Glenn Kirschner agrees with you (2 minutes)
Sorry, wrong thread.
Fucking magnets, how do they work?
Trump does know a lot about Dark Matter as it fills much of his big brain.
Trump: “Nobody knows what magnets are.”
Are you certain he said exactly that, in that order?
So he’s likely to sue BBC for $1 Billion. And BBC is not making a good case for themselves so perhaps shutting up would be good. This show was on so long ago I can’t find it anymore.
Donald Trump has threatened legal action against the BBC, following criticism over how a speech the US president made was edited and used in a Panorama documentary.
His legal team has given the BBC a deadline of 14 November to make a “full and fair retraction” of the documentary - or face being sued for $1bn (£760m).
Okay. let’s just play his entire speech that day. Only a little bit of insurrection.
And he just said it AGAIN!
LOL! So long as BBC gets the “are” and “is” in the correct order they should be safe from retractions and lawsuits.
I’ve got David Attenborough’s “Kingdom” on. He probably could give a page or two speech on the Grand Unified Theory. Hopefully Trump keeps up his “Science Guy” speech.
ETA: Okay, caught up with some of his blathering on magnets. China’s gonna his us with rare earth.
And people have theories about the hydraulics, so that is better than magnets.
Also, a 158% tariff is not the same as 100% on top of a 58% tariff.
I like to think he’s working on the quantum physics of magnetism.
Despite the progress, challenges remain in fully understanding and harnessing quantum magnetic phenomena.
Drat. Too late to edit.
It actually is the same. But to explain 158% tariff as 100% on top of 58% confused me.
And whatever China is or is not hitting us with I cannot figure out.
One time I want a reporter to say
“Just what in the fuck are you talking about?”
If he can do that and Quantum Gravity he’s well on his way to the Theory of Everything! Guaranteed Nobel.
Dagnabit! Another too-late-to-edit
A 158% is 100% more tarrif than 58%, yet is not the same as 58% tariff + 100% tariff.
For $100, a simple 158% = $258
yet stacking them = $100 + $100 = $200, × 58% added to ΦB, the flux density = $316
We seem to be reaching the “just ignore what the crazy old man says” stage of this presidency.
Isn’t that his voters’ starting point: just ignore his crazy ramblings?
The nodfather and his crew didn’t even make it two weeks before breaking the two grand promise.
I guess the nodfather didn’t stop one war he claimed.
The nodfather is not happy with air traffic controllers he’s causing to suffer.
Why does it take a judge to force the federal government to feed children?
Oh, that last sentence answers my question.
The nodfather’s wearing more makeup than the stars of Death Becomes Her did in the funeral scene.
Hell, he looks like he should be in the funeral scene.
The very guy who wanders aimlessly on stage and even stares blankly at a wall when a medical emergency happens right next to him says someone has lost their way. (The bolding is mine.)
Feel free to read the rest of the article. It’s chock full of his bullshit.
si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses
Ad Valorem tariffs are based on the value of the imported goods, specifically for the US on the CIF (Cost/Insurance/Freight) value of the goods in USD. For the US I would expect that usually all the cost components are denominated in USD.
(There are other methodologies. e.g. for an Australian business importing product from Japan the goods might be priced in Yen, insurance in AUD and freight in USD. Any duty payable is assessed on the FOB value of the goods in AUD)
You don’t pay a further tariff on already tariffed values ie you don’t “stack” them..
Maybe I’ve been reading it–and computing it–wrong, then. I’ve been reading that as if something had a 150% tariff, then that product was subject to a 150% tariff on the date that was in effect. Then, if the tariff increased by 38%, then that product, but a different item, now had a 188% tariff in effect.
Am I doing that wrong?
“Am I doing that wrong?”
Not as I read your post.
A product, from a specified country is subject to a specified tariff say 150%.
If the rate changes say increasing by 38% that comes into effect at a specific date.
The tariffs apply to all goods that enter the U.S. or are withdrawn from warehouses for consumption on or after that date.
So any shipment arriving before that date pays 150% on the CIF value. Any shipment arriving after will pay 188%.
The way trump put it was, they would go from 58% to 158%, and he clearly said that was 58% tariff + 100% tariff. It’s basically him saying tariffs are “stacked” as $100 in goods, with 58% applied first is $158, and “stack” in the 100% tariff comes out to $316. A 158% tariff comes to $258. It’s my application of his math. I’m not doing any tarrifing.
It was like he was saying $1,100 is $1000 + $100.
Besides, now I’m reading it’s a straight-up 200% and I don’t know if he said, for $100 that’s a 100% tariff, and that sum is then tarriffed again 100% to $400. It’s possible someone corrected him, yet he still thinks Obama is getting royalties for “Obamacare”
Jon Stewart covered that and the Dems caving on the shutdown. I guess all this tariff talk was this evening.
And the Chinese have banned (at least) all foreign AI chips. Maybe they’ve reverse engineered NVIDIA’s stuff or can even better apply what they did with DeepSeek.
At least five times in what I saw he says he has a good relationship with Xi and the USA will get what it wants. Then he goes to “or else tariffs” and that China “forced” magnets on the world over the past 20 years. He mixes in “rare earth” a lot and of course for 45 years every PC has had some of those (not just magnets) - that’s why computer equipment generally is separated at landfills - to recover some of them.
50 year mortgages. His stupidity and economic and technical ignorance is astounding more and more. Then he might speak somewhat coherently about Syria, then something stupid about Israel.
Right, so it’s your interpretation of his interpretation, which is discredited by almost everybody who passes Economics 1.001
As to the rest of that post, that’s called “flooding the zone”.
Sorry, I probably tend to do that too much. If I’ll try to keep my posts more concise and certainly avoid trump-tech-talk and economy in my posts.
Bill Pulte is a con man.
(His reputation, whatever that is, has been used to legitimize Alex Zarac aka PPseeds of Bed Bath & Beyond meme stock infamy.)