Trump Moving Ahead With Tariffs
[guest post by Dana]
Apparently the President-elect intends to go through with his plans unless someone with influence can make him see the error of his ways:
Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that one of the first executive orders he will sign when he takes office on Jan. 20, 2025, will be to charge Mexico and Canada with a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States.
“This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country! Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long simmering problem. We hereby demand that they use this power, and until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price.” Trump posted.
. . .
In another post, Trump said that he will be charging China with an additional 10% tariff on top of any additional tariffs on products coming into the U.S., arguing the country wasn’t doing enough to stop the flow of illicit drugs.
“Representatives of China told me that they would institute their maximum penalty, that of death, for any drug dealers caught doing this but, unfortunately, they never followed through, and drugs are pouring into our Country, mostly through Mexico, at levels never seen before,” Trump claimed.
As of this writing, the stock market is not yet open. However, Americans will likely end up paying more for consumer goods (groceries), as well as automobiles and electronics, etc.
Remember, this is nothing new. Back in 2020, the news wasn’t good:
Already, Trump’s tariffs have been a net drag on the economy and have failed to achieve his stated goal of boosting domestic manufacturing, according to a new study by two Federal Reserve Board economists, Aaron Flaaen and Justin Pierce.
Any jobs saved or created in U.S. industries protected by tariffs are more than offset by jobs lost in companies that suffer higher input costs or lose export sales because of retaliatory tariffs, the study, which was released last month, concluded.
“The tariffs have not boosted manufacturing employment or output, even as they increased producer prices,” the study found.
As expected, China, Mexico, and Canada have not taken the news well.
Anyway, some food for thought:
"In 2022, Mexico and Canada supplied 51 percent and 2 percent, respectively, of U.S. fresh fruit imports, and 69 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of U.S. fresh vegetable imports" https://t.co/2YPxAv7egK pic.twitter.com/N1107Q5iKD
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) November 26, 2024
Enjoy your fruit & vegetable tax, everyone. https://t.co/5UP9CNeSMG pic.twitter.com/hU2P6k0rVl
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) November 25, 2024
So why would Trump want to sink the economy and have American consumers pay, oh, I don’t know, $10(!!) for an avocado???? Our starting point is: somehow this will make him look good, because we know every decision he makes is ultimately about making himself look good. . .
—Dana
Bleh. Here we go again.
Dana (7c8f85) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:48 am–Donald J. Trump, extolling the virtues of the USMCA he had just signed and will kill in his 2nd term, 1/29/2020
Paul Montagu (ceba6c) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:40 amAnyone? Anyone? Ferris Bueller was entertaining and educational. John Hughes was so ahead of his time.
Paul Montagu (ceba6c) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:05 amAs I pointed out on the Open Thread, imposing draconian tariffs was the the major economic plank of his campaign and certainly a major reason he won the Rust Belt and working class Democrats. Why should Trump disavow a major campaign promise that his voters supported?
Trump has painted himself into a corner-tariffs will certainly not compel countries to end the illegal importation of drugs, including fentanyl (much of which is smuggled in by American tourists); nor will they end illegal immigration. So no matter the economic damage, he will be unable to lift them as drug smuggling and illegal immigration will continue.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:06 amI don’t understand why anyone expected anything different.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:16 amRight now the market reaction is “meh.” The Dow is down 109 points (-.25%), but is climbing; the S&P 500 is up 17.13 (+.29%); and the NASDAQ is up 78.95 (+.41%).
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:25 amProbably because the market understands what a deterrent is.
SaveFarris (8940bf) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:34 amSo why would Trump want to sink the economy and have American consumers pay, oh, I don’t know, $10(!!) for an avocado???? Our starting point is: somehow this will make him look good, because we know every decision he makes is ultimately about making himself look good. . .
Dana (7b6d1a) — 11/26/2024 @ 10:39 amThe Dow is now in positive territory, up five points or .01%, the S&P +26 (.43%); and the NASDAQ +103 (.54%). Still “meh.”
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:01 amIt’s what his voters voted for……the consequences be dammed.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:03 amUltimately, I think he will walk back the Mexico/Canada tariffs after the impact on American industries becomes apparent, especially in the auto industry. The worldwide tariffs he promised, not so much.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:08 amYou won’t see a big market reaction until the tariffs are implemented. Right now it’s mostly speculation as to their impact.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:17 amRip, we all know this is what Trump promised.
His trying to deliver on said promise doesn’t exempt him from criticism for his tariff stupidity. And just like with his counterproductive China tariffs, the three nations affected aren’t going to capitulate; rather, they’re threatening retaliatory tariffs.
One reason the Fed didn’t lower interest rates the last time is they were anticipating that Trump’s actions would be inflationary.
Paul Montagu (ceba6c) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:48 amhttps://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1861411274581594612?
NJRob (c2cef8) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:52 am“– Mexican president announces migrant caravans will be halted”
dude is just straight up lying.
https://www.newsweek.com/caravans-not-reaching-border-says-mexico-president-after-trump-threats-1991916
Davethulhu (08aea7) — 11/26/2024 @ 11:59 amSuddenly, after a four year hiatus, inflation is important and newsworthy.
lloyd (7028d2) — 11/26/2024 @ 12:26 pmOn the other hand, we now have a 4 year respite from people caring about the budget deficit.
Davethulhu (08aea7) — 11/26/2024 @ 12:55 pmWhile I’ve said that tariffs can be understood as a “sin tax”, that begs the question of most sin taxes: is this a sin we want to penalize?
I could make the case that a tariff on state-subsidized exports from China (e.g. solar panels) might make sense. But a tax on maple syrup?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:01 pmThen people shouldn’t act surprised when he follows through. The idea that tariffs will be non-inflationary (especially coupled with mass deportations that will raises costs in the construction and agricultural industries, for example) is of course ludicrous. And those who voted for Trump shouldn’t be surprised if in a year or so inflation goes back to Biden levels.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:01 pmThis is so stupid. We’ve tried tariffs before. They don’t work.
Look up the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. All it did was exacerbate the Great Depression.
Tariffs hurt both the targeted countries (China, Mexico, Canada) and the country doing the targeting (U.S.). The U.S. economy might be able to sustain some damage, but the Chinese economy is already in a slump. If things get worse there, don’t be surprised if Xi Jinping decides to distract the populace by invading Taiwan.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:02 pmOn the other hand, we now have a 4 year respite from people caring about the budget deficit.
Some people. The same people who don’t care about graft, rape, abuses of power or self-dealing.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:03 pmLet’s see what happens once the tariffs are actually imposed. My guess is not capitulation to Trump’s demands but retaliatory tariffs.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:04 pmThe U.S. economy might be able to sustain some damage, but the Chinese economy is already in a slump.
Maybe they should re-orient their economy towards making goods for their own people.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:04 pmBut the lesson we should learn is this: giving plenary tariff power to a politician was stupid then as it is now. Congress has a few months to change the law and get Biden to sign it.
Will they act? Or will they posture?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:06 pmAt the final bell:
As I said before, watch the markets once the tariffs are actually imposed. Katy bar the door.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:10 pmMaybe they should re-orient their economy towards making goods for their own people.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:04 pm
That’s the thinking behind tariffs. “Don’t trade. Just make everything yourself.” It sounds good at first, but free trade is one of those counterintuitive things. In reality, free trade makes both sides better off.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:12 pmWhich people? Dana? Me?
Paul Montagu (ceba6c) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:15 pmI won’t speak for Dana, but I expected it, because Trump stupidly and wrongly talked ad nauseum during the campaign about how great tariffs were.
LOL! That would be a great way to turn Trump’s voters against democracy-change laws that have existed for decades just so Trump won’t be able to have same powers as previous presidents.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:15 pmThose (both here and in the media) who are acting all shocked that Trump would do such a thing. Trump was pretty clear as to what he intended to do as President, so it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:19 pmAnother way to look at it is this: Countries don’t trade with each other per se. It’s not like Biden gets on the phone with Xi and says, “I’ll give you some soybeans in exchange for some clothing.” Nope. Companies trade with each other. Companies in China buy U.S. agricultural products, and companies in the U.S. buy clothing from China.
Tariffs are just the government getting in the way of the free market.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:24 pm1. Why would Republicans support such a bill?
