Tariff man strikes again

[Kpdemello]

I think Trump sorely miscalculated in thinking he could coerce them into a deal with tariffs.

What other options are there?

Are you contending that Trump's tariffs and negotiating style were the only way to deal with China? That can't be right. There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued.

Maybe I'm wrong, but as you said a while back, results matter. Lets see if Trump can get any. So far he's struck out.

So far, while you acknowledge China takes the long view, for some reason you don't.

I don't really understand this comment. I think you're just trying to make a quick jibe. But the reality is that I am taking the long view. Go re-read my post above where I talk about how this trade war could spur China to build their own industrial base to rival the U.S. The long term affect of these tariffs and Trump's negotiating style could be to set back relations with China for years and make better trade terms with China less likely, not more likely.

[madhatter]

I think Trump sorely miscalculated in thinking he could coerce them into a deal with tariffs.

What other options are there?

Are you contending that Trump's tariffs were the way to deal with China? That can't be right. There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued.

Maybe I'm wrong, but as you said a while back, results matter. Lets see if Trump can get any. So far he's struck out.

So far, while you acknowledge China takes the long view, for some reason you don't.

I don't really understand this comment. I think you're just trying to make a quick jibe. But the reality is that I am taking the long view. Go re-read my post above where I talk about how this trade war could spur China to build their own industrial base to rival the U.S. The long term affect of these tariffs and Trump's negotiating style could be to set back relations with China for years and is making a trade deal with China less likely, not more likely.

[Mister Moose]

I think Trump sorely miscalculated in thinking he could coerce them into a deal with tariffs.

What other options are there?

Are you contending that Trump's tariffs and negotiating style were the only way to deal with China? That can't be right. There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued.

Name them.

Maybe I'm wrong, but as you said a while back, results matter. Lets see if Trump can get any. So far he's struck out.

So far, while you acknowledge China takes the long view, for some reason you don't.

I don't really understand this comment. I think you're just trying to make a quick jibe. But the reality is that I am taking the long view. Go re-read my post above where I talk about how this trade war could spur China to build their own industrial base to rival the U.S. The long term affect of these tariffs and Trump's negotiating style could be to set back relations with China for years and make better trade terms with China less likely, not more likely.

The bolded quote is a short term view.

[Kpdemello]

Name them.

Scroll up. I described some in this very thread. But even if you're not willing to do that, you have to acknowledge that foreign policy experts have more than one point of view on how best to handle such situations and they can probably think of lots of options that neither you or I could. But that's not really the point. The point is that Trump's tactics, so far, have yielded poor results.

Maybe I'm wrong, but as you said a while back, results matter. Lets see if Trump can get any. So far he's struck out.

So far, while you acknowledge China takes the long view, for some reason you don't.

I don't really understand this comment. I think you're just trying to make a quick jibe. But the reality is that I am taking the long view. Go re-read my post above where I talk about how this trade war could spur China to build their own industrial base to rival the U.S. The long term affect of these tariffs and Trump's negotiating style could be to set back relations with China for years and make better trade terms with China less likely, not more likely.

The bolded quote is a short term view.

I disagree. It's an accurate statement of current affairs.

[Mister Moose]

Name them.

Scroll up. I described some in this very thread. But even if you're not willing to do that, you have to acknowledge that foreign policy experts have more than one point of view on how best to handle such situations and they can probably think of lots of options that neither you or I could.

There's no point in me quoting ones you may or may not include, or that I might miss finding. Let's stay with your level of knowledge, not something theoretical. Name them.

Maybe I'm wrong, but as you said a while back, results matter. Lets see if Trump can get any. So far he's struck out.

So far, while you acknowledge China takes the long view, for some reason you don't.

I don't really understand this comment. I think you're just trying to make a quick jibe. But the reality is that I am taking the long view. Go re-read my post above where I talk about how this trade war could spur China to build their own industrial base to rival the U.S. The long term affect of these tariffs and Trump's negotiating style could be to set back relations with China for years and make better trade terms with China less likely, not more likely.

The bolded quote is a short term view.

I disagree. It's an accurate statement of current affairs.

Accuracy aside, that is definitively a short term view.

