Readers Write: Trump’s economic ideas, Minneapolis property taxes, prone police restraints

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Speaking at a trade event last week, former President Donald Trump bragged that he saved American jobs by threatening farm machinery manufacturer Deere & Co. with steep tariffs if it moved any production to Mexico. Trump was not telling the truth, of course; the company still plans to build a plant in Mexico. It also plans to lay off approximately 800 American workers.

While we don’t like people to lose their jobs, we have a labor shortage in the U.S., so it’s likely those manufacturing jobs he said he saved (but didn’t) can be absorbed. Mexico has a big pool of labor and a lot of immigrants coming to the U.S. to work. While we need immigrants to sustain our manufacturing and agricultural markets, helping to supply Mexico with more living-wage jobs would lead to fewer people crossing the border. That would save Trump the cost of having to round them all up. And we share a border with Mexico, so products made there don’t have to be shipped across an ocean. That keeps prices lower for American consumers. Win-win-win-win-win.

Meanwhile, while Trump is bragging about the jobs he didn’t save, if elected he supposedly plans to fire tens of thousands of American government workers who are not loyal to him. I’m guessing some people won’t see the irony, and I’m guessing he’ll brag about that, too.

Mary Alice Divine, White Bear Lake

•••

During his recent appearance at the Economic Club of Chicago, Trump interrupted Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait during a question on tariffs. With absolute certainty that he knows better than every economist, trade official and business executive, Trump said: “It must be hard for you to spend 25 years talking about tariffs as being negative and then have somebody explain to you that you’re totally wrong.” Trump seems to imagine that when a container ship from China comes into a U.S. port, a Chinese government bureaucrat walks down the gangplank and hands the port director a Chinese government check payable to the U.S. Treasury. Only in Trump world — not so much in the real world where, of course, the company importing the goods pays the tariffs. Trump’s arrogance and ignorance, and his stubborn insistence on such economic nonsense, would be pitiable if it were not so perilous.

David Aquilina, Richfield

•••

By now every potential voter has heard Trump’s assertion that he, if elected president, will impose massive tariffs on some products coming into the U.S. from other countries. That assertion has been assailed by many experts and Trump’s opponents, but I have not yet seen anyone pointing out that if Trump can do such a thing on behalf of the U.S., those other countries can do the same thing to us — and if they do, American companies will find it much more difficult to sell their products overseas, with the likely result that many American workers will lose their jobs.

David Wixon, Apple Valley

•••

Since economic issues are a top concern for the electorate, you’d think Trump would have been well-versed in them before his Economic Club of Chicago interview on Oct. 15.

Economists have warned that Trump’s plan for taxes on all imports would cause a troubling addition to consumer prices and inflation in this country. In the interview Trump claimed that the other countries would pay the taxes, without accepting that the taxes would be passed on to us. Right, and our retailers always pay the sales taxes technically charged to them.

Trump’s next response was that the taxes would force companies to move here to avoid paying them. Micklethwait observed, “That will take many, many, many years.”

Micklethwait asked Trump to comment on a Wall Street Journal estimate. It said that Trump’s economic proposals would increase the national debt by up to $7 trillion, perhaps as high as $15 trillion. Trump’s response was, “What does the Wall Street Journal know? They’ve been wrong about everything. So have you by the way, you’ve been wrong about everything.” I guess that settles that.

Micklethwait referred to Trump’s plan to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants who are an important part of the U.S. workforce. Trump response was that “we have some of the worst criminals in the world coming in.” Trump dug deeper when he said to a member of the audience, “They will look at you — down [there] a beautiful woman — they’ll look at you and they will kill you.” What?

Trump stated his plan to cut wasteful government spending was to nominate Elon Musk to do it. When asked to give an example, he suggested remodeling Air Force One. What?

Trump opined that his import taxes on a foreign carmaker would lead it to assemble here using our autoworkers. “They take them out of a box and they assemble them. We could have a child do it.” Smooth.

Trump is not fit to be president.

Jim Bartos, Maple Grove

In response to the Oct. 11 story “Mpls. to look at new taxes as downtown property values dip”: Property is valued both on the building and on the value of the location and proximity to community or “land value.” Today, our tax system focuses on the building. So, for example, empty lots pay very little in taxes. While the downtown office building values have decreased, the value of the land downtown is as high as ever. The strong transit connections, proximity to the lakes and the riverfront and other community resources haven’t moved or changed. The problem is we’ve changed what we need to use the land for as we shift to working from home. Homes and retail rather than business offices or parking are needed downtown. A land value tax would shift focus to value the proximity to community resources, encouraging empty lots or vacant buildings to become homes. It wouldn’t be a new tax; it’s just a shift in how we assess property values.

The state Legislature needs to pass a land value tax authorization so Minneapolis can solve its downtown tax crisis. A land value tax report in 2021 showed clear benefits to passing last year’s HF 1342. And HF 1342 made it to the conference committee in 2023-2024. It is time to shift this tax burden to the people speculating on property so they pay their fair share now, repurpose and rebuild — or sell the land to someone who will.

Brit Anbacht, Minneapolis

The simulation of prone restraint used by a substitute teacher at Woodbury High School recently is a stark example of the trauma excessive force can cause for students (“Wis. officer placed on leave for actions at Woodbury H.S.,” Oct. 17).

The Woodbury Police Department is now investigating the situation, but just last fall the same department pulled its school resource officers (SROs) for not being allowed to use this same procedure on students. The use of prone restraints is dangerous, causing lasting physical and psychological damage to the students who experience or witness it. In the case of George Floyd, the use of prone restraint meant death. The irony of the department expressing outrage at a simulation while lobbying to ensure SROs maintain the right to use the actual procedure on students is not lost on this reader.

The teacher’s re-enactment of George Floyd’s murder directly harmed the children in his classroom. Using the bodies of children to recreate one of the most horrific instances of police violence in our history is unconscionable.

For those who find the images of any adult with a knee on the neck of a high school student revolting, I encourage you to contact your elected representatives and the Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to eliminate the use of prone restraints on students in Minnesota schools.

If a simulation can cause this much harm, just imagine the damage done when the actual procedure is used. Prone restraint has no place in our schools.

Erin Sandsmark, Minneapolis

The writer is programs manager for the Solutions Not Suspension Coalition.