Armchair_Politician wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 12:24pm:


We are all aware of this truth, even those who will push back by dismissing your arguments as doomsday scenarios.

Yet, it remains an unavoidable reality and the inevitable consequence of how Trump proposes to implement his tariffs, not the simple tariffs themselves.

Frank wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 1:21pm:


I never claimed that it was inflation, but it is certainly one of the factors that can contribute to it.

Your link also doesn't mention anything about tariffs.  One this it does talk about that CPI is an inflation measure.

Guess what has an impact on CPI?

Tariffs...

The overall impact depends on variables such as the size of the tariff, the degree of reliance on imports, and the broader economic environment. Generally, tariffs can drive up prices, which in turn can increase inflation, particularly when they disrupt supply chains or reduce market competition.

This is why not all tariffs are inherently harmful. However, the approach Trump is taking with his tariffs negatively affects these key factors, the tariff size, import reliance, and the economic context.

It’s as though the policy is designed to create more problems than it solves, especially considering his repeated assertions that China, Mexico, and Canada will bear the cost, rather than the US consumer.

It is starting to look like Tariffs was a joke, he is likely going to claim that Canada and Mexico have bent their knee to Trump and tightened their borders. They will likely give him a way out by making a couple of small changes.

On the other side of the fence both countries are being aggressive towards the USA. The Canadian people have already determined to not by American. The government have plans to increase the tax on export oil into the US. Canada supply the US with about 4.5 million barrels a day. Their increase would lead to US bowser prices being about $1 a gallon more.

Jasin wrote on Dec 1^st, 2024 at 4:15pm:


Quote:


Reagan, Bush, Bush and Trump all left economic disasters behind when they left office.

Clinton, Obama and Biden all fixed the messes left for them.

Now here we go again with a dum dum attempted President flushing the economy down the drain. - any bet that we don't start with unaffordable, unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy ?

You're so close Frank, yet you're still embarrassingly far.

While much of what you're saying it true, not only are you misrepresenting what I said, you're selectively misrepresenting Trump's tariffs too.

Frank wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 1:55pm:


That's not what I said. 

The exchange was,

SadKangaroo wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 12:53pm:


Nobody made the claim the prince increase thanks to the tariffs "IS" inflation.  But it is 100% accurate, and a "truth" that it will lead to a rise in inflation, which all economic experts have been warning about.

As we've been through already, it is not a guarantee when it comes to tariffs, it's all about how they are designed and implemented, with the key indicators of their impact on inflation being the size of the tariff, the degree of reliance on imports, and the broader economic environment. 

These are all things Trump controls.

His timing of the claimed "day one" means there are no measures in place to offer locally made, non-tariffed alternatives for supply chain or final products in the vast majority of cases and where there is, there isn't the capacity to offer that alternative to all consumers. 

His choice of timing also means that he chooses the broader economic environment. 

As for the size of the tariffs, that's directly his choice too.

So any pump in inflation thanks to the way he's designed and implemented the tariffs and a possible following recession can accurately be characterised as "The Trump Recession".

Quote:


Agreed.  That's why it's so damaging the way he's designed the tariffs and his timing of them leaves an enormous shortfall on locally made products without tariffed supply chain components.

If he doesn't go through with the tariffs, that uncertainty will hinder future investment should he implement them, because who knows how long they'll last.  Are they there for the long run, allow a return on investment, or are they a bluff or a gamble to try and force outcomes in other areas.

Uncertainty is the death of investment, so he's causing even more harm if he does this which will blunt the impact of future tariffs he may actually design and implement properly (which is giving him far too much credit that this is even a possibility).

Quote:


You're the only one who is arguing that all tariffs cause inflation.

I'm certainly not saying that.  You are deliberately misrepresenting what I've said to match something where you've found an article that can disprove it.

I've never said tariffs are bad, I've said the way Trump has designed the tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada is the problem that will lead to these negative outcomes. 

He didn't take the Biden route of building up the local supply first, with public and private investment, along with regulatory changes to foster growth in that sector.  Now that this is completed, Biden increased the tariffs, again to borrow your example, on the solar components that can now be bought locally so the consumers have the choice and can avoid the tariffs if they choose.

You said it yourself, "Buying American made at full price instead of cheap, subsidised Chinese is not inflation".

Trump's tariffs don't give people or manufactures that option.

AND THAT'S A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM!

It's not tariffs, it's the way Trump is trying to use them.

All while lying, saying China, Canada and Mexico will be paying for them.

You're SOOOOOO Close to getting it.  You've laid out all the points that support what everyone has been saying about Trump's tariffs, yet you're choosing to not make that link.

So close!!!

Frank wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 4:39pm:


You're the only one who is arguing that all tariffs cause inflation.

Frank wrote on Dec 17^th, 2024 at 4:39pm:


Slow down champ, I meant out of you and me.  I never said all tariffs were bad, I said the way Trump has designed his are, which is 100% accurate and I've explained why multiple times as have you, only you didn't even realise it.

Quote:


Exactly, and I’ve said as much myself. Unless he was lying during the campaign, we’re to take him at his word that he plans to impose a 25% tariff on all imports from Mexico, Canada, and China, along with an additional 10% on Chinese imports.

He’s also proposed a 100% tariff on all BRICS nations, with all of these measures being given “Day One” priority.

This is the plan he presented during the campaign, the one voters in the U.S. had to weigh when casting their ballots.

So, are you now suggesting that his campaign promises can’t be trusted?

Quote:


You’re the one arguing that we shouldn’t trust what he said on the campaign trail, yet I’ve been consistent from the beginning. Based on what we know of his plan, economists have repeatedly warned about the outcomes I’ve outlined here and in the other thread.

In contrast, you’ve been grasping at straws, shifting goalposts, playing semantics, and misrepresenting my arguments, all to sidestep acknowledging the risks and negative consequences of his tariff policies as we currently understand them.

If he backtracks after the inauguration, that comes with its own set of risks. However, those would primarily affect his credibility and the stability of investment in the US economy because he's too unpredictable.

That’s still preferable to the alternative: upward pressure on inflation, supply chain disruptions, skyrocketing costs of living, and the looming spectre of a full-blown, Trump-branded recession.