Posted by burnt-resistor 19 hours ago
Every use case for tarrifs include got subsidy and small trade barriers so it can grow with market share.
He didn't manage to sell them. Everyone hates the tariffs, which are widely understood to have contributed to high prices and economic stagnation.
What he did manage to do is bully the abjectly servile GOP leaders of Congress into not doing anything about the tariffs, even though setting trade policy is expressly assigned to Congress by Article I of the Constitution, and Trump has repeatedly exceeded any legal authority.
A situation where a corrupt and incompetent president is explicitly trying to blow up the US economy using not-really-relevant laws as a pretext was not ever anticipated, and he will hopefully be strongly rebuked (e.g. impeached) by the next Congress.
Your comment begins "Nope, Congress has authorized ..." which just supports the point of the GP that it is Congress that controls the setting of tariffs, even if that may sometimes mean delegating it to the executive branch.
He campaigned and won with tarrifs as one of his main policy points. Voters favour them. Americans get tarrifs because Americans want tarrifs. Deal with it.
We have laws that limit what presidents (and Congress) can do. By extension that limits what voters can get by voting. Americans got/get tariffs because we currently have an administration that is willing to break the law.
In addition, to focus on the point you claim that voters favored them. I've never seen any convincing evidence that this is true, and what evidence I have seen always seems predicated on the claim that the foreign suppliers pay tariffs, which is generally completely false. So, if they were in favor of what they understood, they did not in fact support tariffs in the real world. Further, I did see some polls suggesting that voters favored highly selected tariffs for specific products from specific origins. Again, that's not what the administration has sought to impose.
Even so, I never saw polling that indicated even a plurality of voters were in favor of them one way or another.
Additionally, Trump, Hassett, etc are still blaming Biden for inflation caused by the tariffs... and a lot of their base would rather believe that than admit that they got suckered by an obvious scam.
I'm starting to see this backfire with a lot of "personal responsibility" type old-school republicans to whom I talk. They're getting fed up with the administration just blanket blaming anything bad on Biden. Whether that will translate to actual political change, I do not know. But I found it interesting that I'm hearing the frustration more lately.
Which is looking quite likely.
Although it does assume there are no peculiar and unexpected anomalies with the vote counting.
His followers are literally beyond reason and will accept anything he says. It's so very depressing.
The blue wave will likely be a result of blue turnout and some small number of red sitting at home. And sadly the senate is still a toss up
When Obama put a tariff on Chinese tires, right-wingers (correctly) argued that it was a bad idea that caused American consumers to pay almost a million dollars per "job saved" in the tire industry.
Today the right is in control of the executive, the legislative, the judicial, and and far more news media and... basically just crickets.
As for "he controls the executive". Bullshit. When a Democrat is in office, right-wingers remember that the President is not a king.
Please don't "both sides" this extremely one-sided attack on the American worker.
Source?
https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/2024-2025-liter... (“54% of U.S. adults read below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level”)
Assessing the Readability of Capital Pattern Jury Instructions - https://docs.rwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1207&contex... (2013)
"Plain English" Jury Instructions: Why They’re Still Needed And What The Appellate Community Can Do To Help - https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/plain-eng... (2004)
> The average reading level of American parents of young children is 7th or 8th grade.
> About one in every four Americans (25 percent) is a high school dropout.
> About half (45 percent) have gone to college for some period of time, but fewer than one in six (15 percent) have a college degree.
> Nearly 50 percent of the Americans surveyed cannot read well enough to find a single piece of information in a short publication, nor can they make low-level inferences based on what they read.
I have a problem with "Trump voters are idiots" because it lets them off the hook. They need to be held accountable, helped where their grievances are real, and pushed to reconcile their feelings with the facts.
My brother in Christ, re read the sentence you wrote. That is quite literally the inability to critically think.
Certainly, I understand why the emotion drive humans do emotion driven things. I do not.
U.S. Small Biz Can't Ship to the EU Anymore
the C in CBP, "Customs", is specifically this kind of stuff.
If there is one most-bipartisan-thing-ever, ceding oversight is it. ex:FastTrack Trade
At the time of writing, the article states something that its own link doesn't support (i.e. it is inaccurate). CBP hasn't "suspended all personal prescription importation." What they've done is removed De Minimis Exemption (i.e. duty free below $800), and that's it. Meaning you can still important personal medication before and after Oct 22nd, what has changed is that now it is subject to normal duty.
Do I think this is bad for people importing personal medication? Absolutely I do, and I oppose it. However, I don't think misstating the argument is constructive nor warranted. You could make the argument using the facts on the ground, and then re-state that in the thread title.
So the story is worthy of discussion, and interesting (even the personal medication POV). But this link and this title aren't "it." Hopefully we can get a higher quality source and title on this topic.
This will be financially catastrophic for many Americans who may suddenly have to find hundreds of dollars a month.
I read a lot of it - enjoy reading the butt-covering “legal justifications” written in explaining why there was no public comment period, etc.
Do you think this will motivate people who may have voted for trump but been ok the fence by calling them stupid?
Is it to help give a better alternative or actionable advice? Does it contribute anything to the discussion?
It seems it primarily exist to give you a hit of self righteous dopamine while attempting to create further rifts between individuals.
I see that you didn’t answer my questions though
I don't think the amount of racism in the US suddenly increased from its baseline*, and thus I think that writing off his electoral victory as "because racism" and nothing more than that is an uninteresting feel-better exercise
*Even one inch deeper of an analysis would be more interesting, like if someone countered with "Well, I think the election of Obama was a bridge too far for racists that had previously been quietly holding their noses" or something. On the other hand, both Obama and Trump were the "change" candidate against the "status quo" candidate.
And what is changing things backwards? Yes, it is getting back to good old racism and putting white people above anything colored.
"Fuck your feelings"
Yes. That's been a surprising and important lesson of the Trump movement's success; we've learned that insulting your political opponents can help convince fence-sitters, and doesn't automatically repel them. I wish it weren't so, but in the modern political climate, abandoning insults seems as strategically unwise as abandoning fundraising.