[economy] /u/joe_shmoe11111 points out how Trump's tariffs facilitate forcing US corporations to submit to his direct control
/r/economy/comments/1jqt346/the_blindingly_obvious_goal_of_trumps_tariffs/519
u/Rocktopod 2d ago
He’s got another 3 1/2 years of executive power, minimum (you’re dreaming if you think BOTH the Republican-controlled house & 2/3rds of the Senate would ever vote to remove him, and even if they did, Vance would likely just continue with these tactics).
Congress doesn't have to remove him to end this. They just have to take back the tariff power which is rightfully theirs.
204
u/Requiascat 2d ago edited 2d ago
Sadly the Republicans willingly conceded their ability to even vote on removing the tariffs. They turned the remaining year essentially into one long day to prevent voting on the tariffs at all. It was in the last budget they passed. All the media seem to have forgotten this.
44
34
u/mujadaddy 2d ago
Ah, to be a modern American journalist, waking up each morning with no memory of what happened before...
18
u/UniqueIndividual3579 2d ago
And never questioned by the Democrats and enough voted to pass it.
3
u/AnOnlineHandle 1d ago
The Repubs have complete control of all layers of the US federal government don't they? They don't need the Dems for anything.
5
u/honey_102b 2d ago
couldn't they theoretically take back tariff powers with 2/3s in both houses?
after all he tanked all their portfolios. unless of course they all got insider knowledge and shorted the market before his announcement .
3
36
u/Sangloth 2d ago
The tariffs are bound to be extremely unpopular to the general populace. I think it's reasonable to expect Democrats to win the midterms and rescind those powers, and not completely insane to believe it's possible Republican legislators could split with Trump on this in an attempt to avoid a midterm wipeout.
13
u/bolerobell 2d ago
The President always can veto if Congress tries to rescind it.
20
u/Sangloth 2d ago
Yes, and congress can override that veto. It can also apply pressure in other ways to avoid that veto. I expect the tariffs will prove unbelievably unpopular, and that many congressmen will feel their jobs are on the line. Simultaneously, I expect Trump to become much more unpopular, and have less political power.
15
u/LuminousRaptor 2d ago
God, I hope so, but I've been mentally thinking 'this has got to be the end of it' for like 10 years at this point.
11
27
u/deux3xmachina 2d ago
So much of our current political problems stem from Congress willingly ceding their power to keep their cushy jobs. Vote them ALL out when given the chance, rewarding poor behaviour doesn't incentivize change.
9
u/Rational_Engineer_84 2d ago
That requires the same GOP controlled House approval and 2/3 of the Senate to override a veto. From a retaliation standpoint, I also don't think Trump or MAGA would consider stripping him of his favorite toy any different than an Impeachment and removal.
2
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 2d ago
too late, according to congress one day last the whole year. Too bad their pay wont reflect that stupid fucking decision.
0
236
u/Vralo84 2d ago
It's an interesting take, but I think it misses a couple things.
First, it's not a binary choice or "do what I say or else". Right now CEOs all over the country are calling up the congressmen they bought and screaming at the top of their lungs to "get that guy under control!" Congress can just remove Trump's power to adjust tariffs by ending the economic emergency declaration.
Second, I'm in no way convinced the administration is smart enough to come up with a plan like this. The application of tariffs to uninhabited islands is emblematic of how stupid they are. I honestly think they truly believe it when they whine about trade imbalances being unfair. They feel they are victims punching back at thieves in a very literal sense.
Third, the rest of the world has a say in this. Trump or Congress could end the tariffs tomorrow and they might just go "no backsies" and keep their retaliatory tariffs. Companies have to navigate the whole world now. We are globalized like it or not. America might be the biggest economy but we aren't the only economy.
Fourth, this is going to crash the world economy. They don't have 3.5 years. They probably don't have 3.5 months. Americans were strained financially going into the election. Adding 25% to cost of living overnight is going to have average people livid. As one congressman recently noted the last time Republicans instituted tariffs they lost power for 60 years...
98
u/ButchTookMySweetroll 2d ago
Second, I’m in no way convinced the administration is smart enough to come up with a plan like this.
That’s the fun part, they didn’t! The Heritage Foundation came up with it for them as Project 2025; the current administration is just following that to the letter.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I strongly encourage anyone reading this to go read Project 2025 for themselves (will try edit this with a link when I have the chance/find where I saved the bookmark). I know the 900+ page count can seem a little daunting, but it really is the best way to truly understand why this administration is doing the things that it is, and what they’re going to do next.
