If Trump is successful with his tariffs, I wonder if other countries will copy the model, I think most countries have suffered thanks to the cheap Chinese exports, so this is not just an American problem, if other big economies copy Trumps model I think the Chinese will be in major trouble.

Let’s wait and see

there’s no perfect solution but I think Trump is doing what should have been done 15 years ago, no single country has the economic power of the US but if multiple big economies tax the Chinese it will hurt them bad, I would like to see how China prospers without their cheap exports.

The price in the US should have a minimal effect here as we import direct from China rather than China > USA > Australia.
China also imports a large swathe of our resources as well, which has given us some favorable trade in the past.

Where things get tricky is on resources/components/technology that China imports from the USA.

The fact we already have high prices is another whinge session I could have but won't go into...

Yes you are correct its the American companies, that are paying the tax. One can't blame gamingsoul for this error. We hear constantly from Trump the bullshit about who's actually paying eg

Trump “Tariffs are NOW being paid to the United States by China of 25% on 250 Billion Dollars worth of goods & products,”

Which is a total lie, as its as your said the USA companies that are paying this 25% not chinese companies.

Though this can also hurt Chinese companies as well as the americn ones, as if everything costs an extra 25% from china they are more likely to buy from another country instead of China

Trump is going about this the wrong way, its like he has no idea of whats going on.

One of the first things he done when he got into power was to pull the USA out of the TPP, I think chiefly because it was an Obama thing.

Didnt the moron know the TPP was created specifically to combat China in business, it was a collection of countries bordering the pacific, excluding China to work together to combat Chinese shady business practives eg with IPs etc

No wonder the guy's companies have been bankrupt 6 times, now hes trying to do that but on a larger scale

Classic Dunning Kruger

Case in point, China keeps environmental regulations to a minimum and they are experiencing a boom in productivity plus keeping it that way allows China to dictate the supply of rare earth metals worldwide. Environmental regulation ONLY serve to get in the way if it unreasonably forces austerity and China is taking this advantage to heart. A 'sustainable' future is not worth sustaining if your citizens end up being jobless ... 

China especially defies the idea of low pay somehow having bad effects. In more ways than I could imagine the Chinese are the most ideal employees possible. They aren't entitled to any rights, work long hours, are paid relatively low, and all this is fueled purely with nationalism ... 

Ericsson and Nokia ARE falling victim to Huawei. Have you not seen their losses or declines over the years ? Huawei is the most dominant corporation in the carrier business equipment ... 

What exactly do you suggest would be a better way to rein in China other than tariffs ? Do we just flat out call a sanction from the entire western world against them or what ? 

That was far into the past. Today, most of the breakthroughs we see DON'T come from government funded research. The space age will likely be brought about because of some large corporation instead of NASA ... 

This ISN'T the sputnik moment anymore for America where they heavily invested in a technological race against the Soviet Union. The biggest problem with government 'managed' research is that in the case of a democracy there's no guarantee that the manager in that project would be a 'specialist'. We don't need politicians in technical projects, we need the 'specialists' and we're unlikely to get that with American leaders ... 

The reason why state subsidies for research in China work so well as it does is that the CCP are full of technocrats and if you can prove that you're a qualified 'specialist' to them in a specific field of high need then you'll automatically be granted a lot of power from the party to further pursue technical progress. This feedback process is ideal for reverse engineering and sometimes it works at the leading edge but without applying a similar model of govenrnance in America, they won't be able to see the same benefit since government funding would be a waste ... 

ARPANET was NEVER sold to consumers so it was pretty much just a concept outside of labs! 

IMO ISPs like AT&T, Verizon, T-mobile, Vodafone, etc are the true creators behind the internet because they were the ones who made the backhauls which is extremely important infrastructure and then we have hardware companies like Cisco. The 'internet' that we see today is not a government creation but it is a corporate collaboration ... 

The internet is more than just predated hardware, it's an idea that can't be solely government funded and in fact the closest predecessor to the internet was NSFNET which had tons of private funding from ISPs rather than ARPANET which ended up being a dead end since the government wasn't interested in developing the backhual or maintaining their network technology ... 

Name me one very important technology that was created during this millennium by government funded research ... 

Pretty sure government funded research didn't give us AI, wireless communications technology, automation, or the latest medical technology so what exactly did they do so far recently that makes them so 'essential' to research like you imply ?

I didn't specifically argue that a linear increase in enrollment meant a linear increase in prices as well. In the case of post-secondary schools it seems when demand increases linearly, the price increases exponentially ... 

Tuition free post-secondary school is NOT an entitlement! If it were that simple then just about every program including the likes of Art History would be a ROI but that's not so in the real world. Schools CAN'T keep running if their students aren't profitable ... (money is important to maintain the school)

Maybe but nearly no American politicians today understand the importance of technological leadership so there's no political will for it ... 

America needs to foster monopolies because it gives the Americans a competitive edge against other nations. Monopolies are bad for the opposing country's economy but it's good for the domestic economy since it stands to make more money. I'm not arguing that the US should hold every monopoly but just the most essential ones and yes it's hard to compete with China on just pricing alone since just about everyone would fail ... 

America indeed should be inventing things but now it is China who is starting to invent important technology as well so can you imagine a future where it is SOLELY China that invents ALL important technology in the future ? 

Can you imagine just how annoying it would be if China successfully 'colonized' the moon and claimed it for themselves just because they somehow invented superior aerospace technology ? 

Not at the top of the list but they're up and coming. Shows how countries destroyed by capitalism need a lot more time than countries that only had to deal with communism.

 Sorry about the confusion. the even if you add 25% to US rrp for the PS5 was a reference to a US pricing increase not ours, my take on the situation is even with the US getting a potential 25% increase, historical pricing of imported gaming hardware in Australia shows that the US PS5 will still be cheaper than any AUS PS5.

Agreed, he does do plenty of stuff worth attacking. But I guess its not juicy enough, so we waste time with Russia.

Anybody know how much is actually being spent on subsidies? People always say they hate them, but how much is it really. I suspect its not really that much in the grand scheme but I could be wrong. Based on the figures I see, we spend significantly more making people fat with food stamps.

Just out of curiosity, I did a search Bing search on, "Obama tarrifs." I wouldn't say that democrat was opposed to tariffs.

I wasn't suggesting dems want high taxes for nothing per se. They want to crush the private sector in many cases, throw MORE money at things with little results, etc. I mean education for example, we spend more money educating children than almost any other country with little to show for it. Many of our social services just seem to make people lazy and fatter, that's most prevalent among groups who take advantage of these entitlements. For what its worth, I think there are better ways to dole out social services/welfare but our government is just terrible at it. The solution isn't throw more money at bad programs and bad spending.

I'm still waiting for you to elaborate on how capitalism destroyed Africa.

War torn countries recovered rather quickly thanks to capitalism. The communist countries of the world improved by embracing capitalism, the communist aspect is mainly just to keep a party in power.

Also, not all African countries are equally shitty which suggest some have unique problems (like Islamic problems).

A trade war benefits nobody, the difference is that China understands that and the orange narcissist doesn't. USA has a debt of 22 trillion USD and counting and he is going to make his citizens pay more for goods in the hope it will stimulate US industries..... That's a hell of a risk with all the data saying it will only hurt the US economy. The republicans are meant to be less government, less tax and more freedoms.... This guy is a protectionist it doesn't make sense to the party ethos but it looks like plenty of southerners have drunk the kool aid...