All Activity

But here is the real problem, I dont think these other markets are as accessible or a realistic alternative to the US for several reasons To create new markets you need 3 main things you need functional supply chains you need a trade agreement you need a country that can buy your goods and can absorb what the US buys China is an export driven economy, its the second largest global economy and twice they have been subjected to US tariffs from Trump and yet they still haven't found alternative export markets so they can bypass the US. Why would China continue to export to the US if they could export to other markets? The US is still Chinas biggest export market And then South Africa is part of BRICS and that includes Brazil and India and yet after 15 years we have a massive trade deficit, R270 billion, with BRICS because these countries also protect there own markets. But we have a R37 billion trade surplus with the USA Im not saying its a bad idea to find other markets outside the US, I wish South Africa could do it. Im saying its not that easy or realistic as you seem to think

EU needs to find new export markets because of this deal. For example 70% of Finnish exporting small business companies say that 15% tariffs will remove their ability to work in US market. Only companies that already have production in US say that they are able to continue the trade with the US. So getting 15% instead of 30% is next nothing. Avoiding trade war with US does mainly help the those businesses that don't have competition in US market, so they will not suffer from the tariffs. Other businesses needs to find new customers, because they can't live with profit margins that they get from US trade. Increasing trade with Mexico and Canada would help with exports. India, Brazil, Australia and Argentina would help also with exports, but it would also help with products where we EU has given import quota to US, to move that quota import quota to other countries. Putting tariffs for GOP states would force GOP politician in congress to do some thing or risk billions of dollars worth of trade in their states, as US companies could just continue with 0% tariff trade with EU by moving to democratic state, which would cause internal conflict in US that would make trade war more difficult to run. But anyway this was victory for European nationalist parties, as it showed that EU failed to protect EU's trade and it does not help to say it could have been worst when they failed to get single positive change in their negotiation.

gamebundle files are basically just text / script / code. Inside of them there's code that adds new items et cetera, or they will change what is already in the game. An example, which will probably explain some what you already know, but there's a point at the end of it. Jump to last line in my post for too-long-didnt-read. If I make a mod that changes a specific armor's stats or something, I look up that specific armor's ID number in the game and in my own mod I change the stats Obsidian gave that item. I write my tiny code change in an item.gamedatabundle file and place it in the override \ mod folder for the game. I haven't written anything about any other item or element of the game and thus the only thing my mod will affect is this specific item. If I make another mod for some other item, a weapon or something, and not adding code for any other stuff than this new item, my new mod is perfectly compatible with my first mod. But had I coded anything that would state something else about the same specific armor in my first mod, it would be a conflict of which mod would take precedence, and I must make a choice for which one I want. Now, the point is: The gamedatabundles files can have the same name for the mods, that is no issue at all. It is the code inside them that could potentially be a problem, if they state different things about the same element of the game – items and such. The most common potential clashes, from what I've noticed digging around to learn how to make mods, seems to be that mod makers who make a new item also add their item to a specific merchant in the game – else the item wouldn't be accessible for the player to purchase. But the mod makers copy the list of what the merchant sells and then also places their mod item into that list. If you have two separate item mods that places their new item in the same merchant's inventory, that would clash and only one of the modified lists for the merchant will be used: the one above the other mod in the mod manager. I saw somewhere that you can make a script that just checks what the merchant has in their inventory and then just add the new item to it, which would most likely make two mods altering the same merchant compatible with each other. But that is something that isn't obvious or as direct for most modders, myself included. I would only manage this if I saw an example of it. After this wall of text, finally: read the description for your mods and unless they mention the same item, character, stat, et cetera, you are most likely a 100 % safe.

Is China also a US vassal, they have agreed to 30% tariffs ? I assume it must be if the definition of a US vassal state is negotiating terms around the tariffs?

