Trump 47 Economy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of chicken littles calling for the sky to fall here. For all the talk about economics, I am not surprised DCUM doesn't note the economic history where the US relied on tariffs to become a world-class economy. Moreover, tariffs are a tax on consumption, which economists will tell you is better than a tax on income.

So maybe Trump is onto something after all.

False. Just absolutely false. Selected and strategic tariffs, but not the blanket tariffs trump is trying to impose. Smoot-Hawley, anyone? Anyone?

See, you don't realize that tariffs were a major source of government revenue prior to the imposition of the income tax.

Smoot-Hawley wasn't the problem. The Great Depression stemmed from a massive expansion of credit. If Smoot-Hawley had been the issue, the Great Depression would have ended immediately after its repeal. Funny, that didn't happen.

Yes, a VAT or sales tax is a source of government revenue. Where does the money come from? From the consumer. From the domestic consumer.

Tariffs are akin to the VAT or sales tax. They are paid for by the consumer, the domestic consumer. Us.

You're changing the subject. I never said it didn't come from the consumer. I said it was superior to an income tax, which comes from the producer, which is even worse.

Also, tariffs don't crash the economy. Dems need to calm down and pretend like they are the end of the world. They're not.

Did you fail Macro?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of chicken littles calling for the sky to fall here. For all the talk about economics, I am not surprised DCUM doesn't note the economic history where the US relied on tariffs to become a world-class economy. Moreover, tariffs are a tax on consumption, which economists will tell you is better than a tax on income.

So maybe Trump is onto something after all.

False. Just absolutely false. Selected and strategic tariffs, but not the blanket tariffs trump is trying to impose. Smoot-Hawley, anyone? Anyone?

See, you don't realize that tariffs were a major source of government revenue prior to the imposition of the income tax.

Smoot-Hawley wasn't the problem. The Great Depression stemmed from a massive expansion of credit. If Smoot-Hawley had been the issue, the Great Depression would have ended immediately after its repeal. Funny, that didn't happen.

Yes, a VAT or sales tax is a source of government revenue. Where does the money come from? From the consumer. From the domestic consumer.

Tariffs are akin to the VAT or sales tax. They are paid for by the consumer, the domestic consumer. Us.

You're changing the subject. I never said it didn't come from the consumer. I said it was superior to an income tax, which comes from the producer, which is even worse.

Also, tariffs don't crash the economy. Dems need to calm down and pretend like they are the end of the world. They're not.

So far, they mostly haven't kicked in yet. So they haven't quite crashed the economy yet, although we're halfway there already.

Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of chicken littles calling for the sky to fall here. For all the talk about economics, I am not surprised DCUM doesn't note the economic history where the US relied on tariffs to become a world-class economy. Moreover, tariffs are a tax on consumption, which economists will tell you is better than a tax on income.

So maybe Trump is onto something after all.

False. Just absolutely false. Selected and strategic tariffs, but not the blanket tariffs trump is trying to impose. Smoot-Hawley, anyone? Anyone?

See, you don't realize that tariffs were a major source of government revenue prior to the imposition of the income tax.

Smoot-Hawley wasn't the problem. The Great Depression stemmed from a massive expansion of credit. If Smoot-Hawley had been the issue, the Great Depression would have ended immediately after its repeal. Funny, that didn't happen.

Yes, a VAT or sales tax is a source of government revenue. Where does the money come from? From the consumer. From the domestic consumer.

Tariffs are akin to the VAT or sales tax. They are paid for by the consumer, the domestic consumer. Us.

You're changing the subject. I never said it didn't come from the consumer. I said it was superior to an income tax, which comes from the producer, which is even worse.

Also, tariffs don't crash the economy. Dems need to calm down and pretend like they are the end of the world. They're not.

Did you fail Macro?

They took Micro, not Macro...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of chicken littles calling for the sky to fall here. For all the talk about economics, I am not surprised DCUM doesn't note the economic history where the US relied on tariffs to become a world-class economy. Moreover, tariffs are a tax on consumption, which economists will tell you is better than a tax on income.

So maybe Trump is onto something after all.

