complete ■■■■■■■■■ a bankrupt pension fund don’t pay ■■■■
Case 1.)
Would a 0.00001% sales tax on just a few items that a person could easily choose not-to-buy be inflationary?
Realistically? No.
Case 2.)
What about a 10% sales tax on all goods and services?
Well yes.
What about a 20% tax on a voluntary and easily-avoided 8.5% subset of the economy?
I think any reasonable person, will agree the proposed tariff is lot more like Case #1 above than it is like Case #2. (You know I am right about this.)
I’m good. Thanks for that.
They could, but most pensions are insured against such a thing.
In general, people who retired with pensions have done better than those with 401k’s.
It is true that not every company offered one, and you had to stay with a company for some time for a pension to fully vest.
But that doesn’t change the fact pensions were for the most part better.
That’s stupid.
To operate in America you need American dollars.
That doesn’t mean if you want to set up your own reserve currency you should be punished. Imagine if every country did that.
Again, if the dollar is so mighty, why would Trump feel it needs to be protected? Why would he feel the need to coerce countries into keeping it as the reserve currency?
So is Elon Musk.
He’s TELLING you to expect pain.
(YOU, of course…not him).
What’s stupid is allowing nations to undermine the dollar while profiting off of it.
Being smartest guy on internet she know this.
1 Like
Some would say we been in pain last four ■■■■■■■ years.
2 Likes
100% tariffs. What a clown.
Right. By making their products cost more in our country.
If they aren’t going to make products more expensive, why is he putting tariffs on them?
Intense pain.
Worst presidency ever!
Whats stupid is thinking threatening tariff’s to anyone who is not lock step in what Trump wants is going to yield results.
Tariff’s have their place in a countries economic arsenal but need to be used in a very judicious and targeted way.
Overplay your hand with them and they will backfire on the very economy they are meant to protect.
They certainly are a good negotiating tactic but that tactic fails when he is threatening multiple countries at the same time.
Oh they will definitely “yield results.” In fact they already are.
And the tariffs Donald Trump is proposing.
Are they more like Case#1? Or Case #2?
We both know the answer.
No. To take away the high profit they were making. They could not care less on how much US consumers pay. They only care about how much money they make.
Yep. Just the threat of tariffs has already netted Trump results in Canada and Mexico before he even sets foot back in the Whitehouse. By the time he is sworn in, in all likelihood, none of the promised tariffs will be necessary to achieving the desired results.
1 Like
Taxes to change behavior are now a good thing?
foreign countries behavior? sure, why not, we give them money to change it, why not take some away
It wouldn’t take away from them, just consumers. Businesses aren’t going to suddenly relocate back to the US to avoid having tariffs slapped on their products when it is cheaper to pass it on to the consumer, relocate factories to other countries with lower tariffs, or play the unfinished product game with final assembly done in countries with lower tariffs.
This was tried and it failed but now it is going to magically work because the next president says it will, history be damned.
Maybe we should try hyper-inflating property values in real estate again. That has never gone wrong. 
