Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
The tariff is paid by the car dealer and passed onto the consumer. As one example.
Consumers pay it, not the overseas manufacturer.
So let me say, I agree entirely that the tariffs raise consumer prices. Trumps tarrifs plan is indeed insane, and his claims about it being paid by China or whoever are entirely ludicrous.
However, as a technical point, all taxes have a "tax incidence" that you can measure. The tax incidence is the percent of the tax on a corporation, good, service etc that is borne by an entity. It is not always 100% on a consumer except in the most trivial, "consumers pay for everything" kind of way. For competitive or reputational reasons a firm with substantial revenue might decide to absorb some cost, rather than pass it on. In those cases, the tax incidence is not 100% on the consumer, but shared by the business out of their revenue.
I promise though, Trump has the mind of a decomposing tangerine and absolutely could not speak about or understand the subtleties here.
Anyway, politically speaking, I'll never bring this up again. Please keep hammering Trump however you like and I'll keep my corrections to myself, lol.
Correct. So in the car example, it really only works if the US puts a tariff on imports, and then they do some kind of government credit for domestic cars. This would raise the price of imported cars while making domestic cars more affordable to Americans.
Only kinda, that assumes enough people still buy the imports otherwise there's no money to transfer over.
A tariff isn't a money making tool, it's about making a good not as great a deal against another, typically a domestically made good.
Even domestic cars are assembly in America but the parts come from other countries so no you still going be effected by that.
Also keep in mind there a reason shit not made here. We can't compete with their cheap labor prices. So even if you tried to move some of those jobs back here it would still cost the consumer a shit ton more money on said goods.
This assumes the thing with the tariff is even available. I can't buy a Hilux because of the Chicken Tax.
And how the fuck am I even to make a decent technical without a Hilux?
There's a Second Amendment argument to be made here
Honestly? This would work on this court.
Concepts of a proposal for another Great Depression by the most stablest of the geniuses
Dude wants to sabotage the US on purpose to give Russia an advantage.
Tax Foundation - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Tax Foundation:
MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://taxfoundation.org/blog/trump-mckinley-tariffs-great-depression/
I'm not saying Trump's tariff proposal is a good idea (I don't know enough relevant economics) but that article's own chart shows that tariffs increased to Trump levels after the Great Depression started and then declined back to below Trump levels several years before the Great Depression ended. I don't think the data in the article supports the article's link of high tariffs and the Great Depression.