More tariffs paid by US consumers

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2019, 11:04 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: So we pay more, the rich get richer, and the mexicans lose their jobs? Well I am like every body else and this sounds like a dream scenario. We never mind paying a little more. We all love when the rich get richer, trickle down for the win. And when the mexicans lose their jobs they come here and there is no doubt we all love major migrant flows.

Why would Mexicans come here if the rich get richer and we pay more? 

[NATI BENGALS]

(06-06-2019, 11:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why would Mexicans come here if the rich get richer and we pay more? 

Answer was in what you quoted.

"and the mexicans lose their jobs"

Why a lot of them come here. Looking to work. Dey took er jobs.

Unless of course our recent other trade enemy (china) buddies with this trade enemy. And instead of paying tariffs they decide to do their own thing

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2019, 11:40 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Answer was in what you quoted.

"and the mexicans lose their jobs"

Why a lot of them come here. Looking to work. Dey took er jobs.

Unless of course our recent other trade enemy (china) buddies with this trade enemy. And instead of paying tariffs they decide to do their own thing

So maybe the rich getting richer is a good thing.

Maybe we could work toward our rich getting poorer and having folks lose their jobs, then we could migrate to Canada.

I really don't think you know what you're mad about. 

[BakertheBeast]

Why has the immigration problem ,setting new records for people trying to get into this country, exploded under Trumps time in office so far. He is supposed to be fixing the problem not making it worse. Is this just another case of everything he touches turns to shit?
Follow up question. How is some of that money that he insist be used to build that wall going to find its way into his pocket?

[BmorePat87]

(06-07-2019, 06:49 AM)BakertheBeast Wrote: Why has the immigration problem ,setting new records for people trying to get into this country, exploded under Trumps time in office so far. He is supposed to be fixing the problem not making it worse. Is this just another case of everything he touches turns to shit?
Follow up question. How is some of that money that he insist be used to build that wall going to find its way into his pocket?

It has to do with how you count border apprehensions and asylum seekers. Past administrations weren't including legal asylum seekers in their numbers. The delays at legal ports of entry for asylum seekers has also caused many to willingly get apprehended at the border so that they could then seek asylum. 

[Aquapod770]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-says-u-s-has-reached-deal-with-mexico-11559954306

Well, looks like it worked.

[Dill]

(06-07-2019, 06:49 AM)BakertheBeast Wrote: Why has the immigration problem ,setting new records for people trying to get into this country, exploded under Trumps time in office so far. He is supposed to be fixing the problem not making it worse. Is this just another case of everything he touches turns to shit?
Follow up question. How is some of that money that he insist be used to build that wall going to find its way into his pocket?

Not sure new records are being set. Certainly not for total illegal immigration. 
Maybe for asylum seekers? New records for anti-immigrant rhetoric maybe.

[Aquapod770]

I wonder why this thread hasn't been followed up on? Hmm.

[Belsnickel]

(06-10-2019, 09:56 AM)Aquapod770 Wrote: I wonder why this thread hasn't been followed up on? Hmm.

Because the forum was closed for the weekend.

And because this still doesn't change the negative impacts on us the Chinese tariffs are having. https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-economy-to-enter-a-recession-by-2021-economists-predict

[BmorePat87]

(06-10-2019, 10:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because the forum was closed for the weekend.

And because this still doesn't change the negative impacts on us the Chinese tariffs are having. https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-economy-to-enter-a-recession-by-2021-economists-predict

LOL, thread was last posted in an hour before the boards were locked and he says that immediately after they get unlocked
Also

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/08/politics/nyt-trump-mexico-agreed-deal-months-ago/index.html

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-10-2019, 10:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because the forum was closed for the weekend.

And because this still doesn't change the negative impacts on us the Chinese tariffs are having. https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-economy-to-enter-a-recession-by-2021-economists-predict

Trump deserves a lot of criticism for a lot of things, his stance on China is not one of them.  China has been growing at our expense for decades, I am thrilled that we are finally addressing this.  The Chinese have far more to lose in a trade war than we do, what they count on to keep things as is is the lack of long term strategy inherent in our democratic system and public sentiment turning against tariffs when people have to pay a $1 more for their cheap shit at Walmart.  China is not our friend, or anyone else's, and we need to be acting accordingly.  This is a good move on Trump's part and I hope whoever is POTUS for the next five years stays the course on this.

[Aquapod770]

(06-10-2019, 10:25 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: LOL, thread was last posted in an hour before the boards were locked and he says that immediately after they get unlocked
Also

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/08/politics/nyt-trump-mexico-agreed-deal-months-ago/index.html

Ahhh didn't know the forum was closed for the weekend. 

[Aquapod770]

(06-10-2019, 10:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because the forum was closed for the weekend.

And because this still doesn't change the negative impacts on us the Chinese tariffs are having. https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-economy-to-enter-a-recession-by-2021-economists-predict

Didn't know the forum was closed for the weekend. 

Plus I've been pretty vocal about my feelings of tariffs on here. Free trade is the best trade. 

[Belsnickel]

(06-10-2019, 10:52 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Trump deserves a lot of criticism for a lot of things, his stance on China is not one of them.  China has been growing at our expense for decades, I am thrilled that we are finally addressing this.  The Chinese have far more to lose in a trade war than we do, what they count on to keep things as is is the lack of long term strategy inherent in our democratic system and public sentiment turning against tariffs when people have to pay a $1 more for their cheap shit at Walmart.  China is not our friend, or anyone else's, and we need to be acting accordingly.  This is a good move on Trump's part and I hope whoever is POTUS for the next five years stays the course on this.

I don't disagree that China is an issue, and I am not someone against tariffs on principle. I am against trade wars, because there are no winners. I think that the current approach being taken is not done in a strategic enough manner and is a huge problem for us economically.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-10-2019, 11:15 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't disagree that China is an issue, and I am not someone against tariffs on principle. I am against trade wars, because there are no winners. I think that the current approach being taken is not done in a strategic enough manner and is a huge problem for us economically.

How would you approach it differently?

[*bfine32*]

(06-10-2019, 10:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because the forum was closed for the weekend.

And because this still doesn't change the negative impacts on us the Chinese tariffs are having. https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-economy-to-enter-a-recession-by-2021-economists-predict

Is that whataboutisim?

[BmorePat87]

(06-10-2019, 11:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Is that whataboutisim?

No, because the thread is about all of Trump's tariffs, as noted in the OP. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-10-2019, 12:25 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, because the thread is about all of Trump's tariffs, as noted in the OP. 

I just thought it might qualify as it was a direct response to a post concerning the Mexico Tariffs. of course it is relevant to the OP. That's why i suggested it might be "whataboutisim" and not "derailment". Thanks for the clarification. So many informal rules.

[BmorePat87]

(06-10-2019, 01:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I just thought it might qualify as it was a direct response to a post concerning the Mexico Tariffs. of course it is relevant to the OP. That's why i suggested it might be "whataboutisim" and not "derailment". Thanks for the clarification. So many informal rules.

The post doesn't directly mention Mexico. We can infer that the post is referring to the deal worked out with Mexico, but the update doesn't change the OP's criticism of the tariff policy. Mentioning that the deal didn't end all tariffs isn't whataboutism. No "informal rules" that you have to keep track of.

[BmorePat87]

Trump called into CNBC this morning to complain about the US Chamber of Commerce being in opposition to his tariffs. He claimed that China's economy has lost $15-20 TRILLION since he was elected...