Of course, that’s what tariffs do. They protect domestic industry by making domestic prices higher to allow less competitive local industry to continue. Yes, the higher domestic prices via supply and demand results in somewhat lower demand and hence some lost domestic jobs are to be expected. If you don’t have tariffs to protect your uncompetitive domestic industry, for example clothing manufacture, every single job moves off to Vietnam or wherever and then you lose all the jobs instead of just a few of them.
Do you really want all your computer chips or cell phones or fighter jets made in China, or maybe your favorite - Russia? If not, and they are willing to subsidize low priced production to flood your market with cheap computers, etc, all your domestic producers will go broke. Tariffs or subsidies or domestic government contracts are a way to preserve your national interests rather than these companies’ or foreign powers’ economic interests.
The ends justifies the means is what US politics have been for a while now. It’s not an exclusive of either party and both demonstrate it routinely. The votes are now almost 100% along party lines. Each doing things because they can. It’s not about serving the country, it’s about defeating the other side and even more importantly keeping your seat for as long as possible.
Just look at the SCOTUS nominations between 2016 and 2020. Just look at both parties completely helpless at getting a second stimulus bill because agreeing to a compromise would give the other side a semi-win and who cares if the country needs it or not. If Dems sweep House, Senate, and POTUS, expect that to be demonstrated. And vice versa if GOP win back the House. The era of compromise has been over for quite some time. It’s not coming back. Hardball constitutional play is the new normal.
As far as SCOTUS is concerned, I don’t want an endless chain of court expansions just to swing back the court in your favor every time one party dominates politics.
I’d actually like a scenario where we face the reality that the SCOTUS is now going to be a partisan affair. So instead of pretending it is fair and non-partisan, let’s deliberately embrace partisanship. Give each party 5 Justices and have those 10 agree to unanimously nominate a single tie breaker Justice who’d serve for a short term only. In case one of the 10 Justices dies, the party who appointed him/her calls for their replacement. If the tie-breaking Justice dies, the 10 Justices again unanimously nominate a replacement for a short term. I think something like this would ensure the court is always pretty close to center and does not radically swing back and forth in ideology, thus preventing it from looking utterly stupid by overruling its allegedly-fair prior decisions on a regular basis.
And as a side benefit of this setup, we’d do away with the semblance of fairness in senate hearings that have become rubber stamp events. We’d do away with most issues with timing for replacement vs. that of the election cycles. Less drama and more stability IMO.
That’d obviously never work. There’d be 5 judges nominating one “tie breaker”, and 5 other judges insisting on another “tie breaker”. When made partisan by virtue of the 5/5 split, would you think they’d be any more capable of unanimously choosing an 11th?
All that’s really necessary is a new law mandating a required timeframe for filling open seats. Upon retirement or death, there must be an announced nominee within 2 weeks, and a vote on said nominee exactly 1 month after being announced. Then no room for manipulation (besides, perhaps, a judge deciding when to retire), and no controversy.
If you want to do something novel compared to what happens now, have the outgoing justice be the one to nominate their replacement (either upon retirement, or written in advance in the event of their death). I trust 9 Supreme Court justices to respect legal competency over partisanship, at least much more so than anyone else.
The tariffs were imposed solely on domestic manufacturers that used steel as an input to manufactured goods. Disadvantaging domestic manufacturers to foreign manufacturers who were allowed to buy and use much cheaper steel, import the manufactured goods, and pay no such tariffs.
No, because in this case tariffs were not applied high value-added manufactured goods but instead to raw materials. exactly what we need, protect low-paying crappy jobs that also create massive local pollution…at the expense of higher paying, more productive jobs…MAGA! Make America hunter-Gatherers Again!
That’s what the steel tariffs encouraged. An imported car or truck (as well as many other manufactured products…) paid no steel tariffs and paid no artificially high prices for steel and aluminum. Only the domestically produced vehicles were handicapped…
But the steel tariffs didnt make that guy’s domestic steel supply any more expensive. It already was expensive.
He’s complaining about the free trade agreements that allow finished products to be imported, agreements that have evolved over the last 30 years. He should want additional tariffs imposed, not fewer, since his domestic cost structure will never allow him to compete with cheap foreign imports.
false. Domestic steel prices were artificially elevated to match the tariffs. That’s the obvious result, and it’s what was seen after Trump’s tariffs on domestic manufacturers. Domestic steel producers didn’t massively ramp up production or hire massive amounts of new people (to do the very crappy jobs… ), instead they just increased their prices to match the imported steel+tariffs and pocketed the difference as profits while reducing safety and increasing hours and pollution at the existing plants.
Expensive compared to the cost in other countries. Come on. If domestic steel was competitive with foreign imported steel, there’d be no reason to add tariffs to begin with. The whole point of tariffs is to make the domestic version the preferred option. Which it has - but the finished products continue to compete with cheap imports.
The problem remains the cheap imports.
Yeah? Isnt that the whole point? Cheap foreign steel → finished product → imported without tariffs = competition he cant compete with.
But of course, it’s all Trump’s fault. Ignore the fact that this proposal was put together with the hopes that everyone would buy in. Once again, Trump appears to be the only one trying to make anything happen.
A lot of lost jobs. So, if you were President, this is exactly what you would do? Use executive orders for tariffs without consulting the people involved? Do you think Trump handled this exactly right? If Biden did it, would you be supporting him?
I know your Russian propaganda website supports it, because it makes America weaker.
North Korea just unveiled what appears to be a new intercontinental ballistic missile, and it’s huge
"North Korea’s military rolled out a massive, previously-unseen ICBM on a transporter erector launcher (TEL) with a total of 22 wheels.
“The missile appears to be the largest road-mobile, liquid-fueled missile” anywhere.
“The powerful weapon was unveiled just a few months after the country tested its first ICBM, the Hwasong-14, in July 2017. Analysts said they believe the Hwasong-15 could theoretically strike anywhere in the continental US.”
In addition to the new ICBM, the country appears to have also shown off a new submarine-launched ballistic missile."
Thanks Trump for stopping North Korea from developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Not! Everything gets worse under Trump.
It’s not about the debate. If he tests positive he will have to quarantine and Republicans wont have a quorum for the Supreme Court nomination. All the Republican Senators were exposed (the republican senators eat lunch together several times a week) by the ones that already tested positive. Expect that every Republican Senator will refuse to be tested even if they are hacking up a lung on the Senate floor.
Yes, the multi billion dollar corporation behind CNN and all those other multi billion dollar corps behind other “mainstream news” are totally in the tank for the party that would raise their taxes… because as we all know gigantic corporations and the wealthy people who run them are heavily democratic.
/ow, I think I hurt my eyes I had to roll them so hard.
The question of tariffs and domestic protectionism is not one with clear cut answers, and that’s true regardless of who does it. Lots of people got rich with offshoring and outsourcing, and the world was made more economically efficient. Consumers got cheap goods at Walmart made in China that made their lives better and more affordable. Lots of people lost good jobs to Mexico and China and South East Asia. Is that good or bad on balance?
One thing the free trade approach did was increase social instability within the US, hurting the middle class base, and leading in part to the election of our illustrious President. When Democratic Party abandoned blue collar workers to the consequences of free trade in order to make their rich donors richer, those disaffected became voters for Trump who put America instead of profits first.
Signature Small Duffle [sic] Bag: Listed for $100, this small bag comes complete “lined with gold Trump crest in repeating pattern,” and if that wasn’t enough, an additional Trump crest on the exterior.
Signature Shoe Bag: On sale for just $39.99, this black shoe bag has a zippered side pocket for “functionality,” but don’t fear that the shoe bag is just functional. On the side, the “Trump crest gives it a stylish flair.”
Trump Golf Collector Medallion: Yes, there is a medallion. Of course, there is a Trump medallion. The $15 collectible has the Trump crest “featured in the center and is surrounded by the names of every Trump golf course worldwide.”
Basically all the stuff at Trump hotels: According to a 2016 Washington Post report, the following items at Trump hotels are all made in China: shampoo, body wash, moisturizers, shower caps, laundry bags, shoe bags, pet collars, pet leashes, and bath towels
Well I know this is from your favorite website, but WashPo buried the lead in their coverage so I thought this might be clearer. Several of those plotters were BLM supporters and/or anti-Trump. “Whiteness” apparently did not figure prominently in their reasoning.
That about sums it up. Democrats seemed to think that free trade would mean those making 58-cents/day would suddenly start making $20/hr like in American. Instead, we created more 58-cents/day jobs at the expense of American jobs, and what American jobs were left were only making $15/hr.
Free trade only works when everyone is on equal footing. Otherwise, the first thing that happens is a flight to the lowest cost areas, until the high cost areas regress to the point of everyone being on equal footing. Only then will the global economy move forward.
Democrats dove in head first, and have subsquently put all their effort into criticizing the entirely foreseeable (and mostly inevitable) consequences.
Your Russkie propaganda website again? Other members were associated with racist militias, Confederate flags, and defending South Africa whites. They were not BLM supporters. That’s for sure.
Simply making stuff up to be contradictory is silly. So you are going to pretend that Trump is not a racist, too? Why do most racists, neo-Nazis,KKK members,and ight-wing militia movements support him?
Or are you going to pretend they don’t and it doesn’t matter if they do?
Trump also manufactures clothing in places like Burma and Bangladesh and Mexico. He is making furniture in Turkey. There is also a Trump Towers Istanbul.
Ivanka used to manufacture nearly all of her items in China and applied for trademarks in China while serving in the White House. Strange that none of Trump’s or Ivanka’s products are subject to tariff.
Someone wants to pretend Trump cares about the American economy, He simply does stuff to look good to some people, but he actually doesn’t do much of anything except sow destruction everywhere, like with the farmers.
The most alarming thing is Trump never engages in amicable negotiations. He simply attacks, demands, and starts a trade war. He didn’t try to negotiate with the Chinese at all.
Another comment that less to the idea he’s dodging an answer to avoid pissing off his own “we will get our way no matter what we have to do” supporters.
On Friday, a KTNV reporter asked him again about whether he backs court packing and said: "This is the number one thing that I’ve been asked about from viewers in the past couple of days.”
“Well you’ve been asked by the viewers who are probably Republicans who don’t want me continuing to talk about what they’re doing to the court right now,” Biden responded
“Well, sir don’t the voters deserve to know…?” reporter Ross DiMattei asked.
“No they don’t… I’m not gonna play his game, he’d love me to talk about, and I’ve already said something on court packing, he’d love that to be the discussion instead of what he’s doing now,” Biden said, likely referring to President Trump.
“He’s about to make a pick in the middle of an election, first time it’s ever been done, first time in history it’s ever been done,” he said