34
u/Vralo84 2d ago
I'm aware they are getting most of their ideas from project 2025. There is an old saying, "No plan survives execution." It just means that you can have the best plan in the world, but as soon as you start it's going to go wrong. You have to be able to adapt on the fly to a changing environment to keep things on track.
I'm really hoping they aren't smart enough to do that in any meaningful way. Based on the last few weeks I think I'm right. That doesn't mean they won't do lots of damage, but I do think it means they will fail to reshape the world as they want to.
27
u/ButchTookMySweetroll 2d ago
That’s actually kind of a comforting point you’ve got there, one that I hadn’t really considered. I agree in that I don’t think they’re smart enough to adapt in the face of unforeseen consequences, but even if they were, they’ve shown that they’re way too stubborn to recognize when they’d need to do it… there may be some hope yet.
I really hope you’re right about that, it wouldn’t be the first time a regime like this has been undone by its own shortsightedness. I just hope it ends sooner rather than later…
17
u/GoodIdea321 2d ago
In a lot of ways, it seems like the project 2025 people think they can do Nazism 'better.' And they're against trade, against alliances, against cooperation, etc. They're pro state control of everything. And that might fall apart because the world is much different now than the 1930s.
5
u/saltedfish 2d ago
it wouldn’t be the first time a regime like this has been undone by its own shortsightedness
This is where I'm at as well. I hope they're moving too quickly, breaking too many things, and unable to actually navigate the falling debris so they get crushed by their own actions.
1
u/OfficialSandwichMan 1d ago
They aren’t “getting most of their ideas from project 2025”, it is as literally written for this administration to follow
1
u/Time-Ad-3625 18h ago
The heritage foundation isn't much smarter. They've been releasing stuff like this for decades.
55
u/stedun 2d ago
Fingers crossed about that 60 years.
4
u/JohnnyDarkside 2d ago
I don't even know exactly what he meant by that. Full control of all branches? That's not a bad thing. It's honestly good to not have one party control every branch and this is a perfect example of why. They have had control of each branch plenty of times over the past 60 years. Most presidents were conservative until the 90's.
2
u/puttinonthefoil 2d ago
“A bunch of people with the sole plan of “no government” have had power and it’s bad, so therefore no party should have control” is some real mental gymnastics.
25
u/matingmoose 2d ago edited 2d ago
Your 3rd point is what I was thinking about. The 1930's was not nearly as globalized as today, so this strategy of the government playing favors would work better. In today's markets I'm sorry you ain't getting Canada to buy American goods even if you give the company an exemption and Canada sure as hell isn't lifting their restrictions.
15
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
Additionally, and people keep forgetting this, SOME power still lies with the people. A widespread general strike would set things right pretty quickly. Shit, even just core shipping and transportation industries refusing to work would bring this admin to its knees.
Problem is everyone is so scattered and divided right now, but a sudden increase in the price of EVERYTHING could be the galvanizing force.
5
u/Darsint 2d ago
It’s important to remember that a lot of the people currently in positions of power are morons when it comes to complex situations like the economy.
Occam’s Razor suggests that if you thought tariffs could be used to extort money and favors from corporations, or to control them like the law firms, and you were stupid enough to think it wouldn’t crash the economy, that would look a lot like what we are seeing.
1
u/dedservice 2d ago
As one congressman recently noted the last time Republicans instituted tariffs they lost power for 60 years...
When was that? "Lost power" meaning what?
1
u/LordMacDonald 2d ago
they’re also creating a climate of economic fear where every consumer is going to pull back and buy only the essentials. that’ll hurt all CEOs, not just the ones are his hit list
1
u/Time-Ad-3625 18h ago
- There is nothing that says companies won't just continue layoffs. In fact, some started already. I read this original post, and it doesn't make sense. There is nothing that says companies won't just continue to trim their work forces and still have billions in profit.
66
u/undergroundman10 2d ago
But what about the midterms? I assume that due to his mainly economic policies the Democrats will perhaps gain majorities in both houses of Congress. If so, they could impeach and convict both trump and Vance. Is this just hopium?
107
u/splatse 2d ago
That’s assuming Trump and Musk and their buddies allow fair and open midterms.
I think it’s somewhat likely that they’ll gut various government agencies that stand in the way of them running a rigged election with a guaranteed outcome.
41
u/Jubjub0527 2d ago
Theyre already trying to alter the way we do elections. All they had to rig last November were the swing states. They're busy setting up the midterms to br overturned.
13
u/Specific-Lion-9087 2d ago
Why wouldn’t they have rigged the election in Wisconsin this week..?
Wasn’t that super important for them..?
36
u/airship_of_arbitrary 2d ago
They absolutely tried. Musk spent $25 million to support the far right candidate.
It's just if people vote overwhelmingly against them, they can still win.
You can win. But you have to fight like hell.
13
u/Solesaver 2d ago
This is what I've been telling everybody who is claiming the 2024 election was rigged. It very well could have been rigged, but fascism isn't defeated by a close race. Biden won 2020, but all that did was pump the brakes a bit. People have to come out and reject Trumps fascist vision for America overwhelmingly.
Rigged or not rigged, win or lose, Donald Trump and his movement will continue to be an existential threat until the voting public shuts them down thoroughly. The same thing that will overcome the rigging is what will shove them back into the sewer they crawled out of.
30% of people, in general, like authoritarianism. It's not enough for another 30% to oppose it. Everybody else needs to put their differences (and apathy) aside and say "we reject fascism". It's the only way.
-32
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
How is spending money rigging?
18
u/Equipmunk 2d ago
He was raffling off $1m dollar cheques to people who voted the way he wanted them to
→ More replies (4)13
u/pm_me_ur_demotape 2d ago
Before you @ me, I picked Fox News as a source so you wouldn't immediately discredit it as liberal lies.
If you say "this isn't illegal!" you're right, it's not. It's just shady as fuck.If you say "Democrats have done it too!", you're right, and it was shady when they did it and I don't support that either.
If you say "he paid people to sign a petition, not to vote!", you're right, but the raffle was only available to registered voters in those states and you had to sign a petition that anyone not in his camp is very unlikely to sign.
If you say, "The only people who would qualify and enter his raffle would have voted that way anyway" you're right, and his plan didn't work, they lost.
At the end of the day, he wasn't giving money away for fun, there was a clear intent to influence voters by directly handing over cash. It isn't illegal. It's shitty though.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
4
6
u/deux3xmachina 2d ago
If we addressed concerns on voting security back in at least 2015, that'd be something easy to see/track. With over a decade of claims of election interference from both major parties, it should've been a no-brainer to make election audits easy, fast, and transparent.
At this point it really feels more like a cope than a legitimate concern any politicians have.
12
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
Yes, but since elections (at least at that point) were run by the states, the states admin would have to want to cooperate. Most states are Republican controlled. They wanted this.
3
u/deux3xmachina 2d ago
They've had the exact same issues with election security as Democrats. It also doesn't explain why Democrat "controlled" states like California, New York, Washington, etc. didn't implement anything either.
6
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
Yes, republicans want issues with their elections. They are fascists looking for an excuse to take control.
I wholeheartedly believe blue states were as naive as the rest of us, thinking that Trump would fail spectacularly, but it’s a gambit that hasn’t paid off.
Now they’re all Schumering, and refusing to challenge… well, anything. Even without the fascistic intentions of the GOP, many of them are beholden to rich lobbyists.
5
u/deux3xmachina 2d ago
They were also campaigning on "saving democracy from fascism" ever since Trump took office in 2016. Inaction's not naïve, it's downright complicit if they believe he's a fascist. Their actions don't match their words, which makes them idiots unfit for their roles, complicit in the rise of fascism, spineless cowards, or perhaps more insultingly: think Americans are bumbling idiots they can play for fools to secure their own power.
2
u/algalkin 2d ago
If he takes corporations over, all the media becomes his. That means no opposition will be heard, only Trump propaganda. He is following Putins power take over step by step, only a lot faster.
1
-8
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
That’s assuming Trump and Musk and their buddies allow fair and open midterms.
Again, we do not have national elections. There is nothing "Trump and Musk and their buddies" can do, because elections are run locally.
18
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
Sweet summer child, this will not stop them.
-4
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
Based on what?
