Trump Ups Ante on China, Threatens Duties on Nearly All its Imports (reuters.com) 326
U.S. President Donald Trump warned on Friday that he was ready to slap tariffs on virtually all Chinese imports into the United States, threatening duties on another $267 billion in Chinese goods on top of $200 billion in imports now primed for levies in coming days. Reuters: The moves would sharply escalate Trump's trade war with Beijing over his demands for major changes in economic, trade and technology policy. China has threatened retaliation, which could include action against U.S. companies operating there. Hours after a public comment period closed on his $200 billion China tariff list, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he was "being strong on China because I have to be."
"The $200 billion we are talking about could take place very soon depending on what happens with them. To a certain extent its going to be up to China," Trump said. "And I hate to say this, but behind that is another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want. That totally changes the equation." [...] The $200 billion list, which includes some consumer products such as cameras and recording devices, luggage, handbags, tires and vacuum cleaners, would be subject to tariffs of 10 percent to 25 percent. Cell phones, the biggest U.S. import from China, have so far been spared, but would be engulfed if Trump activates the $267 billion tariff list. Further reading: Apple says Trump's China tariffs are going to hurt the company.
"The $200 billion we are talking about could take place very soon depending on what happens with them. To a certain extent its going to be up to China," Trump said. "And I hate to say this, but behind that is another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want. That totally changes the equation." [...] The $200 billion list, which includes some consumer products such as cameras and recording devices, luggage, handbags, tires and vacuum cleaners, would be subject to tariffs of 10 percent to 25 percent. Cell phones, the biggest U.S. import from China, have so far been spared, but would be engulfed if Trump activates the $267 billion tariff list. Further reading: Apple says Trump's China tariffs are going to hurt the company.
Covfefe (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Covfefe (Score:5, Interesting)
Looks a lot like aphasia. [wikipedia.org] At least temporarily, Trump lost the mental capacity to pronounce that word. Not the ability to recognize the word, because he caught himself and tried to pronounce it again, making exactly the same mistake again. Clearly not his dentures or a dry mouth, two theories that were advanced after a previous similar episode. [youtube.com] No, it is clear that some wires are crossed inside Trump's brain. Considering who it is, this should be a medical emergency.
Watch his videos and you will notice a number of more subtle, but substantially similar events. And sometimes he completely loses track of the logic of a sentence he is trying to construct. These events seem to be increasing in frequency. That is my unscientific observation. This really needs to be assessed properly and scientifically by medical professionals, except not this guy. [thehill.com]
Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
Tariffs are good at protecting an existing business, but you have to have a business to protect for a tariff to work. The US has manufacturing and we were already doing a good job of protecting it. We've doubled out manufacturing output in the last 40 years (while cutting the workforce by 1/3 due to automation, I might add). Broad tariffs at this point are just closing the barn door after the cows got out.
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
If, and I mean if this happens, its going to hurt and hurt bad. Sorry to say that but if this ever happens (which I don't think will), it will take 10 years or longer before things settle. The chicken will come to roost after decades of cheap prices for everything we use today. Basically China was our drug dealer; we are hooked and now it may be time to face rehab which isn't going to be fun and probably put more in the poor house before all said and done.
Re: (Score:2)
It won't recover really. While tarriffs are active, China will look for other trading partners, new supply chains, and so forth. When tarriffs are lifted, China is not going to suddenly abandon this and go back to how things were.
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:4, Informative)
I assume you're referring to the $1 trillion per year that Trump is borrowing from the US citizens to 'boost' the economy.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/... [usatoday.com]
(or did you think it's his genius policies that's doing that?)
Re: (Score:2)
Can somebody translate that into a language that actually has complete sentences, with capitalization and punctuation?
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, I believe he did think of that, because he said "Now, you can argue that my wages will start climbing as a result of this, but..."
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. For 90% of us, wage growth has been anemic, less than 1% per year on average, for 40 years, and cheap foreign goods have been a saving grace only in the last 15-20.
Instead of blaming wage issues on cheap foreign goods, they should be blaming the necessity to shift to cheap foreign goods on the wage issues. After 20 years of increasing income inequality, the 90% of us getting nowhere could no longer afford American quality and had to just buy what we could afford. That resulted in the last 20 years of increasing imports of cheap foreign goods.
