Trump's Tariffs Will Make Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians Poorer
American tariffs will increase the price of final and intermediate goods, hurting our own consumers and domestic manufacturers.

President Donald Trump has floated 25 percent tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports, set to take effect on February 1. If implemented, these tariffs wouldn't just hurt the Canadian and Mexican economies, but also make American consumers poorer and domestic manufacturers less competitive.
From January 2024 through September 2024, total trade between the U.S. and Mexico surpassed $700 billion, while trade with the U.S. and Canada came just short of that figure. Canada and Mexico are also America's two largest export markets: $325 billion and $275 billion worth of goods and services were sold to Canada and Mexico, respectively, over the first three quarters of 2024.
U.S.-levied tariffs would hurt all countries involved. Research conducted by the Peterson Institute for International Economics predicts that 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico would decrease American gross domestic product (GDP) by $200 billion, Canadian GDP by $100 billion, and Mexican GDP growth by 2 percent. These tariffs would also diminish American manufacturing.
TD Economics finds that "most Canadian exports are inputs used by American businesses in their own production." Similarly, Mexico's third-largest export to the U.S. is intermediate goods for vehicles, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity, a data visualization tool for international trade. Erecting tariffs on Canada and Mexico would not only increase the cost of goods enjoyed by American consumers but also increase the price of Canadian and Mexican inputs for American manufacturers, reducing the competitiveness of our exports internationally.
Trump's proposed tariffs have triggered responses from Mexican and Canadian officials. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised that his country would "respond to unfair tariffs in a number of ways." He has also cautioned the president, saying "Canada provides many of the necessary inputs the American economy is going to need in order to grow and boom," such as $170 billion worth of oil, natural gas, and power. Ontario Premier Doug Ford went further, directing the Liquor Control Board of Ontario to prohibit the sale of all American alcohol in the event that Trump follows through with his tariffs on February 1.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has avoided threatening the U.S. with retaliatory tariffs. However, Kenneth Smith Ramos, Mexico's chief negotiator in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, warned that the American economy "relies on hundreds of billions of dollars in Mexican imports that boost the competitiveness of its manufacturing sector."
Trump would be well advised to heed warnings from America's neighbors and pursue a policy of bilateral free trade with them instead of a policy of mutual antagonism. Tariffs make American consumers poorer and American industry less competitive; there's no reason to adopt such an economically indefensible policy.
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
Why did you included Canadians and Mexicans in the headline, like anyone gives a damn?
"Canada provides many of the necessary inputs the American economy is going to need in order to grow and boom," such as $170 billion worth of oil, natural gas, and power. ... the American economy "relies on hundreds of billions of dollars in Mexican imports that boost the competitiveness of its manufacturing sector."
You don't get it, Jack. These are specifically - explicitly - the things for which Donnie T wants to stop relying on imports.
He wants an energy independent America with a resurgence of American industry providing manufacturing and goods made by Americans in America. If he gets that even slightly, then why do we care about Gay North Dakota or Cartel Land?
Shorter AT: The entire field of economics, especially the concept of comparative advantage, is leftist.
No, the entire field of economics is something that Donald wants to return to - given that the Democrats, Progressives, and Marxists have been overtly ignoring it as they create handouts, slush funds, and piss it away on identity politics nonsense.
A return to basic economic principles is a breath of fresh air, after the stink of Biden, Obama, Dubya, and Clinton.
Trump wants a return to the economic principles of protectionism and mercantilism, both of which were debunked back in 1776 with 'The Wealth of Nations' by Adam Smith.
You have a cite for that, or are you just pulling this out of some Democrat talking point?
It’s the latter.
Eric also ignores that the taxes going to the influx of illegal immigrants already is higher than the estimated costs of tariffs. The tariffs are done to try to lower the tax spending going illegal immigrants where Canada and Mexico not only ignore but aid the illegal immigrant problem.
Eric doesn't understand economics. A reduction on spending already occurring that is higher than estimates of cost of tariffs is a net benefit to citizens.
Likewise Eric still ignores fundamental concerns. PPI, which is what would be hit by tariffs, tripled normal growth rates under Biden. This was due to regulatory expansion. Trump just rolled back many of these costs.
Eric believes in an economic system where one variable is responsible for all dependent variables. He ignores the totality of actions being taken and pretend tariffs are all that matters. Overall the summation of actions being taken will reduce PPI and by extension CPI.
Never hire a comms major to be your economics writer.
Strawman, appeal to worse problems, and ad hominem, all in one comment! Bravo! You sure know how to pack in those fallacies! Damn! Great job!
*pats Jesse on the head while being careful to avoid the teeth*
So sayeth Strawcasmic, king of straw.
You still don’t understand what those words mean.
Just stick to getting blackout drunk and skip the comments, Drunky.
You're a terrible gaslighter. You should take notes from the Canadian Cunt. He's much better than you at it. Especially after a bottle of maple whine.
Wow, IDEAS!
Eric doesn't understand economics.
By Eric, are you referring to the article's author, Jack Nicastro?
Never hire a comms major to be your economics writer.
From his bio: Jack graduated from Dartmouth College in the spring of 2024 with degrees in economics and philosophy.
AOC has an econ degree....
So you're saying, like Jesse has done here, she does not absorb information right in front of her, but sticks with her predetermined beliefs?
I think he’s just saying that doesn’t necessarily engender confidence in their point.
The sea lion can't think through how a degree that includes complex system analysis is much closer to economics than a degree in communication.
?
How long before someone comes along and says that anyone who talks about tariffs ignores regulations, and then proceeds to set a strawman ablaze?
Shouldn't be long.
Why? You’re already starting in with the strawmen arguments, Sarc.
I mean he is awake. Starts his day with a coffee, a plastic bottle of booze, and a strawman.
Funny he drops a strawman complaining about strawmen. Poor sarc.
“Trump's Tariffs Will Make Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians Poorer”
Equity!!!!
Right? Pretty sure that's the goal of socialism, not capitalism.
Where's Ronald Bailey's article on how Trump fixed global warming on day 1 of his presidency;)
Instead, lets bang on the 'tariffs are bad only when we do them' drum again.
The narrative says Reason never criticized Biden. That means the narrative is wrong, or all those articles critical of Biden, especially the ones critical of his tariffs, don't exist. Narrative, or cover your eyes and say the criticism doesn't exist. What to do, what to do.
Cover your eyes it is!
Goddamn, Sarc, you did buy stock in straw.
Don't blame him. Blame his lack of intelligence and education.
The self-proclaimed hypocrite-hunter, who did not major in economics, is going around claiming to that anyone who didn't major in economics knows nothing about the subject, while claiming to be a certified expert.
The irony! It burns!
So you’re attacking the messenger with ad hominem attacks while appealing to expertise.
I didn't agree with Biden's tariffs either, and said so. These are worse.
The narrative says that critics of Trump's tariffs were not critical of Biden's tariffs, and that if you criticize His tariffs then you ignore the cost of regulations.
If you disagree with the narrative then you're a liar.
That narrative thing is mighty handy when you can cite “the narrative” and don’t have to actually provide a cite.
When you see people claim Reason never criticizes Biden over and over, then you see articles criticizing Biden, and those comments continue, then the narrative is pretty clear.
Though it does require some intelligence to put those things together. It's not something you can just "cite" with a single comment from someone. So it makes sense that you fail to put things together and demand some "cite" to prove it.
You still won’t give up this strawman even though evidence exists to the contrary.
No one says they don’t criticize Democrats at all. Lots of people do say that the ratio is so lopsided as to point to a revealed preference.
Like someone ranting about Trump supporters all day. But occasionally complains about dems.
Stop being retards and I'll stop pointing out your retardation.
Ideas!
Lots of people do say that the ratio is so lopsided as to point to a revealed preference.
Has it ever occurred to you that the reason why Trump got so much more coverage is because he puts himself into the news? He's an attention whore and a troll. You know, what the Canadian Cunt says I am. If it's the case that he's in the news because he puts himself into the news, then there's going to be more written about him than, say, someone who doesn't. It follows that if Reason is equally critical about Biden's tariffs and Trump's tariffs, but Trump is having rallies where he says tariffs are the greatest while Biden's handlers are keeping him behind closed doors, that there's going to be more critical stuff written about Trump. Think about it. You're not one of the dummies. You can see the obvious.
I don’t think anyone will deny he seeks attention. I will say he’s not the only one who makes it about him. I get it though, if your media empire is tanking and talking about Trump all day, every day, even when he has no power (like when someone else is the sitting president) gets you views, that’s what you’re gonna run with.
I’ll have to do the search again, but if I remember correctly, the sitting president got less mentions on a libertarian website, while he was in office, than his former opponent. That sticks out to people is all I was saying.
>U.S.-levied tariffs would hurt all countries involved.
Sounds like a useful bargaining chip then. The question is - who can sustain more hurt? The US, Mexico, or Canada?
Given the Mexico is about to get a million immigrants, and given the immigration is always a net positive, Mexico should be in a good position to withstand the Trump tariff storm?
"Research conducted by the Peterson Institute for International Economics predicts that 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico would decrease American gross domestic product (GDP) by $200 billion, Canadian GDP by $100 billion, and Mexican GDP growth by 2 percent."
So US GDP for 2024 was 29.167 trillion. 200 billion is .00686. A bit more than 1/2 of 1%?
Canada's GDP was 2.14 trillion, of which 100 billion is .0467.
Mexico's GDP for 2023 1.789 trillion; we are told it will fall by a full 2%, so that decline would be 36 billion?
IF I am doing the math right [and assuming the accuracy of these predictions], seem pretty obvious where most of the hurt will be; I'm calling it Trumpian bargaining.
[Please offer corrections as necessary]
Ah, but you're forgetting the influx of Mexicans, Central, and South Americans that will be 'immigrating' into Mexico and that, due to Trump's persecution of them, Mexico will be 'legally' and morally bound to provide asylum too.
Since immigration of any type is always a 'net benefit' then Mexico's economy should just explode, while the US's economy - because of all those high-quality people leaving (brain drain) should suffer!
Does unlimited immigration of unskilled, uneducated, cheap labor largely depedent on government handouts make us all poorer?
Maybe, maybe not.But all that money scare stuff is how the government arm gets stronger. HE is not putting tariffs in so that you become poorer. So talk about the big picture.
HE is not putting tariffs in so that you become poorer.
He doesn't intend for tariffs to make us all poorer, therefore they won't. His good intentions will override basic laws of economics.
8 years of higher steel tariffs under Biden and Trump and USA Steel needs to sell, should tell anyone protectionism doesn't work.
Deregulate energy, labor and environmental laws. Don't send more money to Washington, DC. That is the recipe for growth.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford went further, directing the Liquor Control Board of Ontario to prohibit the sale of all American alcohol in the event that Trump follows through with his tariffs on February 1.
Thats ok, Doug can still get the good stuff from his brother Rob. The peasents of Ontario on the other hand....
This bluster is mostly about renegotiating USMCA with more favorable terms for the U.S. These terms will probably also include things like commitments from Mexico to accept our deportees and keep fentanyl from being produced in Mexico. It will include things like insisting that Canada meet its NATO obligations, police their border for illegal immigrants, and approve moving auto manufacturing facilities to the U.S.
The press has had eight years to adjust to Trump's shock and awe tactics. You'd think they'd stop crying wolf by now. Just because Trump says, "Jump", you don't need to ask, "How high?". Trump is trolling the press. When will you learn? The observation that Trump's critics take him literally but not seriously has been around long enough to be an old saw. Stop crying wolf on cue already.
No, it's not. It's about declaring fake emergencies and using that to take our three biggest trading partners off the most favored nation status. That will allow Trump to unilaterally raise tariffs on everything from China, Canada and Mexico, without Congress. Naive partisans believe he's using tariffs to get other countries to change their policies. But that's not the case. He's been a UGE fan of tariffs since the 80s. He just likes tariffs. He's creating excuses to raise tariffs because tariffs are the end, not the means.
You’re citing “the narrative”, of course.
Do you have a response to Trump using fake emergencies to activate presidential powers that allow for unilaterally raising taxes on Americans, and how the guy doing this has been praising tariffs for the last four decades, which implies that tariffs are an end not the means?
Or do you just have attacks and insults?
Where’s the fake emergency, Sarc? Please state, with proper references as to how these are fake?
Just check “the narrative”.
Those fake emergencies are in his booze soaked, pickled little nugget of a brain.
Has he implemented every tariff he’s threatened?
No, I suppose snot!
So does that PROVE that we should give Him Unlimited Powers to act like a Madman, and threaten all and sundry with tariffs and WAR? Did ye SNOT notice that He will SNOT place off limits, the use of USA military power to conquer Greenland, Panama, and who knows twat all else?
To those Trumpanzees gone apeshit who LOVE The Madman getting His Way with threats of madness... TWAT happens when they meet ANOTHER madman?
All it proves is that we should wait and see what he actually does before setting each others hair on fire.
Do you totally discount the possibility of the IMMENSE damages that can result when one madman meets another? Ya REALLY pissed me off with Your Threats, so now, My Precious Dignity Offended, I will ONE-UP on ye!!!
Has this NEVER happened, in history, and so then we should STAND BY our homegrown Madman? Whoever threatens the loudest, should get shit Their Way? My Team, right or wrong?
"Tensions mounted between Canada and the United States after Trump, in April 2018, announced the imposition of import tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, an action that threatened to start a trade war and prompted forceful condemnation from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
At the end of August 2018 Mexico and the United States announced that they had come to terms on a new trade agreement that preserved much of NAFTA but introduced a number of significant changes. Under the pressure of being the odd country out, Canada, in the waning hours of September 30, also agreed to join the new trade accord."
----Encyclopedia Britannica, "Renegotiation in North American Free Trade Agreement"
https://www.britannica.com/event/North-American-Free-Trade-Agreement/Renegotiation
Threatening tariffs (and other things) to gain concessions in negotiations is Trump's SOP.
It's all part of Trump's Magic Bean economics. He doesn't understand macroeconomics - nor does he care to, it seems - and his followers, many of whom used to call themselves capitalists or free marketeers - think that Daddy Knows Best.
Says the guy agreeing that tariffs act as an independent function ignoring supply shift or other inputs into the system lol.
You’re a neo Marxist. Your take on economics is irrelevant, at best. Go Soros somewhere else.
Says the regime bootlicker.
Says the regime bootlicker.
A vacuous response.
Well, tell us how the leather tastes.
I wouldn't know. I'm not your mother.
Tariffs are only one sliver of what I take into account running my factory, and no where near the highest tax I have to pay. I’ll wait to see what actually gets implemented and adjust accordingly.
Also, it’s not like the Democrats have a great track record with tariffs either, so it’s hardly just Trump and his supporters.
Did you really just say it's ok because Democrats did it first?
How….How did you get that from my comment which literally places no value on the rightness (or lack thereof) of tariffs?
I, too, literally places no value on the rightness (or lack thereof) of tariffs, or torture, or mass murder, either! Shit is GOOD to be non-judgmental! When Shitler proposes to kill 6 million Jews and other illegal sub-humans, shit is GOOD to shit the difference, cunt-promise, and kill a mere 3 million instead!
Quote in a moment of moral crisis, https://harpers.org/2010/10/dante-the-curse-on-those-who-do-nothing-in-the-face-of-evil/ ... Let's split our legs and shit on the fence! Dante – The Curse on Those Who Do Nothing in the Face of Evil
Yes, Power Pigs who want to RULE OVER US AND DROOL OVER US and micro-manage the living SNOT out us, about who we can freely trade with... ARE evil Power Pigs!!!
In the grand scheme of libertarian thought, there aren’t any good taxes, just less bad ones.
We could have a conversation about which are objectively less bad, but since you decided to equate tariffs to torture and mass murder, I’m guessing that’s off the table.
Property is life! Wait till ye are in jail, and they punish you by allowing you NO food or water, saying that they are "merely" punishing your food and water, SNOT you!
Tariff-taxing the shit out of me and my economic freedom ARE the same thing! He who controls my property rights, controls my life, and my death!
Because no one ever, in the entire history of the world has stopped buying an imported product when it got too expensive, right?
We just keep on buying the exact same amount of imported goods no matter the tariff.
Idiot.
The purpose of tariffs is to change consumer buying patterns, and change foreign countries exporting patterns.
Just to confirm, as a libertarian who opposes government manipulating how people live their lives, you're 100% on board with Trump using the power of government to influence what you buy and don't buy. Is that accurate?
And, by the way, have you stopped beating your wife?
When did you stop grabbing your daughter’s legs?
I am curious as to what the desired consumer buying pattern is.
I would think that having some good affected by a tariff or any action that increases costs would result in lower demand for that good unless the demand lacks elasticity. If that is the case then more resources would have to be expended to obtain said good and those resources would be unavailable for other uses.
Not an economist. I am just curious to see what will happen.
If that is the case then more resources would have to be expended to obtain said good and those resources would be unavailable for other uses.
That is what economists call comparative advantage and opportunity cost, and what Trump defenders call Democrats spouting leftist babble.
And this is what we all call false equivalency.
Exactly. So now more resources have to be expended to achieve the same end from the perspective of the consumer of the goods provided by the importer. Or, the ends may just not be achieved.
I had a few years ago started to study game theory. That is some interesting stuff. Just working through Neumann and Morgenstern now as my wife got a copy for me for Christmas.
JesseAz read a book about game theory. Said it proved all economic thought from the last two and a half centuries to be leftist, and Trump to be right about everything.
I am just interested in the idea of being able to formally describe games in mathematical terms. There is interesting reading on its application to spectrum auctions.
The way I figure it is, if you are correct then you are and if you aren't then you aren't. Reality doesn't care about whose side you are on. Like I tell my wife, we will see.
And you claim people lie about what you say, Sarc? Hypocrite is thy name.
...which leads to the indirect subsidising of inefficient domestic producers and the buying of inferior goods.
And as a point of principle, is anti-capitalist/free market, which exposes the stupidity of your handle.
Objective Americans know that Trump's threatened tariffs (other than his 10% across the board tariff) are nothing but starting points of negotiations with other nations on economic, defense, immigration, finance and other critically important issues.
Most of Trump's proposed tariffs during his first term led to negotiated mutually beneficial trade, immigration, defense and other agreements that greatly benefited both (or most) civilized nations, as was the case with NATO.
With an across the board tariff, with whom are you negotiating? Is it just across the board with certain states or the world? I guess we will have to see.
If the desire is to use tariffs to raise revenue, then I can see that being used.
Not an economist.
See my example of Trump using a tariff on Canadian steel and aluminum in the renegotiation of NAFTA.
He's creating leverage for a negotiation. This is not speculation. This is what he has done, repeatedly, in the past.
So, across the board tariffs applied to certain states. That was my question. I am just looking for information to sate curiosity. Thank you.
+1
does everybody hate seeing a movie with you?
"Research conducted by the Peterson Institute for International Economics predicts that 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico would decrease American gross domestic product (GDP) by $200 billion, Canadian GDP by $100 billion, and Mexican GDP growth by 2 percent."
So taking these predictions and the reported GDP of the nations involved, I did these back of an envelope calculations; what do you think?
So US GDP for 2024 was 29.167 trillion. 200 billion is .00686. A bit more than 1/2 of 1%?
Canada's GDP was 2.14 trillion, of which 100 billion is .0467.
Mexico's GDP for 2023 1.789 trillion; we are told it will fall by a full 2%, so that decline would be 36 billion?
IF I am doing the math right [and assuming the accuracy of these predictions], seem pretty obvious where most of the hurt will be; I'm calling it Trumpian bargaining tactic, in which the US has an overwhelming advantage.
[Please offer corrections as necessary]
Reason insists on looking at tariffs in isolation. Seems to me that Trump is looking at a major overhaul of the federal tax system that may involve a shift to a consumption tax via tariffs while lowering income taxes and cutting federal expenditures. I have no idea how this might look at this point but a consumption tax is at least a voluntary transaction while an income tax is confiscatory. I'm willing to go along for the ride. And as others have noted, this is typical Trump bargaining for the best deal. Maybe Reason should suspend the endless and tedious tariff terror articles until he actually does something.
Reason insists on looking at tariffs in isolation.
Ah yes. Jesse's favorite strawman. He and other liars are claiming that tariffs don't matter because regulations and other things. The liars a saying tariffs don't matter because LOOK OVER THERE AT THE RED HERRING!
Seems to me that Trump is looking at a major overhaul of the federal tax system that may involve a shift to a consumption tax via tariffs while lowering income taxes and cutting federal expenditures.
Not gonna happen. Shifting to tariffs would require them being in the neighborhood of 200%, which no one would pay. He's not trying to shift to a consumption tax. He just likes tariffs because he's a protectionist and a mercantilist. And why not? He's a businessman. It's only natural that he would support government interventions that protect businesses at the expense of the consumer.
I have no idea how this might look at this point but a consumption tax is at least a voluntary transaction while an income tax is confiscatory.
It would look like a 200% tax on imports. Only a fool or a Trump defender (but I repeat myself) would think people would just pay that shit.
I'm willing to go along for the ride.
You're an idiot.
And as others have noted, this is typical Trump bargaining for the best deal.
Deal for whom? For companies that like it when the government hamstrings the competition, or for the consumer who benefits from lower prices? I'll give you a clue. It isn't for those of us who buy stuff.
Maybe Reason should suspend the endless and tedious tariff terror articles until he actually does something.
Maybe his defenders should stop calling economists leftists for disagreeing with their god emperor, and instead enrich their brains with some fucking knowledge for a change.
1. You’re using a strawman to reply to what you’re calling (falsely) a strawman.
2. Strategic tariffs have commonly been used by Trump as starting points for negotiations. He did this last time too, if you weren’t so drunk as not to pay attention.
3. Nice ad hominem.
4. It’s bargaining, dumbass. You work from an extreme toward something reasonable for both parties. And guess what, the American consumer and worker will benefit. They sure as hell haven’t under whatever the fuck it was that Biden was doing.
5. More strawmen, this time with a TDS bent due to Strawcasmic’s terminal disease.
""4. It’s bargaining, dumbass. ""
He will never accept that as a possibility.
I do not know that I or the state would call any tax voluntary vice confiscatory. The transaction is voluntary, sure. Well voluntary within certain bounds anyways depending on necessity. Regardless of the mechanism, some resources are being extracted from the transaction by a third party. Income taxes are taxes on earning paid by the seller. Tariffs/sales taxes are taxes on purchases paid by the buyer. Maybe use the term import tax rather than tariff. I understand that the term tafiff is used but it seems that many people do not realize that it is just a tax paid by the importer on the purchase of imported goods.
So, are we talking like, how 'Bidenomics' made us all* poorer, or something even worse?
* billionaires and Big Pharma excluded
Complete bullshit based on nothing but speculation. It's obvious that reason completely misunderstands the nuances of tarrifs.
"Trump's Tariffs Will Make Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians Poorer."
So did Biden's inflation.
Does that mean you're not in favour of making Americans poorer? Then you should oppose tariffs.
BTW how much of inflation under Biden was due to Biden's policies, and how much to global disruption following COVID? Have you any quantifiable data?
"So did Biden's inflation."
Biden the Hair-Sniffer didn't get inflated ass much, or even half ass mush, ass Der Dear Leader Der TrumpfenFarter-Fuhrer got inflated, that Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief, that them thar THE Sperminator, who got inflated enough to insperminate Queen Spermy Daniels!!! All Hail the Insperminator and Pussy-Grabber in Chief!!!
Remember Solyndra? That was bad. It represented the government under Obama picking winners and losers with subsidies. And of course it decided to subsidize a loser, who went bankrupt, and set a lot of taxpayer money on fire while doing so.
But now, we have the Team Red approach to picking winners and losers - tariffs! The government should apply tariffs to all sorts of imports, in order to shield domestic companies from foreign competition. In other words, the government should pick winners (domestic companies) and losers (foreign companies), regardless of what the average consumer may want.
THIS time, surely, the government picking winners and losers will definitely work! It couldn't possibly be the case that if the government shields domestic companies from foreign competition, that they will become slothful and lazy and inefficient and whenever they get into trouble, instead of modernizing and innovating, they will just run to the government again demanding more tariffs on all of their competition. You know, like how basically the entire domestic car industry worked from the 1950's until about the 1980's.
Yup, this time it will surely work, Trump is a brilliant businessman who has never failed in any business venture in his life, and he is the perfect choice for a TOP MAN to expertly pick winners and losers.
False equivalency, Jeffy. If tariffs pick winners and losers, then they’re picking US companies as winners and other countries’ companies as losers. This is nothing like Obama handing out millions to Solyndra as a chosen “winner” for Obama’s vision. Picking your own county’s companies as winners is what every other country on this planet does.
Tariffs have the effect of saying that losers are in fact winners.
Analogy: foreign athletes are given a 0.2s penalty in the 100m so if say Tebogo runs 9.90 and Lyles runs 10.00,, Tebogo's adjusted time is 10.10 and so Lyles wins. "We're #1", etc.
Good theory except for all the cronies that got exemptions issued in Trumps first term. And the fact he shielded farmers from their decision to do business with China by sending them money stolen from others doing business with China. Some animals are more equal than others I guess.
lol hilarious.
You cry "false equivalency" while then admitting that yes, tariffs pick winners and losers.
Is your only purpose here just to follow me around and shit on my comments?
Great of you to point that out. That means that what Trump does is ok because Democrats did it first!
And here we are with the brown-nosing and cheerleading for the strawmen and false equivalencies Jeffy posted.
Democrats lead the way.
I'm against measuring every policy only by economic impact. So this argument is meaningless. Do tariffs empower the president with regard to bad actors? Can they reduce the availability of dangerous drugs such as fentanyl? Prosperity is good, but it's not a god.
Can they reduce the availability of dangerous drugs such as alcohol? (Didn't we try Government Almighty fixes for that shit once upon a time? How did shit turn out?) . . . Government Almighty (in shit's place) is good, but it's not a god, for common-sense, balanced, well-informed, and benevolent people, at least.
STUPID...
- A 25% Tax on Foreign competition
- Makes an 80% taxed Domestic market 'less competitive'?
RU F'En high?
https://www.cato.org/publications/separating-tariff-facts-tariff-fictions
This seemed to me to provide information. It did not appear partisan but I may be missing it. It was an interesting read nonetheless.
Did you foam-at-the-mouth Trumpaloos learn a DAMNED thing last time Trump pulled this shitty stunt?
https://reason.com/2020/01/22/trump-campaigned-on-saving-factory-jobs-but-u-s-manufacturing-just-went-through-a-year-long-recession/
Clear-cut case below, showing the UTTER FAILURE of protectionism in general, and Trumpist protectionism specifically:
Meanwhile in the real world…
https://reason.com/2019/04/22/trumps-washing-machine-tariffs-cleaned-out-consumers/
Trump’s Washing Machine Tariffs Cleaned Out Consumers
A new report finds the tariffs raised $82 million for the U.S. Treasury but ended up increasing costs for consumers by about $1.2 billion.
PROTECTIONISM DOESN’T WORK!!! DUH!!!
Protect American washing-machine makers from Chinese competition? The FIRST thing that American washing-machine makers do, is jack UP their prices… AND the prices of dryers to boot, too! To SOAK the hell out of all of us consumers!!!
From the above-linked Reason article about washing machines…
“All told, those tariffs raised about $82 million for the U.S. Treasury but ended up increasing costs for consumers by about $1.2 billion during 2018 … (deleted). Although the trade policy did cause some manufacturers to shift production from overseas to the United States in an effort to avoid the new tariffs, the 1,800 jobs created by Trump’s washing machine tariffs cost consumers an estimated $820,000 per job.”
Summary: Nickels and dimes to the USA treasury; boatloads of pain for consumers. USA jobs created? Yes, at GREAT expense! Putting these 1.8 K workers on a super-generous welfare program would have been WAY better for all the rest of us! Plus, you know the WORKERS don’t make super-huge bucks (no $820,000 per job for THEM); the goodies flow to the EXECUTIVES at the top of the washing-machine companies! The same ones who play golf with The Donald, and join him for gang-banging Spermy Daniels! Essentially at our expense!
"PROTECTIONISM DOESN’T WORK!"
So STOP protecting foreign importers by insisting they're Tax-Exempt.
They can pay the same 'production' tax as domestic.
OR get rid of 'production' tax all together.
We have no means, other than military force and trade wars, to dictate taxes internal to other nations. Is bossing around other nations' internal tax policies worth it to ya? Trade wars and shooting wars are both high prices to pay!
Do importers reside in other nations?