Biden Forgets That Workers Are Consumers Too
Who does he think ultimately pays those taxes?

Since taking office, President Joe Biden has sought to position himself as an ally of working Americans. His administration is enacting what it calls a "worker-centric" trade policy, and the president scarcely seems to give a public address without mentioning the importance of union jobs.
"You're a gigantic reason why I'm standing here—standing here today as your president," Biden said in a June keynote address at the AFL-CIO annual convention in Philadelphia. "I owe you. From the very beginning of my running for office, back when I was a kid, it was labor, the unions."
Yet despite all he believes he owes American laborers, Biden's economic policies are punishing them as consumers.
Consider that supposedly worker-centric trade policy. Biden has left in place many of the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, including the levies on aluminum and steel. By artificially hiking the price of imported steel, those tariffs are supposed to boost domestic production, creating more and better-paying steelworker jobs. But the cost of the tariffs rebounds onto every industry that uses steel to make other products. While about 57,000 Americans work in steelmaking jobs, more than 12 million are employed in manufacturing jobs that use steel. The tariffs hurt those workers.
Even steelworkers suffer from the tariffs, which raise prices for cars, appliances, and a host of other products. The Peterson Institute for International Economics, a trade policy think tank, estimates that repealing those tariffs would put about $800 back in the average family's pockets this year.
Biden also has decided to extend tariffs on solar panels and their component parts, which were due to expire this year. In theory, those tariffs promote domestic manufacturing. In reality, they have cost more than 62,000 jobs in the four-plus years since Trump first implemented them by sharply cutting the number of solar panels available for installation and service, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association.
Biden's infrastructure package is another monkey's paw for laborers. The law chips away at the Reagan administration's reforms to federal "prevailing wage" mandates, which determine how much workers get paid for federally funded projects. The White House says the revised mandates, which will boost hourly wages by an average of $3.65, guarantee higher pay for workers. It blissfully ignores the negative impact on infrastructure projects, which is a loss for all Americans who are trying to get somewhere—including organized laborers.
In July, Biden put the finishing touches on a $90 billion bailout of private-sector union pension plans that have been slipping toward insolvency, a provision slipped into last year's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan. More than anything else he has done in office, this bailout is a cynically pro-union move: When Biden told the AFL-CIO "I owe you," he apparently meant that literally. The full cost of the bailout was added to the national debt, meaning workers and consumers eventually will pay for it in the form of higher taxes, slower economic growth, or (more likely) both.
Biden and his labor union allies, of course, argue that corporations should pay for these policies through higher taxes. But that's a red herring. Taxes and tariffs ultimately are paid by people, not businesses. And since the federal government's main sources of revenue are income and payroll taxes, it will be future workers who foot most of the bill.
The fact that workers are consumers too has always been an implicit part of the wider labor movement, which has pushed for higher pay and fewer hours at work. Biden is treating labor policy as if it is a zero-sum game in which workers can benefit at the expense of consumers—as if people fit into only one of those categories.
If it wasn't already obvious that policies aimed at helping Americans as workers can hurt them as consumers, the last year has underlined that point. In July, the Department of Labor reported that wages were up 5.1 percent over the previous year, while prices had risen by more than 9 percent during the same time. Is this a worker-centric economy?
Trade and labor policies should not be worker-centric or consumer-centric. They should be market-centric, because trade and labor are both parts of a market system that benefits Americans as workers and consumers.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Workers Are Consumers Too."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Look for the Union label…and walk away.
I’m by and by turning out to be further $19k or extra month-to-month from local through doing surprisingly sincere and clean task online from local. [rfv-04] I truly have gained expressly $20845 outrageous month from this local task. be a region of at this point this endeavor and start getting more money online through notice teaching:-
.
At the given webpage:>>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Well if Biden removed the tariffs on steel it would be unpopular in Pennsylvania, and whoever is the Republican candidate in 2024 would just campaign to reimpose said tariffs to win Pennsylvania. This is the problem with our electoral college system, a few swing states decide the election and they determine the winners economic policies. It's time to eliminate the electoral college and go to a popular vote system.
Amen, well stated!
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but (dbt-022) my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://cashprofit99.netlify.app/
Sometimes I wonder if sarcasmic is actually so stupid he doesn't realize he's replying to shreek socks, or if he just follows shreek's socks around humping their legs like he does shreek's main handle.
