Grading the First 100 Days

[gil]

When you consider what is of immediate importance, i.e. illegal immigration, DOGE, Tariffs, I give Trump an A+ because I can see where it is all leading. Perhaps I have a different take on the tariffs, seeing them as a long term "investment." But I think they will result in eventual good. As for the other items on the list, I don't see them as being of tremendous importance. We'll likely never learn anything about the Epstein Files, the current economy is a leftover Biden "gift," the rogue justices will eventually be curtailed, and other issues of lesser importance.

Job creation is beginning to ramp up, which will have a major impact on the mid-terms. We will never see the Biden Inflation go back down but we might see increases in wages to compensate. And if the Trump tax passes, well, that's the kicker to an A+.

I give Trump an A. There is only so much he can do within the first 100 Days to correct the mess Biden left us. A lot of it depends upon what Congress will do. Lets give it until the end of October to see how things are going.

I've been pretty outspoken against tariffs, and I'd like to make sure I'm not missing anything in the pro-tariff argument. What is the investment you mention? Do you mean creating the conditions and incentives for increased manufacturing in the US?

That's how I see it, as well as evening the playing field. Again, why should we pay tariffs, but we don't receive them? It was my initial question in the Tariffs section in here, and if someone answered it concisely, I sure didn't see it. There is zero reason that "fair trade" should mean that one nation pays a tariff, but doesn't charge one. The word fair doesn't fit in that narrative.

My understanding is that when we "charge" a tariff, it's our own businesses and consumers that pay. When another country has a tariff, then it's their consumers and businesses that pay.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Tariffs can be broadly classified into three main types: specific, ad valorem, and compound. A specific tariff is a fixed amount levied per unit of an imported good (e.g., $5 per bottle of wine). An ad valorem tariff is calculated as a percentage of the import's value (e.g., 10% of the value of an imported car). Compound tariffs combine both specific and ad valorem elements.

Here's a more detailed look:

1. Specific Tariffs:
Definition:
A fixed fee or tax imposed on each unit of an imported good, regardless of its value.

Example:
A $10 tariff on each imported bicycle, or $1 per kilogram of imported cheese.

2. Ad Valorem Tariffs:
Definition: A tax expressed as a percentage of the value of the imported good.

Example: A 10% ad valorem tariff on imported electronics, meaning a tax of 10% of the total value of the electronics is charged.

3. Compound Tariffs:
Definition: A combination of both specific and ad valorem tariffs.

Example: A 5% ad valorem tariff plus a $5 per unit specific tariff on imported clothing.

Other Important Considerations:

Preferential Duties: Lower or waived tariffs applied to imports from countries with which a country has a special trade agreement, like a free trade agreement.
Retaliatory Tariffs: Tariffs imposed in response to tariffs imposed by another country.
Revenue Tariffs: Tariffs primarily aimed at generating government revenue, rather than protecting domestic industries.



Let's look at it another way.....

If these tariffs bring in enough money that everybody that makes under 200k a year is federal tax exempt, would you be happy? This way the "basic tax" that you pay is based on your spending.

What about Apple and iPhones? I read somewhere that the iPhones actually cost less than $100 to produce in China, but Apple charges over $1,200.00 per phone in the states. That is one hell of a profit. With a 100% tariff on the phones, the cost would go to $200 to import, but would Apple charge the consumer $2,400.00 per unit sold?

Anything made in China and any other shit hole country (like Oakland, CA ) should have a tariff on it because they pay the slave labor much less than in the states.

[gil]

Tariffs can be broadly classified into three main types: specific, ad valorem, and compound. A specific tariff is a fixed amount levied per unit of an imported good (e.g., $5 per bottle of wine). An ad valorem tariff is calculated as a percentage of the import's value (e.g., 10% of the value of an imported car). Compound tariffs combine both specific and ad valorem elements.

Here's a more detailed look:

1. Specific Tariffs:
Definition:
A fixed fee or tax imposed on each unit of an imported good, regardless of its value.

Example:
A $10 tariff on each imported bicycle, or $1 per kilogram of imported cheese.

2. Ad Valorem Tariffs:
Definition: A tax expressed as a percentage of the value of the imported good.

Example: A 10% ad valorem tariff on imported electronics, meaning a tax of 10% of the total value of the electronics is charged.

