Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sounds like you are coming from a purely partisan position but it's actually more nuanced than you suggest. My point was that the populist impulse for tariffs used to be a policy position firmly embraced by Democrats. But I do generally agree that populism (or mob rule) in either party is not a good thing. Also, I'm not in favor of protectionism -- but at least understand that looking for trading balance is something a little different.

I do think, however, given your post, that you mostly misunderstand the nature of "due process" afforded for residents that are in the country illegally. That "due process," clearly defined by law, looks very different from the kind citizens and legal residents enjoy.

So, anyway, like I said, today your choices are popularism vs. Marxist progressivism. Gone is the liberal / conservative dichotomy. Pick carefully.
Marxists?? When? Where?
There is no choice for Marxist progressivism. Not in the USA. There’s hardly any left in the US.
 
Marxists?? When? Where?
There is no choice for Marxist progressivism. Not in the USA. There’s hardly any left in the US.
It always amazes me that those who complain the loudest about radical portions of the opposing political party are completely blind to the radical portions of their own political party. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is almost indistinguishable from the official Marxist/Socialist parties of the 1960s in both tactics and ideology.

 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnWick1954
It always amazes me that those who complain the loudest about radical portions of the opposing political party are completely blind to the radical portions of their own political party. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is almost indistinguishable from the official Marxist/Socialist parties of the 1960s in both tactics and ideology.

Sorry not sorry, but I’ll file that Epoch Times link in the same place I put their precious free subscription when it showed up in my mailbox: the dumpster.
 
Sorry not sorry, but I’ll file that Epoch Times link in the same place I put their precious free subscription when it showed up in my mailbox: the dumpster.

Complete propaganda and conspiracy garbage
Screenshot 2025-04-29 at 11.05.33.png
 
It always amazes me that those who complain the loudest about radical portions of the opposing political party are completely blind to the radical portions of their own political party. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is almost indistinguishable from the official Marxist/Socialist parties of the 1960s in both tactics and ideology.

Posting an opinion piece from a far right conspiracy website isn't the evidence your looking for. :rolleyes:
 
It always amazes me that those who complain the loudest about radical portions of the opposing political party are completely blind to the radical portions of their own political party.
I don’t “have” any political party in the USA and I consider the Democratic Party a little less rightwing than the pre-Trump Republican Party. The current Republican Party is dangerously extreme rightwing. Thanks to Trump and his fans. So compared to what the Republican Party is at the moment, the Democrats surely are leftwing…still no Marxist in sight though.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus is almost indistinguishable from the official Marxist/Socialist parties of the 1960s in both tactics and ideology.

🤣🤣You’re not serious, are you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: raylo32
The difference is simple. The dems have only a few with those radical positions, wheras the entire GOP has drunk the MAGA koolaid. Saying otherwise is a textbook false equivalency. And most indies and dems do call out and detest those positions when they appear. Not sure how old you are but you clearly must not remember the GOP when it was sane.

It always amazes me that those who complain the loudest about radical portions of the opposing political party are completely blind to the radical portions of their own political party. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is almost indistinguishable from the official Marxist/Socialist parties of the 1960s in both tactics and ideology.

 
Last edited:
This. And it wasn’t even all that long ago, was it (or am I old? 😆) when the second Bush was President? I didn’t like him, but he was a far cry from Trump’s madness.

Mitt Romney is like a fever dream for any somewhat moderate person at this point.

At least Mitt would not destroy the economy for his own vanity.

I also don’t believe he would be this cruel and sending off folks to a gulag with zero due process.
 
You can trace the origins of MAGA back quite a ways, but it really started to get serious in the House of Representatives with Newt Gingrich and company. They could not get their way via normal compromise and such so they went nuts with gerrymandering and other tricks. Then the "Hastert rule" totally destroyed the ability of the two parties to ever agree on anything. But at least the Senate was not infected at that time. That finally happened in the Trump era where the GOP in the Senate became just another MAGA tool like the House. Now you have a SecDef tweeting out classified information on private phones and Trump in the WH trashing the economy, selling out our allies, selling gold sneakers and bibles, and rigging the govt rules *that he controls* to profit his businesses including bogus crypto coins... and the entire GOP says "yes sir, that's just fine". I mean, what does it take to wake people up?

This. And it wasn’t even all that long ago, was it (or am I old? 😆) when the second Bush was President? I didn’t like him, but he was a far cry from Trump’s madness.
 
Last edited:
I personally think the rest of the EU was upset Ireland found a way to land Apple and was worried other companies would follow suit, costing them money.
Yes, that's exactly what happened - the EU has a prohibition on "state aids" - i.e., subsidies to companies from a country. The reason for the prohibition is to prevent the "race to the bottom" we see in the US of states/localities handing out goodies to companies because the company will threaten to take their business elsewhere.

The EU Commission brought a challenge to Ireland's tax regime as it benefited Apple, and won.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jakey rolling
The EU has a right to implement their own laws / fines but why is Apple fined based on its total earnings rather than the earnings it makes in the EU ?
As I posted above, the EU has authority to fine 10% based on worldwide turnover, but calculates the actual fine based on other factors and typically ties it primarily to EU turnover. Until the decision itself is released we don't know how the fine was determined.
 
Yes, that's exactly what happened - the EU has a prohibition on "state aids" - i.e., subsidies to companies from a country. The reason for the prohibition is to prevent the "race to the bottom" we see in the US of states/localities handing out goodies to companies because the company will threaten to take their business elsewhere.

The EU Commission brought a challenge to Ireland's tax regime as it benefited Apple, and won.
The EU doesn’t have a blanket prohibition of state eight in fact, allows it under a number of circumstances. For example, Airbus has been a huge recipient of subsidies. In fact the EU lost a WTO dispute with the US over Airbus subsidies, which eventually led to an agreement to reduce tariffs for five years as a settlement. I suspect the EU was more concerned that a US company and not an EU company was getting the benefits of the Irish deal, which, of course is normal for governments. Every government wants to protect its own countries industries and not allow states to protect foreign interest.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.