fordmantpw Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I understand incentives to produce products in the US, but this is a little over the top, especially singling out Ford. Trump advocated instituting a specific tax against Ford products built inMexico during a speech in New York. Rather than incentivize US production, the outspoken billionaire's proposal would penalize Mexican-built Ford vehicles and parts by 35 percent upon purchase. That would ostensibly raise the base price of a Mexican-built Ford Fiesta from $13,965 to over $18,800, and aLincoln MKZ from $35,190 to over $47k. http://www.autoblog.com/2015/06/17/trump-ford-mexico-tax-report/?ncid=edlinkusauto00000016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Yeah I saw his announcement speech and thought he went overboard with the talk against Ford, 1) especially considering it didn't take money from the government, 2) isn't the investment expanding an existing plant, not building a new one, 3) Ford is likely trying to take advantage of trade agreements with other countries by having it in Mexico. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Donald Trump is a pontificating windbag with a really bad hairdo and a penchant to spend $$$ to promote is huckstering ways...my guess is, the presidential run is nothing more than a tax gimmick... 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 hey, would probably put the clothing industry and Walmart out of business if applied to foreign manufacture FULL STOP!...and you couldn't target one item over another, that would constitute double standards.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 He can't. NAFTA. Not to mention the fact that I'll be walking on Mars before he moves into the White House. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1999 White C5 Coupe Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Perhaps for every Ford built in Mexico and shipped to the USA, the US government could deport a dozen illegal immigrents - especially the violent, dangerous criminals and parasites that our President has permitted to enter the USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Fair warning: Leave the politics at the door. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) And yes, I did take a pot-shot at Trump, but I look at that more as criticizing Trump, the apparently horrible person, as opposed to Trump, the Republican. Edited June 18, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted June 18, 2015 Author Share Posted June 18, 2015 Fair warning: Leave the politics at the door. Yeah, I was leery of posting it here for that reason, but since it was directly aimed at Ford... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 True. But there are so many things one can criticize about Trump in general and about this incredibly stupid and illegal proposal in particular without attacking his party affiliation. One wonders if Trump has been briefed on the fact that Ford builds more cars and trucks in the US than any other manufacturer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Oh, the dangers of simpleton politics, when ever you see anyone of either party touting simple straight forward solutions...RUN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Perhaps for every Ford built in Mexico and shipped to the USA, the US government could deport a dozen illegal immigrents - especially the violent, dangerous criminals and parasites that our President has permitted to enter the USA. New Rule: You can't criticize something you can't spell. (This is Grammar Nazism, not politics). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Where was his hair made? Can we tax imports from the mysterious death of the ocean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I am beginning to think that Donald Trump was really P71_Crown Vic.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Trump is only singling out Ford because of the announced investment in Mexico. If it wasn't for this being a contract year, U.S. plant investments would be in the headlines too. That being said, I agree with his stance on taxing imported goods coming from companies producing in a country that practices in unfair trade and currency manipulation. Personally, I hope he stays in the top ten in the polls so he's in the Republican debates. You may not like him, but he is unmatched in business sense in the political world. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You may not like him, but he is unmatched in business sense in the political world. I find it hard to take his "business sense" seriously when he's had 2 companies he was in charge of go bankrupt for reasons of his own doing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Methinks Bill Jr. told Trump that there would be no donations to the campaign. This is the revenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I think we should tax men's hair care products. The taxes paid by Trump alone would probably make a sizable dent in the deficit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I think we should tax men's hair care products. The taxes paid by Trump alone would probably make a sizable dent in the deficit. If you spent that money on hair care and had hair that looked like Donald Trump, then a malpractice suit is in order! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution provides that duties, and excises are legitimate revenue-raising measures on which the United States government may properly rely. So, the Supreme Law of the Land allows it. Of course 'we the people' have let things like NAFTA supersede the Constitution - a very bad thing. Trump was using Ford as an example of what a bad deal NAFTA has turned out to be for the working class. I strongly agree. Prior to the Ford trashing, Trump mentioned “a major auto manufacturer” changed their mind from Tennessee to Mexico-but did not name names – it would guess from my reading of automotive news this was Nissan or Honda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The 'supreme law of the land' would not allow Trump to impose a tariff, even if NAFTA were not in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The 'supreme law of the land' would not allow Trump to impose a tariff, even if NAFTA were not in place. A tariff is constitutional, if not a tactic that is generally accepted by modern political leaders. That being said, I believe our founders were a great deal smarter than modern political leaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 A tariff is constitutional, if not a tactic that is generally accepted by modern political leaders. That being said, I believe our founders were a great deal smarter than modern political leaders. You need to go back and review which branch of gov't is addressed in Article I. Hint: It's not the Executive branch. Congress has the power to levy tariffs (duties), not the President. Also, see Article VI of the Constitution. NAFTA, like it or not, is a treaty, and it would supersede any legislation that tried to create a tariff. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) You need to go back and review which branch of gov't is addressed in Article I. Hint: It's not the Executive branch. Congress has the power to levy tariffs (duties), not the President. Also, see Article VI of the Constitution. NAFTA, like it or not, is a treaty, and it would supersede any legislation that tried to create a tariff. Congress has the power - until you-know-who ram-rods Fast Track through very soon....again I say a BIG mistake. Fast Track is technically unconstitutional as you note above. Yes, I have read the constitution - many times. I am saying the maybe the founders had a better idea. They also clearly cautioned in their writings (federalist papers, speeches etc) to avoid "foreign entanglements" i.e. treaties as NAFTA (as you say, like it or not). I am simply supporting the founders principals as something that might still apply today -even though our leaders often ignore them. If I was to write in your style - I would say "You need "- to read more of the founders documents/speeches. I don't like to debate that way. I trust you are knowledgeable, well read, and are simply debating to what you believe is true. This forum does not allow us to confirm and detail all the backing of statements. Tariffs are constitutional - that is a true statement. I never thought to include a civics lesson on the the thee branches of government and checks and balances with that declaration. Lets not get go there. Back to topic: In a world where we simply cannot avoid "foreign entanglements", what I think Trump was saying with his Ford story is that we need to do a better job in negotiating these types of agreements. Nobody who is in touch with reality could really believe that the President has sole power to impose a tariff. He was speaking like a politician - all of them stand behind the pulpit and declare things that they are constitutionally not empowered to do. The un-informed American voter seems to like them to speak that way. It is confused by voters as strong leadership. Again - my point is simply that our founders, and the constitutional framework are the real genius of our system, often ignored and overrun by modern leaders. Edited June 18, 2015 by Kev-Mo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Basically, it's political rhetoric, filled with the sound and the fury, signifying nothing...told by an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.