6 ms·

The phrase is "taxation without representation", and Trump is the representation. The original founders were upset England could raise taxes and they couldn't v

The phrase is "taxation without representation", and Trump is the representation. The original founders were upset England could raise taxes and they couldn't vote or do anything about it. We now have elected officials who decide taxes

Gregaros 1y ago
gtfo. Nobody voted Trump to _raise_ taxes.
- klipt 1y ago
  If republicans don't like Trump's behavior they should call their senators and tell them to threaten Trump with impeachment and conviction. That's the only leverage Congress has over the president. Republicans control Congress and the presidency, so there's nobody else to blame here.
- CamperBob2 1y ago
  Those who were paying attention the first time and still voted for Republicans voted for exactly that outcome (SALT, anyone?) Those who were not paying attention last time shouldn't have been allowed to vote this time, but... That Would be Bad, mmmkay.
- _1 1y ago
  Congress voted for him to do exactly that.
- autoexec 1y ago
  Yes they did. He made it very clear that he wanted massive tariffs which by necessity would mean that people would have to pay massive taxes on everything they want to buy. Before the election experts were very clear that those tariffs would cost the consumer and importer. People were told that he wanted to go crazy with tariffs, they were repeatedly told that tariffs would take money out of their pockets, and they voted for that. Nobody should be surprised by that now.
  - ceejayoz 1y ago
    > He made it very clear that he wanted massive tariffs which by necessity would mean that people would have to pay massive taxes on everything they want to buy. He also falsely claimed - and his supporters, as is typical, accepted those claims - that other countries would eat that cost. They voted for tariffs. They were willfully ignorant on their being a tax.
    - autoexec 1y ago
      That's true, he did (no surprise) lie to them about it. Everyone was really quick to call out that lie though. This was seen coming for miles.
      - ceejayoz 1y ago
        > Everyone was really quick to call out that lie though. Not on the channels they watch. There's an entire separate Fox News Cinematic Universe safe space you can immerse yourself in exclusively. Even when they bring on a sacrificial lib to yell at, humans in general are phenomenal at ignoring or explaining away clear evidence their strongly held beliefs are wrong.
neaden 1y ago
But the executive branch isn't supposed to be able to raise taxes and he's blatantly using a loophole to do all of this. Your point would be true if it was congress doing this.
JohnFen 1y ago
> Trump is the representation No, it's not. Congress is the representation, not the executive. The executive is supposed to implement what Congress decides.
- hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
  Well, the people voted for Congress, and Congress could curtail Trump's tariff-setting ability anytime they want to, and they have chosen not to. FWIW I agree that Congress has completely abdicated their duties, but by and large "the people" voted for this, it was not hidden or secret (for all his flaws Trump was very clear what he would do with respect to tariffs for a long time), and I think "taxation without representation" is an incredibly poor analogy.
- Auracle 1y ago
  And congress decided that the president can raise tariffs himself. Congress has given away a lot of power, of the years. Ironically I think this is one instance that sort of thing made sense, but they should have done their usual and made some sort of government agency to oversee it themselves. Neither congress nor the president are good managers of tariffs as they're unpopular in the short term, as we've seen, and need a long term outlook.
  - vkou 1y ago
    It's fascinating that just last year, SCOTUS has determined that Congress couldn't delegate its powers to rulemaking agencies that Congress explicitly creates, charters, and funds. Yet, somehow, this implicit 'delegation' (where Congress is very actively doing nothing) is somehow kosher. As long as they won't impeach the leader of their party, anything goes! The man could drop a nuclear bomb on Ohio, and as long as he had 34 surviving votes in the Senate, he'd be fine. If this kind of congressional silence is endorsement, why the hell did SCOTUS get involved to start legislating regulations from the bench in the first place?
    - vel0city 1y ago
      It's not implicit, they're directly doing it. They made a law giving the executive this exact power. They then passed a law redefining the length of a day so they would prevent the countdown in that law from them actually reviewing these. That's right, the Republicans decided the rest of 2025 is just one long legal day.
autoexec 1y ago
People in DC have a legit complaint about "taxation without representation". Realistically, most people do too since corporations and industry are the only ones whose interests are typically represented, but that's more of a failure on our part for not firing the people who refuse to work for us. We elect them after all.
psunavy03 1y ago
Yeah, and they're called "Congress."
- guywithahat 1y ago
  No, it’s a power of the president
hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
I agree with you, but I would still argue that what is going on now is exactly what the Constitution was designed to prevent: rule by executive fiat. Congress controls fiscal policy, and they have complete given up any semblance of their duties in fealty to Trump. Heck, the law that Trump is using to set tariff policy is designed to only be used in cases "of national emergency", and Trump has simply defined national emergency to mean whatever he wants it to mean. I think this article gives a good overview of the issues: https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-usa-china-deal-is-bad-economics-democracy-trade-tariffs https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-usa-china-deal-is-bad-eco... It's similar to how Trump has redefined the simple meaning of "foreign invasion" to give cover to his deportations (in some cases I'd call them abductions) without due process. The people may have voted for this, but in the medium/long term it will be absolutely detrimental to our democracy.
- autoexec 1y ago
  > The people may have voted for this, but in the medium/long term it will be absolutely detrimental to our democracy. None of which was unanticipated. People had been warning voters about the danger to our democracy long before the election and a huge number of Americans decided that they really didn't care about protecting our democracy.
  - strangattractor 1y ago
    Did they really make a conscious decision or was it we want a guy that runs the government like a Reality TV show. Ooops Donny doesn't like Mike (Waltz) any more so time to leave the Island. Pete sure is good at owning the libs - he gets to stay.
  - vkou 1y ago
    Look, if you're going to make voters in Red America choose between democracy and voting for a Republican, they are going to pick the latter 100% of the time. It's just not important to them. If it were, they wouldn't have first primaried in, and then showed up for the guy in 2024[1]. --- [1] I can forgive 2016 and 2020, since at that point, his behavior wasn't that far out of bounds. Since then, he's moved on to conspiring with fraudulent electors, trying to rig vote counts, arresting and imprisoning people without trial, and looking to suspend habeas corpus. Not to mention pay-to-play for access, and treating the treasury like his own personal slush fund.
strangattractor 1y ago
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United"
lenerdenator 1y ago
> The phrase is "taxation without representation", and Trump is the representation. Incorrect. He is the executive. Congress is the representation.

Gregaros 1y ago

gtfo. Nobody voted Trump to _raise_ taxes.

klipt 1y ago
If republicans don't like Trump's behavior they should call their senators and tell them to threaten Trump with impeachment and conviction. That's the only leverage Congress has over the president. Republicans control Congress and the presidency, so there's nobody else to blame here.
CamperBob2 1y ago
Those who were paying attention the first time and still voted for Republicans voted for exactly that outcome (SALT, anyone?) Those who were not paying attention last time shouldn't have been allowed to vote this time, but... That Would be Bad, mmmkay.
_1 1y ago
Congress voted for him to do exactly that.
autoexec 1y ago
Yes they did. He made it very clear that he wanted massive tariffs which by necessity would mean that people would have to pay massive taxes on everything they want to buy. Before the election experts were very clear that those tariffs would cost the consumer and importer. People were told that he wanted to go crazy with tariffs, they were repeatedly told that tariffs would take money out of their pockets, and they voted for that. Nobody should be surprised by that now.
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  > He made it very clear that he wanted massive tariffs which by necessity would mean that people would have to pay massive taxes on everything they want to buy. He also falsely claimed - and his supporters, as is typical, accepted those claims - that other countries would eat that cost. They voted for tariffs. They were willfully ignorant on their being a tax.
  - autoexec 1y ago
    That's true, he did (no surprise) lie to them about it. Everyone was really quick to call out that lie though. This was seen coming for miles.
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      > Everyone was really quick to call out that lie though. Not on the channels they watch. There's an entire separate Fox News Cinematic Universe safe space you can immerse yourself in exclusively. Even when they bring on a sacrificial lib to yell at, humans in general are phenomenal at ignoring or explaining away clear evidence their strongly held beliefs are wrong.

neaden 1y ago

But the executive branch isn't supposed to be able to raise taxes and he's blatantly using a loophole to do all of this. Your point would be true if it was congress doing this.

