Page 1 of 71 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 702

Thread: Economic, taxes, and tariffs discussion

  1. #1

    Economic, taxes, and tariffs discussion

    I wish a Trump or tariff supporter could explain the thinking behind the tariffs. I have yet to see a real explanation of what it will achieve and why is it fair to our allies. We had a lot of tariffs already, why it is that these new tariffs have upset the status quo so much? Why didnt Turdeau take the offer of no tariffs on either side? If Trump wants to protect domestic steel and aluminum, couldnt we just subsidize them? Isnt that what europe has long done with Airbus? Maybe chancellor could explain this because I'm really interested in the <del>conservative</del> Trumpian viewpoint. Obviously the media has given me plenty of the liberal viewpoint already...
    Last edited by cardboardbox; 06-26-2018 at 12:06 PM.

  2. #2
    Journeyman TranaGreg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    downtown
    Posts
    4,404
    isn't the theory that by taxing imports it's supposed create a stimulus for domestic manufacturing, and all those shuttered steel plants (and other manufacturing plants) across the mid-west will become economically viable again?

  3. #3
    Welcome to the Big Leagues, Kid Pauly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    2,022
    as far as tariffs on China, it is simply leveling the playing field. China has been imposing huge tariffs on American-made products for decades and we all know how China tends to come up with knockoff versions of American made products by stealing intellectual property.

    I can see why some think tariffs on all steel, for example, will stimulate both the manufacture and purchase of US steel. The problem is that there simply isnt enough of it right now. I think the idea is to go thru some growing pains while that manufacturing increases.

  4. #4
    Hall of Famer B-Fly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Montclair, NJ
    Posts
    47,557
    You're asking for the conservative position on tariffs, trade and subsidies. As I understand it, the conservative position is pretty much the exact opposite of the Trump Administration's policies.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/31933...are-frank-camp

    True conservative economic policy would say that government intervention in the form of tariffs and/or subsidies are anti-free-market and that anti-free-market is ultimately bad.

    If I understand the Trump position correctly, giving it its most favorable sheen from a conservative free market perspective, he's basically saying that our trading partners are engaged in interventions including tariffs and subsidies that have been hurting the US, and that his tariffs are retaliatory and aimed at forcing them to deal with us and remove the barriers they've placed on free trade to our detriment. If that is, in fact, Trump's game, then presumably all of the tariffs he's imposing are just temporary leverage to compel our trading partners to drop their interventions, at which time we'd presumably drop ours as well, restoring equitable free trade.

    Ultimately, however, I'm not sure I believe Trump has any real intention of promoting free trade and free markets. I think he's looking to shore up support with blue collar American workers who feel like they've been hurt by free trade. Promoting tariffs and/or subsidies in an effort to sustain American businesses and American jobs isn't remotely conservative economic policy in any historical sense, but Trump has decided that it's good politics for him in connection with his grand unifying political ethos - rabid nationalism. Before Bill Clinton, the things Trump is doing on trade would have been associated with the Democratic Party and its promotion of issues on behalf of organized labor, farm subsidies, etc. Bernie Sanders brought skepticism of free trade to his 2016 campaign as well, although with a different tone than Trump's nationalism (America First; we don't win anymore; other countries are laughing at us for letting them take advantage of us)

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by B-Fly View Post
    You're asking for the conservative position on tariffs, trade and subsidies. As I understand it, the conservative position is pretty much the exact opposite of the Trump Administration's policies.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/31933...are-frank-camp

    True conservative economic policy would say that government intervention in the form of tariffs and/or subsidies are anti-free-market and that anti-free-market is ultimately bad.

    If I understand the Trump position correctly, giving it its most favorable sheen from a conservative free market perspective, he's basically saying that our trading partners are engaged in interventions including tariffs and subsidies that have been hurting the US, and that his tariffs are retaliatory and aimed at forcing them to deal with us and remove the barriers they've placed on free trade to our detriment. If that is, in fact, Trump's game, then presumably all of the tariffs he's imposing are just temporary leverage to compel our trading partners to drop their interventions, at which time we'd presumably drop ours as well, restoring equitable free trade.

    Ultimately, however, I'm not sure I believe Trump has any real intention of promoting free trade and free markets. I think he's looking to shore up support with blue collar American workers who feel like they've been hurt by free trade. Promoting tariffs and/or subsidies in an effort to sustain American businesses and American jobs isn't remotely conservative economic policy in any historical sense, but Trump has decided that it's good politics for him in connection with his grand unifying political ethos - rabid nationalism. Before Bill Clinton, the things Trump is doing on trade would have been associated with the Democratic Party and its promotion of issues on behalf of organized labor, farm subsidies, etc. Bernie Sanders brought skepticism of free trade to his 2016 campaign as well, although with a different tone than Trump's nationalism (America First; we don't win anymore; other countries are laughing at us for letting them take advantage of us)
    you are right, I'm not asking for the conservative position, will edit my post to clarify.