Just to be clear are you saying the EU should not have made trade concessions with the US like it did and just paid the 30% but it should have also done what you suggesting in this post. So basically a tariff war with the US because that is exactly what tariffs on GOP states would create? And where does the EU find new export markets because these examples seem to be about imports to the EU? Or when you mention Brazil and India do you mean they could replace the US as an export market

Doesn't mean much. It's been going on and off hiatus since before the first anime was announced. We'll see how many chapters we get this time around.

eu doesn't even dare to think about resist to usa how could they take over the global vassal network of usa purely wishful thinking the one they have decent chance to poach are turkey even that would be long and painful

Yeah... there is one way it could work. Rebadge Russian hydrocarbons. Already being done extensively by Azerbaijan, India and Turkey at very least. You know Trump would love to be in on that rort considering how much cash it's making the Aliyev and Erdogan families. (OK, even that would struggle to get to 250bn p/a, but it would get a lot closer)

they should have used their service tax weapon and put high tariffs for targeted products to kill exports from republican controlled states and lowers tariffs for democratic controlled states to cause internal turmoil in USA. Also offer zero tariffs for Mexico and Canada. Make deals with India and Brazil, decrease tariffs for Australian beef. Look deals with Argentina and Vietnam. Offer support for Taiwan, Korea and Japan. Offer massive investment funds for companies that build semiconductor and battery factories in EU. This would lead short term lost but long term independence and better competition on markets. Current deal offers short term stability but long term losses both in European manufacturing and global trade. But clearly EU's leadership is trying to give Trump political wins in order to avoid facing their past idiocies.

What do you think the EU should have done around these tariff negotiations? Is it better to not export to the US and then they dont have to agree to anything Trump says?

Tennis bowling!

Im not concerned with Trump and what he thinks and says on Truth or what people say on SM . These tariffs could backfire on the USA because it could make inflation worse but we wont know that until 9-12 months But that will be a US self-inflicted problem created by Trump and these tariffs Im concerned with the economic reality of getting the best deal for South Africa around US tariffs. We face 30% tariffs so if can negotiate 15% tariffs like the EU or Japan that would be great So any country that can negotiate reduced tariff terms is better than the initial tariff terms

This was bad deal for EU and we will most likely see increase of support of Russia and China among politician and people, as deal does not have single positive change for EU it has only negative impacts compared to current state and it does not even guarantee long term agreement or that USA does not try to blackmail with withdrawing their military support or putting punitive tariffs. I am not sure that this deal will give even USA any clear benefits. Only positive thing that economist can say about deal is that it decreases instability on market, but even that is questionable as US and EU politician don't seem to agree are cars and medicines part of the deal. So at end day deal is bad faith deal and only reason it exists is that it is seen better than market instability, but it will create most likely create much more market chaos in coming years as it almost guarantees win for anti-eu, anti nato and pro russia/china parties in next elections, because it will increase unemployment rates, national debts, cause decrease in tax income. And it will work as example how EU can't even do the main thing why it exits. $600bn (£446bn), including American military equipment, and spend $750bn on energy - this is also empty claim as it does not have any legality, although EU countries were already planning to buy military equipment as part of their plan to increase defense spending and lack of European options. With energy question is very big question mark, as even though some EU countries are planning to buy US gas and oil to replace gas and oil that they have bought from Russia, $750bn is absurd sum, considering that USA capacity to sell LGN is ~4 billion square meters, which is about 1% of gas that EU uses in year. So USA should increase their LGN exports to 10x (current plan is to double export capacity to 2028) what is now and still it would take over 20 years to spent that $750bn (currently EU countries uses 310 billion euros year to buy oil and 90 billion euros to buy gas). this was 2.5% before April, so this is not win for EU carmakers in anyway. Estimated impact for them is massive loss, only compensated by fact that for some reason USA carmakers are currently suffering from higher tariffs, but this will anyway will case decrease of sales.

That's the point @uuuhhii was making. People just promise Trump eleventy billion billion dollars in investments that will never materialize and he agrees to screw over the local automobile companies to sell a quick win now that his base is falling apart over electing a pdf file. Personally I find that rather hilarious - I mean cognitive dissonance or not, people knew who and what Trump is. It is bewildering to see even the QAnon Shaman being weirded out by Trump's handling of the Epstein list and its implications. You're too hung up on the word bribe. Yes, relenting and giving the US meaningless wins so Trump agrees to lower tariffs isn't bribery in the legal sense. Not that anyone in the Trump administration would be stopped by doing something illegal, but one can dream of a world where actions being illegal isn't the stopping point for politicians. There's still an ethical layer that used to sit well above the legal one. Alas, o tempora, o mores.