Now, instead of fixing the inequality problem so that we can afford to buy American, they want to just force us back? It won't work because we simply don't have the money. I have some choice feelings about that kind of strategy.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
It is funny that wage growth is suddenly considered a problem in the last decade. We are rich.
Between 1979 and 2007, the bottom 90% of the US only saw a total of 16.7% wage growth. From 2007 to 2016, the bottom 90% grew another 4%.
If you look at the 90th to 99th percentile, you see wage growth of 56.9% over the 1979 to 2007 time frame, and another 7.9% since.
It is only when you look at the top 1% that you see wage growth of 156.2% from 1979 to 2007 and -2.9% since.
So, 90% of us can legitimately complain about wage growth sucking since 1979. It has been much less than 1% per year. But this is only a problem now that the top 1% have fallen from their routine 4% per year wage growth that we have a problem?
Whatever. Cry me a river. Why does it seem that the media only represents the elite?
Recent wage growth trends look more like a slight downpayment on an income distribution correction to me. 90% of us would be vastly happier if we simply returned to a 1970's income distribution without any change in the overall total income. Over 40 years, that bulk of our nation has only recently crossed a total of 20% gain. The rest of you, especially the top 1% who have grown by 311% over those same 40 years, are welcome to at least show enough shame to shut up if not to lobby for change.
data [epi.org]
The beatings will continue until morale improves. (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
If you enjoyed that joke, check this one out. [archive.org] The EPA quickly took it down as they found it quite embarrassing.
As reported by Vox [vox.com]:
“[The new fuel efficiency proposal] is anticipated to prevent thousands of on-road fatalities and injuries as compared to the standards set forth in the 2012 final rule,” the EPA wrote in a press release about the announcement. The EPA said the proposed changes would save 1,000 lives per year.
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know about the rest of /. but my wages have not kept pace with inflation.
This trend is very true, well documented, and has been happening since the early 70s when wages became decoupled from productivity. This has happened regardless of which party is in power so it's not a D or R issue. It's a free trade / taxes / mass immigration issue. Trump is a symptom of rage at the establishment, as is Bernie. He's actually pretty benign compared to how it will go if things don't improve. Just as people now think of Bush II more fondly based on Trump, Trump himself is likely going to be thought of more fondly than what's down the road. I expect in my lifetime to see someone make a political career out of the rage from not one banker in jail. Until the guillotines come out don't expect it to get better. The 1% have it too good and the expense of too many.
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to be Chinese robots versus US robots in a few decades, and it will literally be rage against the machine. Perhaps the time will come when Americans are ready to accept that automation is changing the world, not trade deficits. It is literally fighting a 20th century war with 19th century ideas while progress ignores the whole goddamned thing.
Re: (Score:3)
It's going to be Chinese robots versus US robots in a few decades, ...
And to keep costs down, the US robots will be made in China.
Re: (Score:2)
In a way, it won't matter any more. When even the robots are built by robots, it's going to come down to transportation costs. It's going to be a lot cheaper to have a robot manufacturing facility in Michigan building robots for the mid-west, to be shipped via driverless trucks or whatever other automated transportation system, than to put them on a slow boat from China. It's not going to make American manufacturing jobs come back, but it will mean at the very least the manufacturing is more localized to ta
Re: (Score:2)
It's a free trade / taxes / mass immigration issue.
Actually, according to many economists, it is a technology issue.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know about the rest of /. but my wages have not kept pace with inflation.
You should really consider changing jobs then, because my salary has continued to increase far, far faster than inflation. I'm assuming you work in tech, of course. We struggle to find decent candidates and have to pay absurd sums to get qualified people. I've given several pay increases and promotions to keep staff this year alone. They say wages are stagnant but I can tell you that's not the case in tech from everyone I'm talking to and my (anecdotal) experience. Unemployment right now is unbelievably
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, you can argue that my wages will start climbing as a result of this
No, you can't argue that. As Americans replace jobs designing smartphones with jobs sewing t-shirts, wages will go down, not up.
High tariffs mean higher prices and lower wages.
Every complex problem has a solution that is simple, obvious, and wrong. Protectionism is one of those solutions.
