U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-13-2019, 05:53 AM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,270 posts, read 61,221,652 times
Reputation: 31681

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Again, it makes no sense why Trump wants the U.S. to stop doing high value work and downshift to lower value tasks.
Because his supporters don't want to be told we need to reduce population levels...
and the jobs his most ardent supporters can get/keep are that sort of low value task.

 
Old 05-13-2019, 06:33 AM
 
6,628 posts, read 1,658,719 times
Reputation: 3801
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
Tariffs used to compromise 90% of government tax revenue, that was how the US government was run before there was an income tax. Now something like 1% of revenue is from tariffs. Somehow we managed growth and economic expansion with that setup.

The intent of Trump's tariffs is to artificially limit imports from China to get them to cry uncle and open up their markets to our companies. They agreed until at the last minute said actually no we don't agree and hence the additional tariff increases.

Trump has stated repeatedly that in his ideal world there would be no tariffs nor any hindering of companies doing business in any other.

If as a side benefit companies start moving production out of China and weakening their ability to advance technologically that is also a good thing.
I agree with this for the most part. And this is lost on the rabid anti-trumpers who think Trump just wants a permanent tariff on Chinese goods and cannot see past that.

I have no issue with the US government playing hardball with the Chinese, its actually long overdue my issue is Trump doing it. He has shown he will put his own political survival over the greater good of Americans and often his short term strategies fail to consider longer term consequences.

Personally I am willing to wait this out a bit and see what develops. Then pass judgement.

Last edited by Oklazona Bound; 05-13-2019 at 06:44 AM..
 
Old 05-13-2019, 08:09 AM
 
1,524 posts, read 342,961 times
Reputation: 2566
Tariffs are indeed taxes. That's the only thing the OP got correct. The OP got a 1 out of 4 on the test.

They are paid by people. As with ALL taxes, they are borne by actual people. The question is which people? It all depends on the price elasticity of demand and the price elasticity of supply (the slopes of the respective demand and supply curves).
  • X% of the tariffs are borne by customers (in the USA) in the form of prices higher than they otherwise would be
  • Y% of the tariffs are borne by employees (in China) in the form of compensation lower than it otherwise would be especially in the form of fewer hours worked (in China) and layoffs (in China) because of lower production induced by lower US demand
  • Z% of the tariffs are borne by business owners (in China) in the form of profits lower than they otherwise would be, where in China the owners are frequently proxies for the Chinese government
... where X% + Y% + Z% = 100%.

There are secondary effects. For example, at the margin, in the USA a customer might decide not to purchase a widget because the price is now higher than she's willing to pay. As a result, she now has more money left in her wallet. She might spend that money on something else. She might save that extra money, and since in aggregate savings=investments, that means she's invested more for the future.
 
Old 05-13-2019, 08:12 AM
 
Location: USA
15,923 posts, read 8,405,531 times
Reputation: 11934
The tariffs are a temporary negotiating tool in order to get China and other countries to lower or eliminate theirs to level the playing field. The U.S. has been abused for decades by unfair trade practices, that has cost us jobs, and manufacturing. Take the short term pain for LONG TERM GAIN.

Class dismissed.
 
Old 05-13-2019, 08:14 AM
 
1,524 posts, read 342,961 times
Reputation: 2566
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
We likely won’t have inflation as much as a slow down
Inflation -- an increase in the overall price level in the economy at large -- is a monetary phenomenon and independent of tariffs and taxes.
 
Old 05-13-2019, 08:32 AM
 
5,142 posts, read 1,911,820 times
Reputation: 6560
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1insider View Post
We regular folk can't understand the workings of a genius mind.

Yeah well Mister "Genius" is now asking for another $15 Bil in subsidies to hand out to farmers hurt by his Genius Trade War.
 
Old 05-13-2019, 09:19 AM
 
3,569 posts, read 3,018,077 times
Reputation: 7346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Yeah well Mister "Genius" is now asking for another $15 Bil in subsidies to hand out to farmers hurt by his Genius Trade War.

But, socialism?
 
Old 05-13-2019, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
7,098 posts, read 2,465,819 times
Reputation: 10995
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
Tariffs are indeed taxes. That's the only thing the OP got correct. The OP got a 1 out of 4 on the test.
The theoretical, long-term fallout from tariffs (which of course always proceeds exactly as it was diagrammed on the board back in Econ 101) isn't the point, here.

It's that their proponent is either stupid, or dangerously stupid, by his own plentiful words on the topic.
 
Old 05-13-2019, 10:00 AM
 
3,559 posts, read 2,331,094 times
Reputation: 2694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
The tariffs are a temporary negotiating tool in order to get China and other countries to lower or eliminate theirs to level the playing field. The U.S. has been abused for decades by unfair trade practices, that has cost us jobs, and manufacturing. Take the short term pain for LONG TERM GAIN.

Class dismissed.
I'm reminded of something I read in a Krugman column about NAFTA a year or two ago. It went something like, "If NAFTA was like running over the American worker with a car, cancelling NAFTA is like putting the car in reverse and running back over them." In other words, even taking as given that international trade has not been for the benefit of labor, blowing it up doesn't benefit labor either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Yeah well Mister "Genius" is now asking for another $15 Bil in subsidies to hand out to farmers hurt by his Genius Trade War.
Farmers would've been much better off if we just taxed the income the wealthy made from international trade and handed that money out to farmers (or to non-millionaires in general).
 
Old 05-13-2019, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
7,098 posts, read 2,465,819 times
Reputation: 10995
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Farmers would've been much better off if we just taxed the income the wealthy made from international trade and handed that money out to farmers (or to non-millionaires in general).
You mean farmers like Con-Agra and Cargill?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top