"
Strategic tariffs and reciprocal tariffs and punititve tariffs are distinct and different criteria apply to each."
"Yes there are serious balancing challenges for each of these categories, but is continuing what we have now acceptable? What would you have us do?"-----------------------
1. China is a special exception, they steal from us and they are a military adversary.
2. The unrecipical nature of the trading world Trump walked into justifies the tactics he is currently taking.but my understanding is the end game of reciprocal tariffs is zero tariffs.
3. Propping up our noncompetitive industries while breaking down trading partner barriers seems contradictory to me. For every import tax we levy, we can expect more tariffs against our exports. No?
4. A tariff is a tax on our consumer. If they are widespread, then we are poorer. A tough tradeoff.
5. I come into this with with an exporter career bias. A small manufacturer here may have half its business overseas. While tariffs may protect some here they jeopardize others with retaliatory tariffs overseas. Not win-win.
6. Again, the list of countries with lowest barriers to trade and highest barriers, like the Heritage economic freedom index, all point to a direct correlation between economic freedom, low taxes, low tariffs, and prosperity. Prosperity is a big deal, number one except for maybe freedom and security, and it plays a big role in those.
7. Old data but its been posted, docunented here that the high VAT countries of Europe would be the 46th richest state here if a US state (among the poorest) adjusted for PPP, purchasing power parity, because of high consumption taxes.
8. Sorry but I have yet to see the raising and levying of new taxes make existing taxes go down. We have a $2 :trillion deficit. These revenues at best will chip that down, but not if new taxes and trade wars trigger recession or worse.
9. I side with Laffer, Steve Moore, Sowell, Adam Smith on this, here is Jude Wanniski:
Wanniski's 1978 book, The Way the World Works, documented his theory that the United States Senate's floor votes on the Smoot–Hawley tariff legislation coincided day to day with the Wall Street stock market Crash of 1929, and that the Great Depression was the result of the Smoot–Hawley tariff, rather than any failure...https://en.wikipedia.orgJude Wanniski, ki - Wikipedia
10. Trump is playing a high stakes poker game with this. I hope he wins. Winning means (to me) both sides taking their reciprial tariffs down to zero, like India, Vietnam, Britain have suggested.
11. I don't trust government industry technocrats to strike the aforementioned perfect protectionist balance.
12. Back to 1. China is special case. Mexico is a special case, we have goals other than trade. Carve out too many exceptions to free trade and per no. 6. above, prosperity suffers. With economic failure will come political failure, more socialism, less freedom.
JMHO.
Okay, one more, 13. Herman Cain's rule of 9-9-9. If you're going to tax something, let's not be talking in double digits, 25%, 50%, etc. State and local sales taxes I'm seeing across the nation already round to 10%, are bad enough. Add 10 more, the federal tariff to that and we're at 20%. There won't be a lot of consumin" goin' on out there even at that rate. I'm afraid we'll have the economic dynamism of socialist Europe.
