Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses China The Almighty Buck United States Technology

Trump Heaps More Tariffs on China, Still No Deal in Sight (bloomberg.com) 359

The Trump administration slapped tariffs on roughly $110 billion in Chinese imports on Sunday, marking the latest escalation in a trade war that's inflicting damage across the world economy. China retaliated. From a report: The 15% U.S. duty hit consumer goods ranging from footwear and apparel to home textiles and certain technology products like the Apple Watch. A separate batch of about $160 billion in Chinese goods -- including laptops and cellphones -- will be hit with 15% tariffs on Dec. 15. President Donald Trump delayed part of the levies to blunt the impact on holiday shopping. Investors sought the safety of the yen, which edged higher against the dollar as currency markets opened for trading. The offshore yuan pared some losses to trade at 7.1682 per dollar Monday at 10:38 a.m. in Beijing after the PBOC set the fixing rate stronger than all estimates. Asian stocks fell with U.S. equity futures after the tariffs kicked in, even though the measures had been widely anticipated. S&P 500 futures opened 1% lower before paring losses, and Treasury contracts advanced.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trump Heaps More Tariffs on China, Still No Deal in Sight

Comments Filter:
  • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:09AM (#59148820) Homepage Journal

    I was fine with everything else, but it affects the APPLE WATCH? The horrors! Impeach NOW!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Really goes to show what kind of crowd this article seems to be playing to. The author obviously believes there's a big overlap between Apple fanboys and the "Impeach the Drumf"-crowd and I wouldn't be surprised if they're right. However from what I can tell the Apple fanboy crowd is nothing compared to the size it used to be back when Jobs was still alive and at the helm.
    • by shanen ( 462549 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @01:23PM (#59149706) Homepage Journal

      I was fine with everything else, but it affects the APPLE WATCH? The horrors! Impeach NOW!

      Don't worry. Trade wars are easy to win! Real soon now Trump will negotiate a great YUGE deal with China. Even better than his latest deal with Afghanistan! The only thing that's slowing it down is that the Taliban knew what they wanted, but Xi hasn't yet explained things to the Donald.

      What could possibly go wrong?

      P.S. As soon as Trump finishes wrapping up those deals he'll be able to finish the deal for Mexico to pay for the wall. But he's getting pissed with them, so he's probably going to insist Mexico puts up the down payment for buying Greenland, too.

  • by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:13AM (#59148824) Homepage

    Tariffs are normally used to bring manufacturing back to your own country, by removing any competitive advantage that imported goods might have.

    But these tariffs are only being placed on goods from one country, China. Isn't this just going to move manufacturing to other countries, and not back to the US?

    I think the entire world benefits from having free trade and think tariffs are a bad idea overall, but if we're going to implement tariffs, why just one country? Seems completely pointless and self destructive.

    • It's already started. They are just opening/moving factories to Vietnam.
    • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:20AM (#59148842) Homepage Journal

      The idea is that it is used to force China to drop their import tariffs, allow increased import, and stop manipulating their currency. The Chinese don't play "fair". The attempt is to make them play for fair. It isn't necessarily a bad idea, but debatable if it is going to work, but China needs the US. If Obama did it, the same people would be calling it genius.

      • by Zero__Kelvin ( 151819 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:52AM (#59148938) Homepage
        What kind of idiot thinks "it's not a bad idea and might work" when it couldn't possibly work and is literally devastating the economy as he types it, then thinks there is even a chance that anyone else who has ever been President might have been this stupid and shown this much careless disregard for the welfare of humanity to do this?
        • Um, why couldn't it work? And what economy is being "devastated"? Is it that important you get cheap Chinese crap cheaply.

          • by gweihir ( 88907 )

            Um, why couldn't it work? And what economy is being "devastated"? Is it that important you get cheap Chinese crap cheaply.

            It is pretty much. (And most is not "crap" these days....) Not that obvious as long as it works, but look at the question again in a year or two.

        • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @10:49AM (#59149150) Journal

          What kind of idiot thinks "it's not a bad idea and might work" when it couldn't possibly work and is literally devastating the economy as he types it,

          Moronic Trump voters [but I repeat myself], who think that they don't care about the economy while Trump is making things difficult for immigrants and other "out-group" people.

        • by shanen ( 462549 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @01:30PM (#59149724) Homepage Journal

          What kind of idiot thinks "it's not a bad idea and might work" when it couldn't possibly work and is literally devastating the economy as he types it, then thinks there is even a chance that anyone else who has ever been President might have been this stupid and shown this much careless disregard for the welfare of humanity to do this?

          Sadly, that's not how the #BillionDollarLoser thinks or does business. He's just been a puppet and a victim for his entire life, starting with how Fred used him for tax evasion before he entered elementary school. Trump's best hope now is to die with the most toys before anyone gets to study the laundry receipts (for dirty money) that "paid" for the toys.

          I think the funny part is that this entire fiasco started as a publicity stunt. It just went horribly wrong, and again the results were mostly due to other people manipulating Trump to exploit his weaknesses. Which have only grown weaker.

      • by greatpatton ( 1242300 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @10:10AM (#59149018)

        TIf Obama did it, the same people would be calling it genius.

        Obama was in charge for 8 years and didn't do it... so you point is completely moot. And this argument is quite silly as everybody knows that Trump is doing exactly the opposite of Obama and tries to remove all the things he did.

        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          That isn't a surprise. Obama didn't do much at all except keep our military invading countries and passing Obamacare which was just a handout to the insurance companies. It didn't bring down costs, which is the real issue.

          • by DogDude ( 805747 )
            Obamacare which was just a handout to the insurance companies. It didn't bring down costs, which is the real issue.

            It did bring down costs for people with pre existing conditions. Abso-fucking-lutely. And, costs for everybody else are probably signifcantly lower than they would have been without it.
            • by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @11:24AM (#59149286) Homepage

              And, costs for everybody else are probably signifcantly lower than they would have been without it.

              Actually, some (red/purple) states sabotaged the ACA by refusing the subsidies. People who had insurance saw their premiums go up/benefits go down, and people who couldn't afford insurance still couldn't afford it.

              You'd think Republicans would've caught hell for it, but there's a surprisingly large amount of Americans who don't seem to mind voting against their own best interests, as long as their "team" wins.

              • by DogDude ( 805747 )
                there's a surprisingly large amount of Americans who don't seem to mind voting against their own best interests, as long as their "team" wins.

                Amen.
              • by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @12:12PM (#59149486) Journal

                here's a surprisingly large amount of Americans who don't seem to mind voting against their own best interests, as long as their "team" wins.

                This is exactly what it is- the "my team" mentality:

                Identity Fusion - aka “Sports team” mode
                A majority of the United States is confused by the behavior of ~34% of the rest of the country. To grasp what has happened, you just have to realize that some political supporters have gone into “Sports Teams” mode. They have turned politics into an Identity Fusion issue.

                Basically, they have stopped thinking about the representative government as a functional group of public servants. They are thinking about it as if it's their "team" and everything political has become "us versus them."

                Some characteristics of a team fanatic (I'm using Trump Supporters as an example because it's currently the most obvious example, but it can apply to both sides to some degree.)

                Once you realize this is what's happening, the common attributes are there to see:

                - Wearing identifying clothing (hats, badges, colors, logos, slogans) in everyday life.
                - Loyalty regardless of performance or behavior of their "team."
                - Instant disrespect for any member of the opposing team based solely on team affiliation.
                - Hatred of any perceived disloyalty from fellow team fans.
                - Having rallies and parades even when there is no pending game with the primary goal to celebrate and re-enforce being loyal.
                - At gatherings, fans chant slogans and/or sing.
                - Team players (not fans, but players) are 100% supported unless they leave the team. Then they are ostracized and demonized even though they are basically the same person.

            • ... costs for everybody else are probably signifcantly lower than they would have been without it.

              Not for me as far as I can tell - costs for me went up as soon as it went into effect, along with a dose of worse coverage as a garnish.

      • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

        ... It isn't necessarily a bad idea, but debatable if it is going to work, but China needs the US. If Obama did it, the same people would be calling it genius.

        Not at all true. During the Obama administration, the Republicans were very much free-trade absolutists. They would have eviscerated Obama for putting in tariffs.

        And the Democrats, on the other hand, wouldn't have particularly rushed to his defense-- China's trade barriers just wasn't their issue.

        • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @10:58AM (#59149188) Journal

          During the Obama administration, the Republicans were very much free-trade absolutists

          During the Obama administration, the Republicans pretended to care about the deficit.

          In reality, the Republicans care about nothing other than staying in power and promoting the interests of the super-wealthy (so those sweet dollars keep pouring in to support their reelection campaigns).

          Republican voters care deeply about making life worse for darker-skinned people and other out-groups.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          The Republicans would have eviscerated Obama no matter WHAT he did. Just like the "Democrats" are eviscerating Trump no matter what he does. That is the point. You guys are being fooled (again)

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        The problem here is that it is pretty clear that the Chinese can play this longer. Probably the reason Obama was smarter than this. And "fair"? That is just propaganda.