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, you can argue that my wages will start climbing as a result of this
No, you can't argue that. As Americans replace jobs designing smartphones with jobs sewing t-shirts, wages will go down, not up.
High tariffs mean higher prices and lower wages.
Every complex problem has a solution that is simple, obvious, and wrong. Protectionism is one of those solutions.
As Trump has turned the Republican partyy into the party of tariffs and protectionism, next up is a Nixonian re-implementation of wage and price controls. The freeze on Federal employee wages at a time when unemployment is low is merely testing the waters for the next phase. As the Republican party shifts it position to whatever it is that Trump wishes, and obeys his every move, ordinary citizens do not understand that any money coming in from tariffs is not for them.
Am I wrong? Perhaps. But we shall see shortly. Trump is reinventing the Republican party as we speak, and they lack the intestinal fortitude to oppose him. I would not be terribly surprised if we nationalize industry soon, and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan will smile as they sign the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I was really surprised Trump froze government wages. Not the way to convince people that the economy is red-hot.
There are others who need that money more. And we all know who they are.
Re: (Score:2)
As a free trade supporting fiscal conservative, I would love to see a realignment in American politics. I have recently heard some of my liberal friends saying tariffs and subsidies are bad, just because Trump supports them, and they ignore the fact that Bernie advocated the same dumb policies.
If the Democrats can combine social tolerance with sensible economic policies, and the Republicans can concentrate all the stupidity into one party, that would be wonderful.
Re: (Score:2)
As a free trade supporting fiscal conservative, I would love to see a realignment in American politics. I have recently heard some of my liberal friends saying tariffs and subsidies are bad, just because Trump supports them, and they ignore the fact that Bernie advocated the same dumb policies.
If the Democrats can combine social tolerance with sensible economic policies, and the Republicans can concentrate all the stupidity into one party, that would be wonderful.
True, Republicans are pretty tolerant......
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Alibaba just helps you find a friend in China now. IE find a $25 bluetooth headset and basically add it to your wishlist. Then you send a $25 "Cash Gift" to your new friend through Ali, now if your new friend likes your Gift, and low and behold he has a brand new bluetooth headset he has never used, and sends it to you as a gift. Well it was a gift, so no tariff.
Never new I had so many Friends...
Re: (Score:3)
You need not worry. If we put a 15% tariff on them, the Chinese government will simply devalue the Yuan (as they always do) so as to maintain steady employment within China. That's the biggest fear of the CCP, mass unemployment WITHIN China.
Interesting strategy. Not only would that keep their exports attractively cheap, but it would also increase the cost of imports, thereby acting as a de facto tariff.
Of course, currency manipulation has not helped China make friends, in the current US administration or previous ones.
Re: (Score:2)
No, tariffs are lousy at protecting existing business, unless the competition is unfairly cheating. If you use a tariff to protect business, all you're doing is giving CEOs another yacht because why compete? If they can now raise prices because of the tariffs, they will.
It's why tariff relief is generally only given to countries found to be dumping.
Ask any homebuyer how the 20% tariffs on Ca
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Informative)
Close to 8 years of easy Fed interest rates, deficit spending, and under Trump, even more deficit spending...now to the tune of $1 Trillion per year, and every year, now that he and the Republicans have paid off their cronies in industry with their tax cuts.
Basic Keyesian economics, dump that much money into the economy and there would have been something seriously wrong if the economy hadn't boomed. So enjoy it while the bill hasn't yet come due, because when it does, every one of us will suffer.
Re: (Score:2)
No one is really concerned about the debt until Republicans make a fuss. I'll give them credit here. But if they don't care anymore, should we?
The US Dollar is the world reserve currency, so that affords us some margin of safety right? What's the worst that could happen?
Re: (Score:2)
Both parties have seemed concerned over the debt at various times, and both parties have completely ignored the debt at other times.
Right now Republicans don't seem concerned about the debt and are putting their fiscal conservative sides in the freezer for now so that their social conservatives sides can run rampant. This is why you need more than 2 parties (ideally should have 4 or more). When one's view about abortion is a key indicator about how one feels about economic policy, then it's clear the syst
That $1 trillion (Score:2)
It's not Keyesian because none of it is trickling down. Keyesian is demand side economics. What we've been doing is good 'ole fashion voodoo economics...
