Trump says he will introduce 25% tariffs on autos, pharmaceuticals and chips.
-
Physically removed Americans from the United States
A number of Americans have been placed in immigration detention centers to be deported but were later released.[15][16] Up to one percent of all those detained in immigration detention centers are nationals of the United States according to research by Jacqueline Stevens, a professor of political science at Northwestern University.[21]
The following is an incomplete list of Americans who have actually experienced deportation from the United States:
Pedro Guzman, born in the State of California, was forcefully removed to Mexico in 2007 but returned several months later by crossing the Mexico–United States border. He was finally compensated in 2010 by receiving $350,000 from the government.[22]
Mark Daniel Lyttle, born in the State of North Carolina, was forcefully removed to Mexico but later returned to the United States from Guatemala and filed a damages lawsuit in federal court,[13] which he ultimately won.[2]
Andres Robles Gonzalez derived U.S. citizenship through his U.S. citizen father before being forcefully removed to Mexico. He was returned to the United States and filed a damages lawsuit in federal court, which he ultimately won.[3][23]
Roberto Dominquez was born in Lawrence, Massachusetts. He was deported to the Dominican Republic. The government is unconvinced in this case as it claims that there are two people by the same name, both born during the same month and year. According to the government, both children were born to parents with the same addresses, and that one child was born in Santo Domingo, the capital of the Dominican Republic.[24]
Esteban Tiznado-Reyna was born in Mexico to a father who had an Arizona birth certificate, which was found unreliable in an immigration court.[25] Tiznado was found not guilty of illegal reentry into the United States in 2008, but ICE still deported him despite the verdict. Documents were uncovered that the USCIS withheld in the 1980s, showing his proof of citizenship.[24]https://immigrationimpact.com/2021/07/30/ice-deport-us-citizens/
and this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_Americans_from_the_United_States
I want to point out that this list is INCOMPLETE and you should go to the bottom of the Wikipedia page you will see numerous articles depicting the stories of the people above.
I see a handful of mistakes that are not indicative of any policies of deporting legal immigrants. This is most certainly not indicative of any sort of national economic impact.
-
I see a handful of mistakes that are not indicative of any policies of deporting legal immigrants. This is most certainly not indicative of any sort of national economic impact.
You asked for evidence of legal immigrants being deported. I gave you evidence of AMERICAN CITIZENS being deported.
You: Moved the goalposts.
-
You asked for evidence of legal immigrants being deported. I gave you evidence of AMERICAN CITIZENS being deported.
You: Moved the goalposts.
I asked for evidence that was supposed to back up your claim of "you don't have enough people left to to create local production." It did not. A handful of people (who are not engineers) being deported accidentally is not going to impact the ability to create local production.
-
I asked for evidence that was supposed to back up your claim of "you don't have enough people left to to create local production." It did not. A handful of people (who are not engineers) being deported accidentally is not going to impact the ability to create local production.
I'm responding to this
You need to learn to read usernames. I've made no claims
-
I'm responding to this
You need to learn to read usernames. I've made no claims
Well then you were responding to my request to back up their claims, doesn't matter.
Also the screenshots are unnecessary, I can scroll up and read my own comments just fine, thank you.
-
Here's what I would tell someone that thinks manufacturing is coming back.
Say you're a factory owner and goods are costing too much to import from China. Your trusty Excel sheet tells you that, with the tariffs, you can make your widgets for the same price in America.
But you're a smart capitalist! You know these tariffs are going to end up wildly unpopular and will be rescinded sooner rather than later. In any case, the economy may tank and no one will be able to afford widgets.
Yet another problem is that tariffs will make American widgets toxic on the international market. Canadians are already looking to shed American imports.
Now are you, Mr. Smart Capitalist, going to risk building an American factory and get left holding the bag?
Alternate:
"Know what the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was?"
The factory decision is exactly the calculation that will go through hundreds of MBA-educated business leaders.
-
Anyone who thinks we're not heading for a deep, deep recession is deluding themselves
And America is taking everyone with them.
-
I agree, tariffs will be a net positive for the country. Problem is, the people taking the brunt of that impact will, as always, be the poorest and most vulnerable. There are many ways we could solve that problem but of course authoritarians have no interest in that.
That being said, anyone who voted for Trump thinking he would fix the economy is a fucking moron. Tariffs make shit worse before they get better. It will probably be a decade before we start to see any positive impact from them.
Tariffs are a net negative. Always. The things produced will not be competitive on the global market, if they were, we'd already be making them. The higher prices always destroy more jobs than they create. Retaliatory tariffs destroy even more jobs. The higher prices drive down demand and make the working class consumer poorer. Always.
There's no economic upside to tariffs, over any time horizon. They create a small number of jobs in a specific sector at a very expensive cost. Some politicians might decide that the enormous economic cost is worth it for other reasons, but a net positive they are not.
