https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6364963029112
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
Walmart CFO: Tariffs are going to be inflationary, there's no disputing that
2,198 Views |
73 Replies |
Last: 30 sec ago by No Spin Ag
What, now we're worried about inflation???
This argument assumes there will be tariffs. Trump has been clear that he is using them to leverage American companies to return production to the states to create jobs. If those companies do that their products won't face tariffs.
Having said Wal Mart and Amazon are the kings of "Made in China" so I'm confident he sees tariffs on Chinese products as a threat to his business and he's right.
Then you have the reduction in energy costs that will come from his focus on reducing to cost of production of oil and gas which is deflationary. That will to some degree offset potential tariffs.
Having said Wal Mart and Amazon are the kings of "Made in China" so I'm confident he sees tariffs on Chinese products as a threat to his business and he's right.
Then you have the reduction in energy costs that will come from his focus on reducing to cost of production of oil and gas which is deflationary. That will to some degree offset potential tariffs.
A fearful society is a compliant society. That's why Democrats and criminals prefer their victims to be unarmed. Gun Control is not about guns, it's about control.
Detmersdislocatedshoulder
Joined:
Mar 30, 2020
Posts:
12,920
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bazooka Joe said:
What, now we're worried about inflation???
and it's literally coming from the sane people who promised you it was transitory
I agreed with this 6 years ago because the American consumer does pay the tariff.
But Trump proved to me he knows how to effectively use tariffs and the threat of tariffs. He is trying to make our manufacturing more robust and decrease dependency on Chyna for anything he can.
I support the bludgeoning of our foes and rebuilding manufacturing in America that rebuilds towns and communities full of people that are like minded. And I am willing to pay more for it if I must.
But Trump proved to me he knows how to effectively use tariffs and the threat of tariffs. He is trying to make our manufacturing more robust and decrease dependency on Chyna for anything he can.
I support the bludgeoning of our foes and rebuilding manufacturing in America that rebuilds towns and communities full of people that are like minded. And I am willing to pay more for it if I must.
Reality is our overseas trading "partners" do not play the free market game with us. So as long as used strategically and surgically, tariffs (and threatening tariffs) are a way to put ourselves in a better position overall. I'm as free market of a guy as it gets, but I also realize we are already getting battered and fighting with one hand tied behind our back. I hope to mostly see it as a negotiation threat, but sometimes you have to actually use that stick
Tariffs are definitely inflationary.
If they get instituted like his last term, hopefully price increases are offset by things like lowering corporate tax rate and slashing regulations.
If they get instituted like his last term, hopefully price increases are offset by things like lowering corporate tax rate and slashing regulations.
Of course it will be...liberal policies always are.
Tariffs, in and of themselves, are ALWAYS inflationary. It's kind of the whole point of tariffs… make things more expensive on purpose to affect behavioral changes. If they're not inflationary then they didn't work.rgvag11 said:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6364963029112
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
They don't get it. Tariffs send a message to our trading partners to "play ball" Joe Biden's half time of wardrobe slips is over.
After a couple decades of offshoring to foreign countries who hate us, taking jobs away from Americans, bringing more jobs back to the US is "inflationary".
Sorry Walmart if your billionaires are worried about losing out on making more extreme wealth off of cheap imported *****
Sorry Walmart if your billionaires are worried about losing out on making more extreme wealth off of cheap imported *****
Amazon and Walmart online have basically ruined themselves with cheap chinese garbage and knockoffs of American IP. I don't buy anything there because it's mostly crap with inflated false reviews intended to deceive their customers. One big scam market. It's basically the online version of times square street hustlers selling fakes
Walmart only sells Chinese junk anyways.
You sound like a redditor.Ciboag96 said:
After a couple decades of offshoring to foreign countries who hate us, taking jobs away from Americans, bringing more jobs back to the US is "inflationary".
Sorry Walmart if your billionaires are worried about losing out on making more extreme wealth off of cheap imported *****
Now do American taxes an regulatory oversight
He's using them to get other counties to lower theirs which would be good for American manufacturing.
What's concerning is every gadget today has apps, wifi, and network connection from home air filters, to fans, heaters, or hobby 3D printers and drones. And chinese manufacturers are collecting tons of data on Americans sending to their servers with internet connected devices.