2. There are only 12 legislative days in December, and I believe that most of the time will be taken up by a government funding bill, so this idea is superfluous.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:38 pm[guest post by Dana]
Apparently the President-elect intends to go through with his plans unless someone with influence can make him see the error of his ways:
And herein lies the problem. There were so many bright and competent people in Trump’s first cabinet who eventually resigned because Trump was so unreasonable. And Trump would savage them after they quit. That’s always the way it is with Trump. The people he chooses are the best, the greatest, until they don’t lick his boots. After that, they are the worst, the most despicable people ever. It’s comical, really (but also sad).
This time around, who but the most obsequious are going to sign up to be in his orbit? I fear Trump is going to be insulated from reality.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:42 pmNot a word about the reason for the Tariffs: slave labor, fentanyl and the invasion on our border.
NJRob (c2cef8) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:45 pmIt sounds good at first, but free trade is one of those counterintuitive things. In reality, free trade makes both sides better off.
Generally yes, and in the long run. But when a country floods the world with goods from next-gen industries it’s not “trade” but market domination. China doesn’t import much, so calling it “trade” is a pretense.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:47 pmThere are only 12 legislative days in December, and I believe that most of the time will be taken up by a government funding bill, so this idea is superfluous.
They’re on salary, they can work nights and weekends. In the biz, we called that a “deathmarch” but it happened every single year.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:49 pmso Trump won’t be able to have same powers as previous presidents.
The LP has been point this problem out since Nixon. They’ve said “just wait until you get a real ahole in that office and you’ll see we were right.”
If not now, it will happen after.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:50 pmQuestion: other than the source of goods and services, what is the difference between a tariff and an excise tax?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:51 pmSource
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:12 pmI noticed you skipped my first point, which was why would the Republicans support removing the tariff powers from President Trump in the first place?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:16 pm@8
Because you and everyone else having a fit over this are missing the point of tarrifs.
It’s not simply a “tax”. In fact, it’s more than that.
It’s an economic behavior modification tool.
Consumers want cheap stuff.
Post-tariffs, someone will figure out how to drive down the cost to settle on an aggressive, narrow profit margin. Usually that means companies invest within the US, in order to avoid such tariffs. That means, more jobs and more money would be injected in the US economy.
Tariff can also be a “tool” in the international relations department, particularly to ‘encourage’ a obstructive country in the realms of illegal immigrations.
whembly (477db6) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:23 pmTariffs encourage trade with new partners. For example, China’s loss will be India, Vietnam’s gain. Mexico doesn’t have to lose at all, it is being leveraged to cooperate on immigration and drug cartels and has a choice. Mexico was well compensated for cooperation under the previous Trump rules
It is good for the US to diversify away from China for a number of good reasons. #1 being that China is a geopolitical adversary that we are over dependent on and #2 China is a geopolitical adversary that we are over dependent on
A common misconception is that tariffs always make prices go up per the percentage applied, when often the buyer simply finds a vendor that is in compliance and negotiates a price similar to that of the previous vendor.
The Chinese will cheat in places like Boten, Laos where they take over a border town and put “Made in Laos” on it
It is a good thing to sometimes pay a little more in order to retain knowledge and capability, to encourage innovation internally.
steveg (27ab6d) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:24 pmTelemedicine is the future in the GP/PA space, but if all the doctors doing it are in India via Starlink because Big Healthcare outsourced it to keep premiums lower, that is not ideal.
“In 1930, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, in an effort to alleviate the effects of the… Anyone? Anyone?… the Great Depression, passed the… Anyone? Anyone? The tariff bill? The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act? Which, anyone? Raised or lowered?… raised tariffs, in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government. Did it work? Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression.”
SamG (4e6c22) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:27 pmOT: https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/11/the-collapse-of-anti-trump-lawfare/
The Jack Smith cases are dead, dead.
In 2029, prosecutors would be time-barred to try to reindict Trump of the same charges due to statute of limitations.
Lawfare failed.
Good riddence.
whembly (477db6) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:31 pm@42
Bruh…
The Hawley-Smoot Tariffs are nothing like the kinds of tariffs Trump is proposing.
whembly (477db6) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:32 pmI’m of the firm opinion that we should grow our own fruits and vegetables in season and use Mexico and South America for off season.
