DAalseth

lwr32 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

ilarynx said:

foregoneconclusion said:

The governor of California is going to call Trump’s bluff by ignoring the federal tariff and negotiate directly with other countries on tariffs. Seems like a decent strategy considering that the Trump tariffs are entirely dependent on the claim that the national debt has created a national emergency that gives the president the power to levy tariffs. In other words, the White House is likely violating the law and California is going to respond in kind.

Not an option, according to the Constitution. 

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution explicitly says, “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, … but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

I strongly recommend reading the U.S. Constitution. Frequently. You can't preserve, protect, or defend, something you don't know. 

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs

LOL...are you aware of the infamous Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act? That was a bill that passed Congress and was signed by Hoover. Notice that it's CONGRESS that is levying the tariffs and not Herbert Hoover. Which means Trump doesn't have the power to levy tariffs under the Constitution either. The current administration is trying to claim that the national debt has created a national emergency that gives him the power to do it himself. But that is obvious b.s. considering Trump wants to make the $2 trillion tax cut from 2017 permanent + add trillions more in new tax cuts. All of that will explode the national debt to new heights. 

Basically CA is saying "if you're going to pretend to have the authority to negotiate tariffs by yourself then we're going to pretend that we can do that as well". 

Tax cuts mean more money in our pockets to spend, which in turn means more sales tax we’re paying. Where does the sales tax go? 

You a multimillionaire or something? The tax cuts won’t go to us. Didn’t last time, won’t this time. I work in taxes. The last round of Trump tax cuts left a good number of our clients in real trouble. They didn’t get any benefit from the tax cuts, but suddenly were facing huge bills from other ‘adjustments’ made to the code. Some had to sell farms, liquidate businesses, unload houses and move. It was brutal. 

sdw2001 said:

I don’t know whether or not this tariff strategy will work, but I’d give it better than 50-50 odds.

Why? Why would you do that? His first term he tried the same thing albeit on a smaller scale and the US lost, badly. He started a trade war with China and China won, big time, they came out vastly stronger on the world stage than at the start. Now he’s doubling down on trying to tariff his way to prosperity. What’s that old line about insanity being trying the same failed strategy over and over and expecting the same result. 

What on earth would make you think someone who has gone bankrupt as many times as Trump would have a clue about international trade? Why would you trust the judgement of someone with no macroeconomic training or experience, who when given a chance the first time failed by any and every measure. Why would you believe in him to do better this time with the same failed policies he failed with the first time?

We’ve seen this movie before.

I hope the BBC wins and nails Apple and Google to the wall. Quoting without attribution is simply theft. It’s not ok when AI scrapers do it, and it’s not ok when news aggregators do it, it’s not ok when a high school kid does it in a report. It’s just not ok. 

foregoneconclusion said:

The governor of California is going to call Trump’s bluff by ignoring the federal tariff and negotiate directly with other countries on tariffs. Seems like a decent strategy considering that the Trump tariffs are entirely dependent on the claim that the national debt has created a national emergency that gives the president the power to levy tariffs. In other words, the White House is likely violating the law and California is going to respond in kind.

I question that. States Rights are one thing, but international trade, including treaties and tariffs are federal jurisdiction. I question if Cal can just go their own way, refuse to take part and negotiate their own agreements. That would be a Constitutional Law question, but it’s my impression that won’t stand scrutiny. 

dj2k3000 said:

My iPhone 14 Pro Max battery is about ready to be replaced, so I will be going that route and hold onto it for another year or two. Really no reason for me to upgrade, so I’ll sit this round out and see what happens down the road. 

I’d do the same, but we have iPhone11s. Mine especially really needs to be updated. I was hoping to stretch it until Sept, but no.