Post New

Like every single person who didn't have their head fully up their own ass already knew...

"The tariffs are a big (regressive) tax increase: Top bank crunches the numbers on how much Americans are paying for Trump’s trade regime."

"UBS expects the tariffs to have a cumulative direct impact of 1.4 percentage points on the level of core PCE through 2028,
rising to nearly 1.9 points once knock-on effects like supply chain rerouting and domestic producers raising prices under tariff protection are factored in.
Simply: tariffs alone could account for nearly two-thirds of the remaining gap between current inflation and the Fed’s 2% target."

"The report highlights that most American households are less able to weather inflation now than they were two years ago.
While upper-income households are supported by AI-driven equity market wealth, households below the top 20% of the income distribution suffer from historically low liquid assets.
Rising costs, coupled with a slowing labor market, are diminishing consumer perceptions of future prospects."

"Economists find that what’s emerging is a feedback loop: tariffs designed to revive industrial strength are now helping to sustain inflation, which in turn weakens real income growth and constrains the very consumers meant to benefit from the policy."

Lastly tariffs are a regressive tax: they disproportionately punish lower-income Americans, raising the cost of living for those least able to absorb it.
While the wealthy enjoy the tax cuts Trump gifted them!

Remember when republicans used to know all this, before they joined the MAGA Cult?...
"We call a tariff a protective measure. It does protect; it protects the consumer very well against one thing, it protects the consumer against LOW prices." ~Milton Friedman

"Tariffs are simply taxes on imports which serve to raise the prices of those imports." ~Thomas Sowell

"Tariffs will shrink and collapse our economy." ~Ronald Reagan

https://fortune.com/2025/11/12/tariffs-big-tax-inc...

Grover Norquist and Ronald Reagan posting here - they hate new taxes.

Wow!

We finally met a "tax increase" the libs don't like! Amazing. They'll come out as good little supply-siders next.

libs. There's no principle they won't abandon.

We finally met a "tax increase" the libs don't like! Amazing. They'll come out as good little supply-siders next.

libs. There's no principle they won't abandon.

I think it's the inflation they don't like. Of course if you still think inflation is all money supply that will be lost on you.

We finally met a "tax increase" the libs don't like! Amazing. They'll come out as good little supply-siders next. libs. There's no principle they won't abandon. ~The Dope

I was pointing out your hypocrisy. Of course you are too dumb to notice.
Marco is a senior citizen, what's your excuse?

I thought ProGlibs loved higher taxes.

Maybe only on other people, though.

Tariffs can be viewed as a form of consumption tax like a VAT. Lots of European countries have VATs, not sure why ProGlibs would be opposed to tariffs if they think Western Europe has all the answers to everything.

Dope1,

Truly! The ProGlibs (Progressives-Liberals who are concerned about Pro-nouns and are excessively Glib) are now actually tipping their pink wigs to Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman.

Hey if what they're saying is "Let's go Full Monte Reagan and Friedman," I don't think you would find a single Conservative who would disagree.

Milton Friedman was well known for being a monetarist/Chicago school.

Don't know why you would be quoting him on tariffs and ignoring him on inflation.

Other than ProGlib bipolar disorder.

Yes The MAGA cult finally found a tax they love!
A regressive one that punishes low income Americans the hardest!
Does MAGA actually know that's them?

Also an interesting note:
The president could order the release of the entire Epstein document trove at any time, vote or no vote.
So far, he’s declined to do so.

Tariffs can be viewed as a form of consumption tax like a VAT. Lots of European countries have VATs, not sure why ProGlibs would be opposed to tariffs if they think Western Europe has all the answers to everything.

A 10% or so tariff tax across the board could make sense, sure. Raise tax revenue and encourage consumption of domestically produced goods.

Do you think what we have now makes sense?

I think it's the inflation they don't like. Of course if you still think inflation is all money supply that will be lost on you.

Inflation is due to the money supply. This is where your lack of knowledge in using proper terminology comes along and bites you in the a$$.

Allow me to Dopesplain it to you:
Prices for some goods may increase locally due to some exogenous (ask your AI wingman to tell you what that means) event. If a hurricane wipes out the sugar crop then candy bars might get more expensive.

Inflation is a systemic increase in prices due to an oversupply of money. I believe I showed you the exact Investopedia article about it. Again, the AI thing you lean on can help. Meanwhile, you can have your AI dude tell you who Greg Mankiw is.

Here's where many get confused: If a good is so prevalent in the economy and appears as a production input to many, many things then an exogenous shock to that good would cause prices to spike in many areas. Seattle is figuring out right now that excessive gas taxes tend to have pricing effects in other areas.

As far as your point about inflation, you can have a seat. You, your doppel, and all the libs here tried to claim that Biden's inflation was just "transitory".

I thought ProGlibs loved higher taxes.

A little thing I heard, decades ago "don't tax you, don't tax me, let's tax the man behind the tree", ie, everyone wants to tax someone else, for their own benefit.

Tariffs can be viewed as a form of consumption tax like a VAT.

I don't have a problem with tariffs, as a means to remove the incentive for production to be offshored, to exploit dramatically cheaper labor. High tariffs have been imposed on some goods that there is little or no domestic industry to "protect", so are only a means to take more money away from people. Trump has recently backed off of some of those tariffs.

From time to time, I have proposed a VAT, to fund a national health program. That way, people aren't dependent on a "job" to provide insurance they can afford. I have also suggested a mechanism like a VAT to fund an old age pension, to, again, separate old age pensions from the "good will" of an employer. If Social Security was funded by a means linked to GDP, which generally grows, instead of a shrinking number of working people, relative to retirees, we might not have so much hysteria about SS and Medicare going broke.

The US real GDP grew by approximately 134.5% from 1990 to 2023, increasing from about $9.37 trillion to $22 trillion in 2012 chained dollars. The nominal GDP in 2023 was around $27.36 trillion

The U.S. retiree population (age 65 and over) grew by approximately 84%% from 1990 to 2023, from about 32-33 million to 59 million. This growth was driven largely by the aging of the Baby Boomer generation

Steve...old phart

Steve203,

Us baby boomers are to blame for all of it.

That's why baby boomers who have any way of doing so, should retire as early as possible. This will create more job openings for the younger generations. Younger people have more energy and more drive. Oldsters with decades of seniority who you can't get out of their jobs with a crowbar can be extremely unproductive. Let younger people take over.

Don't tell me that old people have all the wisdom. Old people who actually have wisdom have figured out a way to retire early and are already out of the work force, doing something more fun.

Also, old people use up too much medical services. That's not fair.

Booyah for Logan's Run.

Allow me to Dopesplain it to you:

No. Dopesplain it to Albaby, he has he patience for someone who is partisanly deadset against coming to grips with the world around them.

Attempting to understand the real world going on around us is hard enough.

No.


Yes. You want roll with the big dogs, learn to pi$$ in the tall grass. Stop whining and hiding behind other posters.
You can always have AI explain it to you.

Yes. You want roll with the big dogs, learn to pi$$ in the tall grass.

Do you pi$$ in the tall grass?

I pi$$ in the short grass.

Any grass taller than six inches from the ground…. tickles.

Tripod

Do you pi$$ in the tall grass?

I pi$$ in the short grass.

Any grass taller than six inches from the ground…. tickles.

Tripod

I prefer an arcing method.

I prefer an arcing method.

I used to write my name in the snow.

Can’t seem to do that anymore.

Can’t seem to do that anymore.

Because when we guys get old, our prostates turn into grapefruits and the fire hose doesn't have the line pressure it used to!

Because when we guys get old, our prostates turn into grapefruits and the fire hose doesn't have the line pressure it used to!

The terazosin helps, and though the pressure ain’t what it was, there is some consolation……

I can take my time and write the entire text of “War and Peace”, as long as the blank pages are not more that six inches in front of my feet

That's why baby boomers who have any way of doing so, should retire as early as possible.

I retired at 58, because I could. Not for any altruistic impulse of giving younger people an opportunity. I was tired of being worked like a rented mule.

Oldsters with decades of seniority who you can't get out of their jobs with a crowbar can be extremely unproductive.

The places I worked would give you a lecture on "at will employment" and toss anyone they cared to. Forget about seniority. They kept the ones they could beat the most work out of.

...figured out a way to retire early and are already out of the work force, doing something more fun.

Every morning, when I wake up, I know I will not spend the day being yipped at. Everything beyond that is gravy. :)

Steve

That's great Steve I'm happy you were able to pull the ejection handle early. Good for you!

I retired at 58, because I could. Not for any altruistic impulse of giving younger people an opportunity. I was tired of being worked like a rented mule.

This. My number is 57, ideally. My financial advisor looked at me in our last meeting and asked, "Why are you working so hard?" Great question, I thought.

The places I worked would give you a lecture on "at will employment" and toss anyone they cared to. Forget about seniority. They kept the ones they could beat the most work out of.

Also this. After a while you just don't want to live under the proverbial sword of Damocles every day.

Milton Friedman was well known for being a monetarist/Chicago school.

Don't know why you would be quoting him on tariffs and ignoring him on inflation.

I've not quoted him at all, you are confused.

I retired at 58, because I could. Not for any altruistic impulse of giving younger people an opportunity. I was tired of being worked like a rented mule.

This. My number is 57,

I had to wait til 62. By 60 I wanted to go, and I looked at possibilities of retiring and lasted out the next two year because of the benefits. People looked at me and I said my father died at 78, both my grandfathers died in their 80s, but the ages are foolers, because they were bedridden that last two years, and had trouble getting around before that. If I wait till 65 and max everything out, I could die at 68 and what good was that? So I retired at 62 and 6 days later flew to Japan.

Yes. You want roll with the big dogs, learn to pi$$ in the tall grass.

You aren't a big dog. I do what I want. Don't like it? Tough.

AI would probably be correct. I took econ in the late 60s. Cost push wasn't even mentioned. I've had friends interested in Econ, I considered it an easy A, I'm analytical, but not fascinated. Cost push just makes sense and in history there are many economic shocks. If you're want to argue, Albaby may be available.

Cost push is accepted by current economists. All of you are using AI, even those who decry it.

You a

You want to randomly insult other people but don't like it when they push back. If that's the level of interaction you want, you will be obliged.

On the other hand, if you want to have a discussion we're all for it. But the days of libs just teeing off on conservatives are *over*.

We finally met a "tax increase" the libs don't like! Amazing. They'll come out as good little supply-siders next.

libs. There's no principle they won't abandon.
****

They dont like this one because they have to participate in paying and also, it cuts into Club 401K's sacred corporate profits.

They are to the Right of Grover Norquist.

They only like tax increases that makes them feel good "tax the rich" and lets them evade paying when they know full well, Bezos can afford to go to H/R block at the strip mall and hire an accountant for an hour to help him get around it.

Liberals are Corporate Fascists.

I have the perfect tax to impose on the ProGlibs.

You give them each a really big jar, and every time they say "Nazi", they have to put a quarter in the jar.

This will pay off the entire National Debt within 3 months, maybe 4 months, tops.

You want to randomly insult other people but don't like it when they push back.

You called yourself a big dog, I said you weren't a big dog, and that's an insult? You don't get to redefine the word insult in an attempt to justify future or past bad behavior. Capiche? If you don't like that, that's tough - I am just being frank with you.

in·sult verb

speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse.
"you're insulting the woman I love"

Similar:

affront
abuse
be rude to
call someone names
slight
disparage
discredit
libel
slander
malign
defame
denigrate
cast aspersions on
impugn
slur
revile
calumniate
hurt
hurt someone's feelings
mortify
humiliate
wound
snub
rebuff
spurn
shun
treat disrespectfully
ignore
cut dead
give someone the cold-shoulder
turn one's back on
bad-mouth
slag off
trash-talk
sledge
asperse
derogate
miscall
abusive
rude
vulgar
offensive
wounding
mortifying
humiliating
disparaging
belittling
derogatory
depreciating
deprecatory
disrespectful
denigratory
uncomplimentary
pejorative
vituperative
disdainful
derisive
scornful
contemptuous
defamatory
slanderous
libelous
scurrilous
blasphemous
discrediting
bitchy
catty
contumelious
h
Opposite:
compliment
flatter
complimentary
polite

noun
noun: insult; plural noun: insults
/ˈinˌsəlt/

1.
a disrespectful or scornfully abusive remark or action.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.