Trade Wars and Tariffs

#5,001
#5,001
bamawriter said:
Once again, you're just saying "10% for all." You're not even attempting to present any logic.
Click to expand...

The logic is instead of having 200 different agreements on the front end, you start with one standard and hammer out the custom details from there. Maybe a deal is struck in 30 minutes to revert from 10/10 to the exact points agreed to 20 years ago (I doubt that that happens). But both sides likely have issues to address even if basing that specific agreement around the AUSFTA. I doubt that the AUSFTA terms are as simple as they might sound. When does the current agreement sunset? Dumping? Subsidies in certain industries? Are there provisions for addressing unbalanced activity? Is there language to prevent China from avoiding US tariffs by routing goods through Australia?
 
#5,002
#5,002
LouderVol said:
china has taken the long term approach with those moves. so there isn't the immediate pain that drives the decision making of today. and even with the long term issues, with them being long term known issues they can be planned for.

Trump's tariffs are both short and long term pain, and there can be no planning for them because no one, including Trump, has a clue what they will be tomorrow yet alone 6 months from now. and worse for the US there is no guarantee that even if Trump gets the tariff deals he wants it will result in the manufacturing returning in a manner that actually changes our economy.

the 50s, 60s, and 70s, were complete unicorns as far as world wide manufacturing. even if every manufacturing job came back home we wouldn't have close to the same level of success.
Click to expand...

Our guarantee is access to the US consumer. We have the better hand. We need to get something in return for that access and it doesn’t have to simply be tariff revenue.

How’d the planning work out with China grabbing space in the South China Sea and building islands for military instillations? If they move on Taiwan are we gonna nuke them, or is it better to have a unified economic response?
 
#5,003
#5,003
Thunder Good-Oil said:
It’s more tolerable to steal IP, dump products to drive others completely out of major industries, fail to contain deadly viruses that kill a couple million people, run labor camps, grab territory in the South China Sea, disregard environmental regulations… ?
Click to expand...
Apparently so, given the quoted article. What the article highlights is that if we can't be a reliable trading partner then countries will find a replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#5,004
#5,004
Thunder Good-Oil said:
The logic is instead of having 200 different agreements on the front end, you start with one standard and hammer out the custom details from there. Maybe a deal is struck in 30 minutes to revert from 10/10 to the exact points agreed to 20 years ago (I doubt that that happens). But both sides likely have issues to address even if basing that specific agreement around the AUSFTA. I doubt that the AUSFTA terms are as simple as they might sound. When does the current agreement sunset? Dumping? Subsidies in certain industries? Are there provisions for addressing unbalanced activity? Is there language to prevent China from avoiding US tariffs by routing goods through Australia?
Click to expand...

So instead of having 200 custom deals, we put blanket tariffs on everyone... and then work out custom deals.

That's some kind of logic right there.
 
#5,007
#5,007
EasternVol said:
Apparently so, given the quoted article. What the article highlights is that if we can't be a reliable trading partner then countries will find a replacement.
Click to expand...

We aren’t unrealible. It a BS narrative that countries will walk away and find a replacement. It’s very lucrative to sell to the biggest economy on the planet.
 
#5,010
#5,010
LouderVol said:
china has taken the long term approach with those moves. so there isn't the immediate pain that drives the decision making of today. and even with the long term issues, with them being long term known issues they can be planned for.

Trump's tariffs are both short and long term pain, and there can be no planning for them because no one, including Trump, has a clue what they will be tomorrow yet alone 6 months from now. and worse for the US there is no guarantee that even if Trump gets the tariff deals he wants it will result in the manufacturing returning in a manner that actually changes our economy.

the 50s, 60s, and 70s, were complete unicorns as far as world wide manufacturing. even if every manufacturing job came back home we wouldn't have close to the same level of success.
Click to expand...

Tariffs are literally the worst way to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. Removing tariffs on input goods is a better move than adding tariffs on finished products.

Subsidies are a better solution than tariffs, and this can be demonstrated by undergrad econ students using a graph similar in simplicity to that of a supply/demand curve.

Cut red tape. Streamline regulatory practices, remove unnecessary barriers to entry, etc. etc. These are the ways to encourage manufacturing without trying to take a wrecking ball to the economy.
 
#5,012
#5,012
bamawriter said:
Should be a good approach, because reasons.
Click to expand...

Reimagining trade including provisions for addressing grossly unbalanced activity. A surplus with Australia doesn’t offset the huge, total net deficit. Let’s trend in a better direction. Let’s make it clear what we expect with reciprocity or alternative concessions. Let’s end giving away favorable terms so that dollar store crap is more affordable.
 
#5,013
#5,013
bamawriter said:
But they already are attempting to find replacements. They won't be able to replace us all together, but they will where and when they can.
Click to expand...

They mad. They’ll come around.

BRICS is already trying something similar. And it’s a **** show.

Alliances and coalitions can be formed, but they’ll find out quickly that it ain’t easy to replace the protected trade routes, settling transactions, revenue from US markets, national security, natural disaster responses, and other benefits that come with being on friendly terms with the big dog.
 
#5,015
#5,015
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Our guarantee is access to the US consumer. We have the better hand. We need to get something in return for that access and it doesn’t have to simply be tariff revenue.

How’d the planning work out with China grabbing space in the South China Sea and building islands for military instillations? If they move on Taiwan are we gonna nuke them, or is it better to have a unified economic response?
Click to expand...
the us consumer who is going to be living in more inflation. the goods we make are going to be more expensive than their counterpart. energy, labor, regulation. those three things are going to drive costs up. we are hoping, with no evidence to back it up, that the increased wages, more inflation, offset the rise in the cost of goods.

we have seen what its going to do with Home Depot, i think, having to remove products from their shelves. so we are going to pay more, for fewer options, while hoping that inflation magically doesn't happen.

bringing the work back here isn't some magic bullet.
 
#5,016
#5,016
Thunder Good-Oil said:
We aren’t unrealible. It a BS narrative that countries will walk away and find a replacement. It’s very lucrative to sell to the biggest economy on the planet.
Click to expand...
Us changing our trade terms on a whim is being very unreliable. The profit in selling to a large economy or a small economy still depends on price, terms, and volume.
 
#5,018
#5,018
EasternVol said:
Us changing our trade terms on a whim is being very unreliable. The profit in selling to a large economy or a small economy still depends on price, terms, and volume.
Click to expand...

Other than China, which BTW… **** the CCP, who that matters is considering us too unreliable to trade with?

What about the opposite? Is Panama a reliable partner when they’re playing footsie with China?
 
#5,022
#5,022
LouderVol said:
the us consumer who is going to be living in more inflation. the goods we make are going to be more expensive than their counterpart. energy, labor, regulation. those three things are going to drive costs up. we are hoping, with no evidence to back it up, that the increased wages, more inflation, offset the rise in the cost of goods.

we have seen what its going to do with Home Depot, i think, having to remove products from their shelves. so we are going to pay more, for fewer options, while hoping that inflation magically doesn't happen.

bringing the work back here isn't some magic bullet.
Click to expand...

But we’ll have toilet paper and PPE.

Labor here might cost more here than exploited workers somewhere else, but there’s also income taxes being paid with domestic wages.

We are a net exporter of energy.

We ought to import to avoid regulations? Just dump toxins in somebody else’s backyard? How about instead fixing oppressive regulation here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top