Yes, literally anything communicated or a plan would have been better. A fart in an enclosed room of crowded people would have been a better way to communicate than what this orange idiot did.
Instead of Orange Man doing Tariffs would it not have been better for him to talk about shopping locally and so forth. And giving more tax breaks to companies that stay and sell in the US?
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
shopping locally doesn’t shift supply chains as fully as tariffs can, like if you buy orange juice at the store, the plastic for the container could’ve been made from saudi Arabian oil, but tariffs allow that to be more from American. but yeah, what you described would be far better
ogmios@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
I mean, all I can say is that 5 years ago we were trying to get people to buy local because of China, and now Trump has managed to get all the people who didn’t listen back then to become really hardcore about buying local now, thanks to his tariffs.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
No, it’s made me hard core about just NOT buying at all.
BmeBenji@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
I don’t have a helpful answer to your question, but wouldn’t it be better to call him something that’s actually an insult about his character rather than his vanity, like “First Felon” or “First Rapist” or something? Not that he’s the first of any of those but “First” is a descriptor commonly reserved for the White House
oo1@lemmings.world 2 weeks ago
If you want to boost USA manufacturing industries I’d look at the sector that killed it first.
Bring in international capital controls, forex restrictions, limit consumer / mortgage credit maybe bring in some directed credit requirements. Badically the bank egulation that was chucked out in the 1970s. When us msnufacturing industry mysteriously started to decline. 70s recessions were not only caused by oil price shocks, and the sectoral shift was reinforced by bank liberalisation.
I’d think you’d want to force the USA finance industry to invest (at least some decent amount) in the future of USA produtive capacity, instead of letting them invest in China’s future and have an arms race to fuel a perpetual domestic property bubble.
Tarrifs might still be part of it - but if your domestic companies can’t borrow, they can’t grow or maintain/develop asset base.If they don’t have working capital facilities, they liquidate fast.
Tax breaks might work/help (as might tarrifs), but if taxes are all on profits, you still need to borrow against the future to make the investment in the present (i.e. make a loss and pay no tax anyway) to build the productive capacity. They’d be better for short payback or labour intensive industries than for capital intensive industry - without other stuff.
I guess if you mean income tax breaks for workers in certin types of jobs/companies, that is interesting. Either way you need quite a lot of monitoring to avoid corruption of just wierd distortions with unintended consequences. That’s what banks lending to businesses should do and be good at, monitoring their loans and their debtors.