So, Donald Trump decides that all your money belongs Government (like the Democrats)?

by Skip

tax policiesIt is well known that Democrats have been furious with companies undergoing tax inversions – a US company buys a foreign company and then moves its headquarters to that foreign entity.  Reason? US corporate taxes are too high compared to other countries.  Given that their legal fiduciary responsibility is to their shareholders, they do the deal.  However, our feckless Progressive politicians believe that they are ENTITLED, to THAT tax money and that companies are STEALING that money that “belongs” to them in government.

Doesn’t matter that it actually belongs to them that earned it.  That’s the selfishness of the Entitlement State.

And Donald Trump has joined that Democrat outcry, albeit for a different reason (emphasis mine, reformatted):

Donald Trump offered new details Sunday about his plan to tax companies that move their factories to other countries in order to save money on labor costs. The Republican nominee told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd he would consider taxing these corporations a certain percentage on their imports to the U.S. as a penalty for hurting the economy and putting Americans out of work. And he said that if the WTO tried to stop him, he might withdraw the United States from the organization.

“It could be 25%. It could be 35%. It could be 15%. I haven’t determined. And it could be different for different companies. We have been working on trying to stop this government, because we don’t know what we’re doing. And not only Obama, they’ve been trying to stop this from before Obama. But they don’t know.”  Trump said previous attempts to lower interest rates and implement zero-interest loans have failed, which is why he is thinking over this new approach.

This is so wrong in so many different ways and Trump should know better (or those supporting him):

  • Jobs are a side benefit and not the main business of a business. Politicians believe otherwise (or at least say so in pandering for votes).
  • Companies do leave when confronted with uncooperative or bankrupting conditions – which are a function of a number of issues but certainly politicians and bureaucrats that have never signed the front of a paycheck putting more and more on companies’ back don’t help (re: minimum wage uplifts in Washington State, Oregon, and San Francisco for starters).
  • Hurting the economy?  See above – remove the often politically created barriers which often are the tipping point of go-no go.
  • “Different companies”?  So much for equality before the law when the Law, in the Donald’s eyes, is just relative.  Winners and losers should not be the domain of Government but in this, Trump seems to be aligned with the Dems (big surprise, right?).
  • Freedom – is it really up to Government to take the ability to move away?  Where in the Constitution does it give them that power (hint: it isn’t in the original meaning of the Commerce Clause which was to prevent in-fighting and retribution  between the States.

Notice that Trump talked about interest rates and loans – but not about the role that government has played in making industries packing up and leaving (the “thumb on the scale”).  To date, I have pretty much stayed out of the fray about Trump but I could not keep quiet on this.

This is wrong, wrong, wrong – he’s attacking the fundamentally the wrong issues.



Leave a Comment

  • Bryan W

    We know we didn’t get a conservative, and that he is deeply flawed, especially when off the teleprompter.

    We also know Hillary is an un-indicted criminal and cannot be permitted to rob the Constitution and the people for the next 20+ years with court appointments and the enlargement of the administrative state.

    Based on that, what purpose does it serve to keep pointing out the obvious? Our guys lost – he won. Move on.

    • granitegrok

      “Move on.”
      Because sometimes, it isn’t obvious to a bunch of people.

      Besides, I blog on what interests me and this caught my interest. And sometimes I DO like beating a dead horse because too many Republicans keep acting like dead horses on policies

      • sb

        I think you’ll find that even Trump supporters are aware of what his flaws are but have judged the other issues he is strong on to be crucial to fix NOW. And it also bears repeating that Ted wasn’t perfect, either (TPP, Goldman Sachs ties, place of birth, etc).

        That said, I agree with you on the topic of this entry. The outrageous regulations and taxes need to be dropped, not punish the businesses for wanting to flee them.

  • Casual observer

    He needs his advisors to tell him the laws of equal protection. And a history lesson on the Great Depression starting in the 1920’s with protectionist policies of Hoover.