??? sarcasmic isn’t here. ???
Ignore it.
Yes, let’s shit on the little guy.
"This is the problem with our electoral college system, a few swing states decide the election and they determine the winners economic policies. "
Riiiiight.
Electoral Votes in Pennsylvania: 20 (3.7% of total)
Population in Pennsylvania: 13MM (3.9% of total)
I am sure that no one will have ANY reason to go to Pennsylvania, (or any of the east coast megalopolis states) in a popular vote. No they will be flying to states like Wyoming and Montana to fight for THEIR votes.
I see some leftard high-jacked an old username.
Because that's what dishonest leftards do.
I noticed that, noticed the comment was at odds with the original usage, and noticed the squirrely fell for it.
Wasn’t the original (whom I haven’t seen post in a couple of years) lovesconstitution1789 (without the hyphen and loves not love)?
You are correct. Shreek started using this handle back when the original lovesconstitution1789 was still here and has recently busted it out again because I outed the other half a dozen 5-10 year old sockpuppet accounts he brought out of retirement, and he keeps hoping he'll eventually hit on one that I've forgotten.
Here's a hint for you shreek: I haven't forgotten any of them. Not a single one. And even if I had you'd still out yourself in 10 seconds because you are pathologically incapable of not using the same set of grammatical and rhetorical tics on every fucking account.
Nope. And outside of a constitutional amendment, any attempt to do that will be met with extreme resistance. As anyone who attempts to remove the electoral college is a traitor and should be executed for it.
That is what is so dangerous about the Electoral College. Had the Electoral College not been in place to begin with, we would not have had POTUS Elections stolen (G. W. Bush, and Donald Trump), for example. It's true that Hilary Clinton was neither a good POTUS Candidate or a good Secretary of State, and that Barack Obama was not such a great President, either. Having the Electoral College in place, however, made already bad situations far worse, and we ended up with G. W. Bush (who exploited our country's unity at the time of 9/11 to send us to a wrongheaded, illegal war in Iraq), and Donald Trump, who, in some ways, made G. W. Bush look like a moderate by comparison.
Misspelled Maypole is back too—without the potty mouth?
Makes sense as this is another shreek sock. The retarded kiddie fucker almost always busts them out in pairs or threes and replies to himself hoping people will have forgotten and believe he's a consensus builder. Because shreek the retarded kiddie fucker is retarded.
And then California can elect our President. What's not to like in such a scheme?
"Since taking office, President Joe Biden has sought to position himself as an ally of working Americans."
LOL
Biden was put in office to help his billionaire base get even richer. Which is why Koch-funded libertarians supported him. 🙂
#OBLsFirstLaw
Truth. And since the Manchurian Candidate was installed, global billionaires have added over $5 trillion to their wealth. American billionaires added $1 trillion in 2021 alone. Trump won the 2020 election and even Jill Biden knows that.
It's why they never talk about a "mandate," despite Biden's HISTORIC number of votes. They got the W, and they are making the most of it. Sorry if you need baby formula or can't afford $100 a tank for gas.
Funny ho votes work when there is massive fraud and coordinated lack of any quality control in the balloting process.
WOW!
Six whole sentences into a Biden article before Trump gets mentioned.
A new Reason record.
Well they are his tariffs that Biden is keeping.
"Who does he think ultimately pays those taxes?"
Republicans.
On the other hand, inflation and tariffs are the only way to pass the costs on to poor people.
More specifically, anyone who doesn't vote for him and his party.
Boehm, you "reluctantly" voted for this shit. Always remember that. You made Biden's crappola possible.
This again. Here are his exact words. Note that Virginia’s final vote was 54% Biden to 44% Trump, meaning Boehm likely never even bothered to register to vote:
ERIC BOEHM
Reporter
Who do you plan to vote for this year? I am currently not registered to vote in Virginia, where I live. If I change that before the election, I will vote for Jo Jorgensen—unless I believe there is a chance that Joe Biden will somehow fail to win Virginia, in which case I will vote strategically and reluctantly for Biden.
In other words, Boehm wanted Biden to win Virginia. What did InsaneTrollLogic quote wrongly?
Exactly. Boehm telegraphed his obedience to his Marxist masters well ahead of the 2020 election.
Also, let's see you do Ilya Somin, who said he would vote for Biden because Trump spent too much.
