Embargo

[Dauphin]

Sad lol at "swasticar".

Free Musk child with every purchase.

[Dauphin]

The worst thing about them won't be the hypocrisy of the substitutions No. the worst thing about a successful widescale anti US boycott will be that it would be expected to directly and greatly increase US trade deficits which will hugely incentivize Trump to increase, perhaps massively, his tariffs rather than backing off on them. It's the wrong button to push.

You seem to be under a misunderstanding of what the main contributions are to the balance of trade between the US and most countries. It's not end consumers.

US to Canada, for example, it is by value mostly the import of oil and oil based products, heavy industrial equipment, medical equipment, fertilizers, etc. Consumer imports are a small fraction and a complete boycott would be a rounding error in the end sum.

Boycotts are statements, and they may damage specific companies, but they have little real impact on the wider economy.

As opposed to tariffs on pre-consumer materials.

[Provost Harrison]

I'd love to know what Musk company sales boycotts are pivotting to. surely some meaningfully more defensible alternative?

Erm, anything else. There is a big world out there beyond the frontiers of Yankeestan...

[Provost Harrison]

I hear you.

(even though starlink is almost uknown here)


it's what your gut tells you


Do I love mcdonalds?

I do. It's a dirty secret of mine

but not if that means inoccent ukranian mothers have to cry

Mine too. And KFC. Gone. I forgot that if something can stop a hankering for some fast food that not even the care of my cardiovascular system can, it's my morals. Thank **** for those :-D

[Provost Harrison]

That's what I meant, but figure saying LCBO would mean nothing to most people.

Yeah, I didn't know the acronym but with the context I'd have figured out it would've been something something Ontario and that it is the agency that sells alcoholic beverages (didn't know it is was national level or province level, looks like the latter). I knew how the system roughly worked over there but not in any great detail. But as they say, you learn something new every day.

Was just looking at their flagship store in Toronto in images, that's a flashy looking offie. Bet you've not heard that term in a few years ;-)

[Dauphin]

I'm over in London first two weeks of July, if you are around.

[Aeson]

The gamestop pump and dump scheme was achieved by ordinary people with much smaller numbers.

No. It was not a pump and dump. It was an extremely over shorted stock, which caused a short squeeze. Hedge funds caused it by shorting more stock than could be bought back. Some normal people noticed and profited by holding on for higher prices.


​​​​​

[Aeson]

boycotts are sacrifices too. how large depends on what is sacrificed. I didn't recommend anybody sacrifice their lifesavings any more than boycott advocates are advocating patients reschedule urgently needed surgery to avoid a US medical device.

Strawman.

No one is suggesting to avoid lifesaving meds/devices. Or even other needs without adequate alternatives. In any case it's 100% voluntary.

[Geronimo]

Strawman.

No one is suggesting to avoid lifesaving meds/devices. Or even other needs without adequate alternatives. In any case it's 100% voluntary.

no it's not a strawman. a strawman would be me saying "You must not boycott life saving medical devices the cost is too high!" while nobody advocates that. Instead what I did was note that nobody advocates that and that further the boycotters do not in general advocate that people make dangerous sacrifices for the boycott and that as the boycotts are perfectly capable of proceeding with such reasonable limits so could a campaign to target specific stocks proceed without requiring as Nestor warned wiping out personal savings.

Do you really see that comparison as a "strawman"?

[Aeson]

You're right, it's not a strawman. Sorry, misread that post.

[N35t0r]

no it's not a strawman. a strawman would be me saying "You must not boycott life saving medical devices the cost is too high!" while nobody advocates that. Instead what I did was note that nobody advocates that and that further the boycotters do not in general advocate that people make dangerous sacrifices for the boycott and that as the boycotts are perfectly capable of proceeding with such reasonable limits so could a campaign to target specific stocks proceed without requiring as Nestor warned wiping out personal savings.

Do you really see that comparison as a "strawman"?

If you don't argue we should use our savings, then what money are we supposed to use for these 'pump and dump' schemes? I don't particularly have a massive boatload of money earmarked for gambling (besides, how would I escape retribution? Access to the stock market is heavily regulated).
Whereas boycotting as many US products as I can is easy. I need new headphones, Bose was among the options to buy, now they're not, I'll choose between Sennheiser and Sony. It's it effective? Certainly not if it's only me. Do I care if Trump gets angry and doubles down? No I don't, he's not my responsibility, and I don't believe in appeasing bullies to save them and their supporters some hardship.

[Provost Harrison]

I'm over in London first two weeks of July, if you are around.

Hey man, I will be around...will definitely pop and visit :-D

[Aeson]

A pump and dump is when you massively BUY an asset to drive up prices and spark a buying frenzy. Then sell into the suckers. It usually tanks soon afterwards. It is actually illegal, and you can go to prison for trying to manipulate asset prices this way.

It requires a huge investment to significantly change the price of giant companies. For normal people to do this it would have to be coordinated, and that coordination would be an explicit admission of guilt.

Not only would people be risking their savings, they would be making themselves criminals and risking fines and prison.

[Aeson]

Also, widespread coordination would nullify any potential gains, as it would be widely known to be a pump and dump, so no suckers would buy into it.