        • It isn't clear to me. China NEEDS the US, the US employs China, just like Japan needed the US in the 1980s when the Chicken Littles were claiming that Japan was going to take over the US. The US can just shift its overseas manufacturing to the next place. Eventually it will be settled anyway.

      • by skam240 ( 789197 )

        Shit, I accidentally posted this to a comment below yours...

        Sure but no one plays as unfair as China. Rampant IP theft, currency manipulation, product dumping from state industries, cyber espionage, and forced pairings with domestic companies to enter the market are all examples that don't apply to most of the rest playing the game. Couple that with a rising global super power with an appalling human rights record and territorial claims extending not only into international waters but also into US allies te

      • The idea is to keep from letting China get a foothold in the 5G network in America. 5G will be extremely expensive and will require a minimum of $1 trillion of purchases made by the US over the next 3-5 years... no I don't mean by the government, I mean by the people of the U.S. to begin with.

        Consider that China is still mostly self-sufficient and they've becomes substantially more so over the years. They have very little dependence on American goods. In the past, China depended heavily on U.S. Oil and on U
    • The point is to diversify manufacturing across multiple sources (countries), even if not in our own country. Relying so heavily on one entity (China) is a very bad idea. Remember what happened to hard drive prices when a tsunami hit Thailand and crippled every manufacturer?
      • A very reasonable suggestion. Although it is not why the Republicans say that the tariffs are being applied. The story is that it will drive manufacturing back to America and that is obviously not going to happen in any big way with all the other low cost offshore manufacturing opportunities available.

      • by Kernel Kurtz ( 182424 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @11:34AM (#59149336)

        The point is to diversify manufacturing across multiple sources (countries), even if not in our own country. Relying so heavily on one entity (China) is a very bad idea. Remember what happened to hard drive prices when a tsunami hit Thailand and crippled every manufacturer?

        And that works both ways of course. I can assure you that here in Canada diversification of trade is high on the list of every farmer, manufacturer and resource company. The US has been our number one trading partner for generations, but the US is no longer run by sane, normal people. The faster we can find other markets the better.

        Rest assured it's not just the Chinese. The entire western world now considers America sketchy as well.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Confused ( 34234 )

      In general, manufacturer inside a country ask for tariffs if they feel at a disadvantage compared to the imports.
      The government is asking for taxes to have more money to spend.

      The point of tariffs is to keep everyone more or less honest. If you disregards the rules of trades to much, you get hit with tariffs.
      You can have extra tariffs for some products out of a country, but it also can be products from an individual company. This is nothing new and always happens, only most of the time it isn't of general

    • by Anonymous Coward

      First, there are some problems with the China-US relationship that need addressing.
      Second, Tariffs are a blunt tool, not the best, but realistically they are the only tool the president has at his discretion that is sufficient and can't be worked around.
      Third, their bluntness also is useful for negotiation-purposes.
      Fourth, sadly but true Tarrifs simply fit tumps, knock the chess board over negotiation style, so of course its is his go-to tool.

      What are the issues. First, I'm going to ignore any sense of hyp

      • Would mod up if I had points.

        The tariffs are not exactly a new measure. While Europe has been reluctant to address issues like the trade deficit, corporate spying and Chinese protectionism, they have and still are imposing tariffs on goods that they feel are being dumped to kill local markets. The US have been doing the same. What is happening now is heavy tariffs across the board to bring the situation to a head. Painful for all concerned in the short term, but if China can be forced to play nice, i
    • "Tariffs are normally used to bring manufacturing back to your own country, by removing any competitive advantage that imported goods might have.

      But these tariffs are only being placed on goods from one country, China. Isn't this just going to move manufacturing to other countries, and not back to the US?"

      While Trump talks a big talk about bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US to get votes any thinking person easily comes to the same conclusion you have because it's quite obviously true.

      What this is ac

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Already happening. Soybeans for the Chinese will now come from South America and you can bet these sales will never come back to the US. Since a lot of the affected farmers voted Trump, they basically did it to themselves and I have zero compassion. Stupid decision have consequences.

      Also, Trump well knows that universal tariffs would be an immediately obvious drastic catastrophe. He is probably hoping that with just China as a target he can make claims to be keeping his promises but at the same time the una

    • But these tariffs are only being placed on goods from one country, China.

      Perhaps you don't follow the news much, so you have not noticed the tariffs that Trump has placed on Canada, Mexico, and the EU......