You are remarkably ill-informed. The U.S. did not become an economic powerhouse until after WWII. Until then the UK and pound sterling called the shots.

This was long after the end of the 19th century. Read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

No, you nutter, that's not how laws work. The Supreme Court knows this, too, which is why they're avoiding all of the Trump emergency issues. They're all unlawful but they don't want to have to say so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

No, you nutter, that's not how laws work. The Supreme Court knows this, too, which is why they're avoiding all of the Trump emergency issues. They're all unlawful but they don't want to have to say so.

You think the law still works? For a nonpartisan example, I'll note that police steal money all the time in violation of the fourth amendment but courts just let it happen under an absurd legal fiction. The law is quite broken as you can see by ridiculous cases like nationwide injunctions saying Planned Parenthood should not have funding cut.

Look, I'd increased Planned Parenthood funding for services 10x if I could, but they don't have a perpetual property interest in receiving funding. We have a case where the DOJ charged a man with conspiracy but presented no evidence he took part in the conspiracy. The idiot jurors convicted anyway.

The system is broken. You just don't see it yet. Your children, if any, will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

No, you nutter, that's not how laws work. The Supreme Court knows this, too, which is why they're avoiding all of the Trump emergency issues. They're all unlawful but they don't want to have to say so.

You think the law still works? For a nonpartisan example, I'll note that police steal money all the time in violation of the fourth amendment but courts just let it happen under an absurd legal fiction. The law is quite broken as you can see by ridiculous cases like nationwide injunctions saying Planned Parenthood should not have funding cut.

Look, I'd increased Planned Parenthood funding for services 10x if I could, but they don't have a perpetual property interest in receiving funding. We have a case where the DOJ charged a man with conspiracy but presented no evidence he took part in the conspiracy. The idiot jurors convicted anyway.

The system is broken. You just don't see it yet. Your children, if any, will.

I agree. Stat woke, friend.

[Anonymous]

Hershey is raising prices on candy.
GM is loosing hundreds of millions of dollars.
Stellaris is cutting jobs.

Trump 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

The GOP is responsible, W and Trump, for over 58% of the national debt, two president in the last 25 years. That isn't on the Dems or too much spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right now, we have both an income tax and really high tariffs. We have sky-high taxes on both producers and consumers right now. This is not the best of all possible worlds. (Also, the tariffs are unlawful because the president does not have the power to tariff. Which makes negotiating with him even more difficult.)

Yes, we have too much taxation because we have way too much spending.

As for the law, that left the building a long time ago. Trump has a phone and a pen, and that's been good enough for years. Dems can stop crying about the system they built.

No, you nutter, that's not how laws work. The Supreme Court knows this, too, which is why they're avoiding all of the Trump emergency issues. They're all unlawful but they don't want to have to say so.

You think the law still works? For a nonpartisan example, I'll note that police steal money all the time in violation of the fourth amendment but courts just let it happen under an absurd legal fiction. The law is quite broken as you can see by ridiculous cases like nationwide injunctions saying Planned Parenthood should not have funding cut.

Look, I'd increased Planned Parenthood funding for services 10x if I could, but they don't have a perpetual property interest in receiving funding. We have a case where the DOJ charged a man with conspiracy but presented no evidence he took part in the conspiracy. The idiot jurors convicted anyway.

The system is broken. You just don't see it yet. Your children, if any, will.

To be clear, the US government doesn't "fund" planned parenthood. Planned parenthood provides services which hitherto, Medicaid reimbursed for on behalf oc some patients. There is a difference.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hershey is raising prices on candy.
GM is loosing hundreds of millions of dollars.
Stellaris is cutting jobs.

Trump 2025.

Flint, Michigan lost ten-thousand jobs yesterday when a Computer Chip manufacturing company backed out of building a factory after Trump gutted Biden’s Chip Act. And this is after the state spent millions buying up the land, houses, churches, etc to repurpose and clean the land for building.

[Anonymous]

https://apple.news/A2QVjgZDlSNuegDMLEpEZuw

Quick Axios article looking at the polling.

[Anonymous]

Trump:
I am never going to let the dollar slide

Dollar:
Hold my beer