Trade Wars and Tariffs

#7,051
#7,051
lawgator1 said:
I think that in principle its a good thing that tarrif $ could be used to reduce the debt. My complaint is in dressing up what amounts to a tax increase for that purpose into something else. Just call it what it is. Say we are increasing taxes to pay off the debt. Then be accountable.
Click to expand...
Oh please the crying about how the tarrifs are disproportionally impacting the poor, transgendered, and minorities at the grocery store would be deafening
 
Last edited:
#7,056
#7,056
volfanhill said:
So what you really meant was "I'm ok with increasing taxes on people who I think should pay more in taxes."

Very bold and new take for you. Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
And just like the rest of all of this tariff stupidity would require Congress to allocate funds or assign taxes. That basic fact, or the ignoring of that fact, is what got us into this stupid situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#7,057
#7,057
The irony is the Rs were done in by the guy who got appointed after McConnell's stunt in 2016(Gorsuch) and the lady who got pushed through by McConnell's stunt in 2020 (ACB)....
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,060
#7,060
jmacvols1 said:
According the left, businesses did pass the tariff on to the consumer....and it didn't cause inflation to skyrocket as the left claimed it would. Why should the business get a refund when they passed the cost on to the consumer?

On the other hand, if the business ate the tariff and did not pass it on, then they may have a legit claim to a refund and the left was wrong about businesses passing the tariff on to the consumer. Either way, the left loses.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with “the left” besides your mention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and NashVol11
#7,062
#7,062
Never thought id see Republicans so willing get epsteined by Trump that they support illegal tax increases. How far the right has gone from their fundamental fiscal core values.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#7,063
#7,063
jmacvols1 said:
According the left, businesses did pass the tariff on to the consumer....and it didn't cause inflation to skyrocket as the left claimed it would. Why should the business get a refund when they passed the cost on to the consumer?

On the other hand, if the business ate the tariff and did not pass it on, then they may have a legit claim to a refund and the left was wrong about businesses passing the tariff on to the consumer. Either way, the left loses.
Click to expand...
According to the left? You mean Trumps Department of Labor?

The left wins every day Trump remains in office. Newsom gonna win, make all MAGA trans, take your kel tec guns, crocs, jorts, hey dudes, and make your kids gay marry. Its gonna be a blood bath.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#7,064
#7,064
MontyPython said:
Oh I'm sure the Democrats will impeach him when they take over Congress in January of 27, but they won't have enough votes to actually kick him out of office. But frankly I just don't see him completing his term for one reason or another anyway.

I expect some sort of fiery crash of some nature.
Click to expand...
People who think trump will be solved by an election don't understand what's happened. Just my opinion.
 
#7,066
#7,066
volfanhill said:
So what you really meant was "I'm ok with increasing taxes on people who I think should pay more in taxes."

Very bold and new take for you. Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...

No, everyone should pay towards debt reduction. But it should be transparent. If they end up taxing one segment too heavily, that segment votes those in power out, and it balances over time.
 
#7,067
#7,067
lawgator1 said:
I think that in principle its a good thing that tarrif $ could be used to reduce the debt. My complaint is in dressing up what amounts to a tax increase for that purpose into something else. Just call it what it is. Say we are increasing taxes to pay off the debt. Then be accountable.
Click to expand...

Still adding 1.5T-2T in debt every year. We are nowhere near breakeven, much less paying off some portion of the debt...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and hog88
#7,070
#7,070
lawgator1 said:
No, everyone should pay towards debt reduction. But it should be transparent. If they end up taxing one segment too heavily, that segment votes those in power out, and it balances over time.
Click to expand...

There will never be debt reduction without massive spending reductions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,072
#7,072
DinkinFlicka said:
Yes. Quite frequently.

Your rhetoric reflects the capability of your reasoning.
Click to expand...

it is constitutional when implemented under proper authority as evidenced by the tarrifs Biden implemented, which are still in effect, and many other Presidents.

your reasoning sucks.
 
#7,073
#7,073
Orangeburst said:
it is constitutional when implemented under proper authority as evidenced by the tarrifs Biden implemented, which are still in effect, and many other Presidents.

your reasoning sucks.
Click to expand...

Those were also overreaching. There's about 200 years of data to support it.

Your apathy is weak.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top