Its a good question and its an interesting one but its also very complex and nuanced because US debt is not the "simple " debt we know about. Like when anyone borrows from the IMF its easy to understand because the money is owed to the IMF Here is a good link that breaks down the US debt and how its structured https://www.pgpf.org/article/the-federal-government-has-borrowed-trillions-but-who-owns-all-that-debt/ Most of the US debt is owed to various domestic US institutions " At the end of December 2024, the nation’s gross debt totaled $36 trillion. Of that amount, $29 trillion, or 80 percent, was debt held by the public — representing cash borrowed from domestic and foreign investors. The remaining $7 trillion (20 percent) was intragovernmental debt, which simply records transactions between one part of the federal government and another. Domestic holdings of federal debt have increased notably over the past decade, rising from $7.0 trillion in December 2014 to $20.3 trillion at the end of December 2024. The Federal Reserve, which purchases and sells Treasury securities as a means to influence federal interest rates and the nation’s money supply, is the largest holder of such debt." So if the US " collapses " its greatest debt holders are itself So nothing can happen because the bigger problem would be its own collapse Im not sure if Im explaining it properly But that wouldnt be our concern, we all would be dealing with the massive global economic consequence of an economically failed USA. It would make the Great Depression seem like a picnic

I think Im not explaining my point properly or you not understanding it We must separate the objective and advantages of any country exporting goods to the US and then agreeing to US tariffs from the other aspects of these agreements So for example like the Japanese agreement the EU has agreed to the following https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czxpdv5x54ko "It also means EU carmakers will face a 15% US import tax, rather than the 25% global tariff that was introduced in April. But in return the EU is "opening up their countries at zero tariff" to American exports, Trump said. EU steel and aluminium will also continue to face a 50% tariff when sold into the US. For Trump, still feeling the glow from last week's tariffs deal with Japan, the announcement marks another major victory. The EU deal brings with it the expectation of roughly $90bn (£67bn) of tariff revenue for US government coffers – based on last year's trade figures. As part of the agreement the EU will also buy US energy products and arms worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Trump said the EU would boost its investment in the US by $600bn, including American military equipment, and spend $750bn on energy. " Much of this is vague around specifics and you can call it a " bribe " which as I mentioned I wouldnt call it that. And then these other things still have to be negotiated with further supply chains and other contracts This could take years and Trump will be gone in 4 years so who knows if we will ever see " Trump said the EU would boost its investment in the US by $600bn, including American military equipment, and spend $750bn on energy" But tariffs on exports are something that happens almost immediately and is felt almost immediately. There is a massive difference between the EU facing 30% or 15 % So this is also a win for the EU because its primary objective is to continue to export to the US The other alternative to not agreeing to these tariffs is for the EU to find other export markets and ignore the US completely Thats something in South Africa some commentators think is an " obvious " solution to USA tariffs. We should just trade with BRICS or other African countries But obviously thats a solution because we have a trade deficit with BRICS and BRICS countries arent really interested in that changing because it undermines there own domestic economies and most African countries dont have the money to absorb our exports I think you putting much attention on Trumps childish and sensationalized comments around how these agreements are " wins " for him and how he is this incredible negotiator These agreements are fundamentally about one main thing for all the countries cutting deals, they want to export to the US because it benefits there local economies And the likes of China, Japan and the EU have succeeded in that endeavour

Can't believe the nerve of some of these Arbitraitors.

Pretty much, yes. After all, the current CEO and Board of Directors (I.e. the president and congress) is running the ship into the ground full steam ahead and he has a long history of high profile bankruptcies behind him because he lacks business skills. A private company, yeah, sure, the shareholders and the employees suffers alright, but the CEO and board are usually free to start up a new project right away. But when the corporation is a sovereign state, who picks up the pieces?

everyone bounce back from the last great depression eventually the poor will suffer and lost all their property some of the rich will get much richer

Are you just asking what if the amount of debt is so high the likes of the IMF cant provide the money? So if the US collapses how would the $36 trillion get paid back?

