This is what I can get behind.

 

The two pieces go together. Lower the tax rate to incwntivise companys to being their goods back home. If the dont reduce the incentive.

The biggest question has to be is this a tariff on all foreign imports or just a tariff on companies planning to move jobs in the future. I don't like either but there is a difference. I don't know if it's the second one if we have ever had it in this country.

My guess is that we have never had tariffs targeting specific companies because it would be unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment seems pretty unambiguous to me.

He said he would lower taxes but in the meantime we need to put measures in that keep businesses here. It needs to be temporary but necessary. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.

If extraordinary measures include fascist, unconstitutional actions, then Trump can count on my vehement opposition. Our federal government has no right to single out individuals or corporations for punishment, and imposing selective tariffs on companies would be doing so. Trump has no authority now to back up his threats and he will have no legal authority to back them up after he takes office. Smart companies are undoubtedly already preparing contingency plans to move production out of the country if Trump tries to make good on his threats.

My guess is that we have never had tariffs targeting specific companies because it would be unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment seems pretty unambiguous to me.

 

You're not going to get argument from me I'm not a fan of tariffs. I've been researching the topic since I read this thread to match with historical precedence.

 

On the 14th I could see this passing because it's targeting specific behavior not specific companies.

 

But like I said historically I don't like tariffs because they are not a long term solution. But I want my question answered on is this a foreign tariff or a tariff on future behavior.

If it's the second option this will be unchartered waters for most economist from the small anount of research I've done in the last 20 minutes.

You're not going to get argument from me I'm not a fan of tariffs. I've been researching the topic since I read this thread to match with historical precedence.

 

On the 14th I could see this passing because it's targeting specific behavior not specific companies.

 

But like I said historically I don't like tariffs because they are not a long term solution. But I want my question answered on is this a foreign tariff or a tariff on future behavior.

If it's the second option this will be unchartered waters for most economist from the small anount of research I've done in the last 20 minutes.

It is a fairly easy matter for a large corporation to move financial assets overseas in one way or another. If nothing else, companies will liquidate unprofitable subsidiaries and pay out the proceeds in dividends to shareholders, who will then be free to invest in more business friendly economies.

 

Trump should pry himself away from Facebook and Twitter long enough to watch every video of Milton Friedman that he can get his hands on. I have never seen anybody explain the virtues of free market capitalism better than Friedman. Thomas Sowell, a student of Friedman's, is also an excellent proponent of free markets. A Youtube video of Friedman lecturing a young, skinny Michael Moore on basic economics during a college speaking engagement is a classic.

It is a fairly easy matter for a large corporation to move financial assets overseas in one way or another. If nothing else, companies will liquidate unprofitable subsidiaries and pay out the proceeds in dividends to shareholders, who will then be free to invest in more business friendly economies.

 

Trump should pry himself away from Facebook and Twitter long enough to watch every video of Milton Friedman that he can get his hands on. I have never seen anybody explain the virtues of free market capitalism better than Friedman. Thomas Sowell, a student of Friedman's, is also an excellent proponent of free markets. A Youtube video of Friedman lecturing a young, skinny Michael Moore on basic economics during a college speaking engagement is a classic.

 

You are talking to a guy who has memorized all those youtube videos and read all Friedmans books. I am a Friedman disciple. So I agree.

 

On a sidenote I'm pretty sure the video you are talking about isn't actually a young Michael Moore whoever labeled that video is incorrect or just thought thats howna young Michael Moore would talk.

Your vision of the free market leaves America in ruins. Free market here as it should be. Sell it wherever, make it here. Liberals chase American ending policies to no end. At this rate the only thing we will make in The USA is the printing of the money for our unemployment payments. Business will adjust. You dont like it because it came from Trump. So then tell me how shifting jobs to Mexico helps the middle class? What's your remedy for the situation we find outselves in? If you can criticize then come up with a better idea.

 

Wait...what? :stop:

 

Not my vision. You may not not notice FTN, but Trump's policies go against conservative principals. Look at the guys posting against it in this thread. Conservatives.

 

I am just getting a kick out of some of you rooting for socialist economic strategies. :lol2:

You are talking to a guy who has memorized all those youtube videos and read all Friedmans books. I am a Friedman disciple. So I agree.

 

On a sidenote I'm pretty sure the video you are talking about isn't actually a young Michael Moore whoever labeled that video is incorrect or just thought thats howna young Michael Moore would talk.

I took another look at the video and did a few Google searches and I agree, the kid in the video was not Michael Moore. Thanks for correcting me on that point so that I don't make the mistake again. The kid's arguments sure sounded like the kind that Moore makes, but since he dropped out of the University of Michigan-Flint after one year and Friedman is not likely to have spoken there anyway, there is not much chance that it was really Moore.

This was today?

 

How does his Carrier deal work from earlier this week? Does this say he's going back on that?

 

Is it possible the Carrier deal was made with the help of the Indiana Governor? Who then was fine with PEOTUS Trump taking the lion's share while not being able to enforce his mandates since he has not been sworn into office yet?

So you think he told them that if they move the 1300 jobs to Mexico that are still going they will face the tariff he promised?

If he did kudos. If he didn't well...

 

We will just ignore the tax incentives he said wouldn't happen.

 

Everyone's concentrating on the negatives toward American companies and our economy. It may be a shot in the arm of our economy if foreign owned companies decide to move and open factories here to manufacture their products to avoid any tax, duty or toll and to also take advantage of attractive tax incentives? And for the record, I do not care who takes advantage of the incentives.

Trump is a mastermind. He makes posts on Facebook and Twitter and it distracts everyone from the real things we should be concerned about involving him.

Did China ask us if it was OK to devalue their currency (making it hard for our companies to compete), heavily tax our products going into their country (the U.S. doesn't tax them) or to build a massive military complex in the middle of the South China Sea? I don't think so!

 

2 hours ago......

WaPo talked to people in the Trump organization who said this was not a spontaneous call from Taiwan.

 

Trump’s team is lying about Taiwan call: It reportedly took months to plan

Trump is a mastermind. He makes posts on Facebook and Twitter and it distracts everyone from the real things we should be concerned about involving him.

 

It's more fun to play offense than defense...so Trump plays offense and the media reacts (or better said, plays defense)...