[Kpdemello]

From page 1 of this thread:

I'm not even opposed to the concept of threatening to impose tariffs. But Trump's approach was terrible. A better way to do this would be the way it was done with the original NAFTA agreement. Get a bunch of countries to sit down and develop a free trade zone. Other countries are doing it (See EU, ASEAN). Or, if you want to do it unilaterally, call up the leader of a country and say hey, we want to negotiate trade. And start doing it before you threaten them. Offer them something they want. You know, make a deal. If they then drag their feet, tell them look, you have tariffs, and we will reciprocate with equivalent tariffs on the same stuff. Then give them a deadline. Be reasonable.

Instead, trump just started imposing tariffs having nothing to do with anything other than causing harm to other countries to get them to the bargaining table. In economic terms, he pulled out a gun, pointed it at their head, and said, "let's make a deal" Who is going to negotiate in good faith under those conditions?

[Mister Moose]

From page 1 of this thread:

I'm not even opposed to the concept of threatening to impose tariffs. But Trump's approach was terrible. A better way to do this would be the way it was done with the original NAFTA agreement. Get a bunch of countries to sit down and develop a free trade zone. Other countries are doing it (See EU, ASEAN). Or, if you want to do it unilaterally, call up the leader of a country and say hey, we want to negotiate trade. And start doing it before you threaten them. Offer them something they want. You know, make a deal. If they then drag their feet, tell them look, you have tariffs, and we will reciprocate with equivalent tariffs on the same stuff. Then give them a deadline. Be reasonable.

Instead, trump just started imposing tariffs having nothing to do with anything other than causing harm to other countries to get them to the bargaining table. In economic terms, he pulled out a gun, pointed it at their head, and said, "let's make a deal" Who is going to negotiate in good faith under those conditions?

And now that we've come full circle, I'll let you have the last word.

To which I replied, "This is exactly what happened prior to the tariffs." Your list of options can be summed up by diplomacy and discussion. China has ignored that, just like DPRK ignored the nuclear promises to Clinton. You are promoting options, but then you list only one, which we've tried over decades, and have been ineffective. You told me " There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued." and you named only one that has been tried for decades with worsening results. And then you conclude tarriffs were premature, and in 14 months deem them ineffective against a trade imbalance decades in the making.

[madhatter]

From page 1 of this thread:

I'm not even opposed to the concept of threatening to impose tariffs. But Trump's approach was terrible. A better way to do this would be the way it was done with the original NAFTA agreement. Get a bunch of countries to sit down and develop a free trade zone. Other countries are doing it (See EU, ASEAN). Or, if you want to do it unilaterally, call up the leader of a country and say hey, we want to negotiate trade. And start doing it before you threaten them. Offer them something they want. You know, make a deal. If they then drag their feet, tell them look, you have tariffs, and we will reciprocate with equivalent tariffs on the same stuff. Then give them a deadline. Be reasonable.

Instead, trump just started imposing tariffs having nothing to do with anything other than causing harm to other countries to get them to the bargaining table. In economic terms, he pulled out a gun, pointed it at their head, and said, "let's make a deal" Who is going to negotiate in good faith under those conditions?

And now that we've come full circle, I'll let you have the last word.

To which I replied, "This is exactly what happened prior to the tariffs." Your list of options can be summed up by diplomacy and discussion. China has ignored that, just like DPRK ignored the nuclear promises to Clinton. You are promoting options, but then you list only one, which we've tried over decades, and have been ineffective. You told me " There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued." and you named only one that has been tried for decades with worsening results. And then you conclude tarriffs were premature, and in 14 months deem them ineffective against a trade imbalance decades in the making.

[Bubba]

From page 1 of this thread:

I'm not even opposed to the concept of threatening to impose tariffs. But Trump's approach was terrible. A better way to do this would be the way it was done with the original NAFTA agreement. Get a bunch of countries to sit down and develop a free trade zone. Other countries are doing it (See EU, ASEAN). Or, if you want to do it unilaterally, call up the leader of a country and say hey, we want to negotiate trade. And start doing it before you threaten them. Offer them something they want. You know, make a deal. If they then drag their feet, tell them look, you have tariffs, and we will reciprocate with equivalent tariffs on the same stuff. Then give them a deadline. Be reasonable.

Instead, trump just started imposing tariffs having nothing to do with anything other than causing harm to other countries to get them to the bargaining table. In economic terms, he pulled out a gun, pointed it at their head, and said, "let's make a deal" Who is going to negotiate in good faith under those conditions?

And now that we've come full circle, I'll let you have the last word.

