Trump's Tariffs and Possible Trade War

  • HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two)

    Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation)

    if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting board!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If this is true, why were tariffs not mentioned at all in any of the seceding states' Articles of Secession?

Slavery most curiously was mentioned.

 
I know many of you on this board despise Ben Shapiro to the point if he ran by on fire you wouldn't throw a bucket of water on him, but his show is well worth a listen today. He goes in hard on the Trump tariff plans. He punched holes in the entire thing, and shows how the tariffs aren't reciprocal at all like several on here have mentioned. He's hoping Trump will pull them back quickly, but knows that if he doesn't he'll crash and burn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: selmaborntidefan
I know many of you on this board despise Ben Shapiro to the point if he ran by on fire you wouldn't throw a bucket of water on him, but his show is well worth a listen today. He goes in hard on the Trump tariff plans. He punched holes in the entire thing, and shows how the tariffs aren't reciprocal at all like several on here have mentioned. He's hoping Trump will pull them back quickly, but knows that if he doesn't he'll crash and burn.
I think Trump is in the process of ruining his own economy. Trump will get the blame for it, too, as he should. Presidents generally get too much credit when things go well in the economy and too much blame when things go poorly, but in this case, the cause to affect relationship is pretty tight.
 
The seceding states talked about it plenty if you look.


South Carolina​
The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position toward the Northern States that our ancestors in the colonies did toward Great Britain. The Northern States, having the majority in Congress, claim the same power of omnipotence in legislation as the British Parliament. "The general welfare" is the only limit to the legislation of either; and the majority in Congress, as in the British Parliament, are the sole judges of the expediency of the legislation this "general welfare" requires. Thus the Government of the United States has become a consolidated Government, and the people of the Southern States are compelled to meet the very despotism their fathers threw off in the Revolution of 1776.
The consolidation of the Government of Great Britain over the colonies was attempted to be carried out by the taxes. The British Parliament undertook to tax the colonies to promote British interests. Our fathers resisted this pretension. They claimed the right of self-taxation through their Colonial Legislatures. They were not represented in the British Parliament, and therefore could not rightfully be taxed by its Legislature. The British Government, however, offered them a representation in the British Parliament; but it was not sufficient to enable them to protect themselves from the majority, and they refused it. Between taxation without any representation, and taxation without a representation adequate to protection, there was no difference. By neither would the colonies tax themselves. Hence they refused to pay the taxes paid by the British Parliament.
The Southern States now stand in the same relation toward the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation, that our ancestors stood toward the people of Great Britain. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation, and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit exactly as the people of Great Britain taxed our ancestors in the British Parliament for their benefit. For the last forty years the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North. The people of the South have been taxed by duties on imports not for revenue, but for an object inconsistent with revenue – to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the productions of their mines and manufactures. … The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected three-fourths of them are expended at the North. This cause, with others connected with the operation of the General Government, has provincialized the cities of the South. Their growth is paralyzed, while they are the mere suburbs of Northern cities. The bases of the foreign commerce of the United States are the agricultural productions of the South; yet Southern cities do not carry it on. Our foreign trade is almost annihilated.


Florida​
The majority section may legislate imperiously and ruinously to the interests of the minority section not only without injury but to great benefit and advantage of their own section. In proof of this we need only refer to the fishing bounties, the monopoly of the coast navigation which is possessed almost exclusively by the Northern States and in one word the bounties to every employment of northern labor and capital such a government must in the nature of things and the universal principles of human nature and human conduct very soon lead as it has done to a grinding and degrading despotism.



Robert Toombs of Washington, Geo., who subsequently drafted the Georgia Secession Declaration put it this way in a speech before the Georgia Legislature in November 1860: “At the last session of Congress they brought in and passed through the House the most atrocious tariff bill that ever was enacted [i.e. the Morrill Tariff], raising the present duties from twenty to two hundred and fifty per cent above the existing rates of duty. That bill now lies on the table of the Senate. It was a master stroke of abolition policy; it united cupidity to fanaticism, and thereby made a combination which has swept the country. There were thousands of protectionists in PA, NJ, NY, and in New England, who were not abolitionists. There were thousands of abolitionists who were free traders. The mongers brought them together upon a mutual surrender of their principles. The free trade abolitionists became protectionists; the non-abolition protectionists became abolitionists. The result of this coalition was the infamous Morrill bill - the robber and the incendiary struck hands, and united in joint raid against the South.”



Georgia​
The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the Federal Government; that of the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency. The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors. This interest was confined mainly to the Eastern and Middle non-slave-holding States. Wielding these great States it held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor the infancy of their business in this country, the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other countries toward them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence of the whole country.


Texas​
They have impoverished the slave-holding States by unequal and partial legislation, thereby enriching themselves by draining our substance.
 
This is the dumbest economic move I've ever seen a President make. I don't think he could have done a better job of tanking both the economy and financial markets if that had been his aim.

Yesterday, US markets fell between 3.5% and 5%, depending on the index you choose. As I write this about 80 minutes before markets open, today is looking similar.
 
Today's post from the economist I follow...

Tariff Test

Trump 1.0 boosted tariffs from 1.2% to 3.2%. Yesterday, he boosted the average tariff on US imported goods to 24%, higher than the disastrous 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, and international trade is proportionally 3x larger than then. The new tariffs are the ratio of our trade deficit in goods with a nation divided by imported goods from that nation, a meaningless calculation that totally ignores services. Politics masquerading as economics.
 
Last edited:
The only solace I can take is I have never voted for this yutz. I knew the day he entered the presidential race that he would be destructive and I fully expect it to get worse over the remainder of this term...

This is the dumbest economic move I've ever seen a President make. I don't think he could have done a better job of tanking both the economy and financial markets if that had been his aim.

Yesterday, US markets fell between 3.5% and 5%, depending on the index you choose. As I write this about 80 minutes before markets open, today is looking similar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Padreruf
A myopic and ignorant electorate was sold a line of goods that posited that the economy was in shambles, eggs and gas prices were too high.

Unemployment was at a historic low, the stock market was at record heights, inflation was finally getting under control.

All you MAGA cheerleaders out there, I hope you're happy.
 
Last edited:
I think Trump is in the process of ruining his own economy. Trump will get the blame for it, too, as he should. Presidents generally get too much credit when things go well in the economy and too much blame when things go poorly, but in this case, the cause to affect relationship is pretty tight.

I concur with this.

Over and over we have Presidents elected or retired based upon "how my bank account looks at home," but their relationship to that is almost always tangential if not completely unrelated. Plus the fact that external events that no President can control may make things better or worse. Let's be honest, the economy was declining in 1990, but Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait and driving up oil prices exacerbated that situation probably beyond what would have been a normal cycle reset.

But you're right: this is the rare case when a guy has come in swinging a big stick and insisting he gets to do all this stuff, and the success or failure rests entirely on him. And yet it will be his party (and not him) who pays the price at the ballot box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huckleberry
488664370_1137685331796373_2266837181577083804_n.jpg
 
A myopic and ignorant electorate was sold a line of goods that posited that the econom was in shambles, eggs and gas prices were too high.

You're conflating GDP with what folks saw at the supermarket. And btw - those prices were seriously bad enough for Kamala Harris to propose price controls, so it must not just have been Trumpers.


Unemployment was at a historic low,

No it wasn't and that's been covered on this board. All a low unemployment rate means is "people have a job." It doesn't mean they're working 40 hours a week. It does not mean they're better off than they were four years ago. And it doesn't include people unemployed so long they've stopped looking for jobs.


the stock market was at record heights,

the high was December 2024 AFTER the election.....


inflation was finally getting under control.

Btw, let me ask an obvious series of questions then: if things are as good as you're saying here, why was Joe Biden trailing in the polls even BEFORE the debate disaster? And why was he then removed from the ticket? And why wasn't Harris reelected easily with this economic record?

And wasn't abortion going to be the Moses of the Democratic Party, and lead them to the Promised Land anyway? Did that go away and all 50 states adopt unrestricted abortions, or did the news media cover that one up as well as they covered up Biden's decline?

All you MAGA cheerleaders out there, I hope you're happy.

Well, I'm not a MAGA cheerleader, but maybe we should abandon this notion that any such monolith as "the economy" really exists. I don't dispute the reality of the statistics you're citing, but the idea that quoting stats to people livid about prices will work doesn't seem productive to me. I give you credit for consistency on this issue since you've made the point about Clinton making it sound like we were one step removed from 1934 back in 1992. But Clinton benefited from an abnormally high unemployment rate among white collar workers who had just turned forty, too.


To me, "they talked people into believing the economy was bad" is right there alongside the leftist "they trick voters into voting against their best interests." And when nearly 3/4 of the people think we're "on the wrong track," and I say this sadly: they trust demagogues.


Just remember: when Trump blows a hole in the economy, his truckling sycophants will engage in the most amusing gymnastics possible to blame it on Biden/Obama/Clinton.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads