Trade Wars

[Dude#1279435]

The Folgers I buy went from $10.98 to $13.98 like in a week maybe two. So I went with the Maxwell House cause it was 50 cents cheaper. I was eyeing the beans, which were much cheaper, but it was light roast. Obviously not that I like him or anything but will see how it turns out I guess. Don't see how coffee will magically go down though in time under Trump.

Anybody notice anything else that has gone up drastically recently?

 

[dlaloum]

The Folgers I buy went from $10.98 to $13.98 like in a week maybe two. So I went with the Maxwell House cause it was 50 cents cheaper. I was eyeing the beans, which were much cheaper, but it was light roast. Obviously not that I like him or anything but will see how it turns out I guess. Don't see how coffee will magically go down though in time under Trump.

Anybody notice anything else that has gone up drastically recently?

Everything has, everything will - inflation is universal.

The policies can only result in the US$ losing its standing as a reserve currency, and once that happens, its value is dependent on the national debt - the high nationaly debt will result in the US$ dropping in value, which in turn will result in substantial increases in costs of anything that is imported - which given the US has (like many countries) become substantially a service economy, means overall universal inflation.

It also means that the value of most people's income will be reduced.

Solutions exist, but at this point, they effectively amount to a revolution, a complete restructuring... Trump has wrecked much of the existing systems and structures....

 

[Dude#1279435]

Liked the part of the title where Trump says eat the tariffs. They don't. We the consumer do LOL.

Walmart quietly jacks up prices — despite Trump’s demand for retailer to ‘eat the tariffs’

Photos circulating online, particularly on the Walmart subreddit, have documented dramatic price hikes of more than 100% on some items.

nypost.com

>>>“Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” Trump posted. “Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China, they should, as is said, “EAT THE TARIFFS,” and not charge valued customers ANYTHING. I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”<<<

‘Eat the tariffs’: Trump warns Walmart after retail giant cautions steep price raises

President Donald Trump ripped into Walmart, saying on social media that the retail giant should eat the additional costs created by his tariffs.

nypost.com

 

[Dude#1279435]

I thought it would have been better as another said to apply a 10% tariff but not the degree Trump applied them. I think it was pointed out the domestic market (say Ford) doesn't reduce prices since there's less competition.

 

[highfigh]

Everything has, everything will - inflation is universal.

The policies can only result in the US$ losing its standing as a reserve currency, and once that happens, its value is dependent on the national debt - the high nationaly debt will result in the US$ dropping in value, which in turn will result in substantial increases in costs of anything that is imported - which given the US has (like many countries) become substantially a service economy, means overall universal inflation.

It also means that the value of most people's income will be reduced.

Solutions exist, but at this point, they effectively amount to a revolution, a complete restructuring... Trump has wrecked much of the existing systems and structures....

And this has been created by both parties because they just kept spending. If the US debt becomes a problem WRT value of the dollar, it's not the fault of one person/idiot. EVERY member of Congress who voted to drastically increase the debt should be named and made to face any wrath they deserve.

 

[trochetier]

And this has been created by both parties because they just kept spending. If the US debt becomes a problem WRT value of the dollar, it's not the fault of one person/idiot. EVERY member of Congress who voted to drastically increase the debt should be named and made to face any wrath they deserve.

One can argue aggressive tax cuts caused the debt to rise. Data shows the mantra tax cuts pay for themselves is a lie. Having said that IMO the extra debt the Feds took on to manage the Covid pandemic was legitimate.

Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio

Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the economy would be declining permanently.

www.americanprogress.org

https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/us-debt-budget-taxes-spending-social-security-medicare/

 

[highfigh]

One can argue aggressive tax cuts caused the debt to rise. Data shows the mantra tax cuts pay for themselves is a lie. Having said that IMO the extra debt the Feds took on to manage the Covid pandemic was legitimate.

Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio

Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the economy would be declining permanently.

www.americanprogress.org

https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/us-debt-budget-taxes-spending-social-security-medicare/

Sure, tax cuts make a difference but if excessive spending needs to be curtailed- how is that not obvious? It has been discussed and debated for decades! How much money needs to be pissed away and SHOWN that it was wasted? Proxmire was showing waste as far back as the '60s.

 

[Trell]

Sure, tax cuts make a difference but if excessive spending needs to be curtailed- how is that not obvious? It has been discussed and debated for decades! How much money needs to be pissed away and SHOWN that it was wasted? Proxmire was showing waste as far back as the '60s.

One party is always harping about budget deficits and national debt, except when they're in power when it balloons to new record levels.

One party takes away food from starving children, let people die and remove health care for the poor, all in order to partially fund tax cuts for billionaires.

Have you noticed which party that is? I'm not an American but still know that, but do you? In an earlier post you were ranting about Congress breaking the Constitution because they didn't balance the federal budget.

 

[dlaloum]

Sure, tax cuts make a difference but if excessive spending needs to be curtailed- how is that not obvious? It has been discussed and debated for decades! How much money needs to be pissed away and SHOWN that it was wasted? Proxmire was showing waste as far back as the '60s.

Waste is not just related to spending, but how the spending is done.

Spending that goes to low income categories has a massive multiplier effect as each $ is immediately spent on essentials, and typically goes to small businesses, grocery stores etc... which in turn spend - so with each spend cycle involved there is a multiplication of the benefit for the initial spend (and an associated tax return, decreasing the net spend).

Spending which goes to high income categories (wealthy individuals, large corporates) quickly gets offshored into tax havens, it has benefit, but it is basically a single cycle, as opposed to the multi cycle nature of spending on low income categories.

The way to build up a nations GDP and boost its tax income as well as reducing debt etc.... is to spend more at the low end, medical benefits, social security, pensions, education etc... There is a strong and demonstrable "trickle up effect" (but contrary to decades of conservative propaganda, no demonstrable "trickle down").

Close the corporate loopholes, tax high income categories (both corporate and individual), combined with low income spending, and much of the budget deficit would start to disappear.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Waste is not just related to spending, but how the spending is done.

Spending that goes to low income categories has a massive multiplier effect as each $ is immediately spent on essentials, and typically goes to small businesses, grocery stores etc... which in turn spend - so with each spend cycle involved there is a multiplication of the benefit for the initial spend (and an associated tax return, decreasing the net spend).

Spending which goes to high income categories (wealthy individuals, large corporates) quickly gets offshored into tax havens, it has benefit, but it is basically a single cycle, as opposed to the multi cycle nature of spending on low income categories.

The way to build up a nations GDP and boost its tax income as well as reducing debt etc.... is to spend more at the low end, medical benefits, social security, pensions, education etc... There is a strong and demonstrable "trickle up effect" (but contrary to decades of conservative propaganda, no demonstrable "trickle down").

Close the corporate loopholes, tax high income categories (both corporate and individual), combined with low income spending, and much of the budget deficit would start to disappear.

That is, regarding low income, the spending goes to the appropriate areas. Also, it might not be "trickle down" but tricklesoyoucontinuetohaveajob, though I cannot prove that. I don't think people are going to buy into taxing the wealthy more since they already pay for most of everything.

 

[highfigh]

Waste is not just related to spending, but how the spending is done.

Spending that goes to low income categories has a massive multiplier effect as each $ is immediately spent on essentials, and typically goes to small businesses, grocery stores etc... which in turn spend - so with each spend cycle involved there is a multiplication of the benefit for the initial spend (and an associated tax return, decreasing the net spend).

Spending which goes to high income categories (wealthy individuals, large corporates) quickly gets offshored into tax havens, it has benefit, but it is basically a single cycle, as opposed to the multi cycle nature of spending on low income categories.

The way to build up a nations GDP and boost its tax income as well as reducing debt etc.... is to spend more at the low end, medical benefits, social security, pensions, education etc... There is a strong and demonstrable "trickle up effect" (but contrary to decades of conservative propaganda, no demonstrable "trickle down").

Close the corporate loopholes, tax high income categories (both corporate and individual), combined with low income spending, and much of the budget deficit would start to disappear.

