China Retaliates Against the U.S. With Its Own Higher Tariffs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is not liking the Trump tarriffs.

Yea, if you get into a fist fight, your fist is going to sting a little from pounding the other guy's face in.

Hundreds of years of data would suggest that both sides are going to suffer from this trade war. But keep going on with your crude metaphors...

Yea, I have to use a crude metaphor because the liberals seem so focused on wishing ill on Trump's efforts that they forget whose side they are on. Trump is doing this because China is cheating/stealing from the US, that's all of us, every man, woman, and child, immigrant or citizen. Every one of us.

If Trump is successful in getting China to trade more fairly, then both the US and China stands to benefit greatly in the future. Hundreds of years of history shows that sometimes a war is necessary.

Spoken like an unemployed loser living in a basement who gets his social welfare payment either way. Millions of American workers are going to suffer from these tarrifs.

Liar. -DP

Everyone loses in a trade war. Even Trump's chief economic adviser knows that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/us/politics/larry-kudlow-trump-trade.html

Larry Kudlow Breaks With Trump, Saying ‘Both Sides Will Pay’ in Trade War With China

President Trump’s chief economic adviser said on Sunday that American consumers would bear a burden from the escalating trade war with China, contradicting Mr. Trump’s claim that his tariffs were a multibillion-dollar, one-way payment by China to the United States Treasury.

The adviser, Larry Kudlow, made his comments two days after negotiations for a trade deal with China broke off and Mr. Trump followed through on a threat to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese exports.

“In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said in an interview on Fox News. “Both sides will pay in these things.”

Mr. Kudlow’s acknowledgment was merely a recognition of Economics 101. But it flew in the face of one of the president’s favorite arguments: that trade wars are easy to win, and that the pain falls disproportionately on America’s trading partners, which he accuses of having exploited the United States for years through predatory trade practices.

Yea, but sometimes a war is necessary to change behavior. The US fought a revolutionary war for its independence, a civil war to abolish slavery, WWI/WWII to end imperialism, and subsequent wars in attempts to contain communism and terrorism. I wish we didn't have to have a trade war with China. I wish China was more like Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, the economic prosperity of which has demonstrated that US is a friendly and cooperative trading partner.

DCUM Libs need to listen to the above poster.

Why? The above poster cites no data that this trade war will lead to a positive outcome. The above poster isn't going to be funding the families where the employees get laid off because demand for their goods drops off because of tariff hikes.

+1 It's easy to make jingoistic calls for war from the safety of an anonymous post. The poster isn't going to be the one fighting the war, nor are they the employees who are going to be harmed when these higher tariffs cause demand to drop.

I'm the "above poster", I literally am in the middle of this trade war because I am engaged in international trade. I pay a portion of these tariffs that are going up. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is what happens when there are no adults in the room to stop the President from doing something stupid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/business/trump-trade-china.html

China Retaliates Against the U.S. With Its Own Higher Tariffs
China moved to retaliate against the United States, announcing plans on Monday to raise tariffs on American goods ranging from beer and wine to swimsuits, shirts and liquefied natural gas.

The decision, which follows President Trump’s increase in tariffs on Chinese goods last Friday, escalates the pressure in the ongoing trade war.

Trade talks between the two sides broke down last week without a deal, causing tensions that have rippled through financial markets and the global economy. American stocks plunged on Monday, extending the recent losses.

Beijing’s retaliation comes at a time when many in China feel that the United States has behaved highhandedly in threatening tariffs. “Mutual trust and respect are of the essence in handling the negotiations,” said Zhu Ning, a Tsinghua University economics professor.

Meh, it’s already priced in from the first round of tariff wars. More faux alarmism from the left.

[Anonymous]

China has millions in "re-education" camps and suppressing the individual. They have stolen our intellectual property for decades and even you leftists can agree that this has to stop. Malaysia and Vietnam can replace the cheap Chinese goods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of Trump but I agree with him on China. For too long we have allowed them to steal our IP, block imports and subsidize exports. The mistake Trump is making is that he has alienated our allies so that there is no unified approach.

I used to think this as well, but do you seriously think that anyone in the EU is going to work effectively and efficiently with the US in a trade discussion with China? Seriously? Those guys trip over themselves trying to counter balance the power of the US. For them, snubbing US is a competitive sport among their own little group. Just look at their actions in the UN and their attitude towards NATO. Dragging them along, and I do mean dragging, will only slow down the progress at the best, and at the worst one or more of them may side with China on certain issues and cause the process to implode.

I'm not going to say it's smart for Trump to leave other countries out, because I don't know if he seriously thought about the above dynamics, maybe he knew it at an instinctive level. He seems to be all for bilateral negotiations, seems to be just how he prefer things to be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is not liking the Trump tarriffs.

Yea, if you get into a fist fight, your fist is going to sting a little from pounding the other guy's face in.

Hundreds of years of data would suggest that both sides are going to suffer from this trade war. But keep going on with your crude metaphors...

Yea, I have to use a crude metaphor because the liberals seem so focused on wishing ill on Trump's efforts that they forget whose side they are on. Trump is doing this because China is cheating/stealing from the US, that's all of us, every man, woman, and child, immigrant or citizen. Every one of us.

If Trump is successful in getting China to trade more fairly, then both the US and China stands to benefit greatly in the future. Hundreds of years of history shows that sometimes a war is necessary.

Spoken like an unemployed loser living in a basement who gets his social welfare payment either way. Millions of American workers are going to suffer from these tarrifs.

Liar. -DP

Everyone loses in a trade war. Even Trump's chief economic adviser knows that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/us/politics/larry-kudlow-trump-trade.html

Larry Kudlow Breaks With Trump, Saying ‘Both Sides Will Pay’ in Trade War With China

President Trump’s chief economic adviser said on Sunday that American consumers would bear a burden from the escalating trade war with China, contradicting Mr. Trump’s claim that his tariffs were a multibillion-dollar, one-way payment by China to the United States Treasury.

The adviser, Larry Kudlow, made his comments two days after negotiations for a trade deal with China broke off and Mr. Trump followed through on a threat to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese exports.

“In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said in an interview on Fox News. “Both sides will pay in these things.”

Mr. Kudlow’s acknowledgment was merely a recognition of Economics 101. But it flew in the face of one of the president’s favorite arguments: that trade wars are easy to win, and that the pain falls disproportionately on America’s trading partners, which he accuses of having exploited the United States for years through predatory trade practices.

Yea, but sometimes a war is necessary to change behavior. The US fought a revolutionary war for its independence, a civil war to abolish slavery, WWI/WWII to end imperialism, and subsequent wars in attempts to contain communism and terrorism. I wish we didn't have to have a trade war with China. I wish China was more like Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, the economic prosperity of which has demonstrated that US is a friendly and cooperative trading partner.

DCUM Libs need to listen to the above poster.

Why? The above poster cites no data that this trade war will lead to a positive outcome. The above poster isn't going to be funding the families where the employees get laid off because demand for their goods drops off because of tariff hikes.

+1 It's easy to make jingoistic calls for war from the safety of an anonymous post. The poster isn't going to be the one fighting the war, nor are they the employees who are going to be harmed when these higher tariffs cause demand to drop.

I'm the "above poster", I literally am in the middle of this trade war because I am engaged in international trade. I pay a portion of these tariffs that are going up. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

Sure whatever. You can be whomever you want to be on the Internet. But the fact is, that Americans will pay more due to this unnecessary trade war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/us/politics/us-china-trade-tariffs.html

Economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, but most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

The president’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, on Sunday said that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of Trump but I agree with him on China. For too long we have allowed them to steal our IP, block imports and subsidize exports. The mistake Trump is making is that he has alienated our allies so that there is no unified approach.

I used to think this as well, but do you seriously think that anyone in the EU is going to work effectively and efficiently with the US in a trade discussion with China? Seriously? Those guys trip over themselves trying to counter balance the power of the US. For them, snubbing US is a competitive sport among their own little group. Just look at their actions in the UN and their attitude towards NATO. Dragging them along, and I do mean dragging, will only slow down the progress at the best, and at the worst one or more of them may side with China on certain issues and cause the process to implode.

I'm not going to say it's smart for Trump to leave other countries out, because I don't know if he seriously thought about the above dynamics, maybe he knew it at an instinctive level. He seems to be all for bilateral negotiations, seems to be just how he prefer things to be done.

So because Trump is incapable of working with others, then it's good that he doesn't bother with allies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is not liking the Trump tarriffs.

Yea, if you get into a fist fight, your fist is going to sting a little from pounding the other guy's face in.

Hundreds of years of data would suggest that both sides are going to suffer from this trade war. But keep going on with your crude metaphors...

Yea, I have to use a crude metaphor because the liberals seem so focused on wishing ill on Trump's efforts that they forget whose side they are on. Trump is doing this because China is cheating/stealing from the US, that's all of us, every man, woman, and child, immigrant or citizen. Every one of us.

If Trump is successful in getting China to trade more fairly, then both the US and China stands to benefit greatly in the future. Hundreds of years of history shows that sometimes a war is necessary.

Spoken like an unemployed loser living in a basement who gets his social welfare payment either way. Millions of American workers are going to suffer from these tarrifs.

Liar. -DP

Everyone loses in a trade war. Even Trump's chief economic adviser knows that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/us/politics/larry-kudlow-trump-trade.html

Larry Kudlow Breaks With Trump, Saying ‘Both Sides Will Pay’ in Trade War With China

President Trump’s chief economic adviser said on Sunday that American consumers would bear a burden from the escalating trade war with China, contradicting Mr. Trump’s claim that his tariffs were a multibillion-dollar, one-way payment by China to the United States Treasury.

The adviser, Larry Kudlow, made his comments two days after negotiations for a trade deal with China broke off and Mr. Trump followed through on a threat to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese exports.

“In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said in an interview on Fox News. “Both sides will pay in these things.”

Mr. Kudlow’s acknowledgment was merely a recognition of Economics 101. But it flew in the face of one of the president’s favorite arguments: that trade wars are easy to win, and that the pain falls disproportionately on America’s trading partners, which he accuses of having exploited the United States for years through predatory trade practices.

Yea, but sometimes a war is necessary to change behavior. The US fought a revolutionary war for its independence, a civil war to abolish slavery, WWI/WWII to end imperialism, and subsequent wars in attempts to contain communism and terrorism. I wish we didn't have to have a trade war with China. I wish China was more like Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, the economic prosperity of which has demonstrated that US is a friendly and cooperative trading partner.

DCUM Libs need to listen to the above poster.

Why? The above poster cites no data that this trade war will lead to a positive outcome. The above poster isn't going to be funding the families where the employees get laid off because demand for their goods drops off because of tariff hikes.

??? I'm the "above poster". Unlike our liberal friends, I am not someone who claims to know what the future will bring. I am not certain that Trump will be successful with his efforts in this trade war. I do know for certain that getting China to be more fair and open with its trade will benefit both the US and China. The data on this is born out by the fact that it's precisely these more fair and open practices that has brought the economic boom to China. China's GDP is now majorly comprised of private enterprises, with state owned enterprises contributing a substantial minority. The trading activity between the US and China has not just been in terms of material goods, but also in cultural exchange and an expansion of our mutual understanding. This is why no one seriously ponders a potential war between the US and China even if China is aggressively expanding its military reach in the world. This is in stark contrast to the tension that was felt between the US and USSR.

So I don't know the outcome of the trade war, but know with some degree of certainty that a more open and fairly trading China is beneficial to all, so I am supporting Trump's efforts towards this goal by engaging in a trade war.

Agree 100%.
You are the wise voice of reason on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

The president just told Americans not to buy products from American companies like John Deere.

The president would have been better served working through the TPP where other countries would have been participating with the US as a unified voice, but that was the first thing he did as president, pull out of TPP negotiations.

The president has pledge more money to US farmers (from where????) to compensate them for not selling things to China.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is not liking the Trump tarriffs.

Yea, if you get into a fist fight, your fist is going to sting a little from pounding the other guy's face in.

Hundreds of years of data would suggest that both sides are going to suffer from this trade war. But keep going on with your crude metaphors...

Yea, I have to use a crude metaphor because the liberals seem so focused on wishing ill on Trump's efforts that they forget whose side they are on. Trump is doing this because China is cheating/stealing from the US, that's all of us, every man, woman, and child, immigrant or citizen. Every one of us.

If Trump is successful in getting China to trade more fairly, then both the US and China stands to benefit greatly in the future. Hundreds of years of history shows that sometimes a war is necessary.

Spoken like an unemployed loser living in a basement who gets his social welfare payment either way. Millions of American workers are going to suffer from these tarrifs.

Liar. -DP

Everyone loses in a trade war. Even Trump's chief economic adviser knows that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/us/politics/larry-kudlow-trump-trade.html

Larry Kudlow Breaks With Trump, Saying ‘Both Sides Will Pay’ in Trade War With China

President Trump’s chief economic adviser said on Sunday that American consumers would bear a burden from the escalating trade war with China, contradicting Mr. Trump’s claim that his tariffs were a multibillion-dollar, one-way payment by China to the United States Treasury.

The adviser, Larry Kudlow, made his comments two days after negotiations for a trade deal with China broke off and Mr. Trump followed through on a threat to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese exports.

“In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said in an interview on Fox News. “Both sides will pay in these things.”

Mr. Kudlow’s acknowledgment was merely a recognition of Economics 101. But it flew in the face of one of the president’s favorite arguments: that trade wars are easy to win, and that the pain falls disproportionately on America’s trading partners, which he accuses of having exploited the United States for years through predatory trade practices.

Yea, but sometimes a war is necessary to change behavior. The US fought a revolutionary war for its independence, a civil war to abolish slavery, WWI/WWII to end imperialism, and subsequent wars in attempts to contain communism and terrorism. I wish we didn't have to have a trade war with China. I wish China was more like Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, the economic prosperity of which has demonstrated that US is a friendly and cooperative trading partner.

DCUM Libs need to listen to the above poster.

Why? The above poster cites no data that this trade war will lead to a positive outcome. The above poster isn't going to be funding the families where the employees get laid off because demand for their goods drops off because of tariff hikes.

??? I'm the "above poster". Unlike our liberal friends, I am not someone who claims to know what the future will bring. I am not certain that Trump will be successful with his efforts in this trade war. I do know for certain that getting China to be more fair and open with its trade will benefit both the US and China. The data on this is born out by the fact that it's precisely these more fair and open practices that has brought the economic boom to China. China's GDP is now majorly comprised of private enterprises, with state owned enterprises contributing a substantial minority. The trading activity between the US and China has not just been in terms of material goods, but also in cultural exchange and an expansion of our mutual understanding. This is why no one seriously ponders a potential war between the US and China even if China is aggressively expanding its military reach in the world. This is in stark contrast to the tension that was felt between the US and USSR.

So I don't know the outcome of the trade war, but know with some degree of certainty that a more open and fairly trading China is beneficial to all, so I am supporting Trump's efforts towards this goal by engaging in a trade war.

Agree 100%.
You are the wise voice of reason on DCUM.

I prefer to read newspapers and believe the economists and data scientists who say that this trade war will be costly to the American economy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The president just told Americans not to buy products from American companies like John Deere.

The president would have been better served working through the TPP where other countries would have been participating with the US as a unified voice, but that was the first thing he did as president, pull out of TPP negotiations.

The president has pledge more money to US farmers (from where????) to compensate them for not selling things to China.

The US taxpayers will be paying to compensate US farmers for their losses from the Trump trade policies. MAGA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The president just told Americans not to buy products from American companies like John Deere.

The president would have been better served working through the TPP where other countries would have been participating with the US as a unified voice, but that was the first thing he did as president, pull out of TPP negotiations.