It's already biting us in the ass. Putting that much money in the economy with none of it making it to working class Americans is causing the supply side to over-rev. They've got too much money and not enough to do with it. Eventuall
Re: (Score:3)
The only real way out of it is to massively grow the economy so that overall tax revenue increases without additional increases in spending. The first half is possible, but have you ever known a government that
Re:Ok, this isn't funny anymore (Score:5, Informative)
My understanding is, while every president increased the debt, deficit spending was decreased during the administrations of: "Bill Clinton (reduced from 280Billion to 18 Billion)"; and "Barack Obama (reduced from 1.6T to 700 Billion; Stimulus act passed and enacted by Bush.) Let see the deficit went way up most significantly under the administrations of "Ronald Regain from 144 billion to 255 billion", "Donald Trump (700 Billion to 1.2 Trillion) Bush 43 (400 Billion to 1.6T) Bush 41 (255Billion to 347 Billion)
Carter did increase from 78 Billion to 90 Billion, pretty insignificant comparatively to the other increases.
Granted, The Democrats mostly had Republicans in charge of the house when they brought down the deficit. Reagan had democrats in the house; But the biggest increases were when we had Republican in control of both houses and the presidency.
Of course economy is a big contributor to some of those changes also.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want people to look at the government report, link to the government report, not fucking Breitbart.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wages have been slow to adjust, but a recent report [breitbart.com] shows wage growth(*) at 2.9% last month (monthly increase, annualized for a year), which is higher than inflation. Unemployment is at about 2.9% and steady.
(*)Yes, Breitbart.com, which always lies and never tells the truth and are a bunch of poo-poo heads that should be banned. Now dispute the actual numbers and the government report like an adult, or GTFO.
You know, like a stopped clock, Breitbart just might be right now and then. And in this case, it appears they are. [cnbc.com]
But I mean, c'mon. Breitbart? Their reputation is well-known. If you want to be taken seriously, provide some links to other sources, assuming you read any.
Don't forget that the economy, from the point of view of the *people*, only started to get better about October of last year. Looking at the DJIA [google.com] (or other leading indicators) shows we were out of the woods and back to health in 2013.
Repeat after me:
The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
The stock market is not the economy. The economy is not the stock market.
[...]
Out of curiosity (Score:2)
Just because we're having unexpectedly bigger than expected pay increases doesn't mean everyone is helped. Only the average is helped. Overall, most people have had their lives destroyed by Trump and now make less. I know my life is shit now that Trump has hurt the tech industry, and it's hard to find a job. My of my friends with CS degrees have lost their jobs under Trump. So fewer people are driving to jobs now that traffic is less worse in the Bay Area.
Out of curiosity, what's the difference between average and overall?
Can you reconcile "most people have had their lives destroyed" and "fewer people are driving to jobs..." with a steady unemployment rate of 3.8%?
I can reconcile those claims in three words:
Trump Derangement Syndrome
Re: (Score:3)
Third possible result: Congress tells him what he can go do with himself on the trade war and kills it.
This, of course, won't happen because the halls of Congress are filled with feckless us-versus-them morons that are too busy with publicity stunts and blaming the other guys to actually do anything useful.
Re: (Score:2)
This, of course, won't happen because the halls of Congress are filled with feckless us-versus-them morons that are too busy with publicity stunts and blaming the other guys to actually do anything useful.
The White House is full of people like that too ...
We got us an internet tough guy here (Score:5, Funny)
Trump's not going to do shit about China. They're laughing at him and they know all they've got to do is wait now. It won't be long.
Plus, any further tariffs will be written on one of those pieces of paper his staff has been snatching off his desk to keep him from fucking up completely.
Predicting the future (Score:3, Insightful)
Trump's not going to do shit about China. They're laughing at him and they know all they've got to do is wait now. It won't be long.
Plus, any further tariffs will be written on one of those pieces of paper his staff has been snatching off his desk to keep him from fucking up completely.
People who can read minds and predict the future belong on late night cable TV shows, 900 number call-ins on billboards, and newspaper horoscopes.
Re: (Score:2)
As St Augustine famously said, "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind's blowing."
Re: (Score:2)
As St Augustine famously said, "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind's blowing."
I thought that was Rudy Galindo?
Re: (Score:2)
As St Augustine famously said, "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind's blowing."
Heretic! It was "you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows". Burn the witch!
Re: (Score:2)
It shouldn't matter how you translate from the original Latin.
We said that about the first round of tariffs (Score:2)
And remember, the Republican party has very, very few people who genuinely care about the country. Even
Re: (Score:2)
I guarantee that whatever lottery numbers I choose will not be a winner. If I do win then I'll publicly say I'm sorry and pay you $100 (or the first person I meet who claims to be an Anonymous Coward).
Re: (Score:2)
Remember?
Obama's gonna take all our guns
Obama will crash the economy
Obama will invade Texas with Jade Helm
Obama will build FEMA camps for white people.
Uah (Score:5, Insightful)
So much economic stupidity. At least he gave tax breaks to businesses and bailed out the industries he's nearly killed as he taxed the hell out of their supply chain.
Re:Uah (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sorry, which industries has he bailed out? Coal? Natural gas and renewable are still eating their lunch. Steel and aluminum? I fail to see the boom except is CEO's blowing smoke in Trump's direction, although he very much likes and believes it.
In the meantime, he's helped tanked the farming and ag business. His tariffs are being paid by every industry and customer reliant on those imports. And now that inflation is taking off and given the eye-watering deficits and debt, the interest rates will continue to rise. That is tanking the rest of the world's economies. And sooner or later, they won't be able to afford American exports because of the dollar's strength and their own currencies weakness. See Turkey for a preview.
Re:You're against free trade? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is largely bullshit. They certainly INVOKED the spectre of national defense, but the steel and aluminum tariffs are being applied on all steel and aluminum, not just stuff used for defense. And the tariffs even apply to countries like Canada, who aren't shipping sub-standard metals. If the goal was to curb dumping of low-grade metals onto the market, it's not doing its job. The number of American companies applying for exemptions from this absurd tax is orders of magnitude higher than what the government was prepared to deal with. In many cases, US companies literally can't get the steel they need from ANY American provider. How is THAT good for anyone, let alone national defense?
Re:Uah (Score:5, Informative)
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Re: (Score:2)
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader
Re: (Score:2)
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader
As is the $1.2 Billion bailout to farmers hurt by his tariffs [cnn.com]. Our tax dollars at work people, brought to you by "trade wars are easy to win" Trump and the "bailouts are bad", "smaller government is good" Republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
In the meantime our agricultural customers will figure out new supply chains and by food from somewhere else. By the time the tariffs are lifted the customers will have new suppliers and the market will have to slowly rebuild itself.
Meanwhile, the $billions set aside to compensate farms won't count for very much at all once spread around evenly. It's like when I was laid off and I got unemployment insurance that amounted to about $350 a week, which wasn't much of a compensation.
Re: (Score:2)
In the meantime our agricultural customers will figure out new supply chains and by food from somewhere else. By the time the tariffs are lifted the customers will have new suppliers and the market will have to slowly rebuild itself.
Meanwhile, the $billions set aside to compensate farms won't count for very much at all once spread around evenly. It's like when I was laid off and I got unemployment insurance that amounted to about $350 a week, which wasn't much of a compensation.
There will be a few particular agribusiness that will get the overwhelming majority of the money.
This will start out to be a double hit on the taxpayers, but do not fear, The modern Republican party will simply allow the wheels to fall off, as they claim that trillions of dollars added to the deficit don't mean a thing, and perhaps the resulting inflation caused by this endless printing of more money will work out really well.
Re: (Score:2)
Tariff: A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.
putting a tariff on the good a company imports to do business is very much taxing their supply chain.
Tariffs are not taxes any more, They are gifts from Dear Leader
As is the $1.2 Billion bailout to farmers hurt by his tariffs [cnn.com]. Our tax dollars at work people, brought to you by "trade wars are easy to win" Trump and the "bailouts are bad", "smaller government is good" Republicans.
My guess is that the Democrats will have to come in and clean up the mess that the children made. If you study the political and financial history, you will see this often happens.
Time to quote Einstein, as trite as it seems (Score:5, Insightful)
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Isn't it time to look at a different tool for changing the relationship between the US and China? I can't imagine this hurting anybody but the US consumer - AND I suspect that it could be a boon for other countries looking for lower cost goods for their economies.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine this hurting anybody but the US consumer
No, it hurts the Trump agenda too. [nbcnews.com]
Re:This *is* the different tactic (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, please ... that is such bullshit it isn't funny.
America hasn't been giving away their wealth, American corporations have been systematically outsourcing jobs to other countries to cut costs and maximize profits, and therefore shareholder value.
The entirety of how the US measures its wealth is based on shareholder mother fucking goddamned value.
Know what's happened in the process? Much of your populace is getting left behind as people in developing nations are happy to do the same job for less money. Guess what? There's your free market biting you in the ass.
America hasn't been giving away it's wealth, it's greedy corporations have stripped jobs and production out of the US, shifted the money to the 1%, and average Americans have discovered that they're not part of that gravy train.
The problem Americans haven't figured out isn't that "America is giving away her wealth", it's that the wealth isn't owned by the citizens, and the corporations and rich assholes who do own it are keeping ever more of it for themselves.
Anything else would be socialism and evil right? Isn't this what you guys claim to want??
America is a victim of the fucking system they've been foisting on the rest of the world for decades, the difference being in this Ponzi scheme the American people have figured out they're not on the winning side, because nobody gives a fuck about them.
Don't blame the rest of the world for the fact that your own industries have gutted your economy and left you with nothing.
America wants access to everyone else's markets, but is an incredibly protectionist economy.
Boo fucking hoo, we're so upset for you. Because you know what, your Americas companies have been buying companies in our countries for decades, gutting them, and moving the jobs elsewhere.
If you're looking for sympathy from the rest of the world, you're a couple of fucking decades too late. The problem is you guys actually seem to believe that you're entitled to a better life than the rest of the world.
Enjoy the shithole country Trump is helping build for you, and ask yourself, just who is going to be left as your allies? Because the rest of the world is losing any interest in what benefits America if it comes at our expense.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly did we give away our wealth to everyone and anyone? An analysis of the effects from NAFTA resulted in slightly more money per US resident overall. Even though some people lost jobs it was balanced by other people gaining jobs. It was not the huge sucking sound as predicted and most definitely not the worst deal ever as Trump likes to claim. We had a *great* trading relationship with Canada, and the few small areas of disagreement we had were not worth scuttling the entire relationship over.
Tr
Re: (Score:2)
TPP did have flaws. But they weren't unsurmountable flaws, and politicians across the board eventually decided that they would re-investigate it to remove some of those flaws. Free trade means more money for everyone, only Trump doesn't believe that. When Republicans were pushing back on Trump claiming that the tariffs would cause harm, it was not because they were the mainstream elite or dupes of mass media.
Good (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm fine with buying less shit from China, or paying more for what I actually do need to buy (from elsewhere or from China when necessary).
It ultimately means China gets less of US money. A lot less. It's China who loses here, not the US. The US is hundreds of billions in trade deficit to China. China has far, far more to lose in this game of chicken.
China can end it all now if they just agree to one simple thing. Fair trade. If China doesn't like the tariffs and restrictions they can get rid of the s
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
But trade deficits aren't inherently bad. It's not like the US is paying China a bunch of money out of its tax coffers. The trade deficit merely represents the money flowing between people and companies located in different countries. Seriously, just google 'understanding trade deficit', and nearly every single article is about how trade deficits aren't a good indicator of economic performance in and of themselves, they're just a metric of trade. And I'm not talking about left-leaning publications, I'm talking about everyone. Forbes, investment news, economists—virtually everyone agrees that a trade deficit in the right circumstances can be very good.
https://www.nationalreview.com... [nationalreview.com]
https://www.forbes.com/sites/d... [forbes.com]
Really, the only person that doesn't get that is Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
But trade deficits aren't inherently bad.
Have you looked at the US economy lately?
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
And just who the ever loving fuck do you think you're going to get it from?
Trump has started trade wars with Europe, China, Canada, Mexico, Asia ... and is in the process of openly pissing off everyone. You're rapidly running out of friends.
