Donald I, emperor of the world.

[CXRAndy]

Seems no one was bothered about stock markets previously 😁


View: https://x.com/TheGeneral_0/status/1910322233433522219?t=ZqCAFcrWX3p0mNu4itWppA&s=19

 

[Psamathe]

Agreed. He is so used to getting his own way that he can't cope with anyone standing up to him.
Typical bully.

Also reflected in his attitude to others. His continually going on about people/countries "showing him/US respect" yet he shown no respect or even good manners to others. Just look at his behaviour at his recent inauguration, showing no general good manners towards Biden (despite Biden biting his tongue and maintaining a polite stance).

Trump's sidekicks like Vance, Hegseth wittering on about "showing us respect"" I regard as just them parroting what Trump is saying, staying in. Trump's circle by echoing his attitudes.

Ian

 

[First Aspect]

Did you not hear, he can't sue the Chinese companies in china, They don't abide by WTO, though being a member for a long time.

China has the a massive production capacity with very cheap labour rates. They have some of the best designs, by acquiring knowledge from western companies by doing joint venture partnerships

Well no Donald Trump can't sue anyone, because unless it's IP he owns he has no standing. And patent infringement by a Chinese company is nothing to do with the WTO, as it is governed under the domestic law in China. That aside everything you've said is also incorrect.

I do IP this for a living incidentally, so I'm infinitely better informed than you are.

 

[monkers]

Also reflected in his attitude to others. His continually going on about people/countries "showing him/US respect" yet he shown no respect or even good manners to others. Just look at his behaviour at his recent inauguration, showing no general good manners towards Biden (despite Biden biting his tongue and maintaining a polite stance).

Trump's sidekicks like Vance, Hegseth wittering on about "showing us respect"" I regard as just them parroting what Trump is saying, staying in. Trump's circle by echoing his attitudes.

Ian

This is toxic masculinity at work. The British tradition and language was founded on words such as ''honourable'' and ''respectable''. That approach showed that honour and respect were earnt and not demanded; however the British way is also being lost to the thuggery of toxic masculinity due to the likes of 39p Lee.

 

[C R]

Well no Donald Trump can't sue anyone, because unless it's IP he owns he has no standing. And patent infringement by a Chinese company is nothing to do with the WTO, as it is governed under the domestic law in China. That aside everything you've said is also incorrect.

I do IP this for a living incidentally, so I'm infinitely better informed than you are.

Also point out that IP regimes are inherently protectionist The US was fine infringing European patents up until they became big IP holders. China is now playing that game with them.

 

[C R]

Another benefit of tariffs, no pesky cyclists to impede the progress of wankpanzers.

https://road.cc/content/news/giant-forced-reflect-cost-trump-tariffs-313471

 

[KingstonGraham]

When does the stock they can't export to America start getting dumped here at a discount?

 

[briantrumpet]

Are Trump's Tariffs (if they settle at 10%) effectively VAT on only foreign goods? And wholly regressive?

 

[Psamathe]

Are Trump's Tariffs (if they settle at 10%) effectively VAT on only foreign goods? And wholly regressive?

And also very non-reciprocal eg to be reciprocal UK would have to increase its import duties on US products. Pre Trump's changes average for goods US to UK was 3.8% import duty whereas average UK to US was 3.3% tariff so roughly balanced as well as that UK/US trade is also in balance no significant deficit either way. So no "historical" justifications either.

So increasing our import from US tariff would be reciprocal, the principle Trump is using to justify his changes.

If he thinks his changes with regard to the UK are justifiable then he must also think us increasing to match his 10% is justifiable, can't have it both ways.

Ian

 

[Dorset Boy]

And also very non-reciprocal eg to be reciprocal UK would have to increase its import duties on US products. Pre Trump's changes average for goods US to UK was 3.8% import duty whereas average UK to US was 3.3% tariff so roughly balanced as well as that UK/US trade is also in balance no significant deficit either way. So no "historical" justifications either.

So increasing our import from US tariff would be reciprocal, the principle Trump is using to justify his changes.

If he thinks his changes with regard to the UK are justifiable then he must also think us increasing to match his 10% is justifiable, can't have it both ways.

Ian

Oh Trump things he can have it every which way.
Just ask Stormy D!

 

[First Aspect]

Soon, and WTO rules allow for tarrifs in such circumstances.

 

[First Aspect]

Also point out that IP regimes are inherently protectionist The US was fine infringing European patents up until they became big IP holders. China is now playing that game with them.

They aren't inherently protectionist because anyone can apply for a patent anywhere else.

 

[C R]

They aren't inherently protectionist because anyone can apply for a patent anywhere else.

The administrative overhead means that in practice that's not quite the case.

 

[First Aspect]

The administrative overhead means that in practice that's not quite the case.

Sorry but this is nonsense. Ive worked on a Japanese case for a UK applicant and a European case for each of two US applicants today alone. China is also one of the most commonly selected countries for foreign applicants.

 

[C R]

Sorry but this is nonsense. Ive worked on a Japanese case for a UK applicant and a European case for each of two US applicants today alone. China is also one of the most commonly selected countries for foreign applicants.

If you have the financial wherewithal to pay the services of patent attorneys then yes. I have been involved in the process, I even have my name in a US patent. It costs non trivial amounts of money which in itself is a barrier to entry.