In Tweetstorm, Trump Threatens "Retribution" For Companies That Leave The US

[JasperL]

No, Obama as President for the last 8 years is responsible for tax and regulatory policies

Obviously we've needed tax and regulatory changes but that would mean he would have to abandon his agenda and ideology in the interest of the American economy

And no Progressive is ever going to do that

Right, in ideologue land, Obama is responsible for not changing tax policies in place for decades - any tax or regulation that survives his administration is now an "Obama tax" or an "Obama regulation" and republicans who also left those policies in place are not responsible.

Heck, the income tax itself is an "Obama tax" because as POTUS he could wave a hand and eliminate it in favor of a VAT or something. Good observation. Thanks.

 

[Fenton]

Right, in ideologue land, Obama is responsible for not changing tax policies in place for decades - any tax or regulation that survives his administration is now an "Obama tax" or an "Obama regulation" and republicans who also left those policies in place are not responsible.

Heck, the income tax itself is an "Obama tax" because as POTUS he could wave a hand and eliminate it in favor of a VAT or something. Good observation. Thanks.

Every President is responsible for tax and regulatory reforms under their administration which includes changing tax policy from the previous administrations

Why is this so difficult to understand ?

 

[JasperL]

Every President is responsible for tax and regulatory reforms under their administration which includes changing tax policy from the previous administrations

Why is this so difficult to understand ?

It's not - I get it. The income tax is the Obama tax! Thanks Obama.....:roll:

Before that it was the Reagan income tax, then the Bush income tax, then Clinton, then Bush again, and now it's all Obama's fault we still have an income tax. And then roughly at inauguration, the income tax becomes the Trump tax until he eliminates it. This is very easy to understand.

Although I'm guessing there is some reason we can skip the republicans for anything that's bad or you don't like and still blame it all on democrats but I'll wait to hear your explanation.

 

[Vern]

er uh Maggie, I don't mean to be a bother but DA seems to think you should answer his questions before continuing. You used the "answer my deflecting question" dodge as an excuse to cut and run from a conversation with me. You of all people should answer his questions. And I don't think his was even a deflecting question.

Why does New Balance manufacture shoes in the United States yet Nike doesn't? And, according to Nike's CEO, never will?

Look if you are not even going to answer my simple question...I see no point in further discussion with you on this.

Good day.

 

[Helix]

He can't, he'll need congress, and Republicans are corporatist to their core. I find it very unlikely that they'll do anything to upset their overlords.

yeah, i'd be a little surprised if they get on board with that proposal. if the other side proposed it, can you imagine the Republican outrage? man.

 

[MaggieD]

You are missing the point. It is too expensive to manufacture in America...that is why manufacturing jobs are leaving.

And what is to stop a company from deliberately going out of business in America - only to set up under a different name in another country just to avoid the 35% tax? Then what? Because I guarantee you, that is what many will do if this tax comes in.

How will that help American jobs?

i don't know. I'm not a trade expert. Neither are you.

er uh Maggie, I don't mean to be a bother but DA seems to think you should answer his questions before continuing. You used the "answer my deflecting question" dodge as an excuse to cut and run from a conversation with me. You of all people should answer his questions. And I don't think his was even a deflecting question.

Happy? Now, please gig your buddy to answer mine.

Going to the Bulls game right now. Tomorrow.

 

[Vern]

i don't know. I'm not a trade expert. Neither are you.

tell him not me. I'm just pointing out that you demand people answer your deflecting questions but then don't answer questions (deflecting or not).

Happy? Now, please gig your buddy to answer mine.

besides ignoring the blatant hypocrisy of your posts, this is a debate forum. You shouldn't be asking deflecting questions to dodge a point. Questions should be directly related to what someone posted. Me having employer subsidized healthcare is not relevant nor required to discuss Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi or your cousin so the only reason you demand I answer that question to cowardly dodge the discussion. If you don't want to discuss something and only want to flail about things then you really shouldn't be posting at a debate forum.

 

[Nap]

I personally thought there should be a high tariff on all imported goods. We can't compete with companies running sweat shops and simply importing them over. Costs for many items will go up but if they rise too much people will simply stop buying those products and move to American made products.

 

[Fruityfact]

tell him not me. I'm just pointing out that you demand people answer your deflecting questions but then don't answer questions (deflecting or not).

besides ignoring the blatant hypocrisy of your posts, this is a debate forum. You shouldn't be asking deflecting questions to dodge a point. Questions should be directly related to what someone posted. Me having employer subsidized healthcare is not relevant nor required to discuss Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi or your cousin so the only reason you demand I answer that question to cowardly dodge the discussion. If you don't want to discuss something and only want to flail about things then you really shouldn't be posting at a debate forum.

We haven't even started and I can see the buyers remorse, cognitive dissonance, and white moderate guilt. Ah, the next 4 years are going to be fun-people defending the indefensible.

 

[Nap]

If Ford and the rest of the American manufacturers want to continue to move more production to Mexico and Canada just thought I would point out that the Nissan Titan, Murano, Altima, Frontier, and Maxima are all American made. As someone that works for Nissan I support Trump's tariff.

 

[Vern]

I personally thought there should be a high tariff on all imported goods. We can't compete with companies running sweat shops and simply importing them over. Costs for many items will go up but if they rise too much people will simply stop buying those products and move to American made products.

Nap, we've done the "tariff on all imported goods" thing before. It didn't work out well for anybody. just put Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act into google.

 

[MaggieD]

tell him not me. I'm just pointing out that you demand people answer your deflecting questions but then don't answer questions (deflecting or not).

besides ignoring the blatant hypocrisy of your posts, this is a debate forum. You shouldn't be asking deflecting questions to dodge a point. Questions should be directly related to what someone posted. Me having employer subsidized healthcare is not relevant nor required to discuss Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi or your cousin so the only reason you demand I answer that question to cowardly dodge the discussion. If you don't want to discuss something and only want to flail about things then you really shouldn't be posting at a debate forum.

Listen, pal, I don't need Vern to tell me how to interact on this forum. And I SURE don't need you critiquing my performance here. Don't like my style? Don't read my posts.

Now go pull someone else's pigtails.

 

[Fruityfact]

Listen, pal, I don't need Vern to tell me how to interact on this forum. And I SURE don't need you critiquing my performance here. Don't like my style? Don't read my posts.

Now go pull someone else's pigtails.

Do you need a safe space?

 

[MaggieD]

Do you need a safe space?

:lamo:lamo

 

[Nap]

Nap, we've done the "tariff on all imported goods" thing before. It didn't work out well for anybody. just put Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act into google.

You can't really say because that it failed that time it would be bad to enact now. So much has changed that it isn't really a valid point as opposition. Fact is that through crazy amounts of regulation and cheaper labor it is far easier to just make items outside of the US and import them here. The only way to bring back production to the US is to make it more profitable for companies to be here. The only choices are deregulation or raise taxes on importanted goods.

 

[Vern]

You can't really say because that it failed that time it would be bad to enact now. So much has changed that it isn't really a valid point as opposition. Fact is that through crazy amounts of regulation and cheaper labor it is far easier to just make items outside of the US and import them here. The only way to bring back production to the US is to make it more profitable for companies to be here. The only choices are deregulation or raise taxes on importanted goods.

Despite your claim to the contrary, pointing out how it failed horrifically in the past is actually a very valid point. Posting "nuh uh" is the epitome of a non-valid point. Can you find one economist that thinks "high tariff on all imported goods" is a good idea?

 

[Nap]

Despite your claim to the contrary, pointing out how it failed horrifically in the past is actually a very valid point. Posting "nuh uh" is the epitome of a non-valid point. Can you find one economist that thinks "high tariff on all imported goods" is a good idea?

I'm sorry, I just don't see it as a valid reason not to consider it simply because we live in a much different situation than when it was passed. Besides saying it wouldn't work, do you have a solution that would that would work better? The way it is right now simply doesn't work and is slowly destroying this country.

 

[trouble13]

'President-elect Donald Trump fired off Sunday morning with a Tweetstorm (after again complaining about the "totally biased, not funny " Saturday Night Live), and in a series of six tweets threatened heavy taxes as "retribution" for U.S. companies that move their business operations overseas, fire US workers and still try to sell their product to Americans. Trump vowed he would slap a 35% tax on products sold inside the U.S. by any business that fired American workers and built a new factory or plant in another country.

The president-elect tweeted that his administration will "substantially reduce taxes and regulations on businesses. But any business that leaves our country for another country," he added, "fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. ......without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!"

Trump said there will be a 35 percent tax on the country's "soon to be strong border" for companies that leave and then want to sell their products back to U.S. consumers. "This tax will make leaving financially difficult, but.....these companies are able to move between all 50 states, with no tax or tariff being charged," the president-elect tweeted.'

In Tweetstorm, Trump Threatens "Retribution" For Companies That Leave The US | Zero Hedge


Thoughts?

I have a bit of a problem with this if i am understanding it correctly. I think setting up tariffs tailored to keep domesticaly produced products competitive is ok but im not for threatening companies that are here with a targeted tariff on them specifically if they move. Thats kind of unamerican in my book.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Vern]

I'm sorry, I just don't see it as a valid reason not to consider it simply because we live in a much different situation than when it was passed. Besides saying it wouldn't work, do you have a solution that would that would work better? The way it is right now simply doesn't work and is slowly destroying this country.

nap, I posted something that shows how your idea failed horrifically in the past. That's not me saying it wont work. That's me showing it wont work. its incumbent upon you to support your point. You thinking its a different time or situation than when I showed it failed horrifically in the past isn't supporting your point. I even asked if you could find one economist that thinks its a good idea but I'm pretty sure you wont find one.

To sum up, you made a point with zero backup. I showed you exactly how what you proposed failed horrifically in the past. You then posted "nuh uh, its different". That's not good debate. And if you're looking for some ideas start here

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/fact_sheet.pdf