What's concerning is every gadget today has apps, wifi, and network connection from home air filters, to fans, heaters, or hobby 3D printers and drones. And chinese manufacturers are collecting tons of data on Americans sending to their servers with internet connected devices.
Ciboag96 said:
After a couple decades of offshoring to foreign countries who hate us, taking jobs away from Americans, bringing more jobs back to the US is "inflationary".
Sorry Walmart if your billionaires are worried about losing out on making more extreme wealth off of cheap imported *****
Who do you think higher prices negatively affect more- the Walton family of billionaires, or the millions of families that shop at WalMart? Lookup economic Deadweight Loss.
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/tariffs/
I don't understand how people think it won't be inflationary.
1. Higher taxes in the supply chain leads to higher prices.
2. Onshoring back to the US, which is a higher cost location, also leads to higher prices.
It's possible 2 is less than 1. It's also possible wage increases because of US labor demand will increase purchasing power and the impact of 1 or 2.
1. Higher taxes in the supply chain leads to higher prices.
2. Onshoring back to the US, which is a higher cost location, also leads to higher prices.
It's possible 2 is less than 1. It's also possible wage increases because of US labor demand will increase purchasing power and the impact of 1 or 2.
When Section 232 and 301 were implemented on steel products from China, every single dollar of that was passed onto our industrial end users who no doubt pushed it downstream from there.
Even with 25% increases it was still far cheaper to produce many steel products out of China vs domestically.
And competing companies aren't going to give away free margin. If increasing to China another 60% creates a huge advantage to bring production back to the US, it will be domestically priced strategically just under the China level.
I'm fine with the threat of a tariff to get countries to align politically with us. But when it ends up being implemented the impact is real.
Even with 25% increases it was still far cheaper to produce many steel products out of China vs domestically.
And competing companies aren't going to give away free margin. If increasing to China another 60% creates a huge advantage to bring production back to the US, it will be domestically priced strategically just under the China level.
I'm fine with the threat of a tariff to get countries to align politically with us. But when it ends up being implemented the impact is real.
Short to mid term they are inflationary but you have to look at the economic policy holistically, not just one piece of policy. They are a tool to use to improve the entire US economic picture over a significant stretch of time. Also , some inflation is a sign of a healthy economy but not the level of inflation we have seen in the past 4 yrs.
Conversely pretty much every economic policy of the Biden /Harris regime were driving prices up and at the same time hurting free market employment and it was all by design. They wanted to shrink the middle class and create a dependent lower class with little opportunity for economic elevation . They said otherwise … they were lying.
Conversely pretty much every economic policy of the Biden /Harris regime were driving prices up and at the same time hurting free market employment and it was all by design. They wanted to shrink the middle class and create a dependent lower class with little opportunity for economic elevation . They said otherwise … they were lying.
There was a time, many moons ago, that Walmart marketed selling products made in the USA. Not so much now I guess.
Peter Thiel did a very interesting podcast with Bari Weiss on "Honestly" where he discussed some of the impacts of tariffs. Key takeaways-
1. Classic economics say free trade is always best, but that the core assumption there is that the free trading economies are similar in capability and regulation.
2. The situation we have with perpetual huge trade deficits indicates a fundamental problem in trade that needs to be addressed. Tariffs are one way to address it.
3. Trade deficits differentially impact sectors and regions of the American economy. i.e. where does the 800$B annually in cash that China receives in a trade surplus go? It gets reinvested in Wall street in the form of stocks, bonds, and other investment instruments and in US tech companies as investments. So Wall Street and Silicon Valley may actually benefit from trade deficits. Who do trade deficits hurt? US manufacturers. That giant sucking sound of American mfg jobs that Perot talked about. So the coasts generally may benefit from trade deficits and middle America and rust belt states are hurt.
So what will tariffs (or at least the threat of tariffs) do according to Thiel's view?
1. Potentiality level the playing field by forcing other countries to reduce their tariffs on US goods and services.
2. Force manufacturing to shift away from China to other nations that are not our existential geopolitical foes (Vietnam, Malaysia, India etc) so that our geopolitical foe (China) is harmed through economics reducing China's power and ability to buy influence globally.
