Anonymous ID: 45768c Sept. 22, 2020, 8:16 a.m. No.10743808   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3827 >>3831

>>10743774

OK, I'll go back to my 1992 argument on this. When American car manufacturers stop fucking around and actually make vehicles that will last longer than 100k miles without needing extensive care and maintenance or a complete overhaul, more people will buy them. Until then, you get cheaper products that last longer from Japanese auto manufacturers. The important point, here, is jobs are coming back.

 

I guess @POTUS found that magic wand that Obama scoffed about.

Anonymous ID: 45768c Sept. 22, 2020, 8:26 a.m. No.10743895   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>10743827

For the record, it was Reagan's administration that put into place the "intertwine China's economy with our own to prevent an open war scenario down the road". While it seemed like a decent way out of the WWIII problem, it lead to shit products and US getting raked over the coals in trade (with NAFTA in conjunction, of course). I was pulling for Perot, and I'm surprised that the adults in the room let themselves get fooled all over again with as much sense as he made. We know more about the "why", now, with Q, though, so there's that.

 

Now I've not been accused of being Libertarian in a while, but I understand why you'd make that argument. The concept behind capitalism is for competition to drive product improvement and more "bang for your buck" for the consumer. It simply doesn't always work that way in the same sense that socialized anything doesn't always work the way it claims to. When people get a little dough in their bank accounts, typically they want more, and more, and more, etc.