Topic: US Super Court just handed Trump a $130 Billion Bucks Slap in his FACE
Anonymous A started this discussion 4 hours ago #133,167
The Supreme Court delivered a major blow to President Donald Trump, Ruling Friday that he exceeded his authority when imposing sweeping tariffs using a law reserved for a national emergency.
The justices, divided 6-3, held that Trump's aggressive approach to tariffs on products entering the United States from across the world was not permitted under a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
Trump ordered the lights dimmed for a press conference he promised to give 30 minutes ago and and He has yet to hit the stage to rant and rage and cry in front of everyone.
PS: I paid $+2$ more for a 6 pack of imported EU Beer - German or Belgian? and it's been hard to get at Trader Joes because they say they have no clue what the price will be week to week.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 4 hours ago, 28 minutes later[^] [v] #1,419,577
This is a victory. He will cite national security and the deep state going against him. When the economy and stock market improves his idiot base and various other idiots will reward the GOP at the mid terms for economic stewardship.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 4 hours ago, 6 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,578
@previous (B)
I think the midterms will be decided by whether democrat led states or republican led states have better gerrymandering algorithms.
I think the midterms will be decided by whether democrat led states or republican led states have better gerrymandering algorithms.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 4 hours ago, 9 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,581
@1,419,577 (B)
Short term thinking.
The tariffs have been the leverage Trump used to negotiate better trade deals and to incentivize companies to hire domestically.
The elites and their useful idiots have succeeded in hurting the American worker and exploiting 3rd world poverty so that Is capital interests can profit even more.
Short term thinking.
The tariffs have been the leverage Trump used to negotiate better trade deals and to incentivize companies to hire domestically.
The elites and their useful idiots have succeeded in hurting the American worker and exploiting 3rd world poverty so that Is capital interests can profit even more.
Anonymous C replied with this 4 hours ago, 4 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,583
@previous (D)
Tariffs are taxes on Americans. The United States is 4% of the global population and about 25% of global GDP. However, the US economy is driven mostly by consumer spending, not production. So materially speaking, tariffs will not reduce the rest of the world’s ability to create the goods that they need, it would only mean fewer Americans are buying their goods because Americans need to pay a higher price. But 96% of the world’s population is outside of the United States. So it hurts the American consumer much more than it hurts the foreign producer. It’s a bad strategy and has not strengthened our position in the global economy.
Tariffs are taxes on Americans. The United States is 4% of the global population and about 25% of global GDP. However, the US economy is driven mostly by consumer spending, not production. So materially speaking, tariffs will not reduce the rest of the world’s ability to create the goods that they need, it would only mean fewer Americans are buying their goods because Americans need to pay a higher price. But 96% of the world’s population is outside of the United States. So it hurts the American consumer much more than it hurts the foreign producer. It’s a bad strategy and has not strengthened our position in the global economy.
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
Anonymous C double-posted this 4 hours ago, 2 minutes later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,584
What China did in response to Trump’s tariffs was actually smart, the tit for tat retaliation was actually the mathematically most effective strategy they could possibly play by.
Anonymous C triple-posted this 4 hours ago, 2 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,585
The US and China are the best off when there are no tariffs. If China wants Trump to get rid of tariffs, if he raises tariffs, they should raise them by the same amount, and if he gets rid of tariffs, they should also get rid of tariffs. If they do that, it’s impossible for the United States to have an advantage, which is why Trump dropped the tariffs on China, because there’s nothing you can do about that.
Anonymous C quadruple-posted this 3 hours ago, 4 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,586
The only reason European counties seemed more submissive is because they’re democracies so their leaders can’t just do whatever they want, (in theory Trump shouldn’t have the power to impose tariffs either but he was using emergency powers when there’s literally no emergency because he is who he is). So European leaders had to appear diplomatic, especially so since they have a long lasting alliance with the US. Since China is authoritarian and Xi Jinping can do whatever he wants, they didn’t back down, they just took the most optimal and most rational strategy.
Anonymous C quintuple-posted this 3 hours ago, 33 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,590
In terms of "third world" (African) countries though, I think it’s a bit of a mixed bag how they reacted to Trump. The DRC seems to be more "submissive" at face-value in that they’ve openly praised and thanked Trump profusely over the Rwanda conflict. The only problem with that is that the DRC is an autocratic state masquerading as a parliamentary democracy, and they’re not afraid of sentencing American citizens to death, they did that under Biden’s presidency. So when "third world" countries act in a way that seems submissive, it’s not necessarily because they’re weak or stupid or afraid of us, it may actually be because they’re smart enough to manipulate Trump’s psychology. Of course, Trump’s base will fall for it, but that’s kind of the point.
Anonymous D replied with this 2 hours ago, 48 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,591
@1,419,583 (C)
> Tariffs are taxes on Americans.
This doesn't have anything to do with what I said about negotiating trade deals or giving companies an incentive to hire domestically.
> Tariffs are taxes on Americans.
This doesn't have anything to do with what I said about negotiating trade deals or giving companies an incentive to hire domestically.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 hours ago, 52 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,592
@previous (D)
Yeah, that’s exactly right. Taxes on Americans have absolutely nothing to do with negotiating trade deal or giving companies an incentive to hire domestically.
Yeah, that’s exactly right. Taxes on Americans have absolutely nothing to do with negotiating trade deal or giving companies an incentive to hire domestically.
Anonymous E double-posted this 2 hours ago, 42 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,596
The entire tariff thing is just idiocy for Trump to look like a tough guy in front of his base of uneducated rural white voters who don’t know anything about economics.
Anonymous E triple-posted this 2 hours ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,598
What people don’t understand about the US is the US was almost half of the world economy in the 1950s, because all our competition was destroyed after World War Two. Africa was still suffering from colonialism, China had just suffered from horrific Japanese war crimes, Japan and Germany were bombed out, the USSR lost 20 million people from World War Two, America only lost 400,000. The whole "make America great again" thing is stupid, we weren’t robbed of anything or cheated. What happened is since the end of World War Two, the rest of the world rebuilt and experienced faster economic growth than we did. Tariffs aren’t going to fix that.
Anonymous E quadruple-posted this 2 hours ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,599
Then on top of that France and the UK were bankrupt so they had to let go of all of their colonies.
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y (OP) replied with this 2 hours ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,600
@1,419,596 (E)
> The entire tariff thing is just idiocy for Trump to look like a tough guy in front of his base of uneducated rural white voters who don’t know anything about economics.
Conservative Republicans have ALWAYS been anti tariff's.
Trump says in his rage there are better and more powerful ways to impose tariffs. He is correct EXCEPT of no use.
1: He can do his new 10% except it has a very SHORT Time limit and requires congress to extend it. Impossible re not enough votes as it currently stands.
2: He can get Congress to use their authority to put tariff's back in place exactly as they were or even modify per his request. Impossible because his party does NOT have enough votes and current Republicans that are Truly Consertive have said NO to Tariff's so even no where near enough votes.
> The entire tariff thing is just idiocy for Trump to look like a tough guy in front of his base of uneducated rural white voters who don’t know anything about economics.
Conservative Republicans have ALWAYS been anti tariff's.
Trump says in his rage there are better and more powerful ways to impose tariffs. He is correct EXCEPT of no use.
1: He can do his new 10% except it has a very SHORT Time limit and requires congress to extend it. Impossible re not enough votes as it currently stands.
2: He can get Congress to use their authority to put tariff's back in place exactly as they were or even modify per his request. Impossible because his party does NOT have enough votes and current Republicans that are Truly Consertive have said NO to Tariff's so even no where near enough votes.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y (OP) double-posted this 2 hours ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,601
Forgot THIS - TRUMPAnonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 hours ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,602
@1,419,581 (D)
> Short term thinking.
>
> The tariffs have been the leverage Trump used to negotiate better trade deals and to incentivize companies to hire domestically.
>
> The elites and their useful idiots have succeeded in hurting the American worker and exploiting 3rd world poverty so that Is capital interests can profit even more.
Americans pay 95% of the tariffs. Trump used them as a plot to negotiate with his extended business network. The US shed 68,000 manufacturing jobs since Trump took office and agriculture now requires more subsidies. But please continue to play pretend.
> Short term thinking.
>
> The tariffs have been the leverage Trump used to negotiate better trade deals and to incentivize companies to hire domestically.
>
> The elites and their useful idiots have succeeded in hurting the American worker and exploiting 3rd world poverty so that Is capital interests can profit even more.
Americans pay 95% of the tariffs. Trump used them as a plot to negotiate with his extended business network. The US shed 68,000 manufacturing jobs since Trump took office and agriculture now requires more subsidies. But please continue to play pretend.
Anonymous F double-posted this 2 hours ago, 24 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,603
@1,419,596 (E)
> The entire tariff thing is just idiocy for Trump to look like a tough guy in front of his base of uneducated rural white voters who don’t know anything about economics.
They do when nobody buys their soybeans and produce.
> The entire tariff thing is just idiocy for Trump to look like a tough guy in front of his base of uneducated rural white voters who don’t know anything about economics.
They do when nobody buys their soybeans and produce.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 2 hours ago, 7 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,607
@1,419,602 (F)
Technically, Americans pay 100% of the tariff. The tax burden is calculated from how much producer surplus and how much consumer surplus is lost from the products that aren’t bought by consumers due to the tariffs. Foreigners aren’t really paying 5% of the tariffs they’re just losing that in sales.
Technically, Americans pay 100% of the tariff. The tax burden is calculated from how much producer surplus and how much consumer surplus is lost from the products that aren’t bought by consumers due to the tariffs. Foreigners aren’t really paying 5% of the tariffs they’re just losing that in sales.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
Anonymous G double-posted this 2 hours ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,610
The reason more of the burden isn’t on foreign producers is for two reasons:
- if 96% of people live outside the US they can find alternative buyers pretty easily
- Americans can’t find American made alternatives for foreign products so they’re forced to keep buying the same amount of the same products and just accept they have to spend more money
- if 96% of people live outside the US they can find alternative buyers pretty easily
- Americans can’t find American made alternatives for foreign products so they’re forced to keep buying the same amount of the same products and just accept they have to spend more money
Anonymous G triple-posted this 1 hour ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,611
The whole thing can be understood through this fun little graph
https://d35w6hwqhdq0in.cloudfront.net/7b05526ebeb1b2f77b955960dbdd6f50.jpg
https://d35w6hwqhdq0in.cloudfront.net/7b05526ebeb1b2f77b955960dbdd6f50.jpg
Anonymous G quadruple-posted this 1 hour ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,612
The elasticity of the supply and demand curves will determine whether more of the burden from a tax is on buyers or sellers. If you assume demand is inelastic (people can’t find alternatives to foreign made products), that would mean you’d have to imagine the demand curve being more upright like this | as opposed to this \, so you can imagine the top half of that triangle would be bigger than the bottom half of that triangle.
Anonymous G quintuple-posted this 1 hour ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,419,614
It’s great for the US government though!