Trump says he's considering rebate checks for Americans based on tariff revenue

[VySky]

It adds to the cost of IMPORTING it, since the tariff is added at our docks by the duty agents.

Again, its not a cost to the consumer if they don't buy goods under tariffs.

And it adds cost to exporting due to increased production cost.

 

[VySky]

Impact of Import Tariffs on Exports and Global Supply Chain

Learn how import tariffs affect exports, global supply chains, and international trade

oneunionsolutions.com

Exporter need to understand the fundamental relationship between importers and exporters as their main concept. When import tariffs exist, exporter experiences higher costs through their supply chain because those tariffs eventually find their way into business operations. A cost change occurs because this diminishes the competitive advantage of exported goods worldwide.

 

[VySky]

Thanks for the reply
Then you have no problem with the Federal Govt. running a deficit and increasing debt.
Bet you complained when a Dem was President.

No. I did not.
did I cash in the one I got. Yep, put it into savings. Used it to pay my quarterly income tax to the Treasury

Cash for clunkers? You mean selling a car I own to someone (charity?}.
Yes, it is different. I own the car that I am selling.
Some people who got covid checks may not have paid that much into the treasury.

No, cash for clunkers was a Government program from President Obama in 2009

Cash for Clunkers: Definition, How the Rebate Program Worked​

What Was Cash for Clunkers?​

"Cash for Clunkers was a U.S. government program that provided financial incentives to car owners to trade in their old, less fuel-efficient vehicles and buy more fuel-efficient vehicles. The purpose of the program was primarily to act as an economic stimulus during the Great Recession by providing the population with monetary incentives to buy new cars, thereby increasing automobile sales, while at the same time reducing carbon emissions by replacing old vehicles with new, fuel-efficient ones."

Cash for Clunkers: Definition, How the Rebate Program Worked

Cash for Clunkers was a federal program that gave owners a way to dispose of old vehicles in exchange for more fuel-efficient cars.

www.investopedia.com

 

[mike2810]

No, cash for clunkers was a Government program from President Obama in 2009

Cash for Clunkers: Definition, How the Rebate Program Worked​

What Was Cash for Clunkers?​

"Cash for Clunkers was a U.S. government program that provided financial incentives to car owners to trade in their old, less fuel-efficient vehicles and buy more fuel-efficient vehicles. The purpose of the program was primarily to act as an economic stimulus during the Great Recession by providing the population with monetary incentives to buy new cars, thereby increasing automobile sales, while at the same time reducing carbon emissions by replacing old vehicles with new, fuel-efficient ones."

Cash for Clunkers: Definition, How the Rebate Program Worked

Cash for Clunkers was a federal program that gave owners a way to dispose of old vehicles in exchange for more fuel-efficient cars.

www.investopedia.com

Waste of money., imo.

 

[Kushinator]

Create an economic disaster of their own making and then justify the stimulus. Sorry, that doesn't jive.

Huh? Why would the President stimulate the economy even further ($2 trillion+ deficits as far as the eye can see) if everything is so strong and we are doing so well?

Your cult has been duped, and you don't know any better. If you did, you wouldn't have responded with such trash.

 

[Kushinator]

Are you under the false impression that foreigners pay the tariffs? If so, take ECONOMICS 101 in any college. Tariffs are a duty placed upon the product. It adds to the price of the product that Americans pay.

As for fair share, foreign countries have low tariffs on American products, typically around 1%.

I mean....

Prices always increase. It's the rate of increase that matters.

Read an economics 101 book

This person is behaving like a typical incorrigible cultist.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Figures, it takes being MAGA to suggest tariffs are good for us, but for on the chance they are not then cut them a rebate check and call it "helping."

On top of the OP not even knowing what a tariff is. Classic.

It's the price parrots pay for just being able to repeat things without knowing what they mean, so when a parrot tells to f-off, don't take it personally. Conversely, if it says "e-mc2", don't assume it's a genius.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Huh? Why would the President stimulate the economy even further ($2 trillion+ deficits as far as the eye can see) if everything is so strong and we are doing so well?

Your cult has been duped, and you don't know any better. If you did, you wouldn't have responded with such trash.

Suddenly unneeded stimulus is a good thing when they were whinging about the past stimulus.

 

[upsideguy]

Again, its not a cost to the consumer if they don't buy goods under tariffs.

And it adds cost to exporting due to increased production cost.

Well, then what was the problem with inflation? Its not a cost increase if you refrain from buying the product....

My God, the level of inconsistency in Trump supporters baffles my mind .... no wait, they are actually very consistent: Trump can do no wrong. Even if he did, his supporters rationalize it away. A Democrat can do no right, even when they do, Trump supporters will rationalize it away (not true, or really Trump did it)...

Figures, it takes being MAGA to suggest tariffs are good for us, but for on the chance they are not then cut them a rebate check and call it "helping."

On top of the OP not even knowing what a tariff is. Classic.

Yep, more than happy if $100 goes out of the left pocket as long as $10 is put in the right pocket...

In June there was a 27 billion budget surplus due to the tariffs.

Yes, and we also had a budget surplus in June 2016.... I am sure it was used to pay off the debt. Sorry, a single monthly number means nothing...

