Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#261

Post by Whatarethese »

f33d5173 wrote: post #226
edot wrote: post #40

Howard Lutnick and his sons are surely happy about this. It’s almost like Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce , knew this would happen. His sons, at their firm Cantor Fitzgerald, have been offering a tariff refund product wherein they pay companies who are struggling with paying tariffs 20-30% of a potential refund, and if (as they did today) they get struck down, they pocket the 100% refund. https://www.financ…

[flagged]

I mean that's just a silly thing to assume with this administration.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#263

Post by parineum »

kingofmen wrote: post #217
loeg wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is relatively fast for an issue to move through the courts.

Yes. "Relatively". We really need a fast-track process for genuinely insane nonsense to get shot down in a matter of days, not months.

The fast track is congress clarifying their own shit. Courts are slow, it's a feature not a bug.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#264

Post by tracker1 »

simonh wrote: post #187
csense wrote: post #151

I don't think tariffs should be imposed capriciously at the President's whim. But I do think tariffs are an appropriate policy tool that should be used to protect US companies against overseas competitors that get government subsidies or other unfair advantages: Low wages, safety regulations, worker protection, environmental rules, etc.

They can be and are. The USA had tariffs on many products prior to Trump.

I think GPs point was that Tariffs are legitimate as a practice and that some people have been led to believe that they shouldn't exist at all.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#265

Post by anjel »

vlovich123 wrote: post #55
edot wrote: post #40

Howard Lutnick and his sons are surely happy about this. It’s almost like Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce , knew this would happen. His sons, at their firm Cantor Fitzgerald, have been offering a tariff refund product wherein they pay companies who are struggling with paying tariffs 20-30% of a potential refund, and if (as they did today) they get struck down, they pocket the 100% refund. https://www.financ…

It’s a tax on the US economy. A tax levied by individuals rather than the government itself. An ingenious scheme. Evil, but ingenious.

Refunds to business, but unless they have to refund to consumers it's free capital to importers

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#266

Post by iamacyborg »

giarc wrote: post #159
uncletomscourt wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think at some point america would get sick of having a billionaire gang of thieves in charge. Trump just gave himself a $10 billion dollar slush fund from taxpayers. Who stopped him? No one. This amount of money will buy you one great den. Noem wants luxury jets from the taxpayer. So. Much. Winning.

The irony is that Trump won on a message of "drain the swamp" which was supposed to address this issue. Instead it seems like it's more of just "replace the swamp" with his own guys.

I think the swamp has been expanded more than replaced.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#267

Post by tayo42 »

ReptileMan wrote: post #144
tayo42 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fix some of the ambiguities that allowed power to be concentrated in the executive branch. Automatically start elected officials so things like avoiding swearing in don't happen. Limit the power of these executive orders. Introduce recall votes. Switch to public funding for all elections. Theres plenty we can do. That's off the top if my head. I'm sure if smart people sat down to think about it there are lots of prac…

Or hear me out - the congress should start doing their job. The main problem is the congress has been MIA for decades and outsources their power to the executive via regulatory bodies. And probably a good idea for SCOTUS to return some power to the states. There is too much power concentrated in washington, the congress refuses to yield it and the result is imperial presidency. Which is exalting when the president is…

I agree, I think recall votes, term limits, higher pay, fixing election funding would help with that.

We need changes that address the kind of people that are running for these spots and winning then go on to do a bad job. Congress isn't incentived to be effective.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#269

Post by Ajedi32 »

mullingitover wrote: post #59

It’s disappointing but not surprising that the SC left the administration to illegally bilk US taxpayers for billions upon billions of dollars for something that was facially unconstitutional. They should’ve allowed an emergency injunction from the outset.

They didn't rule it unconstitutional - it's not. They ruled that the specific statute Trump was using that allows him to "regulate imports" doesn't include regulating imports with tariffs.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#270

Post by notyourwork »

f33d5173 wrote: post #226
edot wrote: post #40

Howard Lutnick and his sons are surely happy about this. It’s almost like Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce , knew this would happen. His sons, at their firm Cantor Fitzgerald, have been offering a tariff refund product wherein they pay companies who are struggling with paying tariffs 20-30% of a potential refund, and if (as they did today) they get struck down, they pocket the 100% refund. https://www.financ…

[flagged]

Nah, with this administration I don’t believe a lack of impropriety without proof. It’s swampy all the way down.
Post reply on HN