Make Argentina Great Again: US ready to support Argentina with 'large and forceful' action, Treasury chief says

GoldenBoy89 said:

We do. It was the right who went on a crusade against foreign aid.

Click to expand...

Much like the endless billions for and being at the beck and call of Israel this is different cuz reasons.

GoldenBoy89 said:

We do. It was the right who went on a crusade against foreign aid.

Click to expand...

Socialism for us, dog eat dog for the rest. That's the way of many people on the right.

Nithavela said:

Socialism for us, dog eat dog for the rest. That's the way of many people on the right.

Click to expand...

I’m a bit torn. As an Argentinian, I’m glad we’re helping my parent’s home country but as an American, I’m angry it takes having a goofy knockoff version of Trump running the country into the ground to get any help out of the current US administration.

GoldenBoy89 said:

I’m a bit torn. As an Argentinian, I’m glad we’re helping my parent’s home country but as an American, I’m angry it takes having a goofy knockoff version of Trump running the country into the ground to get any help out of the current US administration.

Click to expand...

just be glad for the help.

BTW, do you think that Harris would be helping? Me neither.

mark46 said:

just be glad for the help.

Click to expand...

K.

mark46 said:

BTW, do you think that Harris would be helping? Me neither.

Click to expand...

No. Why do you think Milei should get an off-ramp for his failure to address his country’s economic problems? Why should American taxpayers be on the hook for it when it?

GoldenBoy89 said:

K.

No. Why do you think Milei should get an off-ramp for his failure to address his country’s economic problems? Why should American taxpayers be on the hook for it when it?

Click to expand...

Milei faced a total disaster. He has done a lot. There is so much more to do.

mark46 said:

Milei faced a total disaster. He has done a lot. There is so much more to do.

Click to expand...

And we should foot the bill because?

mark46 said:

BTW, do you think that Harris would be helping? Me neither.

Click to expand...

The instant case wouldn’t have materialized given that Harris did not have massive tariffs on her platform.

Richard T said:

I actually had high hopes that Argentina could move to more of a free market system. Their VAT system though similar to tariffs,

Click to expand...

VAT is common worldwide. About 80% of economies have one. Having a VAT doesn't preclude a free market. The countries with the highest economic freedom scores (Singapore, Ireland, Luxemborg, New Zealand, Switzerland) all have VATs or GSTs.

VATs are not "similar to tariffs".

VATs are a general tax on consumption, not on trade.

That means that they apply to all goods (domestic or foreign), and thus increase prices/reduce consumption generally. Tariffs only apply to foreign goods, increasing prices/reducing consumption of imported goods (or domestically produced goods that include foreign-sourced materials).

Quoting from the Cato Institute:

So why the misleading comparison? The VAT line gives cover to protectionism under the guise of “fairness.” If you can convince the public that other countries are taxing us and we’re not taxing them, then tariffs look like a justifiable policy correction. But the economics are clear: VAT is not a tariff, and tariffs are not a consumption tax.

https://www.cato.org/blog/no-tariffs-are-not-similar-consumption-taxes-vat

Gene2memE said:

VAT is common worldwide. About 80% of economies have one. Having a VAT doesn't preclude a free market. The countries with the highest economic freedom scores (Singapore, Ireland, Luxemborg, New Zealand, Switzerland) all have VATs or GSTs.

VATs are not "similar to tariffs".

VATs are a general tax on consumption, not on trade.

That means that they apply to all goods (domestic or foreign), and thus increase prices/reduce consumption generally. Tariffs only apply to foreign goods, increasing prices/reducing consumption of imported goods (or domestically produced goods that include foreign-sourced materials).

Quoting from the Cato Institute:

So why the misleading comparison? The VAT line gives cover to protectionism under the guise of “fairness.” If you can convince the public that other countries are taxing us and we’re not taxing them, then tariffs look like a justifiable policy correction. But the economics are clear: VAT is not a tariff, and tariffs are not a consumption tax.

https://www.cato.org/blog/no-tariffs-are-not-similar-consumption-taxes-vat

Click to expand...

