lost their biggest market. Of course, the demand that can’t be produced domestically in the US will still be seen, but at a reduced rate, which will reduce the economic development world wide, until new markers are found. China still needs to sell, but the market for the high margin stuff is reduced.

    In the end? I wouldn’t be surprised if this stunt reduces world trade to such a degree it might be viewed as a notable side effect that carbon use went down. Trump might have managed to stop overconsumption like nobody else and with it energy demand. So despite doing the oil industries bidding and go against renewables, the shipping industry stand to loose enough trade that it might affect oil use world wide.














  • Blame game stage? Perhaps? My view is that there are few innocents, but the terminology and discourse is very strict in it’s perspective.

    Same as any other discrimination. There is always one part that has it worse, but it is never a one way street. Perhaps easiest to see with age, where each age group has their resentments against the others. Both are equally generalisations, though. Equally wrong.


  • Ok, so you link texts that say that women (as well as feminism, obviously) can be just as sexist as men, yet you take affront to my pointing out that the terminology used is sexist?

    Which part of it is it that you have such a hard time coming to terms with? That women, by default, is not always the victim, or is it that men is not always the perpetrator? These terms you use to defend the sexism in feminism is getting in the way of what needs to be done.

    That’s not your fault, you’ve been ingrained with it. The fact that you need an A-level university course to be able to make the mental gymnastics needed to understand such language without revolting speaks for its own. Or how was it you phrased it “get you started on the path…”