ChrisWeigant.com

First Shot In The Upcoming Trade Wars

[ Posted Thursday, January 26th, 2017 – 17:28 UTC ]

President Donald Trump's administration may have just fired the first shot in what could become a worldwide trade war. In response to criticisms about his announcing that the border wall with Mexico will be paid for by American taxpayers (and not, as promised, Mexico), Trump has been trying to come up with an answer for how we will be "reimbursed" by Mexico. Today, apparently, he has decided on the preferred method. The White House just announced a 20 percent tax on all imports from Mexico.

This doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but then that's never stopped Trump before. After all, a tariff of 20 percent on Mexican imports will be paid for not by "Mexico," but rather by American consumers. Cars, auto parts, food -- there's a long list of products that will become pricier for Americans to buy. The extra dollars out of American consumers' pockets (which will be necessary to buy these products) will be going to pay for that wall, plain and simple. Mexico the country -- or even Mexican companies -- will not be paying for it at all.

Will Trump's supporters even notice? That's a wide-open question. Will they buy the propaganda that "Trump's sticking it to Mexico!" or will they realize that everything now costs a couple bucks more down at Wal-Mart?

Of course, protectionism has larger goals. The tariff on Mexican imports is part and parcel of Trump's stated goal of moving factories back to the U.S. from Mexico, where they will have to hire American workers (or so the logic goes). If a company makes its products here rather than south of the border, then they won't have to pay the border tax, in other words, so they'll save enough money to pay the higher labor costs in America. Well, maybe... and then again maybe not. They might just choose to continue making products in Mexico and hike the prices charged in the U.S. (to cover the tariff), so they can wind up with the same bottom line.

Trump also wants to either reduce or eliminate the trade deficit with countries like Mexico and China. But there'll be nothing to stop them from raising their own tariffs on American goods. That's why they call it a trade "war" -- because both sides go on the attack. The trade deficit might actually widen as a result of tariffs.

The last big trade war the world saw was during the Great Depression. Economists argue about how much of America's Great Depression was caused by such legislation as the Smoot-Hawley Act, which levied the highest tariffs America had seen in the preceding century. It was signed into law in 1930, and then two years later (when the promised benefits, especially to farmers, failed to materialize) both Senator Reed Smoot and Representative Willis Hawley got booted out of office by their own constituents in the 1932 election. It was not a glowing success, in other words.

Since World War II, the world has been moving in the opposite direction, for the most part. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was signed in 1947, and later gave birth to the World Trade Organization (W.T.O.). These organizations became rather contentious in the late 1990s, in the midst of all the discussions surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and awarding China "permanent most-favored-nation status." You may remember riots in the streets from GATT and W.T.O. meetings from 1999 (Seattle) onward.

Anti-trade sentiment now exists on both the left and the right, politically. This is one reason Donald Trump is now president, in fact. Trump badmouthed NAFTA and Obama's Trans-Pacific Partnership (T.P.P.) continually during the campaign, in a fashion not seen since H. Ross Perot (who famously predicted a "giant sucking sound" of jobs disappearing to Mexico if NAFTA passed). So Trump is now merely making a start on keeping his promises (such as pulling out and renegotiating NAFTA).

However, multinational macroeconomics isn't like building a skyscraper. It's in an entirely different ballpark. We may be about to see the results of such tinkering on a grand scale, in other words. Will Trump decide the Mexican tariff is working great and slap another big one on Chinese goods? That would put all our eggs in the tariff basket, that's for sure. Will the economists who predict doom and gloom be proven right, or is Trump smarter than them all? We may be about to find out.

Perhaps this is too alarmist, though. Donald Trump may either be constrained by the limits of his own presidential power, or he might just be playing a negotiating game. Of course, he could just be flying off the handle in a snit because the Mexican president just snubbed him by canceling their upcoming scheduled meeting. It's impossible to say, really.

Perhaps Trump is just playing hardball in an attempt to strike a favorable deal. If the Mexicans sit down at the table and renegotiate NAFTA so it gives America an advantage, then Trump won't have to slap a tariff on them and he can claim to all his followers that somewhere down in the fine print Mexico is actually paying for that wall! So maybe we'll have a few months of massive uncertainty but wind up (as Trump would say) "winning" in the end. Maybe.

Or perhaps Trump just hasn't realized that he can't actually make everything he wants happen merely by signing executive orders. He's now staked out positions that will either require congressional approval in some way or are just flat-out illegal under international law. Trump has recently been promising that he's going to see those two contentious pipelines get built -- with American steel. This would be a violation of W.T.O. rules, so it'll be interesting to see what Congress has to say about that. Congress will also have to appropriate all that taxpayer money to build the wall, as well as approve any brand-new border tax for Mexican imports. Trump can make pronouncements all he wants, but they don't always show results. For instance, on one of President Obama's first days in office, he signed an executive order to close down the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- and it's still open to this day. Congress balked, and it never happened. Trump isn't king, in other words: Congress or the courts also get a say in most things.

Currently, trade is probably the biggest issue on which Trump and the Republicans in Congress seriously disagree upon. Republicans have traditionally been free-traders, for the most part. Having to debate a big tariff on Mexican imports is going to bring this rift out in the open, which is why it is doubtful American consumers will be paying one-fifth more for Mexican goods at any time in the near future. Democrats aren't exactly united on the issue either, as being against NAFTA and other big trade agreements is actually a subject that Trump and Bernie Sanders largely agree on. Progressives aren't happy with these agreements either, in other words. But progressives might not be as quick to support tariffs as the answer to fix the problems.

If Trump has his way and gets a big tariff on Mexican goods and then decides it's such a good idea that we do the same to China, we might all be headed to a trade war of truly nightmarish proportions. As I write this, the Mexican tariff news from the White House had just broken (nobody has had a chance to chime in on the plan yet, in other words). It will be interesting to see the reactions to it in the next few days. Was Trump just reacting to the Mexican president's snub? Will members of his own party (indeed, members of his own administration) be able to convince him to walk the threat back a bit? It all remains to be seen. I am no economist, macro- or otherwise, I will fully admit. I have no real concept of what the repercussions of a tariff on Mexican imports of 20 percent would be for the American economy. Few do, in fact. But we all may be about to find out which economists' predictions are correct and which are not.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

74 Comments on “First Shot In The Upcoming Trade Wars”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    A 20% import tax on Mexico is non-serious and even the WH seems to know this.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    What's non-serious is that this tax was being talked about in the context of how the US will make Mexico pay for the border wall.

  3. [3] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trump is getting desperate. He knows that the key part of the wall wasn't its existence but that he would make Mexico pay for it.

    There seems to be a deep hatred towards Mexico in some quarters that I simply don't understand. I mean it isn't like they compete with us in any meaningful way.

    Is this a long standing hatred, is it about skin color, or is it recent - i.e. since jobs started moving South?

  4. [4] 
    altohone wrote:

    Liz
    delayed response from comment 4 "taking the 25th"

    It seems that you have elicited an admission from the troll that Trump and Spicer were lying.

    From comment 12
    "For President Trump, the 'truth' is that the inauguration crowd was the largest in history....

    ... we know the FACTS say different"

    After trying and failing to defend the lies again and again and again, the troll seems to have given up and admitted reality.

    Of course, I believe he promised to call out Trump when merited, and this roundabout admission falls far short of that promise.
    I guess ideology trumps integrity after all.

    Comment after comment of the troll's excuses and justifications were just further layers of fiction on top of the lies until he could find a way to wiggle out of the corner he had backed himself into without having to own up to his nonsense.

    You should be proud Liz.
    You got the troll to cave where the others failed.

    Very nice work!

    A

  5. [5] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    They've already backed off this tariff, now claiming it was just one possible solution that they are considering. We are seeing a "presidency by popularity" taking place. Trump has one of his parrots squawk a possible solution to the press, then he watches to see how it trends on Twitter to decide whether he will use it or not.

  6. [6] 
    altohone wrote:

    Hey CW

    "Republicans have traditionally been free-traders, for the most part"

    For the record, "free trade" where regulations are set to favor the interests of big campaign donors isn't technically free trade... and the Wall Street coddling wing of the Democratic party is equally as guilty.
    The TPP was mostly about rigging trade to favor special interests and not so much about reducing nearly nonexistent tariffs.

    I think it's also worth noting (and calling attention to constantly) that inequality, crony capitalism and unregulated banking/trading are NOT disputed as causes of the Great Depression.

    Honest analysis of the Great Recession showed deregulation that allowed massive fraud was the driving force there as well, though our corrupt duopoly establishment has expended a tremendous amount of effort trying to shift the blame elsewhere in order to maintain the status quo and keep their owners out of jail.

    The lessons of the Great Depression and the Great Recession need to be remembered and acted upon or working class Americans will keep paying the price.

    In any case, Trump getting smacked down by the Mexican president is hilarious.
    Unfortunately, the Mexican president is a corrupt conservative as well, and I hope he doesn't benefit politically, because the Mexicans deserve better too.

    A

  7. [7] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Here's a question that I am open to hearing everyone's answer to:

    If Trump is stating that it is a fact that 3-5 million illegal votes were cast during the election, wouldn't that invalidate the election results regardless of who those votes were cast for? If our system is that easily corrupted, shouldn't we investigate all the ways that our election was targeted? What if Russia did somehow corrupt voting machines to cast extra votes for Trump? Trump claiming that he should have won the popular vote and that was why voter fraud had to have occurred is the best way at keeping people from ever accepting it as a possibility.

  8. [8] 
    michale wrote:

    They might just choose to continue making products in Mexico and hike the prices charged in the U.S. (to cover the tariff), so they can wind up with the same bottom line.

    And if they do, then Americans won't buy the higher prices, but rather will stick with American products that have a LOWER price..

    THAT's the whole point of the border adjustments..

    If imported products are HIGHER, then that will incentivalize (an old word I just made up) American innovation to produce the products HERE in the US...

    Daaaamnn!! That Trump is one smart cookie!! :D

    So Trump is now merely making a start on keeping his promises (such as pulling out and renegotiating NAFTA).

    But... But.... But....

    The Left Wingery said that Trump WOULDN'T keep his promises!!!????

    WOW....

    The Left (including the vast majority of Weigantians) was WRONG again with a Trump Prediction....

    WOW.... Just.... WOW.... :D

    Will the economists who predict doom and gloom be proven right, or is Trump smarter than them all? We may be about to find out.

    Considering how WRONG everyone has been about Trump to date....

    My money is on Trump... :D

    Trump has recently been promising that he's going to see those two contentious pipelines get built -- with American steel. This would be a violation of W.T.O. rules,

    America First...

    so it'll be interesting to see what Congress has to say about that.

    Congress will jump when Trump says "JUMP"...

    Trump has an ace of his sleeve that Congress will simply NOT be able to handle..

    For instance, on one of President Obama's first days in office, he signed an executive order to close down the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- and it's still open to this day. Congress balked, and it never happened. Trump isn't king, in other words: Congress or the courts also get a say in most things.

    Trump has that ace that Obama never had.... :D

    But we all may be about to find out which economists' predictions are correct and which are not.

    Considering how wrong predictions have been to date and considering that Trump is a successful businessman and considering that Trump wrote the book on The Art Of The Deal.....

    My money is on President Trump.... :D

  9. [9] 
    michale wrote:

    Troll (Formerly Known As Asshole)

    It seems that you have elicited an admission from the troll that Trump and Spicer were lying.

    For someone who claims that they are not that "into" me, you sure hang on my every word and talk about me a lot to your friends... :D

    Dance, puppet, Dance...

    I OWN you!! :D

  10. [10] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    A 20% import tax on Mexico is non-serious and even the WH seems to know this.

    And yet, it seems to be happening... :D

    What's non-serious is that this tax was being talked about in the context of how the US will make Mexico pay for the border wall.

    No, what's non-serious is the hysterical reactions from the Left Wingery..

    "Holy crap!!! Trump is actually going to BUILD the wall and actually going to make Mexico pay for it!!! Holy crap!!! What do we do know!!!!?????"

    :D

  11. [11] 
    michale wrote:

    Trump is getting desperate.

    Yea.. *TRUMP* is getting desperate..

    Seems to me that the desperation is all on the Left's side of things. :D

    Ya'all went on and on "Oh Trump is not going to REALLY build a wall"

    NOW it looks like Trump IS going to build the wall...

    THEN ya'all went with "Oh, Trump can't make Mexico pay for the wall!!"

    NOW, Trump IS going to make Mexico pay for the wall..

    So, the desperation is all coming from the Left Wingery.. :D

    There seems to be a deep hatred towards Mexico in some quarters that I simply don't understand. I mean it isn't like they compete with us in any meaningful way.

    Maybe it's because they are a corrupt banana republic government who sends us their trash, who in turn murders, rapes, assaults and robs American citizens..

    Maybe THAT has something to do with this alleged "hatred" you seem to think exists...

    Could THAT be it???

    Is this a long standing hatred, is it about skin color, or is it recent - i.e. since jobs started moving South?

    Ahhhh, the old Democrat stand-by... When confronted by FACTS that can't be disputed.... Just blame racism...

    {{sssiiiggghhhhhhh}}

    Thanx, Odumbo.... You really "helped" with race relations.. :^/

  12. [12] 
    michale wrote:

    Listen,

    They've already backed off this tariff, now claiming it was just one possible solution that they are considering.

    Cite???

    Trump has one of his parrots squawk a possible solution to the press, then he watches to see how it trends on Twitter to decide whether he will use it or not.

    Yea.. Odumbo did the same thing...

    If Trump is stating that it is a fact that 3-5 million illegal votes were cast during the election, wouldn't that invalidate the election results regardless of who those votes were cast for? If our system is that easily corrupted, shouldn't we investigate all the ways that our election was targeted? What if Russia did somehow corrupt voting machines to cast extra votes for Trump? Trump claiming that he should have won the popular vote and that was why voter fraud had to have occurred is the best way at keeping people from ever accepting it as a possibility.

    Who cares???

    Besides, according to the Left Wingery, voter fraud doesn't exist..

    There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that Russians hacked the election and changed any Hillary votes to Trump votes..

    The election is over.. Hillary lost...

    We have President Trump...

    Get over it already...

  13. [13] 
    michale wrote:

    Listen,

    Here's a great article on the media vs President Trump...

    WHY THE MEDIA KEEPS LOSING TO DONALD TRUMP
    http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-versus-media-548562

    The President is playing the media and maneuvering the media into it's own demise as a credible source of information...

    And the media is eagerly following President Trump's directions...

    You have to understand one salient point..

    President Trump is a LOT more popular than the media...

    Every time the media slams and attacks Trump, Trump's approval and popularity numbers go up...

    That's how it was during the campaign and that's how it's going to be for the next 8 years...

