China Tariffs Economic Impact (copy)

A jockey truck passes a stack of 40-foot China Shipping containers at the Port of Savannah. 

According to George Will, one of my favorite writers, the tariffs will cost American households an average of $1,000 per year in increased prices. And this was before the recent increase in tariffs on virtually all Chinese imports.

Assuming there are 100 million households in the country, this comes to $100 billion, which is serious money. These tariff receipts are going straight into the treasury where they go to toward the national debt and do nothing to stimulate the economy. If these were returned to households on an equal basis, the effect of higher prices would be offset to a great extent.

Why are the pundits not talking about this approach? It’s doable; the IRS knows the address of each tax filing entity. All the doom-and-gloom talk is serving to deflate consumer confidence, reduce purchases and injure the economy, which could lead to layoffs.

The idea behind tariffs is to reduce imported manufactured goods and increase domestic production of these goods along with the higher wages these manufacturing jobs command.

It’s been done before. In 2008, President George W. Bush sent a check from $300 to $600 to every tax filer to stimulate the economy. This had little effect because it was a one-shot effort that was too small to matter.

Regular monthly checks paid for by tariffs would make a positive impact on consumer enthusiasm, boost the economy and be really good politics. If we are going to have a tariff program, let’s make it work.

Why tax filers and not taxpayers? Because, according to Mitt Romney during his presidential run, 47% of would-be taxpayers pay no federal taxes. We need to get these folks into well-paying manufacturing jobs and increase tax revenue. After all, we’re $22 trillion in debt and could use the money.


Point Street

Edisto Beach


The United States imposed economic sanctions on Japan before the Second World War. The intention was to stop the nation’s territorial and economic ambitions.

How did that work turn out?

Terry Tsurutis

Bull Street


Graham’s record

Wake up. Sen. Lindsey Graham does not represent you anymore. It’s time to examine his record.

While a recent fundraiser boosted his election fund, it was at your expense. The senator joined the rich folks’ fund and left all of us in the dust. In 2017, he sponsored the Graham-Cassidy health care bill, which would have caused many adults to lose their coverage. This is the No. 1 issue for most Americans.

Scoppe: Is Lindsey Graham a shameless apologist or a savvy strategist?

I was brought up to believe you are judged by the company you keep. Playing golf with the commander in chief says much about the real Lindsey Graham. What does this illustrate about his character and commitment?

Let’s look at his service to us these past few years.

According to a June 2017 Post and Courier story, there were more than 1 million children in S.C. and 600,000 of them on Medicaid. S.C. has more to lose because we are the fourth-biggest federal match. But the senator voted against expanding Medicaid at the expense of our residents.

Graham’s most recent disclosure shows he has more than $4.6 million in cash. Does anyone of any ethnicity feel better about the tax cut favoring big business?

When Saudi Arabia beheaded 37 people, where was Graham’s outrage?

Beyond a doubt, the Russians helped Trump get elected. But when it was first reported more than two years ago, there was no response or outrage from Graham.

When the president called the FBI “scum,” where was the outrage?

Over and over, issue after issue, Graham has been derelict in his duties to represent the needs of his constituents and the voice of right versus wrong. It’s time for our senator to retire to Mar-a-Lago where all his friends are.


Jamesbury Road


Red flag law

Get a weekly recap of South Carolina opinion and analysis from The Post and Courier in your inbox on Monday evenings.

Mass shootings are insanity manifested. They are not political. Don’t make them political.

I think we should have a federal red flag law so we can be sure it helps all states quickly and effectively. We can set it up so that:

1. Law Enforcement must act quickly.

2. The triggering action of the law should require more than one person’s complaint unless the facts are clear to everyone and the circumstances are critical. Perhaps it should be administered by the state.

3. There is nothing here that can’t be undone if a mistake is made.

4. Attorney’s fees must be mitigated. We can’t take a person’s guns and then require him or her to hire an expensive lawyer to get them back.

This law would have stopped the Parkland, Florida, shooting. It probably would have stopped the Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. And it may have prevented the Emanuel AME Church shooting in Charleston.

This law would be self-regulation. If doctors can do it, we can do it.


Long Bow Road


Votes matter

The best headline of the year could be, “If your congressman is not voting the way you feel, change who you’re voting for.”


Eastern Isle Avenue