Trump's tariff wars...long post.

[prowla]

  On 27/03/2025 at 11:28, chris_b said:

 

Wow, I did not know that. A very good reason for a complete ban on Teslas.

Expand  

He'd blame the EU for blocking US products.

[TimR]

That Tesla death statistic is extremely misleading.

 

4 people died in a Tesla because they weren't aware of how the door could be opened manually. 

[Baloney Balderdash]

This will lead to inflation worldwide.

 

Also I avoid wherever even possible to buy products produced in the US all together, and I am not alone.

 

The big supermarket chains in Denmark has started marking wares produced in the EU, so people can avoid buying US products.

 

And some big stock investors has been or are planning to sell out of the their US stocks as well.

 

Edited Thursday at 13:14 by Baloney Balderdash

[cetera]

  On 27/03/2025 at 12:57, TimR said:

That Tesla death statistic is extremely misleading.

 

4 people died in a Tesla because they weren't aware of how the door could be opened manually. 

Expand  

That's OK then. Only 24 died for other reasons.

[Pseudonym]

I recommend paying scant attention to announcements about tariffs and much closer attention to the details of tariffs that are actually imposed.

 

 

  On 27/03/2025 at 12:57, TimR said:

That Tesla death statistic is extremely misleading.

 

4 people died in a Tesla because they weren't aware of how the door could be opened manually. 

Expand  

 

Call me old-fashioned, a fuddy-duddy, an amoral individualist if you insist; but I am generally in favour of designs that do not require passengers to read the manual in order to deploy basic safety features such as opening the door from the inside. We aren't cats, which long ago figured out how to get others to open doors for them in all circumstances.

Edited Thursday at 13:34 by Pseudonym

[SteveXFR]

  On 27/03/2025 at 10:32, chris_b said:

 

Which car used to regularly burst into flames, and invariably kill the occupants, when in rear impact accidents?  The car company kept making them after working out that they'd still make money because the cost of the court cases would be less than the sales figures!!! 

Expand  

 

The Ford Pinto but that had a far better safety record than the cybertruck

Edited Thursday at 13:22 by SteveXFR

[prowla]

  On 27/03/2025 at 13:10, Baloney Balderdash said:

This will lead to inflation worldwide.

 

Also I avoid wherever even possible to buy products produced in the US all together, and I am not alone.

 

The big supermarket chains in Denmark has started marking wares produced in the EU, so people can avoid buying US products.

 

And some big stock investors has been or are planning to sell out of the their US stocks as well.

 

Expand  

It'd be good if all manufacturers would do that (like the UK Tractor).

Mind you, we also need to identify companies whose headquarters are in the US.

[TimR]

  On 27/03/2025 at 13:16, cetera said:

That's OK then. Only 24 died for other reasons.

Expand  

 

42,500 died in other cars...

[Pseudonym]

  On 27/03/2025 at 13:35, TimR said:

 

42,500 died in other cars...

Expand  

 

From fires? From defective autopilots? From design flaws? Or is this statistic misleading?

[Pseudonym]

"Yes, M'lud, my client ran over the pedestrian whilst texting. But, as you weigh sentencing, I ask that you consider all the pedestrians he managed to avoid whilst texting."

[tauzero]

https://www.tesladeaths.com/

[edstraker123]

As a distraction from how bad things are in the US - lets look closer to home :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2g03ykxeko

 

Would be nice to get a coalition together willing to address some issues in this country.

Edited Thursday at 22:20 by edstraker123

[Dad3353]

  On 27/03/2025 at 22:18, edstraker123 said:

As a distraction from how bad things are in the US - lets look closer to home :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2g03ykxeko

 

Would be nice to get a coalition together willing to address some issues in this country.

Expand  

 

Just a little disingenuous, I suggest; they're talking about relative poverty. Not quite the same thing as being unable to afford to eat. This kind of poverty can be cured overnight, by simply reducing the income of the upper-earning half of the population. Just sayin'. 

Edited Thursday at 23:15 by Dad3353

[peteb]

  On 27/03/2025 at 23:15, Dad3353 said:

Just a little disingenuous, I suggest; they're talking about relative poverty. Not quite the same thing as being unable to afford to eat. This kind of poverty can be cured overnight, by simply reducing the income of the upper-earning half of the population. Just sayin'. 

Expand  

 

Taxing the top 5% would do it...! 

 

[Kiwi]

On a related topic, this was a fascinating debate between two self made, financially independent men.  One, Gary Stevenson, an working class maths prodigy who trained as an economist and then got rich as a trader betting against the UK's economic recovery.  The other, Daniel Priestly, an entreprenuer with a group of about seven different companies including software companies and various agencies. 

Stevenson struggles to listen and follow a coherent line of reasoning without letting his deep seated anger about inequality and single issue political agenda distract the flow with provocations, contradictions and misrepresentations of Priestly's position. Priestly, in complete contrast, is patient, tactful, diplomatic and persistent. 

The irony is there's a significant amount of agreement between them about the potential solution to wealth inequality and what this is doing to the UK.  However, neither of them pull back enough to see it and the moderator isn't perhaps as proactive as he could have been to keep the discussion on track. 

