Prices of Goods in the U.S. Did Not Rise At All Despite China Tariff Hike

Very common ive noticed. Sickening , isnt it?

 

Thanks for being an honest liberal and demonstrating that liberals want the US to fail.

BTW, how do you earn your living? I ask because I am trying to grasp how/why liberal hope for economic failure. Most people who work for a living certainly don't want economic failure.

 

Yes it does.

First, the Duties ARE being paid.

Federal duties revenue have skyrocketed under Trump:



So the Duties are being paid by someone.

If that someone was the US Consumer as all the anti-Trumpers claimed, then we would be seeing price inflation. We are not:

 

No, it doesn't. You said "consumer prices are very tame" but it shows price levels are 4.2% higher than they were a year ago.

That's not "very tame." That is well above FOMC's inflation target of 2%. Either you mean't to show a different chart, or you don't seem to know how to read it, because it is indexed for 1982-1984. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for the latter.

 

Actually I am.

Months later, though, Trump imposed new tariffs on imported steel and aluminum that increased prices for many American manufacturers, including carmakers. He followed those tariffs with others targeting Chinese-made goods, including parts used specifically in the manufacturing of automobiles. General Motors, in July, said Trump's tariffs would cost it more than $1 billion over a full year and the company's chief financial officer told Reuters that GM would deal with those added costs by "negotiating price reductions with suppliers, raising prices on more popular models, and cost cutting."

The cost-cutting happened on Monday, when GM announced that it would eliminate about 14,000 jobs in North America and could close five manufacturing plants. Alongside two plants in Michigan, one in Maryland, and one in Ontario, Canada, GM said one of the plants targeted to be closed—or, um, "unallocated" in the awful PR-jargon used by GM in the announcement—is just outside of Youngstown, Ohio.

Ford is having a bad year in 2018. Its stock is down 29%, and the tariffs imposed by President Trump have reportedly cost the company $1 billion, as the company is in the midst of a reorganization. Now, the company is announcing layoffs.

Jim Hackett, Ford’s CEO, is working to engineer a $25.5 billion restructuring of the automaker, hoping to cut costs and remain competitive, the Wall Street Journal reports. But auto sales are down, and one reason is the trade tariffs that Trump has imposed on metals and other goods. According to Bloomberg, Hackett has said they have already cost the company $1 billion in profit and could do “more damage” if the disputes aren’t resolved quickly.

Don't sell your house. Those jobs are coming back. *****.

 

No it doesn't, it's a metric zeroed at the early 80's.

Yes it is.

US consumer prices tick up just 0.1% as inflation stays tame

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...7ab84aef3e9_story.html?utm_term=.c74fabf681a6

No it isn't.

The increase in the cost of living over the past 12 months slipped to four-month low 1.6% from 1.8%.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/c...ws-but-price-pressures-still-muted-2019-07-11

Big picture: Inflation has eased in 2019 to a 2% rate or less, confounding predictions that a tight labor market and record economic expansion would generate higher prices. Just a year earlier, inflation was running at a nearly 3% pace.​

The anti-Trumpers have been consistently wrong about the Trump economy the whole time. Now their prediction that his tariffs would cause price inflation has joined their other predictions, face planted into the asphalt. I don't see how their credibility recovers from this.

 

GM and several other makers are cutting back on small sedans, etc because they aren't selling.

People want SUVs/cross overs.

Auto sales may be down-but their price isn't rising due to tariffs.

 

I don't know how we're going to have a meaningful conversation because you don't seem to understand that the chart that I'm quoting does not reflect anything that you are saying, nor does it reflect anything in the articles that you are source. As such, I think it'll be better if I did you a favor and show you how to read the chart.

1) X-axis shows quarterly 1 year interval from June 2018 - June 2019.

2) Y-axis shows change from a year ago. It should be "percentage change from a year ago." Your chart shows the change in the price level (index) when it should be presented in percentage terms. So, I was wrong about the original interreptation. You're not overstating inflation, you're not representing it accurately.

The inflation chart that you're trying to present is this. I don't know how you can discuss economic indicators without accurately presenting the data.

 

^^^^ Yet again a Leftist wants failure for Americans.

 

You seem to have lost your way in the discussion.

Trump imposed Tariffs, they ARE being paid. You can really see the collection of tariffs by the US treasury spike like nothing we have seen in our lifetimes, especially from the second half of 2018 to the present.



So, the tariffs are being paid. We were confidently assured by the anti-Trumpers that these tariffs would be paid by the US Consumer in the form of skyrocketing inflation, yet, once again, that is not the case, in fact, inflation is quite tame.

So, Trump is collecting $Billions in fresh federal revenue that is not coming from the pockets of the US consumer, which seems to only bother you and the anti-Trumpers.

The rest of us are pleased that wages for American Blue Collar Workers are finally growing faster than White Collar wages.


Trump fights the globalists on behalf of the American Worker.

 

And there are still a few RINOs that need to face primary opponents.
Amash saw that coming and saved us a little trouble.

 

Your claim is that "Consumer prices are very tame," then proceeded to show a chart. I pointed out that your chart does not support your claims; particularly the fact that consumer prices are very tame. It's presenting the CPI inflation in index change, not in percentage change.

That is an honest mistake but if you plan on using statistics to support your argument, you should at least make sure the information is accurate.

As for everything else, that's not remotely related to the issues I have raised so I'm not going to address it.

 

Because of course the Trump so called trade deal was nothing more than an update of the previous deal. Basically nobody gained or lost anything.

 

Did we get a massive reduction in price from Trump's gift to corporations?

 

Can you provide any evidence that Trump's America cares about it's workers? You do know that the overwhelming majority ( about 84%) of his tax cut went to the rich. And that hourly wage growth has barely beat inflation during his presidency.

 

Reduction in which prices?

 

Price of consumer goods. Did they go down significantly after Trump's gift to the corporations or did as reported the overwhelming benefit go to stockholders and corporate officres?

You don't actually have to answer because of course the data is inarguable.

 

I don't know. It's unclear what you are asking. And the price of consumer goods? I'm going to assume you're talking about inflation. If that is the case, name your preferred inflation prehaps I'll be able to tell you.

As for the "overwhelming benefit go to stockholders and corporate officers?" I don't know how you would describe a "benefit." I would define a benefit as how disposable personal income response to changes in fiscal policy, namely tax cuts.

Disposable personal income (DPI). Disposable Perosnal Income = Personal Income less Personal Current Taxes.

The purpose of tax cuts mostly affects DPI; basic macro prinicple. You can see from the data that average DPI growth increased as a result.

It's one thing to have confidence of your own expectations; it's another to actually meet them. You would be better off entering your future discussions assuming that there is always someone who knows something that you do not know.

 

I don't blame you.

 

Thump has to work with them and come up with a deal both countries can agree on, not sure Trump is capable

if he is not, China will just wait it out, even if it meant 4 more year, which is very doubtful

China's new dictator also has to save face, this can not be a 100% super win for Trump, that is not how deals work, both sides have to be able to declare it a win to their people

 

No one quits making things they are making money on.

 

And yet consumers have set the market. And its a trend that long predates Trump.

 

Your chart doesn't mean anything as to who is paying for the tariffs.
For all we know business is absorbing them at the cost of profits.
The number is much to small to move CPI around much in total.
If you really wanted to see the effect you would look at the chart posted earlier that shows CPI by the tariff codes.
Did you know 3 more coal mines went bankrupt last month?

 

How much intellectual property should we allow them to steal in the name of compromise? How much of a trade advantage should we give them in the name of compromise?
A level trading field and no theft of intellectual property. No compromise.

 

So you think the Chinese are paying them?