While the U.S president is threatening our biggest car maker (Toyota), the fact is Toyota is now employing around 30,000 U.S citizens, which is about the same as Chrysler.

Trump attacks Japanese car makers "they are selling theirs too many in the U.S and Japanese do not buy enough American cars.".

Trump says strong dollar is "killing the U.S" - now this statement is coherent with his car industry policy, because when Yen gets stronger, then we are more capable of accommodating American cars (if there is -- free market).

But wait, if the dollar gets weaker, wouldn't the the median income of the U.S citizens become lower in comparison with other countries? (Weaker money means if you would like to import something, the cost would be high.)

According to a census, the U.S is a robust importer than the exporter by the margin of around 70 billion USD. (Please see the last page.)

Now, is there any exact economic plan with Trump or Trump administration? Or should were it, could it be called "coherent" (aka workable.)

  • Why on the earth was I downvoted? All there in my question were citations. – Kentaro Jan 31 '17 at 2:19
  • Actually, if I was said this is "opinion based", I am agape. – Kentaro Jan 31 '17 at 11:02
  • I can not improve anymore than this so that this would be "non-opinion-based" ( whatever that might mean, ) – Kentaro Jan 31 '17 at 11:09
  • It was likely closed due to the fact that it could be considered an example listed on the "What types of questions should I avoid asking?" page. Specifically: your question is just a rant in disguise: “______ sucks, am I right?” – Daniel Zastoupil Dec 3 '19 at 23:37
  • While I don't disagree, the question comes off as condescending and biased. Removing those aspects would come off as desiring knowledge, rather than having an opinion be heard, which is what politics.se is designed for. At the very least, a biased question asks for biased answers, which is definitely against the point. – Daniel Zastoupil Dec 3 '19 at 23:39

Now, is there any exact economic plan with Trump or Trump administration?

What's coherent or not is high subjective. In this case, he has laid out his economic vision loud and clear, before the election and after the election: protect American jobs through free but fair trade, lower energy costs, and encouraging economic activities.

It is fair to disagree with his approach, it is fair to refuse to say that it is coherent, and it is even fair to predict it's failure. But it is indisputable that he has laid it out for all to see, as long as you are willing to see.

  • 6
    This answer would big significantly improved with some citations – David says Reinstate Monica Jan 30 '17 at 2:49
  • 4
    I'm not sure how this is answering the question...other than saying the terms "coherent and consistent" seem to be arguable. As for the content of the answer..."vision" alas, is not "policy". This has been one of the major issues with Trump...he doesn't actually offer any policy details in regards to his 'vision'. For example, he may have said he's for free and fair trade, but is now talking about tariffs. These are often seen as being diametrically opposing concepts. – user1530 Jan 30 '17 at 4:00
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Philipp Jan 30 '17 at 18:45
  • 1
    As with most of your answers, this too could be greatly improved by adding a link. You said "[Trump] has laid out his economic vision loud and clear, before the election and after the election". When that is the case it should be very easy for you to give us a link where your readers can be read it for themselves. – Philipp Jan 30 '17 at 18:47
  • "Fair" means "USA first", obviously. "Clear" means "whatever Trump decides at the moment", obviously. When Trump uses words, they don't mean what you think they would mean. – gnasher729 Feb 14 '17 at 11:24

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .