That’s not how anything works. The country exporting to the USA don’t field the tariffs expense. The importers do.
He would just be removing taxes for people like himself to the result of a massive deficit and decreased trade.
I hate Trump, and maybe that’s what he’s thinking.
But I’m not sure replacing taxes with tariffs won’t help; replacing sales taxes with teriffs will mean that domestic products are effectively being subsidized by people buying imported products. This increases demand for domestic products, hopefully stimulation domestic production.
I think the tell isn’t that he is using teriffs, it’s that he wants to cut income taxes at the expense of people buying foreign products.
The USA mainly sells Financial Services and Machinery. Making our own rubber ducks and flatpack furniture would be analogous to a lawyer painting his house when he could have made enough money to pay somebody else to paint it 5x over.
Unfortunately, much of our raw materials are imports so by disincentivizing other countries to trade with us we are killing our own manufacturing capabilities. That is exactly what happened when Trump era steel tariffs killed a large sector of American manufacturing. And he explicitly excluded Russian Steel where his good friend Aaron Abromovich was offering to supply steel for his stupid wall, until congress twisted his arm into signing the additional tariffs against Russia, just another example of how his actions are purely selfish.
At the end of the day, trade is both good and conditional. Other nations might see these actions as hostile and reduce the number of goods they’re willing to sell, as they can’t be the ones left holding the bag if trade suddenly stops one day and they’ve overproduced specialty goods with no use so reducing production is the clear choice, and there is less incentive to offer other less profitable goods as per trade agreements and less incentive to even make new trade agreements in the first place.
You cannot force American CEOs to want to produce goods in the states anymore than you can convince Chinese people to live in the districts where excess homes were built: governments do not have enough control to dictate the markets via anything but positive reinforcement.
It feels like this (common) argument it’s trying to have is cake and eat it too, so maybe you can help me understand.
As you, and everyone, say: the financial burden of the teriffs are paid by the importer and passed to the consumer, rather than being paid by the exporting country or exporter - so what is the disincentive for those countries to continue trade with us? They’ll see a decrease in demand, but is that really a disincentive? I don’t understand how both of these things can be true and have the same cause, at the same time.
The problem is outsourcing, and teriffs are an attempt to make outsourcing less appealing. I understand your analogy, but that’s the problem: we’re encountering Goodhart’s Law. We’re optimizing for GDP, and you’re right that’s teriffs will result in lower optimization, but in chasing GDP numbers we’ve failed to consider where the money is getting allocated. The lawyer could save money by hiring foreigners, but hiring locals helps people in their community. (Not saying foreign workers are bad, just trying to reuse your analogy). I don’t think we should get too preoccupied with economic efficiency, as long as we can ensure the waste stays domestic.
I’m not confident teriffs are actually a good idea, and even if they were I don’t trust Trump to implement them. What I’m trying to do is push back and get clarification about why people are acting like teriffs are inherently bad.
I’m not trying to have the cake and eat it, I’m trying to convince people like you not to shit on the cake just because you think you might be able to eat around it.
What?
Why am I getting down votes?
How am I shitting on anything? What am I even shitting on? \All I’m doing is asking “why do we shit on teriffs and treat them as inherently bad?”
Im trying to have a discussion in good faith, and rather than having any of my questions explained or answered I’m just down voted and vaguely demeaned.I’m being very clear I do not support whatever shit trump is doing, I’m trying to understand why people just hate tariffs.
I don’t understand how, if the importer bares all tariff costs, what would disincentivize a foreign nation from exporting to us since they bear no increased costs. Why would this not just appear as a decrease in demand, from their perspective?I literally explained it to you in simple terms and you still argued against the facts.
Tariffs
Shit on
USA Commerce and Industry
They cannot ever be a replacement for taxation. Their uses are purely as a defence from foreign fuckery in the markets.
You didn’t provide facts, you provided arguments and assertions.
Then I refuted one of your arguments showing how it is seemingly contradicted one of your assertions and asked for elaboration.I don’t understand where your hostility is coming from. I’m not even saying you’re wrong, I’m pointing out arguments that don’t appear (to me) to lead to your conclusion.
I absolutely don’t refute that Trump’s idea is a bad one. My question is more general than that.
deleted by creator
See this is the kind of thing that makes zero actual sense but his supporters pretend to believe he can accomplish it worse they actually believe him.
Look at this graph, when you know, then you know. Fuck all this distraction from the actual problem, orange man is a distraction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_States
Makes sense that profits went up, since this graph is not inflation adjusted
He’s not a distraction if he gets re-elected.
That’s probably why he won’t win again. It would be amazing to have a convicted felon as president, he’d go from being a distraction to being the thing that causes serious unrest.
I said he wouldn’t win in 2016. I was wrong.
Okay so I’ll say he will win in 2024 so then I’ll be wrong as well. It would be crazy if he won as a convicted felon, after being impeached twice, after losing in 2020 by a landslide.
He did not lose in 2020 by a landslide. That’s just not true.
Biden won the election with 306 electoral votes and 51.3% of the national popular vote, compared to Trump’s 232 electoral votes and 46.9% of the popular vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_elections
So suggesting he has no chance of winning when he came that close four years ago and he’s likely not lost a huge number of fans is a little premature.
Numbers are even worse when you consider swing states. AZ, GA, and PA swung Biden’s away by a net 40,000 votes. Razor thin margins, for any Dem candidate.
People fixate on the popular vote, but California going Blue by an extra million votes doesn’t change anything
It was only like 43000 votes across several swing states. Not by much at all.
Convicted Felon and Sex Offender Treason Trump did however lose the popular vote in a landslide and the electoral vote in a landslide.
I guess “landslide” is pretty subjective. The difference was 74 electoral votes, 7,059,526 voters. He only won
Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes in 2016, Clinton won the popular vote by 2,868,686 votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election_in_Michigan
I don’t like this system so I’m done speculating.
I agree with the Squid. We should all be worried. He came ridiculously close last time. Remember the electoral college is not helping. It was basically thousands of votes in 2020 that saved us.
Trump got the 2nd most votes of any presidential candidate in history in 2020. It wasn’t a landslide.
Trump is currently favored in polls and in betting markets. Few people care about the convictions. People who would vote for him definitely don’t care about impeachments. The far-right has a very effective and expansive propaganda machine (old media, alternative media, and social media) that can counter any negative (“fake”) news. Biden is a very weak candidate because of his physical and mental health, and the Democrats are ineffective at “controlling the narrative” compared to the Republicans. I think it’ll probably be a close election, and if I was forced to bet, I’d bet on Trump winning.
That doesn’t sound amazing at all, that sounds totally horrible
Yea, amazing wasn’t the right word choice. Probably should have used “absurd”, “ridiculous” or “bizarre” instead.
Amazing - causing great surprise or wonder; astonishing
Nah you were all good imo lmao people just attribute amazing to positivity
How much can a banana cost Michael, $1000?
Jesus Christ. Why is it that republicans think destroying the country will be better than what we currently have? It’s so fucking insane.
Because it will be better FOR THEM only
How about we eliminate income taxes and replace it with corporate carbon emissions tax, AND cut fuel subsidies.
Take a look at the JOLTS data
516k job openings in April, 385k separations and 382k hires. That’s a deficit of about 100k jobs that aren’t being filled in manufacturing alone. The problem isn’t a lack of manufacturing jobs, in fact it’s the opposite. We have over a hundred thousand manufacturing jobs we can’t fill, and this matches what I hear through the grapevine at my work which does contract industrial cleaning. People don’t want those jobs, and people take advantage of the opportunities available to them to get out of those jobs. Trump would destroy the countries economy if he actually managed to implement this plan
There’s a quote from Arthur Harris that I think shows a pretty fundamental insight into the mind of a fascist.
“The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else and no one was going to bomb them.”
Someone like Trump just does not think, “And then what will they do when we triple our tariffs on their goods.” It’s an innate narcissism, the belief that everyone else exists to do things to and not to have agency of their own.
This isn’t even getting into the reality that this is just another regressive tax scheme designed to shift even more of the tax burden onto the working class.
