It’s all hot air, I bought this 3 months ago. It’s not real estate mafia of NY mob bosses. He hasn’t shown anything other than **** posting on social media.I've noticed that he makes a deal and then gives time for the deal to actually happen. When it doesn't, he doesn't do like our politicians for the last 50 years have done...he doesn't do NOTHING. He goes back to the stick.
"Planning business activity" is more difficult, yes. But it's virtually impossible to do when you have leaders tell the President they're going to do something, only to renege a couple months later.
Under Clinton, Obama, HW Bush, W Bush, and even Trump 1.0, other leaders would SAY the things we wanted to hear, but then would not actually follow through.
Trump 2.0 is simply doing what any good businessman, statesman, or just plain leader SHOULD do. As Reagan once said, "Trust. But follow up."
He's just following up. And it needs to be done.
Who told you that YOU have to keep track? Sheesh, relax. I give it a week, and there'll be a new deal.
Just a reminder...he does have the power to do this. If he doesn't, then the rest of the world just goes back to ripping off America. I sure don't want that.
Capitalism, for it to be real, requires both sides of a transaction to believe that they are benefiting from the transaction.
If you're not, then you've made a mistake somewhere along the line. You can probably still correct it, but you need to admit that maybe you did make a mistake, keeping your skills at a $12/hour level, for example.
And you're going to have to give me an example where he is "firing all women". You can have your opinions, but you can't tell untruths.
I doubt that. Tariffs, when used as a behavior modification tool, can actually have a corrective action long term. I say calm down and put your seat belt on. We'll let you know when the ride comes to a complete stop.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Trump Announces 100% Tariff on Semiconductors, With Exemptions for Companies Building in the U.S.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can you just imagine the conversation when they came up with this trinket? Would have loved to hear the discussion
The fact this “announcement” hasn’t negatively affected the stock price of TSMC or Samsung, the largest foreign producers of semiconductors, shows it’s completely baloney and toothless. The market knows that no one is going to be paying any tariffs. TSMC’s stock appeared to actually go up on the “news”
Most well-off people would because they spend most of their earnings on real estate, investments, and services that would not be affected by tariffs. Meanwhile the poor, who actually spend their money on goods, get taxed into oblivion. Tariffs are just a regressive taxation system and a corrupt way for Trump to punish his enemies while funneling foreign favors into his personal pocketbook masquerading as a negotiation tool and support system for local industry.
Last edited:
Can you actually keep track of all of the tax laws that exist as-is!?!? I doubt it. Even if you are a CPA, they have to look up everything too. They're just better at doing it than the average person! That's why 'experts' exist and even they get it wrong.
The real thing is Trump is using tariffs to level the playing field for everyone. Even when trade isn’t the real purpose. It can cost consumers more in the long run but have you seen Apple raise prices due to tariffs or eat the cost? The bottom line is tariffs are a consumption tax that could pay down the historical deficit. The national debt should be a higher priority than shareholders rights. I will pay more if it eliminates the debt and doesn’t go to shareholders.
Genius. Now go build that magic chip factory and hire people that will take $2 an hour.
Just to be clear, you just want to donate money to the federal government so Trump can “pay down the national debt”? Please feel free to Venmo him personally since you seem to think that’s what actually happening.
Leave the tab open for another 3.5 years and it'll be gone by the next adminstration.
Rather than just sticking to import taxes, countries exporting to US should also introduce export taxes, charged before shipment leaving port heading to US, paid by US companies. Reciprocal too. Let’s see how that will go.
Those countries should be compensated to export products to US.
Those countries should be compensated to export products to US.
At this point executive branch is everything and congress is virtually powerless. I don’t see it going any other way.
Surprise: Trump sabotaged the election to become the 48th president of the United States without election.
It’s such a shame export tax is not a thing. Everyone should charge export tax against US, paid by US companies.
You mean the Congress that is enslaved by Drumpf and nobody has the spine to speak out or stray away from his agenda, fearing the wrath of his nutjob supporter? That one?
The world has to find the way to live on without the US.
Your talking point is outdated. The debt is only bad during Democratic presidencies. It’s big and beautiful now.
There is no way any debt will be paid down. You’re paying for tax cuts for the super rich.
It's funny to think tariffs are going to pay down the national debt. But what's even funnier is to think shareholders would be willing to give up their stock value and dividends.
Heh. US should be the one pay for it not Mexico. Who sells goods to another country by paying their customers?
So, I put some of your claims through ChatGPT. Mainly, the idea that other countries are ripping off the USA. Also, how can tariffs be beneficial, supportive to US economy etc. here is the response. I am not saying that LLM are always correct, but it should at least be discussed. Currently, tariffs are used to get political power. Tariffs are now used to excert pressure on other countries. E.g. India getting Russian oil. Whether using tarriffs to bully others is good or bad is another question. But clearly, they are being used as such.
1. The Claim That “Other Countries Are Ripping Off the USA”
This is mostly a political slogan, not an economic diagnosis.Here’s the argument behind the slogan:
- The U.S. runs persistent trade deficits, especially with countries like China, meaning it imports more than it exports.
- Some argue this reflects unfair practices abroad: e.g., subsidies to exporters, currency manipulation, weak labor or environmental laws, or trade barriers against U.S. exports.
- Therefore, the U.S. is “ripped off” by countries that benefit from access to the U.S. market while allegedly protecting their own.
- Trade deficits are not inherently bad. They reflect macroeconomic factors, especially low domestic savings. The U.S. runs a deficit partly because Americans consume more than they save, and the U.S. dollar is the world’s reserve currency—so other countries want to hold it.
- U.S. companies voluntarily went abroad to reduce costs. This was driven by shareholder interests and consumer demand for cheap products—not foreign manipulation alone.
- Countries like Germany or Japan run large trade surpluses, but they also have open markets. So the existence of a deficit does not automatically imply “ripping off.”
2. Why Tariff Europe? They Have Similar Standards
You’re absolutely right—Europe is not a low-cost, low-regulation competitor. So why tariff Europe?
- Political leverage: Tariffs (or threats of them) are used as a diplomatic tool—even against allies. Example: during the Trump administration, tariffs on steel and aluminum were applied even to EU countries on “national security” grounds. It was less about economics than power signaling.
- Reciprocity rhetoric: Some American politicians argue that because the EU has tariffs on certain U.S. products (e.g. cars, agricultural goods), the U.S. should do the same. But this is cherry-picking, and overall tariff rates in the EU are not drastically worse than U.S. rates.
3. Tariffing Things That Can’t Be Made in the U.S. (e.g. Spanish ham)
Another great point.Yes, tariffing luxury or regionally unique goods like Parma ham, French wine, or Swiss cheese does not create U.S. jobs—it just raises prices for U.S. consumers or hurts U.S. importers/distributors. Why do it then?
- Often, these are retaliatory tariffs in broader disputes (e.g. Airbus vs Boeing).
- They can be used as pressure points in unrelated negotiations.
- Sometimes, it’s just symbolic, meant to appear “tough on trade” without actually reshaping the economy.
4. Will Tariffs Bring Back Jobs?
This is where theory clashes with reality.The promise:
Tariffs make foreign goods more expensive → domestic production becomes relatively cheaper → companies produce in the U.S. → jobs come back.The reality:
- Most production is capital-intensive and automated. Even if factories return, few jobs are created.
- Higher costs get passed on to the consumer, especially in sectors where domestic capacity doesn’t exist (e.g., electronics).
- Global supply chains are sticky. Companies don’t re-shore easily, and when they do, it’s not like 1950s-style mass employment.
5. If Tariffs Were Used to Enforce Better Standards…
This is a very valid idea, and often discussed among economists and progressives.- Carbon tariffs: impose duties on goods from countries with lax environmental rules.
- Labor-based tariffs: target goods made with child labor or union suppression.
- These would level the playing field in a principled way, aligning trade with values.
- Require international cooperation or at least WTO compatibility.
- Are harder to sell politically than “America First” narratives.
So, is this approach beneficial to the U.S.?
In most cases, no. Here’s why:- Consumers lose: prices go up, choices go down.
- Retaliation harms exporters: e.g., farmers who lose access to Chinese markets.
- Companies lose: they face higher input costs and global uncertainty.
- Few jobs are gained, and those that are tend to be in sectors with limited long-term growth.
- Certain protected industries (e.g. steel) gain short-term relief.
- Politicians get to appeal to nationalist sentiment.
- The federal government collects more tariff revenue—but this is a cost to consumers and importers, not a net gain for the economy.
What do you think is going to happen when the federal government has a surplus? And no, I wouldn’t trust that if I Venmo him that it’s not going to his pocket.
US consumers are addicted to purchasing absolute junk made in China by slave laborers. I think that’s a problem. The vast majority of these low cost products are junk that aren’t needed.
The politicians allowed the companies to send all the jobs overseas for shareholders benefits. That’s because they benefited too.
Nobody wins. But one thing I do think is if the US has no national debt, taking care of people that need it would happen.