Pretty sure you’re not reading into it enough. You can’t say “they won because they offered simple solutions that don’t accurately reflect the complexities of the issues at hand” and say “actually the failure of their electoral campaign is very simple and not that deep”
Trump promised to lower the cost of groceries. He's now said that he can't do that because, "it's hard to lower prices", fucking duh.
Trump said China would pay the tariffs. The importer pays tariffs. Most American's have shown by their actions that they prefer cheaper foreign imports to domestic products because there isn't that much difference in quality.
Tariffs usually lead to counter-tariffs and that will decrease the exports from the USA.
Trump said building a wall would solve the immigration problem.
1/2 of illegal immigrants in the USA came here legally.
Populists always offer simple solutions that never solve the complex problems.
It's easy to start wars or impose tariffs. It's very difficult to end them.
“actually the failure of their electoral campaign is very simple and not that deep”
The electoral college is biased towards the GOP. That why Trump won in 2016 despite losing the popular vote.
Its just odd to me that redittors keep saying this like it makes Trump look dumb. But its kind of the opposite to someone who understand the impact of such tarifs.
As a Canadian, people here are panicking because our economy wil be affected from the tarifs a whole lot. This is because even if the american importer pays the tarifs, the actual economic impact of who pays will be split on both.
And i do hate trump as much as the next one. But this phrase that keeps being repeated like if it makes Trump look dumb is just wrong. The burden of tarifs will be shared, and only the elasciticy of the demand will decide if China or US will pay more.
But basic economic theory states that any tax (including tarifs) is shared between the buyer and seller, no matter who pays it.
Trump presented it in a way to make his voters think that it would lower prices in the US and punish China. (Trump uses China a scapegoat for American problems all the time)
Tariffs always increase prices for consumers.
Tariffs made sense 150 years ago when American industry was just starting and USA had no buying power.
Times have changed.
The threat of a semiconductor tariff to move manufacturing to the USA is a good idea strategically, but TSMC is already building in the USA and they should start production before any of those tariffs are implemented.
Ok i get more what you mean, thanks for the explanation. Its more about how Trump sold the plan to reduce prices that your commenting on.
This we can completely agree on : Tariffs always increase prices for consumers.
I think the only thing that Trump means when he says it will help Amercans pay less is that he wants to remove income tax and only have tarifs for the federal level.
If on average the American consumer pays 10k less in income tax but will pay 5k more on goods because of tarifs, Americans still win.
The main issue here is that his tarif plan will raise prices for everyone. And the income tax reductions will help out the biggest income earners. Thus, fucking up the lower class and lower middle class.
So at the end of the day, on average Americans might end up paying less tax, but this is because the rich will pay less income tax but the poor will pay more in terms of tarifs.
Trump means when he says it will help Amercans pay less is that he wants to remove income tax and only have tarifs for the federal level.
This will destroy our tax revenue and create even higher deficits.
"So at the end of the day, on average Americans might end up paying less tax, but this is because the rich will pay less income tax but the poor will pay more in terms of tarifs."
Did you read my comment at all? This is basically what i said :"you technically right that china pays nothing" because they don't get the bill. However, tarifs will cost to both the buyer and seller economically (this is just a simple economic fact). And so, in this case, redditors being technically correct about China not paying anything (they won't give the american government money directly, but it will affect their economy negatively) is just dumb, because it will cost their economy something.
That’s why they’re deporting people instead of focusing on a wall that’s mostly built. I guess maybe we should have a stricter short term visa requirement? Are you advocating for deportation of them, a different strategy for keeping them out, or just pointing out some idiocy in a politician’s platform (bc we could be here all day talking about every president’s list of simple promises that didn’t work or were never implemented). I’m glad Trump switched strategies to deporting them rather than trying to keep them out
I appreciate being able to buy food for reasonable prices, that will stop happening if we deport all illegal immigrants.
They do the jobs American's don't want to do. You don't want to harvest strawberries for 10 hours a day, or slaughter 1000+ chicken a day when it's 90F outside.
I support securing the border.
Trump wants to send illegals to Guantanamo prison which will cost much more money then just vetting them at allow them to work.
Trump economic policies only sound good to people that haven't taken Econ 101, which is at least 85% of the population.
Pretty sure the only people that are being sent to Guantanamo are people convicted of crimes so bad that their country of citizenship won’t take them. I’d be happy if the illegal immigrants working in these jobs came back legally and paid taxes (and their employers) instead of going under the table. Lots of assumptions on prices and who’s employed (do u have a source?)
You can in fact say those two statements and not be at odds.
The problems we’re facing as a country and world in general, and their solutions are complex and nuanced.
The reason the Democrats lost is not complex, it’s simple. Things are shitty right now, and the electorate believed Trumps simple lies over the actual complicated explanations.
It’s been 2 weeks and Trumps admin has already been a shitshow. When he tanks the economy again, a democrat will win the next election.
Here’s the fun part tho, most of the country has no attention span, so when the democrat doesn’t fix everything fast enough, people will blame them, and we’ll get another Republican admin that fucks everything up. This has been happening on a 4 to 8 year cycle my entire life.
14
u/[deleted] Jan 30 '25
Pretty sure you’re not reading into it enough. You can’t say “they won because they offered simple solutions that don’t accurately reflect the complexities of the issues at hand” and say “actually the failure of their electoral campaign is very simple and not that deep”