18
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
What makes makes you think they will not take control of local elections? The law? lol
President Donald Trump last Tuesday issued an executive order that aims to illegally overhaul and take control of major parts of the nation’s election systems. He claimed extraordinary unilateral authority to regulate federal elections and usurp the powers of Congress, the states, and an independent bipartisan federal agency.
They’re literally disappearing Americans. It’s time to stop waiting for someone to save us, and general strike.
-4
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
There is no mechanism for which the federal government, or the executive branch, can take control of local elections.
15
u/BostonDrivingIsWorse 2d ago
This is the most inane thing I have ever read, and I spend an above average part of my day on the internet.
The president controls the military, sweetie.
28
u/splynncryth 2d ago
Midterms are still years away and Trump is already laying the groundwork for massive voter suppression. If he doesn’t start an actual war and declare martial law, the midterms will be rigged, especially in red states. Many of them are particularly attractive targets for voter suppression efforts with their low populations that make the efforts much easier.
It also takes a comically small mount of the population to get a GOP majority in the senate which can the obstruct every effort as we have seen it under Mitch McConnell. I’ve been working on compiling data for all the senate races since 2008 (when things seemed to reach a fevered pitch) to calculate exactly how many voters were responsible for each senate GOP majority but I’m still in the data gathering and formatting phase. My hand-wavy calculation for 2024 was something like 10-11 million people based on the population of the lowest 25 population states that for GOP senators but there are still some flaws in the methods I used to calculate things. But I do think the data will expose how the senate system allows for a tiny fraction of voters to cause the federal government to be hopelessly deadlocked.
But the final thing is the idea that voters will actually vote for pro-democracy candidates. Trump’s numbers in the 2020 elections show he has a base that was about the same size as 2016 despite his harmful tariff policies then and complete mishandling of COVID. House and senate races since then paint a similar picture. It’s highly unlikely that enough voters will flip to have the numbers in Congress needed for any real action.
Other nations fighting this trade war have solid intelligence services meaning they will have good data about the projected behavior of American voters. If we look at their responses, I think we can get a good idea of how they think things may go. It doesn’t leave me optimistic.
-5
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago edited 2d ago
Midterms are still years away and Trump is already laying the groundwork for massive voter suppression.
Source?
EDIT: lol last word block from splynncryth
12
24
u/onioning 2d ago
Hypothetically possible, but pretty super implausible.
8
u/Message_10 2d ago
Honestly? Last week--implausible.
A few weeks from now, as we continue to see all this fall down around us?
The odds go up and up.
15
u/amendment64 2d ago
I talked to a nurse the other day(a new co-worker), and he's a big maga dude. We're in Colorado, so not really a conservative stronghold, and I tried to hit the egregious points. I settled on the fact that Trump and his ilk are sending American citizens to El Slavador without due process(should be an easy win, right?). I even showed him Trump literally saying it happened, so he couldn't blame media reporting(which he did several times, even though he said he never watches to news). All he said when finally convinced it actually happened? "I don't care about due process. He's getting those Venezuelan gang members."
I about pulled out my hair. These people are already brainwashed, and I struggle time and time again to bring them back to reality. About tariffs; all American exceptionalism with him, the delusional "the rest of the world can't do anything without us" mentality. Tanking the economy? "Oh its the long game he's thinking of." He even had select Joe Rogan quotes at certain moments, and when I mentioned how bad trade and tourism were affected, he disparaged anyone else not USAmerican.
I'll keep trying to get through to these people, but there is a conservative media empire that feeds them lies constantly. I'm a loss on how to combat it.
5
u/Message_10 2d ago
Yeah, I feel you--I have family members like that. And I too don't know how we combat it / fix it--to my mind, that's really our #1 problem, as a nation. I don't know what to do about it.
Regarding the current problem--basically destroying the world economy--I hope that whatever damage there is will be "unspinnable." I know that there will be plenty of reality-impaired conservatives who will never, ever get it, but that there will be enough to see "Oh, Trump / conservatives did this = conservatives bad."
Who knows, though. There have been a dozen times they could have thought that, and here we are.
8
u/onioning 2d ago
We live in unprecedented times, and "implausible" is not "impossible," but we're talking about the majority of deep red places voting blue. And over that time Trump will continue to consolidate power and hence control of the propaganda. Seems like an extreme longshot to me.
0
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
No, not hypothetically possible. The federal role in administering elections is zero.
11
u/onioning 2d ago
Hah. You have to ignore everything going on to have faith in a silly thing like constitutionality. Coercion exists, and is already being used to get previously unthinkable results. Crazy how people can still think that laws and the constitution will save us. We are no longer a country of law and order.
What's the federal role in running law firms?
20
u/enoughwiththebread 2d ago
The odds of the Democrats regaining control of both houses of Congress are decent. However, there is almost NO chance of them having the 2/3 majority in the Senate needed to convict and actually remove Trump and/or Vance. To do that would require at least several GOP Senators to defect, and that's just never going to happen.
So at best what will happen is Democrats win majorities in both houses, impeach him in the House and fail to convict him in the Senate, just like both times he was impeached but allowed to stay in office in 2020.
So yeah, it's just hopium that he'll be removed through legal means. What Democrats CAN do however, is with majorities in Congress they can take back the power of tariffs, which means they can take away from him the ability to selectively punish or reward businesses and entities at his whims, or reverse executive decisions such as banning law firms from government work.
10
u/PhysicalGraffiti75 2d ago
If they can rig a presidential election they can rig any election.
-7
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
Are you arguing the presidential election was rigged?
10
u/PhysicalGraffiti75 2d ago
No I’m here to argue about why acrylic paint is better than enamel for painting on scale models.
10
u/wasaguest 2d ago
I'd say hopium at this point. The DNC has shown no interest in dropping it's pursuit of Conservative voters & that pushes their base away (they simply have no interest in meeting in a middle so far to the right of center it borders on fascism).
3
u/BigMax 2d ago
Impeachment takes 66 (2/3) votes in the Senate.
That will never happen. The worst that would happen is an impeachment from the house, which Trump would shrug off, and MAGA would see as another badge of honor.
And perhaps use it to justify impeaching or otherwise getting rid of judges they don't like too. "The democrats are impeachment crazy, we're just following their lead!"
2
u/Jubjub0527 2d ago
I'm not so sure. Elon is going to be out at the 130 day mark and I think it'll be just long enough for most of the Republicans to be convinced that all of this was the democrats' fault to begin with.
8
u/BuzzBadpants 2d ago
This “130 days” nonsense is nothing. Why would that particular esoteric norm be the one that constrains this regime? It’s at best a thing they can point to get rid of Elon’s political liabilities, or at least get him out of the cabinet meetings where he’s pissing everyone else off. But make no mistake, he’s not going away. He has too much money for them to get rid of him meaningfully
0
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
This “130 days” nonsense is nothing. Why would that particular esoteric norm be the one that constrains this regime?
Why wouldn't it?
7
u/BuzzBadpants 2d ago
Because they do not care about norms or law. Musk is proof positive of that. They only do what they want.
-1
2
u/TheHollowJester 2d ago
But what about the midterms?
The 2026 ones? GOP won across the board, didn't you hear? Elon (paraphrasing Trump): "knows those computers better than anybody, all those computers, those vote counting computers, and we ended up winning
Pennsylvaniathe whole country, like, in a landslide."1
u/plain_cyan_fork 2d ago
conviction requires 2/3rd of the senate. The democrats would need to FLIP 20 seats (unheard of in modern history) and keep the 11 seats they currently have up for re-election.
They'd need to win 31 out of the 35 seats available in the election.
The republicans currently hold 24 of the seats up for election in such unlikely democratic states as Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine (thought if Susan Collins wins again she could conceivable cross party lines and vote to convict), Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota,Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wyoming.
In short, he's not getting out via impeachment unless he does something that would magically turn a bunch of people that seem keen on ignoring all the other alarming things he's done into detractors.
So... don't pin your hopes here.
Edit: I said "modern history" but no party has ever flipped 20% of the senate in a single election.
0
-3
u/the1gofer 2d ago
Never going to happen. Democrats don’t have the balls to do anything even when they do win. See Kiersten Cenema and Joe mansion.
28
u/alien88 2d ago
Ah yes, a stunningly incompetent administration has hatched some master plan to oust corporate leadership and directly take it over. Sure.
31
u/dweezil22 2d ago
It's not brilliant: it's shameless and brutal, and banked on everyone else being utterly spineless. He could have even arrived it at like a moth orienting towards light, without even understanding it, just a "Making other people do stuff is fun" type thing.
The extra dangerous thing this admin, vs 2016, he's surrounded by people that either want the really bad stuff, or will just do whatever he says.
7
u/AwayThrownSomeNumber 2d ago
This administration didn't hatch any master plans that it executes. The Heritage Foundation and their Project 2025 came up with it. You can read about that plan right now. Its a matter of public record. You can read it here:
https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
24
u/swills300 2d ago
This is just another grift. You gotta understand that EVERYTHING Trump does is in his self-interest.
Tariffs will generate billions of dollars. Where do you think those dollars will ultimately end up? In the bank accounts of everyday folks? Not a chance.
They may temporarily boost the government's coffers, but if that happens, just look for tax cuts on the rich and on corporations. Maybe some crumbs for the masses just to sell it.
If the economy gets destroyed in the process, all the better. The 1% can then buy up assets for pennies on the dollar, just like they did in '08.
This will just end up being another MASSIVE transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich.
19
u/ClockOfTheLongNow 2d ago
This is perhaps the dumbest take I've seen in recent memory, and speaks not only to a lack of understanding of fascism but a lack of understanding of Trump.
Trump has been extolling the virtues of tariffs since at least the 1980s:
Donald J. Trump lost an auction in 1988 for a 58-key piano used in the classic film “Casablanca” to a Japanese trading company representing a collector. While he brushed off being outbid, it was a firsthand reminder of Japan’s growing wealth, and the following year, Mr. Trump went on television to call for a 15 percent to 20 percent tax on imports from Japan.
“I believe very strongly in tariffs,” Mr. Trump, at the time a Manhattan real estate developer with fledgling political instincts, told the journalist Diane Sawyer, before criticizing Japan, West Germany, Saudi Arabia and South Korea for their trade practices. “America is being ripped off,” he said. “We’re a debtor nation, and we have to tax, we have to tariff, we have to protect this country.”
This is a 40+ year crusade for him based on his fundamental misunderstanding of trade deficits, which are seen in how these particular tariffs were implemented - not in terms of strategic power or economic desires, but because there's a number in a column that he thinks represents something.
The goal is not to force corporations to submit to anything he wants. In part, it's because he has no goal other than achieving his misguided understanding of trade and tariffs. Not to mention that tariffs would be an awful way to facilitate capitulation when he could just make a bunch of regulatory orders through his cabinet-level agencies instead. That would be cleaner and stickier, not relying on direct executive action and instead pursuing a path that his opponents not only view as acceptable, but necessary.
Awful post.
9
u/mycleverusername 2d ago
Also, if you pay close attention, Trumps political M.O. has been to have some crazy idea, then have 3-4 factions who like the idea (but for very different reasons or intended outcomes) try to convince him how to implement it. Then, since he's an idiot, he amalgamizes those ideas into an implementation that makes no sense and will fail miserably at achieving any of the goals of any faction.
That's why you can have a commentary like this post about 90% of the things he has "accomplished". Because they all have outcomes that could appear that he is playing 4d chess, but in reality he's just throwing shit at the wall. The tariffs could be used for consolidating economic power, or negotiating defense spending, or bringing manufacturing back, or just a power grab in general. Except it's none of those things because there is no set "end goal". You can not craft effective policy by just throwing wrenches in the works.
3
1
10
7
u/mistervanilla 2d ago edited 2d ago
No. Classic problem of trying to find a pattern when there is just random noise. Trump is a malignant narcissist whose only agenda is short term personal gratification. He has never shown any indication of grand strategy other than short term brute force. The tariffs are just another way to wag the dog, to show power, to demonstrate to his base that he is the man. The stock markets falling currently to him are an indication of his power, not his failure.
To ascribe anything more to this unhinged egomaniac is projecting your own reason onto the situation.
Besides, tariffs are way too blunt a tool to exert control over individual corporations. What, one CEO disagrees with you and the whole sector gets it? That's not how you get people in line. That's not even to talk about the real economic problems that his base is going to feel - it's not as if these tariffs don't have a significant downside for him politically.
So please, let's stop projecting our own normalcy on this pathetic lunatic. The only lens through which you should analyze Trump is short term gratification of power and authority. Everything else is just trying to find a pattern in chaos because the absence of a pattern would be even more scary to the observer.