    More and more, the American people will say, "Looks like the media is attacking President Trump again.. Go Trump!!! Kick the media's ass!!!!"

    Point to President Trump... :D

  14. [14] 
    michale wrote:

    what's really funny here is ya'all are falling for President Trump's mis-direction..

    It doesn't matter WHO pays for the wall..

    It only matters that the wall is going to be built....

    The Left will lose on the wall being built but will scream "WINNING" when the American people pay for it... :D

    Patriotic Americans don't MIND paying for the wall. As long as the wall gets built, patriotic Americans are happy...

    It's an issue where EVERYONE wins.... Or, more accurately, the Left Wingery loses (the wall is built) but President Trump makes the Left THINK it won something.. :D

    Ya'all are being played...

    Courtesy of the man who wrote the book on The Art Of The Deal.... :D

  15. [15] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    the scenario you're drawing might make some sense if there were any direct evidence it were the case. regardless, it's well documented that donald didn't actually write the art of the deal, he hired someone else to do the work and slapped his name on it. who knows, perhaps the same strategy will be effective regarding border security...

    JL

  16. [16] 
    michale wrote:

    the scenario you're drawing might make some sense if there were any direct evidence it were the case.

    No one has any direct evidence with all their gloom and doom Trump predictions..

    So I figured that NO EVIDENCE NEEDED is the Way Of Weigantia in the here and now... :D

    regardless, it's well documented that donald didn't actually write the art of the deal, he hired someone else to do the work and slapped his name on it.

    Yea... Obama and Hillary did the same thing..

    But it's only an issue when a guy with an -R after his name does it..

    Funny, iddn't it. :D

  17. [17] 
    michale wrote:

    Looks like the Demcorat Party has decided to be the Party Of NO and make sure President Trump is a one term POTUS..

    Democrats launch scorched-earth strategy against Trump

    What began as a high-minded discussion about how to position the Democratic Party against President Donald Trump appears to be nearing its conclusion. The bulk of the party has settled on a scorched-earth, not-now-not-ever model of opposition.

    In legislative proposals, campaign promises, donor pitches and even in some Senate hearings, Democrats have opted for a hard-line, give-no-quarter posture, a reflection of a seething party base that will have it no other way.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/democrats-trump-strategy-234206

    Demcorats are putting Party before Country... They would rather burn and destroy this country rather than work with President Trump...

    And I am CERTAIN ya'all will condemn the Demcorat Party as resoundingly and as loudly and as incessantly as ya'all did the Republican Party, right???

    {{{chiiirrrrppppp}}} {{{chhhiiiirrrrrrpppppp}}}

    Yea... That's what I thought.. :^/

  18. [18] 
    michale wrote:

    regardless, it's well documented that donald didn't actually write the art of the deal, he hired someone else to do the work and slapped his name on it.

    Ghost writers are a common occurrence in the writing industry... Tom Clancy used them a lot.. Yet, he still gets the credit for his novels..

    Hillary Clintons books were ghost written...

    LIVING HISTORY was written by THREE ghostwriters...

    IT TAKES A VILLAGE was actually written by Barbara Feinman

    Why doesn't anyone condemn her??

    DREAMS OF MY FATHER was written by a ghostwriter and not Barack Obama.

    Why is he not condemned??

    So, please.. Let's stop this carp about Trump not writing THE ART OF THE DEAL...

  19. [19] 
    michale wrote:

    So Trump is now merely making a start on keeping his promises (such as pulling out and renegotiating NAFTA).

    He sure as hell is!! :D

    Surprise! Trump doing what he said he would
    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316411-surprise-trump-doing-what-he-said-he-would

    I, for one, find it exceedingly refreshing that we actually have a POTUS who keeps his campaign promises!! :D

  20. [20] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    So, please.. Let's stop this carp about Trump not writing THE ART OF THE DEAL...

    it's not "carp," it's factually true and substantively relevant. donald claims political capital by virtue of his authorship. yes, ghostwriting in the political world is common practice. less common is touting oneself as more politically viable based on authorship of a book one didn't author at all, and whose real author has publicly expressed that any connection between the content of the book and the name on the by-line is pure fiction.

    by comparison, to my knowledge not one of the authors who helped hillary write her book later denounced the work as fiction.

    obama went a step further and actually wrote his own books, with only editorial revisions/additions from bill ayers. among presidents in the modern era, carter and eisenhower are the only others who can firmly share that claim.

    JL

  21. [21] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    also, it's dreams FROM (not OF) my father. before you spout off about a literary work, get a bit more educated on it.

  22. [22] 
    michale wrote:

    t's not "carp," it's factually true and substantively relevant.

    It's ideologically relevant..

    by comparison, to my knowledge not one of the authors who helped hillary write her book later denounced the work as fiction.

    Someone who claims he actually lied before is not any trustworthy person I would take at face value..

    "I lied before but now I am telling the truth about lying before.."

    I also find it EXTREMELY suspect that this ghostwriter SUDDENLY had an attack of conscience RIGHT when Trump was kicking ass in the campaign...

    "I lied before but now I am telling the truth about lying before.. Oh and the fact that I am a raging liberal and Trump is running for POTUS has NOTHING to do with my claims now that I was lying before.."

    :^/

    Let's face reality..

    You WANT to believe this guys claims so you don't inspect his motives whatsoever...

    But, for a guy who claims he is a liar???

    Well, why should anyone believe him now??

  23. [23] 
    michale wrote:

    Oh carp!!!!

    {{Prays for the day we have an EDIT function.. }}

    :D

  24. [24] 
    michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that Tony Schwarz was Trump's CO-AUTHOR, not ghost writer...

    He is also a guy who claims he believes that Trump's presidency will "end civilization"...

    And THIS is the guy you are touting as believable and credible???

    Who are you and what have you done with the REAL Joshua!!!??? :D

  25. [25] 
    neilm wrote:

    He is also a guy who claims he believes that Trump's presidency will "end civilization"...

    Because he knows Trump. Just about everybody who has any long term dealings with the guy thinks he is a spoilt child.

    After a while you'll figure it out. It will be a sad day for you.

  26. [26] 
    michale wrote:

    also, it's dreams FROM (not OF) my father. before you spout off about a literary work, get a bit more educated on it.

    Touche'... I stand corrected.. :D

  27. [27] 
    michale wrote:

    Because he knows Trump. Just about everybody who has any long term dealings with the guy thinks he is a spoilt child.

    So, you agree that Trump could end civilization???

    Like I said.. Who are you and what have you done with the REAL Joshua??? :D He NEVER would have endorsed such blatant fear-mongering hysteria....

    Tony Schwarz is a liar.. By his own admission, he is a liar...

    But you WANT to believe him, so you do...

    It's really that simple....

    Me?? I demand FACTS.. Schwarz doesn't have any... Ergo, he is nothing but a hysterical Left Winger feasting on sour grapes and crow pie...

  28. [28] 
    neilm wrote:

    And if they do, then Americans won't buy the higher prices, but rather will stick with American products that have a LOWER price..

    THAT's the whole point of the border adjustments..

    No, that isn't the point of border adjustments. The point of border adjustments is to allow American firms to increase the strength of the dollar so that the increased prices in a foreign currency are equal to the pre-border adjustment prices. Here is an example:

    2017: No Border Adjustment

    $1.00 = C$1.30
    Canada sells U.S. Ford Car at C$26,000 = $20,000

    2019: 20% Border Adjustment

    $1.00 = C$1.56
    Canada sells U.S. Ford Car at C$26,000 + C$5,200 (tax) = $20,000

    Thus the American consumer sees no difference in price.

    Read up on it - it is all laid out in the Republican plan - I happen to like it as it repatriates a lot of foreign profits that are otherwise not being as productive as they could be, but then I lean fairly right in economic terms. This means that I believe business friendly policies might result in labor volatility however that price is more than offset by the fact that the pie is bigger and so more workers get more pay. The problem with America is that we get the business friendly policies, but we then let the rich keep all the new profits. Why Americans vote for the people who brag about tax cuts for the rich is a mystery, but there you go.

  29. [29] 
    michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I'll take your word for it because you are the resident expert...

    I am just a simple guy applying common sense..

    If Mexican imports are higher costs, I will be Made In America stuff that is cheaper...

    It's real simple to me...

    And, apparently, Trump is doing great, because his approval rating is climbing every day... :D

    Read up on it - it is all laid out in the Republican plan - I happen to like it as it repatriates a lot of foreign profits that are otherwise not being as productive as they could be, but then I lean fairly right in economic terms. This means that I believe business friendly policies might result in labor volatility however that price is more than offset by the fact that the pie is bigger and so more workers get more pay.

    See!? THAT I understand.. :D

  30. [30] 
    michale wrote:

    If Mexican imports are higher costs, I will be Made In America stuff that is cheaper...

    Jesus!!!

    I will BUY Made In America stuff that is cheaper...

  31. [31] 
    neilm wrote:

    Here are some facts regarding trade with Mexico:

    https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/americas/mexico

    Note a couple of things: we run a net positive trade balance in services (the high paying jobs of the well educated). We also have a lot of trade from our mid-West farming community (corn, soy beans, etc.) that would be hit in a trade war.

    Thus the American victims of a trade war with Mexico are likely to hit the rich (who are more Republican leaning) and rural mid-West communities (you know those 'real Americans" that look down on the rest of us).

    The meaning of the chant "Go Donald!" will change from support to a suggestion overnight if Trump is stupid enough to pick a trade war with Mexico.

    China would be even worse.

  32. [32] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "And if they do, then Americans won't buy the higher prices, but rather will stick with American products that have a LOWER price.."

    "Daaaamnn!! That Trump is one smart cookie!! :D"

    ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, and also makes at least TWO ASSUMPTIONS that may or may not be true:

    1.) That American goods would IN FACT still be the cheaper alternative.

    2.) That an American made replacement would even be immediately and easily available.

    Usually the reason something is imported to begin with is not always because it has a cheaper price, but because it is also something that you cannot FIND or produce easily here at home. It is impossible to grow bananas in Kansas, for example.

