Tariffs

[Zero999]

As is taught in elementary economics courses, taxes on consumption (e.g., tariffs and sales taxes on food) are regressive, i.e. take a larger fraction of the income received by lower-income people.
Higher-income people devote a larger fraction of their income on investment and other non-consumption options (which can be a good thing).
Income taxes with higher rates for higher taxable income are progressive in that sense (a word with multiple senses).

That's true, when the taxes are on necessities, such as food, but it falls apart when they're mostly on luxury items, because people on lower incomes spend most of their money on essentials and less on luxuries. These tariffs won't affect the price of bread and butter much, but nice shiny new phones, TVs, laptops etc.

[TimFox]

As is taught in elementary economics courses, taxes on consumption (e.g., tariffs and sales taxes on food) are regressive, i.e. take a larger fraction of the income received by lower-income people.
Higher-income people devote a larger fraction of their income on investment and other non-consumption options (which can be a good thing).
Income taxes with higher rates for higher taxable income are progressive in that sense (a word with multiple senses).

That's true, when the taxes are on necessities, such as food, but it falls apart when they're mostly on luxury items, because people on lower incomes spend most of their money on essentials and less on luxuries. These tariffs won't affect the price of bread and butter much, but nice shiny new phones, TVs, laptops etc.

Look at the total expenditures for upper and lower classes:
The lower classes spend almost all of their income on consumption (food, clothing, shelter, and not much luxury).
The upper classes spend more on luxuries than lower classes, but they save a larger fraction of total income, hence the regressive impact of sales taxes and tariffs.

[Smoky]

NOTE: This message has been deleted by the forum moderator Simon for being against the forum rules and/or at the discretion of the moderator as being in the best interests of the forum community and the nature of the thread.
If you believe this to be in error, please contact the moderator involved.
An optional additional explanation is:

[vk6zgo]

Why in the hell is The United States educating freaking Communists???

because the chinese can afford to pay for it. Imagine the stink from trumpton  if we decided no yanks can attend oxford or cambridge,even if daddies got enough money to buy both unis.

Exactly! Those "freaking Communists" have very rich Daddies who pay big bucks to get their kids educated.
The old days of everybody being "dirt poor" in the PRC are long gone.

Countries compete for those dollars.

[vk6zgo]

I say if anyone has a wild-hair itching to convert a Communist, do it on your time and your dime. Thank you very much

There is no conversion intended, just receiving hard cash & doing the good work of improving the USA's balance of payments.
After all, that is what the current nonsense is all about.

[Andy Chee]

My understanding is tariffs affect luxury imported items, more than essentials, such as food and energy.

Tariffs affect housing construction, which is a big deal.

Tariffs affect automotive manufacturing, which is also a big deal.

[Smoky]

The State colleges in North Carolina (eg NC State, UNC) accept both in and out-of-state students.

An audit was done approximately 8 years ago so these numbers and percentages are approximate and could be different now.

It was concluded that after adding-up faculty salaries , buildings and maintenance, and energy costs, the funds collected from in-state students covered approximately ~19% of the total cost of one semester. The funds collected from out-of-state students covered ~37%.

The remaining 60-80% was paid for by the taxpayers of North Carolina.

In North Carolina, approximately 1/3 of the citizens attend State college.

This leaves 2/3 of the taxpayers, who didn't attend college, having to cover and pay for most of the slack.

When someone from China or India attends our colleges, which are many, blue-collar workers, like me, pay almost the majority of it.

I'd rather it be an American warming every damn seat

[themadhippy]

The remaining 60-80% was paid for by the taxpayers of North Carolina.

guess wot ,theres loads of things we have to pay towards out of tax that we dont personally use.Are you sure you name aint margo?

[wilfred]

Someone said the prime example of TDS is: listening to what he is saying, taking it word for word, and not looking at what he actually is doing.
Or even worse, listening to CNN and others manipulatively edit what he is saying.

Is TDS, trump devotion syndrone, or trump derangement syndrome? I can't be sure from the definition.

[BravoV]

You people are so delusional, its NEVER about tariffs nor bringing back manufacturing, its all about insider trading, 

[Zero999]

As is taught in elementary economics courses, taxes on consumption (e.g., tariffs and sales taxes on food) are regressive, i.e. take a larger fraction of the income received by lower-income people.
Higher-income people devote a larger fraction of their income on investment and other non-consumption options (which can be a good thing).
Income taxes with higher rates for higher taxable income are progressive in that sense (a word with multiple senses).

That's true, when the taxes are on necessities, such as food, but it falls apart when they're mostly on luxury items, because people on lower incomes spend most of their money on essentials and less on luxuries. These tariffs won't affect the price of bread and butter much, but nice shiny new phones, TVs, laptops etc.

Look at the total expenditures for upper and lower classes:
The lower classes spend almost all of their income on consumption (food, clothing, shelter, and not much luxury).
The upper classes spend more on luxuries than lower classes, but they save a larger fraction of total income, hence the regressive impact of sales taxes and tariffs.

It still means the upper classes get proportionally taxed more, so they save less. It hardly affects the poor, because food and fuel prices won't increase.

The main regressive part of this tax is clothing because it's mostly made in China, but there are huge numbers of people who buy clothes with disposable income and it ends up getting thrown away. Poorer people can buy from charity shops, but then it will eventually affect them, as they'll receive fewer donations.

[dietert1]

..
It was concluded that after adding-up faculty salaries , buildings and maintenance, and energy costs, the funds collected from in-state students covered approximately ~19% of the total cost of one semester. The funds collected from out-of-state students covered ~37%.

The remaining 60-80% was paid for by the taxpayers of North Carolina.
..

I calculate 100 - 19 - 37 = 44 %. So you should have written 40 - 50 % instead of 60 - 80 %.
Your claim that the fraction of population who don't use colleges don't want to pay for them is as manipulative.
Stay cool!

Regards, Dieter

[Simon]

The State colleges in North Carolina (eg NC State, UNC) accept both in and out-of-state students.

An audit was done approximately 8 years ago so these numbers and percentages are approximate and could be different now.

It was concluded that after adding-up faculty salaries , buildings and maintenance, and energy costs, the funds collected from in-state students covered approximately ~19% of the total cost of one semester. The funds collected from out-of-state students covered ~37%.

The remaining 60-80% was paid for by the taxpayers of North Carolina.

In North Carolina, approximately 1/3 of the citizens attend State college.

This leaves 2/3 of the taxpayers, who didn't attend college, having to cover and pay for most of the slack.

When someone from China or India attends our colleges, which are many, blue-collar workers, like me, pay almost the majority of it.

I'd rather it be an American warming every damn seat

You seem to persist in trying to derail the thread. Just stop, your maths is so atrocious that I can't even be bothered to explain how wildly wrong you are and you assumption that out of state means out of the US so that you can present the picture you want to is rather worrying.

I suggest you take courses in algebra, statistics and geography before you post on this topic again, unfortunately courses on honesty are not available. Last warning!

[tggzzz]

<omitted to avoid giving oxygen>

You seem to persist in trying to derail the thread. Just stop, your maths is so atrocious that I can't even be bothered to explain how wildly wrong you are and you assumption that out of state means out of the US so that you can present the picture you want to is rather worrying.

I suggest you take courses in algebra, statistics and geography before you post on this topic again, unfortunately courses on honesty are not available. Last warning!

Just so.

But I think you mean "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[Zero999]

<omitted to avoid giving oxygen>

You seem to persist in trying to derail the thread. Just stop, your maths is so atrocious that I can't even be bothered to explain how wildly wrong you are and you assumption that out of state means out of the US so that you can present the picture you want to is rather worrying.

I suggest you take courses in algebra, statistics and geography before you post on this topic again, unfortunately courses on honesty are not available. Last warning!

Just so.

But I think you mean "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

It's just making up  to backup one's faulty argument. Politicians of all persuasions do this and so do companies in the form of marketing. Fortunately most people here can easily spot it.

[coppercone2]

required reading: https://www.ncl.ac.uk/webtemplate/ask-assets/external/maths-resources/percentages.html

[tggzzz]

<omitted to avoid giving oxygen>

You seem to persist in trying to derail the thread. Just stop, your maths is so atrocious that I can't even be bothered to explain how wildly wrong you are and you assumption that out of state means out of the US so that you can present the picture you want to is rather worrying.

I suggest you take courses in algebra, statistics and geography before you post on this topic again, unfortunately courses on honesty are not available. Last warning!

Just so.

But I think you mean "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

It's just making up  to backup one's faulty argument. Politicians of all persuasions do this and so do companies in the form of marketing. Fortunately most people here can easily spot it.

Too many posters here do it

[Smoky]

I apologize

I forgot that most of you live in Countries that will put you in prison if you mock authority by producing embarrassing X memes or by calling-out the bustling Muslim rape-gang market

[Zero999]

I apologize

I forgot that most of you live in Countries that will put you in prison if you mock authority by producing embarrassing X memes or by calling-out the bustling Muslim rape-gang market

Thanks for the amusing post.

Seriously though, Dave doesn't give a toss about that. He's just tired of you shitting over this thread with off-topic, political posts.

[Smoky]

Well, that man can say it to my face instead of sending out one of his hooligans

[Wallace Gasiewicz]

Costs per student in State Unis here are paid by the state and as far as I can figure out range from about 20 K to about 50 K per student year.  Most states are in about 30-40 K per year.   They charge tuition that brings these costs down.  Tuition is higher for out of state students.  As far as I can see out of state tuition is about the "real" cost of the particular states cost per student per year.   In state tuition is about 1/3 to 1/2 of the cost.           
Private Unis (I went to one) can charge what they like, they seem to still charge the same for in state and out of state students.  But most states have additional grants and scholarships available to these private unis inside their respective states. You have to be a resident of the state to get these perks.  "in state student"   
So foreign and out of state students pay quite a bit more than in state students.     
Private unis can have their own scholarships etc and that varies with the uni.   
Grad students get stipends when they have research or teaching duties.   

So, I think out of state students probably pay for the real cost of their undergrad education, making them a cash cow for the uni and the state administration.  Or maybe like a cash "herd".   
This is probably too simple of a look into tuition costs and uni funding because there are all sorts of grants from the feds and elsewhere that  come into play..       

But.....good news......no tariffs on tuition!!

[PwrElectronics]

Isn't the US mostly self-sufficient when it comes to food?

A lot of seasonal fresh produce is imported in the winter.  Including frozen produce.  There are also many things that are not grown in the US or not in large amounts.  Coffee is one that gets mentioned.  I grew up on a farm in the US midwest and as a child in the 70s/80s we only had fresh vegetables in the summer from the garden.  The rest of the year was home canned or frozen.

[tggzzz]

Well, that man can say it to my face instead of sending out one of his hooligans

So Simon is a hooligan?

Seems you are determined not to listen, and to continue with "shitting over this thread with off-topic, political posts".

[Simon]

Well, that man can say it to my face instead of sending out one of his hooligans

Well for better or worse, that's that, at least this boss don't have me shooting people

[MT]

Old school Reagan explains and predicts the cumming of zio Trump and his tariffs 43 years ago. 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0dULipMNa3s?feature=share