California could try using its water in the national interest, restore productivity
PS: Scott Lincicome is trolling. Canada and Mexico will cooperate on the border and the rapeseed oil from Canada will continue to flow south
steveg (27ab6d) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:39 pm@steveg@45 Generally speaking, the arable land in CA is already either growing crops/orchards/pasture or covered in buildings.
Nic (120c94) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:12 pmGood luck with that happening. It is more likely that Mexico (and other countries) will slap retaliatory tariffs on American products.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:23 pmAnd you know this how?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:35 pmI’m sure I’m not the only commenter who has some first hand exposure to the problem, given how common of a problem this is. Estimates for the kill count this year is over 140,000. It’s hard to say, as they do not always test for fentanyl.
Most fentanyl is not brought over the US Mexico border. A significant amount comes that way, albeit I have no idea why DCSCA claims it came from ‘tourists’. Most fentanyl comes from China, directly across the ocean in boats. Some comes from the lesser cartels, but they sourced their through China and India.
https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/DEA_GOV_DIR-008-20%20Fentanyl%20Flow%20in%20the%20United%20States_0.pdf
Because of its concentration level, Fentanyl is easier to smuggle than cocaine and meth. A small amount makes a ton of pills and makes a ton of money. The risks are great, but the organized criminals who ship it here use intermediaries. Mules of various kinds. Those caught with it at points of entry or in the USA are probably addicts themselves. They are certainly worthy of prison, but they are not the primary agents of fentanyl. It makes sense that most of those apprehended in the USA are Americans. The notion they were ‘tourists’ suggests they were just bringing this over for themselves and this isn’t a serious problem. The reality is they were making money off the death and destruction of Americans; often kids in my experience, in service of higher level distributors who aren’t caught with this stuff in their backpacks because they use losers as mules.
There is no question China and Mexico can do much more to control the flow. There is no question that the situation with cartels in Mexico is intolerable.
I am encouraged that the incoming President is acting more aggressively against the interests of Mexico and China to curb this problem. If tariffs drive up prices (and how could they not), but this problem is cut in half, that’s a bargain for the good guys.
This problem is at least as serious as any other foreign policy issue facing the USA. It is effectively one or two Vietnams worth of American death every year.
So let’s do a thought experiment. We’re putting enormous amounts of resources into Russia and Ukraine, two extremely corrupt countries full of people who hate the USA and have no respect for the concept of free speech, and both of which have attempted to interfere with American democracy. Imagine if all those resources treated fentanyl as an act of war?
Recall when Kamala was asked what she would do differently, and she said nothing came to mind. Had she said she would crush the cartels and any Chinese distributor of drugs like fentanyl, and taken on a mother-bear attitude, who knows, maybe she would have beaten an extremely tarnished opponent. Populism is born of frustration with those who don’t seem to care about the problems facing our communities and families. It’s hard for me to praise Trump… it’s not hard for me to hope this works.
I also think efficiency and bottom lines hide the real issue with tarrifs. There is a loss of human dignity in our country. It is tolerable for men to not labor to put food on the tables for their children. We need these men to get jobs. Even if it would be cheaper to outsource their labor to Chinese slaves (essentially) or a Mexican underclass that works outside the law. We need that bad.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:42 pmWith avocados he has an excuse since they are used for smuggling. They get prohibited altogether if coming from certain places in Mexico.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/mexican-president-claims-conspiracy-in-u-s-avocado-ban-linked-to-threat-against-inspectors
Sammy FInkelman (e4ef09) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:49 pmMost people don’t understand the details of the issues, and this way he looks like he is standing up for the United States of America, and keeping campaign promises.
Sammy FInkelman (e4ef09) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:51 pmAre these not simply economic sanctions designed to coerce a foreign government into acting in accordance with American interests? How is this different from imposing sanctions on, for example, Russia over the invasion of the Ukraine. I never hear how these types of sanctions might lead to price increases.
Monash (7ed31e) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:52 pmMexico needs the USA on a level far beyond how the USA needs Mexico.
In fact, much of Mexican imports of legitimate goods directly profit violent cartels. Avocados for example. Eating them is morally questionable.
