Tariffs

[Troglodyte]

Nope, not a coincidence at all when Orange Man Bad.
Someone told me earlier today that you can't trust information from the internets, so your source is invalid.

There’s a difference between multiple news outlets reporting something and seeing something on social media and accepting it as fact. Unless you don’t care about facts.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

There’s a difference between multiple news outlets reporting something and seeing something on social media and accepting it as fact. Unless you don’t care about facts.

We've seen enough times that "multiple news outlets" coordinate their news releases with the DNC and repeat the same talking points verbatim.
It's embarrassing actually.
Exhibit A: Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation.
Unless you don't care about facts.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Democrats and the media are not worried that these tariffs will not work.
They are worried that they will.

Once everyone realizes this, it all makes sense.

Yeah, because down the road we're back to pre-1913 when the government got most of its tax revenue from tariffs and there was no income tax.
When America had its greatest growth in the economy and population.
The Industrial Revolution I think it was called.

 

[oneforthebus]

Yeah, because down the road we're back to pre-1913 when the government got most of its tax revenue from tariffs and there was no income tax.
When America had its greatest growth in the economy and population.
The Industrial Revolution I think it was called.

So are the tariffs a permanent source of revenue and attempt to bring manufacturing back to the US? Or a bargaining chip that will be dropped once other countries get in line and drop theirs? The goal posts seem to move daily.

 

[xjx]

Bargaining chips.

I remember an Audi high rank official saying he would sell trucks in the US if he could sell them for $90000. Well, now you can.

 

[Hypocycloids]

There’s a difference between multiple news outlets reporting something and seeing something on social media and accepting it as fact. Unless you don’t care about facts.

No not really.
These news outlets are being instructed on what to say. You place your trust into something no better than social media.



Here’s an example in relation to a topic you know so much about.

 

[Troglodyte]

No not really.
These news outlets are being instructed on what to say. You place your trust into something no better than social media.



Here’s an example in relation to a topic you know so much about.

Oh please! Tucker Carlson literally argued in court that no reasonable person would take him seriously.

 

[Troglodyte]

Bargaining chips.

I remember an Audi high rank official saying he would sell trucks in the US if he could sell them for $90000. Well, now you can.

What? Audi truck? Audi’s been selling cars in the US for almost 60 years and Volkswagen before that. Most of them are less than $90,000.

 

[MT~Forged]

Despite the problems, America is nothing like a third world country. Come on, dude.

We get closer every year by following the same policies that have been in place for decades.

The US has the strongest consumer market in the world, and only the Chinese export more than we do, and not by as much as you probably think.

This may be true, but the reverse is not. China bans imports of American products to protect their domestic sales. These are the type of barriers that Trump is trying to address to make things actually fair.

Remember when Trump's tax cuts added to the budget deficit even before the pandemic? Good times.

Trump’s tax cuts did what they were supposed to do, incentivize investment in American businesses and repatriate off shore money. The issue is that CONGRESS did NOT do anything to reduce spending.

We spend too much? You don't say.

Yep, and has been mentioned, for stupid stuff

Revenues are at an all time higher because GDP is at all time high. It doesn't mean revenues couldn't or shouldn't be even higher with better tax policy.

What is your suggestion for a “better” tax policy?

Again, we're the second largest exporter in the world, and it's not all commodities.

We can always use more industry, but things are not so dire that the whole system needs to be torn down. Not even close.

I think saying he wants to tear it all down is a huge stretch

"Needs" maybe, but not our current levels of overall consumption.

We would have to reduce our consumption and ration certain things to get by strictly on domestic consumption.

Some people do need to have their consumption rationed

If Trump was as convinced about this country heading toward destruction with tariffs being the solution as you are, he'd be maintaining the tariffs he set instead of pausing and reducing them.

Your implication is that he is sole intention is to use tariffs for income only. Maybe that is his plan, but it appears that he is using them as bargaining chips. If they were only for revenue, you would set them and move on. If they are bargaining chips, you pause them when you get a country to the table as a show of good faith. During negotiations you can then unpause them if you need to.

Wage growth is the highest it's been in around 20 years. Housing costs are hurting the middle class more than anything right now.

A large amount of the wage growth has been FORCED on businesses, not because they were more productive allowing wages to increase.
As far as housing costs, there are many issues at play here.
1. Building trades have been vilified as poor career paths
2. Massive purchasing of housing by private equity firms to force renting
3. Reluctance to build more affordable single family homes to protect the rental markets
4. Government red tape and barriers to building homes
5. Etc

These tariffs and the cutting of foreign aid programs are not going to do **** to address the budget deficit. Any revenue collected by the tariffs will be offset by lower growth in the economy.

Not necessarily true. Reduced import sales in sectors that have domestic competition will allow for increased domestic production.

We'll be fortunate if Trump doesn't leave office with a higher deficit than he inherited, as that would imply we avoided a recession in the meantime.

This isn’t really something that he can control as CONGRESS will still vote to spend more money that we don’t have. The ONLY cuts that are being made are through DOGE exposures.

 

[Troglodyte]

 

[Troglodyte]

 

[DBS1970]

There’s a difference between multiple news outlets reporting something and seeing something on social media and accepting it as fact. Unless you don’t care about facts.

