4 ms·

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is and take a bet saying that in exactly one year, a significant number of these $2.5 billion of contracts will have

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is and take a bet saying that in exactly one year, a significant number of these $2.5 billion of contracts will have miraculously found a way to happen.

root_axis 8y ago
I don't necessarily think you're wrong, I am more addressing your rhetoric that suggests your informed opinion invalidates the story, especially because the anecdotes you present are examples of companies deliberately lying to the media for their own personal gain. Yet the problem is the media... FTA: President Donald Trump’s tariff on imported solar panels has led U.S. renewable energy companies to cancel or freeze investments of more than $2.5 billion in large installation projects, along with thousands of jobs, the developers told Reuters. So are the developers lying? Maybe... but it's still totally legitimate to report that this claim was made. Some things you just have to take at face value because you're not privy to secret boardroom meetings where plans to deceive the public for profit are conceived. Here is another article from another publication about a different tariff story. http://thehill.com/policy/finance/391185-three-arkansas-companies-say-theyll-close-if-trump-doesnt-give-them-exemption http://thehill.com/policy/finance/391185-three-arkansas-comp... Based on the reasoning you presented in your OP (pre-edit), I should just assume that they're lying and are really just appealing to Trump's ego in order to maximize profits. Right? In either case the media can't really know the truth so they just report it and maybe spin the story to one side based on readership.
- jeremyt 8y ago
  Well, I guess you can take that position. I take the position that what the media reports isn't true, or at least it's some sort of propaganda and I look for who's benefiting from the information, unless I see evidence to the contrary. Regarding the news article you linked, it looks to me like those three companies are indeed running a PR campaign to pressure the administration to give them a deal.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    The media is reporting the claim; to reflexively disbelieve the claim because the media is reporting it does not follow logically. Somehow I doubt you'd be bashing the media in your comment if the story delivered propaganda (your words) that supported a position that you agree with.

I am willing to put my money where my mouth is and take a bet saying that in exactly one year, a significant number of these $2.5 billion of contracts will have miraculously found a way to happen.

root_axis 8y ago

I don't necessarily think you're wrong, I am more addressing your rhetoric that suggests your informed opinion invalidates the story, especially because the anecdotes you present are examples of companies deliberately lying to the media for their own personal gain. Yet the problem is the media... FTA: President Donald Trump’s tariff on imported solar panels has led U.S. renewable energy companies to cancel or freeze investments of more than $2.5 billion in large installation projects, along with thousands of jobs, the developers told Reuters. So are the developers lying? Maybe... but it's still totally legitimate to report that this claim was made. Some things you just have to take at face value because you're not privy to secret boardroom meetings where plans to deceive the public for profit are conceived. Here is another article from another publication about a different tariff story. http://thehill.com/policy/finance/391185-three-arkansas-companies-say-theyll-close-if-trump-doesnt-give-them-exemption http://thehill.com/policy/finance/391185-three-arkansas-comp... Based on the reasoning you presented in your OP (pre-edit), I should just assume that they're lying and are really just appealing to Trump's ego in order to maximize profits. Right? In either case the media can't really know the truth so they just report it and maybe spin the story to one side based on readership.

jeremyt 8y ago
Well, I guess you can take that position. I take the position that what the media reports isn't true, or at least it's some sort of propaganda and I look for who's benefiting from the information, unless I see evidence to the contrary. Regarding the news article you linked, it looks to me like those three companies are indeed running a PR campaign to pressure the administration to give them a deal.
- root_axis 8y ago
  The media is reporting the claim; to reflexively disbelieve the claim because the media is reporting it does not follow logically. Somehow I doubt you'd be bashing the media in your comment if the story delivered propaganda (your words) that supported a position that you agree with.