Suppose we go through some hard years, while utterly starving evil at our doorstep, as the USA regains most of her ability to feed and supply herself. Suppose it means labor must be worth more, due to supply and demand, reversing the pandemic concentration of wealth in a way Trickle Down does not.
It’s probably a lot scarier to boomers, who took so much from the USA. Another reason to question why we owe them social security, imo.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:53 pmIf Trump’s tariff threats are just a negotiating ploy, then there will be a lot of disappointed people.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:58 pmIt’s a good thing then I don’t like them. 😉
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:00 pmRip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:06 am
Young American citizens hired by the cartels, but not really “tourists” and the Cato Institute blog post you linked to doesn’t describe them as tourists even if legally that’s what they are.
But Trump will be the one keeping score. He can easily end semi-legal immigration by people claiming asylum at ports of entry and people surrendering themselves between ports of entry, where their identities can be checked, diverting some of them to totally unregistered immigration.
And then there’s the fact that by making it more dangerous and getting more people killed (by Mexicans) he can deter some. Obama did that.
Sammy FInkelman (e4ef09) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:11 pmBut when a country floods the world with goods from next-gen industries it’s not “trade” but market domination. China doesn’t import much, so calling it “trade” is a pretense.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 1:47 pm
I’m sure similar arguments were made in favor of tariffs in the past.
Tariffs impoverish both sides.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:21 pmFair enough. How about “drug smuggling tourists”?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:22 pmBottom line on Chinese imports:
More statistics here (some behind paywall).
Jim Miller (3c879d) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:30 pmIt’s amusing I see this talking point from the same 5-6 engagement trolls on a few forums who parrot whatever the obnoxious gotcha comment is.
Nah, fentanyl and meth distributors are not touring the border when they pick up illegal aliens or drugs. The word tourist is intended to defend the murder of hundreds of thousands of Americans by conflating “trafficker” with “tourist” as though all Americans share some common sin. It’s not unlike the Mexican President’s comments today blaming the USA for the cartel’s violence, because they source their guns through traffickers.
The problem is the cartel. Their trafficking mules deserve prison, but the problem is the cartel giving the orders and making the real money off the deaths of Americans.
Remember, many commenters here cheered the use of ATACMS missiles, a weapon designed to be near parity with some nuclear weapons through conventional means, to protect Ukraine’s borders. What do we get to use to protect American borders?
I don’t see anyone saying we shouldn’t put American illicit fentanyl dealers in prison. Of course we must. But what do we do about the source? It’s china, btw. Most Fentanyl does not come from Americans of any kind. It’s simply shipped from China, directly into the USA. Perhaps we trade too much with them.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:34 pmRip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 2:12 pm
The book definition. Always the tree, never the forest with you.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:35 pmIt’s not simply a “tax”. In fact, it’s more than that.
It’s an economic behavior modification tool.
AKA a sin tax. Just like the $5/pack tax on cigarettes modifies behavior.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:36 pmAnd you know this how?
The new administration is singing a different tune.
NJRob (c2cef8) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:36 pmTariffs impoverish both sides.
As a whole, if you look at it only from the corporate top line and ignore every conceivable externality. Like being dependent for many needed items on a country whose behavior we then have to accept.
Don’t like slave labor in China? Tough. We need those solar panels.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:40 pmAnd you know this how?
They said they would today. It’s in the news.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:40 pmThere will be some people who profit from the tariffs, should they come to pass (trump isn’t exactly reliable).
First, American producers competing with imports.
Second, Americans getting jobs making stuff.
Third, parents who get to see their children grow up, who otherwise would have died from fentanyl, should the nations at war with the USA, Mexico and China, aggressively act to stop the problem (Which really is much broader in scope than fentanyl, with the distribution of newer synthetic drugs in the form of counterfeit pills today).
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:41 pmTargeted tariffs to alter behavior, or to balance trade, are one thing. Often useful. Blanket tariffs are a beggar-thy-neighbor attack on all trade.
It’s like guns. Using a gun for self-defense, or to deter attackers is one thing. Shooting everyone is different.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:43 pmWhat’s being overlooked about tariffs and immigration enforcement is the potential for corruption and crony capitalism.
IN the United States in the 1800s there used to be much lobbying of Congress about tariffs. Now the problem is with arbitrary power by the president to exempt or not.
Immigration enforcement is likely to be scattershot with political decisions at the top and corruption at the bottom
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/25/opinion/trump-tariffs-deportations.html
Sammy FInkelman (e4ef09) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:44 pmGood point.
But one thing Trump probably learned was that his job is very hard to do, and he only has a couple of tools. This is one, and he’s probably not going to use it in a judicious manner. He’s probably going to count on our adversaries to respect his proven ability to be a jackass.
We will pay, probably dearly, but I actually think we need to shake things up on a fundamental level. I do not mind the idea of Americans replacing the jobs of Chinese slaves and Illegal immigrants, even if this makes everything more expensive. It isn’t cheap paying for the joblessness and hopelessness out here.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:47 pmThere will be some people who profit from the tariffs
Case one: An American maker of solar panels, or toasters. Helped a lot by tariffs.
Case two: An American maker of airplanes, sold throughout the world. Not so happy.
Consumers will modify their purchases as always, driven largely by price. They won’t say “Those strawberries are from Mexico, I won’t buy them.” They’ll say “Strawberries are really expensive now, I’ll buy cherries instead. That damn Trump and his inflation!”
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:48 pmThis is one, and he’s probably not going to use it in a judicious manner
Populism is a blunt instrument. And when you add a blunt wielder to the blunt instruments….
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:02 pmIt isn’t cheap paying for the joblessness and hopelessness out here.
As I said, externalities. Sure the economist can point to the growth in GDP, but even the money spent on self-destruction by the hopeless looks like growth to him.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:04 pmMexico isn’t the only country prepared to respond to new tariffs:
UK could strike back at Trump with taxes on
………..
The U.K. carried over tariffs from the European Union after Brexit that were placed on U.S. goods during Trump’s first term as retaliation to the then-president’s sweeping tariffs on European steel. …….
The U.K. tariffs were still in place when Britain formally left the EU in February 2020, and included quintessentially American products like Jack Daniel’s bourbon, Levi’s jeans and Harley Davidsons.
Current and former government officials told POLITICO that the U.K. can immediately place these tariffs back on the U.S. if Trump delivers on his threat to hit all overseas imports with 10 to 20 percent tariffs without triggering pushback from Britain’s trade watchdog.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:13 pm……….
Some of this is simply a matter of national dignity. The USA has always had her ugliness, but I think the aspiration for a nuclear family, for providing, that dream, it’s opposed by something else these days. Addiction is part of the problem. Opportunity another.
I have never subscribed to the Bernie bro shtick, but wealth concentrated rapidly in the pandemic, and there are many reasons why I think the USA is fundamentally stronger if we focus on something other than quarterlies.
I also saw Nancy Pelosi made over $2million today. Just today, on the stock market. Sure, folks like that do not want tariffs. Folks who lost a loved one to the cartel and china’s fentanyl war on the USA may not care so much.
This really depends on how economic hardship manifests.
Already such a manufacturer was probably having a really hard time competing. Unless they make weapons.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:14 pmAny historic examples of tariffs altering a country’s behavior?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:45 pmSpecifically, a non-trade related behavior?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 5:46 pmSpecifically, a non-trade related behavior?
The Soviet Union. It took a while, true, but it did happen.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:16 pmAs long as a demand for fentanyl exists, there will be fentanyl in the U.S. No amount of tariffs or walls will stop it.
The U.S. would have to turn into a police state the likes of which North Korea could only dream of to make a dent in the flow of fentanyl and other drugs. Do we want to live in such a place?
Even if an authoritarian country like China could clamp down on it, labs would pop up in other countries. It’s whack-a-mole. The black market for drugs is just too lucrative.
The War on Drugs is over 50 years old, and yet drugs are everywhere.
We would be better off legalizing drugs, taxing them (but not too much, or we’ll end up like California, which still has an illegal weed problem), and using the proceeds for education and treatment.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:17 pmBut you miss the point: the object in cases like that is not to force change, but to avoid being an accomplice.
In changing how another country engages in trade, you only need to look at the Japanese auto industry and how the mere threat of import quotas produced a sea-change in behavior. All those nice (nonunion) assembly plants in the South both cut costs for the Japanese companies, improved the job situation in Appalachia, and increased the market penetration for Japanese (and later European) cars.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:22 pmAs long as a demand for fentanyl exists, there will be fentanyl in the U.S. No amount of tariffs or walls will stop it.
Do you think that China will persist in its opportunistic economic warfare if it is going to actually cost them all their other markets?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:24 pmDo you think that China will persist in its opportunistic economic warfare if it is going to actually cost them all their other markets?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:24 pm
They will just retaliate with tariffs of their own. It’s a race to the bottom, and we will all lose.
norcal (eae16e) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:27 pmMight help if we quit thinking that stress and mental health can be helped with substance use. Might also help if we addressed people’s neurochemical issues with the appropriate medications and life coaching. All that costs time and money, though, so we’d rather have a nation wide drug problem.
Nic (120c94) — 11/26/2024 @ 6:58 pmThey will just retaliate with tariffs of their own. It’s a race to the bottom, and we will all lose.
One shot over the border at the Korean DMZ will obviously lead to global thermonuclear war, too.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:10 pmAll that costs time and money, though, so we’d rather have a nation wide drug problem.
I cannot tell you the number of bipolar and/or schizo-affective people who decide to self-medicate with street drugs. It’s all too common and (spoiler) doesn’t turn out that well.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:12 pmI don’t accept that. I appreciate the wisdom here – it’s not like we’ve had a lot of success fighting other drugs. A lot of people who die from fentanyl are unaware it was in the pill they purchased. Now around 7-8 in 10 pills sold on the street contain the stuff. Some users are actually scared of the stuff, but their addiction wins out.
It would be nice if the USA was more self-sufficient. Not as profitable, but again, maybe government intrusion and forced globalism has concentrated wealth and been opposed to the interests of the rest of us. (maybe not… I think it’s a mixed issue, but certainly do not think everyone in the USA loses with a more protectionist environment, even if they pay more for all goods).
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:24 pmLeft wing Oregon tried that with Measure 110. They couldn’t repeal it fast enough.
lloyd (5fb2ba) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:52 pm@kevin@84 Yup.
@Dustin@85 “And the hard truth is, cheaping out on these things is very expensive.” Preventative measures often are less flashy. It’s a lot flashier to show how we spent money on law enforcement that confiscated a shipping container of drugs than it is to show the mental health care that reduced the demand and so the shipping container never was shipped at all. We also have no attention span. We don’t like long term solutions that show slow improvement.
Nic (120c94) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:01 pmGood! About time to bring the jobs back.
asset (35e894) — 11/26/2024 @ 9:14 pmI don’t know about other drugs, but the U.S. could get rid of most of the fentanyl by making it legal toi prescribe opioids to any addicts, And it never would have happened had they not cracked down on the prescription of Oxycodone. They could have capped the price at which it was sold to limit the incentive to sell more It was perfectly obvious very soon, if not in advance, what would happen and what was happening.
Also an important factor was improved detection of smuggling which forced innovation into more tiny quantities of opioids.
Drug policy was anything but nimble.
Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/27/2024 @ 2:59 amJust don’t have Missouri’s Senator write the bill.
Problem solved.
Although, to be fair, I did miss school that day…
SaveFarris (8940bf) — 11/27/2024 @ 5:03 amAn amazing substack* that really gets into the underpinning as to why Trump has support:
https://www.lorenzofromoz.net/p/a-unified-theory-of-trump-derangement
I cordial request our writers to read this too, and maybe comment on it.
Also, dig into the comments… really insightfull.
*it’s very clinical observations and has zero hyperbolic nonsense.
whembly (477db6) — 11/27/2024 @ 8:32 amThis is insurrection, right?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-27/trump-transition-says-cabinet-picks-targeted-with-bomb-threats?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google
SaveFarris (8940bf) — 11/27/2024 @ 9:09 amThe US and USSR had bilateral trade agreements in the 1980s, specifically grain sales to the USSR.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/27/2024 @ 9:10 amGood luck with that happening. It is more likely that Mexico (and other countries) will slap retaliatory tariffs on American products.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/26/2024 @ 3:23 pm
And you know this how?
The new administration is singing a different tune.
NJRob (c2cef8) — 11/26/2024 @ 4:36 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/27/2024 @ 10:36 amPresident Sheinbaum’s letter to President-Elect Trump.
They are federal crimes, but not an insurrection.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/27/2024 @ 10:51 amHe’s moderating or trying to backtrack a bit. During the campaign, he said 60% not 10%
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/25/business/economy/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico-china.html
But before the election, he said:
Now he;s only following through on Canada and Mexico where he tied it to migrants, and said that is 25% didn’t work, he’d go to 50% and 75% and even 100%.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-mQeptwOYE
https://www.euronews.com/2024/11/04/trump-promises-high-tariffs-to-mexico-unless-illegal-immigration-stops
I remember a sound byte where he said 100%
Here is a mention of him saying 100%
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/04/trump-mexico-tariff-trade
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/27/2024 @ 12:03 pmhttps://www.wsj.com/opinion/trumps-economic-plan-has-inflation-written-all-over-it-fcbb8204
This does not take into account the rise in price of domestic manufactured goods, as happened with washing machines.
But it is still a one-time increase. He also says that tax cuts (increased deficits) would vause only a little inflation.
He speculates that the Federal Reserve Board could lose its independence and that that would cause inflation.
But inflation went up and down during the period before March 4, 1951 when the Fed was not acting independently.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/27/2024 @ 12:29 pmA lot of people who die from fentanyl are unaware it was in the pill they purchased. Now around 7-8 in 10 pills sold on the street contain the stuff. Some users are actually scared of the stuff, but their addiction wins out.
Dustin (08f20b) — 11/26/2024 @ 8:24 pm
If drugs were legalized, buyers would know exactly what was in the pill they purchase.
norcal (56d72a) — 11/27/2024 @ 1:57 pmOops! Turns out the tariffs (or, more specifically the threat of the tariffs) is ALREADY paying dividends.
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1861928795789267260
SaveFarris (d5d0ad) — 11/28/2024 @ 7:52 am“Oops! Turns out the tariffs (or, more specifically the threat of the tariffs) is ALREADY paying dividends.”
See my post a 15, the tweet is misrepresenting Mexico’s statement.
Davethulhu (08aea7) — 11/28/2024 @ 9:07 amIf drugs were legalized, buyers would know exactly what was in the pill they purchase.
If drugs were legalized, regulated and subjected to government inspection of production facilities, buyers would know exactly what was in the pill they purchase. But what standard of safety would you suggest with, say meth or crack? Both can kill when pure.
We have legal pot today most places, but there is no assurance that the product isn’t adulterated, no rules on potency, and no liability for the suppliers for harms done. Why do you expect that this would be different with other drugs? Show your work.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/28/2024 @ 9:43 amAlso, what makes you think that addicts will care about the purity of the product? The government currently requires opiate-based painkillers to be adulterated with acetaminophen — which is known to cause severe liver damage in large quantities — and people who are addicted to these drugs do not seem to care.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/28/2024 @ 9:47 amHe said, she said
Trump has (already) painted himself into a corner: if the tariffs are implemented, then his voters will suffer the economic consequences; if he doesn’t, then Trump will suffer the political consequences.
Rip Murdock (fdb338) — 11/28/2024 @ 11:32 amTrump claimed victory – is there a reason to complain?
Actually all that (Mexican President Claudia) Sheinbaum said was that the caravans are being taken care of. (thss would be done by paying off the organizers)
Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/28/2024 @ 12:29 pmKevin M (a9545f) — 11/28/2024 @ 9:47 am
Since I haven’t read anything about liver damage, I would assume nobody takes multiple pils. As for addicts some do nd some don’t take precautions. There are places to test for the dose.
https://www.cdc.gov/stop-overdose/safety/index.html
The greatest danger is to people who just came out of rehab and don’t realize what their body’s tolerance now is.
And from taken counterfeit pills, which is more properly characterized as poisonings rather than overdoses.
Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/28/2024 @ 12:39 pmTrump always claims “victory” even if it never happens when it suits his narrative. . President Sheinbaum did not mention anything about “closing the border” despite what Trump said. On the contrary, she said Mexico would never close their borders. In addition, nothing was mentioned by Trump about fentanyl smuggling.
Rip Murdock (dd5d29) — 11/28/2024 @ 3:53 pm