The Most Disgusting Conspiracy In American History

[stxjimmy]

Now go and ask AI if Judge Merchan had entered a Judgement of Conviction as of the date of my statement. That is the key because in NY nobody is officially convicted until a judge does so. On July 11th, the Judge did enter a Judgment of Conviction. The sentence: Trump received a conditional discharge and no jail time. Prior to sentencing, Trump was found guilty, but not yet formally convicted in the full legal sense. At that point, someone might argue that: “There is a verdict, but no judgment of conviction until sentence is imposed.” That’s legally true under criminal procedure. But now that sentencing has occurred, that distinction no longer applies in this case. I was out of the country that day.

You’re clutching at straws. Your own post says trump was found guilty.
And if you’re curious logic was being followed people would be sentenced without being convicted. I think not!

 

[Rightguide]

You’re clutching at straws. Your own post says trump was found guilty.
And if you’re curious logic was being followed people would be sentenced without being convicted. I think not!

Because you're ignorant.

 

[Rightguide]

In which parallel universe can tariffs, any tariffs, not be inflationary.
The whole point is to put a charge on the goods involved thus they cannot be anything but inflationary.

In the economic universe, a place in which you are not trained or fluent.

One of the reasons why a tariff may not be inflationary is that a tariff is a tax on the importer, who may decide to absorb the added cost in order to maintain market share. Also, prices may remain stable if there are domestic alternatives that maintain supply and keep prices stable. I explained it in more detail here:

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...american-system.1631404/page-5#post-100905667

Here are my sources:

1. CBS News – “The Trump tariffs aren't causing U.S. prices to spike. Here's why.”
Highlights business strategies used to delay or offset tariff costs, such as pre-stocking inventory, using bonded warehouses, or absorbing costs rather than passing them to consumers. bis.org+7theweek.com+7epi.org+7abcnews.go.com+2cbsnews.com+2brookings.edu+2


2. Brookings Institution – “U.S. tariffs and global inflation” (Robin Brooks, June 2025)
Explores how tariffs exert modest inflationary pressure in the U.S., but also apply deflationary influence on exporting nations. Suggests limited and uneven impact.


3. Economic Policy Institute – “Tariff increases did not cause inflation … removal would undermine supply chains”
Notes that between 2016 and 2021, increased tariff revenue made up merely 0.3% of U.S. consumer spending, and that rolling them back would have only minor, temporary effects on prices. epi.org


4. CBO Report – “Budgetary and Economic Effects of Increases in Tariffs”
Estimates tariffs could raise inflation by only about 0.4 percentage points in 2025–2026—modest compared to broader economic forces. taxpolicycenter.org+9cbo.gov+9investopedia.com+9


5. The Week – “Tariffs were supposed to drive inflation. Why hasn't that happened?”
Explains why slowed hiring, slack consumer demand, and company strategies contributed to muted inflation despite record tariffs.

 

[ll74]

"Who may absorb the cost"....

Lol

That's a tell

Tariffs are taxes on the importer.

 

[stxjimmy]

In the economic universe, a place in which you are not trained or fluent.

One of the reasons why a tariff may not be inflationary is that a tariff is a tax on the importer, who may decide to absorb the added cost in order to maintain market share. Also, prices may remain stable if there are domestic alternatives that maintain supply and keep prices stable. I explained it in more detail here:

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...american-system.1631404/page-5#post-100905667

Here are my sources:

1. CBS News – “The Trump tariffs aren't causing U.S. prices to spike. Here's why.”
Highlights business strategies used to delay or offset tariff costs, such as pre-stocking inventory, using bonded warehouses, or absorbing costs rather than passing them to consumers. bis.org+7theweek.com+7epi.org+7abcnews.go.com+2cbsnews.com+2brookings.edu+2


2. Brookings Institution – “U.S. tariffs and global inflation” (Robin Brooks, June 2025)
Explores how tariffs exert modest inflationary pressure in the U.S., but also apply deflationary influence on exporting nations. Suggests limited and uneven impact.


3. Economic Policy Institute – “Tariff increases did not cause inflation … removal would undermine supply chains”
Notes that between 2016 and 2021, increased tariff revenue made up merely 0.3% of U.S. consumer spending, and that rolling them back would have only minor, temporary effects on prices. epi.org


4. CBO Report – “Budgetary and Economic Effects of Increases in Tariffs”
Estimates tariffs could raise inflation by only about 0.4 percentage points in 2025–2026—modest compared to broader economic forces. taxpolicycenter.org+9cbo.gov+9investopedia.com+9


5. The Week – “Tariffs were supposed to drive inflation. Why hasn't that happened?”
Explains why slowed hiring, slack consumer demand, and company strategies contributed to muted inflation despite record tariffs.

I don’t need economic lessons from the chief propagandist for a man who believes he can drop prices by 100, 500, 600, 1000 or even 1500 %.
You’re as dumb and ignorant as your cult leader.

 

[stxjimmy]

In the economic universe, a place in which you are not trained or fluent.

