Trump announces 25% tariff on all imported cars and car parts

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990861]This is about the hypocrisy of TacoMan. Any way to undermine trump. Its not about tariffs.[/QUOTE]

you don't he's given biden equal criticism?

[QUOTE=diamenz;14990874]you don't he's given biden equal criticism?[/QUOTE]

I don't make two contradictory points and support 2 different positions.

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990880]I don't make two contradictory points and support 2 different positions.[/QUOTE]

you support the blanket tariffs, no? that's fine btw. so you excuse a temporary higher tax rate for the benefit of a better america in the long term.

how is that not the same as theman also breaking off from his normal ideology under a unique circumstance?

[QUOTE=diamenz;14990881]you support the blanket tariffs, no? that's fine btw. so you excuse a temporary higher tax rate for the benefit of a better america in the long term.

how is that not the same as theman also breaking off from his normal ideology under a unique circumstance?[/QUOTE]

I never supported any tariffs. I believe in free trade. But if these tariffs are retaliatory to what the other countries are doing to us, then i'm fine with it.

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990882]I never supported any tariffs. I believe in free trade. [/QUOTE]

then i was mistaken. why are you not speaking out against them?

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990882]But if these tariffs are retaliatory to what the other countries are doing to us, then i'm fine with it.[/QUOTE]

but are they? i posted an article regarding this and you dismissed it out of hand.

[QUOTE=diamenz;14990887]but are they? i posted an article regarding this and you dismissed it out of hand.[/QUOTE]

I have no knowledge of it so I don't comment.

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990890]I have no knowledge of it so I don't comment.[/QUOTE]

because it wouldn't serve your interests to do so, am i right? let's be honest here.

[QUOTE=TeflonDonTrump;14990880]I don't make two contradictory points and support 2 different positions.[/QUOTE]

You can do two things at the same time, it's time to tax the rich, they're paying less and less taxes...and if you want American corporations to bring back their jobs to the US, tax incentives, guaranteed loans and grants, as long as they pay fair wages to Americans. It's not rocket science, retard.

[QUOTE=TheMan;14990949]You can do two things at the same time, it's time to tax the rich, they're paying less and less taxes...and if you want American corporations to bring back their jobs to the US, tax incentives, guaranteed loans and grants, as long as they pay fair wages to Americans. It's not rocket science, retard.[/QUOTE]

You can tax the rich and give the rich tax cuts at the same time.

Beaner logic my friends. This is why they specialize in pushing around carts with unhealthy food and drywall

^^Hey, you shouldn't be talking about who pays their taxes to whom just because you know that everyone knows you're so freaking broke. :no:

[QUOTE=warriorfan;14990761]No one wants to live in europe and beg america to protect them so they can have shitty healthcare for cheap :roll:[/QUOTE]

[url]https://www.newsweek.com/rankings/worlds-best-hospitals-2025[/url]

14 of the top 30 are in Europe only 8 in the US. Start educating yourself.

[IMG] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/644997621836152892/1357359498444017775/487980874_10161371194458108_5436106305399542484_n-1.jpg?ex=67f5d9ca&is=67f4884a&hm=4180253658b7aa7e193926a6ee597d9a416e1a633111047771905fb763d8e26e&[/IMG]

[QUOTE=warriorfan;14990958]You can tax the rich and give the rich tax cuts at the same time.

Beaner logic my friends. This is why they specialize in pushing around carts with unhealthy food and drywall[/QUOTE]

Tax incentives to corporations based on coming back and having union jobs you absolute moron.

[QUOTE=TheMan;14991061]Tax incentives to corporations based on coming back and having union jobs you absolute moron.[/QUOTE]

Not having to pay tariffs by producing in America is a tax incentive.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991063]Not having to pay tariffs by producing in America is a tax incentive.[/QUOTE]

Not really, you need a strategy behind it, tax incentives, grants, loan guarantees like the CHIPs Act and use tariffs like a surgical knife and not a blunt hacksaw and target specific industries and give industry time. It was decades in the making of manufacturers leaving the US, it's not a matter of months nor a couple of years.

You don't start a heavy handed trade war with the whole world at once, it's just plain stupid.

If the whole world wanted to, they could really screw the US by heavily tariffing all US exports which would lead to massive job loss in the US. Every economist out there not part of the MAGA cult says this is NOT the way to bring jobs back, this will only lead to worldwide economic crash if Trump doesn't reverse course.

This will go either of two ways...Trump pauses/stops this nonsense because enough billionaires got in his ear, he'll claim a bunch of countries want to renegotiate and call it a win or he can't control his ego and he just doesn't care about the damage to the average American family and he'll continue until we have a depression worse than what we have ever seen in our lifetime...and I'm not talking only about the US, this will be felt everywhere.