Furthermore, as Boehm points out (and Longtobefree opines is somehow verboten to mention) this wasn’t a Trump vs Biden issue. If anything, the tariffs were Trump’s and there was a greater chance that Biden might reverse them:
“Biden has left in place many of the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, including the levies on aluminum and steel.”
There was never any indication that Biden would reverse the Tariffs. Mike is gaslighting agsin. Biden specifically pandered to the steelworkers unions.
Adults back in charge.
Return to normalcy.
No mean tweets.
Libertarian Moment!
Biden did not forget. He is simply propagating progressive "economics". In this system, quantities and parameters like wages, prices, taxes, operating costs, profits and losses, employment, inflation, etc. are absolutely unrelated to each other. These are all separate considerations to be considered in isolation and resolved purely on political bases. And changing one has no effect on any other.
"resolved purely on political bases"
YEP.... It's all plain as day to conquer the USA for a Nazi-Empire/National Socialism then onto Communism...
Democrats really make no secret of their conquer the USA intentions and it's baffling so many voters don't seem to mind. I guess they still haven't come to grips that the USA doesn't support *STOLEN* lunches (criminal activity) nor does natural law itself.
And when Gov-Gun theft runs out of SLAVES and other people's *earned* lunches its going to get even more ugly around here.
Do you regret your vote?
Well, at the end of the day it should be better for US to have its own steel production that not. It is not better to get squeezed out of the steel production and then wait until the foreign steel producers raise their prices squeeze the american economy. You rather give money to China?
There are no easy solutions to this. Were tarrifs good when Trump installed them and now bad when Biden use them, just because he is a democrat? You got to chill out 🙂 Vinnaroddset
Right. Because once the US slows or stops its steel production it will never again be capable of making it again...Why, China can just raise prices to eleventy billion dollars a ton and the US will be stuck.
To be clear, Reason has been against tariffs regardless of the person installing them.
Right. Because shuttered steel mills will just magically begin producing steel again instantly as soon as prices rise. Why, the US can just spin up a new chip fab or oil refinery as soon as prices begin rising and the Magical Invisible Hand will bring equilibrium to all things.
God you're a fucking clown. Your only redeeming feature is that this site is filled with people even more retarded than you are.
It will work the same way as oil production. Switch off when government wants oil production to cease in favor of wind and solar power, then switch back on when those options do not work. Easy peasy! All those oil company investment funds and workers with experience in the business will just be sitting on the sidelines waiting for their turn to produce energy for the nation.
Best case scenario: the government is taking our money (in the form of higher prices) and giving it to steel workers and the steel industry.
It's redistribution of wealth; planned-economy-thinking, no different than making tax payers pay off student loans.
Hey Boehm.. What about domestic free trade?
You don't suppose freeing the steel market from having to pay for other people's commie-perm-vacation-paychecks, covid-scare-vacation-paychecks, unearned-commie-education, lazy-irresponsible-housing, commie-enforced-payrate, commie-land, commie-loans, commie-energy, commie-healthcare, etc, etc, etc, etc...
JUST might help manufacturing **MUCH-MORE** than a comparatively minor-tax on foreign goods???
It's amazing you can complain so faithfully about foreign tax but entirely dismiss domestic taxes. You must be writing your articles from a foreign country? 🙂
If the National Government is going to being doing trade deals (national-trade regulation), and national defense (it's purpose of existence). I can't think of a better way to fund it than by the international pipeline of trade.
Of course its pro union. They get the benefits and ALL the workers have to pay for it.
Yeah 3.65 per hour is gonna be real money to the unions. A net gain notwithstanding their increased costs as consumers. The problem is union racketeers represent a tiny fraction of the working class. Union members will exclusively get the bump but they'll share the cost with the rest of us. Kinda like student loan forgiveness. Friends of Joe: Unions, Idiots who bought worthless degrees, billionaires of every stripe. Enemies of Joe: Everybody else.
I think that's what my first job paid.
This would be funny if it wasn't so sad to see what passes for an education these days.
Eric, where were you when the Steel Industry was begging Obama to pass the very same tariffs that Trump did? In your eyes they are only bad because Trump initiated them. Your previous articles back this up "Orange Man Bad".
The reason that Biden doesn't get rid of the tariffs is because he is owned by the Unions and the Green energy companies.
Get real. This is just another Reason hit job on Trump, thinly disguised as a criticism of Biden.
That made no sense.