Trump's Hollow Surplus Claim - FactCheck.org

In recent speeches and media scrums, President Donald Trump has lauded the federal budget surplus for the month of June, claiming the surplus had not happened in "many, many years" or "decades." To be clear, the U.S. had not recorded a surplus in June since 2016 – but the country has had several...

www.factcheck.org

 

[justoneman]

I thought the idea of the government giving out money was a bad idea? Or has the MAGAverse already forgotten the endless whinging Trump did about the last time the government did that? Of course the comedy there was he was for it before he was against it back then too.

A rebate would be a rebate on taxes paid. It's tax reduction not free money.

 

[Kushinator]

Suddenly unneeded stimulus is a good thing when they were whinging about the past stimulus.

When they were claiming pandemic stimulus was unnecessary.

 

[ttwtt78640]

A rebate would be a rebate on taxes paid. It's tax reduction not free money.

Congress just passed a ‘big beautiful’ tax reduction bill, which allegedly (per the CBO) added over $3T to the federal “budget” deficit over the next decade.

 

[justoneman]

Congress just passed a ‘big beautiful’ tax reduction bill, which allegedly (per the CBO) added over $3T to the federal “budget” deficit over the next decade.

Yes. Way too much spending. I get it. However tax reduction is not spending.

 

[BitterPill]

When the left cries about tariffs it often goes with how they are being excessively taxed.

Today President Trump floated rebate checks based on tariff revenue.

Trump spreading the wealth among those who need it the most.

=========================

Trump says he's considering rebate checks for Americans based on tariff revenue

President Trump said he's considering using money generated by U.S. tariffs to offer a "little rebate" to Americans.

www.cbsnews.com

I certainly hope there is a mechanism to prevent lib-progs, wayward Libertarians and especially RINOs gaining from Trump's largess, but once there is, full speed ahead!

MAGA.

 

[Ikari]

When the left cries about tariffs it often goes with how they are being excessively taxed.

Today President Trump floated rebate checks based on tariff revenue.

Trump spreading the wealth among those who need it the most.

=========================

Trump says he's considering rebate checks for Americans based on tariff revenue

President Trump said he's considering using money generated by U.S. tariffs to offer a "little rebate" to Americans.

www.cbsnews.com

Didn't y'all get post when Biden was trying to forgive student loan debt and claiming he was buying votes?

So just to be sure, you're ok with Trump trying to "but votes" but not the Democrats.

lol, standard MAGA hypocrisy.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Again, its not a cost to the consumer if they don't buy goods under tariffs.

And it adds cost to exporting due to increased production cost.

Tariffs don’t add to production costs for the overseas manufacturers because they aren’t paid by the manufacturers.

They are paid by American consumers.

WW

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes. Way too much spending. I get it. However tax reduction is not spending.

OK, but it’s more borrowing, which means more spending on interest.

 

[ElChupacabra]

A rebate would be a rebate on taxes paid. It's tax reduction not free money.

You haven't fully thought this through to understand what I said. Think about it some more.

 

[ElChupacabra]

When they were claiming pandemic stimulus was unnecessary.

Exactly right, but now like magic checks cut out to people isn't inflationary. It must be nice to just say things without having to think them through.

 

[VySky]

Didn't y'all get post when Biden was trying to forgive student loan debt and claiming he was buying votes?

So just to be sure, you're ok with Trump trying to "but votes" but not the Democrats.

lol, standard MAGA hypocrisy.

Non-sequitur.

Biden’s efforts were Unconstitutional. Remember?

Trump’s proposal is not.

See the difference?

 

[ncguy]

Non-sequitur.

Biden’s efforts were Unconstitutional. Remember?

Trump’s proposal is not.

See the difference?

the constitutionality of this isn't the issue. not that biden knew IN ADVANCE how scotus would rule.
the issue is the claim of "buying votes".
see the difference?

 

[VySky]

the constitutionality of this isn't the issue. not that biden knew IN ADVANCE how scotus would rule.
the issue is the claim of "buying votes".
see the difference?

Biden was clearly buying votes because he was running for re-election. And he knew it was unconstitutional. Experts and even Pelosi told him so,

And when the courts ruled against him, he kept doing it anyway.

Trump has no votes to buy. There is no election where he would need votes!

See the difference?

Your reasoning skills failed you.

 

[ncguy]

Biden was clearly buying votes because he was running for re-election. And he knew it was unconstitutional. Experts and even Pelosi told him so,

And when the courts ruled against him, he kept doing it anyway.

Trump has no votes to buy. There is no election where he would need votes!

See the difference?

Your reasoning skills failed you.

Trump is trying to buy support for his agenda and support for other Republicans
Biden wasn't running when the student loan started , when the courts ruled against him, he kept trying to help people
See the difference
Your reasoning skills failed you

 

[roberthughey]

When the left cries about tariffs it often goes with how they are being excessively taxed.

Today President Trump floated rebate checks based on tariff revenue.

Trump spreading the wealth among those who need it the most.

=========================

Trump says he's considering rebate checks for Americans based on tariff revenue

President Trump said he's considering using money generated by U.S. tariffs to offer a "little rebate" to Americans.

www.cbsnews.com

Keep the money

 

[VySky]

Biden wasn't running when the student loan started , when the courts ruled against him, he kept trying to help people
See the difference

Biden revealed his plan, or started buying votes, in 2022. Back then he was running.

And he canceled student loan debt in the summer of 2023 after the courts ruled against him in June of the same year.

Are you sure you want to continue going down this path of discussion?