BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Quite
Donald I, emperor of the world.
- Thread starter C R
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Quite
Would not surprise me if there was a roll back next month with some making significant gains. Then again I’d probably be less surprised by Trump doubling down.
All uphill
Well-Known Member
I know someone who is looking forward to this new business opportunity.
His understanding is that a small amount of smuggling is expected and tolerated to keep the border open. In other words you can make a few quid, but don't be embarrassing.
CXRAndy
Über Member
Another big balls, now backtracking
View: https://x.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1907832235257901301?t=Y7i11JDmSDbLHil9JUr4zw&s=19
View: https://x.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1907832235257901301?t=Y7i11JDmSDbLHil9JUr4zw&s=19
CXRAndy
Über Member
The title has it spot on, asylums will be full
View: https://x.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1907190579164799304?t=NvwntDiQr6_FcU_AMtUnNQ&s=19
View: https://x.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1907190579164799304?t=NvwntDiQr6_FcU_AMtUnNQ&s=19
CXRAndy
Über Member
Trump's policy has already got one of Britain's biggest manufacturers moving location
'JCB to double US business as manufacturers urge Starmer to seize Brexit opportunity
Manufacturer is moving production from Europe to mitigate the effects of Trump’s trade war'
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/carm...BkMp5OohOy-k-PV2sejOTOMbcxIbo2CR93esN9q6zq4yv
'JCB to double US business as manufacturers urge Starmer to seize Brexit opportunity
Manufacturer is moving production from Europe to mitigate the effects of Trump’s trade war'
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/carm...BkMp5OohOy-k-PV2sejOTOMbcxIbo2CR93esN9q6zq4yv
Last edited:
briantrumpet
Regular
Carney not beating around the bush. Whilst I can see why Starmer is being coy, I'd prefer to hear him be as forthright about how Trump has torpedoed a system that kinda worked, not least for the US economy as a whole.
To my mind, so US doesn't want to trade with the rest of the world so we and the rest of the world should be focusing on establishing better trade arrangements between those of us who do want to trade with others.
Trump wants tariffs to be reciprocal, so UK should make them reciprocal and UK increases tariffs on US imports up to the 10% level set by the US. That's not retaliation, just doing what Trump wants - being reciprocal.
For too long the US has been exploiting cheap labour is SE Asia, using their labour at far lower rates than US workers would accept.
But it does highlight the inability of the US to get facts even close to reality eg Trump claims Vietnam charges 90% tariffs on US imports where reality is 9%. No Government is ever going to make good sensible decisions based on completely fictitious data.
Ian
Trump wants tariffs to be reciprocal, so UK should make them reciprocal and UK increases tariffs on US imports up to the 10% level set by the US. That's not retaliation, just doing what Trump wants - being reciprocal.
For too long the US has been exploiting cheap labour is SE Asia, using their labour at far lower rates than US workers would accept.
But it does highlight the inability of the US to get facts even close to reality eg Trump claims Vietnam charges 90% tariffs on US imports where reality is 9%. No Government is ever going to make good sensible decisions based on completely fictitious data.
Ian
First Aspect
Member
Not quite, it's already building a factory there. theyve just announced it will be bigger.
They key word being announced.
It is what is called politics. If the CEO is arguing in favour of a tariff free trade deal, that infers benefits to manufacture outside of the US.
See the contradiction?
First Aspect
Member
Incidentally, anyone noticed that the orangutan seems to have become bored with troublesome peace deals? They are hard and take longer than a few days.
briantrumpet
Regular
Look on the bright side: their attempt to make the fictional figures look scientific is genuinely funny.
First Aspect
Member
They think they are smarter than everyone else.
They are wrong.
This doesn't matter though, because they are smarter than most MAGA voters.
They are wrong.
This doesn't matter though, because they are smarter than most MAGA voters.
stowie
Well-Known Member
Does anyone have an easy explanation for how these tariffs are going to work?
I guess the 10% UK tariff vs 20% EU could have a theoretical* advantage for the UK. But are the tariffs based on origin rules (eg. 60% originating from the country) or based on where goods are finished, or where the most value is added etc.
*I say theoretical because companies would need stability of conditions to invest huge sums in new plants in other locations. If they think the tariffs are a temporary thing that will go when Trump does then they can wait out the 4 years and pay the tariffs which will be cheaper than the Capex in new facilities.
It does seem that the tariffs are based on a very crude metric around balance of trade. UK seems to have been treated lightly due to that. Other countries (eg. Brazil) have the same tariff regime for what seems like similar reasons even though Brazil is really quite protectionist and a strong competitor against US agriculture and raw materials. Among, the worst affected are the small, poor nations with large negative balance of trade - it may well be devastating for them (and probably move them closer towards China). Also, Taiwan seems quite hit. Which could well have some consequences since most high end chips are manufactured there - companies could move manufacturing out of the US to lower tariff regions where they can service US at lower cost and also address the rest of the world. Of course all this only happening if companies think conditions are stable and therefore RoI can be realised.
