Trump to raise tariffs to 60% on all Chinese goods if elected
theregister.com
theregister.com
Since virtually everyone (individuals as well as businesses) in the USA is a consumer of imported goods, everyone will be subjected to a massive tax increase.
The only clear winner in this 19th century approach to economics is government --- and even this is questionable over time. Simple minded solutions for simple minded folks.
He was referring to Brazil and Bolsonaro, but the sentiment is just about the same.
Tariffs in general might but what you have now is just more expensive stuff, so fewer sales. People importing materials and putting them together in the US simple make less profit.
Apparently people making stuff and/or using immigrant labour are planning accordingly and taking immediate action. I.e. panic buys, layoffs etc.
> During his first presidency Trump instituted a limited number of extra tariffs, chiefly against China. Upon taking office, President Joe Biden kept them in place and even extended them. But what's different about these new proposals is that they are rising across the board by up to 20 percent, or so it has been said on the campaign trail.
and also: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/10/us/politics/us-biden-chin...
At some point the cycle needs to be broken. I'm not advocating such proposals (as Trump's). I am championing the idea that the current status quo is sociopolitically unsustainable and that critics need to do better than "no" as the answer to any change. We can't keep doing insanity.
That's textbook insanity. We can't say we're pro-change and then shoot down anything that commits to change. Sure, Trump is likely wrong. But "no don't do THAT" is not actionable. It's not a viable alternative. It's the experts not wznted to stick a pin in the reality they created.
When does it stop cause the current sociopolitical environment is not sustainable.
Vote for this discredited economic genius and it will be proven in the most harsh way possible.
The best hope for his stated plan is that it is just another lie designed to entice simple minded voters desperate for any change, even a bad one.
So again, I'll ask: What should we do then? The status quo is broken. "No, not THAT" is not an actionable solution.
Furthermore, I'll add the last time Trump kicked off similar "anti China" economic actions we were assured *by the experts* that complete doom was imminent. That didn't happen. I agree 100%, he's no economic genius. The problem is, nor is anyone else (tho they'd like us to believe otherwise).
A similar question I love to asked is: "Ok. He's a schmuck. But how did we get here? And who is responsible and accountable to that?" I *never* get an answer. Why? Because the loudest anti-Trump / pro status quo voices are typically the most responsible for his rise. They're not going to openly admit their guilt so they play the distraction card.
The rule of thumb is simple: The Opportunist does not create The Opportunity.
No? Ever hear of inflation?
25% tariffs on Chinese goods helped promote it. The plan being proposed now is to tariff *everything*.
This can only kick inflation into high gear. Considering that the USA imports *a lot*, this will most likely trigger a recession for the world's most successful economy.
What should we do then?
Doing "anything" is an act of desperation --- and not necessarily better than doing nothing.
Not shooting ourselves in the foot for no good reason would be a better start.
Yes, agreed. There are people who feel desperate and want something done. Doing nothing is what got us Trump. How is more of the same going to fix that? Hint: It didn't and it's not. And here we are again faced with the prospect of Trump.
The opportunist didn't create the opportunity. Keep that in mind as you look for those who are responsible for all this. What has changed for the better since Trump showed up?
I'm sorry --- how about a massive new consumption tax? Feel better now?
This is the gist of Trump's economic plan. Only an idiot would consider this a "solution".
Economic "sabotage" would be a more accurate description.
Second: Even if things are bad, they are not so bad that they can't be made much worse. It's easier to not make a dumb move than it is to make a smart one. We may not know how to make things better, but at least let's not make things worse. "We have to do something, X is something, therefore we have to do X" is extremely poor reasoning. No, if things are bad, we have to do something that will actually help.
Saying "I don't actually believe this, but lots of people do, so we should take it seriously" doesn't serve any purpose.
For example, "the experts". They got us here, and here isn't sustainable. It's insanity to keep pushing "the experts" when they got us here. Where is their accountability? Where are their fixes? Economic decisions don't exist outside the sociopolitical systems they impact. Economic theory isn't reality.
Again. Not my opinion. Just the facts mamam.
Call them opinions if that helps you, but "my facts" spoke this morning.
"No... Because the experts..." is weak at best. "No... But what might help correct things..." is all that should be acceptable.
The arc of my point is, ppl completely discount how we got here. No retros. Just repeating the same foolishness, because it's comfortable (?). That comfort isn't helping. It's time to get comfortable with being uncomfortable.
But it sure seems you're looking favorably towards idiotic policies simply because they're different.
Just because the experts should be challenged doesn't mean Trump is right. The sociopolitical status quo is unsustainable. Going back to the same well championing the same ideas is insane.
It is, unfortunately, an argument that does appear to appeal to a lot of people. We saw this with Brexit, for instance; a surprising number of people, after the fact, claimed to have voted for Brexit not because they thought it would be good, per se, but because they thought _any_ change, even a change for the worse, would be better than the status quo.