Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

MoneyWatch The Trump tariffs aren't causing U.S. prices to spike.

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by OklahomaGator, Jun 28, 2025 at 1:40 AM.

  1. Donzo

    Donzo GC Hall of Fame

    2,062
    755
    313
    May 20, 2008
    Of course... The TACO excretion is so lame and ignorant it's less than worthless.

    For the hate mongering left no to understand the process of Trump's tariffs is beyond witless- Like China was going to have a 245% tariff.

    upload_2025-6-28_14-16-57.jpeg



    For chickening out- don't let the facts stop the lies:
    • May 2025: The U.S. collected nearly $23 billion in tariff revenue, setting a new monthly record, about three times the amount collected in May 2024.

     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  2. vegasfox

    vegasfox GC Hall of Fame

    3,856
    325
    148
    Feb 4, 2024
    Posters don't understand what causes inflation
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    18,549
    2,445
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Here is the problem with the "it was just negotiation" explanation: if true, it is a noncredible threat. That makes it not useful from a negotiation standpoint. Which is why what we have gotten for tariffs is...higher tariffs than we previously had on our products. And that is about it.

    Who did they collect that from, specifically? Did you ever imagine yourself cheering higher taxes?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. ATLGATORFAN

    ATLGATORFAN Premium Member

    4,183
    1,107
    2,153
    Aug 10, 2015
    this part is a tough one to hear…… take for example 21% of the entire budget……social security…… is 100% a Ponzi scheme. You or I design that system and open a business tomorrow, we both go to prison. I mean by definition it requires new suckers to pay in every year because the money is gone. The design and fleecing of The funds have always made it a mathematical certainty it implodes…. what has the left done for decades?. Not thought about the long term because the effects of this absurd program wouldn’t be felt by the politicians imposing it, 1. Because they are not required to contribute and 2, their political careers over and riches made long before it blows up. Makes madoff look like a piker. There are plenty of us who have been shouting that for decades. Yet here we are. So tap the brakes on pointing fingers at who is thinking immediate vs long term.

    Social Security constitutes approximately 21% of the total federal budget. In fiscal year 2024, the federal government spent $1.5 trillion on Social Security, which was about 22.4% of the total federal spending of $6.78 trillion, according to USAFacts. This makes it one of the largest individual programs funded by the federal government
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. gatorpa

    gatorpa GC Hall of Fame

    12,545
    1,248
    708
    Sep 5, 2010
    East Coast of FL
    Plus a 0.9% drop is pretty small.

    Consumers may have been fearful due to the sky is falling crowd and did not keep spending as frivolous as they tend to do.

    I’ll personally thank all the doom and gloom that crushed the market in early April. Let me double down and get into some names that had run too much for me to take a position. I’m up 25% or so since then
     
  6. coleg

    coleg GC Hall of Fame

    2,484
    860
    1,928
    Sep 5, 2011
    Social Security spent aprox, 1.5 T but it took in 1.42 T. The net not the total expense is the issue.
     
  7. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    5,560
    976
    2,578
    Aug 14, 2007
    lol republicans have had plenty of chances to address this and haven’t. I can’t believe you just pointed the finger on ss at just the left. I’m not even sure why you brought that up in a thread on tariffs but ok. You do you.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. vaxcardinal

    vaxcardinal GC Hall of Fame

    10,148
    1,413
    2,793
    Apr 8, 2007
    How have democrats addressed it given that they too have had plenty of chances to address it
     
  9. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    5,560
    976
    2,578
    Aug 14, 2007
    they haven’t when did I say they did?
     
  10. vaxcardinal

    vaxcardinal GC Hall of Fame

    10,148
    1,413
    2,793
    Apr 8, 2007
    You didn’t…just pointing that out since you only giving half the picture
     
  11. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    12,839
    1,230
    1,618
    Apr 9, 2007
    The OP article mentions companies loading up on inventory before tariffs hit. Here's the million dollar question. How long before that inventory is gone and what happens to prices when companies restock?

    And we're already seeing price increases from tariffs. But they aren't big because we're seeing demand drops. For comparison, 2009 saw a reduction in consumer spending by 2.4%. It also saw deflation by .4%. So how are we seeing a monthly drop in consumer demand with no corresponding price drop at all? I'm fact, inflation has remained constant at around 2.3%.

    The economic indicators should be slowing down inflation. They aren't. So back to the million dollar question. What happens next?
     
  12. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    5,560
    976
    2,578
    Aug 14, 2007
    lol I haven’t given hair the picture of anything. My god. You’re so desperate to pivot and deflect it’s pathetic.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. vaxcardinal

    vaxcardinal GC Hall of Fame

    10,148
    1,413
    2,793
    Apr 8, 2007
    1st sentence of post 27
     
  14. GolphinGator

    GolphinGator GC Hall of Fame

    3,953
    4,535
    2,213
    Apr 9, 2007
    Gainesville/ Micanopy
    No one is counting lower fuel cost. Shipping cost has to be down a good bit with the prices at the pumps being and staying lower. That has to help offset any increase in product cost. I would think
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    91,092
    27,431
    14,613
    Apr 3, 2007
  16. ATLGATORFAN

    ATLGATORFAN Premium Member

    4,183
    1,107
    2,153
    Aug 10, 2015
    the argument was immediate vs long term. I presented that any program( I used SS as an example ) that was mathematically certain to implode was/is the textbook definition of short term solution. Also please don’t attempt to conflate my argument of leftist and exchange that for democrat. I presented that leftist, of which FDR was certainly a hard core leftist, had spent their political careers exchanging short term political gain at the expense of long term viable programs of which again SS was always calculated to blow up. So again tap the brakes on saying who is using short term vs long term as the problem. Thread creep not intended.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  17. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    7,825
    682
    443
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    I love that someone "disagreed" with this. I needed a laugh. Thanks man!

    Wow, just imagine being "that guy".
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  18. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    7,825
    682
    443
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    Provided talking points. Why the "thought" ends there and can't be expanded on. Just sloganeering.
     
  19. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    5,560
    976
    2,578
    Aug 14, 2007
    All I read here is deflection from the op - which is about short term outcomes of tariffs implying that concerns about them may be overblown. I brought up long term concerns and you pivot to fdr and ss? lol ok.
     
  20. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    24,298
    2,091
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    A more accurate title of this thread would have been "MoneyWatch The Trump tariffs haven't caused U.S. prices to spike yet." The article itself explains why the tariffs haven't had much of an impact yet. Some relevant excerpts from the article:
    • Some businesses facing higher tariffs are choosing to hold off on passing any cost increases through to consumers as they wait for the fog around U.S. trade policy to lift.
    • After the Trump administration announced a range of tariffs on Canada, China, Mexico and dozens of other countries earlier this year, many companies scrambled to stock up, or front-load, on products, parts and other imports to avoid incurring added tariff costs. "They tried to front-run the imposition of the duties by importing rapidly," Daco said. "They bought goods they needed and stocked them, so that was the first line of defense against the tariffs."
    • Although Mr. Trump has announced sky-high tariff rates, the actual duties collected at the U.S. border so far are lower than the official rates. That's because some importers have been able to skirt the levies by storing goods in so-called bonded warehouses or foreign trade zones. Businesses can use bonded warehouses, which are usually located near major commercial ports, to temporarily store goods, components and other inputs without immediately having to pay tariffs or taxes.
    There is a good chance that the tariffs will result in either increased prices, shortages or both later down the road. There is also a very real possibility that Trump will either continue delaying implementation of the more egregious tariffs or could end up reducing them and although somewhat unlikely considering its recent history of capitulating to Trump there is even the possibility that in end the SCOTUS could decide that Trump exceeded his statutory authority in imposing the tariffs.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2025 at 12:04 PM
    • Winner Winner x 1