By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Pyro as Bill said:
RolStoppable said:

Retaliation means that we'll pay more for goods coming in from the USA which are either not relevant for the majority of people here or can be easily substituted with goods from a different country. Canada is just about the only country that has to be very careful about this, because their economy is much more intertwined with the USA than any other USA+X combination.

On the other hand, Americans will have to price higher prices for virtually everything because they have issued tariffs against virtually everyone, plus their own goods are often crap, hence why they buy so many foreign products.

In other words, countries who retaliate will have a much easier time to weather the storm than Trump and his USA can do. Hence why I am all for the EU to kick the USA's butt. Plus on a personal level, I don't buy any US goods to begin with, so there won't be any hardship on my end anyway.

US LNG and military hardware are gonna be replaced by who exactly?

Trump clearly isnt opposed to free trade if the tariffs are retaliatory. If Vietnam drops their tariffs then Trump will do likewise and the Switch 2 can be sold on the cheap.

It's good that the world is getting a lesson on what's really important.

Well, the tariffs aren't retaliatory, so thats the first problem with that. They aren't based on tariffs imposed on US, they are based on the trade deficit between the USA and X Country. As such, unless Trump wavers on his formula, there isn't really anything that can be done about them in the short term. Now, Trump might waver, it wouldn't be the first time, but buying into the idea that these are all "retaliatory" is just accepting a lie at face value...



Around the Network
Pyro as Bill said:

Europe loves to moralise about how they offer better social protections even though the poorest man in America gets healthcare treatment Europeans could only dream of. When Europe is forced to pay for the real costs of defence and health without the US subsidising, maybe theyll be a bit more appreciative.

When I was a right-wing "libertarian" a decade ago I used to believe the same thing. "Europe can only afford universal healthcare because the U.S subsidizes its defense."

But the reality of the matter is that parts of Europe have had universal healthcare long before the U.S was a global hegemon and when the countries were much poorer and sicker than they are today 

Germany, for example, has had UHC since Bismarck (right-wing politician) used its implementation to undermine the nascent socialist movement in the 1880s. 

The U.S wasn't "paying for its defense" then. The U.S barely had a standing army itself in that decade.

There is also the matter that the poorest in the U.S only have access to healthcare because of Medicaid, which the GOP wants to significantly cut or tie to work. Without Medicaid there is absolutely no way the fifth of Americans who use it will be able to afford it. Many elderly will have to move back home with their boomer and Gen X children (Medicaid pays for about half of nursing home care for seniors), many children will develop preventable health conditions which will follow them into adulthood, disabled people will suffer or die.

The ironic thing of this argument from the right is that it puts more pressure on Europe to allow in more immigrants so as to make up for the age-pyramid demographic crisis. Which the modern right-wing opposes.



sundin13 said:
Pyro as Bill said:

US LNG and military hardware are gonna be replaced by who exactly?

Trump clearly isnt opposed to free trade if the tariffs are retaliatory. If Vietnam drops their tariffs then Trump will do likewise and the Switch 2 can be sold on the cheap.

It's good that the world is getting a lesson on what's really important.

Well, the tariffs aren't retaliatory, so thats the first problem with that. They aren't based on tariffs imposed on US, they are based on the trade deficit between the USA and X Country. As such, unless Trump wavers on his formula, there isn't really anything that can be done about them in the short term. Now, Trump might waver, it wouldn't be the first time, but buying into the idea that these are all "retaliatory" is just accepting a lie at face value...

Ive already agreed the formula makes no sense. The point is that if you offer Trump free trade he's open to reciprocating therefore he cant be an ideological tariffer.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

If the end result of tariffs is more free trade then perhaps there is method to his madness. $60 oil will cripple Russia more than any tank.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Simply lowering trade barriers, if they exist, won't be enough, because they don't factor into the random calculation of these so-called tariff rates. Israel, for instance, eliminated all of its tariffs on U.S. imports on Tuesday. Trump still imposed new tariffs on Israel on Wednesday. That's because Trump's real goal is not really to eliminate trade barriers; it's for the U.S. not to have a trade deficit with any country in the world.

Wall Street Blew It - The Atlantic



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
Pyro as Bill said:

Europe loves to moralise about how they offer better social protections even though the poorest man in America gets healthcare treatment Europeans could only dream of. When Europe is forced to pay for the real costs of defence and health without the US subsidising, maybe theyll be a bit more appreciative.

When I was a right-wing "libertarian" a decade ago I used to believe the same thing. "Europe can only afford universal healthcare because the U.S subsidizes its defense."

But the reality of the matter is that parts of Europe have had universal healthcare long before the U.S was a global hegemon and when the countries were much poorer and sicker than they are today 

Germany, for example, has had UHC since Bismarck (right-wing politician) used its implementation to undermine the nascent socialist movement in the 1880s. 

