this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
227 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19844 readers
3932 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Article for people who can't visit the website.Republished here under their terms:

S&P says effects of Trump's tariff plans 'overwhelmingly negative'.

By Brett Rowland | The Center Square

The Capitol decorated from President Donald Trump's second inauguration on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025.Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies

(The Center Square) – A credit-rating agency reported Thursday that President Donald Trump's proposed tariffs could slow economic growth, increase inflation and push up unemployment.

The S&P Global Ratings economics team, in its first high level estimates, found the potential effects of the tariffs were "overwhelmingly negative," according to the report.

S&P analysts said the tariffs could slow gross domestic product growth, boost unemployment and inflation. It noted that "the effects on the U.S. are smaller than for trading partners." Gross domestic product, or GDP, is a measure of economic output.

Trump proposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from Canada and Mexico, and an additional 10% tariff on goods imported from China. Last-minute negotiations ended with a one-month reprieve for both Mexico and Canada.

S&P noted the uncertainty around Trump's tariff plans creates problems for businesses and U.S. families.

"Uncertainty around the path of U.S. policy and its objectives is high, and confidence bands around our forecasts are correspondingly wide," according to the S&P report. "Moreover, the ongoing deal-making mode of the new administration risks complicating long-term decision making by both firms and households."

On Tuesday, Trump paused his plans for 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada while starting talks with China on a 10% additional tariff over fentanyl smuggling.

On Saturday, Trump ended decades of duty-free trade between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada with a 25% tariff on imported goods from the two countries, with a lower 10% tariff on Canadian energy resources. Trump initially said he'd keep the tariffs in place until the illegal fentanyl trade subsided. He also added a 10% tariff on imports from China over that country's role in producing the chemicals needed to make fentanyl, a powerful opioid blamed for the majority of U.S. overdose deaths.

Two days after imposing tariffs on U.S. neighbors, Trump relented after reaching temporary deals with Mexico and Canada. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said Mexico will immediately reinforce the border with 10,000 members of the National Guard in a move to stop drug trafficking. Drug trafficking that has been a problem for both the U.S. and Mexico for decades. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also promised to reinforce the northern U.S. border in exchange for a pause on tariffs.

China hit back earlier this week with limited tariffs on U.S. imports. The Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council of China put additional tariffs on some U.S. imports while filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization.

A credit-rating agency reported Thursday that President Donald Trump's proposed tariffs could slow economic growth, increase inflation and push up unemployment.

all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 hours ago

They're going to make money either way. That's why these creeps all support Trump, capitalism, etc.

[–] aggelalex@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Unavailable due to legal reasons. Site doesn't serve for GDPR countries. Care to copy the article for people like me?

[–] Cat@ponder.cat 3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Article.S&P says effects of Trump's tariff plans 'overwhelmingly negative'.

By Brett Rowland | The Center Square

The Capitol decorated from President Donald Trump's second inauguration on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025.Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies

(The Center Square) – A credit-rating agency reported Thursday that President Donald Trump's proposed tariffs could slow economic growth, increase inflation and push up unemployment.

The S&P Global Ratings economics team, in its first high level estimates, found the potential effects of the tariffs were "overwhelmingly negative," according to the report.

S&P analysts said the tariffs could slow gross domestic product growth, boost unemployment and inflation. It noted that "the effects on the U.S. are smaller than for trading partners." Gross domestic product, or GDP, is a measure of economic output.

Trump proposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from Canada and Mexico, and an additional 10% tariff on goods imported from China. Last-minute negotiations ended with a one-month reprieve for both Mexico and Canada.

S&P noted the uncertainty around Trump's tariff plans creates problems for businesses and U.S. families.

"Uncertainty around the path of U.S. policy and its objectives is high, and confidence bands around our forecasts are correspondingly wide," according to the S&P report. "Moreover, the ongoing deal-making mode of the new administration risks complicating long-term decision making by both firms and households."

On Tuesday, Trump paused his plans for 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada while starting talks with China on a 10% additional tariff over fentanyl smuggling.

On Saturday, Trump ended decades of duty-free trade between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada with a 25% tariff on imported goods from the two countries, with a lower 10% tariff on Canadian energy resources. Trump initially said he'd keep the tariffs in place until the illegal fentanyl trade subsided. He also added a 10% tariff on imports from China over that country's role in producing the chemicals needed to make fentanyl, a powerful opioid blamed for the majority of U.S. overdose deaths.

Two days after imposing tariffs on U.S. neighbors, Trump relented after reaching temporary deals with Mexico and Canada. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said Mexico will immediately reinforce the border with 10,000 members of the National Guard in a move to stop drug trafficking. Drug trafficking that has been a problem for both the U.S. and Mexico for decades. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also promised to reinforce the northern U.S. border in exchange for a pause on tariffs.

China hit back earlier this week with limited tariffs on U.S. imports. The Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council of China put additional tariffs on some U.S. imports while filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization.

[–] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 14 points 18 hours ago

So, all the things they already said before the election in which a significant portion of Americans voted for him because of economic and totally not bigotry related reasons?

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago

Lol "could"? What else are they going to do?

[–] kava@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

i wonder if it's all just a big show. he threatened tariffs to mexico and canada. when canada said "ok bro fuck you too" all of a sudden they come to an agreement to delay. similar story in Mexico. in a few weeks he'll say "i got the best deal out of the history of deals. Mexico and Canada are gonna pay their fair share" and people will forget about it to focus on the next ludicrous thing he says

i wonder if it's gonna be the same with the deportations. something like 5% of the workforce is illegal. and they are highly concentrated in specific industries. it would wreck havoc on those industries and the economy as a whole. it's really hard to understate. something like every 100 illegals deported causes something like 18 jobs to be lost according to research from Iza based on Obama's radical deportations. (Obama's 1st and 2nd term both deported more than Trump's first term)

i read an analysis by an economist the other day, the deportations alone could reduce lead to the GDP shrinking by something like 3%. keep in mind the housing crisis back in '08 led to a 2.4% decrease in GDP

basically- if Trump actually goes through with his plans we're in for a long period of economic hardship that we haven't seen in half a century. and with it comes lots of radical movements because people will be angry and scared and the right wing is more than happy to throw fuel on the fire

however.. maybe this is all sort of a show. Kind of like his last term with "the Wall". The wall was never meant to be built nor was it meant to accomplish anything. It was just a big theater for his base. An easy to understand symbol to point to. Trump supporters believe based on feeling and not on logic.

of course, that could just be me being optimistic.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

It’s all a show to keep everyone angry but distracted from who’s actually pulling strings. They’re going to do whatever they want, toss blame somewhere else, we’ll all rush over there and get riled up, while they’re halfway through the next thing.

They do what they want because there are no repercussions. They’re untouchable, so far, so we have no reason to assume anything will get better as the people who’ve been fucking us for centuries just took all the power under the guise of “we are so going to help all of you”.

I have no idea where society’s “line” is, but so far they haven’t crossed it despite all of the shit they’ve already done. The housing crisis was them. No repercussions. Many got stupid rich because of it, even. In fact, every financial crisis is the direct result of the behaviour of this minuscule group of sociopaths who escape any kind of punishment pretty much 100% of the time.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The wall wasn't a show, it was expensive, a lot of it was put up, and what didn't happen was the result of concentrated effort. This time the dems seem more resigned

[–] kava@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

It was always meant to be a show

The border is over 1,500 miles. It's so wildly expensive and impractical to build a wall over all of it that the notion is absurd. And if you build a wall, people will climb over it. They will bury underneath it. They will cut through it. Etc

Even if he had succeeded there is little chance it would have meaningfully stemmed the tide of illegals coming across the border. Trump was fully aware of this. But it's doesn't matter- like I said- it was show. Americans don't want a complicated speech on the nuances of economic migrant migration to the US. They don't want to hear about labor shortages in the US and the changing demographics.

It's much easier to say "We're building a Wall" and everybody applauds. Trump on a fundamental level understands this very well. And he's really really good at it.

Having said all that- it doesn't even take into considering more than majority of illegals in the US did not cross the border at all. They come on legal visas at legal ports of entries like airports and just overstay their visa. So the Wall is incapable of even impacting the largest source of illegal immigrants.

what didn’t happen was the result of concentrated effort. This time the dems seem more resigned

The Dems have slowly been joining the GOP in the anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Joe Biden near the end of his turn did a photoshoot with CBP and talked about strong borders and used the world "illegal" in a speech. He promised to halt the construction of "the Wall"- he instead expanded construction.

Back when Biden was running initially he campaigned on "a compassionate approach to immigration". Kamala, however, campaigned on "strong border and national security"

The entire country is becoming radicalized. That isn't to say GOP (and Trump especially) is more extreme, but a rising tide lifts all boats. or maybe sinks them, I don't know