The idea is it will kick off an opportunity to bring back more manufacturing to the US. Having no ability to manufacture strategic products like antibiotics is a problem
Two other factors. First, most of them have trade surpluses with the US. Thus they are more vulnerable to a tariff war. Second, they have devaluation to maintain market share as a tool. If they were to do this, American consumer price increases for imports are offset by the relative increase in the value of the dollar. The bet is that they will do this.
If there is a drug problem, it is because people are demanding these drugs and there will always be a supplier. You cannot push demand for anything unless people see a need to have it. I guess many do even if it is for killer drugs.
True here in the US and true for all the colonist. Tobacco was the most sacred plants bar none in both North and South America. It was treated as a sacrament. Once the New world was conquered by Europe Tobacco became a very profitable commodity.
Likewise Coca, the leaf is chewed, never have the Indians refined Coca to make cocaine. The Coca plant (One of the most densely nutritious plant known) has always been use wiith respect. Again Europeans/West found a way to purify and addict many people. And so it goes.
However the Chinese fought hard against the UK and US to block opium from entering their country. They were technologically no match.
Nothing of the kind has happened here. Something is amiss here in the USA that people crave addictive substances rather than life. Why is that?
Yes, "It is regrettable . . . ." is not apology or even an admission of responsibility. Trump may decide it's good enough or not; I defer to him as to how best to handle it. But if it were up to me, I'd send a message (probably privately) saying "Apologize now or the deal is off and the next deal will be much worse for Ukraine."
I just don’t share your pro-globalist viewpoint. Alex Smith is probably the granddaddy of globalism and his economic principles honestly led to the Kissingerian vision of the 20th century that brings us to our present. Increasing friction to international trade, through whatever means, is the only path toward revitalizing America, particularly rural America. Your vision of free trade among nations will only serve the laptop class, the bureaucratic class, the financiers and the freeloaders. People who don’t make anything or do anything. That is why we are ruled by NGOs woke school marms and over empowered bureaucrats.
I reject your pro globalist vision wholeheartedly and think it will only lead to more despair, rural carnage and the continued destruction of the founding principles of our great nation.
I would venture that in today's world that if you make a good product for a reasonable cost and sell it for a reasonable price, that it will be in demand.
Using tariffs to replace taxes is short sighted unless you reduce spending. Using tariffs to promote local buying may work but only if you have similar products to replace imports.
Eventually, the US will be cut out of world trade as China, Russia, India and others form their own trade systems. The US no longer lives in a vacuum.
Already China and Russia are moving well ahead of the US on the A/i front as well is in most technologies and that is where the future lies. Although I think it is a gigantic mistake...unbridled technology that is.
I won't guess whether tariffs are a good long term bet to lower or eliminate income taxes. It has been many years since tariffs were the main US source of income. In the meantime, inflation is not going away and prices continue to increase. I will bet that tariffs will cause the price of goods to increase. The most prudent thing to do is cut the size of government significantly while lowering the budget considerably.
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 significantly worsened the U.S. economy during the Great Depression by triggering a wave of retaliatory tariffs from other countries. Here’s how it affected the economy:
1. Decline in Exports – Many U.S. trading partners responded with their own tariffs, reducing demand for American goods abroad. U.S. exports dropped by about 61% from 1929 to 1933, deepening the economic downturn.
2. Increased Costs for Consumers – The tariffs raised import prices, making foreign goods more expensive. This hurt American consumers and businesses that relied on imported materials.
3. Retaliation and Trade War – Countries like Canada, France, and Britain imposed their own tariffs on U.S. goods, further shrinking global trade.
4. Agricultural Collapse – Farmers were particularly hard hit, as they had already been suffering from overproduction and low prices. The tariffs made it harder to sell crops overseas, worsening rural poverty.
5. Worsened the Great Depression – While the U.S. economy was already in decline, Smoot-Hawley deepened the recession by discouraging international trade and limiting economic recovery.
Overall, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff is widely regarded as a policy failure that contributed to the prolonged economic slump of the 1930s.
A bit polemical and historically inaccurate. To switch to tariffs and drop income taxes would require an across the board rate of 70% or more and be quite regressive.
Many mainstream economists acknowledge the theoretical validity of Gomory and Baumol work while remaining skeptical about using it to justify protectionist policies. They argue the risks of government failure in implementing strategic trade policy often outweigh the potential benefits they identified. Past tariffs protecting an industry have had a negative impact on the economy and the industry
Jordan,
Tariffs are all well and good but they only apply to goods. 90% of the GDP of the States is Non-manufacturing.
So services are responsible for 90% of GDP which are generally not subject to tariffs.
So the overall affect on GDP will be negligible, if at all !
The idea is it will kick off an opportunity to bring back more manufacturing to the US. Having no ability to manufacture strategic products like antibiotics is a problem
Two other factors. First, most of them have trade surpluses with the US. Thus they are more vulnerable to a tariff war. Second, they have devaluation to maintain market share as a tool. If they were to do this, American consumer price increases for imports are offset by the relative increase in the value of the dollar. The bet is that they will do this.
> the fentanyl problem
REPLY: I don't know much about "the fentanyl problem". But I wonder what is wrong with our country that people feel the need to medicate?
I do know that the UK and the US push opium on China. The very first drug pushers in the world were the UK and US and European nations.
Push back from China and other nations. Blow Back are we surprised. Check out the Opium Wars to see how the US and UK force drugs on China.