3. Compound Tariffs:
Definition: A combination of both specific and ad valorem tariffs.

Example: A 5% ad valorem tariff plus a $5 per unit specific tariff on imported clothing.

Other Important Considerations:

Preferential Duties: Lower or waived tariffs applied to imports from countries with which a country has a special trade agreement, like a free trade agreement.
Retaliatory Tariffs: Tariffs imposed in response to tariffs imposed by another country.
Revenue Tariffs: Tariffs primarily aimed at generating government revenue, rather than protecting domestic industries.



Let's look at it another way.....

If these tariffs bring in enough money that everybody that makes under 200k a year is federal tax exempt, would you be happy? This way the "basic tax" that you pay is based on your spending.

What about Apple and iPhones? I read somewhere that the iPhones actually cost less than $100 to produce in China, but Apple charges over $1,200.00 per phone in the states. That is one hell of a profit. With a 100% tariff on the phones, the cost would go to $200 to import, but would Apple charge the consumer $2,400.00 per unit sold?

Anything made in China and any other shit hole country (like Oakland, CA ) should have a tariff on it because they pay the slave labor much less than in the states.

Still, with these different types of tariffs, it's always the home country (i.e., where the imports are purchased ) that pays.

I posted somewhere here about the cost of an iPhone. It's well more than $100, probably over $500 as I recall. I also posted that Tim Cook says they use China for manufacturing because of advanced manufacturing capabilities -- capabilities that US companies do not have; it is not because of cheap labor.

Sure, I'd be happy with no federal income tax. But what is the math? How much tariff revenue would be required to replace income tax on these taxpayers?

I hate to say it, but I see a "rush to defend" tariffs that is not based on how tariffs work. Why is this?

[auroraave]

The problem with your position is twofold - first of all - why is it okay for tariffs to be used against us - but bad if we use them - we are somehow not allowed to reciprocate? The notion that the US does not have the production or technological capabilities to mass produce iphones here is utterly absurd. It is 100% about cheap foreign labor - you seriously think cook would admit publicly to basically using slave labor? DO you understand the optics of admitting that? Of course he is not going to say that, c'mon, man.

Second, the moment tariffs were announced - every single dem (politician) and all the usual suspects in the 'legacy media' responded with their predictable outrage theatrics - not based on the good or bad of tariffs - but because Trump announced it. It is their baseline position on LITERALLY ANYTHING he does or says. Having watched this for ten years now, my baseline is to immediately reject ANYTHING that comes out of the mouths of Dem politicians or the CNN's of the world as ridiculously biased and most likely untrue (oh, I can add a looooooooooong list) - based on the false and outright lying narratives they have pushed on us on an epic scale for the last decade. You suggesting there is a 'rush to defend' is truly comedic when you consider what has been shoved down our throats for the last decade - most of it is the non stop anti trump outrage. Somehow defending an idea as plausible - makes it suspect according to you. My God that is rich. "Covid didn't come from a lab"

I reject the idea there will be no fed tax - that's nonsense and nothing more than Trump bluster. Taxes should absolutely be lowered on all levels - as DOGE has now exposed the absolutely disgusting grifting our taxes are being used for. Funny how the Dems are 'outraged' that Trump is trying to eliminate waste and fraud and negotiate better trade deals - ideas that benefit ALL taxpayers. When the fuck would anyone ever oppose that? Oh, right... if it was Trump's idea.

Stimulus, response.

[Michael K.]

I saw a clip a few days ago about Hilary talking about free trade and the use of tariffs, and she seemed to think it was necessary. I’m sure all the liberals would have applauded the shit out of it back then.

You are spot on in your “Orange Man Bad” statement BPJ. It’s gotten utterly ridiculous. They supported a corpse for three and a half years, and then applauded Harris for taking over for what they finally admired was a corpse. It’s disgusting. Just keep paying taxes and don’t give a shit that the money is spent in male on make sex in Africa! You can’t make this shit up because it’s not believable.

[gil]

The problem with your position is twofold - first of all - why is it okay for tariffs to be used against us - but bad if we use them - we are somehow not allowed to reciprocate? The notion that the US does not have the production or technological capabilities to mass produce iphones here is utterly absurd. It is 100% about cheap foreign labor - you seriously think cook would admit publicly to basically using slave labor? DO you understand the optics of admitting that? Of course he is not going to say that, c'mon, man.

