The grave error of widespread protectionism.
There is no doubt that the United States has been experiencing for decades the problem of an overwhelming trade deficit with almost all countries in the world, 
especially with China. It is a disastrous reality that has been getting worse year after year and reveals the covert policy of those countries that have abused tariffs, subsidies, and low wages to make US goods less competitive. Eventually, they managed to dismantle entire industries whose entrepreneurs had gone bankrupt or fled to countries that unilaterally promoted their competitive advantages against this country.
Intending to partially remedy this problem, the tax reduction for many of these industries that was applied during the previous administration of President Trump, achieved the return of many of these producers to resume their activities in the United States. It was a successful measure that should continue to be promoted in the current administration.
On the contrary, the measure promised during the campaign and now in the process of being implemented, which would impose 10% tariffs on the import of all products from those countries that have enjoyed abusive trade advantages for so long, is a serious mistake that will not only foment a disastrous trade war but, far from alleviating the tax burden suffered by the inhabitants of this country, actually represents a deceptive 10% tax on both consumers of manufactured products and producers and entrepreneurs who import from those countries the raw materials essential for the production of their products.
President Trump has boasted that countries that abuse our indifferent trade policy will thus be paying a tax that can be subtracted from the tax burden on the inhabitants of the country. One wonders if any economist could have advised him to make such a blunder. If so, he is an impostor economist.
- Hits: 80
Tanto para una familia como para un país, una deuda desmedida que pueda poner en peligro una catastrófica insolvencia, demanda un esfuerzo intenso por disminuir los gastos, mientras se busca incrementar los ingresos. Esto es complicado y choca con la resistencia de los afectados ya que conlleva renunciar, al menos temporalmente, a un modo de vida falsamente opulento que se sustentaba del crédito, a un nivel que finalmente alcanza un límite que resulta impagable y termina en la ruina, tanto en el plano familiar como en el nacional.
lejos en las políticas populistas que dibujan un falso crecimiento basado en una creciente deuda pública que ya supera los 36 trillones=36 billones en español=$107,000 por cada ciudadano y residente legal, agravada por la carga abrumadora de los intereses que hay que pagar por esa deuda, la cual se ha agudizado desde 2021 con una notable alza de la tasa de interés, hasta el punto que el servicio de la deuda ya sobrepasa ampliamente el presupuesto de defensa, obligando al Estado a pagar un interés anual de más de un trillón de dólares (un billón en español), una cifra que, además, sigue creciendo aceleradamente. Esta es la onerosa situación que heredará la nueva Administración en enero, enfrentando un déficit presupuestario de más de 2.2 trillones (2.2 billones en español) anuales, que se suman a la ya espantosa deuda y sus respectivos intereses.
Los defensores de la tributación argumentan que las nociones de derechos legales de propiedad privada están definidas por el marco legal del Estado y, por lo tanto, la tributación exigida por parte del Estado no representa una violación de la ley de propiedad, a menos que el impuesto en sí sea ilegal.