Posted on 01/07/2016 5:05:15 PM PST by conservativejoy
So the average Joe gets to pay way, way more at the store and gets to worry about losing his job after China inevitably retaliates with tariffs of its own, shrinking foreign demand for U.S. goods? That sounds like a plan.
Four years ago, when Trump flirted with running for president, he suggested a 25 percent tariff on Chinese goods. Now it’s 45 percent. Is that based on an economic calculation or is it just Trump getting a little crazier with the protectionist cheez whiz to prove he's more populist now than ever?
"The only power that we have with China," Mr. Trump said, "is massive trade."...
"I would do a tax. and the tax, let me tell you what the tax should be ...the tax should be 45 percent," Mr. Trump said.
China is on a path this year to surpass Canada as the biggest single trading partner of the United States, and its factories provide American consumers with lower-cost products ranging from clothing to computers, so such steep tariffs could hurt the pocketbooks of many Americans.
This CNN Money piece from 2011 concisely addresses the weak points in the tariff idea. If Trump is eyeing it as a bluff, to scare China into ending its currency manipulation, that's one high-stakes bluff. Would China's leadership bow to an overt economic threat from a new U.S. president upon his taking office, knowing what kind of signal that would send about Chinese resolve towards America? If they call President Alpha Male's bluff, then he has no choice but to implement the tariff and the trade war is on. And as the CNN piece explains, a U.S. market that's effectively closed to Chinese imports wouldn't necessarily turn to U.S. manufacturers and U.S. workers to fill the void. More likely it’d turn to other developing economies with lower labor costs to supply those cheap goods. Result: Tension with China, pain for American manufacturers who'd suddenly find the Chinese market closed to them, and less than what was promised by Trump about a revival in American manufacturing. (China could also challenge the tariff in the WTO, but I assume Caesar Trump would pull the U.S. out of that if the ruling didn't go his way.) As for whether this represents good, old-fashioned "conservative" economics, let's not even bother analyzing it. We're well past that point of Trumpmania now.
Here's something else to raise an eyebrow from Trump's meeting with the NYT editorial board today:
In addressing the Oregon standoff, Mr. Trump also spoke about the "great anger out there" that appears to be fueling the situation in Burns, Ore.
"I think what I'd do, as president, is I would make a phone call to whoever, to the group," he said, adding later, "I'd talk to the leader. I would talk to him and I would say, 'You gotta get out - come see me, but you gotta get out.'"
"You cannot let people take over federal property," Mr. Trump said. "You can't, because once you do that, you don't have a government anymore. I think, frankly, they've been there too long."
President Trump would directly negotiate with people who are illegally occupying federal property? That's an incentive for every radical across the spectrum to create hostage situations, knowing that the president's direct involvement in resolving it would be a huge media spotlight for their cause. If Black Lives Matter seized a federal office somewhere tomorrow and Obama decided to speak with them directly, we'd be killing him today for legitimizing the takeover by granting them a presidential audience. Trump's smart enough to understand that, but his ego's too big to let him absorb the lesson. Because he's convinced of his own supreme competence in all situations, he thinks that him talking directly to Ammon Bundy would obviously be the easiest way to end the standoff expeditiously. As for what he means by "they've been there too long," he told the Times that he wasn't necessarily calling for military action but that "at a certain point you have to do something." Er, like what? Obama and his deputies have played the Oregon standoff smartly by waiting Bundy and his crew out; a new Ruby Ridge would be a disaster for all sides. As it is, by being patient, the feds have put Bundy in a position where he’s already talking about leaving voluntarily at some point. Trump, forever impelled to "show strength," might choose the Ruby Ridge option simply because he couldn't tolerate the perception of weakness in strategic patience.
Via Andrew Stiles, here's Trump floating the tariff idea back in 2011. If you're at work, be advised that there's an F-bomb (actually, an MF-bomb) to come. Here again you see the core of Trumpism at work: The tariff might not work if a guy with a high-pitched feminine voice is pushing it, but if President Alpha Male pushes it, those puppies in Beijing will roll over and let him scratch their bellies. There are no tough guys in China's brutal authoritarian top tier, after all.
