re: TRUMP: US Will Impose 100% Tariff on China Starting November 1st

quote:

---

You have that completely backwards.

Russia has $2.2 trillion in nominal GDP and a population of 150 million
China has a $19 trillion GDP and a population of 1.4 billion
The US has a $30 trillion GDP and 340 million people

---

Incorrect using Nominal GDP in not an accurate assessment because it does not account for the higher cost of living because of the 37 trillion in debt dollars we printed that caused inflation and decreased the value of the dollar. That is why the IMF and World Bank use PPP GDP to get a more accurate assessment

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

And dumbasses like you can't understand we dont care if economy drags, because coming out better long term is the goal. And we will win this standoff.
Unlike mrons like you, we dont sweat short term pain, if its better long term.

You're a clown

Not possible.

quote:

---

PPP is only useful when looking at intranational / domestic issues not international issues. nominal GDP is the international comparator.

---

Incorrect and exact opposite of what you claim

Grok Question:
Is it accurate to say PPP is only useful when looking at intranational / domestic issues not international issues?




No, that statement is not accurate. Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) is primarily a tool for making international comparisons of economic indicators, such as GDP, productivity, and living standards across countries, by adjusting for differences in price levels and currencies.

It allows for more meaningful cross-border assessments of real economic output and purchasing power, as opposed to nominal exchange rates, which can be volatile and fail to account for what goods and services actually cost in each location.

For instance, organizations like the OECD, IMF, and World Bank rely on PPP for global benchmarking and socioeconomic analyses."

quote:

---

nominal GDP obviously is the measure of a country’s capacity.

---

Nope. GDP is productivity. capcity is...well capacity. It's entirely possible for those two to diverge. In fact, China's capacity far exceeds their productivity in many cases. That is why they are les expensive in the US where productivity is often near 100% of capacity.

It's also why tariffs ultimately won't work for the US. We don't have spare manufacturing capacity. So before anything reshores, we need to add capacity. That only happens in one of two ways: more money printing, or lower standard of living to "motivate" workers enough to make us a net export country.

quote:

---

No

---

Hmm why isn’t it called GDC?

quote:

---

Regardless though, the comparator is nominal value. PPP, relative to international trade, is irrelevant.

---

I guess it depends on what you want to measure. But if you want a decent comparison, you’ll have factor out currency strength.

quote:

---

You're under the impression reshoring was supposed to be instantaneous?

---

No. But that’s the problem. It’s going to take longer to build capacity than tariffs will last.

quote:

---

Or are you saying a return of scaled manufacturing to the US over time is an impossibility?

---

Withput massive money printing or a large drop in standard of living…. virtually no chance.

If it was likely, we wouldn’t need tariffs. They are an admission that we are uncompetitive. And even if we do reshore with tariffs, wi hat happens when the tariffs go away? Manufacturing costs don’t drop by magic. Regulatory costs don’t go away with scale.

So long term.. Do you think we build wealth relative to other nations by overpaying for goods relative to the rest of the world? If so, why not start breaking windows?

You should visit Chendgdu, a nd see
if you still think China is short on manufacturing or economic capacity. It’s like living in the future.

quote:

---

That is 100% false.

---

So in your mind we are competitive in the market place, we just… don’t have it by choice?

quote:

---

But your contentions as basis for that hate are ridiculous. Sorry.

---

I mean, do we have excess capacity? Is it more economically productive to produce here? If so, why isn’t anyone doing it already? You seem tot hunk they were competitive, but need tariffs too. Seems incongruent.

quote:

---

You hate tariffs. I get it.

---

I don’t. I have no emotions about tariffs. If we had excess labor and manufacturing capacity, a weak currency, potential for large foreign capital inflow, and a lower standard of living than our trade partners, I’d be all for them.

quote:

---

Transactional value as a nominal measurement (gold, oil, the USD). That's the way trade works.

---

That doesn’t really work very well on a macro scale though. And it painfully neglects what we as a country spend our most of our economic productivity on.

It matters what you buy.

In the US we spend our money on SS, Medicare, and the military. Non-productive liabilities. China is spending money on energy, transportation, and education. Tariffs does nothing to address thst disparity.

quote:

---

My God, you drink that bs coolaide?

---

Explain how charging US companies and consumers 100% tax to purchase affordable items helps this country.

1- Why Tariffs

A. Protecting Strategic Industries

Tariffs can protect industries that are essential to national security (steel, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, energy, etc.).
By preventing foreign companies—especially those backed by government subsidies—from flooding the market with ultra-cheap goods, tariffs ensure:

Domestic companies stay viable

Skilled jobs remain in the U.S.

The U.S. maintains independent production capacity during global disruptions (e.g., pandemics, wars, or trade conflicts)

B. Encouraging Domestic Investment

When imports are more expensive due to tariffs, U.S. companies have more incentive to:

Build new factories at home

Hire American workers

Invest in automation and productivity improvements

Over time, this can increase U.S. output and reduce reliance on imports, which may eventually lower prices through local competition and efficiency.

C. Counteracting Unfair Trade Practices

Many nations use tactics like currency manipulation, state subsidies, or forced technology transfer to gain trade advantages.
Tariffs can level the playing field — forcing foreign producers to compete fairly rather than rely on government support.

D. Increasing Government Revenue

Tariffs bring in revenue that can fund infrastructure, tax cuts, or industry incentives.
Historically, before income taxes existed, tariffs were the main source of U.S. federal revenue.
That money can offset deficits or be reinvested domestically.


2. Why Tariffs Don’t Always Drive Up Prices

A. The Pass-Through Myth

Not every tariff dollar automatically translates into higher consumer prices.
Here’s why:

Foreign exporters often absorb some of the cost to maintain access to the massive U.S. market.

Exchange rate adjustments can neutralize some of the tariff’s effect — if the dollar strengthens, imports stay roughly the same price.

In competitive markets, importers and retailers may reduce margins to keep shelf prices stable.

B. Domestic Substitution

When tariffs make imports less competitive, American alternatives often scale up.
As domestic production increases, local supply stabilizes or even drives prices down.
Example:
Tariffs on Chinese solar panels led to increased U.S. manufacturing, and prices of solar panels still fell globally due to technological improvements and competition.

C. Short-Term vs Long-Term Impact

In the short term, tariffs can raise some input costs.
But in the long run, if they create:

More domestic production capacity

Stronger supply chains

Innovation due to competition

…then the overall effect can stabilize or even lower prices through greater resilience and self-sufficiency.

D. Inflation Context

When the U.S. economy is strong, and consumers have higher incomes, modest tariffs have little effect on inflation.
For example, tariffs on select imports might shift production domestically without significantly changing consumer price indexes (especially if the tariffed goods represent a small share of total spending).

Everything above is accurate no matter what you try to say.