The U.S wasn't "paying for its defense" then. The U.S barely had a standing army itself in that decade.

There is also the matter that the poorest in the U.S only have access to healthcare because of Medicaid, which the GOP wants to significantly cut or tie to work. Without Medicaid there is absolutely no way the fifth of Americans who use it will be able to afford it. Many elderly will have to move back home with their boomer and Gen X children (Medicaid pays for about half of nursing home care for seniors), many children will develop preventable health conditions which will follow them into adulthood, disabled people will suffer or die.

The ironic thing of this argument from the right is that it puts more pressure on Europe to allow in more immigrants so as to make up for the age-pyramid demographic crisis. Which the modern right-wing opposes.

Yeah the infinite immigrant ponzi scheme is the only alternative to Europe actually being productive and being able to defend itself properly. Let's see how that argument holds up against Russian propaganda.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

User Requested removal



Ryuu96 said:

Simply lowering trade barriers, if they exist, won't be enough, because they don't factor into the random calculation of these so-called tariff rates. Israel, for instance, eliminated all of its tariffs on U.S. imports on Tuesday. Trump still imposed new tariffs on Israel on Wednesday. That's because Trump's real goal is not really to eliminate trade barriers; it's for the U.S. not to have a trade deficit with any country in the world.

Wall Street Blew It - The Atlantic

Trump has been a proponent of tariffs for decades but he's not stupid. He understands why countries usetariffs but he also accepts that America can win at the free trade game too if they dont have to compete with blocs that devalue their currency.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Pyro as Bill said:
sc94597 said:

When I was a right-wing "libertarian" a decade ago I used to believe the same thing. "Europe can only afford universal healthcare because the U.S subsidizes its defense."

But the reality of the matter is that parts of Europe have had universal healthcare long before the U.S was a global hegemon and when the countries were much poorer and sicker than they are today 

Germany, for example, has had UHC since Bismarck (right-wing politician) used its implementation to undermine the nascent socialist movement in the 1880s. 

The U.S wasn't "paying for its defense" then. The U.S barely had a standing army itself in that decade.

There is also the matter that the poorest in the U.S only have access to healthcare because of Medicaid, which the GOP wants to significantly cut or tie to work. Without Medicaid there is absolutely no way the fifth of Americans who use it will be able to afford it. Many elderly will have to move back home with their boomer and Gen X children (Medicaid pays for about half of nursing home care for seniors), many children will develop preventable health conditions which will follow them into adulthood, disabled people will suffer or die.

The ironic thing of this argument from the right is that it puts more pressure on Europe to allow in more immigrants so as to make up for the age-pyramid demographic crisis. Which the modern right-wing opposes.

Yeah the infinite immigrant ponzi scheme is the only alternative to Europe actually being productive and being able to defend itself properly. Let's see how that argument holds up against Russian propaganda.

How do you solve the aging demographic problem? The only two culturally viable solutions (the third, far-right, "solution" is to re-enslave women) we know of are automation and immigration. Subsidizing family making doesn't work. Many European countries have tried. 

Also having a system where young productive people subsidize the lives of older less productive people isn't a ponzi scheme. It is social insurance based on the natural reality that at least until we achieve LEV, people age and become less productive. 



This has nothing to do with tariffs, it's entirely to do with him being a fucking moron who doesn't understand the reason why some countries have trade deficits with America and sees those as a tariff on America. He is a complete idiot who believes no country in the world is allowed a trade deficit with America.

For Christ sake he is attacking Canada and Mexico, entering a trade war with them, despite him being the damn person responsible for the last trade agreement between America-Canada-Mexico, he is saying his own trade agreement is shit! His calculations on that stupid chart were completely made up nonsense with the help of AI.

Oh and he is also the treason why a trade agreement between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States failed.

Trans-Pacific Partnership - Wikipedia

Among other things, it called for a 90-percent reduction of all tariffs between member countries by 1 January 2006, and reduction of all trade tariffs to zero by the year 2015. The agreement cuts over 18,000 tariffs. Tariffs on all U.S. manufactured goods and almost all U.S. farm products would be eliminated, with most eliminations occurring immediately

After taking office, the newly elected President Donald Trump formally withdrew the United States from TPP in January 2017.

He is a moron who doesn't understand global trade at all, the same moron who bankrupted casinos, once he has destroyed America's economy, all that will benefit is billionaires buying up America for cheap, this isn't some 4D Chess move to weaken China (Wtf, I don't even know how someone could even leap to that conclusion), nearly everything he has done since taking office has benefited China and the last time he got into a trade war with China he lost because he doesn't have a damn clue what he is doing.