Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
They were raised. Bush raised tariffs on lumber and steel. Tariffs are federal taxes. Everything you buy that’s made of wood or steel costs more now. These taxes are huge compared to the puny cuts.
283 posted on 06/17/2003 9:56:28 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies ]


To: SUSSA
They were raised. Bush raised tariffs on lumber and steel. Tariffs are federal taxes. Everything you buy that’s made of wood or steel costs more now. These taxes are huge compared to the puny cuts.

In fairness - as you can see, I am making friends on all sides - not EVERYTHING that's made of wood and steel costs more now. Not if they're made in the U.S.A. Imposing some puny/tiny trariffs after noticing that certain nations were practicing dumping is one of the very few decisions W made that I agree with.

But... this topic too deserves its own thread.

So... for the record, I do support W imposing tariffs on foreign steel and wood. I wish he imposed more.

290 posted on 06/17/2003 10:05:06 AM PDT by A Vast RightWing Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies ]

To: SUSSA
Bush raised tariffs on lumber and steel. Tariffs are federal taxes. Everything you buy that’s made of wood or steel costs more now. These taxes are huge compared to the puny cuts.

I am not a tax expert, but aren't tariffs taxes on imports? If imported lumber and steel means I have to pay more for them, wouldn't that encourage me to buy more of our own lumber and steel? Wouldn't that boost our own country's lumber and steel companies production, the very companies the greenies have been trying to get shut down for years? Do you suppose greenies buy much lumber and steel?

Please continue, educate me. Unfortunately I do not have time to stay here and finish this with you now, but I will try to return to read more later.

This author would have been better to have included more specifics into his piece instead of just broad brush sweeping generalizations, imo. There is much to be learned from discussion of the specifics. When the author's entire piece is presented as one sweeping generalization about how bad Bush is and how most Bush supporters are blind voters, why would anyone, especially mainstream conservatives, want to bother to respond?

298 posted on 06/17/2003 10:16:42 AM PDT by Ms. AntiFeminazi (three rights make a LEFT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson