My understanding of what tariffs are supposed to accomplish is raise the cost of foreign goods (which in the case of China are subsidized or use forced labor to keep the prices down) to what domestic goods sell for making it a wash for consumers who will hopefully buy the domestic product instead of the foreign made one.
The tariffs collected go to other parts of the economy such as back to the farmers as was the case during Trump's admin. They do hurt the US consumer initially, but in the long run it helps to stabilize domestic production and keep our dollars at home where they get recycled in the economy. Like producing our own oil rather than importing it from our enemies and the dollars paid out that do not come back. No one has the patience or the will to make this approach work, not to mention the multinational corps who have no interests in conducting business in the interest of a "home" country.
Just to be clear. You are supporting the idea that the government should interject itself into private commerce transactions to raise the price of goods of one (preffered) supplier over the cost of another (unfavored) supplier? and further, it should then redistribute the $s raised by giving them to other private entities as subsidies to encourage/discourage production and further manipulate market prices?
Either he still doesn't know how tariffs work, or he's still lying about it. Seems like most of his minions don't seem to know that tariffs are paid by importers, not exporters, and importers pass those costs on the the (American) consumer.
My understanding of what tariffs are supposed to accomplish is raise the cost of foreign goods (which in the case of China are subsidized or use forced labor to keep the prices down) to what domestic goods sell for making it a wash for consumers who will hopefully buy the domestic product instead of the foreign made one.
The tariffs collected go to other parts of the economy such as back to the farmers as was the case during Trump's admin. They do hurt the US consumer initially, but in the long run it helps to stabilize domestic production and keep our dollars at home where they get recycled in the economy. Like producing our own oil rather than importing it from our enemies and the dollars paid out that do not come back. No one has the patience or the will to make this approach work, not to mention the multinational corps who have no interests in conducting business in the interest of a "home" country.
Either he still doesn't know how tariffs work, or he's still lying about it. Seems like most of his minions don't seem to know that tariffs are paid by importers, not exporters, and importers pass those costs on the the (American) consumer. âWeâre gonna be a tariff nation,â he went on inanely. âItâs not going to be a cost to you, itâs going to be a cost to another country.â
Plus his batshit crazy claim that public schools perform covert sex change surgery on minors- which he has now repeated a couple of times.
The MAGA minions will complain about inflation... high taxes... and then not skip a beat to support the idea that tariffs will bring back US jobs (oh yeah...don't forget we're deporting the low-cost workforce).
Either he still doesn't know how tariffs work, or he's still lying about it. Seems like most of his minions don't seem to know that tariffs are paid by importers, not exporters, and importers pass those costs on the the (American) consumer. âWeâre gonna be a tariff nation,â he went on inanely. âItâs not going to be a cost to you, itâs going to be a cost to another country.â
Plus his batshit crazy claim that public schools perform covert sex change surgery on minors- which he has now repeated a couple of times.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Sep 9, 2024 - 9:16am
rgio wrote:
Trump is setting the table for a loss. He will never admit defeat to a black, Asian womanâ¦. So if he doesnât win, it will be because it was stolen.
Trump is setting the table for a loss. He will never admit defeat to a black, Asian womanâ¦. So if he doesnât win, it will be because it was stolen.
and, based on precedent, will cause his minions to rise up against all...blacks, Asians, women....
This is the standard from the media. "Trump delivers remarks in Wisconsin" no mention of ANY of the bat shit crazy stuff he says, just that he delivered remarks. Nothing to see here.
Trump is setting the table for a loss. He will never admit defeat to a black, Asian womanâ¦. So if he doesnât win, it will be because it was stolen.
I see him as unprepared to answer a very difficult question coming from out of the blue trying to not say anything wrong that he might regret later.
I've heard some snippets from this event and he was generally doing rather well.
We'll see who is what come Tuesday.
Not that it matters ... Harris could do worse than Biden did and she wouldn't lose a single vote. Her support is unshakeable.
ð A question about child-care is a very difficult question? By Trumpâs standards⦠maybe so. You do know that there will be a lot of questions asked during the debate? That doesnât bode well for Trump.
Maybe he gets lucky and they donât ask any difficult ones that night.
JD Vance was asked pretty much the same question about the costs of child care and he scraped together a more coherent response. It still suckedâeffectively JD suggested the grandparents could help out a bit more. That was an echo of GHW Bush's 1992 campaign response to concerns about the rising costs of health care, where Bush envisioned "a thousand points of light" created by neighbors helping neighbors.
JD IIRC did go on to talk about building up a network of volunteers and making it easier for people who wanted to work in child care earn certification in the field but he ran away from the basic problem of the issue: how do you get child care costs down?
Trump just babbled. You have to effectively READ TEA LEAVES to understand his words but apparently Trump believes that massive and widespread imposition of tariffs on goods and materials brought into the US will magically reduce our deficit, boost our economic growth and SOMEHOW REALLY MAJICKLY distribute that fictional tariff revenue into non-existent government programs to pay for child care.
JD gave the traditional Republican responseâvolunteerism and free market forces will handle child care costs.
Trump fantasized and hallucinated. Lousy AI chatbots could have come up with a better response.
Iâve said this in the past but Trump is like the kid in high school trying to answer a question on a verbal quiz who hasnât studied for it and just throws any bullsh*t at the wall to see if any of it will stick.
"Well let's compare, Donald.
Our education - you lose, Donald
Our political experience - you lose, Donald
Public opinion - you lose, Donald.
Thirty four felony charges - you lose, Donald.
So, you're a loser, Donald. Everyone is saying it."
How an unprepared yet astute candidate should reply would be first, not comment on something they don't have an answer for.
Of course this is politics, and all politicians respond to all questions...so the next best course is to talk a "bit" around it....like he may have attempted....but not ramble and get caught in lies like we will have no deficits in a short period of time....
JD Vance was asked pretty much the same question about the costs of child care and he scraped together a more coherent response. It still sucked—effectively JD suggested the grandparents could help out a bit more. That was an echo of GHW Bush's 1992 campaign response to concerns about the rising costs of health care, where Bush envisioned "a thousand points of light" created by neighbors helping neighbors.
JD IIRC did go on to talk about building up a network of volunteers and making it easier for people who wanted to work in child care earn certification in the field but he ran away from the basic problem of the issue: how do you get child care costs down?
Trump just babbled. You have to effectively READ TEA LEAVES to understand his words but apparently Trump believes that massive and widespread imposition of tariffs on goods and materials brought into the US will magically reduce our deficit, boost our economic growth and SOMEHOW REALLY MAJICKLY distribute that fictional tariff revenue into non-existent government programs to pay for child care.
JD gave the traditional Republican response—volunteerism and free market forces will handle child care costs.
Trump fantasized and hallucinated. Lousy AI chatbots could have come up with a better response.