To which I replied, "This is exactly what happened prior to the tariffs." Your list of options can be summed up by diplomacy and discussion. China has ignored that, just like DPRK ignored the nuclear promises to Clinton. You are promoting options, but then you list only one, which we've tried over decades, and have been ineffective. You told me " There are a whole range of options that a U.S. president could have pursued." and you named only one that has been tried for decades with worsening results. And then you conclude tarriffs were premature, and in 14 months deem them ineffective against a trade imbalance decades in the making.

TPP was designed by the US and China's regional trading partners to do exactly what you're suggesting. It was a multi-lateral approach to a problem all signatory countries recognized. Trump pulled out of TPP immediately upon taking office. At a time when allies were needed, Trump decided to go one on one.

[freeski]

Trump's new tariffs and threats of new tariffs - Results

First, this guy is a master negotiator (it is possible to think one is a genius in some realms and an A$$ in others).

Old allies Canada and Japan and many others are taking up the production slack as are we in the U.S. One example, steal production is being ramped up here and Canada. We are inking new treaties...

5th generation hardware out of China is being put on the back burner. Trump is standing firm with his patent law, reverse engineering stand. This is where Obama failed us and the world.

With this brush he is painting the left as socialists or worse for standing up for the Red slave labor producing goods in Gina.

This is the tip of the iceberg. Other presidents might move in this direction, he is doing it seemingly overnight.

[Bubba]

China isn't powerless...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/dont-sa ... eningbrief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Kpdemello]

Don't worry, some guy once said about 14 months ago that trade wars are easy to win.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[XtremeJibber2001]

China isn't powerless...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/dont-sa ... eningbrief" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“The phrase “Don’t say we didn’t warn you” was only used two other times in history by the People’s Daily — in 1962 before China’s border war with India and ahead of the 1979 China-Vietnam War.”

Very touching.

[Kpdemello]

New tariffs on Mexico in an effort to get them to stop people from crossing the border:

Trump announced Thursday that his country plans to impose a 5% tariff on all Mexican imports from June 10. In a statement, he attributed that unexpected move to a “border crisis” that has resulted in America being “invaded by hundreds of thousands of people.” He even suggested that he could raise the tariff on Mexico’s goods to 25% by Oct. 1 this year if the country did not sufficiently halt the flow of migrants into the U.S.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/31/john-ne ... cally.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So does this mean NAFTA 2.0 is out the window? I don't think Mexico has ratified it yet. Why would Trump shoot himself in the foot so badly? NAFTA 2.0 was one of his few accomplishments. Although I guess calling it an accomplishment is premature given that nobody has ratified it yet.

In any event, it looks like Mexico will retaliate, and now Trump will have a trade war on two fronts. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. It kind of reeks of desperation, actually. Trump can't get his border wall built, and his attempts to control the flow via other means keep getting shot down as unconstitutional, so he turns to the one thing he's learned he can do without any cooperation from Congress or the courts - tariffs. I really think it's time for someone to bring a legal challenge to his ability to levy these tariffs unilaterally, because as I've said before, I think it rests on dubious grounds.

[Bubba]

New tariffs on Mexico in an effort to get them to stop people from crossing the border:

Trump announced Thursday that his country plans to impose a 5% tariff on all Mexican imports from June 10. In a statement, he attributed that unexpected move to a “border crisis” that has resulted in America being “invaded by hundreds of thousands of people.” He even suggested that he could raise the tariff on Mexico’s goods to 25% by Oct. 1 this year if the country did not sufficiently halt the flow of migrants into the U.S.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/31/john-ne ... cally.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So does this mean NAFTA 2.0 is out the window? I don't think Mexico has ratified it yet. Why would Trump shoot himself in the foot so badly? NAFTA 2.0 was one of his few accomplishments. Although I guess calling it an accomplishment is premature given that nobody has ratified it yet.

In any event, it looks like Mexico will retaliate, and now Trump will have a trade war on two fronts. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. It kind of reeks of desperation, actually. Trump can't get his border wall built, and his attempts to control the flow via other means keep getting shot down as unconstitutional, so he turns to the one thing he's learned he can do without any cooperation from Congress or the courts - tariffs. I really think it's time for someone to bring a legal challenge to his ability to levy these tariffs unilaterally, because as I've said before, I think it rests on dubious grounds.

Illegal border crossings have been increasing under his watch so obviously the solution is to punish US automakers and others with supply chains running through Mexico plus making US consumers pay the cost. Such a deal....