[QUOTE=TheMan;14991112]Not really, you need a strategy behind it and go at it with a surgical knife and not a blunt hacksaw. If the whole world wanted to, they could really screw the US by heavily tariffing all US exports which would lead to massive job loss in the US. Every economist out of the MAGA cult says this is NOT the way to bring jobs back, this will only lead to worldwide economic crash if Trump doesn't reverse course.[/QUOTE]

Of course there's a strategy behind it, though you or the economists who's all read the same books for the last 40 years might not agree with it.

Put pressure on other governments, giving them incentive to negotiate new trade deal that are better for the US than the ones in the past.
Put pressure on individual companies and give incentive to bring production back to the US.

Maybe there is a better strategy, but I certainly don't agree that the people with the same ideas as the ones who's been in charge for the last many years are the ones who have it, wouldn't be in this mess to begin with if that was the case.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991125]Of course there's a strategy behind it, though you or the economists who's all read the same books for the last 40 years might not agree with it.

Put pressure on other governments, giving them incentive to negotiate new trade deal that are better for the US than the ones in the past.
Put pressure on individual companies and give incentive to bring production back to the US.

Maybe there is a better strategy, but I certainly don't agree that the people with the same ideas as the ones who's been in charge for the last many years are the ones who have it, wouldn't be in this mess to begin with if that was the case.[/QUOTE]

You also know that trade deficits doesn't mean a country is screwing us right? I do agree that it was bad for the US to lose many manufacturing jobs to other countries but that was pushed by the free trade neoliberal conservatives in the GOP. As a left leaning on economics pro union Democrat (I no longer identify as a Democrat because they're basically GOP lite), I never liked seeing so many manufacturers leaving to South East Asia to pay slave wages while getting insanely rich, I knew it wasn't good for US families because of lost job opportunities, though the trade off was we got cheaper goods. Back to my main point, trade deficits aren't necessarily a bad thing, all that means is that we keep buying shit we want. I run a family business, I have a trade deficit with a family run coffee and donut shop on my corner, they have never bought anything I sell yet I buy my coffee at their shop every morning, they aren't screwing me, I love their coffee, I have the money so I buy it :confusedshrug: Now if a country is tariffing an American product, then by all means, do a retaliatory tariff, but if they don't and you still have a budget deficit, all it means is that that country has goods you want, they aren't screwing us over but Trump doesn't seem to be able to grasp this simple concept.

[QUOTE=TheMan;14991136]You also know that trade deficits doesn't mean a country is screwing us right? I do agree that it was bad for the US to lose many manufacturing jobs to other countries but that was pushed by the free trade neoliberal conservatives in the GOP. As a left leaning on economics pro union Democrat (I no longer identify as a Democrat because they're basically GOP lite), I never liked seeing so many manufacturers leaving to South East Asia to pay slave wages while getting insanely rich, I knew it wasn't good for US families because of lost job opportunities, though the trade off was we got cheaper goods. Back to my main point, trade deficits aren't necessarily a bad thing, all that means is that we keep buying shit we want. I run a family business, I have a trade deficit with a family run coffee and donut shop on my corner, they have never bought anything I sell yet I buy my coffee at their shop every morning, they aren't screwing me, I love their coffee, I have the money so I buy it :confusedshrug: Now if a country is tariffing an American product, then by all means, do a retaliatory tariff, but if they don't and you still have a budget deficit, all it means is that that country has goods you want, they aren't screwing us over but Trump doesn't seem to be able to grasp this simple concept.[/QUOTE]

But which countries doesn't have tariffs on US products? Pretty sure they all do, except for Israel last I heard.
Even on small stuff, like if you're an American business and want to sell a pair of $150 shoes to a person in Scandinavia, there's a straight 20% tariff slapped on your sales price, on top of their regular VAT sales tax, only because you're selling them from the US. The customer simply won't get his product released from customs there unless he or she pays the extra fee directly to their government.

Good example of very real B2B tariff differences here:

[video=youtube_share;oM96ErKnyTE]https://youtu.be/oM96ErKnyTE[/video]

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991125]

Put pressure on other governments, giving them incentive to negotiate new trade deal that are better for the US than the ones in the past.
Put pressure on individual companies and give incentive to bring production back to the US.

[/QUOTE]

which one is it though? is trump in this for the short or long term? i don't think he's made that clear.

trump could get some quick deals, drop the tariffs and use them to piggyback on to the trillions in corporate tax cuts. it's either that or he truly believes in bringing back american manufacturing and is going to ride this until the end.

knowing trump and how much of a 'wins' focused and lack of ideology guy that he is, it's probably the former.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991151]But which countries doesn't have tariffs on US products? Pretty sure they all do, except for Israel last I heard.
Even on small stuff, like if you're an American business and want to sell a pair of $150 shoes to a person in Scandinavia, there's a straight 20% tariff slapped on your sales price, on top of their regular VAT sales tax, only because you're selling them from the US. The customer simply won't get his product released from customs there unless he or she pays the extra fee directly to their government.

Good example of very real B2B tariff differences here:

[video=youtube_share;oM96ErKnyTE]https://youtu.be/oM96ErKnyTE[/video][/QUOTE]
The USMCA trade deal was pushed by Trump to replace NAFTA, every product between the three are for the most part tariffs free except some that were agreed upon by the 3 trading partners.

[QUOTE=TheMan;14991163]The USMCA trade deal was pushed by Trump to replace NAFTA, every product between the three are for the most part tariffs free except some that were agreed upon by the 3 trading partners.[/QUOTE]

But Canada uses supply management policies instead right on relevant industries like dairy, right? So instead of tariffs on every product, there's just a limit on how much dairy products can be exported in total from the US to Canada until a very high tariff kicks in.

And more importantly, those two countries are special in this regard because they're neighboring countries to the US. Problem with Mexico's isn't that they're exporting real Mexican products to the US, but that US companies is nearshoring and moved production there to lower costs, so American products made in Mexico so to speak and this dynamic has completely taken off in the last years, even just from 2023 to 2024 that trade deficit increased by 13%.

I get that it's a point for you to say that USMCA is a deal Trump pushed and that's fair, but it doesn't mean he should be happy with it or how things have been going since. I also agree with you that the tactics used by Trump on this are very hardcore and won't make him popular in the world, but I'm sure they'll be effective in creating change fast as possible and Trump doesn't have much time left this being his 2nd term.
He'll also die relatively soon, I'm sure he'd like to see some results as well before that happens. Like I said in the thread earlier, 0% tariffs with Europe would be sweet and they've now opened up for that discussion, which wasn't anywhere on the table or even the menu before he did this.

prices are gonna go up for products regardless of this "pause". companies will use it as an excuse to price gouge americans simply because they can and/or they'll use the excuse that the uncertainty of any future tariff reimplementation are forcing them to play it safe. so the middle class gets *ucked either way and the big shots will of course get their tax breaks.

[QUOTE=diamenz;14991597]prices are gonna go up for products regardless of this "pause". companies will use it as an excuse to price gouge americans simply because they can and/or they'll use the excuse that the uncertainty of any future tariff reimplementation are forcing them to play it safe. so the middle class gets *ucked either way and the big shots will of course get their tax breaks.[/QUOTE]

It's a dead end discussion bro when people expect a quick solution.

Raise tariffs and companies will raise prices, screwing over the middle class.

Raise corporate taxes and companies will raise prices, screwing over the middle class.

Don't do anything and companies will keep moving as many production jobs as possible overseas and south of the border, screwing over the middle class.

Capitalism by nature will evolve against the middle class. By nature it seeks to create products for as cheap as possible, as efficient as possible. That is great for getting us cheap products, but it is awful for wage and salary growth.

Slowly over time, the average American worker makes less and less, as businesses evolve to become more and more efficient. Replacing humans with computers when possible, paying younger less qualified people when they can get away with it.

The only solution is government intervention. The wealthy must be forced to spread their wealth. This is a solution that scares the right, they equate it to communism. But it isn't communism where every single worker has the same exact salary and there are no classes. That does not work and it is understood. But what also needs to be understood is that what works great in 1825 may not work great in 2025. And what worked poorly in the past may be needed in the future. Different eras have different demands and very different situations.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14991634]Capitalism by nature will evolve against the middle class. By nature it seeks to create products for as cheap as possible, as efficient as possible. That is great for getting us cheap products, but it is awful for wage and salary growth.

Slowly over time, the average American worker makes less and less, as businesses evolve to become more and more efficient. Replacing humans with computers when possible, paying younger less qualified people when they can get away with it.

The only solution is government intervention. The wealthy must be forced to spread their wealth. This is a solution that scares the right, they equate it to communism. But it isn't communism where every single worker has the same exact salary and there are no classes. That does not work and it is understood. But what also needs to be understood is that what works great in 1825 may not work great in 2025. And what worked poorly in the past may be needed in the future. Different eras have different demands and very different situations.[/QUOTE]

How wealthy is wealthy? You're ready to spread some of yours?