Cough, cough, Operation Mockingbird, cough, cough...

 

[Ron Burgundy]

So are the tariffs a permanent source of revenue and attempt to bring manufacturing back to the US? Or a bargaining chip that will be dropped once other countries get in line and drop theirs? The goal posts seem to move daily.

Bargaining chip. Congress, even if it's run by the Pubbies, will never agree to eliminate the income tax. It's a big part of where they get their influence and donations.

 

[Confluence]

There’s a difference between multiple news outlets reporting something and seeing something on social media and accepting it as fact. Unless you don’t care about facts.

what matters more is who pays for that reporting, because that payers defines the type of news reports.

How do you not understand this?

 

[Confluence]

I do not know who that man is, but what he said is true

 

[ZonaBurgh]

So are the tariffs a permanent source of revenue and attempt to bring manufacturing back to the US? Or a bargaining chip that will be dropped once other countries get in line and drop theirs? The goal posts seem to move daily.

White House switchboard: 202-456-1414. But to answer your question, yes, definitely.

 

[Troglodyte]

what matters more is who pays for that reporting, because that payers defines the type of news reports.

How do you not understand this?

How do you not understand that she is required to submit a financial holdings document reporting the trades? Are you suggesting that multiple news outlets made up a story that could easily be refuted and she just hasn’t bothered to do so? She has declined comment. Strange.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

what matters more is who pays for that reporting, because that payers defines the type of news reports.

How do you not understand this?

Rhetorical question?

 

[DBS1970]

If you think this was a coincidence, I have a wonderful bridge to sell you.

https://apnews.com/article/greene-stocks-conflicts-interest-restoration-hardware-tariffs-trump-f9922a970c837cb76dd8ddc01f20f51d

Oh no MTG bought the dip like everyone else with the money to do so....

 

[MT~Forged]

Oh no MTG bought the dip like everyone else with the money to do so....

Yes we did, though my purchase wasn’t much in comparison. But it did feel good to be part of the club

 

[Troglodyte]

 

[Superman]

How do you not understand that she is required to submit a financial holdings document reporting the trades? Are you suggesting that multiple news outlets made up a story that could easily be refuted and she just hasn’t bothered to do so? She has declined comment. Strange.

 

[oneforthebus]

Zona was making light of the doom-and-gloom pronouncements stemming from the stock market's yo-yo act the past month. Morons cite the loss as to the number of points the Dow fell and announce those as "the biggest ever," which is a complete joke. The measure should be percentage loss, preferably over a relevant time frame. But using daily changes, fine. The biggest single-day losses in Dow history are:

​

1	1987-10-19	1,738.74	−508.00	−22.61
2	2020-03-16	20,188.52	−2,997.10	−12.93
3	1929-10-28	260.64	−38.33	−12.82
4	1929-10-29	230.07	−30.57	−11.73
5	2020-03-12	21,200.62	−2,352.60	−9.99
6	1929-11-06	232.13	−25.55	−9.92
7	1899-12-18	58.27	−5.57	−8.72
8	1932-08-12	63.11	−5.79	−8.40
9	1907-03-14	76.23	−6.89	−8.29
10	1987-10-26	1,793.93	−156.83	−8.04
11	2008-10-15	8,577.91	−733.08	−7.87
12	1933-07-21	88.71	−7.55	−7.84
13	2020-03-09	23,851.02	−2,013.76	−7.79
14	1937-10-18	125.73	−10.57	−7.75
15	2008-12-01	8,149.09	−679.95	−7.70
16	2008-10-09	8,579.19	−678.91	−7.33
17	1917-02-01	88.52	−6.91	−7.24
18	1997-10-27	7,161.14	−554.26	−7.18
19	1932-10-05	66.07	−5.09	−7.15
20	2001-09-17	8,920.70	−684.81	−7.13

​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_daily_changes_in_the_Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average

Three of the biggest loss days were Covid-related of course, the most in a single day the famous October 1987 crash, and then the 1929 crash.

The recent stock market fluctuations would have been the tip of the iceberg. The slide was halted because the tariffs were paused. What do you think was gonna happen when the price of literally every single consumer product started to go through the roof?

Economists knew it, they made sure Trump knew it, hence the pause and now the "exemptions".

 

[ZonaBurgh]

View attachment 14205

And this is why all the hand wringing and angst by the left leaning media and their pundits is so disingenuous. How can it be insider trading when anyone with an IQ above 80 knew what might happen to the market when the tariffs kicked in initially? You never sell on the down slide but cautiously wait to buy and ride the wave. No one knows how this will all play out, but with the kicking and screaming by the libs, the job will be harder, with every citizen in the country paying the price of the dims defiance. Think how much stronger the position of the US would be if the country supported the efforts by the White House. But no, the country be damned, politics is more important, even if it destroys the country in the process.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

Economists knew it, they made sure Trump knew it, hence the pause and now the "exemptions".

You're proving the point of others that the tariffs are indeed a bargaining chip, with countries willing to negotiate and hence the exemptions.
Do you think Trump may have, in part, issued the exemptions because other countries are willing to talk, while agreeing that it also stopped the panic selling? Will Trump's plan come to fruition, who knows, but it isn't going to be decided in days, weeks, or even months.