  33. [33] 
    neilm wrote:

    If Mexican imports are higher costs, I will be Made In America stuff that is cheaper...

    It's real simple to me..

    Please read the Republican plan - they lay it all out.

  34. [34] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "They've already backed off this tariff, now claiming it was just one possible solution that they are considering.

    Cite???"

    OK, Here are TWO, straight from the TRUMP Administration for you:

    1.) White House press secretary Sean Spicer later clarified that "A 20% tax on Mexican imports is NOT a policy proposal, but an example of options of how to pay for wall."

    2.) White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus tried to downplay Spicer’s remarks further, telling NBC News’ Peter Alexander that the import tax was one among a “buffet of options.”

  35. [35] 
    michale wrote:

    The meaning of the chant "Go Donald!" will change from support to a suggestion overnight if Trump is stupid enough to pick a trade war with Mexico.

    COULD change....

    The meaning of the chant "Go Donald!" *COULD* change...

    That's another TRUMP IS TOAST prediction....

    Usually the reason something is imported to begin with is not always because it has a cheaper price, but because it is also something that you cannot FIND or produce easily here at home. It is impossible to grow bananas in Kansas, for example.

    But if there is a market for cheap bananas in Kansas, they CAN be grown in Florida..

    Again, AMERICA First...

    We have tried it the Democrat's way... It failed miserably...

    Trump is a PROVEN successful businessman..

    My money is on him... Ya'all think differently, I know..

    But here's the thing.. MY assessments have absolutely NO ideological basis whatsoever..

    Ya'all's assessments are NOTHING but ideologically based...

  36. [36] 
    neilm wrote:

    Another thing to remember about the "border adjustment" is that it is part of a plan that Paul Ryan rolled out in June of last year, when Trump was expected by everybody, including Ryan, to lose the election.

    This is basically a VAT - and just to be clear, the border adjustment is a tax exemption for U.S. exporters. The price of all cars, regardless of origin will increase 20% - so American cars will be 20% higher, but since American firms will effectively be allowed to deduct American wages, they are supposed to be able to lower costs and thus local prices.

    This is where it gets really complicated and I can't think of a simple example to explain it.

    You have to read the plan. Expect it to take a few hours and you'll need to be googling a lot while doing it - sorry - the way the VAT works on effective payroll taxes and thus offsets the 20% tax on American goods (you did know about that part - right?) is Byzantine - at least to me.

  37. [37] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "t's not "carp," it's factually true and substantively relevant.

    It's ideologically relevant.."

    Oh I see, so once you have been proven wrong about something, it is suddenly "not relevant" anymore. Got it!

  38. [38] 
    michale wrote:

    1.) White House press secretary Sean Spicer later clarified that "A 20% tax on Mexican imports is NOT a policy proposal, but an example of options of how to pay for wall."

    2.) White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus tried to downplay Spicer’s remarks further, telling NBC News’ Peter Alexander that the import tax was one among a “buffet of options.”

    OK, great.. So, all ya'all's hysteria is entirely misplaced because it's only one of many options being discussed..

    So, if President Trump decides AGAINST this option, ya'all will give him credit....

    Right?? :D

  39. [39] 
    michale wrote:

    Let's join and say goodbye to private dick, JOE MANNIX

    Mike Connors passes away at 91...

    I remember staying up late past my bed time to watch MANNIX while my parents were out....

    Another one gone....

  40. [40] 
    neilm wrote:

    But if there is a market for cheap bananas in Kansas, they CAN be grown in Florida..

    But they will be taxed at the same rate and imported bananas - the corporate tax plan Ryan is proposing taxes all bananas - regardless of origin. The only bananas that aren't taxed are those from Florida that are exported to e.g. Canada - those taxes get the "border adjustment" that lowers the price for Canadians so they don't pay our VAT as well as their own - otherwise all American exports would be doubly taxed.

    Please folks, read the damn plan.

    The border adjustment isn't an import tax, it is a tax exemption for our exporters.

  41. [41] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "But if there is a market for cheap bananas in Kansas, they CAN be grown in Florida.."

    Bananas are NOT grown in Florida in ANY large scale commercial way.

    The first commercial banana farm in the United States was established in Florida, near Silver Lake, in 1876, but the climate wasn’t hot enough.

    Hawaii is actually the largest banana producer in the United States. However, Banana production in Hawaii has followed a descending trend, from 13,181 mmt in 2000 to 8,090 mmt in 2010. Hawaii produces mainly the conventional Cavendish assortment and the Hawaiian apple banana, which are sold in the local markets due to high employment and land expenses.

    It was easy enough to research this, given the internet.

  42. [42] 
    neilm wrote:

    So, if President Trump decides AGAINST this option, ya'all will give him credit....

    Right?? :D

    Are you delusional. Trump proposes something cray, then we have to give him credit for realizing his idea is crazy?

    If he suggested moving the SuperBowl to Juneau, Alaska, then decided that they don't have a stadium, and it is frigid in February so changed his mind, you would give him credit?