You are quite a bit off on your figure. It was 106 billion through November. They would lose 440 billion. Who gets hurt worse? That is a difference they cannot make up.
I'm also prepared to argue the merits.
Theoretically, it would inspire Americans to produce their own goods for cheaper, I suppose.
They cannot because of government labor, environmental, medical, and tax regulations; those make it impossible for Americans to produce their own goods profitably.
Trump's solution: more government.
Cruz is a Constitutionalist, so I know that his solution is going to tend toward the Constitution: less government.
I'll only vote for what I want to win. I want the concept of "more government" to lose.
Naw, Trump already said he will tear up the Nafta agreement...What are they going to do, call us names???
So the average Joe gets to pay way, way more at the store and gets to worry about losing his job after China inevitably retaliates with tariffs of its own
Now that's funny...China already restricts how many American goods can come into their country...We'd gain far more than we would lose...
It's a win-win situation for America...Go Trump Go...
It's not a direct equivalent as I'm sure you know.
45% Tarriff on Chinese good give American producers an opportunity to turn up a business and subject themselves to market forces in the USA.
Why should American companies, and workers, be compelled to compete with international slave labor domestically? Do we have no choice in the matter?
Because Americaa would then make those millions of Chinese products that we used to make...
The tax base would skyrocket...Millions would go back to work...That would fund our practically dead military...Once the immigration problem is taken care of there will be more work than people looking for jobs...That will raise wages considerably...
That's making America great again...
My economics education tells me that barriers to trade are bad. My economics education is only overruled when it comes to national security, like weapons systems. Manufacturing capacity in general is not something I care about and want to see protected.
A tariff would just mean that products get sourced in the U.S. etc. Supply chains would have to change. It wouldn’t be so bad in the medium term actually.
First chapter in his book ^Art of the Deal^.
Always start high! But career politicians are too stupid to understand deals.
Go to WalMart and check where everything you buy is made. Now add 45% to your total at the register.
________________________________________________
I’d be happy to pay the difference for quality U.S. MADE PRODUCTS.
We would all save money by not having to drive back to Walmart to return some Chinese made piece of crap that breaks the first time you use it.
Our dogs wouldn’t be poisoned to death. Remember the Melamine in dog food?
Do you really feel comfortable when you take vitamins made in China? I read that 90% of vitamin C comes from there.
Think twice before you sit down at the table and eat your Talipia filets that were fed raw human Chinese sewage.
Yes, I’ll pay more for Made in U.S.A. food and products. Screw China.
If China cuts off imports from America- no big deal. If China cuts off exports to America, they’ll last about 10 weeks.
_____________________
You nailed it, PAR35. Thanks.
Much easier to add 45% to pay at the checkout when Iyou have a good paycheck and a full time job.
Much harder to pay for the cheap Chinese goods at Walmart when all you have is a part time job with wages based on cheap foreign workers on H1-B visa.
Taxes suck and I don't want to pay them.
The requirement that our companies MUST set up manufacturing in their country AND employ high ranking Chinese officials as senior executives and engineers or not sell their product in their country.
Requirements that we ‘share’ our technology in order to expand our production in their country. That sort of stuff.
China has had Carte Blanche with our technology and good humor, as well as our wide open market for far too long. It is high time they are reigned in.
That is the most stupid idea of all all times. Tariffs are always self-defeating. Trade wars have historically tragic consequences. The United States should unilaterally abolish all tariffs. It would lay all these crony socialists to waste. Always follow the money. The biggest proponents of protective tariffs are large crony socialist “enterprises.” They benefit Wall Street, not Main Street. Trump’s call for high protective tariffs is politically deft, but economically daft.
Now the really, really stupid side of Trump comes out.
That looks like Marla Maples holding the banner!
Every 8 years the Republicans and Democrats can swap the dictatorship. What a bright future you envision.
By all means tell us Cruz’s big plan.
By all means tell me how a 45% tax is anything but abysmally stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.