The president has pledge more money to US farmers (from where????) to compensate them for not selling things to China.

He said he would buy US goods and use them for humanitarian aid. But I thought he also said he would cut humanitarian aid. Not very reassuring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The president just told Americans not to buy products from American companies like John Deere.

The president would have been better served working through the TPP where other countries would have been participating with the US as a unified voice, but that was the first thing he did as president, pull out of TPP negotiations.

The president has pledge more money to US farmers (from where????) to compensate them for not selling things to China.

The US taxpayers will be paying to compensate US farmers for their losses from the Trump trade policies. MAGA!

+1 There's a reason that even Trump's cokehead chief economic adviser is pointing out that Americans will suffer losses under this trade war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the "above poster", I literally am in the middle of this trade war because I am engaged in international trade. I pay a portion of these tariffs that are going up. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

Sure whatever. You can be whomever you want to be on the Internet. But the fact is, that Americans will pay more due to this unnecessary trade war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/us/politics/us-china-trade-tariffs.html

Economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, but most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

The president’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, on Sunday said that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs.

Okay, well given that it's an anonymous forum, the fact that you are engaging means you are by default in acceptance of certain claims of facts. You are free to challenge them, and I'm willing to discuss my knowledge international trade in any way to establish my "bona fides".

Again, very few people wants to fight a war for the sake of the war itself, but rather people reluctantly enters war in order to achieve some goal after the war. People like you who keeps talking about the effects of the war itself is not convince those of us who are focused on the goals of the war, which is a more open and fair trading partner in China, to the benefit of both the US and China, and those free-loading Europeans who will obviously turn to China and say "I'll have what the US is having."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the "above poster", I literally am in the middle of this trade war because I am engaged in international trade. I pay a portion of these tariffs that are going up. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

Sure whatever. You can be whomever you want to be on the Internet. But the fact is, that Americans will pay more due to this unnecessary trade war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/us/politics/us-china-trade-tariffs.html

Economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, but most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

The president’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, on Sunday said that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs.

Okay, well given that it's an anonymous forum, the fact that you are engaging means you are by default in acceptance of certain claims of facts. You are free to challenge them, and I'm willing to discuss my knowledge international trade in any way to establish my "bona fides".

Again, very few people wants to fight a war for the sake of the war itself, but rather people reluctantly enters war in order to achieve some goal after the war. People like you who keeps talking about the effects of the war itself is not convince those of us who are focused on the goals of the war, which is a more open and fair trading partner in China, to the benefit of both the US and China, and those free-loading Europeans who will obviously turn to China and say "I'll have what the US is having."

That's your opinion. Most people would prefer not to fight wars where both sides end up worse off. Trump doesn't understand foreign policy and even his own party is trying to get him to see reason as he attempts to drive the economy into the ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the "above poster", I literally am in the middle of this trade war because I am engaged in international trade. I pay a portion of these tariffs that are going up. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

Sure whatever. You can be whomever you want to be on the Internet. But the fact is, that Americans will pay more due to this unnecessary trade war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/us/politics/us-china-trade-tariffs.html

Economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, but most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

The president’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, on Sunday said that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs.

Okay, well given that it's an anonymous forum, the fact that you are engaging means you are by default in acceptance of certain claims of facts. You are free to challenge them, and I'm willing to discuss my knowledge international trade in any way to establish my "bona fides".

Again, very few people wants to fight a war for the sake of the war itself, but rather people reluctantly enters war in order to achieve some goal after the war. People like you who keeps talking about the effects of the war itself is not convince those of us who are focused on the goals of the war, which is a more open and fair trading partner in China, to the benefit of both the US and China, and those free-loading Europeans who will obviously turn to China and say "I'll have what the US is having."

That's your opinion. Economists and other experts disagree. Most people would prefer not to fight wars where both sides end up worse off. Trump doesn't understand tariffs or foreign policy and even his own party is trying to get him to see reason as he attempts to drive the economy into the ground.