When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
And to help the discussion Dave, here are some hard numbers...
Yet Trump’s 25% tariffs, it turns out, have done little for the people they were supposed to help. After enjoying a brief tariff-induced sugar high last year, American steelmakers are reeling. Steel prices and company earnings have sunk. Investors have dumped their stocks.
The industry has added just 1,800 jobs since February 2018, the month before the tariffs took effect. That’s a mere rounding error in a job market of 152 million and over a period when U.S. companies overall added nearly 4 million workers. Steelmakers employ 10,000 fewer people than they did five years ago.
For the first few months after Trump’s tariffs took effect, steel prices did rise. The price of a metric ton of hot rolled band steel hit $1,006 in July 2018, according to the SteelBenchmarker website, which tracks steel prices. Since then, it has plunged to $557 — lower than before the tariffs.
“Over time, (pricing has) come down, down, down, down, down,” said Mark Lash, president of United Steelworkers Local 1066 in Gary, Indiana, which represents about 1,400 workers at US Steel’s plant there. “It’s not where it was when the tariffs were announced.”
Hours before polls close in 14 Democratic primary states, Brazile—now a Fox News contributor—was asked by America’s Newsroom anchor Sandra Smith to react to comments made by McDaniel earlier on the program.
“It does depend on how big a lead that Sanders takes out of California is,” the GOP chair said. “If he picks up a huge proportion of delegates. I don’t see anybody getting out soon. It is leading towards a brokered convention, which will be rigged against Bernie if those superdelegates have their way on that second vote.”
Brazile immediately became indignant over McDaniel offering up her take on the Democratic race, calling on her and other Republicans to “stay the hell out of our race,” adding that she’s “sick and tired” of Republicans telling her about the Democrats’ process.
“First of all, they don’t have a process,” Brazile declared. “They are canceling primaries. They have winner-take-all. They don’t have the kind of democracy that we see on the Democratic side.”
“For people to use Russian talking points to sow division among Americans is stupid,” she continued. “So Ronna, go to hell! This is not about — go to Hell! I’m tired of it.”
For a change, Braineack is actually speaking the truth in this thread. California Proposition 47 aka: "The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act," downgraded a large number of crimes which had previously been felonies to misdemeanors.
So long as the monetary value of the crime does not exceed $950, shoplifting, burglary, forgery, fraud, and writing bad checks are essentially not prosecuted any more.
Now, I'd argue that in the video above, the value of the cosmetics probably exceeded $950 (even at Walgreens), but the overall consequence is that car burglaries and shoplifting have increased significantly.
In other news, saw this posted by a person I know in real life:
On his last day in office, President Trump needs to publicly announce that he identifies as female. That way, liberals with be driven insane by whether to celebrate her, or denounce this gender-fluidity bullshit.
In other news, saw this posted by a person I know in real life:
On his last day in office, President Trump needs to publicly announce that he identifies as female. That way, liberals with be driven insane by whether to celebrate her, or denounce this gender-fluidity bullshit.
You say that as if it's too fantastical to actually happen. I feel like after the ride we've been on here, literally anything is possible. Pitch the idea to the Simpsons and have them spin it through their prophecy machine.
For a change, Braineack is actually speaking the truth in this thread. California Proposition 47 aka: "The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act," downgraded a large number of crimes which had previously been felonies to misdemeanors.
So long as the monetary value of the crime does not exceed $950, shoplifting, burglary, forgery, fraud, and writing bad checks are essentially not prosecuted any more.
Now, I'd argue that in the video above, the value of the cosmetics probably exceeded $950 (even at Walgreens), but the overall consequence is that car burglaries and shoplifting have increased significantly.
I'm not an actuary, so I have no idea how you could determine this realistically. I wonder if the cost of stolen goods, which of course is passed on to us through higher prices because of loss and increased insurance the store must carry, is cheaper than using LEO resources to arrest, process, and lock people up?
For example, the only reason I'm against the death penalty is it's typically more expensive to carry out than a life sentence with no parole. There are plenty of crimes where I think you should be taken out behind the courthouse, 2 in the back of the head, and thrown in the landfill.
I'm not an actuary, so I have no idea how you could determine this realistically. I wonder if the cost of stolen goods, which of course is passed on to us through higher prices because of loss and increased insurance the store must carry, is cheaper than using LEO resources to arrest, process, and lock people up?
I think that there is an intangible cost associated with theft and fraud, especially when the victim is an individual who may not be insured against such losses.
For instance, let's say that you're in a public place, with your laptop open on a table in front of you, and someone walks over, picks it up, and walks away.
There are numerous costs associated with this theft aside from the monetary value of the laptop, which is quite likely to be less than $950, assuming you're not an Apple fan. The loss of the data contained on the laptop, especially if that data subsequently leads to an identity theft or similar, is one.
Another is the loss of time and productivity associated with not having the laptop, especially if you were heading to a business meeting later that afternoon and now you no longer have the information or tools needed to participate.
And, of course, there's the simple fact that being robbed is a stressful and demoralizing event, especially if it's been happening a lot lately. "First my car was broken into, then my bike was stolen, and now this? **** this, I'm leaving Sacramento."
As a broad generalization, letting criminals know that, so long as they keep their thefts under $950 they will not be prosecuted, seems like a bad thing to me.
And, from a purely objective standpoint, it's not as though Prop 47 included a provision "... and we're going to lay of 50,000 police officers statewide, to make up for the added cost of the robberies."
I think that there is an intangible cost associated with theft and fraud, especially when the victim is an individual who may not be insured against such losses.
For instance, let's say that you're in a public place, with your laptop open on a table in front of you, and someone walks over, picks it up, and walks away.
There are numerous costs associated with this theft aside from the monetary value of the laptop, which is quite likely to be less than $950, assuming you're not an Apple fan. The loss of the data contained on the laptop, especially if that data subsequently leads to an identity theft or similar, is one.
Another is the loss of time and productivity associated with not having the laptop, especially if you were heading to a business meeting later that afternoon and now you no longer have the information or tools needed to participate.
And, of course, there's the simple fact that being robbed is a stressful and demoralizing event, especially if it's been happening a lot lately. "First my car was broken into, then my bike was stolen, and now this? **** this, I'm leaving Sacramento."
As a broad generalization, letting criminals know that, so long as they keep their thefts under $950 they will not be prosecuted, seems like a bad thing to me.
And, from a purely objective standpoint, it's not as though Prop 47 included a provision "... and we're going to lay of 50,000 police officers statewide, to make up for the added cost of the robberies."
Definitely on an individual level, no. And in general I don't like the idea of just going, "Meh, it's not that much let's not worry about it."
I was more thinking about the store situation like this, or clothing stores where we frequently see these kids doing this crap. Just to be clear before someone else jumps in, I am in no way, shape, or form condoning this type of bullshit.
I was more thinking about the store situation like this, or clothing stores where we frequently see these kids doing this crap. Just to be clear before someone else jumps in, I am in no way, shape, or form condoning this type of bullshit.
Similar dynamics apply.
Whether we're talking about a corporate-owned Wal Mart, a franchisee-owned retail outlet, or a privately owned clothing store, if you're constantly being robbed because there is no law enforcement in the place where your store is located, then your costs are going to escalate and your profits decline, either due to uninsured losses or due to your insurer deciding that your store is a poor risk. You're eventually going to decide that it's not desirable to remain in that location.
First one store closes, then another, and before you know it, you have inner Detroit.
0
