Trump Threatens Walmart Not To React to His Tariffs
On the bright side, at least Trump finally admitted his tariffs are, indeed, paid by Americans.

President Donald Trump growled at the world's largest retailer over the weekend, ordering it not to raise prices in response to his tariffs.
After weeks of saber-rattling between the United States and China, the countries agreed to a detente, during which American tariffs on China would come down to 30 percent (plus a 10-percent baseline), from as high as 145 percent. Still, that's higher than they were before the trade war, and Walmart—the U.S.-based retail giant with over $600 billion in annual global sales—cautioned last week that it may soon have to start raising prices as a result of Trump's trade barriers.
"Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, 'EAT THE TARIFFS,' and not charge valued customers ANYTHING. I'll be watching, and so will your customers!!!"
In just a few short sentences, Trump's missive includes both an implicit threat against an American company and a fundamental misunderstanding of simple economics. At the same time, it suggests that he may know more about the effects of his own policies than he has let on in the past.
Walmart currently imports about 60 percent of its products from China, totaling $49 billion last year. With a flick of Trump's pen, Walmart must now pay an additional $15 billion just to import the same amount, and he insists the company should "eat" that cost.
The company actually imports less from China than in years past—as recently as 2018, the share was closer to 80 percent, whereas it has now diversified its supply chain and gets more from countries like Vietnam and India. But Trump also imposed tariffs of 46 percent on Vietnam and 27 percent on India, leaving the company little recourse.
And despite Trump's declaration that Walmart "made billions of dollars last year," a company's revenue means little without factoring in its costs.
For the first quarter of this year, Walmart reported a gross profit margin—meaning sales minus costs, without accounting for any other business expenses—of 24.2 percent. Even if Walmart wanted to, as Trump said, "eat the tariffs," it doesn't have room to absorb a 30-percent tax on all goods from China. (When factoring in other costs, Walmart's net profit margin falls to 2.75 percent.)
"We will do our best to keep our prices as low as possible, but given the magnitude of the tariffs, even at the reduced levels announced this week, we aren't able to absorb all the pressure given the reality of narrow retail margins," Walmart CEO Doug McMillon told investors on an earnings call.
Trump's rebuke displays a type of economic illiteracy we most often associate with progressives: In 2022, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) blamed high grocery prices on rapacious grocery store chains even as those same chains reported profit margins of less than 1 percent.
But Trump also showed an uncharacteristically accurate understanding of how tariffs work.
Throughout the 2024 campaign season, both Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance, repeatedly said that tariffs were paid by other countries, not ours.
"A tariff is a tax on a foreign country," Trump told attendees at an August 2024 campaign rally. "That's the way it is, whether you like it or not. A lot of people like to say it's a tax on us. No, no, no. It's a tax on a foreign country."
"Our corrupt leadership said if you put tariffs on China, prices will go up," Vance said later that month. "Instead, Donald Trump did exactly that, manufacturing came back, and prices went down for American citizens. They went up for the Chinese, but they went down for our people."
This was a fanciful notion. Tariffs, by definition, are paid by companies that import goods, not by the countries that export them. And Trump's declaration that Walmart should "EAT THE TARIFFS" concedes that.
"Tariffs are fees companies pay the federal government to import certain products into the United States," wrote Shannon Pettypiece and Rob Wile of NBC. "If a big-box retailer, for instance, is importing sneakers from China, it must pay a tariff to Customs and Border Protection officials at a port of entry before it can bring the shoes into the country to sell at its American stores."
In that example, the retailer would then have a choice: absorb the extra cost of the tariff and make less money on the sale, or pass the cost on to the consumer by hiking the retail price of the sneakers. Some companies may opt for the former, but eventually they'll have no choice but to raise prices.
Obviously, it's an abuse of power for a sitting president to threaten a private company for raising its prices. It adds insult to injury that those prices are going up as a direct result of that same president's economic policies.
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
"Trump Threatens Walmart Not To React to His Tariffs"
Lancaster is a lying pile of slimy TDS-addled shit. Fuck off and die, asshole.
Did you not read Trump's post? That is what it said.
You're a lying, retarded sack of shit.
The republicans are toast.
Probably. But, 10% Libertarian is better than 1,000,000% un-fucking-Libertarian Nazi Leftist scum like you, micropenis.
If you read his posts in Abe Simpson's voice they're kind of funny.
Did YOU read it? He was asking the ultra-ultra-rich folks who benefitted from the economic system Trump is protecting and who benefitted from the millions who are not just customers but presumable fellow citizens ---- to not act like some Massah at the Big House.
Dispute this if you dare but you won't find Bloomberg's to be off
The Walmart family owners , the Waltons, have a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
It's hard to be so stupid that MollyGodiva makes more sense, but geez, it's as much of a threat as all of Biden's threats to censor or else.
Uh, no it isn't, lying sack of shit.
Uh, yes it is, unimaginative bag of bovine excrement.
Molly is uninformed but here you beat here. NOTHING was as threatening or inimical to our entire Founding as BIden's Government Disinformation Board.
Very good, sir. What a well thought-out, considered response to a article critical of Trump! Much better than the usual "Biden did it first!" or "Nyuh uh!".
President Donald Trump growled at the world's largest retailer over the weekend, ordering it not to raise prices in response to his tariffs.
Suddenly, “jawboning” is bad.
Always been bad. Go check.
The the real problem is not the tweets (the trufs), but that this maroon doesn't have the first clue as to the most basic of economics. It's really hard to know what he thinks about tariffs, because he holds so many contradictory statements about them. They are a tax, not a tax, are always good, have dire effects on consumers, first massive then he pulls back, good for consumers, but then pulls back, tariffs on most favored trading partners and then on penguins. It's so fucking bizarre.
But worse, this SINGLE SOLE INDIVIDUAL has absolute total power over tariffs.
So jawboning Walmart to suck of 20% to 200% tax hikes and more is stupid. Tax hikes (yes, tariffs are taxes) that wildly fluctuate form week to week. All other taxes get passed on to consumers. Republicans (at one time the conservative capitalist party) have told us this for decades. Suddenly all it takes to stop businesses from passing on taxes to consumers is ... jawboning. Gosh.
Trump is an economic illiterate. That's being charitable.
I don’t recall your scathing response to Biden administration “jawboning” social media companies.
That issue is not at all related to tariffs.
The subject was “jawboning”. You tried to redirect.
And MollyGodiva goes from "making more sense than Sevo" back to the usual utter idiot.
Everyone makes more sense than Sevo. He’s just an angry ball of hate and ignorance. He’s just enough worse than Jesse that he is a grey box and Jesse isn’t. But it’s damned close.
Another data free analysis by Nelson. As typical of most of the idiots here lol.
It is funny how religious you guys are despite the consistency of you being wrong.
Idiots like Seve just above? Idiots like you here, with your own data-free analysis?
Whom have you ever proven wrong, other than the few olden times when you showed sarc his own posts? I notice you haven't done that in a long long time.
Here you go Nelson, stg, and the other keyenesians too dumb to know they are keyenesian.
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/why-keynesians-got-inflation-and-growth-wrong
First, it’s ZeroHedge. They should just be honest and call themselves EchoChamber. Find a reputable site to link to and maybe you won’t look like such a credulous rube.
Second, Keynesian policies are just one type of demand-side economic theory. Between supply-side and demand-side policies, supply-side has an unbroken record of failure while demand-side has proven to be a winner.
Give benefits to the rich and corporations and the beneficiaries will be … the rich and corporations. Give benefits to the middle and lower classes (tax cuts, specifically) and the beneficiaries will be everybody.
Force companies to fight each other for customers. Don’t give them benefits, foolishly assuming that they will use it to invest (the supply-side fallacy). Shocker: they never do, they use it for stock buybacks and C-suite compensation. Zero impact on the economy, but the rich get richer.
And SGT goes from lying about Trump to lying about his lying. Fuck off and die, asshole.
I'm not as familiar with Brandy's complete CV as you apparently are, so I defer to your observations. However, doesn't the "Well, Biden did it first" argument get tiresome to you, like it does to the rest of us?
You all keep screaming basic economics as you fail in your predictions every time.
The very fact you think there are basic theories for complex and chaotic theories shows you how very little you know.
There would be more than 1 school of economics if it was all basic dumdum.
You don't know squat about basic economics. You, for instance, believe that Trump is correct that tariffs are not taxes, they are taxes paid by exporters, they are harmless and don't raise prices, they raise prices enough that a mother can only buy 2 or 3 dolls instead of 30, they raise prices enough to protect domestic industry, they raise enough revenue to replace the income tax ...
Sorry, I ran out of memory for all the inconsistencies you believe because Trump says them, even though you have counseled everybody to only believe what Trump does, not what he says.
“ The very fact you think there are basic theories for complex and chaotic theories shows you how very little you know.”
Yes, the only things humans can understand are simple and stable things. Everything else in life is a baffling mystery that defies comprehension.
At least you’re willing to acknowledge your complete inability to understand anything beyond the most basic ideas. Although your inability to understand tariffs raise prices challenges even that premise.
This is always hilarious to me.
You moronic always wrong simpletons keep assuming complex systems to be simple even after your beliefs are constantly proven to be wrong over and over.
Simple basic beliefs do not work on complex systems. We don't build airplanes on simple environmental or aerodynamic rules or laws. But you're too much of a retard to understand this.
You can't even admit your prior assumptions and predictions were wrong despite us telling you why your assumptions were wrong and why your predictions would be wrong.
You think your C in an inter course makes you an expert.
It is highly amusing.
Yes, complex stuff like ...
* Tariffs are taxes on imports, but they won't raise prices, or at least not much, or at least not so high that moms can still buy 2 dolls for their daughters instead of 30.
* Tariffs raise prices enough that domestic industry can raise prices to match, but prices don't really rise, and Walmart and Amazon should just east the non-existent price rise which isn't really there and doesn't really hurt very much, at least not for long.
* Trade deficits can go down while foreign investments go up, even though they are the same thing. Because Trump is magic.
* Abrogating 15 trade agreements makes Trump a reliable trade partner and negotiator.
On and on. Your turn.
You think your C in an inter course makes you an expert.
Just because you usually have 2 D's with your intercourse...
Ahem. Double d’s.
Maybe you can understand it if we make it as simple as possible: if everything else remains the same and tariffs are applied, the cost for the company goes up. Since companies don’t stay in business by selling things for a loss, what do they have to do to make a profit? Remember, nothing else has changed.
Can you understand that? If not, you shouldn’t be trusted with sharp objects or motor vehicles.
And Nelson in this post does exactly what I accuse the retards of. Lol.
Your assumption is wrong retard.
In a complex system you can not assume independence for the variables. They all have effects on each other. Building a model on this assumption will always be wrong.
Thank you for proving how little of economics you understand.
Fucking. Hilarious.
In your defense of your understanding you prove how ignorant you truly are. Lol.
Oh, independence of variables like trade deficits and foreign investments going in opposite directions even though they are, by definition, the same value.
Brilliant. You math whizzes are awesome.
If it's your contention that we cannot make predictions within complex systems, how then can we be expected to believe that the tariffs will create manufacturing jobs or reduce the trade deficit?