There was a good argument raised by a Dutch economist (sorry name escapes me) that Trump is raising tariffs as a negotiating tool. US has huge power with the dollar as a world reserve currency but this has downsides in a floating exchange rate where the dollar is always "overvalued" against others due to the reserve nature it also holds. So tariffs are negotiated down in return for currency appreciation of trading countries, plus (it appears) a payment for US military protection. The US thus holds onto reserve status whilst also enjoying competitive currency advantage. Trump tried it with China in his previous term, but this simply accelerated manufacturing moves to NAFTA countries thus bypassing tariffs. Hence the aggression towards close US partners to try to close this down. The economist did point out this plan, as with other historic agreements such as Bretton Woods relied first and foremost on trust between involved parties. And this is the fundamental flaw with the Trump plan - without trust, the plan may well forge partnerships that were highly unlikely 12 months ago. For example Japan, Korea and China co-ordinating a joint tariff response would have been seen to be unfeasible pre-Trump based on their relationship and history. But here we are. I can see the EU looking for increase trade relationships with China as the US moves away from EU partnership for example. If things get really bad, key countries may look to move away from dollar reserve currency thus removing a key power from US global negotiations, but this would be an economic change of huge proportions.
I guess the 10% UK tariff vs 20% EU could have a theoretical* advantage for the UK. But are the tariffs based on origin rules (eg. 60% originating from the country) or based on where goods are finished, or where the most value is added etc.
*I say theoretical because companies would need stability of conditions to invest huge sums in new plants in other locations. If they think the tariffs are a temporary thing that will go when Trump does then they can wait out the 4 years and pay the tariffs which will be cheaper than the Capex in new facilities.
It does seem that the tariffs are based on a very crude metric around balance of trade. UK seems to have been treated lightly due to that. Other countries (eg. Brazil) have the same tariff regime for what seems like similar reasons even though Brazil is really quite protectionist and a strong competitor against US agriculture and raw materials. Among, the worst affected are the small, poor nations with large negative balance of trade - it may well be devastating for them (and probably move them closer towards China). Also, Taiwan seems quite hit. Which could well have some consequences since most high end chips are manufactured there - companies could move manufacturing out of the US to lower tariff regions where they can service US at lower cost and also address the rest of the world. Of course all this only happening if companies think conditions are stable and therefore RoI can be realised.
There was a good argument raised by a Dutch economist (sorry name escapes me) that Trump is raising tariffs as a negotiating tool. US has huge power with the dollar as a world reserve currency but this has downsides in a floating exchange rate where the dollar is always "overvalued" against others due to the reserve nature it also holds. So tariffs are negotiated down in return for currency appreciation of trading countries, plus (it appears) a payment for US military protection. The US thus holds onto reserve status whilst also enjoying competitive currency advantage. Trump tried it with China in his previous term, but this simply accelerated manufacturing moves to NAFTA countries thus bypassing tariffs. Hence the aggression towards close US partners to try to close this down. The economist did point out this plan, as with other historic agreements such as Bretton Woods relied first and foremost on trust between involved parties. And this is the fundamental flaw with the Trump plan - without trust, the plan may well forge partnerships that were highly unlikely 12 months ago. For example Japan, Korea and China co-ordinating a joint tariff response would have been seen to be unfeasible pre-Trump based on their relationship and history. But here we are. I can see the EU looking for increase trade relationships with China as the US moves away from EU partnership for example. If things get really bad, key countries may look to move away from dollar reserve currency thus removing a key power from US global negotiations, but this would be an economic change of huge proportions.
Ian H
Legendary Member
Here's a little puzzle. This quote is from the editor of which magazine?
Watching President Donald Trump’s Rose Garden performance yesterday, it was hard to believe what I was seeing: flawed economics, inaccurate history and cockamamie calculations used to justify the most wrong-headed and damaging policy decision in decades. Mr Trump’s “Liberation Day” was more like ruination day... Almost everything Mr Trump said this week—on history, economics and the technicalities of trade—was deluded.
Watching President Donald Trump’s Rose Garden performance yesterday, it was hard to believe what I was seeing: flawed economics, inaccurate history and cockamamie calculations used to justify the most wrong-headed and damaging policy decision in decades. Mr Trump’s “Liberation Day” was more like ruination day... Almost everything Mr Trump said this week—on history, economics and the technicalities of trade—was deluded.
ebikeerwidnes
Senior Member
Slight problem was highlighted by a US commentator before
The US does not have the mechanisms or staff to administer collect these tariffs
let alone the staff to enforce them and check that people are doing what they are supposed to
On top of which - if this does bring manufacturing to the US - which is will
then this requires factories to be built and equipped
but in the meantime people have had higher prices and much higher unemployment
and, in the US this means that there are a lot of people around that have lost their medical insurance
Which means a lot fo people who are not al all happy with trump and his policies
The US does not have the mechanisms or staff to administer collect these tariffs
let alone the staff to enforce them and check that people are doing what they are supposed to
On top of which - if this does bring manufacturing to the US - which is will
then this requires factories to be built and equipped
but in the meantime people have had higher prices and much higher unemployment
and, in the US this means that there are a lot of people around that have lost their medical insurance
Which means a lot fo people who are not al all happy with trump and his policies
Similar threads
