Trade War!!!


We’re doing it! USA USA!!!
A couple of questions though:
Why?
What’s our endgame here?
In a trade war, both economies get hurt. If you’re gonna bring jobs back to the us, us salaries are almost gonna certainly raise the prices on what you’re buying. And my understanding from you guys was people couldn’t afford stuff before that.
Comments
-
So you are in favor of the status quo then. At least you are honest.
-
The status quo was horrible, I'm told.
For some reason.
-
Friends? We don't need any friends, damnit!
-
Well, then do it, Ford. Let’s see it.
Is he double-dog swearing and really means it this time? I’d consider an immediate cut off of energy to over a million US households and businesses to be an act of war if I was Trump. There have to be contracts for this, too.
-
The end game is fair trade.
-
The status quo where both nations prospered from trade? Im failing to recognize what problem we were trying to address here.
-
How much international trade have you been involved with in your career?
-
Both nations?
-
I laughed. That is quite an assumption to make.
-
Buck, none, but I’m dealing for the last day with a retarded freight broker. A broker who is going to have a pallet with $75,000 in oil pump products sitting at the Montana-Canadian border tomorrow morning if he can’t get the tax paperwork straight and call our shipping guy (or me) and the company we are shipping it to back to the R&L driver ASAP.
-
I work for a fortune 10 company so I have plenty knowledge in this area thanks. I have more international trade experience in my Johnson than this entire board combined
It is not realistic to have US companies purchase parts, merchandise, in America and allow them to compete. Anyone who believes this is dumb as dirt/EverettChris. -
Complaining that the other side fired back during the war you started is pathetic.
-
Complaining that the other side fired back during the war you started is pathetic.
So Canada has no existing tariffs on any US products? Interesting since they do.
Ford is a pussy if he doesn’t follow through on his threat now, and yes, deliberately harming millions of US citizens by cutting off their power is an act of war IMO.
You are truly anti-American at this point.
-
Yes, Canada is bitching about being forced closer to fair trade is pathetic, agreed.
-
Building the HR intranet for Amazon counts as the international trade?
-
You seriously have me all wrong Bob. I’m cheering for the following:
-Deporting the farm employees who are illegal aliens who are getting paid under the table and replace them with Americans, who you will have to pay at an obnoxious rate to do that job-Eliminating all imports and have everything built in the USA
I’ve done enough where I can escape to another country and watch from afar the idiots who endorse these policies have to deal with the aftermath of paying American made prices for them. I’m cheering for it. -
Tariffs only hurt America if they are American tariffs
Other countries impose tariffs and it helps America
I work for a Fortune 500,000 company so I know
-
The point you don’t seem to understand is the ease of international companies selling into the US vs the complete pain in the ass on logistics, tax, banking, regulation and economic disadvantage of going the other direction.
-
Where's the goal line, ladies?
What signifies "fair"?
-
Scrubbing toilets at Amazon Lake Union doesn’t make you a trade expert, Spaz.
-
No pain for either side. Which can only be achieved with equal pain happening first.
-
Did you read anything in this thread, or Trump's reason for the Tariffs? Equal application both ways
But go ahead and scream and writhe in your little hovel while you click away on your crusty keyboard without understanding anything
-
When the CEO we elected as President and his advisors see it as fair, I’ll believe them. Unlike the America Last Democrats, whose entire platform now is Not Trump, even if opposing him harms US citizens.
-
Your quarrel is with Bob_C. He thinks the tariffs are leading somewhere. You think they are an end in of themselves, apparently.
-
Dems allege a great concern about how tariffs (a tax on imports) will affect the working man and that the dems are the ones that care. Then take a look at the dems who almost universally want to increase US and state taxes and regulations and don't give a phuck about the increase in prices on consumer goods to the American consumer. Tariff taxes bad, income, property, sales, carbon and excise taxes good. It's almost like they never took an economic course that wasn't taught by a commie. New York not only going to tax in state gas companies but also try to impose liability on out of state and foreign producers. When a dem says they are concerned about consumer prices, they lie.
https://nypost.com/2025/03/02/us-news/ny-gov-kathy-hochul-sued-over-75b-climate-law/
A coalition of business and trade groups is suing the Hochul administration over a law that will force oil, natural gas and coal companies to pay $75 billion for spewing carbon emissions.
Gov. Kathy Hochul’s administration claimed the law was necessary to combat the companies contributing to climate change for decades — but critics said the extra costs will be passed along to consumers through prices at the pump and heating bills.
“This law is not only illegal and misguided, but it will likely increase the cost of energy, placing an unnecessary burden on New Yorkers and consumers nationwide — especially during a time of already high prices,” Marty Durbin, president of the US Chamber of Commerce’s Global Energy Institute and plaintiff in the case, told The Post.
A coalition of business and trade groups are suing the Hochul administration over a law charging companies for carbon emissions.
The lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court claims Hochul and the state legislature exceeded their authority by approving the New York Climate Change Superfund Act last year, and asked that it be tossed out as unconstitutional.
The plaintiffs also include the New York State Business Council, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Mining Association.
“We’ve always argued that this is bad policy for New York, and we intend to seek reversal through all available avenues,” said Ken Pokalsky, vice president of the NYS Business Council.
The law aims to essentially charge fossil fuel companies for their purported shares of “global, lawful greenhouse gas emissions based on completely unsubstantiated ‘attribution science,'” the plaintiffs claim.
Federal law prohibits New York from imposing liability on fossil fuel energy producers for harms allegedly caused in the Empire State by greenhouse gases emitted outside the state, the lawsuit said.
The plaintiffs said there’s no way that an estimated 38 energy firms could pay back those costs without raising prices to customers, and some critics wondered whether it could even be collected from foreign-owned companies.
“New York seeks to reach back decades in time and impose significant monetary penalties on those producers (operating almost completely outside the State), potentially subjecting other States and consumers to increased energy costs, while reaping the financial benefits to pay for ‘climate change adaptive infrastructure,'” the suit claimed.
It’s the second lawsuit filed against the law. Twenty two states, led by West Virginia, also filed a challenge last month.
An analysis conducted for the bill’s sponsors state Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan) and Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz (D-Bronx) last year showed foreign-owned and American companies together would pay about $3 billion a year over 25 years.
The oil giant Saudi Aramco of Saudi Arabia could be slapped with the largest annual assessment of any company — $640 million a year — for emitting 31,269 million tons of greenhouse gases from 2000 to 2020.
Aramco — formally known as the Saudi Arabian Oil Co. — is owned by the Saudi Royal family.
The state-owned Mexican oil firm Petróleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, emitted 9,512 tons of CO2 and could face an $193 million assessment for generating 9,512 million tons of greenhouse gases.
Russia’s Lukoil could be assessed with a $100 million yearly fee for spewing 4,912 millions of CO2.
The 38 companies identified as carbon polluters include American petro giants Exxon and Chevron as well as Shell and BP in the UK, Total Energies IES in France, Petrobras in Brazil, BHP in Australia, Glencore in Switzerland, Equinor in Norway and ENI in Italy.
-
"But what about regulations?!" wailed Gasbag.
#SantimoniousWhataboutism
-
He's right. You're full of shit
Democrats bleed the working man dry t
-
No, tariffs hurt the American consumer as those cheaper prices you are used to paying are no longer cheaper goods. Free trade benefits the consumers…you.
Like I said, it’s fine with me. I’ve just witnessed a year and a half of bitching on prices so let’s just say I’m confused about your stance on this. EverettChris is dumb so I understand why he’s confused….but not sure why the rest of you are.
-
lol I see @haie lurking in here again….scared to engage.
Not that I blame the guy. -
I don't overpay for anything. Because I don't have to
You're not concerned about the American consumer. Tariffs are the least of their problems
You defended Biden inflation for 4 years so maybe take a seat champ