News Focus
News Focus
icon url

fuagf

07/30/25 8:25 PM

#536560 RE: B402 #536554

Trump's ides of unfair trade deals have been more debunked than not. You must have read that, but it doesn't jibe with your 'defend Trump trade policy' does it. And some countries had higher import tariffs than America did, but not all, yet Trump has slapped a cross the board 10% tariff on. And some countries had lower tariffs on some goods than the US itself had. See:

But, broadly speaking, it is legitimate for Trump to point out that some countries have a higher average tariff on imports than America's.

And those tariffs push up the cost of many American exports to those countries, which might be said to disadvantage US exporters relative to exporters in those countries selling into the US.

[bar graph]


However, whether this amounts to unfair trade that serves to harm the US is not clear cut.
Most economists judge that the costs of import tariffs are, ultimately, borne by households in the country
that imposes them because they can mean that imported goods become more expensive.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw4epl1994o

And there are WTO rules: How might a reciprocal tariff work?

On 10 February, Trump suggested it could mean the US imposing the same average external tariff on imports from each individual nation as those countries impose.

He told reporters: "If they charge us, we charge them. If they're at 25, we're at 25. If they're at 10, we're at 10."

This would likely break the MFN rules of the WTO, which require a nation to impose the same tariff on particular goods, regardless of where they came from.

If the US imposed, say, a tariff of 9.4% on all goods coming from Vietnam but 3.8% on all goods coming from the UK (the same as their own average external tariffs) that would be a breach of the rules.

If the US could show the targeted country was already itself breaching the organisation's rules in some way it might be able to claim that specific retaliatory tariffs against that country are justified under WTO rules.

[...]
Could US tariffs actually come down?

If Trump were serious about exactly matching individual tariffs from other nations it could also, in theory, require the US to lower some tariffs, not to raise them.

The US has higher tariffs on certain agricultural products than some of its trading partners.

For instance, the US currently imposes effective tariffs on many milk imports of more than 10%. But New Zealand, a major global milk producer, has 0% tariffs on its dairy imports.

The US milk tariffs are designed to protect US dairy farmers, including many in the swing state of Wisconsin, and lowering the tariff for milk exporters from New Zealand would likely face political resistance from politicians from that state.

Similarly, a genuinely reciprocal US tariff regime based on individual goods would pose challenges for the US automotive industry.

The US imposes a 25% tariff on imported trucks, including from the EU.

But the EU's own tariff on imported trucks, including from the US, is only 10%.

So a US reciprocal tariff with the EU on imported trucks would, in theory, mean the US lowering its tariff here.

While a reciprocal tariff on EU cars might be welcomed by American automakers, a reciprocal tariff on EU trucks might not be.


This could mean nations with higher average external tariffs than the US would be penalising their own consumers rather than Americans.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw4epl1994o

USA had/has a trade surplus with Australia yet Trump wanted to go after our pharmaceutical benefits scheme. And Brazil, 50% tariffs proposed because Trump thinks their judicial system is being unfair to his like-minded authoritarian friend Bolsonaro.

That 's wielding a big stick just because you have it.
icon url

blackhawks

07/30/25 9:11 PM

#536571 RE: B402 #536554

You're a blind ideologue who doesn't like the Dems on cultural and racial issues which causes you to blame the Dems for a wider range of economic issues, blame which does not stand up to scrutiny. Biden handed the country two bills that were designed to help far more of the country than anything Trump has done or proposed to do.

I think the world has had the advantage on trade with the US and its time that changes....

Please, going forward, drop any of your assertions into the AI search box of your choice. I do.

The world has had the advantage on trade with the US? Really?

The claim that "the world has had the advantage on trade with the US" is a common talking point, but the reality is more nuanced.

1. Trade Is Generally Mutually Beneficial

Economists broadly agree that trade, including free and open trade, has benefited the U.S. economy overall. The U.S. gains from access to goods and inputs produced more efficiently abroad, which supports lower prices for consumers, boosts innovation, and enhances economic growth. In fact, international trade is estimated to have raised American real incomes by 9% compared to a world without trade liberalization.

U.S. companies, through both importing and exporting, can prosper, compete more effectively on the world stage, shield themselves from currency fluctuations, and quickly respond to supply chain disruptions.

2. The U.S. Trade Deficit and Its Meaning

The United States typically runs a trade deficit, meaning it imports more than it exports—especially in goods, though it runs a surplus in services.

A trade deficit, though sometimes seen as a sign of disadvantage, is not necessarily harmful. It allows the U.S. to access a wide range of goods and services, keeps consumer prices low, and attracts substantial foreign investment. The United States’ status as the issuer of the world’s main reserve currency also means that global demand for dollars increases the trade deficit, but this is seen as a benefit for America, not exploitation.

Trade deficits often reflect macroeconomic factors like savings rates, rather than an "unfair deal." The U.S. tends to save less and invest more compared to many other countries, and trade deficits help balance these macroeconomic flows.

3. The Structure of U.S. Trade Relationships

There have been concerns—especially among some politicians—that certain countries gain at the U.S.'s expense due to trade imbalances or protectionist policies. However, most evidence suggests that the U.S. is not broadly being "taken advantage of"; instead, the overall benefits of trade (jobs, economic growth, consumer choice) are widely distributed.

Recent major trade deals, like the 2025 U.S.–EU agreement, aim to remove many tariffs and open more markets to U.S. products, further balancing relationships and benefiting U.S. industries and workers.

4. Trade Does Create Both Winners and Losers

While the overall economy benefits, trade can harm specific industries or workers exposed to foreign competition. This drives much of the political debate about "fairness." Nevertheless, the consensus remains that trade's benefits to the U.S. as a whole outweigh its downsides, especially when policies are in place to assist affected workers and communities.

Bottom Line:

The United States has not been systematically disadvantaged in global trade. Rather, trade has been a net positive for the U.S. economy—raising standards of living, supporting millions of jobs, and keeping the country a leader in innovation and productivity. Individual sectors or groups may face challenges, but these are not evidence that "the world" as a whole has had the advantage over the U.S. in trade

Perplexity.ai
icon url

sortagreen

07/30/25 9:22 PM

#536574 RE: B402 #536554

Thank goodness, we'll finally be able to buy good old fashioned "made in West Virginia" computers again. Made with US steel and copper no doubt... and phones too.

Your fucking orange bitch put a 50% tariff on Brazil for prosecuting his boyfriend.

Just shut up.