Dude, you've got it backwards. Reason has always supported free trade and opposed tariffs, regardless of the president. It's the Trumpaloos who change their stance on trade depending upon who is in power.
Really? Think this through. When the US was formed the ONLY source of funding for the Federal Government was TARIFFS and taxes on distilled liquor.
You go back in the archives, you will find articles supporting tariffs and asking why Obama didn't pass them. The items that I mentioned were used as reasons why Obama SHOULD have passed the tariffs.
If you could hook up a turbine to Reason and use it's flip-flops as power there wouldn't be an electricity shortage.
The 'free trade' mantra has become less about economics than about utilitarianism, corporate cronyism, and one might even say religion.
Lord knows I disagree with Trump on everything - but it is very easy to understand his appeal on the protectionist stuff to people who spent the last 30 years (basically when GATT transitioned to WTO) on the losing side of the 'everyone benefits from free trade'. It was the same appeal as Perot and has been completely absent from DeRp since then.
As for unions and collective bargaining, it wouldn't surprise me at all that that comes back. It's not about a power conflict between workers and consumers. It is about the power conflict between workers and, for lack of a better word, the 1%. And workers have been seriously losing that one for 30+ years too.
What’s the correct income disparity?
The same as the correct price of bread in a free competitive market.
I choose to measure wealth from the floor, as opposed to inequality.
I'd much rather be poor in a rich nation than be rich in a poor nation.
A poor person in a rich nation experiences great inequality, and as a result they feel really bad about themselves. But compared to poverty they're doing quite well.
A rich person in a poor nation isn't that much richer than everyone else, because everyone is poor. There isn't much inequality to feel bad about, but they're still fucking poor.
Makes a lot of sense being that you're on welfare and would be homeless without section 8 housing vouchers.
Hi, Tulpa!
Agreed.
My mother was a rich person in a poor nation. On the one hand, she had a personal maid and the house was awash in servants, like Downton Abbey. On the other hand, that house was bamboo, had no glass in the windows, no indoor plumbing, had waves of smallpox and cholera go through, and if another rich family came visiting and brought some cans of Spam or a block of Velveeta it was considered a handsome gift fit for nobility.
At what point does the disparity become feudalism?
I'm somewhat confused here. If we "give" eleventy billion dollars to China for steel and cheap goods, what do the Chinese do with the U.S. dollars? Do they have Scrooge McDuck money bins all over China, or do they maybe spend the money on stuff that creates U.S. jobs?
Like, U.S. Government bonds, issued to cover profligate U.S. Government spending?
This. Lolberts are the most economically fucking illiterate dumbfucks to ever drop out of college after half a semester.
They spend it on their own military and building cities that they then tear down. I imagine the money spent in the US is on resources they haul back to China and the only U.S. jobs they're interested in are in Washington D.C.
No, they buy property in the US
So their property sustains or creates jobs in the U.S. until such time as, should China really piss us off, it can be confiscated from them?
To precisely the same extent that Black Rock's monopolist position in the American rental sector "sustains or creates jobs in the U.S."
Which is to say, zero.
do they maybe spend the money on stuff that creates U.S. jobs?
I don't know what China does with the money, but we create jobs with the steel we buy or save money for other items with the cheap goods. It's not like we are not getting anything in return for our dollars.
Biden Forgets
That Workers Are Consumers TooFTFY
Beat me to it
Biden has never been a working member of a union, never paid dues, or ever walked a picket line.
brandon has never had a job in his life. never worked a single day.
In July, the Department of Labor reported that wages were up 5.1 percent over the previous year, while prices had risen by more than 9 percent during the same time. Is this a worker-centric economy?
Tish tosh. Team Blue will fix that by raising the minimum wage to $25/hr. Then everyone will be rich, and can then afford to pay their fair share in taxes and everyone will be fine.
You know who else presumed to speak on behalf of his nation’s workers?
Pretty much every politician ever.
reminder,
the most 'small hat' cabinet in American history
Democrats hate successful people, as all losers do.
the percentage of all us worker who are unionized is as low as it has ever been. if you factor out the government workers the number is extremely low. brandon is speaking to a very small minority of the country. the fact is that unions are bad for everyone except the union bosses. these archaic organizations are unnecessary and in fact make things worse. the single biggest reason why government schools are so bad is directly caused by unions.
60% of Americans didn't file a federal income tax in 2020. The federal budget is largely financed by tax revenue from the top 20%. And about a quarter of federal spending is financed by debt.
