- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:52 pm to Suntiger
Unfettered global trade has led to record wealth inequality in America, an affordability crisis, persistently above trend inflation, record corporate profit margins, historically depressed labor share of income, a broadly hollowed out American manufacturing base, an opioid crisis and a depression/anxiety/suicide epidemic as an increasingly growing proportion of the populace sees a broken American dream.
It also has led to persistently wide US government deficits despite near full employment, a debt to gdp ratio that is accelerating rapidly where true interest expense (payments toward entitlements, veterans benefits, interest on debt) is running greater than tax receipts and a massively negative net international investment position over 70% of GDP where foreigners own more and more of US assets as a product of stored excess trade balances.
A continuation of traditional policies likely would have eventually led us to a violent fourth turning as a narrowing of the wealth and power in America into increasingly fewer and fewer hands would threaten the fabric of the democracy.
The Covid experience also gave us a clear look at how exposed our national security was from chronic supply chain shortages of critical elements to fight future wars and epidemics.
Maybe we should try something different. That is what Trump policies are trying to do. We may ultimately end up in the same place but perhaps we can change the course of our own destiny.
Seems worth a try when we know where continuing the old ways will lead.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:56 pm to slackster
quote:I don't think it's coming back, but Vance is an even bigger believer on this than Trump from what I've heard. He truly believes recruiting the blue collar middle permanently destroys the dem party.
Massive manufacturing is never coming back here when they’re 3 years away from a new president.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 7:37 am to slackster
quote:
Massive manufacturing is never coming back here when they’re 3 years away from a new president.
Biden didn't remove any of the tarrifs that Trump put in. I don't think the next Democrat President will remove any long term tarrifs that Trump puts in now. So, once the deals with our trading partners have been made it will be open season for a manufacturing resurgence here.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 8:18 am to Suntiger
100% a negotiating tactic and tool for leverage.
People thinking businesses will invest in domestic manufacturing knowing it could all go away in 3 years ain’t happening.
Even if it worked, Trump would see the highest inflation in the history of mankind which he’s not wanting either.
Strictly a flex move to negotiate other things.
People thinking businesses will invest in domestic manufacturing knowing it could all go away in 3 years ain’t happening.
Even if it worked, Trump would see the highest inflation in the history of mankind which he’s not wanting either.
Strictly a flex move to negotiate other things.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 9:37 am to Suntiger
I am against the premise that using the imbalance of imports to exports with a country is a reasonable measure of successful business with that country.
Trump appears to have a low IQ to me.
Trump appears to have a low IQ to me.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 9:45 am to KWL85
Very smart people outside of politics have discussed the implications of trade imbalances for much longer than this current political cycle.
Warren Buffet 2003 LINK
Warren Buffet 2003 LINK
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:16 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
Back in my very much younger days in the 1960's there were hundreds of textile mills and related manufacturing businesses across the South.
The U.S. is 60 percent of the world's stock capitalization. Maybe we should continue to focus on what we do well. Sorry Norma Rae, but your job is not coming back. We need to produce a bit more of things that are critical to our health and security, such as medicine and chips,but Barbie does not need to be manufactured here.
Meanwhile, there is a shortage of electricians and plumbers while we force kids into college and debt in order to become Art History majors.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:17 pm to Suntiger
Leverage.
We have terrible trade deals and fund a lot of countries who in return treat us poorly.
We have terrible trade deals and fund a lot of countries who in return treat us poorly.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:21 pm to KWL85
quote:Yes and no. I'm all for the globe organizing itself according to comparative production advantages.
I am against the premise that using the imbalance of imports to exports with a country is a reasonable measure of successful business with that country.
But some of the imbalances really do beggar belief. e.g. I think I read in Japan, 92% of domestic automobile purchases are Japanese. Sure, it makes sense there would be a good deal of country/brand loyalty. But 90%+? Nah. Something else there has a thumb on the scale. Same thing in Europe for a lot American brands (auto or otherwise).
Posted on 4/8/25 at 4:23 pm to slackster
quote:
Massive manufacturing is never coming back here when they’re 3 years away from a new president.
Also, do we really want massive manufacturing of the China and India variety to come to the U.S.?
I think pollution issues can sometimes be exaggerated by the left in this country, but that smog in China and India is real and I personally want no part of it.
China smog
most polluted countries
Posted on 4/8/25 at 4:39 pm to Suntiger
I think we need a lot of cash to refinance the debt comfortably and protect the dollar and Trump thinks a generational shakedown of the weaker players is our best bet.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 4:42 pm to momentoftruth87
Yep. Leverage.
The dude is a power player. He is really good at creating/recognizing and utilizing leverage to get his way. AND he's always the last to fold. People know that, and its scary.
The dude is a power player. He is really good at creating/recognizing and utilizing leverage to get his way. AND he's always the last to fold. People know that, and its scary.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 6:24 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Leverage.
We have terrible trade deals and fund a lot of countries who in return treat us poorly.
Trump negotiated the last trade agreement with Canada and Mexico in his first term. Are you saying he did a bad job negotiating those deals? Because he said they some of the best deals for the US ever.
Posted on 4/8/25 at 7:09 pm to Suntiger
I think he did what he thought he could and then lied about being happy with it. Aka politics. I don’t know what’s changed but Trump seems far less supervised than he was 4 years ago.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 7:11 pm
Posted on 4/8/25 at 7:57 pm to Suntiger
quote:
Trying to break the economy to bring down interest rates and inflation
This is what I think
Posted on 4/8/25 at 11:14 pm to Suntiger
This is by and large a targeted attack on China first, to try and land crippling blow while they are weak.
2nd, to even out trade imbalances and bring critical, national security production back to the US.
2nd, to even out trade imbalances and bring critical, national security production back to the US.
Posted on 4/9/25 at 4:54 am to Suntiger
quote:It actually can.
It can’t be all of the above
If one is seeking the best deal for the US, the negotiating team can give in some of the areas and gain more in others. E.g., 'Country A' has trade restrictions, some tariffs, and a 20% VAT which is waved with its exports. The Admin's expected endpoint with 'Country A' is elimination of tariffs and restrictions w/ a 15% residual tariff as VAT comp. However, 'Country A' agrees to do away with tariffs, restrictions, and the VAT on US goods. So the US agrees to drop tariffs altogether.
The claim is "rolling back after negotiating won’t bring back manufacturing." In fact though, in that scenario, it could. Demand for less costly US goods would rise overseas, and US manufacturing would need to ramp up to meet demand.
---
In his typically boorish fashion, Trump says "they're ripping us off!"
But, boorish or not, he's right.
That and the tariff response is something Trump mulled and discussed for decades. So, if someone contends "the administration has no idea what it’s doing," they should be reminded that Trump's entire economic team was assembled to this exact end.
Post-WWII, the US made a sound decision to rebuild European and Japanese economies. Our own economy, the world's largest, was uniquely unscathed. We could have flooded the European and Japanese markets with cheaper better quality goods and delayed their recovery by decades. But we didn't.
Instead, we allowed them to implement unilateral protectionist measures to help them rebuild. Meanwhile we largely focused on our own flourishing domestic situation.
Reliably awarded favors often turn into recipient expectations. Eighty years on, that is exactly what happened in our trading relationships. Asymmetric trade barriers allowed as a favor to aid post-war recovery were simply continued, and then became expectations. Eventually asymmetrically favored manufacturing bases ate into our own domestic base, and here we are now with $1T annual trade deficits.
More important, and probably somewhat related are our ongoing budget deficits, national debt and associated cost-of-carry. All of the above are major problems.
All can be mitigated to some extent with tariffs.
That is what the purpose of these tariffs is.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News