That’s generally how tariffs work. A tariff on grain is not a tariff on bread. A tariff on steel is not a tariff on knives. A tariff on cotton is not a tariff on clothing.
It can be, of course. A tariff can be on steel and items made with steel. But that’s not usually the case, and it’s usually called out as such. Of course, Trump is not what you’d call the most precise communicator in the world, but all we can do is work with what he says.
Right, but this tariff, at least as I understand it, is on chips imported as chips, not on products that contain chips. An iPhone will, of course, be subject to some other damn fool tariff, but not this specific one.
Of course, my understanding of this specific tariff may be wrong.
What he means is, if I buy an iPhone built in China, this tariff won’t affect the price I pay.
But if I buy a phone built in America, with an imported processer, this tariff will make that phone more expensive.
This is the way.
Sure they can write laws making it illegal to claim the king of Thailand is a doddering old fool anywhere in the world. Good for them.
They have no legal right to enforce it on me, though. If I visit their country, of course, I will be subject to their laws. But they can’t apply it to me until then.
They can write whatever they like, but in practical terms, they can only enforce their laws inside their borders.
No European law applies outside Europe. That’s kind of the nature of laws.
Back when I lived in N. Carolina, there was a local brand called “Dr. Enuff.” Loved that stuff.
On earth? No, not by a long shot. We would need to get into the deconstructing planets business.
Context is as important to language as syntax.
Context is important to the message, yes. But if I need the context to understand a particular word, I would understand the message just as well without that word.
Yea. Not helpful.
I’m aware of the existence of contranyms. None of the examples you gave apply, as they just have different meanings, or the same leaving with different connotations.
Right, that’s “speaking figuratively.” There are rules for that.
But a word that means the opposite of what it means is not a useful word.
I’d hate to find a box in my lab marked “inflammable.”
I love me some Stratigo.
Because we don’t want them doing surge pricing.
Is there some reason we want brands to join the conversation?
Information flow can never go backwards. There’s plenty of examples of reporters or even social media compromising military operations. In at least a few cases, it has lead to the destruction of military assets. Once broadcast, the damage is done.
Trying to force reporters to think hard about what they are broadcasting is a good thing, from the point of view of national defence.
Is it normal to allow people to send military information to your enemy?
I’m not a huge fan of either of the two belligerent, but this is not exactly an unreasonable position to take. And they are at least putting reporters on notice.
I picked it up from an episode of Deep Space Nine. Good times.
Packaging, no. But manufacturing it into something else, yes.
Do you think a tariff on copper would apply to an iPhone? Or a tariff on oil?