It's a long one at over two hours but really interesting to see them both agree on the need to challenge orthodox thinking.  See what you think!

[edstraker123]

  On 27/03/2025 at 23:26, peteb said:

Taxing the top 5% would do it...! 

Expand  

I wouldn't disagree  !

[SumOne]

  On 27/03/2025 at 10:32, chris_b said:

 

Which car used to regularly burst into flames, and invariably kill the occupants, when in rear impact accidents?  The car company kept making them after working out that they'd still make money because the cost of the court cases would be less than the sales figures!!! 

Expand  

 

 

 

[Steve Browning]

Stevenson was on Question Time last night and was very one dimensional, as you say here. Personally, it detracts a little from his message. 

 

I agree with most of what he says. There is enough money to solve all the poverty etc issues around the Globe but it's predominantly in the hands of people who don't need it but won't part with it.

 

Similarly with companies. Some make obscene profits and could be unaffected by losing some of that profit. 

 

I can't help thinking that the solution requires may too much cooperation between countries. 

[tegs07]

  On 28/03/2025 at 07:17, Steve Browning said:

Stevenson was on Question Time last night and was very one dimensional, as you say here. Personally, it detracts a little from his message. 

 

I agree with most of what he says. There is enough money to solve all the poverty etc issues around the Globe but it's predominantly in the hands of people who don't need it but won't part with it.

 

Similarly with companies. Some make obscene profits and could be unaffected by losing some of that profit. 

 

I can't help thinking that the solution requires may too much cooperation between countries. 

Expand  

I agree about Stevenson. I think he is better on paper rather than in a debate. It’s probably the frustration of knowing that no change will lead to extreme poverty and in a service and consumer lead economy this is hardly an engine for growth. I posted the same interview in another thread as I thought that there are definitely arguments that both parties put forward that could provide a route out of the doom loop that party politics has been stuck in for decades. I have long known that austerity is not a Tory problem. It’s a product of demographics, globalisation, debt, borrowing costs (too low for too long) and a society totally divorced from the economic reality that a changing world has left them living through.

 

There needs to be radical change if government wants to break out of this austerity cycle. They need to convince the market (bond and equity) that they have a vision worth investing in. They need to sort the deficit either by taxation or improving productivity (or a combination of the two).

 

However please don’t let it be the selfish, blind arrogance of the Trump vision which is pushing the world closer to a nuclear arms race and making things like climate change, disease prevention and global migration even worse.

Edited Friday at 07:49 by tegs07
clarity

[Steve Browning]

I think the problem needs a global solution. Taxation is the obvious way to deal with this swiftly, but needs there to be a global approach, so that those who are subject to the tax regime can't up sticks elsewhere.

 

A multi-billionaire could easily cope with just the one billion (even that is excessive but let's be generous). Restricting them to that single billion and taxing away the rest would be immediate. Similarly with companies, taxing such things as dividends, management charges, royalties etc at a much higher rate would reduce the amount of these charges (and the other costs that allow companies to move costs offshore) flowing out to tax havens.

[tegs07]

  On 28/03/2025 at 08:08, Steve Browning said:

I think the problem needs a global solution. Taxation is the obvious way to deal with this swiftly, but needs there to be a global approach, so that those who are subject to the tax regime can't up sticks elsewhere.

 

A multi-billionaire could easily cope with just the one billion (even that is excessive but let's be generous). Restricting them to that single billion and taxing away the rest would be immediate. Similarly with companies, taxing such things as dividends, management charges, royalties etc at a much higher rate would reduce the amount of these charges (and the other costs that allow companies to move costs offshore) flowing out to tax havens.

Expand  

I am not even sure it needs to be global. There are plenty of entrepreneurs who would prefer the climate, culture and relative stability offered by Europe than other countries where economic opportunities may be greater. Most of these individuals get the best of both worlds by owning property and holding assets in Europe. This is the leverage required to get them to pay their way. Sure pop off to Dubai but your keeping no untaxed assets as a backup plan or passive income. There are too many loopholes that allow these guys to exploit the system. 

Edited Friday at 08:21 by tegs07

[Steve Browning]

Maybe a company should only be allowed domiciled directors. That would also clip their wings a little.

Edited Friday at 08:25 by Steve Browning

[tegs07]

  On 28/03/2025 at 08:25, Steve Browning said:

Maybe a company should only be allowed domiciled directors. That would also clip their wings a little.

Expand  

There are a number of ideas. Many of the UAE countries don’t allow ownership of property by foreign nationals or restrict the areas where foreign ownership is permitted. Much of Europe has turned its residential property into a business opportunity that causes immense economic hardship for its own citizens. I am sure there are ways to tackle this without going down the Spanish route of damaging the tourist industry.

[TimR]

The monopolies and mergers commission was supposed to stop companies growing so big. We should have something similar for personal wealth. 

 

We should be banning certain companies from operating in the UK. And we should be investigation umbrella companies that 'own' all these other companies. There's something like 5 companies that control pretty much all the food we eat. 

 

The problem is agreeing a limit. 

[Steve Browning]

Hand the planet to the bass players! We've got it sorted.