Surely, you're not saying that economists, that universally agree that tariffs generally drive prices up, cannot know this, but Trump intuitively can correctly predict the opposite?
YOu are laughable. He has the bucks that shows he knows about money and you are some anonymous teen with a computer and access to Mother Jones
He has the money his father left him and if he had invested it all in bonds he would be richer today. He is a terrible businessman and knows nothing about economics.
I know, I know. He’s filed for bankruptcy four different times which is the gold standard of business success.
Trump is raising taxes on businesses and ordering them to pay for it with their filthy profits instead of raising prices?
Let me guess. It is bad when Democrats do the same thing, but because it's Trump it's ok.
What costs the business more money? Regulation or import taxes?
Why is PPI not up despite your predictions?
Now you're playing sarc's game of dodging the issue. Tariffs raise prices, and Trump told Walmart to eat the cost. He was threatening Walmart and every other store just as much as Biden was threatening social media companies if they didn't censor messages and users.
Feckless idiot. That you have to stoop to sarc's level would embarrass anybody else.
Stooping to my level? You've got that back-asswards. Then again you are always trying to suck up and be his friend. So that's no surprise.
Tariffs can raise prices. But they haven't retard. As shown by actual data.
There are many cost offsets that you're fucking ignorant to, just like sarc.
Ironically it is you mixing up cost and tariffs.
We literally have data showing you to be wrong. Lol.
I even gave you an example 2 months ago about cost offsets for tariffs due to monetary decreases between the Canadian and American dollar, showing all tariff costs absorbed by Canada due to decrease of monetary value between the two currencies.
I literally linked you to the overall cost effect of the tariffs from trumps first term showing a less than 3% effect on costs from the estimates of tariffs.
You, like sarc, seemingly hate actual data as you live in a world of bumper sticker beliefs.
And you, like, sarc continue to demand we ignore the much higher actual cost drivers to prices.
Retard, tariffs raise prices by definition. I guess definitions aren't your strong suit.
Tariffs can raise prices. But they haven't retard. As shown by actual data.
Remember when we were arguing whether crime was up or down? Then you said we cannot trust the government numbers, we must look at the anecdotal evidence.
Well, Walmart's announcement is your anecdotal evidence that tariffs are causing price increases to hold you over until the CPI reports capture this data and you can go back to your old denial.
Here's more:
https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/tariffs-explained-price-hikes-loom-as-trump-attempts-trade-deals/
YOu are so blind. Threatenting ?????
THe Waltons , owners of Walmart, have a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
Given them a little tax spanking , ,just a teeny 10% and there's $43 Billion that they could have helped the system that gave them galactic sums of money and the fellow citizens with an average of $432 Billion less in their family 'fortune' ...this is just Stalinist talk, he used to laugh as he sent a worker to the concentration camps for criticizing the Workers Paradise !!!
You understand that everything, especially the follow-on inflationary effects of decreased orders, don’t happen right away, right? The impacts will start to be felt from now through the next two months. If the instability (of both tariffs and the President) continues, orders will continue to be delayed or canceled as companies adopt a wait-and-see approach, which will result in less supply.
Basic economics quiz for Jesse: what happens to prices when demand remains the same, but supply falls?
And a decrease in supply will take months to normalize, so as soon as we start to see the effects, they will grow for 2-3 more months because it takes almost 3 months, usually longer, for an order to be produced and delivered.
In economics, this type of situation is referred to as “lagging” because it happens weeks or months after the event that causes it.
Basic supply chain quiz for Jesse: how quickly can an order arrive in the United States after it has been placed?
The increased costs have already been caused by the schitzoid tariff yo-yo of the last month or two. The fact that we haven’t seen the impact yet doesn’t mean it isn’t coming.
You understand that everything, especially the follow-on inflationary effects of decreased orders, don’t happen right away, right?
I don't think he does. For example he still insists that the CARES Act that Trump signed did not cause inflation because the inflation happened while Biden was president. Therefore the inflation was Biden's fault. He really believes that. The guy is not very bright. But he's not totally retarded. If he was totally retarded he'd have an excuse. But because he's only almost retarded he's just an exercise in frustration.
And here we see sarc and lies. That is not what I've said. I've never denied monetary supply increases cause inflation. In fact it is me who keep reminding you of that fact. Lying fuck.
Except in some other comment here, you claim inflation is dropping and thus tariffs aren't raising prices. Oops!
You understand you have been correct on zero of your predictions right? That we have decades of data regarding tariffs that shows no correlation right?
Keep doubling down though. Makes me laugh as the retards keep up their religious beliefs.
You're even misunderstanding the fact that a set tariff policy is a one time impulse, not inflationary over time. A common mistake for economic retards lol.
No, because every prediction has been about what will happen a month or two after the tariffs disrupt trade. There’s a delay, genius. And that lag is about to end, those orders are about to arrive, and the prices are about to go up because the anticipated profit when the companies placed (and paid for) their orders 90+ days ago has been erased by the tariffs. When those products hit the shelves in the next few weeks, the prices will have to be raised or they will all be sold at a loss or a minimal profit.
Do you really not understand how long it takes an order to arrive in the country after the order is placed? 90-120 days is typical.
Nelson , you realize (of course you don't) That the economy added 303 000 jobs recently and that BIden
Now this is NYT so I want you to stipulate. Don't say "I don't believe those numbrrs' we know that, just say "if those numbers were true I would say this about Biden and this about Trump" READY ??????
U.S. Added 818000 Fewer Jobs Than Reported Earlier
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › Business › Economy
Biden what? I’m not sure what unemployment figures have to do with this discussion. Not only is unemployment not a problem (a situation that has been the same for years), it isn’t related to retail pricing.
Are you trying to say that the job estimates aren’t precise? No shit, Sherlock. The initial jobs number is based on a survey of 60k households in the US. The unemployment rate is extrapolated from that and released about a week after the month concludes. It is quick, but not precise. The adjustments come later with more comprehensive data.
BTW, the data is collected exactly the same way every month. It was collected the same way in Trump’s first term, Biden’s term, and now Trump’s second term. In fact, it’s been collected the same way for decades.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/063015/how-does-us-bureau-labor-statistics-calculate-unemployment-rate-published-monthly.asp
If you think I’m going to be upset that you’re criticizing Biden, you’re talking to the wrong person. I didn’t think he was a particularly good President. Better than Trump, but that’s true of most Presidents. Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson have a lock on the top two worst Presidents, but Trump is making a hard push to own #3.
People in general do not react well to having costs passed on to them.
Read any discussion of auto leasing, and you will find all kinds of rage at having sales and property taxes passed on to the consumer.
I don't understand all the stupidity that's going on right now with these tariffs. Protectionist tariffs are supposed to raise prices. I mean, that's the entire point. You can't nudge consumers into buying Murkin if the tariffs don't raise the prices of stuff made in China. Yet Trump is ordering companies to not raise prices. What the fuck? He thinks protectionism doesn't raise prices? The man, and anyone who defends him, is a total moron.
Tariffs also raise the prices of stuff made in the United States. If the tariffs cause a $2 widget made in China to sell for $20, then the $2 domestic widget now gets sold for $19. I mean, duh!
Republicans used to be somewhat economically savvy. Now they are total buffoons falling all over themselves in the race to praise their Orange Jeebus.
Worst example evah.
Worst response ever. The only thing stupid about his post is the actual numbers. But if you knew anything at all about protective tariffs, you'd know that the entire point of protective tariffs is to raise import prices so high that inefficient domestic industries can raise their own prices high enough to make a profit.
Yet Trump is berating Walmart for wanting to make a profit. Huh.
Republicans used to be somewhat economically savvy. Now they are total buffoons falling all over themselves in the race to praise their Orange Jeebus.
That's one of the reasons Trumpism is described as a cult. Part of the psychology of cults is that the members suspend their understanding of reality and replace it with shared stupidity. If you don't share in the shared stupidity then you risk being kicked out. With Trumpism the biggest stupid is the belief that the election was stolen. But there are other shared stupids like, but not limited to, rejecting the last 250 years of economic thought. Anyone who doesn't share the stupidity is attacked and looked down upon, even if they share the rest of the cult's beliefs. Look at how SGT is treated. He's a total Trump bootlicker except for economics. But because of that deviation from their faith, the followers of Trumpism call him a leftist, and they believe it.
""Part of the psychology of cults is that the members suspend their understanding of reality and replace it with shared stupidity.""
Describes progressives.
Suspended understanding of reality... like ignoring actual data?
https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/despite-mainstream-panic-us-consumer-price-inflation-tumbles-lowest-over-4-years
That's nice. Inflation is a matter of money supply, not prices. Walmart, Amazon, and every other retailer whose products are imported, or whose domestic products rely on imported inputs, is raising prices.
This article itself is all about some actual data. Why do you suspend your understanding of that reality and change the subject to monetary inflation?
Changing the subject is what you yell at sarc for. Now you are caught doing the same. Shame, shame, shame.
Hey congrats. You got a simple assumption correct finally.
No, the article is not relying on data, they are making an assumption no supply shift will ever occur, they make th4 assumption price negotiations can't happen with their suppliers. Two very common acts during any tariff change.
It is once again you ignoring their assumption in their model are wrong.
You still think raising costs for a company won’t raise prices at the store. Do you don’t even have one simple assumption correct.
Speaking of lack of understanding of basic economics, like sarc you dismiss the cost pressure from the demand side like an utter retard.
Oh wow, like if customers demand low prices, Walmart will sell below cost, because, golly, I don't know, they don't want a profit, they'll just dip into the Scrooge McDuck gold and jewelry vault to make up the difference, or maybe Trump will get a subsidy passed like he did for farmers during his first term.
You tell us, O Wise One.
So prices aren’t rising, but demand will be lower? Why?
And demand will adjust to rising prices. No one is saying it won’t. But the supply and demand curves will cross at a higher point, particularly for necessary items like cell phones, cars, groceries, housing, and fuel, just to name a few. Those will see little drop in demand, resulting in MUCH higher prices.
Well, unless the seller decides to cut their price to compensate for the tariff. If there's a non-tariffed alternate supplier, that might be the seller's only option.
You don't understand and lot of stuff as shown by your constant failed predictions.
I find it humorous that the dumbest ones here are all in agreement that they are the knowledgeable ones despite being proven wrong over and over.
You haven't proven anyone wrong. You used to claim you'd rebutted me, but you never did anything except cuss and change the subject.
You couldn't rebut a dehorned goat.
“ I find it humorous that the dumbest ones here are all in agreement that they are the knowledgeable ones despite being proven wrong over and over.”
Exactly where have we been “proven wrong”? Literally the most successful retailer in the world has identified the cause of price increases. It’s not like Wal-Mart is some touchy-feely liberal company. They know what they are talking about.
Of course, Jesse not understanding the lagging price effects of tariffs is also to blame, but if we had to identify every idiocy that he believes we wouldn’t have time for anything else.
Every single one of your predictions dumdum. Lol.
Waiting for the economic apocalypse still.
I can also point to over 2 centuries of data you choose to ignore.
