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.
Trump Administration official Peter Navarro went on CNN to defend Trump's tariff policy......He claimed the following......
1...."The tariffs are hurting China. China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs. Look at the data. There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this."
and he also claimed....
2....That Trump delayed tariffs on China to avoid hurting American consumers during the Christmas shopping season as a "a Christmas present to the nation."
You cannot genuinely hold both of these beliefs together.....that the tariffs are being entirely paid by China and delaying tariffs helps American consumers.
Even the most ardent Trump supporters must admit that this is a contradicting position. This is logic 101.
One study found that ites under tariff saw their prices rise 3% while items not under tariff saw their prices fall 1%. Another study found that US consumers paid 95% of the tariffs while China paid 5%.
Hmm...
Credit for this post's intellectual foundation goes to Eric Boehm of Reason.com
You can support Trump if you choose, you can support tariffs if you choose, but this logic put forward by a Trump official on CNN is Orwellian and not supportable. Am I wrong?
Trump Administration official Peter Navarro went on CNN to defend Trump's tariff policy......He claimed the following......
1...."The tariffs are hurting China. China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs. Look at the data. There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this."
and he also claimed....
2....That Trump delayed tariffs on China to avoid hurting American consumers during the Christmas shopping season as a "a Christmas present to the nation."
You cannot genuinely hold both of these beliefs together.....that the tariffs are being entirely paid by China and delaying tariffs helps American consumers.
Even the most ardent Trump supporters must admit that this is a contradicting position. This is logic 101.
One study found that ites under tariff saw their prices rise 3% while items not under tariff saw their prices fall 1%. Another study found that US consumers paid 95% of the tariffs while China paid 5%.
Hmm...
Credit for this post's intellectual foundation goes to Eric Boehm of Reason.com
You can support Trump if you choose, you can support tariffs if you choose, but this logic put forward by a Trump official on CNN is Orwellian and not supportable. Am I wrong?
The tariffs were delayed because retailers already locked in their numbers for the Christmas season, therefor it makes sense to wait until after the holiday season before adding more tariffs.
Also, I find you post very strange. How can US consumers be paying almost all of the tariffs that are between 10-25 percent, but prices only rise 3%.
The prices prove that the US consumer is paying very little of the tariff costs.
Also, I find you post very strange. How can US consumers be paying almost all of the tariffs that are between 10-25 percent, but prices only rise 3%.
The prices prove that the US consumer is paying very little of the tariff costs.
Hey man....
Mark ups!
Mark ups...my man..
So China sells the iPhoneX to the US for $370.25. A 10% tariff would mean the US middleman now buys it for an extra $37!
The US retailer sells it for $999.....a 10% tariff though on the final price is only a 3.7% increase in the price.....as the tariff is on the base initial price before the mark up....
If China eats 10% of that tariff than the price only rises about $33 or 3.3%.....
So China sells the iPhoneX to the US for $370.25. A 10% tariff would mean the US middleman now buys it for an extra $37!
The US retailer sells it for $999.....a 10% tariff though on the final price is only a 3.7% increase in the price.....as the tariff is on the base initial price before the mark up....
If China eats 10% of that tariff than the price only rises about $33 or 3.3%.....
That's right. 2.4 million jobs lost in 8 years can be directed attributed to China.
Since China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, 2.4 million jobs have been lost or displaced in the United States as a result of the burgeoning trade deficit with that nation
Dr. Robert Scott, International Economist for the Economic Policy Institute, has a new paper, Unfair China Trade Costs Local Jobs and it's well researched, damning. The AAM has published the report in an easy scrolling presentation on the AAM website.
...
What is astounding in this report are the areas with the number one job losses from trade with China, the heart of those jobs of tomorrow we heard touted by politicians, is Silicon valley. Get that? It's not just India stealing the U.S. tech sector, it's China.
Growing trade deficits cost jobs in every state and congressional district (CD), the report found, including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The computer, electronic equipment and parts industries experienced the largest growth in trade deficits with China, resulting in 628,000 job losses—26 percent of all jobs displaced by trade between 2001 and 2008.
We should continue in this direction because this is what we are used to, right?
The economy grew by 6.2% in the second quarter, a drop from 6.4% in the first quarter and 6.6% in all of 2018, according to China's National Bureau of Statistics.
"There's no doubt in anyone's minds that the trade war is a major contributing factor here, especially coming at a time when the economy was already in the midst of a slowdown," the online foreign-exchange broker Oanda said.
...
The growth rate was the lowest since the NBS started calculating its economic data in 1992, at the start of China's long bull run, according to the Financial Times.
Most of the decline came from weakening exports because of the additional tariffs places upon Chinese goods.
...
In a report Monday, Nomura analysts said that for China "the worst is yet to come."
In a worst-case scenario, Nomura predicted that falling exports would shave 0.4 percentage points off China's GDP growth, with another 1 point of growth being erased by lower manufacturing investment caused by disruption of supply chains.
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.
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.
Plus throw in the 1% deflation that the WSJ saw in non-tariff goods and the trend is not 3%, but rather 4% from the -1% baseline, man!