6
u/jh937hfiu3hrhv9 2d ago
Chump has been a manipulator his whole life. That is how the trust fund baby leveraged his inheritance. He has been allowed to buy his way forward with little consequence and is filled with hubris. Manipulation has become a subconscious act. Now he is the anointed one in a position to negotiate for the price of fealty to fascism. Wall Street's congress is to blame for their Frankenstein and their responsibility to decommission the monster.
2
u/Iyellkhan 2d ago
the thing is, it all assumes the rest of the world wants to maintain its access and reliance on the US consumer market. it would be insane to assume thats gonna come back as a thing
1
u/Morgannin09 2d ago
The last fleeting hope for any sanity to visit the GOP before the midterms is the thought that they may, similar to democrats, be waiting for Trump to screw things up so badly that he finally loses enough support from his own MAGA base that it is no longer political suicide to oppose him. If they act now, Trump can retaliate in all sorts of ways, not least in calling them out in public and getting the MAGA dipshits to blame them for any economic fallout by interfering with his genius tariff agenda. But let him run amok, let 401k's melt down and prices skyrocket, and the hope is that those same idiots will beg their Congress people to finally step up instead of fall in line.
It's a long shot to assume they have an ounce of forward thinking at this point, but it's all I've got.
1
u/bus_factor 2d ago
wow i haven't heard about the law firms thing. absolutely disgraceful of the firms and the rule of law is well and truly dead in the US.
1
u/Phantom_Symmetry 2d ago
I think the DOGE cuts are meant to gut career officials who are more likely to oppose an order if it’s against standard protocol and country too.
1
u/burtonsimmons 2d ago
At some point, a bunch of corporations are going to figure out that it’s cheaper to buy a few senators with a spine than it is to deal with this nonsense.
1
1
u/olionajudah 2d ago
Maybe allowing a president to unilaterally exploit tarriffs the same way the mafia runs their protection racket was never a great idea?
1
u/lizard_king0000 2d ago
Not only that but all of the billionaires will buy up the scraps of the infrastructure for pennies
1
u/progdaddy 2d ago
Why doesn't Congress or the Courts neuter this shit? I thought we had 3 co-equal branches of government.
1
u/Mach5Driver 2d ago
I didn't read it. Corporations need to pressure the GOP--REALLY SQUEEZE THOSE RATS--until they squeal. So many more Americans despise Trump than EVER and the GOP also knows that they will get blamed too at the ballot box.
1
u/snowflake37wao 2d ago edited 2d ago
Well. Thats sobering as fin f af. Damn.
The law firms was a good example but the ones not mentioned that I kept thinking about from just a third into reading down; news media. they settled incredibly quick, then the other reporters called them out for a day, then the coverage went mum. he is using the government to control the law firms, using the law firms to push the media, and the tariffs to push and pull the corps. Instead of calling this logic out reporters are just saying the tariffs will hurt the economy, yet randoms on reddit are able to present the crux of it all in one erudite post. Just. Damn. All thru unilateral EO. Damn.
1
u/tierras_ignoradas 2d ago
Best explanation so far.
- Trump has done this before.
Big oil, which contributed close to $1 billion to Trump's campaign, is exempt from any tariffs. Trump told the Chinese that if he gets a good deal on TikTok, he'll lower their tariffs. (I think that is Trump-talk for kickback). For Trump's bribe solicitation from the Oil Industry last April, see
Trump’s $1bn pitch to oil bosses ‘the definition of corruption’, top Democrat says
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/03/trump-big-oil-campaign-pitch-corruption
Trump told the Chinese that if he gets a good deal on TikTok, he'll lower their tariffs. (I think that is Trump-talk for kickback).
- Several states, including FL, work on the pay-for-play model.
The result is unregulated industry and much higher prices. Companies also leave. Who wants to show up for Pam Bondi's latest auction? The insurance industry is leaving Florida. Like Trump charges $5 million for private audience, DeSantis charges $50K for a round of golf.
1
u/bobbymcpresscot 2d ago
So its either going to be do as I say to stay in control, or basically something bad will happen to trump shortly.
1
u/onlyhere4gonewild 2d ago
Yeah, I don't believe this. If anything, this week has proven that his group is too stupid to pull off something this ingenious.
1
u/Thoraxekicksazz 1d ago
These companies could just as easily buy up congress and fund them to fight against trumps tariffs.
0
1.4k
u/bigbysemotivefinger 2d ago
If he could just go ahead and have the massive heart attack he's obviously long overdue for we would all be better off.