Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
NYrepublican

Trump tariff poll

Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's tariffs?  

20 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's tariffs?


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 03/15/2018 at 07:29 PM

Recommended Posts

Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's tariffs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's tariffs?

Approval of Trump's tariffs is, by default, whether knowingly or admittedly, approval of unnecessary and aggregious hikes in prices and drops in availability of affected products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that I am at least impressed that his policy announcements are actually matching up to his economic-nationalist position. For a while at the beginning, Trump seemed to not understand the disconnect between his stated vision and his inability to express an understanding of inflation vs. deflation. Maybe he still doesn't have a grasp on these things personally, but his administration is clearly catching up to his lead.

I don't feel that the proposed tariffs are good for either the beloved free market or for the average American, so I don't exactly support it. But if I were in the position of a capitalist-cum-politician who wanted to force capital investments back into the national economy, these kinds of nationalist/protectionist policies are exactly the things I would be exploring. In other words, if it were in my interests and I weren't working class.

All that said, I am in no way an economist and there's a hell of a lot more that other people know than myself. Will American industry make up the gap? How bad will price wars become? There's a lot of variables, and a lot of risk, but that's exactly what people want Trump for, so, hey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two words on why I'm against this trade tariff: Smoot-Hawley. 

This tariff proposal hinges on the belief that A: US can produce as much steel we import, and B: sell as much domestic goods to offset potential foreign tariffs that will be imposed on the US. And I'll be honest, I doubt that will happen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Free Trade please. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

1 Free Trade please. Thank you.

So we do agree on something. I'll be darned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LokiLoki22 said:

So we do agree on something. I'll be darned.

With Trump's new proclamations on Guns and Trade I find myself saying:

Can I get an order of Constitutional Freedom with a side of Free Trade and Economic Liberty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

With Trump's new proclamations on Guns and Trade I find myself saying:

Can I get an order of Constitutional Freedom with a side of Free Trade and Economic Liberty?

So.... We are theoretical opposites socially...... but I agree. As a gunowner, I believe that the correct amount of control is waiting periods. from there, it gets slippery and fast. I am more of a Rockefeller Republican (and not in the sense that I've been dead for thirty years) on trade. The more, the better. Trading won't happen in a free market unless both sides gain value from it. That much is basic economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎02 at 8:30 AM, NYrepublican said:

Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's tariffs?

 

On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎02 at 12:53 PM, Lyly said:

I will say that I am at least impressed that his policy announcements are actually matching up to his economic-nationalist position. For a while at the beginning, Trump seemed to not understand the disconnect between his stated vision and his inability to express an understanding of inflation vs. deflation. Maybe he still doesn't have a grasp on these things personally, but his administration is clearly catching up to his lead.

I don't feel that the proposed tariffs are good for either the beloved free market or for the average American, so I don't exactly support it. But if I were in the position of a capitalist-cum-politician who wanted to force capital investments back into the national economy, these kinds of nationalist/protectionist policies are exactly the things I would be exploring. In other words, if it were in my interests and I weren't working class.

All that said, I am in no way an economist and there's a hell of a lot more that other people know than myself. Will American industry make up the gap? How bad will price wars become? There's a lot of variables, and a lot of risk, but that's exactly what people want Trump for, so, hey.

 

On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎02 at 11:22 PM, Sunnymentoaddict said:

Two words on why I'm against this trade tariff: Smoot-Hawley. 

This tariff proposal hinges on the belief that A: US can produce as much steel we import, and B: sell as much domestic goods to offset potential foreign tariffs that will be imposed on the US. And I'll be honest, I doubt that will happen.  

 

On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎03 at 8:49 PM, Reagan04 said:

With Trump's new proclamations on Guns and Trade I find myself saying:

Can I get an order of Constitutional Freedom with a side of Free Trade and Economic Liberty?

 

On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎03 at 8:52 PM, LokiLoki22 said:

So.... We are theoretical opposites socially...... but I agree. As a gunowner, I believe that the correct amount of control is waiting periods. from there, it gets slippery and fast. I am more of a Rockefeller Republican (and not in the sense that I've been dead for thirty years) on trade. The more, the better. Trading won't happen in a free market unless both sides gain value from it. That much is basic economics.

Well, this is quite interesting. Trump's response to Congressional leadership, and a majority in Congress, showing a lack of support for his new tariff's led to him saying "we're not backing down (notice the WE), get used to it." This seems to imply that either/or Trump doesn't really need Congressional approval to make these tariffs, but can do so by dictatorial fiat if Congress won't cooperate, and/or the Congressional GOP leadership is NOT PERMITTED to disagree with or vote against these tariffs. Either scenario is HIGHLY disturbing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Patine said:

 

 

 

 

Well, this is quite interesting. Trump's response to Congressional leadership, and a majority in Congress, showing a lack of support for his new tariff's led to him saying "we're not backing down (notice the WE), get used to it." This seems to imply that either/or Trump doesn't really need Congressional approval to make these tariffs, but can do so by dictatorial fiat if Congress won't cooperate, and/or the Congressional GOP leadership is NOT PERMITTED to disagree with or vote against these tariffs. Either scenario is HIGHLY disturbing.

I agree. I think the Trump presidency could lead to a weakening of the executive by amendment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Patine said:

Well, this is quite interesting. Trump's response to Congressional leadership, and a majority in Congress, showing a lack of support for his new tariff's led to him saying "we're not backing down (notice the WE), get used to it." This seems to imply that either/or Trump doesn't really need Congressional approval to make these tariffs, but can do so by dictatorial fiat if Congress won't cooperate, and/or the Congressional GOP leadership is NOT PERMITTED to disagree with or vote against these tariffs. Either scenario is HIGHLY disturbing.

Here's the answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Tariff_Act

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lyly said:

This sounds like it only gives Trump the ability to renegotiate tariffs unilaterally with countries who agree with his proposals and ideas, NOT to start trade wars. I think the "reciprocal" part of the act's name is a good indicator of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so, it's hard for me to determine. I meant it in the sense of signalling that your suspicions seem to be correct - Trump can unilaterally renegotiate tariffs. I'm not a legal expert and this act has been modified a few dozen times and has amendments out the wazoo, but it seems to point in the direction that Congress handed over negotiating powers to the Executive Branch in the beginning of the 20th century and that trend has only been reinforced over the decades. I'm sure there are a dozen other items of legislation, executive orders, and treaties that add layers to the cake.

Here's the most relevant text from the act itself: the President, whenever he finds as a fact that any existing duties or other import restrictions of the United States or any foreign country are unduly burdening and restricting the foreign trade of the United States and that the purpose above declared will be promoted by the means hereinafter specified, is authorized from time to time to proclaim such modifications of existing duties and other import restrictions, or such additional import restrictions, or such continuance, and for such minimum periods, of existing customs or excise treatment of any article covered by foreign trade agreements, as are required or appropriate to carry out any foreign trade agreement that the President has entered into hereunder.

Given that SOME amount of tariff probably exists already on steel and aluminum, however modest, that would presumably put power in the hands of the Executive branch to make new relevant policy. That said, there's a lot of restrictions and limitations on the power as stipulated, but they also all have time-relevant clauses, so they may not be relevant any more. Trump is also known to be a person who presents bald-faced lies as fact and then when he has his way will work around whatever the legalese says, even if it means he doesn't get what he first mentioned at all, so it is entirely possible this Act does not allow him to do what he claims it does, but as we saw with Andrew Jackson - it's a matter of stopping him, not letting him.

Further relevant links:
https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/february/trump-administration-sends-annual

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/12/news/economy/trump-trade-reciprocal-tax/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×