2 ms·

It's even worse than that. Their argument against corporate income taxes is that any tax imposed on a corporation is just passed on to consumers. Hard to see w

by tzs 1y ago

It's even worse than that. Their argument against corporate income taxes is that any tax imposed on a corporation is just passed on to consumers. Hard to see why companies would pass on a government imposed tax if it is an income tax but not a tariff. If anything you'd expect it to be the other way around, because an income tax allows deductions for much of the cost of making that income which generally means the amount of tax is lower in times when the business is not making much money, whereas a tariff is on the cost if the businesses imports which can remain high even in times where the business is not making money.

tracker1 1y ago
Both are passed to consumers... the difference is a tariff is a point for international negotiation, there are competing options to a tariffed product, and it's a relativistic approach. The U.S. has lost so much in terms of even being able to produce anything that it's in a weak position not just in terms of trade, but in domestic security in and of itself. The lesson from COVID should be that ensuring domestic production of at least SOME of everything that CAN be produced domestically in the US should be ensured to exist. As examples... IMO, all prescription medications/devices should require dual sourcing and at least 50% domestic production. This ensures actual patent licensing as well as being able to ramp up from 50% in case of a need (war/pandemic). It's nearly impossible to ramp up from 0, but easy to ramp up from 50%. This can/should be extended to essential infrastructure, communications and technologies. Most countries don't have the size/scale/scope to do this... the U.S. and a handful of other countries are and should take advantage of that and ensure it for their own critical security. I don't say any of this from an isolationist PoV, I think trade is important... I think diplomacy is important... I just feel that a level of domestic security in terms of self-reliance at a certain level is more important.

by tzs 1y ago

tracker1 1y ago

Both are passed to consumers... the difference is a tariff is a point for international negotiation, there are competing options to a tariffed product, and it's a relativistic approach. The U.S. has lost so much in terms of even being able to produce anything that it's in a weak position not just in terms of trade, but in domestic security in and of itself. The lesson from COVID should be that ensuring domestic production of at least SOME of everything that CAN be produced domestically in the US should be ensured to exist. As examples... IMO, all prescription medications/devices should require dual sourcing and at least 50% domestic production. This ensures actual patent licensing as well as being able to ramp up from 50% in case of a need (war/pandemic). It's nearly impossible to ramp up from 0, but easy to ramp up from 50%. This can/should be extended to essential infrastructure, communications and technologies. Most countries don't have the size/scale/scope to do this... the U.S. and a handful of other countries are and should take advantage of that and ensure it for their own critical security. I don't say any of this from an isolationist PoV, I think trade is important... I think diplomacy is important... I just feel that a level of domestic security in terms of self-reliance at a certain level is more important.