Trump signs tariffs

[mrhorseplayer]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Then why is he taxing American consumers by putting tariffs on the products that they buy?

What taxes has President Trump put on consumers?

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by mrhorseplayer

What taxes has President Trump put on consumers?

Tariffs are taxes on imports. Taxes get passed on to the consumer, or the company can't stay in business. Trump has imposed a 30% import tax on imported solar panels, and the great majority of solar panels here are imported. Who do you think pays that tax? It is simple economics.

[MargieRose]

If I am remembering correctly, Trump said that there will some "pain" to endure for a while in trying to get the trade deficit under control. So, some consumer goods will cost us more...for now. In the grand scheme of things, over the long haul, as a nation, we, especially the younger citizens of our society, will ultimately benefit more, I believe.

For something like solar paneling now, for some, they either don't want it, or if they do, they can't afford it at the pre-tariff price, to begin with. For those who do want it and can afford it now, they will still be able to afford it, even with a price increase, and they would likely be getting a better quality product, if they were able to buy competitively-priced American made...would be worth it.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by MargieRose

If I am remembering correctly, Trump said that there will some "pain" to endure for a while in trying to get the trade deficit under control. So, some consumer goods will cost us more...for now. In the grand scheme of things, over the long haul, as a nation, we, especially the younger citizens of our society, will ultimately benefit more, I believe.

Trump doesn't understand economics in general, or trade in particular. A "trade deficit", which is also known as a capital surplus, is not a bad thing for the economy. It keeps prices down and capital investment up. American steel makers have already increased prices in response to the tariffs. My guess is that those prices will stand as long as the tariffs are in place. During the 2016 campaign, Trump's economic expert said that his tariffs would increase consumer prices 10-15%. Is that an acceptable "pain" for the average American worker?

The trade deficit is a red flag issue for Trump because he believes that it is killing manufacturing jobs in this country. The truth is that over 80% of lost manufacturing jobs in this country have been lost to automation, not to jobs moving off-shore. And he doesn't understand that the resulting capital surplus creates more jobs. The problem for him is that they tend not to be manufacturing jobs.

For something like solar paneling now, for some, they either don't want it, or if they do, they can't afford it at the pre-tariff price, to begin with. For those who do want it and can afford it now, they will still be able to afford it, even with a price increase, and they would likely be getting a better quality product, if they were able to buy competitively-priced American made...would be worth it.

Solar paneling was just a random example. Trump has also put tariffs on washing machines, steel, aluminum, and Canadian lumber, all of which mean higher prices for consumers. And higher prices mean lower demand for American products too.

Production of solar panels is highly automated, and even manufacturers in this country are mostly foreign companies. The big unintended consequence in this industry is because the vast majority of American solar jobs are in installation, not manufacturing.

U.S. manufacturing of solar cells employed only about 1,300 people at its recent peak in 2012. ...tariffs would hurt homegrown companies that make racks, tracking systems and electronics that are part of a power system.

Industry groups have estimated that decreased demand due to higher prices could eliminate up to 20,000 installer jobs.

How is any of this going to benefit the nation in the long haul?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-a...-solar-panels/

[woodtoo]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Trump doesn't understand economics in general, or trade in particular. A "trade deficit", which is also known as a capital surplus, is not a bad thing for the economy. It keeps prices down and capital investment up. American steel makers have already increased prices in response to the tariffs. My guess is that those prices will stand as long as the tariffs are in place. During the 2016 campaign, Trump's economic expert said that his tariffs would increase consumer prices 10-15%. Is that an acceptable "pain" for the average American worker?

The trade deficit is a red flag issue for Trump because he believes that it is killing manufacturing jobs in this country. The truth is that over 80% of lost manufacturing jobs in this country have been lost to automation, not to jobs moving off-shore. And he doesn't understand that the resulting capital surplus creates more jobs. The problem for him is that they tend not to be manufacturing jobs.

Solar paneling was just a random example. Trump has also put tariffs on washing machines, steel, aluminum, and Canadian lumber, all of which mean higher prices for consumers. And higher prices mean lower demand for American products too.

Production of solar panels is highly automated, and even manufacturers in this country are mostly foreign companies. The big unintended consequence in this industry is because the vast majority of American solar jobs are in installation, not manufacturing. Industry groups have estimated that decreased demand due to higher prices could eliminate up to 20,000 installer jobs.

How is any of this going to benefit the nation in the long haul?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-a...-solar-panels/

President Trump understands economics a helluva a lot better than you do.
I'm supposed to take your word over his, I don't think so.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

President Trump understands economics a helluva a lot better than you do.
I'm supposed to take your word over his, I don't think so.

Thank you for that detailed argument proving Trump's superior understanding of the subject.

I'm not asking anyone to take my word. I provide sources for what I say, something neither Trump nor the Trumpettes do. I have shown here many times that Trump's ideas on tariffs have been rejected, and proven wrong, by economists and top business sources from both sides of the aisle.

Trump studied economics at Wharton in the late 1960s. At that time, and when I first studied economics some years later, the mainstream economic theories were based on the writings of John Maynard Keynes. A large part of the economic theory that the Neo-Keynesians were teaching back then has been debunked. Most of us have moved on since then. Trump has not. At least as far as economics and trade are concerned, Trump is still living in the 60's.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Trump doesn't understand economics in general, or trade in particular.

This statement simply makes you seem completely clueless and/or symptomatic of TDS that anything written after it is meaningless. As you can imagine, it saved me loads of time.

I can tell you that as a fellow graduate with an Economics degree, Trump definitely knows economics. He also knows trade. Just because you have bought into what others are saying doesn't make it true. There are plenty of us with economic degrees that aren't worried at all with Donald's actions. Why? That is the question you should research more before writing another tome that isn't worth reading.

I like you Clocker, but you have a burr in your saddle about Trump and it ain't pretty to look at. Listen, Trump is a blowhard, and an egotist, and loves himself much too much, and lies repeatedly, but I can live with all that because I also believe that he loves America like the common person does and knows what he is doing, both domestic and foreign. I didn't vote for him because I thought he was perfect. I knew what I was getting, which is why he will command 40% no matter what he does. We want a fixer. We want an anti-establishment guy. Is that so hard to understand? I wish Trump were Abraham Lincoln, but ya gotta take what you're given.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Thank you for that detailed argument proving Trump's superior understanding of the subject.

I'm not asking anyone to take my word. I provide sources for what I say, something neither Trump nor the Trumpettes do. I have shown here many times that Trump's ideas on tariffs have been rejected, and proven wrong, by economists and top business sources from both sides of the aisle.

Trump studied economics at Wharton in the late 1960s. At that time, and when I first studied economics some years later, the mainstream economic theories were based on the writings of John Maynard Keynes. A large part of the economic theory that the Neo-Keynesians were teaching back then has been debunked. Most of us have moved on since then. Trump has not. At least as far as economics and trade are concerned, Trump is still living in the 60's.

trump is not a Keynesian. FDR was a Keynesian. As you know, there is a huge difference between the two.

[Tom]

0bama was the Keynesian!

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Tom

0bama was the Keynesian!

Ha, I knew that was coming.

Keynesian economics is a belief that govt can fix the problem through excessive spending, and to me, its roots are in socialism, not capitalism. So the Obama and Bush bailouts after the 2008 depression were Keynesian in nature. Hard to kill bad theories sometimes.

[MargieRose]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Trump doesn't understand economics in general, or trade in particular. A "trade deficit", which is also known as a capital surplus, is not a bad thing for the economy. It keeps prices down and capital investment up. American steel makers have already increased prices in response to the tariffs. My guess is that those prices will stand as long as the tariffs are in place. During the 2016 campaign, Trump's economic expert said that his tariffs would increase consumer prices 10-15%. Is that an acceptable "pain" for the average American worker?

The trade deficit is a red flag issue for Trump because he believes that it is killing manufacturing jobs in this country. The truth is that over 80% of lost manufacturing jobs in this country have been lost to automation, not to jobs moving off-shore. And he doesn't understand that the resulting capital surplus creates more jobs. The problem for him is that they tend not to be manufacturing jobs.

Solar paneling was just a random example. Trump has also put tariffs on washing machines, steel, aluminum, and Canadian lumber, all of which mean higher prices for consumers. And higher prices mean lower demand for American products too.

Production of solar panels is highly automated, and even manufacturers in this country are mostly foreign companies. The big unintended consequence in this industry is because the vast majority of American solar jobs are in installation, not manufacturing. Industry groups have estimated that decreased demand due to higher prices could eliminate up to 20,000 installer jobs.

How is any of this going to benefit the nation in the long haul?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-a...-solar-panels/

I would never pretend to be knowledgeable enough on this subject to be able to debate you on your opinion; however, the author of these articles espouses a view that is contrary to yours. He, apparently, agrees with Donald Trump on this issue. He impressed me. What do you think?

Economists Are Liars: Here’s Why America’s Trade Deficit Is Bad

https://nationaleconomicseditorial.c...trade-deficit/

How Global “Free Trade” Killed the Middle Class

https://nationaleconomicseditorial.c...-middle-class/

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by tucker6

This statement simply makes you seem completely clueless and/or symptomatic of TDS that anything written after it is meaningless. As you can imagine, it saved me loads of time.

That statement was a preface to the details that followed. I said that a trade deficit is not a bad thing and some reasons why. I pointed out that automation, not trade, is the major killer of manufacturing jobs. No one addressed any of those things but, as expected, made it about me and my "TDS".

Trump's own economic advisors said that his tariffs could raise the cost of living by 10-15%. No one addressed that, or why that would be a good thing according to them.

As one example, I showed evidence that Trump's tariffs on solar panels would help a heavy-automated industry with about 1300 employees, while potentially killing 20,000 installer jobs plus others in supporting industries. No one argued objectively to the contrary.

Tariffs are bad for consumers, period, no matter who proposes them. If anyone wants to objectively discuss the issues, like those above, I'd be happy to. But here it's all the usual response. Trump is MAGA, and critics are haters.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Tom

0bama was the Keynesian!

Keynes was all about the tariffs towards the end of his career...

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Ha, I knew that was coming.

Keynesian economics is a belief that govt can fix the problem through excessive spending, and to me, its roots are in socialism, not capitalism. So the Obama and Bush bailouts after the 2008 depression were Keynesian in nature. Hard to kill bad theories sometimes.

Keynesian economics is a at its most basic a nationalistic economic theory based around intervention.

Those here misunderstand Keynes if they think bailouts and deficit spending are his only tools and not tariffs as well. Trump checks two of those boxes btw.

You know who else was all about tariffs...? Everybody's favorite around here... Paul Krugman.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

Keynesian economics is a at its most basic a nationalistic economic theory based around intervention.

And the Neo-Keynesians of the late 20th Century believed that the federal government could fine tune the economy with the various economic tools available to them. While Trump is not a strict believer in any particular school of economic theory, this view is what he is closest to. With a large topping of impulse and instinct. And he is certainly in no way a conservative.