I’d like someone to make a compelling case that tariffs would even be successful at addressing what they’re intended to accomplish.
You need a stick as well as a carrot. This is a stick. The carrot is domestic tax reduction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffs_in_United_States_history
Wouldn’t it help create a need in the country that could be satisfied by USA manufacturing?
But it’s not tariffs alone. It’s coupled with reduction of income taxes (both individual and corporate) and reduction of crippling regulations to help encourage the formation of US manufacturing.
From what I've been able to gather, 'accomplishing' something is not the goal at all, but rather that having the import tax hikes is an end in itself. Basically. some poor helpless people believe they need to be protected more than we do so they look at import taxes and say I-WANT-IT-I-WANT-IT!!!!!
Sure.
35% is basically the fee we charge on companies that move to countries that don’t require companies to toe the same regulatory line ours do.
Trump’s approach is to make toeing that line less expensive, while at the same time making sure that companies toe that line regardless of where they are manufacturing.
Not hard to understand. Right now, moving makes sense because the tax and regulatory burden on companies is at nightmare proportions.
China, for example, spends zero on R&D - they steal everything they’ve got. The US innovates, and spends big to do so. Why should the Chinese benefit from that?
Trump’s position is, ‘go ahead and steal it - we’re going to levy an R&D tax on all your technical products’.
That makes sense. Certainly cheaper than trying to get the Chinese to enforce a contract, or appear in court.
You get less of what you tax.