Is there an infographic about this I can give to my maga relatives when they inevitably bring this up, so I don’t actually have to talk about it with them?
Well, worked everytime someone did this in the past … not!
The US tax rate is very similar to other nations, the only difference is what we spend our tax money on. Most rational nations spend their tax money on their citizens. The US spends it on other poor countries citizens, but not in the way you are thinking. We spend hundreds of billions of dollars to bury Palestinians under rubble. Hundreds of billions to cover Yemen people alive while they sleep. Meanwhile, school teachers in America have classes over 30 students and have to buy their own school supplies.
This is such a gloriously uninformed opinion. The benefits to the US from being a global superpower are staggering, investing a million dollars in shutting down the Houthi attacks on merchant ships or whatever returns hundreds of millions of investment back to the US by way of trade (also, they are “spending” that money on the wages of nationals, it’s not leaving the country). The Israeli Hamas is a proxy war with Iran, it’s unethical and utterly immoral, but to argue that it’s costing the US money is flawed.
There are real areas us spending is bad, the fact that the US spends over 17% of gdp on healthcare when other countries like Australia spend less than 11% does mean that Americans are spending too much money on healthcare (and literally getting shit for it), but it still doesn’t mean that they are destroying 6% of GDP.
We spend more on the military than the next ten countries combined. TWO of which are actively engaged in open conflict with each other.
I’m not sure that you understand my point. Spending money on military is an economic gain for the USA, for every cent spent they gain dollars in returns. It’s a “good” investment (from an amoral financial perspective, as said above, the ethics are appalling). Another country who spends less but also has a return to their economy less than they spend (like North Korea) is a bad use of taxpayer money. The amount of spend/return isn’t relevant, the ratio is what matters.
I am sick of free trade being stifled… Whoever makes the best product should get the money having the products I buy dictated to me is unamerican
Great idea but it’s bullshit that this could ever be implemented.
It’s not a great idea. It would make the US a walled garden as all our exports become harshly taxed by the rest of the world. The country wouldn’t collapse but our standard of living, education, and healthcare would drop precipitously.
This is absolutely going to get him votes. If he does it, is another thing entirely.
There are between 8 to 10 million Americans that don’t live in the US. Every penny they make is taxed to Uncle Sam even if they don’t step foot in the country their entire life.
It is universally hated. And the only other country stupid enough to do this is Eritrea.
You know how you get 8 million votes? Drop income tax. That doesn’t even count all the red state domestic Americans who also don’t want taxes (but don’t understand tarrifs and therefore local pricing).
If he campaigns on this, versus just saying it one time, he will absolutely 100% win.
This is not true. Most countries have a taxation agreement with the US which excludes a significant portion of income and/or taxes paid from US income. You do still pay taxes to the US on foreign income, but not on every penny.
Every penny they make is taxed to Uncle Sam
There is no where near a 100% income tax rate LMFAO. Obviously nonsense claims do not make a good argument.
If he campaigns on this,
MAKE INFLATION GREAT AGAIN
I think they mean they tax based on their total income not they collect the entire income
Canada does the same thing for people abroad
Marginal tax rates are based on adjusted gross income, type of income, and amount of income. Common adjustments include tax credits, tax free income adjustments, and deductions.
All of those still take into account your total income
No they don’t. The standard exemption for fiscal year 2024 is $14,600 for every single filer, regardless of total income. The first $14,600 is literally not taxed.
There’s also many credits that do not take income into account at all.
Brackets are how your total income is broken up. Your total income is still relevant so they know when to stop taxing
That’s a very different statement than “every penny you make is taxed”.
Even if he meant that his hyperbole is still wrong. Every penny is not taken into account since all amounts are rounding to the nearest dollar.
It’s somewhat accurate to say “every penny they make is taxABLE to Uncle Sam” which is different from saying 100% tax rate. Americans living outside the US still need to file a tax return and report all their income, and pay tax on it to the US, even if it is from a foreign source. That said they could claim the foreign tax credit if they paid tax to a foreign regime on that income already, or the foreign income exclusion under some circumstances which would reduce their taxable income to the US.
It’s somewhat accurate to say “every penny they make is taxABLE to Uncle Sam”
It’s completely meaningless but hyperbolic to say that because that’s the way taxes work in every country. No country randomly ignores random amounts of income from taxation. Also, there is the concept of tax exempt income and the fact that pennies and dollar fractions are completely ignored on tax forms.
He will do it, for the rich, not the poor.
Convicted Felon and Sex Offender Treason Trump gave rich people a gigantic tax cut and tax increases to the middle class. Next year every income group making 75k or less will pay MORE taxes thanks to him.
Will suck but honestly this is the least of our worries. Trump has openly said he will deport u.s. citizens and is arguing that he can assassinate people that disagree with him.
Cool. They vote too you know.
They vote too you know.
Yeah… with “donations.”
18% of Americans earn more than $100k/yr. They do not lobby. They just vote. Income tax reduction disproportionately benefits about half the country, especially benefits a fifth of the country.
In a race where it’s estimated 40k people will decide the entire outcome, getting 20% of the country on your side is good numbers.
In a race where it’s estimated 40k people will decide the entire outcome, getting 20% of the country on your side is good numbers.
Republicans have been saying shit about eliminating income taxes for years, or even flat out eliminating the IRS. I don’t see this specific policy turning "millions"of voters like you say.
The best thing trump can do is get voters excited. Voter turnout is abysmal in this country. Whoever gets more people to actually show up to vote wins. Joe Biden was a shoe in before he hard-backed Israel and now it’s a toss-up
The difference is that all GOP candidates previously knew, or had a cabinet that knew, it was a terrible awful thing to do for the country. It would NEVER pass. But it could be campaigned on. Just like repealing abortion… See how that worked?
The party of Trump is not the GOP of old. These are idiots that can and do actually get things done. Mostly because they do it all wrong and haphazardly. But it doesn’t matter because the action takes effect immediately and the remedy takes years to work through a judicial system.
Too many American democrats don’t understand they aren’t even playing the same game. Bringing a spatula to a gun fight.
Removed by mod
Fuck off idiot Murican
Removed by mod
I don’t really understand your point.
What about the other n million Americans who pay income tax? They might find it appealing too.
The 10 million living outside the US would pay less american income tax than residents.
You have a dead heat match. A few votes matter. This is millions of extra votes.
Many Americans outside the country pay more than Americans inside the country as they tend to be more affluent so higher income tax bracket. Yet not UHNW so it’s all capital gains.
This basically eliminates almost all taxes on the rich, burdens middle and lower class with higher prices, and blows up budget deficit.
So much for FiScAL ReSPonSibiLiTY
Yeah, are you being fiscally responsible, chump? How much are you making? Jeff over here needs another yacht!
The real rich don’t pay any income tax tho? Not sure what you mean. Sure the high-income developers and engineers and lawyers etc. would become a richer, but they are not the rich, are they? The owners of the businesses they work at are. And they don’t pay income taxes.
In the USA in 2021, the top 1% of earners payed 26.3% of federal income from taxes, $3,872,395,000,000 Total. The top 50% of earners payed 89.6% of income taxes.
You could argue that the “true” rich people weren’t earners because they took out loans against their stocks and properties, but they’re either going to sell or die sometime and that has been true for centuries. However, Elon Musk for example won’t make your list if that’s how you measure it because he did sell and he paid billions in taxes.
This freak lost a fucking Casino. The place where people just give you their money. A CASINO!!! He is an idiot and the worst “business man”. Con man looking for a new con.
Are you suggesting that Convicted Felon and Sex Offender Treason Trump is not a very stable genius?
That would be… Correct!
Not a casino. Multiple ones. Because the dumb fuck decided the best way to run resorts was to have them compete and under cut each other.
Idiot is an understatement.
Unfortunately, I can’t think of a strong enough word, including the one now regarded as a slur.
Fuckwit is my go to. Or “Too stupid to breathe.” Or bring out some Linus Torvalds, but honestly Trump doesn’t deserve to be graced by that mans insults, as awesome as they are from a “JFC dude, that is going way too far”, except Trump would actually deserve them unlike the poor kernel maintainers.
