Trump: It would be devastating if the Supreme Court rules against tariffs | Metals Mine

  • Trump: It would be devastating if the Supreme Court rules against tariffs

Comment Options
19monza64
Nov 6, 2025 12:00pm
Permalink
Devastating? But of course not, Mr. Trump, why would it be? After all, what could possibly go wrong in a tariff war where everyone pays more, companies shut down, and farmers use wheat as fuel to heat their homes? The Supreme Court, with its obsession for the 'Constitution' and 'separation of powers,' clearly doesn't understand the brilliant simplicity of your plan: a world where every product, from the TV to the tomato, costs twice as much. It's just the price to pay for patriotism, right? And besides, who needs trading allies when you can have... well, tariffs. Infinite, magnificent tariffs. If the Supreme Court rules against it, well, it will only be devastating for those who love economic stability and predictable markets. Stuff for boring people.
Reply
19monza64
Nov 6, 2025 1:16pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#E239
{quote} Were countries charging tariffs or engaging in non competitive practices with the US before Trump was elected? Yes or no? Did most everyone country agree to a deal with the administration this year? Did they have to agree or did they choose to? They chose to. Trump knows the US needs revenue, only two choices were tariffs or raising taxes. Taxes were a non starter, so he had no choice. Sure he could have done it better, but the choice was still necessary. Sorry to point out facts with regard to your pointless self serving post to try to...
Ah, the splendid logic of "we had to tax foreign products or American citizens, and since the second option was unpopular, what choice was there?"

A line of reasoning so subtle it eludes most, such as:

Reforming the tax system to tax ultra-high incomes? Unthinkable.

Cutting subsidies for corporations already bloated with profits? Heresy.

Investing in competitive sectors instead of raising barriers? Too complicated.

No, the "baseball bat" method is much better: tariffs for everyone! Then, if trading partners "choose" to negotiate... well, it's as free a choice as a hostage deciding to cooperate with their captor. A diplomatic victory that smells of ambergris and burnt rubber.

Thank you for enlightening us with this pearl of economic realpolitik. Next time I need a financial advisor, I'll look for someone who, when faced with a budget shortfall, instead of reviewing expenses, sets the living room on fire to save on heating. Don't worry, your intellect is like Trump's trade strategy: everyone is subjected to it, but no one can quite figure out the point.
Reply
Jade Gate
Nov 6, 2025 10:38pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#03F4
{quote} It’s honestly shocking how little you know about the US. You don’t understand its people, its politics, or its realities. You are just another clueless child who thinks you just have to snap your fingers and all the problems go away. Try running for president with the slogan that you will raise everyone’s taxes a lot and you will cut social programs to get the budget under control. Are those things necessary? Sure, now go get elected and get everything passed in the house and senate. Idiot. Politicians worldwide are corrupt liars. Change...
Guess what? That's exactly what happened in Aussie. The political party that won, put the GST to the people at an election. It took 2 elections to educate people on the advantages but they did just that. Our GST replaced the wholesale sales tax, which was previously an invisible cost to consumers. Once they understood that, the people voted in favour of the party proposing the GST.

At this moment in time, if any party would adopt a platform of "keep the status quo" instead of pursuing endless unsustainable growth, they would get my vote no contest. The only reason govt's need continual growth is to pay off debt. Far better to engage in some decent belt tightening, especially the largesse given to corporate America.

But the US political system is rather stuffed when individual members of both houses are not beholden to vote along party lines and their votes can be bought for a price. That is a truly self destructive incentive to reining in spending. Not simple to fix, but a politician with brains, wit and an ability to reach the people directly, could in fact embark on a revamping of the current US system, one that is supported by the people and be celebrated for having the guts to do it.