      It will take the US a long time to rebuild the global relationships Trump delights in destroying.

    • We already had:
      1980's: War On Drugs
      2000's: War On Terror
      Now: War On Trade

      You can't have a War On Trade without tariffs.

  • by Confused ( 34234 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:21AM (#59148848) Homepage

    An adjustment of the way trade happens with China has for a long time been overdue. China - and also many American corporations producing in China - were skilfully exploiting the loopholes in the system. Time to correct this. I've recently been in South-East Asia and most people I met thought Trump does the right thing. Few people outside China like the Chinese.

    What are going to be the consequences?
    * Stuff from China will become more expensive, thus reducing the margins from those profiting most from it.
    * Stuff from other places, which aren't as blatant in exploiting the loopholes, will become more competitive.
    * Perhaps even some American products might become more interesting. Walmart might put some American products actually produced in America on the shelves again instead of the crap out of China.
    * Perhaps, but probably unlikely, the Chinese will get a little more cooperative and start to take the concerns of their business partners more seriously.

    Capitalism is the best system to optimise the benefits under given rules. If the result is too lopsided, it's time to adjust the rules. Capitalism in turn will adapt to the new situation and optimise for the new situation. All those cry-babies calling foul when the rules change don't get capitalism. They want a nanny-state catering to their benefits.

    • by Ă…ke Malmgren ( 3402337 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:32AM (#59148876)
      Capitalism only caters to a subset of human needs. The needs of capitalism are counter to the needs of the young, elderly, sick or feeble. To capitalism, they're drains that consume resources without creating value. Yet almost everyone can plainly see the value of taking care of them. Capitalism is thus flawed, and should be patched or replaced so that maximizing profit is tied to maximizing human potential.
      • Which economic system is better? Can you show us a country that has said economic system, and is successful?
        • by jareth-0205 ( 525594 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @10:19AM (#59149040) Homepage

          Which economic system is better? Can you show us a country that has said economic system, and is successful?

          Generally the response to this is normally "any Scandinavian country". But usually what then happens is a bunch of excuses why they don't count for some reason.

          • by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @10:46AM (#59149140) Homepage

            Which economic system is better? Can you show us a country that has said economic system, and is successful?

            Generally the response to this is normally "any Scandinavian country".

            All the Scandinavian countries are capitalist.

            They tend to be capitalist with effective government social programs paid for by taxes, but that doesn't counter the fact that their economic system is basically capitalist.

            But usually what then happens is a bunch of excuses why they don't count for some reason.

            They don't count because it's inaccurate to say that they're not capitalist.

            • They don't count because it's inaccurate to say that they're not capitalist.

              Well the original poster wasn't necessarily positing a completely non-capitalist system:

              Capitalism is thus flawed, and should be patched or

              I would say a Democratic Socialist capitalism is certainly "patched", and different, from the American system.

      • What's your replacement look like? We already have safety nets in the system for those it directly benefits less. And btw old people on the whole do pretty fucking well. They've had a lifetime of benefiting from the system. It's why so many can retire and enjoy many years of healthy and carefree living.
      • by Confused ( 34234 )

        To capitalism, they're drains that consume resources without creating value. Yet almost everyone can plainly see the value of taking care of them. Capitalism is thus flawed, and should be patched or replaced so that maximizing profit is tied to maximizing human potential.

        Actually, only if the rules allow for it. The way capitalism was lived in the USA in the recent past, where the companies made their own rules, is broken. Don't put the fox in charge of the henhouse.
        Capitalism is for a big part just local optimisation.

    • Next, you'll be arguing it's fair to sell opium in China because they had it coming for a long time.
      • by skam240 ( 789197 )

        Right, engaging in a trade war with China because of unfair trade practices is the same as the colonial practice of forcibly introducing opium to the Chinese market to hopefully pacify the population.

        Those two things have nothing to do with each other and you're an idiot.

    • > Few people outside China like the Chinese.

      Ok.

      > I've recently been in South-East Asia and most people I met thought Trump does the right thing.

      Sure, if you don't like Chain, you'll say anyone that says something anti-China is doing the right thing.

      I'm sure if he was saying the Chinese were bad because they don't support their currency enough, the same people would be agreeing with that too.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by mark_reh ( 2015546 )

      Few people outside any asian country like any other asian country because of a long history of wars fought among them.

      If companies move out of China, they'll go to Viet Nam or other up-and-coming developing nation. And you know who's already there? The Chinese.

      While we "bring back coal", the Chinese look to the future and invest in other countries against the time when Chinese labor or tariffs become too expensive. They're building infrastructure throughout Africa and Central Asia. They're investing in

      • by skam240 ( 789197 )

        Thinking the trade war against China is a good idea is not at all the same as thinking Trump is a good president. You're stupidly confabulating two completely different things.

        Helping to fund the creation of our new and growing global adversary is what is stupid and is what we have been doing for the last few decades. At least if we can curb their unfair trade practices like IP theft, currency manipulation, product dumping from state industries, and forced company pairing to enter their market we would at l

    • While China's illegal (counter to the WTO agreements) restraint of trade laws have long needed to be addressed, doing it all at once is really punching a lot of American companies right in the breadbasket.

      Why is it that it's okay to fix the trade situation with China all at once, but we can't fix the minimum wage not keeping pace with inflation all at once?

    • I wish I had mod points, because this is exactly right. My handle is nearly 25 years old, and is from a time when social engineering fascinated me. Capitalism works because it is evolutionary- it adjusts better to change.

      I hate change. I'm actually to the point that I would support a distributist monarchy, which many people think is communism but is really just capitalism with a mandatory ownership requirement for citizenship.

      But yes, if we're going to monkey with the rules, it is true capitalism that wi

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @09:33AM (#59148878)
    since Bush Sr to raise taxes. Folks keep forgetting Tariffs are taxes we pay.

    And right now companies are paying those taxes, and very likely will continue to. They'd love to raise prices, but wages are down [marketwatch.com], the Job Numbers were overstated [marketwatch.com]. Consumers can't, not won't, pay more. So companies are eating it.

    I keep saying this, but that won't last. Pretty soon stock-price boasting layoffs are coming, followed by mandatory unpaid overtime for the survivors. It'll be 2008 all over again but bigger and badder. For one thing this [dailymail.co.uk] thing [cnn.com] wasn't going on in 2008. And the people we have in charge in the US are quite a bit worse at what they do then the last bunch who tanked the economy between 2000-2008.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Taxes already did go up for many Americans. Trump is just a Republican for convenience sake. He is really just another Democrat from NYC.

      • ..and he was a registered Democrat til 15 years ago.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          Of course. Hillary Clinton was once a Republican too. She just found that being a Democrat at one point was more expedient/or profitable. People who think there are differences are fooling themselves. The Trumps and Clintons and Obamas all live within a 3 block radius of each other in DC.

      • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday September 02, 2019 @11:07AM (#59149216) Journal

        He is really just another Democrat from NYC.

        That must be the most moronic claim that I have heard for a while.

        I don't think that Donny has any principles, besides promoting himself and making money for himself (which he isn't good at), but to suggest that he promotes Democratic principles ..... that's laughable. Yes, I know he mulled a run as a Democrat in years past, but just look at the actual policies he has enacted, the people he nominated to the Supreme Court. They are all diametrically opposed to the principles of Democrats.

        You are also promoting the idea that "they are all the same", which leads naturally to the suggestion that people should not bother to vote. All of this are partisan memes, intended to keep Republicans in power.

        Republicans are the masters of vote (and voter) suppression. You are just the useful idiot doing their work for them.

    • Tariffs are temporary. What's your alternative plan to bring China into line? There's been a one sided trade war going on for decades. Please share your fix for the West dealing with China's abusive anti-Western policies.
    • by Confused ( 34234 )

      Folks keep forgetting Tariffs are taxes we pay.

      Tariffs are raised more or less at the beheads of the local manufacturer to even out advantages foreign manufacturers have.
      Taxes are raised by the government to have more money to spend.

      Now if you depend on having cheap sneakers available at $9.99 from Walmart, you'll be disappointed when they can't be imported at this rate form China any more. Either Walmart finds similar priced sneakers in Bangladesh or Vietnam or you'll have to pay $14.99.

      But those aren't taxes.

    • Makes me glad I work at a probably "recession-resistant" company. A large chunk of our business falls under 800-171 regulations, or is very "high-end" consumers (recently, a major sports franchise). My job is critical to keeping the company compliant; of course I personally could be replaced but someone would still be needed to do that function; it's really more than a full-time job. It's also a major function of my job to ensure we do NOT purchase anything that comes directly from China if possible...I've
  • I haven't seen this mentioned on any of the major news programs.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]–Hawley_Tariff_Act

    "Although there is disagreement about the scale of its effect, the consensus view among economists and economic historians is that "The passage of the Smoot–Hawley Tariff exacerbated the Great Depression.""

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Working...