Data Show These 6 Big Cities Aren’t Faring Well After Minimum Wage Hikes

Heritage Foundation ^ | January 20, 2016 | Leah Jessen

[ChessExpert]

I’m afraid any tax has its downside. Taxing imports does hurt the American consumer who now faces less attractive choices.

As for stockholders, some benefit, some lose. Those who hold stock in companies that compete against tariffed goods gain. Those who own stock in companies that are subject to the tariff lose.

Also, there will be further repercussions. If we erect tariffs against others, they may increase their tariffs against us.

Now here is something that most people don’t fully appreciate. Trade is reciprocal; you trade something for something.

Imagine that we bought from no one - Island USA. In that case, no one would buy from us. This would be good for some of our producers. However those who produced for export would suffer.

If tariffs are too high, expect smuggling.

Americans will tolerate low taxes. It may be best to have a variety of taxes, so that no one tax is too high. But I think the best answer is to cut government spending so we don’t need so much tax revenue. Also, grow the economy!

[ChessExpert]

People are willful. For every government action, there will be reactions. That is why socialism can never win. But sometimes socialists have the power to make everyone lose.

[central_va]

Completely open markets have an upside and a downside. Tariffs have an upside and a downside.

Economics is political as well as theoretical.

[DugwayDuke]

“But no the cost differential between slave wage products and the cost of US workers goes to the stock holders. So hopefully the tariff will just negate that. So the increase will be negligible.”

A 45% tariff on imported goods has been proposed. You actually think the impact of a 45% increase in the cost of goods will be “negligible”?

[central_va]

45% is to high. If it were up to me I'd start at 5%, then if the ChiComs play rough and maintain their trade barriers I would up it 5% again each year and cap it at 25%.

I would ease in the tariffs slowly, insidiously.

[DugwayDuke]

“45% is to high. If it were up to me I’d start at 5%, then if the ChiComs play rough and maintain their trade barriers I would up it 5% again each year and cap it at 25%.”

So, in your opinion, a 25% increase in the cost of goods is ‘negligible’?

[central_va]

So, in your opinion, a 25% increase in the cost of goods is 'negligible'?

No, a 25% increase in the cost of imported manufactured goods is about right.

[DugwayDuke]

“No, a 25% increase in the cost of imported manufactured goods is about right.

So, why do you want to pay 25% more for your TV (or whatever)? Exactly how does this increase your quality of life.

[central_va]

So, why do you want to pay 25% more for your TV (or whatever)? Exactly how does this increase your quality of life.

First, all tariffs are voluntary consumption based taxes and would raise revenue for the US govt and help close the deficit if we(ever) get a responsible congress. Secondly, Samsung etc. would be scrambling to open facilitates in the USA to manufacture TVs. This is the ultimate goal here. Thirdly, it would be a shot back at the Asian "tigers" that the USA is back in the game and coerce them to open their markets. Lastly, I could feel good about buying TV's again, and that my fellow Americans built it and are not collecting welfare.

When I was in the service I raised my hand and promised to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic up to and including giving my life. I would surly pay a tariff on consumer electronics.

Sorry for being so long winded.