President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

[hog88]

I see people in here bemoaning the tariffs that have previously expressed support of a national sales tax or consumption tax. What's the difference? Tariffs are a tax we will all pay but it's one we can choose not to pay. I say kill the income and other federal taxes and fund the federal government through tariffs and fees like the founders intended.

 

[swampfoxfan]

Have you been looking at the evidence presented? It certainly appears so.

Are you sure the evidence exists and is it credible?

Would the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity not shield Obama?

 

[LouderVol]

I see people in here bemoaning the tariffs that have previously expressed support of a national sales tax or consumption tax. What's the difference? Tariffs are a tax we will all pay but it's one we can choose not to pay. I say kill the income and other federal taxes and fund the federal government through tariffs and fees like the founders intended.

yeah, but that is the flaw. you got to kill the other taxes to make this make sense. a consumption tax/tariff on top income and all other taxes isn't a net benefit.

Trump hasn't mentioned slashing income taxes. this has all been suggested as a way to increase tax revenue for the government, not to decrease/get rid of dumb taxes.

 

[hndog609]

I see people in here bemoaning the tariffs that have previously expressed support of a national sales tax or consumption tax. What's the difference? Tariffs are a tax we will all pay but it's one we can choose not to pay. I say kill the income and other federal taxes and fund the federal government through tariffs and fees like the founders intended.

I could be wrong but I thought those espousing the national sales tax was supposed to replace the income tax. (Maybe that was the intent of some but not others)

 

[n_huffhines]

$16m payoff
Fired Colbert
Eliminated DEI

This merger's gotta be a shoe-in for FCC approval, right? Swamp! Swamp! Swamp!

Skydance promises to end DEI initiatives at Paramount after merger | Fox Business Skydance informs Trump’s FCC it will eliminate DEI at paramount, create CBS News ombudsman following merger

 

[Orangeslice13]

I get it, math is hard. It's even harder when you want with all your heart to believe a lie.

Darths law of internet debate

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

I see people in here bemoaning the tariffs that have previously expressed support of a national sales tax or consumption tax. What's the difference? Tariffs are a tax we will all pay but it's one we can choose not to pay. I say kill the income and other federal taxes and fund the federal government through tariffs and fees like the founders intended.

You aren't going to want a national VAT (see Brazil, for example).....

 

[hog88]

yeah, but that is the flaw. you got to kill the other taxes to make this make sense. a consumption tax/tariff on top income and all other taxes isn't a net benefit.

Trump hasn't mentioned slashing income taxes. this has all been suggested as a way to increase tax revenue for the government, not to decrease/get rid of dumb taxes.

Completely agree with you on this. Maybe (doubtful) that will be on next years agenda before the midterms.

 

[swampfoxfan]

I see people in here bemoaning the tariffs that have previously expressed support of a national sales tax or consumption tax. What's the difference? Tariffs are a tax we will all pay but it's one we can choose not to pay. I say kill the income and other federal taxes and fund the federal government through tariffs and fees like the founders intended.

The tariffs would need to be reciprocal. Otherwise it would be a similar mess to what we have now. Saudi pays a 4%tariffs and Mexico pays 45%, next administration reverses it,a not likely example but you get my point.

 

[hog88]

You aren't going to want a national VAT (see Brazil, for example).....

Agreed, I don't like VAT systems but Brazil has gone nuts with theirs and made it unwieldy.

 

[85SugarVol]

Clearly, you need a MAGA re-education camp. We can't have you out here formulating your own thoughts.

I sentence you to reading homoerotic X posts for the next 4 hours....

 

[hog88]

The tariffs would need to be reciprocal. Otherwise it would be a similar mess to what we have now. Saudi pays a 4%tariffs and Mexico pays 45%, next administration reverses it,a not likely example but you get my point.

I agree, the fact we often change direction/policy every 4 to 8 years is our biggest weakness.