Yes, thanks for correcting me. Though a VAT can effect trade flows, they are taxes applied at the point of sale on any products. I took that wrong cue from Kevin O'Leary, which I just found on a Trump facebook page. Source: Donald Trump For President

Donald Trump For President​

July 18 ·
NEW: Kevin O’Leary says Trump’s tariffs are actually a smart play....and the markets are about to explode.
Mr. Wonderful just connected the dots in a way no one else is saying:
“What Trump is really putting in place is a VAT tax. A consumption tax. He’s just not calling it that.”
He says the so-called “tariffs” are actually reciprocal taxes....no different from what Europe and Canada already do.
“You start to see tariff rates between 10 and 12%, that’s the same as the VAT taxes the Swiss, French, British, and Canadians already charge.”
He even predicts the final landing spot:
“If we end up globally with a reciprocal 10–12%, everything works out—and the market thinks that too.”
“That’s why these indices are near all-time highs.”
The panic over tariffs? About to get real quiet.

Richard T said:

The panic over tariffs? About to get real quiet.

Click to expand...

Not really.

While global trade policy uncertainty is receding - which is good - the impact of tariffs on the US economy is becoming clearer. And, it's not good.

The US CBO trimmed its 2025 US GDP forecast from 1.9% (made in Jan-2025) to 1.4% (made in Sep-2025). The primary driver of that decrease was tariffs and trade uncertainty.

Similarly, Deloitte has cut its US GDP forecast from 2.8% to 2.1% (and cut its 2026 forecast to 1.4%). EY has cut its forecast from 2.2% to 1.7%. Vanguard lowered its forecast from 2% to 1.4%.

A 0.5% to 0.7% reduction in growth doesn't sound like much, but consider that the US economy is around $30.5 trillion. That means the economic slowdown is going to cost lost growth of anywhere from $185 billion to $235 billion.

Tariffs are adding to US inflation as well.

Core inflation is forecast to grow from 2.7% at present (12-month moving average) to around 3.0% to 3.3% in 2025 to 2026. For instance, the CBO has increased its inflation forecast for 2025 from 2.2% to 3.1%. Inflation is being driven by higher prices for goods and the majority of that increase is being driven by higher import prices.

US businesses spent an extra $88 billion dollars on imports for the year to August 2025. Most of that is being passed through directly to consumers. Estimates of tariff cost pass through rates start at 50% at the low end and top out above 80%, clustering around 62-68%.

That's only going to get higher - as built up inventories are eaten through, more and more businesses are going to have to purchase goods that are subject to significant tariffs. There's good modelling that pass through rates are going to end up close to 100%, and even some (somewhat convincing) arguments that pass through rates will actually exceed 100% as businesses crank up prices due to domestic substitution impacts.

Gene2memE said:

Not really.

While global trade policy uncertainty is receding - which is good - the impact of tariffs on the US economy is becoming clearer. And, it's not good.

The US CBO trimmed its 2025 US GDP forecast from 1.9% (made in Jan-2025) to 1.4% (made in Sep-2025). The primary driver of that decrease was tariffs and trade uncertainty.

Similarly, Deloitte has cut its US GDP forecast from 2.8% to 2.1% (and cut its 2026 forecast to 1.4%). EY has cut its forecast from 2.2% to 1.7%. Vanguard lowered its forecast from 2% to 1.4%.

A 0.5% to 0.7% reduction in growth doesn't sound like much, but consider that the US economy is around $30.5 trillion. That means the economic slowdown is going to cost lost growth of anywhere from $185 billion to $235 billion.

Tariffs are adding to US inflation as well.

Core inflation is forecast to grow from 2.7% at present (12-month moving average) to around 3.0% to 3.3% in 2025 to 2026. For instance, the CBO has increased its inflation forecast for 2025 from 2.2% to 3.1%. Inflation is being driven by higher prices for goods and the majority of that increase is being driven by higher import prices.

US businesses spent an extra $88 billion dollars on imports for the year to August 2025. Most of that is being passed through directly to consumers. Estimates of tariff cost pass through rates start at 50% at the low end and top out above 80%, clustering around 62-68%.

That's only going to get higher - as built up inventories are eaten through, more and more businesses are going to have to purchase goods that are subject to significant tariffs. There's good modelling that pass through rates are going to end up close to 100%, and even some (somewhat convincing) arguments that pass through rates will actually exceed 100% as businesses crank up prices due to domestic substitution impacts.

Click to expand...

Yes, that was Trump's quote not mine. To me we might have a repeat of the Smoot-Hawley Act. I would have supported reciprocal tariffs or that certain nations be moved out of normal trade relations.

11 billion for Argentina.

butkiss for those in america who may need it i guess.