RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Trump slaps tariffs on Mexican imports until illegal immigration probl - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Trump slaps tariffs on Mexican imports until illegal immigration probl Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   BerkeleyUnderground 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 17,444
  • Joined: 20-April 04

Posted 30 May 2019 - 07:52 PM

Trump slaps tariffs on Mexican imports until illegal immigration problem solved

President Donald Trump announced new tariffs against products imported from Mexico late Thursday, saying in a tweet that they would stay in effect until the illegal immigration problem was solved. "On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP," Trump said. "The Tariff will gradually increase until the Illegal Immigration problem is remedied at which time the Tariffs will be removed. Details from the White House to follow." In a separate statement, Trump blamed Mexico for not doing enough to stop illegal immigrants from crossing into the U.S., saying "Mexico has not treated us fairly." Trump said the tariffs will rise to 10% on July 1 if the crisis persists, and by another 5% for every successive month up to 25% by Oct. 1, unless "Mexico substantially stops the illegal inflow of aliens coming through its territory."

https://www.marketwa...lved-2019-05-30
0

#2 User is online   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,436
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 30 May 2019 - 08:24 PM

Sounds good to me.

The avocado toast crowd will be up in arms, no doubt.
0

#3 User is offline   Kilmerfan 

  • Ah hell I still like Mel.
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 25,825
  • Joined: 29-May 03

Posted 30 May 2019 - 10:48 PM

Speedy going to pay!
0

#4 User is offline   moocow 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,105
  • Joined: 18-December 04

Posted 31 May 2019 - 12:31 AM

How is this legal? Tariffs are the jurisdiction of congress (Article I Section 8). There’s nothing in the Constitution that grants the president the power to create and maintain tariffs.
0

#5 User is online   Moderator T 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 37,139
  • Joined: 02-October 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 12:52 AM

View Postmoocow, on 31 May 2019 - 12:31 AM, said:

How is this legal? Tariffs are the jurisdiction of congress (Article I Section 8). There’s nothing in the Constitution that grants the president the power to create and maintain tariffs.

Congress gave away part of their tariff power in the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, allowing the President to levy tariffs either through trade negotiations or for national security reasons. In the past it was used to fight against oil embargoes. Trump has used this power to affect aluminum prices in the past and his administration has argued for its use in regards to automobiles. Their theory is that the auto industry affects our economic security, and thus affects our national security. At least drug crime and unchecked migration are a little more legitimate in terms of actual national security concerns compared to the President's other uses of it. Either way though its a pretty big overreach, but unfortunately one thing that Trump, Obama, Bush, and Clinton have in common is an interest in expanding the power of the Presidency beyond what the Founders likely intended.
0

#6 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,387
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 01:00 AM

View PostModerator T, on 31 May 2019 - 12:52 AM, said:

Congress gave away part of their tariff power in the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, allowing the President to levy tariffs either through trade negotiations or for national security reasons. In the past it was used to fight against oil embargoes. Trump has used this power to affect aluminum prices in the past and his administration has argued for its use in regards to automobiles. Their theory is that the auto industry affects our economic security, and thus affects our national security. At least drug crime and unchecked migration are a little more legitimate in terms of actual national security concerns compared to the President's other uses of it. Either way though its a pretty big overreach, but unfortunately one thing that Trump, Obama, Bush, and Clinton have in common is an interest in expanding the power of the Presidency beyond what the Founders likely intended.


Yeah, and the Obama administration saw childhood obesity as a threat to national security and took significant steps to starve children with their policies...

I applaud Trump's move and support him wholeheartedly on this.
0

#7 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 30,561
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 04:18 AM

How about an embargo?

Better yet, invade and conquer Mexico and remove all of their corrupt government.

Problem is, we'd only replace it with OUR corrupt government?
0

#8 User is offline   NH Populist 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,335
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 31 May 2019 - 05:28 AM

It's not like Mexico couldn't do more to stop the flow of illegals. It's not like they haven't been asked already either. Tariffs will work, a lot of imports coming from Mexico are coming from manufacturers who moved there from the U.S. to reduce costs. G.E. comes to mind as one example. It's well past time we have a president looking out for America, thank you President Trump!

This post has been edited by NH Populist: 31 May 2019 - 05:30 AM

0

#9 User is offline   GrimV 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 8,647
  • Joined: 08-May 06

Posted 31 May 2019 - 02:30 PM

"The beatings will increase incrementally until moral improves".

I'll elaborate...

Illegals are fleeing their host countries due to economic hardship. Trump believes increasing economic hardship will stem the flow of illegals.

And this logic makes sense because...why?
0

#10 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,857
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 03:21 PM

View PostGrimV, on 31 May 2019 - 02:30 PM, said:

"The beatings will increase incrementally until moral improves".

I'll elaborate...

Illegals are fleeing their host countries due to economic hardship. Trump believes increasing economic hardship will stem the flow of illegals.

And this logic makes sense because...why?


Bullseye!

IMO this is an overreach by Trump. If it was objectionable and wrong to Conservatives under Obama, Clinton, and Bush, it's just as wrong under Trump.
0

#11 User is offline   gravelrash 

  • I wish they all were punk rock girls
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 15,046
  • Joined: 24-June 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 05:06 PM

I agree with Trump. Use every tool in the kit.
0

#12 User is online   Squirrel 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 824
  • Joined: 24-September 18

Posted 31 May 2019 - 05:10 PM

I’m sure there’s an orange man evil graph soon. But I’m all for this

This post has been edited by Squirrel: 31 May 2019 - 05:10 PM

0

#13 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,797
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 31 May 2019 - 06:39 PM

This probably won’t work, but if Mexico steps up to the plate and says, okay we’ll stop the children from getting on the long distance trains from border to border, like they did in 2014 and how it slowed the supply of children to a trickle at the border, then it’s a victory.

Fundamentally, all of the border is the fault of Congress. At least Trump is trying. He’s running out of tools to get the border secured. Congress has defeated everything he’s tried. And note CAREFULLY that half a year ago when Trump talked about the crisis at the border, what was the message from the left? “There’s no crisis at the border!” And the last month or so, what do these same people say, after their photo ops failed to convince anyone? “Oh, the border crisis must be dealt with!” (But only the way we permit.)

This post has been edited by zurg: 31 May 2019 - 06:40 PM

0

#14 User is offline   Severian 

  • Order of the Seekers for Truth & Penitence
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 14,078
  • Joined: 14-February 04

Posted 31 May 2019 - 06:44 PM

The only way to make someone else care about your problems and help try to solve them is to make it as painful for them as possible to let them continue. Mexico could turn back people at their southern border, and they are willing to be a lot more harsh/effective than we are, but they don't care. In fact I think they dislike the US enough they want to contribute to our issues. As it is now they pay almost no price for letting them through.
0

#15 User is offline   GhostOfAndrewJackson 

  • <no title>
  • Group: 100+ Posts NonDonor
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 17-April 19

Posted 31 May 2019 - 07:06 PM

View PostRock N, on 31 May 2019 - 04:18 AM, said:

How about an embargo?

Better yet, invade and conquer Mexico and remove all of their corrupt government.

Problem is, we'd only replace it with OUR corrupt government?


In general Mexico might kick our ass. Mexicans men are tough hombres and the majority of our fighting age are males have eaten far too much soy and likely spent some time on their knees. I live in majority Hispanic community and I run a martial arts school, what they may lack in cerebral understanding and technique they make up for in ferocity and willingness to eat five punches in order to give one. The only group we seem to have that will match them for a willingness to die are our people of color and there are far too few of them to make a difference.

Our technology is superior but in the hills and mountains of Mexico we would be fighting a guerilla war and likely would far as well as the Soviets did against the mujahideen.

Obviously, just my opinion. I may not like Mexico or its culture, but I do respect them as an enemy. They have been fighting a war of attrition for decades now and seem to have the upperhand having thoroughly taken over many of our communities and government institutions while supplanting our endemic culture with their own language and culture. Ever notice in a mixed Hispanic marriage, invariably, the children learn Spanish and still fly Mexican flags?

All right, I am done ranting; thanks for the therapy session.
0

#16 User is offline   GhostOfAndrewJackson 

  • <no title>
  • Group: 100+ Posts NonDonor
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 17-April 19

Posted 31 May 2019 - 07:07 PM

By the way a 20% tax on remittances to Mexico also be very effective.
0

#17 User is offline   GrimV 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 8,647
  • Joined: 08-May 06

Posted 31 May 2019 - 07:13 PM

View PostSeverian, on 31 May 2019 - 06:44 PM, said:

The only way to make someone else care about your problems and help try to solve them is to make it as painful for them as possible to let them continue. Mexico could turn back people at their southern border, and they are willing to be a lot more harsh/effective than we are, but they don't care. In fact I think they dislike the US enough they want to contribute to our issues. As it is now they pay almost no price for letting them through.


According to Mulvaney, "We are going to judge success here by the number of people crossing the border and that number needs to come down substantially”...anyone care to define "come down substantially"?
0

#18 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,857
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 07:28 PM

View PostGhostOfAndrewJackson, on 31 May 2019 - 07:06 PM, said:

In general Mexico might kick our ass. Mexicans men are tough hombres and the majority of our fighting age are males have eaten far too much soy and likely spent some time on their knees. All right, I am done ranting; thanks for the therapy session.


When did you serve?

Have you ever been in battle alongside Americans?

You disparage people you don't know. Pathetic.

Keep posting, your ignorance is amusing.
0

#19 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,797
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 31 May 2019 - 09:21 PM

View PostGrimV, on 31 May 2019 - 07:13 PM, said:

According to Mulvaney, "We are going to judge success here by the number of people crossing the border and that number needs to come down substantially”...anyone care to define "come down substantially"?

I would not accept anything less than 75%, and wouldn’t call any action a success if the number isn’t over 90%.

A wall would make the number over 90% for sure.
0

#20 User is offline   Noclevermoniker 

  • Wire Dachsies Matter
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 16,945
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 31 May 2019 - 09:45 PM

View PostSARGE, on 31 May 2019 - 07:28 PM, said:

When did you serve?

Have you ever been in battle alongside Americans?

You disparage people you don't know. Pathetic.

Keep posting, your ignorance is amusing.

I don’t believe the post referred to our military, rather American males of age, many of whom are pretty soft.
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users