China also has deeper pockets and cash reserves, and America is far more dependent on China than they realize. They've got a huge cash reserve of your money and treasury bills.
Tell you what, America can stop it's farm subsidies and stop bitching about similar subsidies other countries have. What's that? No? Then you don't want free trade either.
So here's a little reality check for you ... the rest of the world is losing patience with your President, and losing any feelings of friendship towards the US. We can no longer separate your asshole president from your idiot citizens who parrot the dumb shit he says.
So, please, by all means, piss off your friends and allies. Just don't go stomping around blustering about how we have to listen to you or give a fuck your your interests.
Because we're all fine with buying less shit from America or giving a fuck about what Trump thinks.
Do you have a problem with fair? (Score:2)
So here's a little reality check for you ... the rest of the world is losing patience with your President, and losing any feelings of friendship towards the US. We can no longer separate your asshole president from your idiot citizens who parrot the dumb shit he says.
I hear what you're saying - you would like your country to pay for your defense from Russia.
I think we can arrange that.
Real friends don't leech off of others, they abide by their obligations.
We're only making the tariffs fair and even. Trump has said repeatedly that he would welcome getting rid of all tariffs on both sides. He's said that directly to Merkel, using those exact words. Her response was to laugh.
Eliminating all tariffs seems fair.
Do you have a problem with fair?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In this case "fair" would enable larger US industries (many of which are subsidized, like every product with corn in it) to flood the markets of other countries, and undercut the domestic industry and put them out of business.
Kind of like what China did to the US? Fair is fair.
Re: (Score:2)
The rest of your comment is spot on. Trump is basically pissing away all the hard-earned friendships and good-will the U.S has gained from WW2-forward and willfully relinquishing its status as a global-leader
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, the Trump argument of using the Big Stupid Number, in this case, the balance of trade. Your understanding of that is right out of the 1800's, like your hero, the alleged president.
Re: (Score:2)
Argue against it. The long running imbalance has destroyed the US economy. We have extreme wealth disparity in the US because of it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fine with buying less shit from China, or paying more for what I actually do need to buy (from elsewhere or from China when necessary).
It ultimately means China gets less of US money. A lot less. It's China who loses here, not the US. The US is hundreds of billions in trade deficit to China. China has far, far more to lose in this game of chicken.
China can end it all now if they just agree to one simple thing. Fair trade. If China doesn't like the tariffs and restrictions they can get rid of the same exact tariffs and restrictions they impose on us, and poof, we reciprocate.
So are you now a socialist? You do not believe in the free market or supply and demand? Funny how conservatives have almost overnight become believers in Keynesian economics. Just like Nixon did.
With Tariffs, it is a direct admission that you cannot compete, therefore must put artificial Taxes on other's products to artificially make them cost more.
Elimination of anyhing resembling a free market, anti competitive tariffs, and taxes. The Republicans inch toward socialism and eventually communism.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fine with buying less shit from China, or paying more for what I actually do need to buy (from elsewhere or from China when necessary).
It ultimately means China gets less of US money. A lot less. It's China who loses here, not the US. The US is hundreds of billions in trade deficit to China. China has far, far more to lose in this game of chicken.
China can end it all now if they just agree to one simple thing. Fair trade. If China doesn't like the tariffs and restrictions they can get rid of the same exact tariffs and restrictions they impose on us, and poof, we reciprocate.
So are you now a socialist? You do not believe in the free market or supply and demand? Funny how conservatives have almost overnight become believers in Keynesian economics. Just like Nixon did.
With Tariffs, it is a direct admission that you cannot compete, therefore must put artificial Taxes on other's products to artificially make them cost more.
Elimination of anyhing resembling a free market, anti competitive tariffs, and taxes. The Republicans inch toward socialism and eventually communism.
Are you a retard? (Yes, you are.)
I'm fine with a free market. We do not have a free market. Trump wants a free market. China ALREADY imposes huge tariffs and restrictions on OUR SHIT. We are merely returning the favor in kind.
If you want a FREE MARKET ask China to drop their tariffs and restrictions against us. The US will then reciprocate and our tariffs and restrictions against China will be dropped.