My predictions haven’t even arrived yet. I explained, in detail, how long it takes for an order to arrive after it is placed. Prices haven’t had to be raised because the products that will be hit with tariffs are still en route. Once they arrive, the tariffs will force price hikes. And that will happen in the coming weeks.
You keep saying our predictions have failed, but none of them have actually happened yet. So they couldn’t possibly have failed.
It has been explained to you over and over again and even you can’t be so stupid that you can’t understand. So the only remaining possibility is you are intentionally and willfully misrepresenting what we have said and when the price hikes will arrive. But you’re a paleocon, so intentionally and willfully misrepresenting things is what you do.
“ People in general do not react well to having costs passed on to them.”
Normally, the consumer could express their displeasure by purchasing from someone else. But tariffs are universal; there isn’t any retailer that won’t be hit by the added costs of tariffs, so there’s no one else to switch to.
If there is rage, combined with a minimal level of intellect and education, it should be directed at the source of the added costs: Trump’s tariffs. If there’s rage and Jesse-level intellect, it will be directed anywhere except where it should be. Because ignorance is bliss, and Jesse is the most blissful guy on this forum.
Hmmm, what is your point? That they shouldn't be passed on?
That people don't understand? That people don't realize there is short-term pain for long-term gain ?
Really where are you going with that? I know that my neighbors hate "$3 Trillion a year needed for climate change" US sends $150 Billion to Ukraine....Biden sends $8 Billion to South Africa
Trump is raising taxes on businesses and ordering them to pay for it with their filthy profits instead of raising prices?
Sure. This will be a great leap forward.
When did Trump become the same flavor of stupid that AOC is? Usually he sticks with the rainbow coalition of stupid that he’s collected over the years.
When did Trump become the same flavor of stupid that AOC is?
What's even more puzzling is why people who understood economics before Trump came along have renounced the dismal science and instead embraced cult-like ideas that tariffs are magic and Trump is a wizard.
There is no content to this. I teach college students whose major is Philosophy. This would get a fat '0' on a paper for violating the 3 rules of discussion
1) You have no citation for a source about those Economists
2) Tariffs as magic doesn't equate to tariffs are never good
3) What people? Most normal folks support him and they have the down home Economics knowledge that you are disgusted with
....DOn't spend more than you have
---Don't lose most of your money paying off interest on borrowing
----Don't use your money on strangers at the cost of neglecting your own family
Are you in highschool writing for the school paper ??
https://youtu.be/ESL4UWuYqYk?si=6d8Wu9OawbGszhjY
Interesting interview about the real history of global free trade. It was originally sold as a foreign policy tool. Its original supporters admitted that it wouldn't be good for US workers or the US economy but was necessary to fight communism and preserve the peace after World War II. Indeed, none of the half wits who shill for globalism have ever read or understand its original justification nor have they ever actually read Ricardo or Smith or have anything other than a cartoonish understanding of classical economics.
The worldwide reduction in trade barriers has been a boon to mankind for the last 50 years. Our standard of living has never been higher. And a man has been elected president who wants to burn it all down.
Yes, unsupported assertions are highly persuasive. Thanks for providing a perfect example of the sort of half-wit I am talking about. You are so misinformed and stupid, it is impossible to know where to even start to undo all of it.
Only a quarter-wit could be so ignorant of economics studies showing over and over what you mislabel as "unsupported assertions".
I note that your claim of "unsupported assertions" is itself an unsupported assertion, as are all the links you Trumpies post, as is this comment itself. You may as well complain that all these comments are written in Latin characters, and everyone knows Latin is a dead language. That's the level of expertise you bring to these comments.
“ Its original supporters admitted that it wouldn't be good for US workers or the US economy”
Workers and the economy not only aren’t the same thing, they often are at odds. Free trade isn’t good for US manufacturing workers, but great for service workers, white collar workers, and the economy as a whole. Free trade literally is a great thing for the economy.
“ Indeed, none of the half wits who shill for globalism have ever read or understand its original justification”
Why should anyone care about the “justifications” that were used before I was born. For my entire lifetime, free trade has continuously delivered superior economic returns for America. If something is proved to be good and beneficial, who cares what rhetoric was used to sell it on the first place.
It’s like the “Margaret Sanger believes in eugenics” argument for why Planned Parenthood is a bad thing. It’s been wildly successful at delivering health care (including abortion) for my entire lifetime. Who cares what the dead-for-decades founder believed, since it has exactly zero to do with today.
“ who shill for globalism”
Globalism is inextricably connected to free trade. If you claim to like free trade, but hate globalism, than you could just as credibly say that you hate breathing, but like being alive. It’s nonsense.
Globalism/free trade has delivered unmatched prosperity to the United States. It may be damaging to those who chose to make a career in a dying industry like manufacturing, but the same could be said about those who learned how to make buggy whips after the invention of mass-produced automobiles. It was a bad individual choice for the person who made it. The nation shouldn’t be punished because of bad individual choices.
"Free trade isn’t good for US manufacturing workers, but great for service workers, white collar workers, and the economy as a whole."
Shorter version: free trade is good for consumers. It's not great if you're trying to compete against other suppliers.
Kinda. American companies make themselves competitive by producing their products in the same places that foreign companies do. It levels the playing field. So it isn’t good for one segment of workers, but it’s good for American consumers, American businesses, and other segments of workers.
If American companies were to produce their products here, they would go out of business. You can’t overcome a 10x labor cost on production, especially since the quality is indistinguishable.
I don't have the opportunity to watch the video now.
The theoretical justification for free trade comes from the era of Smith's _The Wealth of Nations_, published n 1776. That's quite a bit pre-WWII. The justification is that trade always benefits the two traders. Free trade in general benefits the consumers in both countries.
If you happen to be a worker in a country and you're out-competed by a worker in another country, then yes, that specific trade doesn't benefit you. But that's the nature of competitive economies. Trade isn't special here, you can be out-competed by any number of things including workers _in_ your country.
Finally, no one is just a worker or just a consumer. Most everyone is both. So while you might lose because your job is eliminated, you also benefit from access to inexpensive goods. Having recently been unemployed, I realize that's cold comfort.
In summary, the case for free trade is much deeper and sounder than "we'll make our workers take a hit to further foreign policy goals."
Public statements aren't a threat.
If Trump orders regulators to harass Walmart like Biden did with SpaceX ill complain.
Boehm saying Amazon should out tariff pricing on their website also isn't a threat.
Then you agree with Reason that all the Biden administration's public jawboning for censorship were not threats.
Congratulations, my son, you have come around to the Dark Side. Aping sarc's tactics, approving of government threats, you have come a long way.
I will say, Politicians running their mouths off in public isn’t so much the problem, because politicians are always running their mouths off.
It’s what they do behind closed doors where the real issues, like the Biden Admin planting people in the social media companies offices, or Obama’s closed door meetings with the insurance companies, come from.
A public statement is a threat.
Ordering the FTC to investigate would be carrying out the threat, turning it into an action.
Lancaster is a lying sack of Leftist shit.
What an insightful rebuttal. Your brilliance is fully on display with that one.
Walmart's net income last year was $15B.
They're supposed to just eat a $15B tariff hike?
lol. Republicans are such morons.
Wow. You think tariffs apply to profits.
For your comment to make any lick of sense, you'd have to assume Walmart imports are 12% of all imports based on last months receipts.
You're not that intelligent are you.
Only a moron faux-businessman like yourself could claim that paying higher prices doesn't reduce profits. Where'd you get your business expertise, from the back of a box of cornflakes?
“ Wow. You think tariffs apply to profits.”
Tariffs raise costs, which lower profits.
Simple economic fact for Jesse: the most simplistic (hence the only way you might, possibly, comprehend) definition of profits is revenue minus costs.
So yes, tariffs are directly related to profits. They hurt profits.
Walmart imports on the order of $50 billion from China every year. That means at the current, graciously reduced rate, they are responsible for close to $15 billion in import taxes (and possibly quite a bit more).
So, no, it's not even a little bit reasonable to expect Walmart to absorb the increased cost.
I'm actually surprised the number is so low. Stats I've seen flying around say Walmart imports on the order of 60-80% of its products from China. I would have expected that to be over $100 billion a year. Given that scale, it's also completely unreasonable to expect Walmart to shift its purchasing to producers in other countries in short order. I don't see Walmart has any choice _but_ to pass the cost to consumers.
I simply point out how bereft you are of data
They could eat it and not even burp or spoil their dinner. They have
a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
Wait, you think the Walmart heirs should personally pay the tariff? I assume you realize they're not the only Walmart shareholders, right? And I assume you understand the concepts of market capitalization, profit and loss, and cash flows? This is a P&L/cash flow issue, not a market cap issue.
Basically what you're saying is Walmart should operate at a net loss for now, maybe forever, because...Trump says so? That's not a sustainable business model. Companies go out of business if they don't turn a profit.
Let's go back to first principles. A tariff is a tax. The importing company (Walmart) writes a check to the Treasury for the tax. As a matter of accounting, they're going to turn around and pass that cost to _someone_. Who's that someone going to be? It could be the exporter (by paying the exporter less for the product). Walmart is famous for managing costs so I have to believe there's no more blood to get from that stone. They could cut their profit but as we've discussed, their entire net profit just about barely covers the tariffs. Companies which generate no profits go out of business (and the stock price would collapse to the book value of the company). They could cut internal costs, e.g. firing workers and closing underperforming stores. Finally, they can raise prices.
Walmart will need to choose some from column A, some from column B. If you were CEO, which would you choose? The problem is, raising prices is really their only realistic option. If Trump really was a good businessman and learned anything at Wharton, he'd realize that.
Meet the new Warren, same as the old Warren.
Trump unilaterally did the biggest tax hike in decades.
8647.
Since 1993 or 1951, depending on who you ask.
Lol. Fucking leftists are retarded.
You're literally advocating for increased income taxes in this morning thread.
Right now the tax estimates of tariffs in total is 160B a year based on receipts last month.
But you want to increase income taxes by 300B a year by letting the 2017 income tax cuts expire.
How fucking dumb are both of you?
How do you still not understand supply shift? We have decades of data proving you and the retard Molly wrong.
You have decades of nothing.
Are you saying that the current 10% and 30% tariffs are Trump's end goal? That's ridiculous. They do nothing useful. They raise prices today, promise to lower income taxes next year, and piss off voters, in exchange for disrupting economies, not protecting domestic industries, and keeping the IRS.
Even Trump isn't that stupid. Not even you believe that balderdash. Therefore his end goal must be high enough tariffs to replace the income tax and protect domestic industry. That would be 71% for a direct replacement tariff rate, except the concomitant reduction in imports will reduce tariff revenue so much that the income tax will still be necessary. But all prices will still rise, not just imports, because that is how protective tariffs work, by allowing domestic producers to raise prices.
Great. Now you've got high prices and the income tax. Is that Trump's end goal? Not likely, but that's what he'll get. Just in time to hand the 2026 elections to the Democrats. Is that what you want? Do you think clapping your hands can save Tinkerbell, err, I mean Trump, from the inevitable third impeachment? Do you think that telling mothers to buy 2 dolls instead of 30, and pay more, is the right way to keep 0.8% of voters from changing their mind?
Well your girl Kamala sure didn't win the race by a nose !!!!
Fucking fascist.
Wait, Rob Misek posted? Oh, you are using it the wrong way again. Got it.
Dunking on Misek will never not be funny, I don’t care who does it.
Admittedly, it was the obvious joke. But if someone tosses you a softball, you’re morally obliged to smack it over the fence.
Trump shouldn't be 'ordering' private business but only an idiot thinks a post on Truth Social is an 'order'.
That said; If you're still shopping at Walmart for the best deal you're an idiot to start with. Walmart's prices have out-done practically every other outlet around.
TrumpBiden shouldn't be 'ordering' private business but only an idiot thinksa post on Truth Socialstaffers calling businesses with censorship suggestions is an 'order'.Oh wait. You were totally outraged about what Biden did. Principles shminciples. You only care about who, not what.
As-if there is no difference between a Government headed letter with multiple congressmen signing it and a post on Truth Social media. TDS Snowflake.
Neither have any lawful power and are backed only by intimidation. Though you're right in that there is a big difference between the two. That would be that Trump's 'order' is backed with a bigger threat of retaliation than anything Biden did. That and the people who were rightly angered at what Biden did will defend Trump doing the same thing. People with no principles who judge everything based upon who, not what. You know, people like you.
So; Call me to be more upset when the ?order? matures instead of pretending it already has.
At least you acknowledge your dearth of principles. That's a start.
Something your Dem-Bias and endless Self-Projection will never allow you to do.
Biden pushed 5T in new regulations in 4 years retard.
How are you so ignorant?
Then you agree that all Biden's jawboning for censorship was fine and dandy.
Gosh, I wonder why Walmart prices have risen. But more to the point, I wonder who gave you permission to buck the party line and admit Walmart prices have risen in defiance if Trumponomics, which says tariffs are not taxes, do not raise prices, yada yada yada.
You're an idiot.
You need to shorten your handle by the last two words.
You need to take your meds, old man.
Another one who thinks government is wise, eh?
Well, maybe in comparison to your boring copy-n-paste, government looks good, but that's hardly a recommendation.
Wrong , unbelievably wrong , about Walmart
a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
It's a veiled threat, just like "nice business youse got here. It's be a shame if something were to happen to it."
Given how vindictive Trump sounds, only a fool would ignore the implication.
Expecting billionaire companies to eat the costs (of whatever is imposed) is exactly what I would expect a progressive to say.
Expensive mandates pushed on companies that should cost customers nothing extra is the progressive dream.
In reality, the company will decide how much it can eat, or desires to eat, or not.
No, the market will decide how much the company eats. The company doesn't decide jack. The laws of supply and demand decide everything.
Until the 'laws' are written with Gov-Gun threats behind them.
Turning the Halls of Justice into the Halls of Criminals who think a trade-median of barbaric 'Gun' fights for the last twinkie is what the USA is suppose to be about.
Government only scope/purpose should be to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all 'against' those trying to take it away. Sadly; Today mostly it does the complete opposite of what it's suppose to do.
The market will have a play. I used to work for a major retailer. Almost every year vendors would raise their prices and there would be conversations about how to best handle that.
Duh. The company reacts to the market. Where'd you get all those buzzwords, from Jesse's box of cornflakes after he was done getting his business expertise from it?
“ No, the market will decide how much the company eats.”
Since every company is hit exactly the same, everyone can get away with passing on the costs. No one has to eat anything because there is no competitive advantage in selling things for a loss. It’s not like there’s a company out there that is exempt from the added costs of the tariffs.
Wrong again there are NO companies in the entire world that come within a parsec of the net worth of the Waltons of Walmart
a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
The heirs of Walmart’s founders are rich. So? It’s the company that is relevant, not a bunch of rich people.
You understand the Waltons and WalMart are two separate and largely unrelated things, right? Short of their huge numbers of shares, they are just like every other stockholder. And as an inviter, if a company asked me to pay their tariffs I would rightly tell them to fuck off.
“ Expensive mandates pushed on companies that should cost customers nothing extra is the progressive dream.”
You misspelled “delusion”.
I fail to see any orders or threats in that Trump post. I do see TDS in this piece.
Did you also approve of Biden's censorship jawboning?
Or are you just a run-of-the-mill Trumpie hypocrite?
A true hypocrite like you will applaud the Government Disinformation Board of Biden and then call everybody else a Trumpie hypocrite
True Trump defending hypocrites (but I repeat myself) like you were rightly enraged when Biden used intimidation to get companies to do what he wanted, and now you attack anyone who criticizes Trump for using intimidation do get companies to do what he wants.
People like me, principled people who hold both teams in contempt, say it's scummy no matter which team does it.
This is the third time you’ve posted that asinine retort. There’s a fundamental difference between saying some shit from the bully pulpit and actual agents of the government reviewing people’s posts and telling the company what was allowed and what needed “context”. You get that, right?
FWIW, the retarded shit Trump or Biden (well Biden’s puppet master) say on social media or in an interview is fine and dandy. It’s the actions they take to follow through on the bloviating that actually matters.
You seriously think jawboning is as far as the Biden Administration went? Most of the time they didn't even say anything publicly, they just went directly to actually stifling speech and business.
Walmart didn't vote for the tariffs but plenty of their customers did. So why should Walmart pay?
All people didn't vote for a [Na]tional So[zi]alist Leftard-Grift Shop.
So why should [WE] all have to pay?
Good point. I'm still looking for the only Tax those who vote for it legislation. By COVID spending alone that'd be Democrat voters pay 75% of taxes and Republicans pay 25%.
Wrong question based on two dumb premises.
The Walton family made their 432 BILLION under the economic system Trump is trying to save and strenghten. Their customers are not just poor suckers to be fleeced, you would think they would care for their country and their customers both of which made them everything they are. $432 BILLION and they are being abused ????????????????????????????????? You are textbook obtuse
ADAM SMITH
It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.
Here's an idea: Wally world could spend some of it's available cash on local suppliers.
No wait, corporate executives would have to take a pay cut.
You Trump defenders have gone total leftist.
"If those rich businessmen would only give up some of their immoral profits then they could buy local!"
"Those evil corporations can afford to pay more taxes if they give up some of their immoral profits!"
Fuck, man. What kind of stupid pills do you have to eat to be a MAGA?
You are stupid and I welcome every chance to point it out.
The Walton family is worth $432 BILLION according to Bloomberg and you want to say that they got that way by fair pricing !!! You poor benighted clod
That is so leftist of you. AOC and Bernie would be proud.
It also shows that you don't understand the difference between money and wealth, which is essential to being a leftist economic ignoramus or a Trump defender.
If you need to make me a Trumpie you do that but my CMA Economics training say you are a moron
NOt evil not immoral ...If Trump / IRS made a slight change of 10% the Waltons would be hugely better off eating the tariffs
a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg
“ Here's an idea: Wally world could spend some of its available cash on local suppliers.”
So lower their profits by buying a more-expensive American version? The tariffs need to be a lot higher before the cost of American manufacturing can match the landed cost of foreign production.
Why would they want to give up even more of their profits?
Why in the world would something made next-door end up being more-expensive than something made and shipped 1/2 way around the world?
Shipping cost of the raw materials from 1/2 way around the world, so it can be made next door?
+ All the regulations and taxes the USA burdens companies with. Environmental and energy being some of the most onerous. Plus some labor laws.
BINGO +1000000, "All the regulations and taxes the USA burdens companies with. Environmental and energy being some of the most onerous. Plus some labor laws."
Comparative advantage. You know, one of those economic terms you refuse to learn because you consider knowledge to be leftist.
FFS you're stupid. What kind of logical "comparative advantage" can you chalk up under shipping something 1/2-way around the world instead of getting it next-door? Tinkerbell's magical dust?
Your 'woke' education terms is nothing but blatant STUPIDITY.
But do those countries only have comparative advantage because they don’t have, as Sometimes a Great Notion put it, “+ All the regulations and taxes the USA burdens companies with. Environmental and energy being some of the most onerous. Plus some labor laws.”?
That doesn't matter in Economics, and some of those are transnationals so there is not DAnish v United States or Indian vs United States.
That was Trump's point. Why are we letting China kill us on Pharmaceuticals for example
Just 4 minutes to see why you don't understand
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=663551469423186
“ Why in the world would something made next-door end up being more-expensive than something made and shipped 1/2 way around the world?”
Because shipping is cheap and the labor is 1/10 (literally) of what it costs here.
Companies have a way to compare the cost of goods produced abroad getting to the same point (inside the country) as domestic production. It’s called landed cost and it’s as common as it gets in business.
Look it up and you’ll have your answer.
Nelson, again you just don't get basics. Made in USA is a legal term it doesn't mean totally and often can't mean totally.
The FTC gives an example in which a watch is produced in the U.S. with American labor and mostly U.S. parts, but the company uses foreign-origin movement components in the watches. The movements may not be a big percentage of the product’s production cost, but without them, the watches won’t work. “Because movements are essential to the watches’ function, an unqualified Made in USA claim is likely deceptive,” the FTC says.
You are the one injecting, giving you a huge benefit of the doubt, tertiary issues that you pretend are primary issues.
Nothing is solely made in one country any more. The tariffs will raise the price of the imported components for domestic production and the massively expensive labor in the Us will add even more.
Mass market manufacturing is ruinously expensive in America.
To avoid the tax.
Obviously.
It's entirely voluntary. All they have to do is make that trade-off.
Joe, you are no friend of normal people
What a goddam hypocrite to defend the Waltons so you can yap about tariffs. Do a little goddam homework
The Walton family, heirs to the Walmart empire are world's richest family by light years . With a combined net worth of $432 billion, as reported by Bloomberg.
What !! does it bother you , Joe, they could drop a mere tithe and that would cover 44 BILLLION of those tariffs. But you want to be a big deal at Reason and a go-to Libertarian so you defend those poor Waltons.
Careful, you're kind of sounding like Bernie there, suggesting that billionaires can afford to accept less profit for a greater good.
NO, I have never liked Bernie, he is almost ignorant of basic Economics.
I am saying the opposite. They have that $432 Billion because of the American customers and the American system and they can't just milk both, if you live in the house, Mom used to say, you live by the rules.
What American capitalist rules are they not living by if they pass on the cost of tariffs to their customers and tell them about it?
Also, what echoes Bernie and his fellow travelers is the idea that they are so rich that they can afford to forgo profits that they could otherwise make according to the rules of free market capitalism. That is what confuses me about what you said. You said "they could drop a mere tithe and that would cover 44 BILLION of those tariffs." Since this article was in response to Trump saying that they should "eat" the tariffs themselves, instead of passing them on to their customers, it sure sounds like both you and Trump are suggesting that the wealthy should not seek as much profit as the free market would allow them to earn, so that some greater good can be served.
Like I said, that sure sounds like something Bernie would say...
These billionaires lighting 100s on fire to light their cigars.
"The fat cats need to be taken down a peg" is a bedrock libertarian principal.
Oh wait.
Remember, it's only jawboning if a Democrat does it.
Remember, If Democrats are jawboning then it's ALL TRUMPS FAULT!
...because social media posts of course. /s
Leftard deflection / self-projection 101.
...in which case, jeff will be in favor of it.