Mothra said:
Redbrickbear said:
Frank Galvin said:
Redbrickbear said:
ATL Bear said:
whiterock said:
Redbrickbear said:
whiterock said:
Mothra said:
whiterock said:
Robert Wilson said:
Mothra said:
boognish_bear said:
Not sure if this is accurate across the board or not… Comments seemed to indicate so
So, when I first saw the list, I thought it was actually a reciprocal tariff based on the tariffs imposed by other countries, and I thought it might not be so bad.
However, if this is truly the formula Trump used - which is based apparently on trade deficits - this is not a reciprocal tariff but instead a tariff that tries to get manufacturing to come back to the US - something that is likely never gonna happen in any large numbers.
In short, the Trump admin is misleading the American people by labeling this a reciprocal tariff. That's just a wholly false statement.
Such an entirely ridiculous and unnecessary move, and it's going to come back to bite him. Kiss the midterms goodbye. We are going to lose the House and the Senate. So dumb.
I hope Republicans who didn't skip Economics 101 will block this deal.
I'm with you. I could get on board with reciprocal tariffs. If we are instead enacting huge one sided tariffs just to counteract trade deficits, that's insane.
muddled thinking. the purpose of tariffs is to address a trade deficit, which will benefit domestic manufacturers and jobs. Whether they are reciprocal or not depends on the nature of the abuse happening, e.g. look at the way China relocates production & transshipments to avoid existing trade restrictions. This is particularly true when it comes to trade subsidies (which many countries do) and non-tariff barriers to trade like the EU VAT.
if you are going to pick this fight you have to smack hard coming out of the gate, to effectively deny entry to our market unless concessions are made. Your opponent, who has investments in an existing supply chain has to make hard decisions about whether he is going to abandon the supply chain or open up his own market to your goods. Sure, the wealthier countries will have at least theoretical options to consider, but it will take years for them to restructure and in the meantime they will incur more damage to their economy than they will inflict on ours (by virtue of having a trade surplus with us).
our position is quite strong and concessions from trade partners are a matter of when not if.
So, in other words, this is about damaging other countries' economies more than helping our own. It will take years to change supply chain and manufacturing base, but at least over the course of the next two years we can damage their economies worse than they can damage ours. In the meantime, the American people take it in the shorts.
Such a silly strategy.
The silliest strategy of all is doing nothing and accepting the status quo, which is what you are advocating.
There are a lot of people in American who see nothing wrong with the status quo
They walk out of their expensive homes in their expensive neighborhoods and see nothing wrong with the current spoils system or how the economic pie is divided up
They are going to learn (by the ballot box or the bullet) how wrong they are
The red light is flashing...and the American electorate is signaling (potentially dangerously) revolutionary impulses
[America's newly elected president may be a demagogue and a populist, but what he is above all is a revolutionary.
In hoping to make America great again, Donald Trump promises to introduce a fundamental, comprehensive and rapid transformation of American political, economic, social and cultural institutions. Such a massive change is what we mean by the term "revolution."]
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4976570-america-has-elected-a-revolutionary-will-he-succeed/
The aversion to tariffs is a foremost luxury belief of the upper classes. THEIR careers are not impacted by a flood of cheap foreign goods……
You simpletons are absolute economic idiots. Making the working and middle class pay for their own economic demise through higher prices is one of the most evil ironies I've ever heard of.
Their economic demise was the closing down of 60,000 factories and the importing in of 40-50 million 3rd worlders to work for semi-slave wages
What multi-million dollar home in Highland Park are you posting from to be this blind to the economic realities of modern America.
Get out of the Texas Triangle and drive through America sometime
[U.S. manufacturing employment plummeted by one-third, and 60,000 U.S. factories were closed, just between 1995 and 2010]
I am guessing that "ATL Bear" doesn't live near Highland Park.
There is an absolute myth that America's lower and middle classes (economically speaking) are suffering like never before. Access to medical care, the safety net, and ease of life have never been higher. We have severe challenges, but of the scores of billions of human souls that ever existed, almost all of them would prefer to have lived in America, circa 2025.
Success in America requires education, ambition, hard work, and a responsible lifestyle. If you have and do those things, you almost certainly will have a great life. It is not my grandfather's economy or even my father's economy. But it is still a great place to live. I wish we would quit pretending otherwise.
The USA is a great place to live…I would never argue other wise
And yet at the same time it's middle and lower classes are feeling squeezed like never before…
Have you not notice the political tensions we are living under? Politico described it as "pre-revolutionary"
The middle and lower classes are voting consistently for the most outsider candidates they can find and the ones offering "change"
They are signaling with a flashing red light that they are highly discontented with the present economic arrangement.
And it does not matter that you seem to think they are just not working hard enough…
And you believe that bringing more manufacturing back to the US is going to solve all of these issues?
Solve all issues? No, you can never solve all probelms
But you can help bring back good paying jobs.....and good paying jobs help to stabilize society and stabilize communities (especially among the working and middle class)
That in turn makes everything a little easier....politics, social issues, interpersonal relationships.
Imagine tomorrow if you lost your job and could not get another....imagine if everyone you know in the Woodlands (assuming you live there) could also not find a job. What kind of effect would that have on your mental situation and on the mental situation of your family, friends, and community?
2nd and 3rd order effects and all........every real conservative should be able to understand that
[Since 1989,
the tragedy of Flint's decline has been repeated in a number of Midwestern cities plagued with shrinking populations, opiate addiction, joblessness, and a pervasive feeling of hopelessness. Flint and nearby Detroit remain the worst-case scenarios of once-proud, unionized, and solidly middle class "motor cities" that have fallen into ruin. After the 2008 crisis, both had their local authority stripped away by the state of Michigan, with emergency managers replacing municipal governments. In Flint, the emergency manager terminated a water contract with the city of Detroit, preferring to draw water from the polluted Flint River and send it down aging pipes to city residents,
42 percent of whom live below the federal poverty line. [
Once a thriving industrial city of nearly a quarter million people, with most residents' employment tied in some way to automobile manufacturing, Flint's population has dwindled to less than 100,000 in the aftermath of auto plant closures during the 1980s. The city has demolished over 5,000 abandoned houses in the last decade. Today, not one grocery store exists within the city.]
[General Motors was at its peak with around 85,000 employees in the 1980s, according to David White, Genesee Historical Society President....
About 90 percent of Flint's wage, salary and shareholder earnings were estimated to come from local General Motors products in 1950, according to MLive-The Flint Journal archives.
Flint's population boomed from 13,000 to more than 156,000 residents between 1900 and 1930 - a 1,000 percent gain and 17-times the national growth in population, according to MLive-The Flint Journal archives.
The city's population continued to climb and peaked at about 200,000 in the 1960s]
https://brightthemag.com/the-fall-of-flint-e74aded576d9
