this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
725 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19120 readers
3063 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -2 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

Yes. We will pay for the tariffs.

American companies will pay for the tariffs, and then we the consumers who buy their products will pay for the tariffs via price increases.

This is money that we will invest. It is a tax. It is the government causing us to spend more money.

It is not a usual tax in the sense of money paid to the IRS. But it is an economic cost that we will pay in order to support a government policy.

The cost is paid to enact a certain outcome. The outcome is less importing of goods, and more of those goods being provided by sources within our borders. It will cost money to make this change. That cost will be paid by us.

We are being forced to pay money to enact a policy. That’s how it’s essentially a tax.

Except this policy is basically:

  • More stuff that American consumers consume, will come from American companies
  • There will be more manufacturing capability to meet this demand
  • There will be more demand for American labor, improving the lives of American workers
  • We will be more militarily capable due to being able to build more things in-house

That is a set of changes being targeted by this policy. We will pay for this policy by paying higher prices. The intention, the hope, is that the policy will pay for itself in terms of the third bullet point: more manufacturing in America means more jobs for Americans. More demand for American stuff means better bargaining position for American workers, means more income.

In the short term it’ll suck. Just like any other heavy tax can suck in the short term, before the benefits can manifest and make it worth it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 112 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a certainty, not a fucking "likelihood'. That's how they work.

[–] wagesj45@fedia.io 63 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You mean there's no chance that Wal-Mart might choose to absorb the increased prices out of the goodness of their hearts? :o

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 82 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Pretty sure everyone was told this before the election.

Problem:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2024/11/12/trump-election-win-college-educated-voters/76109508007/

"Harris outperformed Biden’s 2020 numbers among white voters with college degrees. Meanwhile, exit polling from NBC News gave Republicans a 9-point gain with voters who never attended college."

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 45 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Thing is, basic economics is a high school subject, except:

"Sir, when am I going to have to know how tariffs work in the real world?"

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You had econ in HS? Mine had it but it was only an elective.

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think mine even had it as an elective. We were too busy spending 2 years of history classes learning how nice the Pilgrims were to the natives. And this was in Massachusetts, which I believe ranks #1 in education in the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago

'I love the poorly educated', donald j trump, feb 2016.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

I bet a big portion of that 9% shops at Walmart.

Would been smart for Wally’s bottom line to maybe tell their customers about this before the fucking election.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago (7 children)

There are two bright sides to this (and dark sides as well):

-This will decrease demand of Chinese goods in the U.S., hurting a country that is ... problematic to say the least. (Anyone remember the Uyghurs? The O.G. Gazens?) It probably won't shift demand back to the U.S. factories, but maybe it is time for another country to become the slave-labor-ish manufacturing capital of the world.

-When the prices skyrocket, along with food from all the missing immigrant farm hands, Trump will get blamed. I just hope this wasn't the plan all along and those "fake" inflation hikes back after covid weren't to cover for the real ones down the road.

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 72 points 1 day ago (2 children)

When the prices skyrocket, along with food from all the missing immigrant farm hands, Trump will get blamed.

i really hope you’re right, but i think that will most likely get blamed on biden “ruining the economy” in his last term, or something in that vein. a lot of trump voters get their news from fox news or directly from donald trump, and i can’t imagine either of those sources criticizing trumps economic policies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

When the prices skyrocket, along with food from all the missing immigrant farm hands, Trump will get blamed.

In all likelihood, only a small percentage of his voters will actually blame him for the predictable consequences of his tariffs. The rest of them will believe Trump when he blames it on Biden's economic policies that were put in place before Trump's second term. Our egos have a funny way of making us do mental gymnastics to avoid having to accept the idea of oneself being wrong.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 64 points 1 day ago (1 children)

just like mexico paid for his 'wall'

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hydrashok@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Duuuh. Did they really think the company would just eat the additional costs? What a bunch of maroons.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They thought the exporting country/company would pay for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Don't worry. Trump branded everything will be made by US ~~ prison ~~ slave labor and thus be a good 10% cheaper than the goods under tariff.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›