I finally found the first thing in my house that was partially made in Canada. I had a stack of pancakes this morning and the maple syrup bottle says it is made from ingredients from both the U.S. and Canada. Unfortunately the syrup was bought last year so I did not pay any tariffs on it. I guess it is Vermont maple syrup from now on.
Does anyone else have a story of the sacrifices they have to make because the price of Canadian goods has increased?
The remade Fiero seat adjust knobs that I bought from the Fiero Store have a huge Canadian flag sticker on the plastic bag that they came in. But I bought those pre-tariff.
It's amazing how MAGAcentrics are completely on board with these high "tariffs" on international goods crossing the border... but if the US government had increased their revenue by this huge amount by levying exorbitant "taxes" instead, there'd be rioting in the streets at this point! I guess it's all on the terminology used. Works like a charm on the gullible.
The US Supreme Court has spoken... "Tariffs are taxes". And also that the president doesn't have the power to impose them. Not looking good for Donny. First, the GOP was crushed in elections yesterday, and now this.
I know none of you will watch the video... but I'll park it here for historical purposes.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 11-06-2025).]
The US Supreme Court has spoken... "Tariffs are taxes". And also that the president doesn't have the power to impose them. Not looking good for Donny. First, the GOP was crushed in elections yesterday, and now this.
I know none of you will watch the video... but I'll park it here for historical purposes.
U.S. Supreme Court questions legality of Trump’s tariffs
...the legal questions at the heart of the case directly confront the powers that a U.S. president can wield.
“Tariffs are taxes. They take dollars from Americans’ pockets and deposit them in the U.S. Treasury. Our founders gave that taxing power to Congress alone. Yet here, the President bypassed Congress and imposed one of the largest tax increases in our lifetimes,” argued Neal Katyal, a lawyer representing a handful of small businesses that have sought to overturn the tariffs.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 11-06-2025).]
Okay, fine... it was spoken at the Supreme Court hearings. I suspect we'll be re-visiting this a few times over the next while. "Talking heads" from both sides will no doubt be having a field day over this. We'll eventually see who has been the most gullible.
I listened to an hour or two of the back and forth between the Justices and the Solicitor General. What I found reassuring was that the some of the Justices and the Solicitor General were all very thorough in their questions and responses.
After hearing more about this case, I now think that President Trump is going to lose. There are parts of the law that explicitly gives the president the power to impose tariffs but they are limited. What the president is doing is based on the parts of the law that grant him the power to regulate and ban imports. It is not a very strong case to interpret regulating or banning as giving the ability to impose tariffs. The president already has a plan B which will be to use 150 day 15% tariffs as his leverage for trade deals.
I wonder if SCOTUS will require a refund of tariffs collected, which will bust the budget, or if they will write off what has already been collected. I'll bet they do the latter.
After hearing more about this case, I now think that President Trump is going to lose. There are parts of the law that explicitly gives the president the power to impose tariffs but they are limited. What the president is doing is based on the parts of the law that grant him the power to regulate and ban imports. It is not a very strong case to interpret regulating or banning as giving the ability to impose tariffs. The president already has a plan B which will be to use 150 day 15% tariffs as his leverage for trade deals.
I wonder if SCOTUS will require a refund of tariffs collected, which will bust the budget, or if they will write off what has already been collected. I'll bet they do the latter.
IT WOULD BE NICE IF THE MONEY PAID WAS RETURNED TO THE CITIZEN WHO PAID IT
