Should Either Political Side in the U.S. Object to this Statement by Trump, Re: Tarrifs on Companies that send Jobs out of the Country?

[postman]

Its worth considering

But we have a much higher standard of living here and that means higher wages

So other than that what do you have in mind?

What about changing the deduction they get as a business expense when they buy from anywhere including China. To a direct tax offset of the additional expense from buying American.

Ex: The widget from China costs them $10, an American made widget costs them $15. Buy from China and they get a $10 business expense deduction, Buy from America and it's $16, but since Business only pays about a 25% income tax, they save $2.50, but they're still paying $7.50 out of pocket.
Buy American for $16, and save $4.00 but they're paying $12 out of pocket.
Let them deduct the difference out of pocket as a tax credit, directly reducing their tax by $4.50

That way their switch to American manufacture is completely cost neutral. And let them do it for up to 50%, still buying half from China and half from America. This assures that the American product is equal to, and not a superior product at taxpayer expense.

 

[kyzr]

Do you know how many years I have been hearing this?

Its true. No wonder you hear it a lot.

 

[Mac-7]

Mitt is a sore loser POS.

No kidding

He’s a pompous ass

 

[pknopp]

1. The US DEBT Clock

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

You expected Biden to do what Trump wouldn't do?

2. Mitt is a sore loser POS.

All the lawsuits say he is hardly the only sore loser.

 

[Moonglow]

Tax companies who layoff Americans to move their jobs to other countries whose workers are less expensive due to their standard of living being so much lower. Tax them on goods they turn around to sell back to Americans, that is.

It seems that both political sides would support that. But, maybe I'm missing something. If you have a legitimate objection to the idea, I'd love to read it and discuss it.

Thanks!

he was president why did he not do it?

 

[j-mac]

He had four years to do this and did nothing.

It amazes me how short people's memory is....For example, you would think, in reading your post here that Trump had unconditional support when he was in office...That couldn't be further from the truth...Trump had not only the entirety of the Democrats against him, (even when a deal would have benefitted them), but a significant portion of Republicans as well...Yet you come in here and make the statement like that? As though what? he could just wave a wand? Give me a break...

Trump likes to talk and that's all he can do.

You're right, that's all he can do at present...Then why is he such a threat that liberals have done little but talk about him, nonstop, for the entire 3 years he's been out of office? It's obsession...Meanwhile, what can only be described as the most corrupt President in the history of this country sits, unchallenged by anyone in his own party that claimed that they were honest brokers in bleating endlessly about Trump...

So, continue on Pknopp with your hit and runs, but know, you're part of the problem, and don't even see it....

 

[Mac-7]

What about changing the deduction they get as a business expense when they buy from anywhere including China. To a direct tax offset of the additional expense from buying American.

Ex: The widget from China costs them $10, an American made widget costs them $15. Buy from China and they get a $10 business expense deduction, Buy from America and it's $16, but since Business only pays about a 25% income tax, they save $2.50, but they're still paying $7.50 out of pocket.
Buy American for $16, and save $4.00 but they're paying $12 out of pocket.
Let them deduct the difference out of pocket as a tax credit, directly reducing their tax by $4.50

That way their switch to American manufacture is completely cost neutral. And let them do it for up to 50%, still buying half from China and half from America. This assures that the American product is equal to, and not a superior product at taxpayer expense.

That's worth considering

Its more complicated to explain than a tariff but that might make it more appealing to voters

Its the same cost to consumers but more hidden

 

[kyzr]

and each of those was worse than the one that came before them. That is what we get from the duopoly, worse choices every cycle.

And here is the crux of the problem, your standards are so low that merely surviving is seen as "fine" and is good enough for you.

which according to you "fine" and surviving

and who have you voted for that is pushing for such things?

1. Worse choices in a democracy generally means that the MSM propaganda network are NOT giving voters unbiased information.

2. If democrats win in 2024, we will not be fine. We will be in very bad shape going forward.

3. The $34T debt is a product of the current political system.

4. No one has proposed cutting spending, raising taxes, or balancing the budget. Mike Johnson said he will start that process in 2024. We'll see. Nikki Haley said she will do those tough choices. I support her.