3. Harm Chinese companies and manufacturing in China A LOT, help non-geopolitical foes (India, Vietnam, Malaysia) some, hurt US consumers some temporarily as mfg shifts away from China elsewhere and prices go up some then reset as mfg moves away from China.
4. Help Rust Belt states (read as swing states) economically, thus helping Vance potentially win in 2028.
Another interesting point Thiel made was that he would never want a free trade absolutist to negotiate a trade agreement because they would believe there is nothing to negotiate and get taken advantage of.
1. Classic economics say free trade is always best, but that the core assumption there is that the free trading economies are similar in capability and regulation.
2. The situation we have with perpetual huge trade deficits indicates a fundamental problem in trade that needs to be addressed. Tariffs are one way to address it.
3. Trade deficits differentially impact sectors and regions of the American economy. i.e. where does the 800$B annually in cash that China receives in a trade surplus go? It gets reinvested in Wall street in the form of stocks, bonds, and other investment instruments and in US tech companies as investments. So Wall Street and Silicon Valley may actually benefit from trade deficits. Who do trade deficits hurt? US manufacturers. That giant sucking sound of American mfg jobs that Perot talked about. So the coasts generally may benefit from trade deficits and middle America and rust belt states are hurt.
So what will tariffs (or at least the threat of tariffs) do according to Thiel's view?
1. Potentiality level the playing field by forcing other countries to reduce their tariffs on US goods and services.
2. Force manufacturing to shift away from China to other nations that are not our existential geopolitical foes (Vietnam, Malaysia, India etc) so that our geopolitical foe (China) is harmed through economics reducing China's power and ability to buy influence globally.
3. Harm Chinese companies and manufacturing in China A LOT, help non-geopolitical foes (India, Vietnam, Malaysia) some, hurt US consumers some temporarily as mfg shifts away from China elsewhere and prices go up some then reset as mfg moves away from China.
4. Help Rust Belt states (read as swing states) economically, thus helping Vance potentially win in 2028.
Another interesting point Thiel made was that he would never want a free trade absolutist to negotiate a trade agreement because they would believe there is nothing to negotiate and get taken advantage of.
Isn't Walmart owned by big republican givers?
P.H. Dexippus said:Ciboag96 said:
After a couple decades of offshoring to foreign countries who hate us, taking jobs away from Americans, bringing more jobs back to the US is "inflationary".
Sorry Walmart if your billionaires are worried about losing out on making more extreme wealth off of cheap imported *****
Who do you think higher prices negatively affect more- the Walton family of billionaires, or the millions of families that shop at WalMart? Lookup economic Deadweight Loss.
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/tariffs/
Ahh, the old "what about the po folk" argument. Gotta keep that cheap **** coming in unabated.
Free market means a truly free market. If the trading partner slaps tariffs on, we do too. If they don't, we don't. That's free market. Not a unidirectional free market.
HEard an interview last week regarding tariffs on foreign seafood in the 70's. They were put in place because we were being flooded with product from other countries and it was apparently decimating our domestic production. The tariffs generated a ton of revenue for decades. They went into an account within the agency that was responsible for marketing and propping up domestic producers. Well the person being interviewed explained that she finally found the bucket the tariff income was going into. Immediately, once it hit the account, it was drained and moved into the agency's general account.
So all of the income brought in from the tariffs was doing nothing more than being used to inflate the agency that was supposed to be helping the local producers. The local producers received nothing. The agency grew exponentially over decades. Their congressional oversight had given up decades ago managing them, leaving the agency to manage itself and to create new sub agencies. And when Congress doesn't provide oversight, the agency is allowed to spend and create regulations unopposed by anyone.
Long story short, nothing was created except administrative bloat, regulatory red tape, corruption, and more government. The industry that was trying to be helped received nothing. Government received everything.
DOGE is an attempt to return the agencies to their original scope, to force Congress to provide oversight they have abandoned for decades, to reduce the regulatory burden, and to force government back to efficient means of operating.
So all of the income brought in from the tariffs was doing nothing more than being used to inflate the agency that was supposed to be helping the local producers. The local producers received nothing. The agency grew exponentially over decades. Their congressional oversight had given up decades ago managing them, leaving the agency to manage itself and to create new sub agencies. And when Congress doesn't provide oversight, the agency is allowed to spend and create regulations unopposed by anyone.
Long story short, nothing was created except administrative bloat, regulatory red tape, corruption, and more government. The industry that was trying to be helped received nothing. Government received everything.
DOGE is an attempt to return the agencies to their original scope, to force Congress to provide oversight they have abandoned for decades, to reduce the regulatory burden, and to force government back to efficient means of operating.
As I was reading your response I was thinking "that's a problem for DOGE" - which you got to as well.
Agree that how the US govt uses the tariff income is a completely separate issue than the geopolitical impact of tariffs.
Agree that how the US govt uses the tariff income is a completely separate issue than the geopolitical impact of tariffs.
Remember when Walmart core tenent was only sell Made in the USA products?
But what if those tariffs were used towards the positive goal of balancing the federal budget as opposed to feeding government bloat. I know they are a drop in the bucket compared to federal spending but if they accomplish the goal of leveling the playing field for domestic producers and reducing the deficit it's a different thing imo.
I'm all for fair trade and if international producers are just outperforming us with no unfair advantages then so be it but if they are manipulating markets that's a different thing. Free trade on a level playing field is optimal… no argument there.
I'm all for fair trade and if international producers are just outperforming us with no unfair advantages then so be it but if they are manipulating markets that's a different thing. Free trade on a level playing field is optimal… no argument there.
Depends on how you use them. If Europe has 100% tariff on Ford and GM but we have no tariff on Mercedes and BMW then tariff Europe until they remove their tariff on Ford and GM.Jeeper79 said:Tariffs, in and of themselves, are ALWAYS inflationary. It's kind of the whole point of tariffs… make things more expensive on purpose to affect behavioral changes. If they're not inflationary then they didn't work.rgvag11 said:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6364963029112
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
Walmart protecting themselves.
King of the made overseas movement.
King of the made overseas movement.
GE said:Depends on how you use them. If Europe has 100% tariff on Ford and GM but we have no tariff on Mercedes and BMW then tariff Europe until they remove their tariff on Ford and GM.Jeeper79 said:Tariffs, in and of themselves, are ALWAYS inflationary. It's kind of the whole point of tariffs… make things more expensive on purpose to affect behavioral changes. If they're not inflationary then they didn't work.rgvag11 said:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6364963029112
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
They're still inflationary.
Maybe inflationary for short to mid term and maybe not over the long term. Also perhaps just the threat of the tariff levels the playing field for domestic producers
Just depends. Trump imposed tariffs on washing machines back in 2018. Prices shot up initially 10% during 2019. Typically a lag of 2-3 quarters.
Once more manufacturing opened in the US, the prices came back down.
Tariffs can be useful but there is always going to be short term inflationary pain.
Once more manufacturing opened in the US, the prices came back down.
Tariffs can be useful but there is always going to be short term inflationary pain.
Definitely Not A Cop said:
Tariffs are definitely inflationary.
If they get instituted like his last term, hopefully price increases are offset by things like lowering corporate tax rate and slashing regulations.
This^^^^
Tariffs alone will not fix the problem.
And Tariffs as the main solution will not fix the problem.
BUT right now people are struggling to pay the rent, groceries, and energy.
None of those big 3 basics will be affected the least by tarrifs.
The majority of people aren't going to be hit hard when the cost of an iPhone goes up 20% or get upset.
The people that can afford the extra 20% will pay it and are a minority.
The people who can't afford it don't give a *****
Gotta get inflation under control.
BigRobSA said:GE said:Depends on how you use them. If Europe has 100% tariff on Ford and GM but we have no tariff on Mercedes and BMW then tariff Europe until they remove their tariff on Ford and GM.Jeeper79 said:Tariffs, in and of themselves, are ALWAYS inflationary. It's kind of the whole point of tariffs… make things more expensive on purpose to affect behavioral changes. If they're not inflationary then they didn't work.rgvag11 said:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6364963029112
I bet he's wrong. Many people will be disputing that.
They're still inflationary.
So is low unemployment.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
--Thomas Jefferson
--Thomas Jefferson
Featured Stories
See All
A&M at risk of undercut when undertaking trip to underrated Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
48:02
23h ago
4.0k
5:59
20h ago
2.0k
16:53
1d ago
3.1k