Tariffs are just a consumption tax, and given the enormous Keynesian spending of the past and the high inflation we are facing, consumption taxes are what the country needs.
They should be market-centric. And the place that needs to happen is with government spending. But what's distorting the market is those $7 trillion in federal spending. What's distorting the market even more is to finance most of that with debt and taxes on capital investments and the people who make capital investments, while having the mass of consumers pay very little taxes.
For you to argue that tariff-free imports somehow are more free market oriented and benefit workers is absurd in the extreme. Until spending is cut, the US needs much higher taxes on consumption and much higher taxes on the lower and middle classes, so that the people who receive the benefits from government spending actually pay for it. If you want to talk about relative degrees of libertarianism, that would be more libertarian than the system we have right now in which the entire nation is financed by the top 20% and debt.
That's what happens when the government spends like a drunken sailor and doesn't tax consumers enough to pay for it.
Reason's prescription? Tax consumers even less, on the theory that the way to deal with too many dollars chasing too few goods is to put even more dollars in the pockets of consumers!
Are you just staggeringly economically ignorant or are you deliberately trying to destroy the US economy?
I am a worker. I pay taxes--and I consider doing so to be a PRIVILEGE. It is my RESPONSIBILITY as a citizen of this country--and a member of the human race.
Taxes are the price we pay for living in a civilized society. It is true that I disagree with how SOME of my tax dollars are spent. I don't appreciate being forced to fund a massive and totally undeserved tax cut bill for the rich that increased my taxes. Nor do I appreciate being forced to pay for a bloated and destructive defense budget.
But I am very happy to see my taxes pay for some student loan relief. I paid back my own student loans and delayed my retirement so I could pay for my daughter's Bachelor's degree. I all too happy that other people will not have to go through all of that--or at least as much of it.
Instead of whining about taxes, we should be grateful to live in a society and government that provides us with services and benefits that nobody else in history has ever had. Taxes and government policies should NOT be market driven. They should be people driven. We can start with the repeal of the 2017 tax legislation, so that the government can pay its bills and serve the citizens and the middle class can stop supporting the wealthy.
Not the government's job to do that. Perversion of founders intent; exactly what they were trying to avoid actually. They said as much. Over and over. Alas, human nature cannot be contained for long!
I shall enjoy the spoils of the empire and watch the spectacle as it disintegrates under the weight (and toll) of ever increasing centralized power and control.
BTW most people under 1 mil paid as much or more after 2017. I know I did.
I'm way under a million. My taxes went down. Only people that pay more was the SALT cap lowering to 10k. Blame that on your own state.
How exactly did you fund a massive tax cut for the rich?
Taxes are a nearly universal feature of authoritarian and totalitarian societies. When it comes to the US, taxes are the price we pay for living in a semi-fascist society, run by semi-fascist Democrats.
That's because if you are in the bottom 60%, you aren't actually paying any taxes, you are receiving government handouts. And that's why you like the current semi-fascist system.
You're delusional, greedy, and entitled: the typical fascist.
"undeserved tax cut bill for the rich that increased my taxes"
See, when you lie right there. It's shown everyone got a tax cut.
Increased your taxes, so it must be because of SALT since that was capped at 10k and is the only think that caused taxes to go up.
You just said taxes are your privilege. Why would you want to pay less? You know you can donate more too.
You do realize government hinders a lot of the goods and services you talk about. It increases the cost.
I do love how you like to tax other people's money. You can give all of yours to the government and let them tell you what to do. It's not yours right it's there's anyway. Student loan - screw everyone that didn't go to college or that responsible . Why not credit card debt?
So Mike you can feel it's a privilege to pay income tax, sales tax (or what you spend), property tax, death tax, inheritance tax, and loads of others. I think the rest of us are sick of all of them. I'm betting your daughter got a liberal degree.
What happened to Boehm? He made some sense.
""You're a gigantic reason why I'm standing here—standing here today as your president," Biden said in a June keynote address at the AFL-CIO annual convention in Philadelphia. "I owe you. From the very beginning of my running for office, back when I was a kid, it was labor, the unions.""
Any time Biden says he's been for something "from the beginning," it's a lie. Just stop listening from there, because everything that follows will just be more BS. He's done this over and over again on different issues for decades, even on issues that didn't really exist when he first got into politics.