And this is key with Trump’s mentality on this. From his business career he’s used to being the “stronger” bully who makes the other party (or even his own other partners on his side of the deal) “eat” the costs/losses. So in his mind if you want to sell in America you WILL “eat” the tariff or just miss out.
Or something like that. I dunno if Trump is confused but listening to him sure confuses me.
If only it wasn’t for those damn childless cat ladies standing in the way of production.
Except he doesn’t understand that they won’t “eat the tariff”. Sure, they’ll pay it, but they do it by passing the cost along to the US end buyer. The sellers maybe lose a few sales due to higher prices, but when it’s a product that Americans can’t get anywhere else, that will likely be a small fraction of sales. But since the sellers aren’t still complaining about it, Trump thinks he’s won. He never looks past the superficial.
I’m sure that Trump, at some time, has accused his opponent(s) of being Fascists and antifa in the same breath. I haven’t actually seen/heard this, but I’ve never tried to hunt such an utterance down. (For those who don’t get it, antifa is a contraction of “anti-Fascist”.)
I like to troll my MAGA friends on Facebook on June 6th by posting that famous pic of the troops wading ashore in Normandy and commenting: “Antifa on their way to confront some White Supremacists.”
The other possibility is that tariffs will raise the price on imported goods to the point that manufacturing them in the U.S. will become competitive, and lead to more jobs. Which would probably mean importing more raw materials to support that manufacturing, tariffs on those materials, etc. It’s complicated.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised for Trump to claim all the benefits simultaneously; we’ll raise trillions from tariffs on things that we no longer import because they’re made here.
And that’s why Trump doesn’t understand it. All he sees is money coming in, and he can’t figure out where it’s actually coming from.
A rare pleasure for this all-conquering business mogul.
No, it isn’t.
A) Tariffs are a tax increasing the cost of imported goods.
B) Which is passed along to consumers, increasing the price of imported goods.
C) Which makes domestic goods more competitive.
Which is the purpose of tariffs.
Three steps, A-B-C. Not complicated. If you dig down to the fine points of exactly what proportion of the tariff is passed along, what proportion is lost, what the exact dynamics of foreign vs domestic production becomes, and incorporate the impact on our logistics industry, and the time it takes domestic production to ramp up, sure it gets complex.
Trump doesn’t understand the ABC, doesn’t understand tariffs at the high school economics level. Saying it’s complicated suggests that rank and file voters can’t understand it, they can, and they should.
I hope Harris eats his lunch over this issue, you’re concerned about inflation? the price of things? wait until THIS GUY slaps a trillion dollar tax on half the stuff Walmart sells, so his rich buddies and donors can get an income tax cut.
That, Walmart’s profitability, is the reason this (along with significant cuts to SNAP) ain’t gonna happen.
trumps Schrodinger’s Mexican- simultaneously being too lazy to work AND stealing all our jobs. 
Especially “black jobs”. 
That last step there is where the issues are- becuase sometimes there are no domestic goods, and what is the definition of a domestic good? A Honda made in America? A Toyota assembled in American from parts made in Mexico?
It isnt really simple at all.
Remember- inflation and the National debt are always and only the Democrats fault.
Yes it is. The basics of tariffs are simple because the basics of anything are simple. The full consequences, which other countries will retaliate with tariffs of their own, how much prices will rise, and how much manufacturing will relocate, are a whole lot harder to figure out. That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t try to figure things out, and decide if tariffs are “good” or “bad”.
Tariffs are good because they create an incentive to smuggling, which benefits the mafia, who are his friends. And don’t forget: he is the smuggest of them all.
A debate between two competent people about the pros and cons of a proposed tariff is not simple at all. There are a great many complicating factors to consider.
A presidential candidate suggesting we’re going to rake in trillions with his tariffs on Chinese imports thus enabling universal child care across the country… that is simple. Simply wrong. Tariffs aren’t too complicated for him, he’s misunderstanding tariffs to the point of failing high school intro to economics.
OMG Tariffs are so complicated is a bad take on this issue. Trump wants to replace income tax with tariffs, which is idiotic.
Wouldn’t this work out to be highly regressive? Which is the point – let the working poor and middle class pay for most of government, while the upper class and corporations pretty much skate.
Between that and his plan to rerun to the spoils system (whereby qualified civil servants are replaced with his personal cronies), it would seem that Trump’s America is firmly rooted in the 19th century.
If Trump is elected, don’t be surprised if Pinkertons start busting up worker strikes.
Its also self defeating. As I’ve said in other threads, while conservatives usually point to the Laffer curve in the case of income tax where at the current tax rates it doesn’t apply, it would be a major factor in his plan. In order to bring in the “trillions” of dollars he is promising to replace income tax and eliminate the deficit, he would have to raise tariffs so high that it would make imports prohibitively expensive, cutting them down to near zero, which in turn means would mean that the amount of tax money generated by the tariffs would also go to zero. Meanwhile other countries are likely to retaliate to Trumps tariffs with tariffs of their own. So effectively the US would be cutting itself off from global trade., or in other words we would be self imposing sanctions, like those we punitively apply to countries like North Korea, while bringing in precisely zero dollars in revenue.
“They can’t walk out of their apartments and buy a loaf of bread without getting mugged or wrapped or shot”
“You know, I never— they call it the Democratic Party because it sounds so nice. I call it the Democrat Party. It’s actually the Democrat Party. They ought to change the name. They’re always arguing that. I always call it that. It’s called Democrat Party.”
“They’re going into schools. They’re beating the hell out of our other pupils. We’re giving them chairs and we’re telling families that have had their children in that school you can’t go to that school anymore.”
“The new thing in New York, you go to a pharmacy to buy aspirin, to buy a toothbrush, and it takes you 45 minutes to get a clerk to open up the glass”
“I could stop campaigning… I could tell Lara I don’t have come anywhere anymore”
We’re at the intersection of this thread and another Trump thread. May I just opine about Trump’s economic plan over here by pointing to a post I made over there:
Mostly, yes.