If billionaires were forced to give up their wealth it would mean them having to sell off stocks and cause stock prices to go down.
You've spent a decent amount of time in the last few days arguing as to why that definitely cannot happen and how it would lead to companies raising prices and screwing over the middle class, no? Seems like another dead end.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991647]How wealthy is wealthy? You're ready to spread some of yours?

If billionaires were forced to give up their wealth it would mean them having to sell off stocks and cause stock prices to go down, you've spent a decent amount of time in the last few days arguing as to why that definitely cannot happen and how it would lead to companies raising prices and screwing over the middle class, no? Seems like another dead end.[/QUOTE]

I think there are several different mechanisms. Forcing companies to pay out a certain % of royalty payments to it's workforce is one. Forced profit-sharing plans. A company must either reinvest it's profits into the company (like Amazon) or pay say 25% of all it's quarterly profits out to all of it's employees based on seniority or something else. The owners can not keep all of the profit. Maybe most, but not all. And if a company does not post a profit? They do not have to pay anything, which gives the workers incentive to work harder, as they are now part owner.

Or perhaps companies are forced to give it's employees a certain amount of stock in the company every year. So that all employees share in the wealth to some degree.

Some companies already do these things, but they do them on their own. If it were something every company was forced to do? Middle class would be in much better shape was they would grow along with the economy.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14991648]I think there are several different mechanisms. Forcing companies to pay out a certain % of royalty payments to it's workforce is one. Forced profit-sharing plans. A company must either reinvest it's profits into the company (like Amazon) or pay say 25% of all it's quarterly profits out to all of it's employees based on seniority or something else. The owners can not keep all of the profit. Maybe most, but not all. And if a company does not post a profit? They do not have to pay anything, which gives the workers incentive to work harder, as they are now part owner.

Or perhaps companies are forced to give it's employees a certain amount of stock in the company every year. So that all employees share in the wealth to some degree.[/QUOTE]

Alright so the already wealthy billionaires get to keep their money and stocks, but companies are now forced to pay out more money for their workers through a set of arbitrary rules.

1) When all the billionaire investors hear about these news laws are coming and companies will profit a lot less in the future, they sell their stocks and tank the market.

2) When companies find out they're being forced to pay out more money to their US workers by law, they'll have even more incentive to move jobs overseas or south of the border.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991660]Alright so the already wealthy billionaires get to keep their money and stocks, but companies are now forced to pay out more money for their workers through a set of arbitrary rules.

1) When all the billionaire investors hear about these news laws are coming and companies will profit a lot less in the future, they sell their stocks and tank the market.

2) When companies find out they're being forced to pay out more money to their US workers by law, they'll have even more incentive to move jobs overseas or south of the border.[/QUOTE]

A lot of companies already pay out shareholders every quarter in the form of a distribution. Like I said, everything I just typed out is something that a lot of companies already do. It just needs to be EVERY company. Every US worker should have a little ownership in some way. That would solve the problem. It either forces CEOs and owners to share a little, or grow the company and hire more.

Another mechanism would be some form a wealth cap. Like a human can only have $50 Billion in wealth or something like that. Really all you need to buy literally anything you want is $1B. That would buy all the beach homes and Ferraris you could want. There is no reason at all to have more wealth than that. And you could set it to where it excludes owners from having to sell their own company's stock or something.

There are different ways of spreading wealth, and eventually? we will be left with no other choice. Especially when automation really starts removing jobs.

can somebody explain to me what we got out of this? i don't have the energy to cut through the bullshit on left and right media.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14991172]But Canada uses supply management policies instead right on relevant industries like dairy, right? So instead of tariffs on every product, there's just a limit on how much dairy products can be exported in total from the US to Canada until a very high tariff kicks in.

And more importantly, those two countries are special in this regard because they're neighboring countries to the US. Problem with Mexico's isn't that they're exporting real Mexican products to the US, but that US companies is nearshoring and moved production there to lower costs, so American products made in Mexico so to speak and this dynamic has completely taken off in the last years, even just from 2023 to 2024 that trade deficit increased by 13%.

I get that it's a point for you to say that USMCA is a deal Trump pushed and that's fair, but it doesn't mean he should be happy with it or how things have been going since. I also agree with you that the tactics used by Trump on this are very hardcore and won't make him popular in the world, but I'm sure they'll be effective in creating change fast as possible and Trump doesn't have much time left this being his 2nd term.
He'll also die relatively soon, I'm sure he'd like to see some results as well before that happens. Like I said in the thread earlier, 0% tariffs with Europe would be sweet and they've now opened up for that discussion, which wasn't anywhere on the table or even the menu before he did this.[/QUOTE]

The dairy quotas are never reached so those high tariff rates never get triggered. I assume they will get rid of those quotas in the next agreement if they have never been rached.