No menu items!

ahead billion tariff plan taxes

Share This Post

This morning’s front page of the New York Times was dominated by a long story about the “bipartisan” tariff plan that was announced today. The plan was supposed to help small businesses and farmers in the U.S., but instead, it will help American companies and foreign ones compete for “the same business”.

The “unilateral” tariff plan is the first step towards a new trade deal that will help small companies and farm-supply families. The New York Times is a big proponent of the plan. But in its current form it’s also hard to get a clear picture of what a deal will look like for small companies and farmers.

But as long as we’re being vague about the details, I think it would be fair to say that these tariffs are going to help small businesses. But if you’re not a small business, you might not like the idea of your business being hit by the new tariff plan.

First of all, the New York Times likes to pretend that they are in favor of free trade. But in reality they are against it for a variety of reasons. The biggest ones are the costs associated with enforcing tariffs, not to mention the fact that trade is a zero-sum game, so one person will lose a big business to the other.

When I was a kid, I was told that if a kid was in a class, they would die, because there was no way they could afford to live. But since I became a kid, I felt I could go on living. I have to be careful that I don’t kill myself because I’m a kid. I don’t want to be a kid. But if I was, I wouldn’t be in that class. Now I’m a kid and I can’t have that.

The fact is that the US Trade Representative’s office has begun a multi-pronged plan to tax imports. The first one would be to charge a billion dollars to the trade deficit. The second would be to charge a billion dollars to the deficit in the global economy. The third would be to give a billion dollars to the World Trade Organization (WTO) to reduce the tariff rate to zero by 2015. The fourth would be to charge a billion dollars to the deficit in all industries.

The plan is to increase the US trade deficit by a billion dollars a year, and reduce the tariff rate to zero by 2015. That means we’d lose billions in export sales, and billions in import sales. We’d be in the same position we were in in 2005. This is a bad plan. For one, it would be a tax on our very own economy. For another, it would increase the deficit in the rest of the world.

Wed we are in a global recession. This is not a good thing. If we reduce imports, then the rest of the world’s economy would suffer. But it would not be a good thing. If we increase exports, then we would be paying more for goods and services made in the US. If we reduce our imports, we are not being paid for those products.

What is bad is that we’re doing this in the middle of a recession. What is good is that we’re doing this and are doing it in the best possible time for the rest of the world.

In other words, in a recession we should be using our tariffs to encourage firms to build here, rather than the opposite. In other words, we should be increasing our exports to offset the price of our imports.

spot_img

Related Posts

Fintech Firm Faced Allegations by ASIC: Block Earner CEO Called for Clarity 

Block Earner, a financial institution in Australia based in...

The Duck Prediction: Litecoin ($LTC) Price Could Surge Over 400% While Leading Altcoin Rally

The well-known crypto analyst suggested that the price of...

South Korea is about to impose its new legal framework for better crypto-related projects. 

South-Korean authorities bring forward new amendments to the crypto...

Who will be the next NFTs leading blockchain: Cardano?

With Solana recovering from the FTX saga, Cardano can...

‘FUD’ on withdrawals is purely due to technical issues: CoinList.

The exchange clarified that they do not have any...

Why is there a Crypto Crisis: “Black Swan” author explains.

Naseem believes the crisis is not a liquidity crunch...
- Advertisement -spot_img