-
Tariffs are a net negative. Always. The things produced will not be competitive on the global market, if they were, we'd already be making them. The higher prices always destroy more jobs than they create. Retaliatory tariffs destroy even more jobs. The higher prices drive down demand and make the working class consumer poorer. Always.
There's no economic upside to tariffs, over any time horizon. They create a small number of jobs in a specific sector at a very expensive cost. Some politicians might decide that the enormous economic cost is worth it for other reasons, but a net positive they are not.
[citation needed]
-
Well then you were responding to my request to back up their claims, doesn't matter.
Also the screenshots are unnecessary, I can scroll up and read my own comments just fine, thank you.
Ok good stuff. Screenshots are unnecessary, but if you were any good at scrolling up, you would have known who you were responding to. Screenshot for reference
-
Ok good stuff. Screenshots are unnecessary, but if you were any good at scrolling up, you would have known who you were responding to. Screenshot for reference
Okay, enough trolling, you're being blocked now, goodbye.
-
I think you're underestimating the Department of Education's role in preventing red states from destroying public education. They can now do whatever they want with their education system and there is absolutely zero federal oversight coming their way. And you better believe Republican state legislatures are chomping at the bit for this one.
Edit: "champing at the bit" per u/slumberlust
I think you're overstating how effective the DoEd is at coordinating curriculum, as well as how effective state governments are at the same.
I'm in a red state (Utah), and we're pretty competitive in terms of scholastic attainment (top 15 in most metrics), above many blue states that spend way more on education. Higher spending does not seem correlated with higher achievement. Also, from non-rigorous comparison of some state lists of academic achievement (like this wiki page), I don't see a clear relationship between how states vote and academic performance that can't more convincingly be explained by rural vs urban/suburban demographics.
So while it's a popular talking point, I'm not convinced the DoEd is actually helping here. Schools will do better in areas with more parental engagement, and curriculum choice, funding, and rigor in testing don't seem have much of an impact. We're spending more than ever, have strict education standards, etc, yet test scores continue to drop across the country.
So no, I don't think the DoEd is effective, and in fact I think they're largely to blame for tuition outpacing inflation, because student loans are easier to get, so sold m schools can get away with raising prices.
What we should have are laws that states must maintain a secular education, and if religion is taught, all major religions are given equal treatment. That, and that states must provide a free K-12 education for all residents, and that public universities must be affordable for all residents who qualify (with grants as appropriate). That's it, no common standard, no loans, etc. Education is better handled locally.
That said, I don't trust Trump or Musk to handle this properly.
-
[citation needed]
Wikipedia has a whole list of citations on this very sentence lol.
There is near unanimous consensus among economists that tariffs are self-defeating and have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare
-
Wikipedia has a whole list of citations on this very sentence lol.
There is near unanimous consensus among economists that tariffs are self-defeating and have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare
Oh well, you have a single sentence from a Wikipedia article, I guess I was wrong!
The citations are all concerning the concept of "free trade" which is an incredibly generic phrase.
-
This post did not contain any content.
That 25% magic number
-
BIC probably produces lighters in the US, they have a couple of locations there. It could also be razor blades or ballpoint pens though and the lighters are coming in from Mexico. Or surfboards. Still can't believe they produce surfboards.
Or BIC might exit the US market, the French aren't exactly known to be forgiving or accommodating. If you make their US factories pay 25% on the flints they're importing from another factory elsewhere they might just say fuck it, let's burn this place down, we'll go somewhere where these lighters aren't hit by 25% retaliatory tariffs.
BIC is a French surfboard manufacturer?
-
BIC is a French surfboard manufacturer?
Pretty sure they had BIC windsurf boards in Canada when I was a kid.
Edit: Shit, they still do too, as of 2008.
-
BIC probably produces lighters in the US, they have a couple of locations there. It could also be razor blades or ballpoint pens though and the lighters are coming in from Mexico. Or surfboards. Still can't believe they produce surfboards.
Or BIC might exit the US market, the French aren't exactly known to be forgiving or accommodating. If you make their US factories pay 25% on the flints they're importing from another factory elsewhere they might just say fuck it, let's burn this place down, we'll go somewhere where these lighters aren't hit by 25% retaliatory tariffs.
Bic lighters are made in France. 25% is peanuts to them, they get much higher tariffs in south america.
-
Pretty sure they had BIC windsurf boards in Canada when I was a kid.
Edit: Shit, they still do too, as of 2008.
Fascinating
-
On the one hand, fostering local production of these goods is positive for national resilience, and also has a chance to reduce shipping around the world, which is bad for the environment.
On the other hand, good fucking luck, lol.
Yet he supports oil.. Which accounts for a sizeable share of international shipping. This is while the US doesn't have enough refining capacity for the type of oil we produce.
