Dave, a lot of good stuff here. But when you got to Trump and what he would do, you left out a few things, one of which is across the board tariffs. This is something he really believes in and he can do without Congress. It amounts to bad economics and, maybe more importantly, very bad strategy in a world where the US should strive to lead a coalition of countries that prefer a US led order to a Chinese led one.
I’m not much of a mercantilist either, protecting certain industries by raising the costs for all Americans. The money from tariffs themselves to the federal government are usually just wasted on some stupid project or another. Of course, not all is black and white as tariffs to oppose dumping which seeks to destroy American competition for future financial gain and tariffs to encourage industries where necessary overseas products are manufactured by politically unstable or unfriendly regimes would be reasonable.
As far as Trump Harris. The only difference is that Trump talks about it. In August, Biden raised tariffs on Canadian softwood from 8.05% to 14.54%. I read an article that that with the tariffs in 2022, it increased the cost of a single family home by $32,000. Tariffs on steel are still at 25% (also increasing the cost of housing). Biden recently (May 2024) put a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs and 25%-50% tariff on Chinese solar panels/solar cells. So are far as examples in the article of the differences between Trump/Harris tariffs, don’t make the top ten and really shouldn’t be a reason to vote for either. Interesting for me and perhaps an article is why America can’t manufacture products to be competitive with anti-dumping foreign countries. I have an idea, but valuing brevity won’t share then right now in this post. Thanks for commenting!!!
Biden has kept the Trump China tariffs--I believe for political, not strategic reasons--since the Trump tariffs didn't make sense (tariffs on Canadian steel? and other tariffs on intermediate goods that drove up costs for American manufacturers?) Trump takes his cue from economists who are hacks. I give the Biden admin. some credit for more strategic sense overall when it comes to tariffs. What Trump wants to do is put an across the board 20 percent tariff on foreign goods. No thought for alliances etc.
I’m with Rick, Dave. A lot of interesting stuff but you shortchanged the ‘if you like’ Trump decision. You should also like to see him shut down the federal trial for trying to overthrow the 2020 election.
Hi Clint, Love your photography…please keep them coming.
On the Trump side/lots to talk about. I just responded to Rick on tariffs, take a look. As with most issues, I deal with, there is a lot of room for reasonable disagreement. As for the insurrection, that is probably another couple articles and maybe a book with the concepts starting with what an insurrection is, prosecutorial discretion, separation of powers, election interference vs. propaganda vs. the first amendment vs. misinformation, using the legal system for political purposes etc, using violence as a form of political activism etc. The SCt has started weighing in on all of these issues, not that they are Gods on Olympus, but that effort has led to packing the court concepts, judicial ethics reform, protection justices from people trying to kill them (or not depending on how they vote) etc. Don’t know if I have enough time to untangle all of those threads, definitely an interesting topic. Be well my friend.
Dave, a lot of good stuff here. But when you got to Trump and what he would do, you left out a few things, one of which is across the board tariffs. This is something he really believes in and he can do without Congress. It amounts to bad economics and, maybe more importantly, very bad strategy in a world where the US should strive to lead a coalition of countries that prefer a US led order to a Chinese led one.
I’m not much of a mercantilist either, protecting certain industries by raising the costs for all Americans. The money from tariffs themselves to the federal government are usually just wasted on some stupid project or another. Of course, not all is black and white as tariffs to oppose dumping which seeks to destroy American competition for future financial gain and tariffs to encourage industries where necessary overseas products are manufactured by politically unstable or unfriendly regimes would be reasonable.
As far as Trump Harris. The only difference is that Trump talks about it. In August, Biden raised tariffs on Canadian softwood from 8.05% to 14.54%. I read an article that that with the tariffs in 2022, it increased the cost of a single family home by $32,000. Tariffs on steel are still at 25% (also increasing the cost of housing). Biden recently (May 2024) put a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs and 25%-50% tariff on Chinese solar panels/solar cells. So are far as examples in the article of the differences between Trump/Harris tariffs, don’t make the top ten and really shouldn’t be a reason to vote for either. Interesting for me and perhaps an article is why America can’t manufacture products to be competitive with anti-dumping foreign countries. I have an idea, but valuing brevity won’t share then right now in this post. Thanks for commenting!!!
Biden has kept the Trump China tariffs--I believe for political, not strategic reasons--since the Trump tariffs didn't make sense (tariffs on Canadian steel? and other tariffs on intermediate goods that drove up costs for American manufacturers?) Trump takes his cue from economists who are hacks. I give the Biden admin. some credit for more strategic sense overall when it comes to tariffs. What Trump wants to do is put an across the board 20 percent tariff on foreign goods. No thought for alliances etc.
I’m with Rick, Dave. A lot of interesting stuff but you shortchanged the ‘if you like’ Trump decision. You should also like to see him shut down the federal trial for trying to overthrow the 2020 election.
Hi Clint, Love your photography…please keep them coming.
On the Trump side/lots to talk about. I just responded to Rick on tariffs, take a look. As with most issues, I deal with, there is a lot of room for reasonable disagreement. As for the insurrection, that is probably another couple articles and maybe a book with the concepts starting with what an insurrection is, prosecutorial discretion, separation of powers, election interference vs. propaganda vs. the first amendment vs. misinformation, using the legal system for political purposes etc, using violence as a form of political activism etc. The SCt has started weighing in on all of these issues, not that they are Gods on Olympus, but that effort has led to packing the court concepts, judicial ethics reform, protection justices from people trying to kill them (or not depending on how they vote) etc. Don’t know if I have enough time to untangle all of those threads, definitely an interesting topic. Be well my friend.
Enjoyed!