If you think that China can go without US goods for longer than the US can go without Chinese goods,
Trump Only Knows One Thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re the writer on the NYT, I don't know if s/he is really in the alleged administration or just punking them. However, given the better sourced Woodword (sp?) book, it is fairly clear that few in the alleged administration have a high opinion of Fearless Leader. Battering and demeaning the hired help when the hired help can strike back is a completely different ball game than running a penny-ante company (and driving it into bankruptcy 4 times...6 depending upon who's counting).
So it turns out the hire help
Re:Trump Only Knows One Thing (Score:4, Informative)
You're giving him way too much credit (Score:2)
Trump went bankrupt for real several times. His banks wanted to try and recover as much as they could and Trump had a well known name & brand so they let him keep some money and go on playing the part of the rich man so they could try and use his brand to bilk people out of money. Worked too. But that wasn't Trump's
Wait, MONEY, not FREEDOM? (Score:2)
The fucking point is to pressure them into treating their people better, not to affect the US markets.
Since we're clearly not doing that, the rest is just theatre.
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory Last Week Tonight clip (Score:3, Funny)
Alternative link for Canadians and Brits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
And if thats TLDW for you, at least watch from 14:54 to see how Trump got his Trade with China expert.
The big takeaway from that for me (Score:2)
Where is half a TRILLION going? (Score:3)
So assuming all the tariffs are enacted, where is the 467 billion spent? Because if you say to support K-12 education, SS, or the environment then great, if you say to buy more billion dollar warplanes and to start a star wars program, then FU.
Re:Where is half a TRILLION going? (Score:5, Funny)
every penny of that 467 billion is being spent on Dear Leader's ego. It's a small price to pay for such an exquisitely rare, delicate, and gilded of egos. I hear there may be one or two more out there, but I never saw one. No Collusion! Let me tell you, though, the ego that you're going to be getting... means that I'll be very happy on tv. That means more ratings. The happier I am, the more ratings I get, which means I'm worth more. And let me tell you, once all of that happiness trickles down to you dumb southerners, you'll be happier too - thus you'll get better ratings, and make more money. That'll really make those 17 angry democrats even more angry. And the more angrier they get, the less happy they'd be... so they'd get less ratings and make less money. It's win win win lose draw win. I like drawing. I make the best drawings. I colored that flag better than all those kids. Those kids are losers, let me tell you about losers. Losers have fragile egos. Not an ego like mine, mine is huge. An ego that big can't be fragile because it's big. Have you seen those photoshops of my inauguration? Ya, big like that. Bigly big. Big bigly. Happy.
Sun Tzu's advice (Score:4, Interesting)
If you completely surround an enemy, his soldiers will fight bravely. If you leave them a path to escape, they will run away.
This is actually a pretty good time to put some trade pressure on China. They've reached the end of an era of explosive growth and the transition to something more sustainable is bound to put pressure on them. A trade war can really hurt them right now (as it can hurt us as well).
This is a time to have your exit strategy worked out. If we have a shrewd and accurate idea of what we can feasibly walk away with, we could do quite well out of a little trade saber rattling. The thing is if we don't have an exit strategy, we can hurt our own economy and give the Chinese regime a legitimate scapegoat for its own problems.
So this is a test of the president's acumen. Does he have the brains to know when to walk away from a conflict?
Re: (Score:2)
" Does he have the brains to know when to walk away from a conflict?"
Do you pay attention? This moron doesn't have the brains of a turd floating in a toilet.
Re: (Score:2)
It was a rhetorical question.
Winning? (Score:3)
spoiled brat (Score:5, Insightful)
If *I* want.
Not advisers, not the american people, I.
"*I* am the state"
me me me, I I I. He has all the situational awareness of a toddler.
World Trade Organization (Score:3)
this is probably trump's only smart move (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Serious question - could you get your bearings from anywhere besides China? I don't mean a U.S. supplier, necessarily. I mean anywhere but China?
80% of the world isn't China - it seems there must be manufacturing elsewhere. If not, then don't you think that's a highly vulnerable position - for the country and for your company - and we should do something to reduce our dependency on them?
Re: (Score:2)
A helicopter parent sounds like it wasn't an easy birth.
Re: (Score:2)
The rotor unfolds after birth. Miracle of nature.