What happens if/when a country goes bankrupt? I.e the moment they can no longer service their sovereign debt, what happens then? I remember Sri Lanka, but that one was in such a sorry state anyway that its unlikely anyone noticed and one African country being bailed out by the IMF within the last decade, but if the debt is beyond the means of any single institution, what would happen then?

Good news for those of us who likes the Frieren story. The manga just lefts its hiatus and picked up on the story where it left off (image is the end of chapter 140, chapter 141 has been released). The Foundation Arc, the Shadow Warriors planning to assassinate the head of The Continental Magic Association ("CMA") at a ball in the imperial capital. Back row from left to right is Sein, Stark and Falsch, next row is Fern, Frieren and Sense, all making up a bodyguard for the head of the group, Serie. Most powerful being known in existence (in the setting at least, if there had been such a thing as a scale, she is beyond an order of magnitude more powerful than Frieren) and also the designated target of the Shadow Warriors, an ancient clandestine imperial special forces unit specialized in fighting mages. Not on this image are the last two two people the CMA brought along, featuring at the end of chapter 141, Land and Ubel. The latter looking like the proverbial nuke ready to go off (Ubel is probably more dangerous than a nuke because a nuke follows the laws of physics and logic).

No, not no. Yes. Trump doesn't even notice that the EU just "agreed" to buy more energy from them in the next three years than US companies could feasibly supply, even if there was enough transportation capacity. If US based companies would ramp up oil and gas extraction to meet the demand and transportation capacity would be redirected entirely to trading with the EU, the energy market would collapse. That's not going to happen. The bridge offer's still on the table, by the way. I can see you're interested. C'mon. I know you always wanted a bridge. Obviously that is what Trump thinks he is doing, but nation after nation says these trade "deals" are more like frameworks. Point being, they get a reduction in tariffs - for car imports the EU now joins Japan in having US dealerships pay less tariffs for imports than domestic car manufactures because they still have to pay the regular tariffs on Canda and Mexico. Look at Australia, they "opened" their markets for American beef. Australia doesn't import beef beyond wagyu from Japan. They export beef worth billions and import beef worth millions. Do you really think anyone is going to sell US beef on the Australian market? It's more expensive and of lesser quality than locally sourced beef. Besides, the beef population in the US is at an all-time low, similar to the current situation in the EU where beef prices are exploding due to a lack of cattle. Trump can go home and tell people that he now opened up formerly closed markets for the ranchers and farmers suffering under his killing of USAID to placate them. Markets that aren't going to buy. Just like the Japanese aren't going to buy cars larger than their roads from US companies.

Trigger - eh, another kdrama that falls off at the end. No great story conclusion/sense of satisfaction, just a lot of "what if/would you" ruminations with a small side of hope. Towards the end they were presenting both the anti-gun and sort of NRA-like stances via various methods - there were a few great quotes for both sides in there - along with some "humanity is not logical ...." type stuff. One of its problems was that (I think) it wants to have a heavy anti-gun message, but the format (action/crime thriller) and its showcasing of "people pushed to breaking points" so we can sympathize with a situation that could lead to violence, plus a kind of likable but almost comic-genre super-villain chr, almost glorified guns instead. So it doesn't work for me as some social message. At the least, it's too perfunctory. Be a serious topical drama, or be a fun/exciting crime thriller, pick one and stick to it, that kind of thing. Acting and action good, first few episodes pretty good, show as a whole kinda "meh." Oh and I probably should've mentioned that if anyone is very sensitive to the school violence/shooting issue, one of the side plots, the resolution episode is probably going to be heavily triggering. On the more humorous side, there was one small scene late in the series between two gangsters and their protracted, eventually OTP pistol showdown that was utterly (intentionally) hilarious.

No I cant understand why people are getting so emotional about these tariff agreements? Its all about the benefits to be able to export to the USA because the USA has such a strong consumer driven economy China agreed to worse tariffs compared to the EU, China has 30% tariffs The main point is all these countries want to continue to export to the US because they know this benefits there economies Yes Trump is using the strength of the US domestic economy to pressure countries to agree but obviously it still benefits the likes of the EU, China or Japan or they wouldnt agree to these tariffs