US citizens do now understand that the word "tariff" is in fact just another word for "consumption tax" and that govt is now expecting everyday consumers to pay off the national debt while the ultra rich and big corporations get away with paying stuff all. At least they have grasped that much.
Reply
Windstrown
Nov 6, 2025 12:27pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#E239
{quote} Were countries charging tariffs or engaging in non competitive practices with the US before Trump was elected? Yes or no? Did most everyone country agree to a deal with the administration this year? Did they have to agree or did they choose to? They chose to. Trump knows the US needs revenue, only two choices were tariffs or raising taxes. Taxes were a non starter, so he had no choice. Sure he could have done it better, but the choice was still necessary. Sorry to point out facts with regard to your pointless self serving post to try to...
It's not a true fact when you don't consider the fact that they countries that agreed to that were all threatened one by one with military and more proposals and europe only said yes because of how bad the Russian situation would become if they said no. In any normal world where europe had no war threatening it, they would instantly decouple from America. Open your eyes. You need money? Tax more that exactly what every single nation ever did to fix their deficit problems. You had such a grand scheme going on with globalization strong dollar to buy cheaper outside of the US and maintain a good civilized life. And you are just ruining it because you have no brains. I don't pitty you at all though more than 50% of the people voted for that so they deserve what's coming for them
Reply
Vancarbon
Nov 6, 2025 1:48pm — Edited
Permalink
Quoting Trader#03F4
{quote} It’s honestly shocking how little you know about the US. You don’t understand its people, its politics, or its realities. You are just another clueless child who thinks you just have to snap your fingers and all the problems go away. Try running for president with the slogan that you will raise everyone’s taxes a lot and you will cut social programs to get the budget under control. Are those things necessary? Sure, now go get elected and get everything passed in the house and senate. Idiot. Politicians worldwide are corrupt liars. Change...
You can’t realistically call someone an idiot for advocating these policies :

Reforming the tax system to tax ultra-high incomes? Unthinkable.

Cutting subsidies for corporations already bloated with profits? Heresy.

Investing in competitive sectors instead of raising barriers? Too complicated.

Here lies the root to many of the problems , Corporate America has too much sway in the political arena . A fair and decent democracy includes all , not just the wealthy top 10% tier .

The comment is fair and balanced ( and eloquently stated )
Reply
19monza64
Nov 6, 2025 2:22pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#03F4
{quote} It’s honestly shocking how little you know about the US. You don’t understand its people, its politics, or its realities. You are just another clueless child who thinks you just have to snap your fingers and all the problems go away. Try running for president with the slogan that you will raise everyone’s taxes a lot and you will cut social programs to get the budget under control. Are those things necessary? Sure, now go get elected and get everything passed in the house and senate. Idiot. Politicians worldwide are corrupt liars. Change...
Ah, the classic tactic: anyone who disagrees with me is an "idiot." What a sophisticated argument.

You remind me of a quote by a certain Einstein: "It is easier to split an atom than a prejudice." Apparently, the same goes for oversimplified ideas about politics.

So, perhaps the real idiot isn't the one trying to imagine solutions, but the one who believes insulting others is the solution. Don't bother trying to understand — I'm sure it's far too simple for your sophisticated mind.
Reply
Schultz
Nov 7, 2025 5:52am — Edited
Permalink
Quoting CycleGF
If the supreme court reject the Tariff ..just introduce VAT Tax ...
But Trump so enjoys using tariffs as a play thing when he wants to point his finger at a country.

A VAT/consumption tax would apply equally to all products including being non-discriminatory across imports from all countries.

That would make Trump quite sad.

A little maths, I digress - USA spends say 20 trillion (16.5 billion a month) on consumables. At a modest 10% "VAT", that is 2 trillion.

What is annual tariff revenue? 350 billion? Pfft.

I understand various states have taxes on goods. I know nothing about those details.
Reply
Momofrmnyc
Nov 6, 2025 12:16pm
Permalink
It's projected we are supposed to collect anywhere from $300-400 billion by the end of 2025 via tariffs. USA GDP last year was 29.18 trillion. The IRS collected about $5.1 trillion in tax revenue last year.

For all the pain for enduring tariffs you'd expect a larger revenue especially if you hinted at this being able to replace income tax.
DmShka
Nov 6, 2025 11:30am
Permalink
Just curious, how it will work for countries who already decided made a deal about tariffs, if court cancel all of this bs with tariffs.
Reply
here2there
Nov 6, 2025 3:23pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#E239
{quote} Were countries charging tariffs or engaging in non competitive practices with the US before Trump was elected? Yes or no? Did most everyone country agree to a deal with the administration this year? Did they have to agree or did they choose to? They chose to. Trump knows the US needs revenue, only two choices were tariffs or raising taxes. Taxes were a non starter, so he had no choice. Sure he could have done it better, but the choice was still necessary. Sorry to point out facts with regard to your pointless self serving post to try to...
As a result of Trump's obsession with tariffs, we are paying more in taxes, and more for goods and services.
Reply
Vancarbon
Nov 6, 2025 1:10pm
Permalink
If we’re going to be fair and just here ( as much as I despise tariffs ) protectionism needs to be applied pro rata to all countries trading under WTO rules .

Europe and many countries flout these rules and use workarounds , the US gets it in the neck ( abuse wise ) because of the size of its economy and leverage .

Other countries should also step up to the table and stop applying unjust taxes both on their own citizens and other countries to subsidise their own economy and sectors .

It’s not just a one way street . Trump uses a blunt instrument to wield leverage over his trading partners , free trade is free trade pro rata .
Reply
Vancarbon
Nov 6, 2025 2:20pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#2622
{quote} Yes, you are in fact an idiot if you think those things can pass in the house and the senate. It’s like saying everyone should be nice, no more crime or violence ever. If you think that’s achievable this year in this world, you are, by definition, an idiot. They can’t even open the government back up but you think they can pass things that have never been passed before? Sure, lol. There is no way to fix politics currently, just like there is no way to get the EU to understand that they are a failed experiment and will eat itself alive when...

Not only is that wrong on so many levels ( too many to mention ) , it includes falsehoods and deflections .

It’s a Strawman argument , you haven’t addressed what was highlighted . However , I digress and don’t intend to become embroiled in political arguments or controversy which is a daily occurrence on these boards .
Reply
CycleGF
Nov 6, 2025 11:05pm
Permalink
US doesn't have Value Add (VAT) Tax like in Europe , where People pay like 20% Tax to the Government as they consume. So, Trump came up with Tariff which acts exactly like VAT Tax , where people end up paying as they consume. VAT and Tariff are used to pay off government debt , and that's how they issue Bonds to public. Therefore, buy Government Treasury bonds to offset the tax payout from the Coupon fixed income ..but rather working class people buy expensive Gold to become rich ....the mentality is pathetic..that's why poor remain poor
Reply
CycleGF
Nov 7, 2025 6:55am
Permalink
Quoting Schultz
{quote} But Trump so enjoys using tariffs as a play thing when he wants to point his finger at a country. A VAT/consumption tax would apply equally to all products including being non-discriminatory across imports from all countries. That would make Trump quite sad. A little maths, I digress - USA spends say 20 trillion (16.5 billion a month) on consumables. At a modest 10% "VAT", that is 2 trillion. What is annual tariff revenue? 350 billion? Pfft. I understand...
you are probably right
This is where it gets funny as hell .. then why the US needs double taxation on consumers... This is absolutely ridiculous...in this case Supreme Court will reject the Tariff knowing it's devastating implications on the US consumers and inflation
Reply
Windstrown
Nov 6, 2025 12:05pm
Permalink
Quoting 19monza64
Devastating? But of course not, Mr. Trump, why would it be? After all, what could possibly go wrong in a tariff war where everyone pays more, companies shut down, and farmers use wheat as fuel to heat their homes? The Supreme Court, with its obsession for the 'Constitution' and 'separation of powers,' clearly doesn't understand the brilliant simplicity of your plan: a world where every product, from the TV to the tomato, costs twice as much. It's just the price to pay for patriotism, right? And besides, who needs trading allies when you can have......
Beautifully written.
Reply
Windstrown
Nov 6, 2025 1:34pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#C5EC
{quote} Pity us? That’s hilarious. I and everyone I know are doing great. I have zero complaints about my life. But from your unrelenting anger I’m guessing your life stinks, and it will do nothing but get worse. Having your socialism and your open borders will eventually destroy you. But you are right, I do not pity you, you chose your own destruction.
Dude I'm doing great thanks. I just don't buy american anymore. Me and many more. Good luck in your bubble little one
Reply
Schultz
Nov 7, 2025 11:28am
Permalink
Quoting Jade Gate
{quote} Guess what? That's exactly what happened in Aussie. The political party that won, put the GST to the people at an election. It took 2 elections to educate people on the advantages but they did just that.
Some of us dinosaurs may remember watching with horror the interview of Dr John Hewson by Mike Willesee about a cake.

