U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old Today, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Michigan, Maryland-born
66 posts, read 17,308 times
Reputation: 190

Advertisements

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

https://reason.com/2019/08/19/peter-...=p2ANqtz--E-R3


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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 06:34 PM
 
Location: United States
11,061 posts, read 5,133,840 times
Reputation: 5302
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuakerBaker View Post
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

https://reason.com/2019/08/19/peter-...=p2ANqtz--E-R3


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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:02 PM
 
Location: Michigan, Maryland-born
66 posts, read 17,308 times
Reputation: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
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%.....

https://www.businessinsider.com/thin...vie-theaters-1


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!

This could make sense in my mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:04 PM
 
23,771 posts, read 12,537,411 times
Reputation: 7588
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuakerBaker View Post
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%.....

https://www.businessinsider.com/thin...vie-theaters-1


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!

This could make sense in my mind.
and even if the consumer isn't eating all of the costs -- somewhere in the USA someone is paying more and that will slowly get to the consumer.

It just will.

That's why Tim Cook took time to fly to Washington DC to meet with Trump.....to explain how international trade works.

How some international trade is important and works for the USA economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
10,750 posts, read 4,492,013 times
Reputation: 4757
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
and even if the consumer isn't eating all of the costs -- somewhere in the USA someone is paying more and that will slowly get to the consumer.

It just will.

That's why Tim Cook took time to fly to Washington DC to meet with Trump.....to explain how international trade works.

How some international trade is important and works for the USA economy.
Will go right over Trump's head.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:19 PM
 
479 posts, read 337,667 times
Reputation: 433
they want another 2008 crash to happen again so they can grab it all
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:43 PM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,891 posts, read 15,647,186 times
Reputation: 11591
We could just freely hand over hundreds of billions of dollars like we used to...

Doesn't do much for the bottom line, but it gives people the warm fuzzies...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,891 posts, read 15,647,186 times
Reputation: 11591
Trump statement...

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,891 posts, read 15,647,186 times
Reputation: 11591
From the past for a frame of reference...

2.4 million jobs lost due to China from 2001-2008

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?

------------------------

Last month...

China's economy just posted its lowest growth rate in 27 years

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
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 · Bug Bounty

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