- 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
re: Trump urges for $100 billion more in tariffs
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:18 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:18 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
nipplebreath
Flew under the radar but I chuckled.
0
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:19 pm to QboveTopSecret
quote:
rump also commands the moral high ground in this dispute. You can't have free trade with a country that steals hundreds of billions of dollars and arms your enemies. Period. A country that acts this way is an adversary, not an ally.
And why would you think a country that acts like that give a frick about a moral high ground?
Negotiations are about leverage. Not moral high grounds.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:20 pm to QboveTopSecret
quote:Problem is that this isn't something zero sum game; in this case it's likely a negative sum game with both nations in the net negative.
If it is going to be retaliation, this story won't end well for China's economy.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:21 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Good to see liberals finally realizing that taxes and regulations hurt consumers
I see what you're trying to do here but this is really an apples and oranges comparison. Tariffs and trade wars are not even in the same ballpark as domestic taxes and regulations.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:22 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
Problem is that this isn't something zero sum game; in this case it's likely a negative sum game with both nations in the net negative.
correct
People falsely assume that if China is losing that we must be winning
The most likely outcome is both countries lose
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:22 pm to OMLandshark
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:23 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
Problem is that this isn't something zero sum game; in this case it's likely a negative sum game with both nations in the net negative.
And who has more to lose? The guy who just earned a lifetime appointment as leader of China or the guy who has his party already facing difficult midterms in a matter of months?
Someone mentioned it earlier but it's very true...all the shady shite Trump has done and the GOP has managed to be "deeply concerned" and then not do shite. This, this is different. I fully expect some serious GOP backlash if he goes through with escalating this situation.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:25 pm to mmmmmbeeer
Baloney
Tariffs raise prices for the same reason any regulation does
Domestic producers charge higher prices for products because their costs are higher. Since tariffs remove foreign competition or force foreign competitors to pay taxes, consumers are hurt
When our government places a regulation on a business, that cost is passed on
Tariffs raise prices for the same reason any regulation does
Domestic producers charge higher prices for products because their costs are higher. Since tariffs remove foreign competition or force foreign competitors to pay taxes, consumers are hurt
When our government places a regulation on a business, that cost is passed on
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:27 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Does China devalue our currency? And what is the long term negative of China owning much of our debt?
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:28 pm to Powerman
quote:
And why would you think a country that acts like that give a frick about a moral high ground?
Yeah, no shite. Xi Jinping wouldn’t give a shite if people started dying like the Great Leap Forward so long as their economy was doing well and his populace didn’t rebel. Stalin clearly didn’t give a single frick about the moral high ground.
The issue with China is the populace is very much aware how the rest of the world operates. If they go too far, then the populace will rebel to an extent not seen in over half a century and kill him. They’re aware of the Great Leap Forward, and Gen X and under have no intention of experiencing it as their parents and grandparents did. They’d rather go down to gunfire than live through what their parents and grandparents did.
This is why China is heavily investing in Africa and basically legally conquering it is to make sure that doesn’t happen again, even if all their neighbors and the territories they’re investing in starve to death themselves.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:29 pm to mmmmmbeeer
quote:I don't particularly care about the political losses, so much as the broad losses on the overall economy and the average person. But I think Trump has more to lose while China as a nation has more to lose. Problem is that they already treat their citizens as much more expendable, so they probably can handle more of the same without any major upheaval.
And who has more to lose? The guy who just earned a lifetime appointment as leader of China or the guy who has his party already facing difficult midterms in a matter of months?
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:29 pm to AUsteriskPride
quote:
They have a lot more mouths to feed and an economy that is a lot more fragile than the U.S.
The Chinese government doesn't have the same compassion for the welfare of their populace as the United States and you're naive if you think otherwise
They're willing to let their citizens starve if they're that interested in winning this stupid dick measuring contest
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:31 pm to AUsteriskPride
“You think they want to have a trade war?” Mr. Romney said. “If you are not willing to stand up to China, you will get run over by China, and that’s what’s happened for 20 years.”
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:31 pm to cahoots
quote:
It really is amazing to see so many (not all) Republicans and/or conservatives fall in love with tariffs overnight. I can’t figure it out
It's their god emperor. Anyone besides Trump and they'd hate it.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:32 pm to RogerTheShrubber
strange times when I find myself agreeing with you more often than not
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:32 pm to Quaker
quote:Well that would help out exporters, a benefit if we're solely looking at trade and nowhere else.
Does China devalue our currency?
quote:They only own a small percentage and I believe they've been decreasing that recently.
And what is the long term negative of China owning much of our debt?
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:34 pm to mmmmmbeeer
quote:
Good to see liberals finally realizing that taxes and regulations hurt consumers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see what you're trying to do here but this is really an apples and oranges comparison.
Absolutely they are.
In the end, consumers pay corporate taxes, tariffs and cost of regulation.
Tariffs are just defacto taxes.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:34 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Baloney
Tariffs raise prices for the same reason any regulation does
Domestic producers charge higher prices for products because their costs are higher. Since tariffs remove foreign competition or force foreign competitors to pay taxes, consumers are hurt
When our government places a regulation on a business, that cost is passed on
I mean that's all just common sense, HHTM. I'm not arguing that higher prices aren't higher prices based on what caused them to rise. If I'm paying $6 for a pound of bacon when it used to be $5 a month ago, yes, that price increase could be due to any number of things to include tariffs, taxes, or regulations.
I can point to benefits of domestic taxation and regulation. I cannot point to a single benefit of starting a trade war with China that will not only increase my costs, but hurt my market holdings, hurt the job market, and possibly throw us into a recession. It's just pointless.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:35 pm to QboveTopSecret
Romney would have been the guy to elect to take on China because he knows how to operate with some finesse instead of having these temper tantrums that go nowhere because they send the market into a tailspin.
If Trump was serious he would stop tweeting...stop scaring the market and put together an actual strategy on taking on China but that would require doing some real work...its easier just to have Twitter temper tantrums.
If Trump was serious he would stop tweeting...stop scaring the market and put together an actual strategy on taking on China but that would require doing some real work...its easier just to have Twitter temper tantrums.
This post was edited on 4/5/18 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:35 pm to Powerman
quote:
The Chinese government doesn't have the same compassion for the welfare of their populace as the United States and you're naive if you think otherwise
They're willing to let their citizens starve if they're that interested in winning this stupid dick measuring contest
I was a social media manager and marketer in China, and they won’t put up with what their ancestors did. I thoroughly convinced that within the next 20 to 30 years China will be a free country, or at least by European standards be free.
If their daily life gets anywhere close to what their parents and grandparents experienced, expect a very violent uprising. While the Chinese are proud of how much they’ve risen, they’re frustrated that they aren’t where the US is and especially Japan. They know Mao was a monster. Their government knows this, which is why they’re investing in Africa.
I think Americans would put up with it more than the Chinese since we think we could at least vote these people out of office. The Chinese know that’s not on the table and the suffering that happened in the past. China is a powder keg, and fortunately there isn’t a match near it yet.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News