    • Bruce Currie

      Your history lesson on the Great Depression would be interesting, but probably not very historical. This blog’s favorite president, Calvin Coolidge, was president for most of the ’20’s. Hoover was president from 1929 to 1933.

  • Bruce Currie

    Lewis Powell would be proud. The Koch Brothers surely are. Your screed is right out of their rewrite of US economic history and the Constitution, over which they’ve labored mightily for the better part of 4 decades, providing the $$$ to mercenaries in think tanks they’ve bankrolled and in academic institutions they’ve bribed. Enlightened self-interest, or an expression of naked corporate greed? As the network known as Fox, but in light of recent news, might more aptly be labeled: ‘Pig’, famously put it: “we report, you decide.”

  • Bruce Currie

    What a piece of argle-bargle. It ignores our own history, in favor of a glibertarian, bull**** , economic philosophy that, had the Founders followed Skip’s advice, would have left us a third world nation and a permanent colony of Europe. N. America might today more closely resemble S. America.

    “For about 200 years, we understood well the benefits of tariffs, subsidized exports and protectionist policies in the United States. Had the fathers of the United States like Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Andrew Jackson or Ulysses Grant applied for IMF loans, they would have been denied: All of them believed in high tariffs and a heavy control of foreign investment, and considered “free trade” to be absurd.

    But it was another Founding Father—Alexander Hamilton—who knew best how to spawn American industry to make the country independent and competitive. As the nation’s first Treasury Secretary, Hamilton submitted his Report on the Subject of Manufactures in 1791 to the US Congress, outlining the need for our government to foster new industries through “bounties” (subsidies) and subsequently protect them from foreign imports until they become globally competitive.

    Additionally, he proposed a roadmap for American industrial development. These steps included protective tariffs on imports, import bans, subsides, export bans on selected materials, and the development of product standards.

    It was this approach of putting America first that our government followed for most of our history, with average tariffs of 30 percent through the 19th and 20th centuries. There is no denying that it helped turn America into an industrial and economic juggernaut in the mid-20th century and beyond.

    The three periods when we radically dropped tariffs – for three years in 1857, for nine years in 1913, and by Reagan in 1987 – were all followed by economic disasters, particularly for small American manufacturers.

    The post-Reagan era has been particularly destructive to our economy because not only did we mostly eliminate the tariffs, but we became “free trade” proponents on the international stage. After Reagan blew out our tariffs in the 1980s, and Clinton kicked the door totally open with GATT, NAFTA, and the WTO, our average tariffs are now around 2 percent.

    And the predictable result has been the hemorrhaging of American manufacturing capacity to those countries that do protect their industries through high import tariffs but allow exports on the cheap – particularly China and South Korea.

    The irony is that we have abandoned Hamilton’s advice—and our own history—while China, South Korea, Japan and other nations are following his prescriptions and turning into muscular and prosperous economic entities.”

    • Radical Moderate

      Holy Cripes Skip! I’m agreeing with Bruce Currie! I feel nauseous.
      However I don’t think Bruce will agree with my reasoning since he doesn’t want to see a ‘Traditional’ America return once again.
      Look at it this way…The powers that be brought America to where it is today by using extreme and unconstitutional measures. I’m sure you will agree with that.
      In order to return America to its ‘Traditional/Historic’ form it will take the exact same. I’m sorry to break it to you if you didn’t know already, but unfortunately we will not escape this situation by ‘Democratic’ means.
      There is only one choice. Trust Trump to do the right thing with his ‘Pen & Phone’ and force of will or let Hilary get elected and watch our Constitutional Republic vanish before our very eyes. Never to be seen again. The powers that be intend on changing our voting system to the ‘popular vote’ which is why they have been flooding the country with illiterate masses. Then its game over.
      It seems like a pretty clear choice to me.

      • Bruce Currie

        It depends on what your definition of “traditional” is.

        • Radical Moderate

          ‘Traditional’ in my book is defined as Eurocentric. America must return to the same values based in Western Civilization as it was when founded.
          And no Bruce…it doesn’t mean a return to slavery, patriarchy or any of the other negative traits that were unfortunately part of America’s history.
          The reality is that Western Civilization should be recognized for the immense good that it has brought to the world and it should return as the guiding star of our Nation.
          Now go ahead and flame away.

          • Bruce Currie

            In general terms, I’m going to agree with you, by avoiding getting into specifics. The point of my post above, and where I differ with Skip’s post, is the fact we ( or rather the 1% and the neo-liberal economists they underwrite) have made markets the central fact of life. It’s been done at the expense of democracy and national sovereignty. The most flagrant current examples of this are the Investor State Dispute Systems (ISDS) of the TPP and other trade deals, that Obama has hoped to get through Congress via fast track. The underlying premise is that the marketplace itself is the supreme good, with no regard to how goods and services that the market is supposed to provide are actually produced. Libertarian and mainstream economists have churned out endless bull**** claiming markets are supposedly self-regulating, at least in the long run. But that claim doesn’t account for the existence of monopolies– in the Robber Baron era, for example, they preceded government regulation (so government “regulations” can’t be blamed for creating them). And as Keynes said, in the long run, we’re all dead.

          • Radical Moderate

            Amazing…100% correct!
            You make the statement “It’s been done at the expense of democracy and national sovereignty”, which is the entire thrust behind Globalism and the so called ‘New World Order’. The plan for years has been to work towards tearing down borders, ensuring a free flow of labor and creating a centralized monetary system, all of which only benefit the global 1%. Unfortunately one of the byproducts of the ‘free flow of labor’ is that it works to depress the living standards of ‘First World’ nations and elevate the living standards of all other nations with the caveat that the Global 1% is entitled to their natural resources. This, of course was part of the entire plan since the begining. There must be an equalization of living standards around the globe before they can be merged into one OS (operating system) for lack of a better term. This is why I advocate Economic Nationalism. What do I consider Economic Nationalism? That’s an easy answer…before one engages in any type of business transaction, the first question in ones mind should be; will this transaction adversely affect my country and my fellow citizens?
            Do not mistake me for an isolationist, I believe it is possible to have a healthy system of Global trade while still maintaining strict borders and while still having a strong sense of National Identity.
            For the past fifty years I have witnessed our Nation being destroyed by politicians that were sworn to protect its people. They were elected to stand on the watch tower while the rest of us were occupied by going to work every day with our heads down to the grind stone. We trusted them to watch our backs. The American worker has been betrayed by those in power and positions of trust. The labor Unions that were instituted to protect the American worker have been bought off by the Globalists as is evidenced by the wholesale loss of benefits and pensions countrywide.
            This is why Trump speaks to me. He appears to understand that American businesses cannot prosper if its customer base is poor or struggling. The only ones that prosper in that type of environment are the Global Bankers who lend because workers need to borrow in order to live at the same level as the people that came before us. Global Bankers that can, in turn, afford to buy off politicians on both the Left and the Right. There are people that thrive financially in the midst of economic chaos. The cry of the Left is a ‘living wage’ but wages are not the problem. It is merely a distraction which is being used to create friction between the classes. The REAL problem is inflation. The dollar has lost its value which is why prices have skyrocketed. They won’t talk about it, because the worry is that people may begin to ask questions about what happened to our economy and why did the value of our dollar plummet in relation to goods and services. Which may lead them to discover the how it all circles right back to Globalism.
            Trump appears to be shining a light on all the right culprits. The same culprits that have been responsible for disrupting other nations and peoples under false pretenses. The same culprits that have manipulated our international markets. The same culprits that have bought up all the main stream media in order to keep people distracted and ignorant.
            It really does appear Trump is daring to point his finger at the same culprits that have been literally tearing apart our Globe limb from limb in order to reshape it into something more pleasing to their own vanity.
            As I previously said; “This is why Trump speaks to me”.
            All the best,
            “If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed by the truth.” ? Carl Sagan

Previous post:

Next post: