Trump Tariffs cost Americans $3 billion a Month more in spending, Trump Trade Deficit Largest in U.S. History!!! Winning?

I still can't get over the double standard #1: Wisconsin Republicans are in a panic over the "uncertainty" manufacturers would have if Gov. Evers dramatically reduced the manufacturers tax cut. These supposed "job creators" may see it as a penalty, and just leave out state forever.

I still can't get over the double standard #2: On the other hand, Trump blew up every trade agreement the world depended on, and still hasn't renegotiated and got any of them approved. Plus, tariffs are forcing farmers to lose money or go into bankruptcy, and consumers are paying about 1 percent more of their hard earned money on things they buy...yet Republicans are oddly not just cheering Trump on, but they're saying we'll all be better off when and if the art-of-the-deal is ever completed? Note:

It's the double standard of double standards!

And then this happened (anyone in right wing radio, at Fox News, or at any of the other conservative media sources and institutes paying attention?: 

President Donald Trump’s trade war cost American businesses and consumers $3 billion a month last year in higher prices, according to a study by top economists. The U.S. “experienced substantial increases in the prices of ... goods ... the president appears to be relying on a 2018 analysis of data from the 1990s, when the United States represented a larger share of the global economy and enjoyed more leverage over exporters in other countries.

But looking deeper...

...dramatic changes to its supply-chain network, reductions in availability of imported varieties, and complete pass-through of the tariffs into domestic prices of imported goods,” noted the study issued Saturday by economists from the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, and Princeton and Columbia University. “Overall ... we find that the full incidence of the tariff falls on domestic consumers.”

Here's the Public Radio's Marketwatch report: Despite Trump's claims that we're sticking it to China, here's the breakdown on how his tariffs will effect what we buy:

In a 2016 campaign speech in Pennsylvania, Trump called the trade deficit a “politician-made disaster” and promised swift change. “We can turn it all around — and we can turn it around fast,” he said.

The president, who has insisted that “trade wars are good and easy to win,” has bragged repeatedly that even as trade negotiations have dragged on, China is paying the U.S. “billions of dollars in tariffs.”

Compare Gov. Evers reduction in the Manufacturers tax cut to the following...not even close:

The trade war also cost companies an additional $1.4 billion a month in efficiency losses as they changed the way they do business to adapt to the tariffs, such as cobbling together new supply chains, according to the study.

How will the conservative voting base react to the news, if and when they stumble on this story? 

Another paper by economists and academics published Sunday concluded that the main victims of Trump’s trade war have been farmers and blue-collar workers in regions that supported Trump in the presidential election.

“Workers in very Republican counties bore the brunt of the costs of the trade war, in part because retaliations disproportionately targeted agricultural sectors, and in part because U.S. tariffs raised the costs of inputs used by these counties.’

Yup, Trump's is the biggest in the nation's 243 year history:

The Commerce Department said Wednesday that — despite more than two years of President Trump’s “America First” policies — the United States last year posted a $891.2 billion merchandise trade deficit, the largest in the nation’s 243-year history.

Oh, and One more thing-Consumer Tax Refund Psychology: With consumers paying more now thanks to Trump tariffs, it can't be good if they get a smaller tax refunds after his much ballyhooed tax cut for the wealthy. This just adds insult to injury:

A new study by the JPMorgan Chase institute, reported by the Washington Post, casts doubt on Republicans’ blasé attitude about changing refunds. It turns out millions of households really do rely on that money coming back into their pocket at that exact time:

The average refund, which amounts to nearly six weeks’ take-home pay for the typical household, is crucial to a family’s financial stability, the JPMorgan Chase Institute study found. But ... their refunds diminish by as much as 9 percent this year because less is withheld from paychecks ... families depend on the tax season windfall to pay down debt, make major purchases or cover big outlays like out-of-pocket health care expenses. “For about 30 percent of families, this ends up being the single largest cashflow infusion of the year,” said Fiona Grieg, director of consumer research for the JP Morgan Chase Institute, who worked on the study. “This is really a moment that resets their spending levels … it does play a key role in creating a savings buffer that families rely on for the better part of a year.”