JohnFen 1y ago

> Trump is the representation No, it's not. Congress is the representation, not the executive. The executive is supposed to implement what Congress decides.

hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
Well, the people voted for Congress, and Congress could curtail Trump's tariff-setting ability anytime they want to, and they have chosen not to. FWIW I agree that Congress has completely abdicated their duties, but by and large "the people" voted for this, it was not hidden or secret (for all his flaws Trump was very clear what he would do with respect to tariffs for a long time), and I think "taxation without representation" is an incredibly poor analogy.
Auracle 1y ago
And congress decided that the president can raise tariffs himself. Congress has given away a lot of power, of the years. Ironically I think this is one instance that sort of thing made sense, but they should have done their usual and made some sort of government agency to oversee it themselves. Neither congress nor the president are good managers of tariffs as they're unpopular in the short term, as we've seen, and need a long term outlook.
- vkou 1y ago
  It's fascinating that just last year, SCOTUS has determined that Congress couldn't delegate its powers to rulemaking agencies that Congress explicitly creates, charters, and funds. Yet, somehow, this implicit 'delegation' (where Congress is very actively doing nothing) is somehow kosher. As long as they won't impeach the leader of their party, anything goes! The man could drop a nuclear bomb on Ohio, and as long as he had 34 surviving votes in the Senate, he'd be fine. If this kind of congressional silence is endorsement, why the hell did SCOTUS get involved to start legislating regulations from the bench in the first place?
  - vel0city 1y ago
    It's not implicit, they're directly doing it. They made a law giving the executive this exact power. They then passed a law redefining the length of a day so they would prevent the countdown in that law from them actually reviewing these. That's right, the Republicans decided the rest of 2025 is just one long legal day.

autoexec 1y ago

People in DC have a legit complaint about "taxation without representation". Realistically, most people do too since corporations and industry are the only ones whose interests are typically represented, but that's more of a failure on our part for not firing the people who refuse to work for us. We elect them after all.

psunavy03 1y ago

Yeah, and they're called "Congress."

guywithahat 1y ago
No, it’s a power of the president

hn_throwaway_99 1y ago

I agree with you, but I would still argue that what is going on now is exactly what the Constitution was designed to prevent: rule by executive fiat. Congress controls fiscal policy, and they have complete given up any semblance of their duties in fealty to Trump. Heck, the law that Trump is using to set tariff policy is designed to only be used in cases "of national emergency", and Trump has simply defined national emergency to mean whatever he wants it to mean. I think this article gives a good overview of the issues: https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-usa-china-deal-is-bad-economics-democracy-trade-tariffs https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-usa-china-deal-is-bad-eco... It's similar to how Trump has redefined the simple meaning of "foreign invasion" to give cover to his deportations (in some cases I'd call them abductions) without due process. The people may have voted for this, but in the medium/long term it will be absolutely detrimental to our democracy.

autoexec 1y ago
> The people may have voted for this, but in the medium/long term it will be absolutely detrimental to our democracy. None of which was unanticipated. People had been warning voters about the danger to our democracy long before the election and a huge number of Americans decided that they really didn't care about protecting our democracy.
- strangattractor 1y ago
  Did they really make a conscious decision or was it we want a guy that runs the government like a Reality TV show. Ooops Donny doesn't like Mike (Waltz) any more so time to leave the Island. Pete sure is good at owning the libs - he gets to stay.
- vkou 1y ago
  Look, if you're going to make voters in Red America choose between democracy and voting for a Republican, they are going to pick the latter 100% of the time. It's just not important to them. If it were, they wouldn't have first primaried in, and then showed up for the guy in 2024[1]. --- [1] I can forgive 2016 and 2020, since at that point, his behavior wasn't that far out of bounds. Since then, he's moved on to conspiring with fraudulent electors, trying to rig vote counts, arresting and imprisoning people without trial, and looking to suspend habeas corpus. Not to mention pay-to-play for access, and treating the treasury like his own personal slush fund.

strangattractor 1y ago

"Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United"

lenerdenator 1y ago

> The phrase is "taxation without representation", and Trump is the representation. Incorrect. He is the executive. Congress is the representation.