One of the reasons why a tariff may not be inflationary is that a tariff is a tax on the importer, who may decide to absorb the added cost in order to maintain market share. Also, prices may remain stable if there are domestic alternatives that maintain supply and keep prices stable. I explained it in more detail here:

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...american-system.1631404/page-5#post-100905667

Here are my sources:

1. CBS News – “The Trump tariffs aren't causing U.S. prices to spike. Here's why.”
Highlights business strategies used to delay or offset tariff costs, such as pre-stocking inventory, using bonded warehouses, or absorbing costs rather than passing them to consumers. bis.org+7theweek.com+7epi.org+7abcnews.go.com+2cbsnews.com+2brookings.edu+2


2. Brookings Institution – “U.S. tariffs and global inflation” (Robin Brooks, June 2025)
Explores how tariffs exert modest inflationary pressure in the U.S., but also apply deflationary influence on exporting nations. Suggests limited and uneven impact.


3. Economic Policy Institute – “Tariff increases did not cause inflation … removal would undermine supply chains”
Notes that between 2016 and 2021, increased tariff revenue made up merely 0.3% of U.S. consumer spending, and that rolling them back would have only minor, temporary effects on prices. epi.org


4. CBO Report – “Budgetary and Economic Effects of Increases in Tariffs”
Estimates tariffs could raise inflation by only about 0.4 percentage points in 2025–2026—modest compared to broader economic forces. taxpolicycenter.org+9cbo.gov+9investopedia.com+9


5. The Week – “Tariffs were supposed to drive inflation. Why hasn't that happened?”
Explains why slowed hiring, slack consumer demand, and company strategies contributed to muted inflation despite record tariffs.

So which importer of Chinese goods has a margin that could soak up a 145% tariff?

 

[dmallord]

In which parallel universe can tariffs, any tariffs, not be inflationary.
The whole point is to put a charge on the goods involved thus they cannot be anything but inflationary.

I suppose that ignoring the Canadian news that the tariff on lumber will increase the cost of US homes by approximately $14,000 isn't tied to 'inflation' and would be a mistake in tying it to Mr. Felon's 'Make America Great Again' acts. That cost will be added to a new home buyer's out of pocket mortgage payments. Or will the Canadians pay that?

 

[Rightguide]

So which importer of Chinese goods has a margin that could soak up a 145% tariff?

The current tariff levied on China is 30%.

 

[ll74]

The current tariff levied on China is 30%.

Which might change this afternoon ...maybe

.who knows .....possibly

 

[Rightguide]

"Who may absorb the cost"....

Lol

That's a tell

Tariffs are taxes on the importer.

I provided five sources to back my statements, why don't you check them out before commenting?

 

[ll74]

I provided five sources to back my statements, why don't you check them out before commenting?

Lol

Tariffs are a tax on importers.

Your sources and your post reinforce that.

 

[Bray123]

Ford cars will rise in price by a greater margin than Toyotas. Why does Trump hate American cars?

 

[stxjimmy]

The current tariff levied on China is 30%.

Nothing you say can be relied upon, but let’s assume for a moment 30% is accurate - Same question which importer of Chinese goods has a margin that can absorb 30%?

 

[stxjimmy]

I provided five sources to back my statements, why don't you check them out before commenting?

Don’t need to I have an economics degree. I know they’re discredited since the late 19th century, and that they are credited with exacerbating the Great Depression as most nations adopted them.

 

[stxjimmy]

I provided five sources to back my statements, why don't you check them out before commenting?

Try Wikipedia. One Quick Look gives:
“
“Tariffs on imports are designed to raise the price of imported goods to discourage consumption. The intention is for citizens to buy local products instead, which, according to supporters, would stimulate their country's economy. Tariffs therefore provide an incentive to develop production and replace imports with domestic products. Tariffs are meant to reduce pressure from foreign competition and, according to supporters, would help reduce the trade deficit. They have historically been justified as a means to protect infant industries and to allow import substitution industrialisation (industrializing a nation by replacing imported goods with domestic production). Tariffs may also be used to rectify artificially low prices for certain imported goods, due to dumping, export subsidies or currency manipulation. The effect is to raise the price of the goods in the destination country.

There is near unanimous consensus among economists that tariffs are self-defeating and have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare, while free trade and the reduction of trade barriers has a positive effect on economic growth.“

 

[stxjimmy]

I suppose that ignoring the Canadian news that the tariff on lumber will increase the cost of US homes by approximately $14,000 isn't tied to 'inflation' and would be a mistake in tying it to Mr. Felon's 'Make America Great Again' acts. That cost will be added to a new home buyer's out of pocket mortgage payments. Or will the Canadians pay that?

One would think a real estate developer of all people would realise that.

 

[Rightguide]

Lol

Tariffs are a tax on importers.

Your sources and your post reinforce that.

Yes, but they don't result in inflation. Here is your favorite source, MSNBC, admitting it.

https://rumble.com/v6wkn4a-msnbc-ad...ng-inflation-apocalypse.html?e9s=src_v1_upp_a

 

[ll74]

Yes, but they don't result in inflation. Here is your favorite source, MSNBC, admitting it.

https://rumble.com/v6wkn4a-msnbc-ad...ng-inflation-apocalypse.html?e9s=src_v1_upp_a

Yes, they do.

Inflation is just a sustained increase in prices over a period of time.

MSNBC isn't admitting anything you're suggesting.

You're not smart.