Trump gives China one day to end retaliations or face extra 50% tariffs

China expects to outlast US in trade war, alarming Big Tech.

See full article...

 

[VoidWeaver]

I once defended? Can you quote me on that? Personally, I thought the BEV tariffs were stupid and said so, and that if China was subsidizing their industry to that degree, we should do so as well. That that was a more rational response.

Go on, I'll wait. You'll be able to produce no such quote, because I said no such thing.

I'll come back tomorrow with a citation from HBR -- which is firmly entrenched on the side of capital, for capital. That's why those tariffs were put in place, and no amount of revisionism on your part changes that fundamental truth.

Unless the Harvard Business Review is somehow a leftist propaganda rag all of a sudden? That'd be a much more laughable position than ANY you have ever espoused here.

Dumping is firmly illegal and firmly in violation of world trade agreements. You're not allowed to do that. You can, if you'd like, sell things at cost, but selling them below cost to drive the competition out of business is fundamentally anti-competitive.

Even capital using its own capital to sell stuff below cost is recognized globally as a bad thing. Using state capital to do the same thing? Far worse.

(And do go on and quote me on that; you won't be able to, because you're making stuff up. That's quite rude. Don't put words in my mouth. Don't put words in anyone's mouth -- that's a hallmark of, well, something that I'm in far too good a mood to actually type. My girlfriend is asleep on one side, my wife on the other, yet I'm cursed with insomniac tendencies.)

Let me get this straight: you're profoundly worried about dumping when, amusingly enough, the largest and most damaging "dumping" taking place in 2025 isn't cheap Chinese BEVs, but legacy auto manufacturers flooding markets worldwide with ICE vehicles; technologically obsolete, environmentally ruinous, and generously subsidized by decades of entrenched policy.

Perhaps your insomnia would benefit from a reevaluation of priorities rather than an anxious scramble for Harvard's imprimatur.

This right here is why I don't have this one on ignore. It's the raw comedy of it. Imagine someone actually typing the phrase, "Consistency is a cruel mistress indeed," while somewhere between smug and a huff, dead serious AF. It's pure caricature, Family Guy Stewie with mustache and monocle. If it's manual trolling, bravo, entertainment derived, 11/10 masterclass. If it's LLM slop, let's take a second to appreciate the diamonds that really do bob to the surface in a crap flood. It gives me faith that patiently mining the random permutations of a huge vector map might get us profundity we ourselves can't acknowledge until after it's said.

But yeah, arguing that the spree arsonist burning down everything is proof positive that the only match you care about is bad is somewhat reductionist. And I want the cheap Chinese car market flood.

The world will enjoy the flood of cheap Chinese BEVs, it's infinitely preferable to drowning in fossil-fueled complacency.

 

[VoidWeaver]

Perhaps your whole existence would benefit from the occasional "whoops, I was wrong about what you said, I didn't read carefully," or an "I'm sorry I told lies about what you said."

Sweet sullen teenage Jesus, you're tedious. Are you stupid, a liar, or a stupid liar? I didn't defend the BEV tariffs. I haven't done so in this discussion, and I haven't done so previously,. You made that up out of whole cloth which is, frankly, disgusting. I hold nothing but contempt for liars, and even more contempt for those who can't read. Rather -- those who just refuse to do so.

What I offered was the stated rationale for those tariffs to exist -- that state subsidy of industry is, in fact, a direct violation of world trade agreements. I also said "we should do that, too, instead of emplacing those tariffs."

Are you less than six months old? A year? That's when object permanence develops, after all, and you don't have any.

But, hey, go on and sit there in your feigned superiority, when the whole community now can see you're a liar who can't read.

((Note to the moderators: maybe this is less polite than it should be, but calling a spade a spade isn't a "personal insult," and it's far more rude to lie about what someone has said than to call a stupid liar a stupid liar.))

You're worthless, VoidWeaver. Discussion absolutely hinges on people being honest about what the other parties in the discussion have said, yet you're firmly unable to do so.

Stop lying, liar. That's not what I said, that's never been what I've said, and rather than say, "oh, sorry, I was wrong" you doubled down on your lies. That's a piece of shit move. And literally everyone but you knows it. You aren't privy to any special insights, and your lack of basic respect for the truth means no one should further engage with you.

Because, as I've said: liars are worthless, and you've just shown everyone that that's exactly what you are, have been, and will be.

Calm yourself. It's interesting to witness how quickly your rhetorical decorum descends into personal histrionics and vehement indignation. My criticism was never about accusing you specifically of directly defending tariffs, it was about your complacency within an echo chamber which consistently and loudly did so. You occupy a comfortable place within this collective, benefiting from and reinforcing its narratives, a fact which is plainly observable to anyone who frequents these discussions.

And while you're quick to denounce perceived misrepresentations, you remain conspicuously silent when your fellow travelers indulge regularly in precisely the sort of rhetorical excesses and distortions you claim to despise. If clarity is truly what you desire, then by all means, let’s be clear: the broader argument here is that the outrage over "dumping" rings hollow when juxtaposed against the vastly more damaging practices still dominating legacy auto in 2025, practices you appear unbothered by, or at the very least, insufficiently vocal about.

Spare me the sanctimony, then. Your evident sensitivity shows more than mere irritation at imagined slights, it reveals a disquieting discomfort with confronting the inconsistencies and contradictions of the collective position you've comfortably inhabited.

 

[VoidWeaver]

Nope, I just can't stand liars, and holy hell your language sounds like an LLM trained on Philosophy 101 students mixed with the sort of people who pay tens of thousands of dollars for an MFA from an unaccredited institution.

It's not overly sensitive to be upset when someone lied about what you've said. Which you did do. That's not an imagined slight at all, that's you straight up lying through your teeth, then refusing to back down when called on your bullshit.

I don't take myself all that seriously. I do take inquiry quite seriously, and I can't stand liars. Not your kind of liar, anyway. "Does this dress make me look fat?" Is the sort of question one can lie about.

"VoidWeaver is fundamentally against cryptocurrency, especially Bitcoin, and thinks it's all a grand sham perpetrated by the state to allow rubes to think they've got financial autonomy, when it makes them more beholden to Systems than anything"?

That? Every word in that quote is a lie, even the articles and prepositions. And you wouldn't like anyone to say that's what you've said, would you? That you're ars's biggest cryptocurrency skeptic? That you single-handedly demonstrated to this community the folly of their ways, and that, be blessed, you're so glad you could correct their errors and get them to run away from crypto?

I don't think you'd like that very much at all.

And it still would absolutely fucking kill you to say "I'm sorry I misrepresented what you said, Orwell, that wasn't fair of me."

You'd rather spend several paragraphs excusing your shitty behavior than acknowledge that you're a liar who tells lies, apologize, and then stop lying.

Shouldn't be surprising to anyone, at this point. You are so obviously a liar who tells lies that a significant fraction of the community has you on ignore.

But hey, 11/10 masterful trolling, if it's just you, or do tell us what LLM you're using if it isn't -- I've often wondered where to find examples of "flowery complicated language isn't always better than simple direct language." I'll probably cite your posts to my oldest daughter; she's working on her master's and this whole thread is a masterclass on "how to not say much at all using an awful lot of words."

Do go on, though, taking yourself far too seriously, or misrepresenting the output of an LLM as your own. It's got to be one or the other.

If brevity is what you crave, allow me to offer it now: You are overly sensitive, dramatically indignant, and far too eager to cry foul at a perceived slight rather than engage with the real criticism offered.