Cable Forum - U.S President: Donald Trump

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - U.S President: Donald Trump (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33704412)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Yes, it's perfectly possible that, IF, the wall gets built the US will secure 'payment' for it from Mexico by hook or by crook. I reckon that Mexico is more reliant on the US than the other way around so they'll probably find a way to do it.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35919350)

Election Pledge. “Mexico to pay for the wall, in some form or other”

Quote:

So, how would that money be recouped from Mexico?

There are a number of options, but nothing has been officially decided.

1. Raising tariffs on imports. Mr Trump's spokesman, Sean Spicer, said on 26 January that the president wanted a 20% tax on Mexican imports to pay for the wall, although he later added that it was one of several options still being considered. "By doing it that way we can do $10bn (£8bn) a year and easily pay for the wall, just through that mechanism alone," he told journalists. Forbes has argued that existing duties on Mexican goods would have to be quadrupled to pay for the whole of the wall, even if its cost were spread over 10 years. US companies would also almost certainly source products from elsewhere, reducing the revenue. The Mexican government could respond by removing tax benefits for US foreign investment. The investment totalled $101bn in 2013.

2. Remittances. Two possibilities here. President Trump could try to use laws aimed at preventing money-laundering to halt Mexicans working in the US from wiring money to families back home. The sector is huge - about $25bn a year. The hope is that the threat would cow Mexico into coughing up for the wall. The second option is to tax the remittances. Either a flat tax on all, or a far more punitive tax on those who cannot prove legal residence. But Mexicans affected by remittances might simply avoid using the wire companies and find undocumented third parties to transfer the cash.

3. Levying a "border adjustment" tax. House Republicans propose lowering corporation tax from 35% to 20% but base it on the place of consumption, not production. Imports would be taxed but not exports. A 20% tax, given the $60bn trade deficit with Mexico, would raise $12bn a year. Mexico could do little, the Washington Post reports, because border adjustments would apply to all US trading partners and would not therefore be seen as a singling out Mexico.

4. Increasing travel visa and border crossing fees. Targeting countries that have a bad record on illegal immigration, including Mexico, for higher visa fees would be popular among many Republicans. Along with increasing the fees on cars and individual people crossing the border it would raise revenue, but would probably not be enough alone.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-37243269

1. Raising tariffs on imports - the US consumer/customer would end up paying the extra 20% tax (as it would likely be added on to the price), so Mexico wouldn't be paying

2. Remittances - as the article stated, Mexicans affected by remittances might simply avoid using the wire companies and find undocumented third parties to transfer the cash, so Mexico wouldn't be paying

3. Levying a "border adjustment" tax - it's the same as No. 1, but for all countries (it's just another import tax). Once again, it would be the end consumer (in the USA) who would end up paying this tax, and once again Mexico won't be paying.

4. Increasing travel visa and border crossing fees - as the article states, it probably wouldn't be enough.

2 of the 4 options mean the US consumer pays, not the Mexicans.

btw, previous attempts by the USA (and other countries) to impose extra "import" taxes didn't end well (under WTO rulings).

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/28/bord...retaliate.html

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35919383)

Perhaps you did not get, they will pay for it in some form or other. They, Trump or Congress will try.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35919383)

btw, previous attempts by the USA (and other countries) to impose extra "import" taxes didn't end well (under WTO rulings).

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/28/bord...retaliate.html

Well at least you have some idea why Trump is desperately trying to undermine the WTO now.

It doesn't really matter who actually pays as long as it can be presented as Mexico paying. The barely a third of the US that support this policy are unlikely to have any interest in the actual facts and will simply proclaim anything that doesn't agree with their world view as fake news.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7994356.html

Quote:

Donald Trump's planned state visit to the UK has been downgraded to a "working visit", likely forming part of a multi-country tour, it has been reported.

It means the billionaire will not be a guest of the Queen, as was previously envisaged.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35919804)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7994356.html

Which reminds me, isn't it time we had a new Speaker in the House? One who remains impartial and doesn't make accusations against the POTUS.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35919804)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7994356.html

Downing Street are totally denying this is the case, thus meaning, it's Fake News.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35919818)

Downing Street are totally denying this is the case, thus meaning, it's Fake News.

this is what happens when the gutter press is quoted .

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35919818)

Downing Street are totally denying this is the case, thus meaning, it's Fake News.

Of course, the government would never lie.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35919828)

Of course, the government would never lie.

or the gutter press

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35919828)

Of course, the government would never lie.

Well, where has this downgrading information come from ?

Not the PM, it seems and it is her who extended the State invitation, I am not sure it is down to anyone else to downgrade it or who would have the authority to do so.

You expect to me to believe a news source in which the editor had a thought process similar to that of a serial killer, thoughts about wanting the Prime Minister chopped up in to pieces and kept in a bag in his freezer ? :erm:

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35919835)

Well, where has this downgrading information come from ?

I dunno, not seen the original report. Sources within the foreign office would be my best guess as it seems to come from the UK media.

Quote:

Not the PM, it seems and it is her who extended the State invitation, I am not sure it is down to anyone else to downgrade it or who would have the authority to do so.

Both sides can agree that for whatever reasons to change the terms of the visit. I doubt either of them would have used the term 'downgrade'.

Quote:

You expect to me to believe a news source in which the editor had a thought process similar to that of a serial killer, thoughts about wanting the Prime Minister chopped up in to pieces and kept in a bag in his freezer ? :erm:

Well I imagine he has good sources within the government!

Either way I am not vouching for the news but pointing out that the press office of Downing Street or the White House Press Office are bad sources for verifying the veracity of news.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35919816)

Which reminds me, isn't it time we had a new Speaker in the House? One who remains impartial and doesn't make accusations against the POTUS.

That's entirely down to MPs.

Which accusations did he make that were false? That Trump is racist and sexist is hardly an accusation it's a statement of fact. I may well have missed other things.

---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:53 ----------

So looks like there's some insight into why Tillerson called Trump a 'moron'.

If this is true, that is the perfect word to describe him. The man reckons he's super intelligent so obviously doesn't care about the consequences of nuclear war and has no trouble spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer money on pointless WMDs.

I'll run with moron. Incapable of grasping the consequences and getting upset that the US stockpile, which I'm sure they showed him in pictures as he appears to have a toddler's attention span, has been reducing for a really good reason.

Nuclear weapons are incredibly expensive. Conventional alternatives for many operations have been built. Even the current stockpiles are more than enough to change the world for generations. They aren't something to build up to satisfy a man-child's ego and after decades of nuclear disarmament it's shockingly ignorant to even make those comments. Probably wasn't being literally but the man still hasn't grasped that words have consequences in his position.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35919835)

Here’s the Telegraph’s take on this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...thout-meeting/

Quote:

Donald Trump is set to visit Britain as early as January in a scaled-down “working” trip that would not see him meet the Queen or stay at Buckingham Palace.

A senior US diplomatic figure told this newspaper that the American President may be flown in to open the country’s new London embassy.