It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Wants 20% Import Tax to Pay for Wall With Mexico

page: 7
13
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Still no explanation.





posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

The military is one of our best hopes, this is true. Many of them would most definitely resist that kind of action RIGHT NOW. We've got about a million in town from what this says.

However, there's a lot that can play out yet and other factors remain. Obama signed the executive order into action allowing drone strikes and U.N force upon citizens. That's certainly a start.

Some troops will NOT resist authority. And most of all, erosion of principles, propaganda and intolerance could easily be fed into our current regime and very slowly lead into the kind of situation I'm suggesting here.

At the rate things are going, who knows what kind of state this country will be in in a decade or more?
While the wall may seem innocuous to citizens at this time, it may be another thing entirely before we know it. I've said it several times now, these people play the LONG GAME.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That and the fact that most of the rest of the world was struggling to rebuild from the war for decades after.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

My investments are completely setup in anticipation of inflation also. I cannot wait .... Go go go and bring it on! The dollar is dying anyway, and the sooner the better, IMHO. Fiat will be proven worthless the world over, I hope ... though they will probably try to force us into a 'cash-free' digital currency first, and then into negative interest rates for holding cash in the bank, before the last gasp of fiat is over.

Fiat (the current US Dollar especially) NEEDS to die. We need our lawful Constitutional money back. Current US dollars are technically illegal anyway, and the whole Federal Reserve thing has been a debt based scam.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: olaru12


Fiat (the current US Dollar especially) NEEDS to die. We need our lawful Constitutional money back. Current US dollars are technically illegal anyway, and the whole Federal Reserve thing has been a debt based scam.




What metal are we going to use to back up the Dollar? We sold all our gold to China.

I agree the Dollar will fall and the global currency will be the Yen; Just a matter of time.

The rupee also shows some "huevos" if you are a money mkt trader.


edit on 28-1-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: gottaknow
a reply to: yuppa

The military is one of our best hopes, this is true. Many of them would most definitely resist that kind of action RIGHT NOW. We've got about a million in town from what this says.

However, there's a lot that can play out yet and other factors remain. Obama signed the executive order into action allowing drone strikes and U.N force upon citizens. That's certainly a start.

Some troops will NOT resist authority. And most of all, erosion of principles, propaganda and intolerance could easily be fed into our current regime and very slowly lead into the kind of situation I'm suggesting here.

At the rate things are going, who knows what kind of state this country will be in in a decade or more?
While the wall may seem innocuous to citizens at this time, it may be another thing entirely before we know it. I've said it several times now, these people play the LONG GAME.


A UN force. lol. They cant even peacekeep let alone invade the US. Also a soldiers oath isnt to blindly follow a president who goes against the constitution. Soldiers are more principled than even police. so how about stop projecting onto soldiers as being mindless robots.
And No matter how long the game there is always a way to cheat the system.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Soldiers won't work for free, they have families to support. They'll back whoever gives them a paycheck.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Fowlerstoad

What would you back a currency with? An expanding money system is necessary to prevent poverty. There's not enough rare materials in the world to back a dollar, and even if there were we couldn't afford to hide those materials away to back currency opposed to processing them in the economy.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Appreciate your response!
I just want to clarify that I'm not projecting soldiers as being mindless robots. I stated Most would definitely resist.
I believe in and respect our soldiers and frankly, they are the only reason I do not support activities such as flag burning or other derogatory actions against our nation.

But they're not all infallible. As Aazadan mentioned, they have families to support as well and when given a choice, family is going to come first.

Another factor is not all soldiers are the amazing citizens that we picture them to be. Some of them have chosen the military route out of economical desperation. Others(and I know one personally - don't worry, he failed out eventually) just wanted the action and even the chance to kill.

Simply wearing fatigues and taking orders does not make a person wholesome and heroic.
Even though many of them are.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   
The vast majority of American imports from Mexico are vehicles and electronics and machinery. Those are built by American companies in Mexico. The US does not need to build these in Mexico. Once Donald Trump slashes regulations, it would become profitable to build these in the US rather than build in Mexico and import.

I would say a selective tariff on imports from Mexico built by American companies and no tariff on imports of foods and drinks from Mexico.

Once regulation is slashed in the US and production of vehicles and electronics and machinery have returned to the US, there would be no further need of tariffs on any imports from Mexico.

www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Get ready to dig much deeper into your wallet.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: gottaknow
a reply to: yuppa

Appreciate your response!
I just want to clarify that I'm not projecting soldiers as being mindless robots. I stated Most would definitely resist.
I believe in and respect our soldiers and frankly, they are the only reason I do not support activities such as flag burning or other derogatory actions against our nation.

But they're not all infallible. As Aazadan mentioned, they have families to support as well and when given a choice, family is going to come first.

Another factor is not all soldiers are the amazing citizens that we picture them to be. Some of them have chosen the military route out of economical desperation. Others(and I know one personally - don't worry, he failed out eventually) just wanted the action and even the chance to kill.

Simply wearing fatigues and taking orders does not make a person wholesome and heroic.
Even though many of them are.


Uh Huh. the old, hold their families hostage to induce loyalty eh? Soldiers in that situation will cut the people who are doing so to them throats given the chance. SO yeah do that to the Us military at your own peril.
A captive army is just as dangerous as a illegal combatant.

Also the majority of soldiers who resisted would outnumber th e ones who became traitors.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I suppose, in the US we would back your currency with whatever tangible assets our region/country could still produce for trade. Metals would be best ... for the US : Nickel ... zinc, copper, titanium, some rare earth metals, also maybe lead silver gold platinum etc ... but probably the commodities that would back a 'new' solid US dollar could not be silver and gold like the old times, but instead mostly agricultural grains and fossil fuels. Sad, but true. IT would lead to a decline in local standards of living in the US, but that is already baked into the cake. There is going to be a decline in the standard of living for most people in the US no matter what happens next now anyway, I am afraid.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: Aazadan

I suppose, in the US we would back your currency with whatever tangible assets our region/country could still produce for trade. Metals would be best ... for the US : Nickel ... zinc, copper, titanium, some rare earth metals, also maybe lead silver gold platinum etc ... but probably the commodities that would back a 'new' solid US dollar could not be silver and gold like the old times, but instead mostly agricultural grains and fossil fuels. Sad, but true. IT would lead to a decline in local standards of living in the US, but that is already baked into the cake. There is going to be a decline in the standard of living for most people in the US no matter what happens next now anyway, I am afraid.



Backing a currency requires having that commodity in reserve. The dollar is very valuable, it would take just about all the gold, silver, platinum, precious gems, and proven oil reserves on earth to match the current number of dollars out there and if we did that, it would all be sitting at the federal reserve to exchange and use, we wouldn't be securing more, and we wouldn't be trading with each other. It would be a permanently shrinking money supply.

Fractional reserve banking is the way to go because it unconstrains the money supply. The only thing is, we need to enforce sane limits. We used to lend at a 10:1 ratio, but these days it's closer to 35:1, and some large banks are extended as much as 70:1. We definitely need to get a handle on that aspect of the banking system, but moving to a non fiat currency would cause much worse issues than what you're trying to solve.

Personally, I would rather not admit defeat and shoot for a solution that can maintain or improve our standard of living.



posted on Jan, 29 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen

The cost would only be passed on to the consumer. No government would actually be paying for it.



Does that same logic apply to an increase to the minium wage? Cause I've heard otherwise.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join