Trump Supproters - Defend Trump's Understanding of Tariffs
- Thread starter El OchoCinco
- Start date
American Institute for Economic research
https://www.aier.org/article/trumps...485rrVKzqu7q1j5y66paW-PHzBiDThVgaAsdTEALw_wcB
https://www.aier.org/article/trumps...485rrVKzqu7q1j5y66paW-PHzBiDThVgaAsdTEALw_wcB
Neil Cavuto on FOX
"I don’t know where to begin here," said Cavuto after airing Trump’s remarks. "But just to be clarifying, China isn’t paying these tariffs. You are. You know, indirectly and sometimes directly. This latest round of tariffs that kick in on September 1, on $300 billion worth of goods at 10 percent, that will most directly be felt by consumers directly, because that happens on almost entirely consumer items rather than industrial-related items. But just wanted to clarify that; our governments don’t pay these things, you do, one way or another."
"I don’t know where to begin here," said Cavuto after airing Trump’s remarks. "But just to be clarifying, China isn’t paying these tariffs. You are. You know, indirectly and sometimes directly. This latest round of tariffs that kick in on September 1, on $300 billion worth of goods at 10 percent, that will most directly be felt by consumers directly, because that happens on almost entirely consumer items rather than industrial-related items. But just wanted to clarify that; our governments don’t pay these things, you do, one way or another."
Bigger burden on business
It’s even harder to figure out how the cost of tariffs is split, the Fed said, between U.S. wholesalers at the port of entry, retailers who sell the products and consumers who eventually buy them.
The Fed pointed out there’s not much data or research to make accurate estimates because heavy tariffs largely fell into disuse among the wealthiest nations after World War Two.
The most likely scenario is that U.S. companies have largely absorbed the cost of tariffs by accepting lower profits given the strong resistance by customers to higher prices. Companies have been unable to raise prices very much for years.
There’s one other intriguing possibility, the Fed suggested: Companies may be leaving reported import prices unchanged to reduce their U.S. profits and lower their tax burden.
https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/750C6490-0F93-11EA-8A2C-7E78494900E7
Tariffs alone are not going to achieve the goal when we are a huge net importer from China, and it does not help when the President does not understand trade and economics so I doubt he understands other things to get the job done and the USTR, and Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of Treasruer are ass clowns for not speaking up the truth.
"It’s not the Chinese, at least not directly. American businesses and consumers are bearing the biggest direct cost of billions in dollars in U.S. tariffs, a wave of research has found."
Let me give you business advice and you can hate me and think I am an asshole but I have been successful in business for past 20 years or so and one tenet I live by that has served me well is this:
If someone is flat out wrong on the basics or easiest details, they will fuck up the rest when it gets more complicated or requires more brain power.
Trump cannot even get the basics right with a whole staff of economists and trade experts than I have no faith in his so wonderful smart business skills.
If and when phase 2 goes through we can revisit this discussion and all your expert notes.
Uh my expert notes will not change....China does not pay tariffs to the U.S. treasury. No exporter pays tariffs imposed by the importing country into the importer's treasury. It is an IMPORT tax.
Holy shit is this the American school system?
I don't care what Cavuto thinks.
Of course the consumer is likely to pay more when you cut down on supply.
That is irrelevant.
Are you saying China is not harmed by tariffs?
Because I doubt the studies would show that unless the goods were underpriced and there was high inelasticity of demand.
Is your argument that China does not directly pay into the treasury?
Well that is not really the point in my opinion.
What Trump should mean is that the US govt gets revenues and China and the export chain is harmed to some degree... you would also expect the supplier to shift to a new region to avoid the tariffs if the tariffs are high enough.
==
As I said economic theory is that quotas raise prices and the exporting country gets to reap the benefit of lower volume but higher prices. (in the short run)
Whereas tariffs shift some revenue out of the export (chain) to the govt and suppliers may shift over time.
Of course the consumer is likely to pay more when you cut down on supply.
That is irrelevant.
Are you saying China is not harmed by tariffs?
Because I doubt the studies would show that unless the goods were underpriced and there was high inelasticity of demand.
Is your argument that China does not directly pay into the treasury?
Well that is not really the point in my opinion.
What Trump should mean is that the US govt gets revenues and China and the export chain is harmed to some degree... you would also expect the supplier to shift to a new region to avoid the tariffs if the tariffs are high enough.
==
As I said economic theory is that quotas raise prices and the exporting country gets to reap the benefit of lower volume but higher prices. (in the short run)
Whereas tariffs shift some revenue out of the export (chain) to the govt and suppliers may shift over time.