    Thanks for trying to explain the Trump position. Do you know if tariffs between us and Canada and our EU allies was about even before Trump? If they had more tariffs than we had then I dont see how they could complain.

  6. #6
    Big Leaguer senorsheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Rocky Mountain Way
    Posts
    3,272
    Quote Originally Posted by B-Fly View Post
    You're asking for the conservative position on tariffs, trade and subsidies. As I understand it, the conservative position is pretty much the exact opposite of the Trump Administration's policies.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/31933...are-frank-camp

    True conservative economic policy would say that government intervention in the form of tariffs and/or subsidies are anti-free-market and that anti-free-market is ultimately bad.

    If I understand the Trump position correctly, giving it its most favorable sheen from a conservative free market perspective, he's basically saying that our trading partners are engaged in interventions including tariffs and subsidies that have been hurting the US, and that his tariffs are retaliatory and aimed at forcing them to deal with us and remove the barriers they've placed on free trade to our detriment. If that is, in fact, Trump's game, then presumably all of the tariffs he's imposing are just temporary leverage to compel our trading partners to drop their interventions, at which time we'd presumably drop ours as well, restoring equitable free trade.

    Ultimately, however, I'm not sure I believe Trump has any real intention of promoting free trade and free markets. I think he's looking to shore up support with blue collar American workers who feel like they've been hurt by free trade. Promoting tariffs and/or subsidies in an effort to sustain American businesses and American jobs isn't remotely conservative economic policy in any historical sense, but Trump has decided that it's good politics for him in connection with his grand unifying political ethos - rabid nationalism. Before Bill Clinton, the things Trump is doing on trade would have been associated with the Democratic Party and its promotion of issues on behalf of organized labor, farm subsidies, etc. Bernie Sanders brought skepticism of free trade to his 2016 campaign as well, although with a different tone than Trump's nationalism (America First; we don't win anymore; other countries are laughing at us for letting them take advantage of us)
    I agree with all of this. I don't think he has significant support for this from any quarter, including his own party. As such, I'm guessing he'll wrangle some insignificant concessions from our trade partners, declare victory, and then back off of this very bad idea. At least I hope so - that's the best possible outcome at this point.
    "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
    "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
    "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by senorsheep View Post
    I agree with all of this. I don't think he has significant support for this from any quarter, including his own party. As such, I'm guessing he'll wrangle some insignificant concessions from our trade partners, declare victory, and then back off of this very bad idea. At least I hope so - that's the best possible outcome at this point.
    when has Trump ever backed off anything? But yes, this would be one of the better outcomes.

    Even better would be congress maybe doing something for once and taking away tariff power from the president.

  8. #8
    Big Leaguer senorsheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Rocky Mountain Way
    Posts
    3,272
    Quote Originally Posted by cardboardbox View Post
    when has Trump ever backed off anything? But yes, this would be one of the better outcomes.
    Separating families at the border, most recently. I think he can be swayed from his positions when his own party turns on him, and I don't think Republicans are going to have much patience for this as more American businesses get caught in the crossfire.
    "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
    "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
    "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."

  9. #9
    Welcome to the Big Leagues, Kid In the Corn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Minneapolis...close to Hornsby
    Posts
    1,575
    My neighbor works in the steel industry, and I was talking with him over the weekend. He has talking about the tariffs and what it has created in his business. His territory includes Canada. He told me that his Canadian clients are clamoring for order to be filled before the tariff starts in July. His America clients are also after him for steel. He's told the Canadian clients that they are backlogged in supply by about 3 months, so there is little chance to meet the inventory needs before the tariff starts in July.

    He said, "I went into my boss and said, 'You might as well call the CEO in right now and have him make a statement about how we're going to handle this. Because we are going to take in the shorts if we can't meet the Canadian demand. We're gonna wind up paying the tariff ourselves to keep the client."
    "Looks like I picked a bad day to give up sniffing glue.
    - Steven McCrosky (Lloyd Bridges) in Airplane

    i have epiphanies like that all the time. for example i was watching a basketball game today and realized pom poms are like a pair of tits. there's 2 of them. they're round. they shake. women play with them. thus instead of having two, cheerleaders have four boobs.
    - nullnor, speaking on immigration law in AZ.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by senorsheep View Post
    Separating families at the border, most recently. I think he can be swayed from his positions when his own party turns on him, and I don't think Republicans are going to have much patience for this as more American businesses get caught in the crossfire.
    I feel like the separating families issue is a bit different but cant figure out exactly how to put it into words at the moment. Trade imbalance and protecting our industry was a campaign promise that I dont think he will back down from. Separating families was a mistake made as he was trying to fulfill the illegal immigration campaign promise. I believe Trump will regroup and take another pass at immigration later. I guess I'm trying to say I dont think he backs down easily from what he really believes in and I dont think he really wanted to separate families.

    ugh, its too early to be trying to figure out what goes on in Trump's head. I'm probably not making much sense.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •