- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tariffs are Taxes and Increase Prices for Consumers
Posted on 11/3/25 at 5:46 pm to Auburn1968
Posted on 11/3/25 at 5:46 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
All of those mills and factories closed very quickly afterward.
And prices plummeted.
0
Posted on 11/3/25 at 5:50 pm to BlueFalcon
quote:
slave wages
Anybody who uses this term is too economically dumb to have an opinion that anyone should take seriously.
The average American factory worker makes around $17 an hour.
The average Chinese factory worker makes around $6 an hour.
The average Mexican factory worker makes around $4.50 an hour.
The Mexican and Chinese workers live better on their $6 and $4.50 an hour than the American does on $17 an hour. Because our economy is so much more developed.
The "slave wages" nonsense ignores the context and is just a stupid thing to say.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 6:25 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:You're overlooking the other benefits of producing here. People have jobs, businesses support the communities and pay taxes, generational wealth increases, competition helps to keep prices reasonable, etc
They can be produced here. For a lot more money
quote:Wrong again
Which then leads to the same problems as the tariffs themselves
quote:It's already been posted once. See the recent computer processor problem. You can't possibly think it's not horrifying to be dependent on an ideological enemy for things like pharmaceuticals, steel, technology, etc. If you don't, then you are especially stupid
Explain to me in economic terms why you make that claim. Why is it bad in your estimation to have a majority service oriented economy?
quote:And yet dems will go on and one about muh unemployment. Figure your narrative out would you
Do you realize that we don't have enough workers to fill the $17 an hour jobs we already have?
quote:You don't even know the basics of this issue. I'm having to explain it to you like you're 5
There's nobody so insufferable as the person who is stupid enough to not be able to realize how stupid they are
quote:When you don't understand what you're talking about, you probably shouldn't be calling someone an idiot.
You're simply an idiot who for some reason thinks that bringing low paying manufacturing jobs back to America is worth tanking the economy
Why can't we take much of the already existing low paying service jobs and make those manufacturing jobs and solve several problems in doing so?
And the economy is not "tanking."
quote:
I'm sure you're not aware that Trump's first round of tariffs (from 2016) resulted in a net loss of jobs
Good luck proving that. Job loss/gain is not solely dependent on any 1 sociological factor. I'm sure you knew that alreadyPosted on 11/3/25 at 6:57 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
overall retail prices by about 4.9 percentage points
How much if that is relative to the almost 10% inflation under Biden and the now 3-4% current inflation and would inflation be zero if no tariffs
Posted on 11/3/25 at 8:38 pm to wackatimesthree
The total value of all imports into the US is 4.11 trillion LINK
To total size of the US economy is 30.62 trillion LINK
4.11/30.62 is 13.42% I was off by a little, but not by much.
But even more important than that, what part of your post in any way shape or form refutes my underlying point?
Of course we import inputs into the production process. But the value of those inputs are built into the final sale price of those goods. All those construction inputs, all those auto parts, all those medical supplies… they still only collectively represent 13.42% of the total value chain.
Yes, imports still go into the production of other goods. But the cost of those goods already incorporates the cost of imports into it. Meaning 13.42% is still 13.42%. That’s the portion of the total US economy which is attributable to imports. So if those imports increase in cost by 10%, and if 100% of that cost increase is passed along to consumers (big if), that only a 1.342% increase in the overall cost of goods in the economy. Total expenditure for the same number of goods would rise from 30.62 trillion to 31.03 trillion.
That’s not an insignificant sum. But it’s also not the sky falling outcome you want to paint it as.
To total size of the US economy is 30.62 trillion LINK
4.11/30.62 is 13.42% I was off by a little, but not by much.
But even more important than that, what part of your post in any way shape or form refutes my underlying point?
Of course we import inputs into the production process. But the value of those inputs are built into the final sale price of those goods. All those construction inputs, all those auto parts, all those medical supplies… they still only collectively represent 13.42% of the total value chain.
Yes, imports still go into the production of other goods. But the cost of those goods already incorporates the cost of imports into it. Meaning 13.42% is still 13.42%. That’s the portion of the total US economy which is attributable to imports. So if those imports increase in cost by 10%, and if 100% of that cost increase is passed along to consumers (big if), that only a 1.342% increase in the overall cost of goods in the economy. Total expenditure for the same number of goods would rise from 30.62 trillion to 31.03 trillion.
That’s not an insignificant sum. But it’s also not the sky falling outcome you want to paint it as.
This post was edited on 11/3/25 at 8:40 pm
Posted on 11/3/25 at 10:02 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
People have jobs
Did you miss the part about not having enough workers to fill the $17 an hour job vacancies we already have?
quote:
Wrong again
What a well substantiated argument. How could I not be persuaded by that?
quote:
You can't possibly think it's not horrifying to be dependent on an ideological enemy for things like pharmaceuticals, steel, technology, etc. If you don't, then you are especially stupid
As I have posted about 100 times here, anything you want produced here for national security reasons can be produced here by simply offering a domestic company a government contract. That's all it would take. There's no reason to think you have to have tariffs and tax the American people in order to accomplish that. Unless you're a moron, which you clearly are.
quote:
And yet dems will go on and one about muh unemployment. Figure your narrative out would you
Please post where (up to this point) I have ever said anything about unemployment. You're a liar as well as being a cretin.
quote:
I'm having to explain it to you like you're 5
You literally haven't explained anything. You've just waved your fat arms about and pissed your pants.
quote:
Why can't we take much of the already existing low paying service jobs and make those manufacturing jobs and solve several problems in doing so?
What does that even mean? You can't "make service jobs manufacturing jobs." What kind of ninny wizard are you? Service jobs exist because some company needs employees to perform functions. Bringing a manufacturing plant to America doesn't mean that those companies no longer need those jobs filled. You seem to struggle with the concept of what jobs are and how. they work at a granular level. They aren't just numbers. You can't "change" one type of job into another.
Unemployment is at 4.3%. The long term average is 5.67%. 5% is commonly regarded as being at "full employment." We're below that. We're already at what economists have long considered "full employment."
If these jobs were paying $80,000 a year, that would be one thing. But they don't. They pay an average of $35,000 a year. Which means they offer no advantage over jobs that are already vacant, people who do work them barely pay anything in income taxes, and they are not going to in any way strengthen the economy. It doesn't benefit anybody...It's just a slogan.
quote:
And the economy is not "tanking."
Not yet, but inflation is certainly rising. About a 10th of a percentage point a month since April. From 2.3% in April to 3.0% last month, and steadily rising. That's the highest it's been since Trump was sworn in.
This post was edited on 11/3/25 at 10:05 pm
Posted on 11/3/25 at 10:06 pm to Aubie Spr96
Congrats OP, you’ve won the lowest IQ of the month award!
I won’t waste my time schooling you, but I’ll ask you a question:
How does a negative trade deficit work for a superpower country to trade at deficits “aka getting bent over” with EVERYONE across the Globe you idiot???!!!!!
Go do your research on how trade works and then come post something worth schooling you about
I won’t waste my time schooling you, but I’ll ask you a question:
How does a negative trade deficit work for a superpower country to trade at deficits “aka getting bent over” with EVERYONE across the Globe you idiot???!!!!!
Go do your research on how trade works and then come post something worth schooling you about
Posted on 11/3/25 at 10:27 pm to funnystuff
quote:
That’s not an insignificant sum. But it’s also not the sky falling outcome you want to paint it as.
If you say so.
It's the biggest tax increase since 1993.
Bigger than Obamacare.
LINK
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News