Second, the moment tariffs were announced - every single dem (politician) and all the usual suspects in the 'legacy media' responded with their predictable outrage theatrics - not based on the good or bad of tariffs - but because Trump announced it. It is their baseline position on LITERALLY ANYTHING he does or says. Having watched this for ten years now, my baseline is to immediately reject ANYTHING that comes out of the mouths of Dem politicians or the CNN's of the world as ridiculously biased and most likely untrue (oh, I can add a looooooooooong list) - based on the false and outright lying narratives they have pushed on us on an epic scale for the last decade. You suggesting there is a 'rush to defend' is truly comedic when you consider what has been shoved down our throats for the last decade - most of it is the non stop anti trump outrage. Somehow defending an idea as plausible - makes it suspect according to you. My God that is rich. "Covid didn't come from a lab"

I reject the idea there will be no fed tax - that's nonsense and nothing more than Trump bluster. Taxes should absolutely be lowered on all levels - as DOGE has now exposed the absolutely disgusting grifting our taxes are being used for. Funny how the Dems are 'outraged' that Trump is trying to eliminate waste and fraud and negotiate better trade deals - ideas that benefit ALL taxpayers. When the fuck would anyone ever oppose that? Oh, right... if it was Trump's idea.

Stimulus, response.

If people are against something just because Trump supports it? That is wrong. Period. Full stop.

There are lots and lots of economists who are anti-tariff and always have been. It's ideological, of course (the champions of the free market), but I don't see it as political.

What does it mean for tariffs "to be used against us"? If China imposes tariffs on American goods, it's their citizens and business that are paying.

I'll stand by the statement that American manufacturing capabilities have fallen behind those of China. Tim Cook is far from the only one who has said that (and the interview I cited in the tariffs topic was 8 years ago). If you want cheap, you can go places that are cheaper than China.

As I said above, I give Trump an F for tariffs not only for the policy, but also for the way he announces something, then pulls it back, then adds something new. We (the business community and people who are about the economy) need something more stable. Across the board high tariffs that don't change is better than back and forth unpredictability.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

advanced manufacturing capabilities -- capabilities that US companies do not have; it is not because of cheap labor.

Bullshit!
Bullshit!!
Bullshit!!!

Cheap labor is a manufacturing capability......... in other words PROFIT.

[gil]

advanced manufacturing capabilities -- capabilities that US companies do not have; it is not because of cheap labor.

Bullshit!
Bullshit!!
Bullshit!!!

Cheap labor is a manufacturing capability......... in other words PROFIT.

That's the story we grew up with, and it was true at the time. But change happened. Just like "made in Japan" used to mean cheap stuff, remember? Japan developed technology and manufacturing capabilities, and by the 1990s companies like Toyota, Sony, and Hitachi were world class, and arguably better than American companies in their industries.

So sure there is low cost stuff coming out of China, and I'll cede that point. But where is the best high technology manufacturing? Where are the greatest numbers of the best engineers? THAT is where I want America to compete. You always want to take on the most difficult challenges that will form the industries of the future.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Based on SLAVE LABOR.

What would the true cost be to make the iPhone in the states with unions, and government regulations?

iPhone & Nike are the worst kinds of capitalism..... exploit slave labor to make the largest profit you can.

I do find it unfortunate that you can't understand this because you seem to be a very kind-hearted person. But please, have a great time with the apps on your iPhone walking around in your $300 Jordans.

[gil]

Based on SLAVE LABOR.

What would the true cost be to make the iPhone in the states with unions, and government regulations?

iPhone & Nike are the worst kinds of capitalism..... exploit slave labor to make the largest profit you can.

I do find it unfortunate that you can't understand this because you seem to be a very kind-hearted person. But please, have a great time with the apps on your iPhone walking around in your $300 Jordans.

Good question. I'll happily buy a smart phone or running shoes made in the US. Any suggestions?

Somehow, I think we are losing the plot. I'm talking about how well I think Trump is doing on tariffs. if he is driven by ending slave labor, good for him, but it seems to me that caring about slave labor is mostly a far left cause, and the rest of us keep our heads in the sand about it (or make fun of the leftists who care about this and other woke causes).