World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Every country should have just stopped trade with the US as soon as this tarriff nonsense started. Big mistake even engaging imo.
I imagine the strategy everywhere is to keep the lid on this while you can shift your trade elsewhere. TBH the shift should have started during the first Trump admin, but to be fair, nobody thought that Trump can out-Trump himself this bad.
Suddenly cutting off a lot of trade suddenly is a stupid and reckless move that would hurt people in their countries as much as it would hurt the US. It's basically the same behavior as Trump with his absurd tariffs, banning trade with a country, and taxing people obscenely to buy things from that country mostly work out to the same effects in practice.
Incentivizing other trade partners, and maybe slowly disincentivizing the US makes a lot of sense though. Maybe it made more sense years ago, but as they say, if the best time was yesterday, the next-best time is today.
The thing I'm wondering about is that even the MIC of Europe and the US is intertwined, inasmuch the US is switching to German rifles from their old M4s, and a significant portion of the F35 is also manufactured in the EU. I wonder if that's in scope of the tariffs, or if it's purchased by the US government directly so it would be exempt.
Such an exemption would be moot: The tariff income goes to the US federal budget, and in this case, the extra costs caused by the import tariffs are paid from the US federal budget. It's +-0 all the same with the import tariffs. However, there will also be import tariffs in the other direction, and those need to be paid to EU. Anything that needs to be brought from USA to EU in order to be processed there into an F35 component causes extra money to go to EU.
he US federal budget doesn't really win or lose anything through the import tariffs alone, but the opposing import tariffs go to foreign countries in the EU and there's no reason why the US federal administration would exempt from those tariffs.
Of course, when EU countries are buying F35 planes, it matters more: There the components being brought from EU to USA are subject to import tariffs paid to the US federal budget, and are money lost from the perspective of EU. But at the same time, how is the price of the F35 agreed upon? If the price is already fixed, then Lockheed Martin has to pay the EU import tariffs from its own pockets and might get the US import tariffs compensated as federal subsidies. But, if the agreements say that the variance in prices are covered by the buyer, then the US import tariffs actually benefit the US.
It’s almost a moot point with how many taxable components going into those jet chunks could be impacted by the tariff before the US government procures the finished good. The resulting cost overrun is part of the grift.
You do not negotiate with terrorists... Wait, what?