 

[CobbVol]

I’m more amazed by the people do who don’t believe it will cause inflation. I can see some small + outcomes (the bad outweighs the good).

But I can’t comprehend any argument that tariffs will not cause inflation.

Trump implemented tariffs in 2018 and it yielded no inflation.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Trump implemented tariffs in 2018 and it yielded no inflation.

Trump didn’t implement 25, 50, and 100% tariffs in 2018. And it’s moronic to claim that tariffs of those levels won’t cause price increases and thus inflation.

I googled. Trump did put specific high tariffs on steel and solar imports. However over all tariffs were 4.1% in the aggregate

Tariffs in the first Trump administration - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Trump didn’t implement 25, 50, and 100% tariffs in 2018. And it’s moronic to claim that tariffs of those levels won’t cause price increases and thus inflation.

I googled. Trump did put specific high tariffs on steel and solar imports. However over all tariffs were 4.1% in the aggregate

Tariffs in the first Trump administration - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Also had 5 rate increases from Dec 17 to Dec 18 as well which could have hid the inflationary impact from the tarrifs as well...

 

[CobbVol]

Trump didn’t implement 25, 50, and 100% tariffs in 2018. And it’s moronic to claim that tariffs of those levels won’t cause price increases and thus inflation.

I googled. Trump did put specific high tariffs on steel and solar imports. However over all tariffs were 4.1% in the aggregate

Tariffs in the first Trump administration - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Again, 2018 yielded no inflation and I am sure the screaming about tariffs were just as loud then as they are today.

TBD on the impact of the current tariffs. It is clear as day that they are primarily addressing NTBs for US producers and investment in the US using the %s and access to our market as the leverage.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Again, 2018 yielded no inflation and I am sure the screaming about tariffs were just as loud then as they are today.

TBD on the impact of the current tariffs. It is clear as day that they are primarily addressing NTBs for US producers and investment in the US using the %s and access to our market as the leverage.

And you’re still equating the much narrower tariffs from his first term to the broad and high tariffs from this term. It’s disingenuous as hell.

 

[CobbVol]

And you’re still equating the much narrower tariffs from his first term to the broad and high tariffs from this term. It’s disingenuous as hell.

It’s disingenuous of you to not see IPs, NTBs, market access, and investment in the US and only see %s.

EDIT: Plus, tariffs were placed on China so not really "narrow"

Steel and Aluminum Tariffs (March 2018​

Tariffs: 25% on steel, 10% on aluminum
China, one of the world’s largest steel producers, was directly impacted by this protectionist push, which was justified on national security grounds. This triggered the first signs of retaliation from Beijing.

$34 Billion in Tariffs Kicks Off the Trade War (July 2018)​

Tariffs: 25% on $34 billion of Chinese goods
This marked the official start of the U.S.–China trade war. The list included machinery, auto parts, and other industrial goods—seen as the backbone of China’s tech ambitions.

Expanding to $200 Billion (September 2018)​

Tariffs: 10% on $200 billion in imports (set to rise to 25%)
In a massive escalation, the Trump administration levied a 10% tariff on consumer products ranging from electronics to furniture, signaling the broadening of the trade conflict.

Rate Hike to 25% on $200 Billion (May 2019)​

Tariffs: Increased from 10% to 25%
As trade talks stalled, Trump followed through on his threat to hike the previous round of tariffs to 25%, increasing the pain on U.S. importers and consumers.

15% Tariff on Consumer Goods (September 2019)​

Tariffs: 15% on $112 billion of Chinese imports
Targeting everyday goods like clothing, shoes, and TVs, this round was felt directly by American households. It was designed to ratchet up pressure on Beijing ahead of negotiations.

“Phase One” Deal (January 2020)​

Tariffs: Some reductions, many remain
While this deal paused escalation and led to a small rollback (some tariffs lowered from 15% to 7.5%), it left most duties intact—especially the 25% tariffs. China pledged to increase purchases of U.S. goods, but compliance was mixed.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

Yeah, but

View attachment 757691

(give a like if you get the reference, the lyric hit me so strong I almost said it out loud)

FNM is in my top ten.

 

[NorthDallas40]

It’s disingenuous of you to not see IPs, NTBs, market access, and investment in the US and only see %s.

Lol. Ok.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

I'm betting G Maxwell will soon have a pardon,if she promises to keep her mouth shut. Or maybe commits suicide

"Tomorrow, it's either going to rain, or it isn't."

 

[NorthDallas40]

It’s disingenuous of you to not see IPs, NTBs, market access, and investment in the US and only see %s.

EDIT: Plus, tariffs were placed on China so not really "narrow"

Steel and Aluminum Tariffs (March 2018​

Tariffs: 25% on steel, 10% on aluminum
China, one of the world’s largest steel producers, was directly impacted by this protectionist push, which was justified on national security grounds. This triggered the first signs of retaliation from Beijing.

$34 Billion in Tariffs Kicks Off the Trade War (July 2018)​

Tariffs: 25% on $34 billion of Chinese goods
This marked the official start of the U.S.–China trade war. The list included machinery, auto parts, and other industrial goods—seen as the backbone of China’s tech ambitions.

Expanding to $200 Billion (September 2018)​

Tariffs: 10% on $200 billion in imports (set to rise to 25%)
In a massive escalation, the Trump administration levied a 10% tariff on consumer products ranging from electronics to furniture, signaling the broadening of the trade conflict.

Rate Hike to 25% on $200 Billion (May 2019)​

Tariffs: Increased from 10% to 25%
As trade talks stalled, Trump followed through on his threat to hike the previous round of tariffs to 25%, increasing the pain on U.S. importers and consumers.

15% Tariff on Consumer Goods (September 2019)​

Tariffs: 15% on $112 billion of Chinese imports
Targeting everyday goods like clothing, shoes, and TVs, this round was felt directly by American households. It was designed to ratchet up pressure on Beijing ahead of negotiations.

“Phase One” Deal (January 2020)​

Tariffs: Some reductions, many remain
While this deal paused escalation and led to a small rollback (some tariffs lowered from 15% to 7.5%), it left most duties intact—especially the 25% tariffs. China pledged to increase purchases of U.S. goods, but compliance was mixed.

Great!! Focus on China! We’ve agreed on that! But yes it’s still narrow focus on one country. It’s a big one bit it’s one country and not every damn trading partner we do business with. That’s the disingenuous part by you, comparing this broad based large tariff across the board on all trading partners with the focused tariffs on China in the first term. China also is the big offender on IP theft and NTBs as you’ve deflected to. Great go after them in kind across the board with all the tools.

I’ve advocated for moving trade out of China for years. Thanks for affirming my stance!

 

[ButchPlz]

Great!! Focus on China! We’ve agreed on that! But yes it’s still narrow focus on one country. It’s a big one bit it’s one country and not every damn trading partner we do business with. That’s the disingenuous part by you, comparing this broad based large tariff across the board on all trading partners with the focused tariffs on China in the first term. China also is the big offender on IP theft and NTBs as you’ve deflected to. Great go after them in kind across the board with all the tools.

I’ve advocated for moving trade out of China for years. Thanks for affirming my stance!

China is and has been eating our lunch and all we get out of Trump is tariffs and focus on other countries (for some reason) instead of using what we can on the Chinese.

 

[NorthDallas40]

China is and has been eating our lunch and all we get out of Trump is tariffs and focus on other countries (for some reason) instead of using what we can on the Chinese.

Bingo! And in his current trade war Trump keeps giving China a pass while pointing at hollow “wins” with other trading partners. Every damn time. Bessett has already floated China will get a pass beyond Aug 12.

 

[LouderVol]

depending on what all their "DEI" programs are its probably just more cost savings rather than bending the knee.