  43. [43] 
    neilm wrote:

    If he suggested moving the SuperBowl to Juneau, Alaska, then decided that they don't have a stadium, and it is frigid in February so changed his mind, you would give him credit?

    This is true "fanboy" thinking.

  44. [44] 
    neilm wrote:

    At any rate, Ryan's plan is probably doomed for the following reason:

    Ryan's plan is effectively a Value Added Tax (VAT).

    VATs are evil in Republican-Land, so he is pretending it is something else.

    However what he is pretending it is is illegal under WTO rules, so to get it past the WTO he is going to have to call it a VAT, so the Fox News crowd will go nuts.

    Plan dead.

  45. [45] 
    michale wrote:

    Bananas are NOT grown in Florida in ANY large scale commercial way.

    But, if there is a market for them, they CAN be...

    THAT's my point.. An opportunity for AMERICANS to help AMERICANS...

    What's wrong with that???

    Ya'all are on record as despising the AMERICA First idea....

    And THAT is why we have President Donald Trump..

  46. [46] 
    michale wrote:

    This is true "fanboy" thinking.

    Same kind of thinking I dealt with during the Odumbo Administration...

    :D

  47. [47] 
    michale wrote:

    However what he is pretending it is is illegal under WTO rules, so to get it past the WTO he is going to have to call it a VAT, so the Fox News crowd will go nuts.

    Frak the WTO...

    America First, baby.... :D

  48. [48] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Bananas are NOT grown in Florida in ANY large scale commercial way.

    But, if there is a market for them, they CAN be..."

    NO, they CANNOT. Did you NOT READ the part where I wrote:

    "The first commercial banana farm in the United States was established in Florida, near Silver Lake, in 1876, but the CLIMATE WASN'T HOT ENOUGH." ????

    How often are you going to try to justify the impossible? Or are you hoping that global warming IS for real so you can grow bananas in Florida before it is covered by the ocean???

  49. [49] 
    michale wrote:

    How often are you going to try to justify the impossible? Or are you hoping that global warming IS for real so you can grow bananas in Florida before it is covered by the ocean???

    Talk about justifying the impossible!! :D

    Florida will never be covered by the ocean... :D

  50. [50] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Frak the WTO...

    America First, baby.... :D"

    YEAH RIGHT, Let's see how far that gets you when American courts start enforcing WTO rules because they are part of American law, because we lawfully ratified the treaty and it remains in force until we withdraw from it. And I don't think you want to tank the American economy and turn the WHOLE world against you by withdrawing from the ONLY international organization that sets the rules for international trade that America HELPED create in the first place.

  51. [51] 
    michale wrote:

    And I don't think you want to tank the American economy and turn the WHOLE world against you by withdrawing from the ONLY international organization that sets the rules for international trade that America HELPED create in the first place.

    Ya'all are claiming Trump already is going to tank the US economy, right??

    So, since Trump is going to tank the US economy anyways, what's to lose by giving the WTO the finger??? :D

  52. [52] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Florida will never be covered by the ocean... :D"

    IT WAS before and it will be again.

    Forever is a long time in geological time Michale.

    Given your age, you of all people should know that. :-D

  53. [53] 
    michale wrote:

    I mean, if ya'all are going on a hysterical bender with hysterical fear-mongering instead of logical and rational discourse, don't be surprised if I follow you there...

    A hysterical bender every once in a while is a lot of fun.. :D

  54. [54] 
    John M wrote:

    By the way Michale, you might also want to tell that to the current residents of Miami and Miami Beach, who are currently having to deal with the encroaching ocean, and whose local governments just spent millions of dollars on underground pumps to try to stem the encroaching tide.

  55. [55] 
    John M wrote:

    Michael wrote:

    "I mean, if ya'all are going on a hysterical bender with hysterical fear-mongering instead of logical and rational discourse, don't be surprised if I follow you there..."

    No one here is being hysterical but you.

    Funny how that works, eh?

  56. [56] 
    michale wrote:

    By the way Michale, you might also want to tell that to the current residents of Miami and Miami Beach, who are currently having to deal with the encroaching ocean, and whose local governments just spent millions of dollars on underground pumps to try to stem the encroaching tide.

    Cite?? Preferably a site that relies on FACTS and not hysterical Left Wingery ideology..

    If it's that, I'll be VERY disappointed..

    "Is it some kind of military thing where you teach whales to dive for torpedoes or some dipshit stuff like that? If so, I'll be very disappointed.."
    -Gillian Taylor, STAR TREK VI-The Undiscovered Country

    :D

    No one here is being hysterical but you.

    Yea??

    Every prediction ya'all have ever made about Trump is hysteria....

    TRUMP IS GOING TO DESTROY CIVILIZATION!!!

    TRUMP IS GOING TO WRECK THE ECONOMY!!!

    TRUMP IS HITLER!!!!!

    TRUMP IS SATAN!!!!

    All ya'all HAVE is hysteria....

    Funny how that works, eh? :D

  57. [57] 
    michale wrote:

    And where ya'all's credibility takes a hit is that, when making these hysterical and unfounded accusations, NO ONE acknowledges their track record for accurate predictions..

    Name.. ZERO... ZILCH... NADA.... NONE...

    Whenever CW makes predictions, he always puts down his track-record so his readers can judge for themselves the validity of his prediction capability..

    If ya'all want me to take you seriously, ya'all have to explain exactly why ya'all have been wrong about Trump EVERY TIME.....

    I'm just sayin'.....

  58. [58] 
    michale wrote:

    If ya'all want me to take you seriously, ya'all have to explain exactly why ya'all have been wrong about Trump EVERY TIME.....

    If ya'all need any help with that, just let me know.. Speaking as someone who is constantly wrong on one very specific aspect, I have a few ideas for ya.. :D

    Always ready to lend a hand.... :D

  59. [59] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Program Note:

    My apologies for the interruption in service. I had to verify some information with the domain name host, and I let it slip, so the whole domain was down earlier today. I think everything's hunky-dory now, so you shouldn't have any more problems accessing the site. Friday's column will appear later today, have no fear! And again, my apologies for the interruption.

    :-)

    -CW

  60. [60] 
    michale wrote:

    There was an interruption?? :D

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Indeed there was! A very scary one, I might add. :)

  62. [62] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    They've already backed off this tariff, now claiming it was just one possible solution that they are considering.

    Cite???

    WH backs off import tax

  63. [63] 
    michale wrote:

    Indeed there was! A very scary one, I might add. :)

    Glad I missed it... :D

  64. [64] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    John [34],

    Thank you! I didn't see you had already taken care of it for me.

    Michale said

    No one has any direct evidence with all their gloom and doom Trump predictions..

    So you want proof that someone's prediction WILL come true if they aren't supportive of Trump? Wow!

    I, for one, find it exceedingly refreshing that we actually have a POTUS who keeps his campaign promises!! :D

    Obama signed an executive order calling for the closing of Guantanamo Bay. How did that work out? Trump's wall hasn't been built yet.

    But here's the thing.. MY assessments have absolutely NO ideological basis whatsoever..

    Ya'all's assessments are NOTHING but ideologically based...

    How many times of you saying this is it gonna take for you to actually believe it?

  65. [65] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    To everyone:

    Yep, there was an interruption! But it was through my own lack of keeping up on the bookkeeping, nothing serious. Just glad it came back up as fast as it went down!

    :-)

    -CW

  66. [66] 
    michale wrote:

    How many times of you saying this is it gonna take for you to actually believe it?

    How many times are you going to dispute this without providing factual evidence to support your dispute??

  67. [67] 
    michale wrote:

    So you want proof that someone's prediction WILL come true if they aren't supportive of Trump? Wow!

    No... I want real tangible evidence that shows that yer predictions are possible...

    Is that too much to ask??

    Apparently, it is...

  68. [68] 
    michale wrote:

    Obama signed an executive order calling for the closing of Guantanamo Bay. How did that work out?

    Crappy.. Like ALL things Odumbo did...

    But here's the thing and you simply CANNOT explain it..

    The American people did NOT want terrorists from Gitmo to be released or relocated to American soil...

    The American people are whole-heartedly in support of Trump building a wall to secure our southern border...

    That's the difference that makes ALL the difference...

  69. [69] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Cite?? Preferably a site that relies on FACTS and not hysterical Left Wingery ideology..'

    How about a link to a two part article in the Miami Herald, will that do???

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami.../miami.../article41141856.htm

  70. [70] 
    John M wrote:
  71. [71] 
    John M wrote:

    Damn, can't get the whole link to post. It was after the last miami backslash Followed by article41141856.htm

  72. [72] 
    michale wrote:

    JM,

    What exactly are you cit'ing?? :D

  73. [73] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "What exactly are you cit'ing?? :D"

    I should think that would be obvious.

    It's an article in the local paper in 2015 , specifically the Miami Herald, about how many millions of dollars were spent on elevating roads and installing pumps to deal with flooding due to the rising ocean because of global warming, since you said you wanted "proof."

  74. [74] 
    michale wrote:

    It's an article in the local paper in 2015 , specifically the Miami Herald, about how many millions of dollars were spent on elevating roads and installing pumps to deal with flooding due to the rising ocean because of global warming, since you said you wanted "proof."

    If it was because of global warming, you would have a point..

    But it wasn't, so you don't..

    Miami is built on a swamp.. Flooding is a result of the tides and NOT because of global warming..

    Unless the Left Wingery is now complaining that humans are causing tides... :^/ Which wouldn't surprise me a bit..

    Irregardless of all that, the "rise" of sea levels is likely a hoax...

    https://www.iceagenow.info/category/sea-levels-are-falling-not-rising/

    Like the rest of the human caused global warming con..

    You see, as I said.. It ALL depends on WHICH science you want to follow.. WHICH science you cherry pick..

    You MIGHT be right..

    But, given *ALL* the science, it's more likely that you are wrong...

Comments for this article are closed.