 

[pknopp]

It amazes me how short people's memory is....For example, you would think, in reading your post here that Trump had unconditional support when he was in office...That couldn't be further from the truth...Trump had not only the entirety of the Democrats against him, (even when a deal would have benefitted them), but a significant portion of Republicans as well...Yet you come in here and make the statement like that? As though what? he could just wave a wand? Give me a break...

Trump signed off on every dollar of debt and even argued for more debt.

Trump Demands Changes to Coronavirus Relief Bill, Calling It a ‘Disgrace’ (Published 2020)

 

[kyzr]

You expected Biden to do what Trump wouldn't do?

All the lawsuits say he is hardly the only sore loser.

1. ALL pols take the easy route. Spending too much generally leads to getting re-elected.

2. Stacy Abrams and several other pols on both sides are also sore losers. Hillary said that no dem should ever concede another election. Just sayin'

 

[WorldWatcher]

Maybe you never owned a business but a businessman has to make a profit

Which he cant do if the competition is way underpriced

Trump would have produce here just like everyone else

Correct.

But still doesn't address what he was doing. In chasing profit he offshored his own products to make higher profits.

Now he's trying to hook the gullible by sayings he's for tariffs to protect American jobs.

Sorry, if you are for protecting American jobs now, maybe you should have protected American jobs instead of shifting your own product production overseas to cheaper labor markets. It's not like anyone expected the "Trump" brand to be cheaper.

WW

 

[Moonglow]

How about instead of tariffs, why not programs that make it economical for American business to make it over here, instead of buying it from China.

 

[theHawk]

Also because china does not care about pollution

The chicoms have s near monopoly on rare earth elements not because they control the raw material

They dont

They can process other countries raw material cheaper by leaving dirty byproducts that they will never clean up

That price advantage must be erased by tariffs

Yea it’s funny how these enviro-wackos are totally fine paying the Chinese to pollute the planet in order to manufacture our goods.

 

[pknopp]

1. ALL pols take the easy route. Spending too much generally leads to getting re-elected.

As you suggest we do again.

2. Stacy Abrams and several other pols on both sides are also sore losers. Hillary said that no dem should ever concede another election. Just sayin'

And you'll never find me defending Hillary over anything.

 

[Mac-7]

But still doesn't address what he was doing. In chasing profit he offshored his own products to make higher profits.

Trump offshores to stay in business

Its the same reason so many American companies moved production to china or mexico

Its because of competition from other companies

 

[Mac-7]

Yea it’s funny how these enviro-wackos are totally fine paying the Chinese to pollute the planet in order to manufacture our goods.

That precisely whats going on with the globalists

 

[the other mike]

Trump is not going to do that. He would tarriff his own businesses.

He had nearly balanced the trade deficit with China until your Wuhan Lab planDemic hit.

Save the lies for your poor Sunday school runtz.

 

[pknopp]

He had nearly balanced the trade deficit with China until your Wuhan Lab planDemic hit.

Save the lies for your poor Sunday school runtz.

https://www.axios.com/2019/09/03/trump-trade-deficit-world-china

 

[WorldWatcher]

Trump offshores to stay in business

Its the same reason so many American companies moved production to china or mexico

Its because of competition from other companies

So, excuses to justify him to being a hypocrite.

WW

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. Worse choices in a democracy generally means that the MSM propaganda network are NOT giving voters unbiased information.

2. If democrats win in 2024, we will not be fine. We will be in very bad shape going forward.

3. The $34T debt is a product of the current political system.

4. No one has proposed cutting spending, raising taxes, or balancing the budget. Mike Johnson said he will start that process in 2024. We'll see. Nikki Haley said she will do those tough choices. I support her.

1. Yet you support the system that keeps giving us worse choices.

2. We will not be fine no matter who wins the White House as both have been to not be up to the job.

3. Yet you support it with all your being and with your ever vote. Does that not make you responsible for said debt?

4. Yet you keep voting for people that will not do what you think needs done, and the worst part of all is you are happy with the system and spend your days defending it.