Also Nixon and Kissinger agreed that there is only one China. I am surprised Jordan Schachtel, that you don't know your history.
If there is a drug problem, it is because people are demanding these drugs and there will always be a supplier. You cannot push demand for anything unless people see a need to have it. I guess many do even if it is for killer drugs.
Good day Crixcyon,
True here in the US and true for all the colonist. Tobacco was the most sacred plants bar none in both North and South America. It was treated as a sacrament. Once the New world was conquered by Europe Tobacco became a very profitable commodity.
Likewise Coca, the leaf is chewed, never have the Indians refined Coca to make cocaine. The Coca plant (One of the most densely nutritious plant known) has always been use wiith respect. Again Europeans/West found a way to purify and addict many people. And so it goes.
However the Chinese fought hard against the UK and US to block opium from entering their country. They were technologically no match.
Nothing of the kind has happened here. Something is amiss here in the USA that people crave addictive substances rather than life. Why is that?
I have to disagree with your chronology of Zelensky positions. It’s more like this:
Plan A (Oval Office) do whatever I want and demand unlimited US support. Insult the US until they comply.
Plan B (London) still do whatever I want and get Der Stormer to demand unlimited US support. Continue to gaslight the US.
Plan C (KEEV) still do whatever I want and ask nicely for unlimited US support. But no apology.
Yes, "It is regrettable . . . ." is not apology or even an admission of responsibility. Trump may decide it's good enough or not; I defer to him as to how best to handle it. But if it were up to me, I'd send a message (probably privately) saying "Apologize now or the deal is off and the next deal will be much worse for Ukraine."
I just don’t share your pro-globalist viewpoint. Alex Smith is probably the granddaddy of globalism and his economic principles honestly led to the Kissingerian vision of the 20th century that brings us to our present. Increasing friction to international trade, through whatever means, is the only path toward revitalizing America, particularly rural America. Your vision of free trade among nations will only serve the laptop class, the bureaucratic class, the financiers and the freeloaders. People who don’t make anything or do anything. That is why we are ruled by NGOs woke school marms and over empowered bureaucrats.
I reject your pro globalist vision wholeheartedly and think it will only lead to more despair, rural carnage and the continued destruction of the founding principles of our great nation.
I would venture that in today's world that if you make a good product for a reasonable cost and sell it for a reasonable price, that it will be in demand.
Using tariffs to replace taxes is short sighted unless you reduce spending. Using tariffs to promote local buying may work but only if you have similar products to replace imports.
Eventually, the US will be cut out of world trade as China, Russia, India and others form their own trade systems. The US no longer lives in a vacuum.
Already China and Russia are moving well ahead of the US on the A/i front as well is in most technologies and that is where the future lies. Although I think it is a gigantic mistake...unbridled technology that is.
Time to bring back to the USA what old man bush, Clinton , bush jr, OBUMA , obiden sent away (jobs)for the global cabal…we want AMERICA FIRST
period…we the citizens have been used and abused for far to long.
Yes absolutely right..AMERICA FIRST …nuff said. ..by any means necessary
I thought the good guys were in charge of Facebook? They're still deleting and blocking my posts.
I won't guess whether tariffs are a good long term bet to lower or eliminate income taxes. It has been many years since tariffs were the main US source of income. In the meantime, inflation is not going away and prices continue to increase. I will bet that tariffs will cause the price of goods to increase. The most prudent thing to do is cut the size of government significantly while lowering the budget considerably.
They’re blinking. Zelenskyy blinked.The Democrats aren’t blinking. They’re getting more negative, dangerous and anti-everything sane.
Guess 1930 is ancient history?
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 significantly worsened the U.S. economy during the Great Depression by triggering a wave of retaliatory tariffs from other countries. Here’s how it affected the economy:
1. Decline in Exports – Many U.S. trading partners responded with their own tariffs, reducing demand for American goods abroad. U.S. exports dropped by about 61% from 1929 to 1933, deepening the economic downturn.
2. Increased Costs for Consumers – The tariffs raised import prices, making foreign goods more expensive. This hurt American consumers and businesses that relied on imported materials.
3. Retaliation and Trade War – Countries like Canada, France, and Britain imposed their own tariffs on U.S. goods, further shrinking global trade.
4. Agricultural Collapse – Farmers were particularly hard hit, as they had already been suffering from overproduction and low prices. The tariffs made it harder to sell crops overseas, worsening rural poverty.
5. Worsened the Great Depression – While the U.S. economy was already in decline, Smoot-Hawley deepened the recession by discouraging international trade and limiting economic recovery.
Overall, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff is widely regarded as a policy failure that contributed to the prolonged economic slump of the 1930s.
For a little better perspective on how Tariffs actually work to our benefit, Paul Craig Roberts gives a little history on how they are beneficial for our Trade: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/02/paul-craig-roberts/president-trumps-idea-of-replacing-the-income-tax-with-tariffs-is-sound-and-a-great-advancement-in-the-restoration-of-freedom/
A bit polemical and historically inaccurate. To switch to tariffs and drop income taxes would require an across the board rate of 70% or more and be quite regressive.
Many mainstream economists acknowledge the theoretical validity of Gomory and Baumol work while remaining skeptical about using it to justify protectionist policies. They argue the risks of government failure in implementing strategic trade policy often outweigh the potential benefits they identified. Past tariffs protecting an industry have had a negative impact on the economy and the industry