Some things can simply not be forgotten.
Reply
DwnUndrTrdr
Nov 6, 2025 9:59pm
Permalink
Quoting DmShka
Just curious, how it will work for countries who already decided made a deal about tariffs, if court cancel all of this bs with tariffs.
Look up Lutnick’s old firm Cantor Fitzgerald ( now run by his sons ) to get a starter on “tariff insurance” and the games behind the scenes.
DwnUndrTrdr
Nov 6, 2025 10:03pm
Permalink
Trump should have just gone through the appropriate legal channels before applying a tax on penguins with absurd mathematical guesswork to decide the tariff rates. Good old fashioned street tuff’s shakedown. Gotta use some of that money on Argentina to bail Bessent’s buddies out…
san99
Nov 6, 2025 11:00pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#B749
SCOTUS ruled that Biden couldn't "forgive" student loans, but they kept on transferring student debt to the taxpayers. If SCOTUS rules against tariffs, just ignore it.
You enjoy paying extra taxes?
Reply
CycleGF
Nov 6, 2025 11:11pm
Permalink
If the supreme court reject the Tariff ..just introduce VAT Tax ...
Reply
objective
Nov 6, 2025 11:46am
Permalink
Devastating for whom?
Reply
Trader#EDC2
Nov 6, 2025 11:25am
Permalink
They definitely could rule against the current law you are using. That’s ok, just use a different law and kick the can down the road until the midterms.
Reply
hamidyekta
Nov 6, 2025 11:43am
Permalink
I don't think they will vote to repeal the tariffs.
Reply
AKS2026
Nov 6, 2025 11:35am
Permalink
Fuck your mother, you are the one who committed this whoredom.
Reply
AKS2026
Nov 6, 2025 11:36am
Permalink
trump slump
Reply
Trader#923B
Nov 6, 2025 11:43am
Permalink
Quoting AKS2026
Fuck your mother, you are the one who committed this whoredom.
What are you doing? Are you a child? Your parents abused you?
Reply
Trader#E239
Nov 6, 2025 12:16pm
Permalink
Quoting 19monza64
Devastating? But of course not, Mr. Trump, why would it be? After all, what could possibly go wrong in a tariff war where everyone pays more, companies shut down, and farmers use wheat as fuel to heat their homes? The Supreme Court, with its obsession for the 'Constitution' and 'separation of powers,' clearly doesn't understand the brilliant simplicity of your plan: a world where every product, from the TV to the tomato, costs twice as much. It's just the price to pay for patriotism, right? And besides, who needs trading allies when you can have......
Were countries charging tariffs or engaging in non competitive practices with the US before Trump was elected? Yes or no?

Did most everyone country agree to a deal with the administration this year? Did they have to agree or did they choose to? They chose to.

Trump knows the US needs revenue, only two choices were tariffs or raising taxes. Taxes were a non starter, so he had no choice. Sure he could have done it better, but the choice was still necessary.

Sorry to point out facts with regard to your pointless self serving post to try to make yourself sound smart.
Reply
Trader#6955
Nov 6, 2025 12:20pm
Permalink
Quoting Momofrmnyc
It's projected we are supposed to collect anywhere from $300-400 billion by the end of 2025 via tariffs. USA GDP last year was 29.18 trillion. The IRS collected about $5.1 trillion in tax revenue last year. For all the pain for enduring tariffs you'd expect a larger revenue especially if you hinted at this being able to replace income tax.
Use your own math. If taxes are 5T then the most that could get passed in congress is maybe an effective raise of 5% more in taxes. How much is that in comparison to the tariffs?
Reply
Trader#C5EC
Nov 6, 2025 12:35pm
Permalink
Quoting Windstrown
{quote} It's not a true fact when you don't consider the fact that they countries that agreed to that were all threatened one by one with military and more proposals and europe only said yes because of how bad the Russian situation would become if they said no. In any normal world where europe had no war threatening it, they would instantly decouple from America. Open your eyes. You need money? Tax more that exactly what every single nation ever did to fix their deficit problems. You had such a grand scheme going on with globalization strong dollar...
Pity us? That’s hilarious. I and everyone I know are doing great. I have zero complaints about my life. But from your unrelenting anger I’m guessing your life stinks, and it will do nothing but get worse. Having your socialism and your open borders will eventually destroy you. But you are right, I do not pity you, you chose your own destruction.
Reply
Trader#03F4
Nov 6, 2025 1:24pm
Permalink
Quoting 19monza64
{quote} Ah, the splendid logic of "we had to tax foreign products or American citizens, and since the second option was unpopular, what choice was there?" A line of reasoning so subtle it eludes most, such as: Reforming the tax system to tax ultra-high incomes? Unthinkable. Cutting subsidies for corporations already bloated with profits? Heresy. Investing in competitive sectors instead of raising barriers? Too complicated. No, the "baseball bat" method is much better: tariffs for everyone! Then, if trading partners "choose"...
It’s honestly shocking how little you know about the US. You don’t understand its people, its politics, or its realities. You are just another clueless child who thinks you just have to snap your fingers and all the problems go away. Try running for president with the slogan that you will raise everyone’s taxes a lot and you will cut social programs to get the budget under control. Are those things necessary? Sure, now go get elected and get everything passed in the house and senate. Idiot. Politicians worldwide are corrupt liars. Change that fact then talk about what can be done correctly.
Reply
Trader#959C
Nov 6, 2025 1:48pm
Permalink
Quoting Trader#03F4
{quote} It’s honestly shocking how little you know about the US. You don’t understand its people, its politics, or its realities. You are just another clueless child who thinks you just have to snap your fingers and all the problems go away. Try running for president with the slogan that you will raise everyone’s taxes a lot and you will cut social programs to get the budget under control. Are those things necessary? Sure, now go get elected and get everything passed in the house and senate. Idiot. Politicians worldwide are corrupt liars. Change...
Did you remember to breathe when you typed that?

Oxygen to the brain helps.
Reply
Trader#2622
Nov 6, 2025 2:03pm
Permalink
Quoting Vancarbon
{quote} You can’t reasonably call someone an idiot for advocating these policies : Reforming the tax system to tax ultra-high incomes? Unthinkable. Cutting subsidies for corporations already bloated with profits? Heresy. Investing in competitive sectors instead of raising barriers? Too complicated. Here lies the root to many of the problems , Corporate America has too much sway in the political arena . A fair and decent democracy includes all , not just the wealthy top 10% tier . The comment is fair and balanced ( and eloquently stated )
Yes, you are in fact an idiot if you think those things can pass in the house and the senate.

It’s like saying everyone should be nice, no more crime or violence ever. If you think that’s achievable this year in this world, you are, by definition, an idiot.

They can’t even open the government back up but you think they can pass things that have never been passed before? Sure, lol.

There is no way to fix politics currently, just like there is no way to get the EU to understand that they are a failed experiment and will eat itself alive when the millions of violent people you let in start to take everything you thought you owned. You won’t admit it, so you won’t fix it.

American voters, in general, can’t accept that the government they vote for stole all their money by devaluing it, so they keep voting for people who do the same things over and over. The difference is, America can defend itself and quite literally take anything it’s wants from most of the world. The EU is so militarily weak and fractured they can’t do either of those.

Look at the most successful and powerful companies in the world, what country are they from? The EU, Canada, Australia, etc can’t accept they are weak and feckless. China could walk in and take over and there is nothing you could do to stop them. You exist because of US military and nuclear deterrence. If you paid for your own protection you would be more than bankrupt.
Reply
Trader#B749
Nov 6, 2025 11:31am
Permalink
SCOTUS ruled that Biden couldn't "forgive" student loans, but they kept on transferring student debt to the taxpayers. If SCOTUS rules against tariffs, just ignore it.
Reply
Trader#4613
Nov 6, 2025 12:37pm
Permalink
The Brazil tariffs because he didn't like fellow global mob man Bolsanaro being prosecuted strips away all pretense. They will be overturned if there is any credibility left for the Supreme Court.
Reply
    • Older Stories  
    President Trump Makes an Announcement

    From youtube.com/whitehouse|Nov 6, 2025|11 comments

    President Donald Trump speaks live from the Oval Office in Washington, D.C. Watch his full remarks.

    Fed’s Hammack: 'Not obvious' U.S. Central bank should cut interest rates again given inflation

    From @DeItaone|Nov 6, 2025

    FED’S HAMMACK: 'NOT OBVIOUS' U.S. CENTRAL BANK SHOULD CUT INTEREST RATES AGAIN GIVEN INFLATION Fed's Hammack: It will take two to three years to get inflation back to 2%. FED'S HAMMACK: MONETARY POLICY IS 'ONLY BARELY RESTRICTIVE, IF AT ALL' Balancing Act: The Dual Mandate on an Economic Tightrope My thanks to the Economic Club of New York for inviting me to speak today and to Bill Dudley for moderating what I’m sure will be an engaging discussion. As many of you know, I lived and worked in New York for 30 years before moving to Cleveland to begin my new role at the Federal Reserve. I love Cleveland, and I love talking with friends and neighbors about all the great things to see and do in Northeast Ohio. But I have to chuckle when the topic turns to Cleveland traffic, which is nothing compared to the endless gridlock that I experienced in Manhattan—before congestion pricing kicked in, of course. Some of you might be thinking, just take the subway! If only the decision were that simple. When I lived in New York, I faced the daily debate about the comfort of a cab or the certainty of subway timing. But even once in the subway, I faced the maddening choice: do I jump on the local 1 train pulling into the station or wait for the express 3 train that says it’s four minutes away? Getting around New York is a balancing act to optimize every second of every day, and right now a balancing act feels like the perfect metaphor for monetary policy: If the economy is a tightrope, policymakers are tasked with walking a fine line to keep our dual mandate goals of maximum employment and price stability in balance. Today I’m going to talk about why I believe policy should be at a mildly restrictive setting to strike the right balance between our goals. But let me stress the “I” part of that sentence and indicate, as always, that these are only my views and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve System or of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC).

    Trump has other tariff options if the Supreme Court strikes down his worldwide import taxes

    From apnews.com|Nov 6, 2025|3 comments

    President Donald Trump has warned that the United States will be rendered “defenseless’’ and possibly “reduced to almost Third World status” if the Supreme Court strikes down the ...

  • Story Stats

  • Related Stories