Tariffs Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter BubbaOtis
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 431
  • Views: 8K
  • Politics 
Alas. Article I, section 10:

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

States already make "trade deals" with countries but they are informal and not really binding.
I'm aware of Article 1.

You seem to be disillusioned as to the Constitution having any weight at all in this moment in history. It doesn't. It is only our acquiescence to it that keeps the flimsy thing together at all. We have leadership that doesn't value it and won't enforce it. The populace is not far behind.
 
I'm aware of Article 1.

You seem to be disillusioned as to the Constitution having any weight at all in this moment in history. It doesn't. It is only our acquiescence to it that keeps the flimsy thing together at all. We have leadership that doesn't value it and won't enforce it. The populace is not far behind.
Please don't try to lecture me about the constitution. I'm fully aware of the threat.

But states still can't do trade deals. How would that even work? If the constitution means nothing, then Trump would just shut it down. If the constitution does mean something, they aren't allowed. Why would any foreign nation commit to a treaty with a state, when the likelihood of getting any benefits from it are low (because the trade deal is illegal and/or contrary to federal policy).

In addition, states' free trade deals would not be able to overcome federal tariffs (which as a practical matter get levied at ports of entry), so what would be the point?
 


“My government will keep our tariffs on until the Americans show us respect and make credible, reliable commitments to free and fair trade.”
 
Trump still doesn't understand the auto industry. After all those talks with industry executives, how does he not understand that he can't shut down Canada's auto industry permanently without also shutting down America's auto industry (at least the Big Three, leaving only the foreign models)?
You think he listens when anyone else talks?
 
It's not clear he listens to himself. It could just be a memory thing. That's a lot of lies for one old man to remember.
 
Back
Top