“What is a tariff?”, they asked

A trending search since the election.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%207-d&geo=US&q=Tariff,trump%20tariffs&hl=en-US#:~:text=more_vert-,‪Nov%201%20at%208%3A0…‪Nov%204%20at,33,-Compared%20breakdown%20by

2 Likes

It’s amazing. Reminds me of the post I made a few days ago where the search “Did Joe Biden drop out of the race?” trended on election day. I guess people were surprised to see his name not on the ballot. My guess is the next trending search will be… “How does Project 2025 affect me?”

2 Likes

I agree, but I also understand why people are confused. In her ads, Kamala defined the tariffs as a direct tax on individuals without context, obviously omitting the current Trump tariffs her administration has in place.

Resulting in people seeking actual facts. Not a bad thing.

2 Likes

Both sides spun it in a way that confused voters, she called it a “national sales tax” and he portrayed it as a penalty on foreign governments. Neither are true.

1 Like

As with any REAL business, ALL COSTS should be passed down to the consumer in one way or another. It may suk, but it’s business!
As President Trump explained, it is a direct penalty targeting those outside of the USA.
How those entities choose to handle “their” costs, is entirely up to them. Some will absorb the costs, others will add it to the consumers List Price at POS, etc…
US Citizens that choose to pay that inflated fee from overseas countries, should really be reflecting on their knowledge of economics, (or the lack of)… as we all know almost half of this country have no friggin’ clue about any of it… which is how Harris was able to fleece most of her followers!!

4 Likes

1 Like

He’s 100% wrong.

Have you ever worked in an import/export business? I have on both sides of the coin.

From 1990 to 1996, I was the traffic manager for a manhole gasket manufacturer. I prepared the documents needed for export shipments into Canada, Mexico, and Israel. The tariffs that our customers paid were not a penalty to us as an exporter, it was a direct cost of goods sold, passed on to their customer.

And until 2004, I was the Production/purchasing manager for a low voltage lighting manufacturer. I sourced electrical components from China and Taiwan, and made the shipping arrangements with US customs brokers to handle the import. The tariffs that we paid were not a direct penalty of our vendors, they were a direct cost of goods that we passed on to our customers.

So, I ‘m telling you now, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Tariffs are not a “direct penalty targeting those outside of the USA”.

It’s a direct cost to the importer that is passed to the end user.

2 Likes

Remember, Trump is only matching tariffs. Only a self-serving, entitled country taking advantage of American prosperity would consider this a trade war.

Until there is an adjustment, such as

  1. The exporting country reduces its equal corresponding tariff to maintain its competitive market advantage within the states.
  2. The exporting country moves its manufacturing to the US to avoid tariffs.
  3. A US manufacturer makes the same product at home for less.

The longer-term effect will be. 1. Lower-cost goods. 2. Increased tax revenue. 3. More manufacturing in the USA.

Also, I would encourage you to read all of JJ’s post. All of your points are in there. This is not rocket science for any of us.

3 Likes

That’s what I learned in my HS & College Economics 101 as well!

4 Likes

Until it isn’t.

The cost of the tariff either gets passed along to the consumer, the product get’s sold in another market, or the tit for tat starts a trade war that’s a lose lose for everyone involved.

Don’t take my word for it, look to the Soy Bean Farmers about how the Trump Tariffs worked out for them the last time he was calling the shots.

And this, looking forward, if Trump starts another trade war with his tariffs.

And then there is this…

Contrary of popular belief, Trump was an economic disaster.

So, US raises tariffs imposed on goods from certain countries, and in turn, those countries will reduce the tariffs on goods exported from the US. I don’t think so.

The exporting manufacturer wasn’t paying any tariffs in the first place. How are they going to avoid something they never paid in the first place?

This would be a greatest advantage, but that is why manufacturers are importing. I could buy electronic components for pennies on the dollar compared to buying US manufactured components.

Yes. It is a reciprocation policy.

If you do not know this, then you don’t know what you are talking about, period.

There is a lot more to the soybean industry than people want to see. It has long been mired in instability and Biden continues these tariffs today.

1 Like

Oh okay. What’s your background, the restaurant business?

I understand reciprocity, it’s for mutual benefit.

15 years. Five as a manager, seven as a General Manager, and six years in charge of concept development and deployment as Director of Operations.

Want to see my resume?

Read the Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act information available. If I export a car and a 10% tariff is attached, then the trade partner could reasonably expect a reciprocal 10% tariff, no? Well, that is not happening.

Now, if they want to continue importing cars and not encourage us to make our own cars for less, they may unilaterally agree to lower tariffs.

1 Like

I understand the concept, I don’t agree with the proposed solution. Retaliatory actions will result in a reciprocal response.

1 Like

Lame duck President signing a 5-year deal with China. You cannot make this up.

Biden administration extends U.S.-China tech agreement days before leaving office

Mr. Moolenaar and 13 other House members said renewing the agreement in the final days of President Biden’s term is a “clear attempt to tie the hands” of the incoming Trump administration, which could reject it or negotiate a better arrangement

Furthermore,

The House recently passed legislation requiring any extension of the science and technology agreement with China to include 15 days’ notice to Congress, explicit protections for human rights, and curbs on dual civilian-military research. “While not yet law, the Biden Administration’s decision to ignore Congress’s articulated guardrails is alarming,” the committee said in a statement.

3 Likes

what ever psyop the DS OP Mockingbird media chums out to the sheeple.

What’s next? Watch out for hyper super-duper bird flu. :wink: :roll_eyes: :disguised_face:

That agreement has been signed every five years for the last 45 years. So the last time the agreement was signed was…Well, you do the math.