doesnt sound very free market to me
if they raise prices because they have to, thats just normal
if they raise prices because they can get away with it, thats kinda nasty though
this post was submitted on 17 May 2025
726 points (98.9% liked)
politics
23540 readers
2474 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Hahaha! This is the ONE time I agree with Trump.
All defending the house that Sam built, it is the richest company in the world by revenue beating out Amzaon and state owned organizations like Saudi Aramco and Chinese controlled organizations. It regularly bullies its way into small towns, demanding tax cuts and the infrastructure to build their stores, run those stores at a loss until all competition is gone then raises prices to squeeze out the area. Then is happy to shut down the "bottom performing stores" leaving a wasteland behind for these towns that lost everything to the mega giant. They're turning the home town of Bentonville into Austin, even driving out local business for their friends out of Austin.
And the biggest thing is... Project 2025, all of this going on, written by the Heritage Foundation... The Walton Family Foundation is one of the big funders of the Heritage Foundation as well as many of the other Project 2025 advisory board partners. They made it easy to search even! https://www.waltonfamilyfoundation.org/grants-database
I've come from its home town, Walmart has always pushed a radical republican conservative agenda. Walmart is not some hapless victim, this is pure 100% leopards dining on some faces that voted for the leopards eating faces party.
The only thing I agree with on Trump here is that he's correctly pointing out that WalMart made billions in profits last year. Yes, WalMart supported this monster in the first place thinking it would work out for them in the long run, so it's a leopards eating faces scenario for sure, and I wouldn't be sad if WalMart lost profits this year because of Trump's stupidity. It's just too bad that regular people are going to suffer because WalMart killed the small businesses that used to support towns that they wormed their way into.
We aren't even done adjusting to inflation pricing, and here we are not getting slapped with a Trump Tax on top of it. Madness.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
WalMarts whole thing is tiny profit margins
They literally don't have a choice. It isn't about giving up profit margins, it's about having a profit margin AT ALL.
Walmarts whole thing is driving out competition. They're the richest company in the world and supported Trump. They asked for this.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Back to school prices are gonna see the most change.
Perfect malicious compliance opportunity: the price tag stays the same, but add an itemized Trump Tax for the difference.
Walmart won't kiss the ring. They supported Trump. The only thing they'll do is fight him if it looks like they can't control him.
It's depressing how important this is. Walmart is core to a lot of American's purchasing. If Walmart decides to kiss the ring, even for a while, when they stop could determine when a wave of anger will hit, maybe even control the midterms. If they just pass on the prices now, many americans' cost of living is going to soar, right at the same time many of them will be facing layoffs as businesses choke to death on materials costs.
Anyone else remember what happened last time large numbers of americans experienced large amounts of free time? Do you think they'll be any happier when they are experiencing that level of free time without the benefit of CoViD stimulus? A lot of people are going to get hurt.
Their costs go up because of the tariffs, he can't expect them to lose profit at scale just to appease him. It would be a super bad business decision on Walmarts side if they do that.
They literally can't without getting sued by investors. Look at United Healthcare - they're getting sued for lost profits because they couldn't deny more claims after Luigi.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'll be shocked if Walmart choses to "eat the cost" for tariffs.
They don't "eat the cost" so their employees don't need food stamps, a program also on the chopping block. If they gut medicate/medicaid the Walmart pharmacy will also definitely feel that loss.
Just more displaying that the rich, and particularly rich people like trump, live in the land of no consequences. They make demands that others pay for, never themselves, and when underlings defy them they become furious. Walmart CEOs are underlings, now.
I hope this more of a "don't bite the hand that feeds you," and Trump recieves SOME kind of consequence. He's been a conman for years, and at some point, CEOs should be able to see that. Like, do they really think he has THEIR best interests in mind? We're lucky he's even accepting that one plane as a bribe, since I expected him to sell out for the price of a big mac with fries (no drink).
The American Lukashenko supporters are clueless about tariffs. Oh the fuck well, let them pay more for products in every single red run welfare Oblast in the USA. Like many have typed, those prices are not going to decrease.
And once the trade war is done, the prices will remain higher due to "record profits" and "people will continue to pay it because they have to".
100% This. Walmart is far from the "aw shucks" helping the common man image it wants to portray
Certainly what we appear to have experienced in the UK, I'm sure it's the same in other countries
Britain’s a bit different, as it’s caught in a perfect storm. It got a large amount of its energy from Russia, and the invasion hit just as Britain was also pouring massive investment into renewables and nuclear, which has to be paid for via energy bills. Add onto that the £40bn annual loss to the economy from Brexit and yeah, prices aren’t going down any time soon, but it isn’t necessarily because of profiteering. For example, rail freight operators have mothballed their electric fleet because the tariff per mile is so much higher than diesel at the moment. And they’re a business sector who can readily change from electricity.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wal-Mart just does not give Trump any respect. /s
Does Walmart even wear a suit? A lot of people are saying they don't. Good people
Man he really is the American lukashenko D:
Why not refund the taxpayers cost of tariffs from the tariffs collected? Tariffs are being broken out on invoices, file the tariff tax as deductions on 1040’s. It would be a wash for the taxpayers.
The goal seems to be replacing of federal income tax with import tariffs (like it was in the 1800s). The flat rate they set could collect as much as the income tax if import levels stay the same. Also, some of the stats shared by the administration early on on collections per day would multiply up to the total income tax collected. Writing them off would be counterproductive.
The only downside with consumption taxes is that they are regressive. People in the lowest income levels will end up paying more percentage richer people because there is so much that rich people can consume from overseas vs poorer people.
Canada tried that with a carbon tax
People weren’t able to understand the two were related
That seems convoluted but also as stated it wouldn't be a wash.
A deduction means pretend that portion of income never existed and the taxable portion of it is not charged.
Then generally the deduction has to be above the standard deduction to make sense to use, and the standard deduction is just so high nowadays.
So if you claimed a hypothetical deduction of 1,000, then you reduce your tax burden by only 200 or so, assuming you otherwise had like 20 some odd thousand in deductions to get you close to the standard deduction.
The only way it would be a wash is if it were a refundable tax credit with no qualifications, and that almost never happens for anything. I could imagine a non refundable credit that would make it a wash for anyone with sufficient tax liability.
However, this would make the tariffs an utterly pointless needless complication, needing a whole lot more accounting by sellers and consumers just to get to a similar and simpler position of not doing the tariffs in the first place.
If the tariffs are immediately refunded, why collect in the first place?
Well you see the problem here is that you're using your brain and well we just can't be having that