Yeah, that kind of defines 'waste'- using something for no good reason, bad reasons, stupid reasons, etc. Have you seen the sites that list wasteful US government spending?

Spending on wealthy people as 'help' makes no sense- they're not the ones who need assistance, but it makes them happy, so in a way, not all of it is wasted, if gifts and campaign donations to candidates is the goal. BTW- I'm not writing that last part as if I'm in favor of it.

What is your definition of 'loopholes'? All tax write-offs or just some of them?

Congress, for the purposes of showing ridiculous spending, is responsible for tremendous amounts of money that was pissed away. Another problem that amounts to a lot of money is defrauding government programs and the list is long- I searched using 'defrauded government assistance programs in 2025' and these include PPP/various COVID relief, Medicaid, SNAP/WIC, etc.

 

[Trell]

Congress, for the purposes of showing ridiculous spending, is responsible for tremendous amounts of money that was pissed away. Another problem that amounts to a lot of money is defrauding government programs and the list is long- I searched using 'defrauded government assistance programs in 2025' and these include PPP/various COVID relief, Medicaid, SNAP/WIC, etc.

So, how much is it then? Musk said 2 TB out of 6 TB federal budget.

DOGE didn't find much, if anything, of "fraud, abuse and waste". But then they didn't look into Medicare Advantage or other areas where rich dudes are eating pork on the public expense. Like Musk.

 

[dlaloum]

What is your definition of 'loopholes'? All tax write-offs or just some of them?

Put it this way, if a corporate is paying less than 20% of its revenue as Tax - there is something seriously wrong.

One of the underlying principles of corporatisation, is that a "corporation" is a "person" ... There should be a hard limit on deductions for any person or corporation, which ensures that all income is taxed appropriately...

There have been efforts for years to set up an international treaty specifying this sort of a hard limit for corporates.... which has gone nowhere.

Fixing the corporate tax loopholes would capture a large part of the wealthy individuals tax loopholes - needless to say, those individuals and corporates have an enormous outsize influence worldwide - their pockets are incredibly deep - an outcome of 50 years+ of successful lobbying, and the creation and exploitation of loopholes.
We need a new generation of ground up "peoples revolutions" to change things..... and that is a tall ask.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

One of the underlying principles of corporatisation, is that a "corporation" is a "person" ... ...

Since they are a person individually, they should pay personal income tax rates as a single person, not married.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Put it this way, if a corporate is paying less than 20% of its revenue as Tax - there is something seriously wrong.

Why though? Above 20% I can't see it. I'd rather see a flat tax across-the-board, but obviously with the wealthy and lobbying can't see it happening.

 

[highfigh]

Put it this way, if a corporate is paying less than 20% of its revenue as Tax - there is something seriously wrong.

One of the underlying principles of corporatisation, is that a "corporation" is a "person" ... There should be a hard limit on deductions for any person or corporation, which ensures that all income is taxed appropriately...

There have been efforts for years to set up an international treaty specifying this sort of a hard limit for corporates.... which has gone nowhere.

Fixing the corporate tax loopholes would capture a large part of the wealthy individuals tax loopholes - needless to say, those individuals and corporates have an enormous outsize influence worldwide - their pockets are incredibly deep - an outcome of 50 years+ of successful lobbying, and the creation and exploitation of loopholes.
We need a new generation of ground up "peoples revolutions" to change things..... and that is a tall ask.

You didn't define 'loopholes'.

You want international control over any country's corporations? Why not just have one world government, while you're at it?

When you write "revenue", are you referring to gross or net?

If gross revenue is taxed at 20%, many companies wouldn't turn a profit, ever. They aren't working with that large of a profit margin to support that level of taxation before expenses.

"People, not profits", right?

I'm not a fan of the "I don't want to pay ANY tax" bunch but there has been no way to prevent corporate off-shoring of labor and manufacturing and IMO, the government shouldn't be able to force a company opr corporation to lose money by keeping it all at home. However, being a money-grubbing vulture corporation isn't good, either.

In conversations with one of my clients, we hit on taxation and she said "If I pay high taxes, it means I'm making money". THAT, I can respect.