Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (329750)	4/5/2025 4:51:38 PM
From: zax	5 Recommendations Recommended By bentway CentralParkRanger combjelly GPS Info koan Respond to of 364647

>> No, it is anticipated that, like China, they will respond by opening negotiations. China responded with 35% tariff's of their own. >> No one running a trade surplus is off-limits. Except Russia. How can unpopulated islands be running a trade surplus? >> We are trying to raise a trillion dollars On the backs of US taxpayers. Somehow I don't think this is good policy.

To: i-node who wrote (329750)	4/5/2025 5:47:04 PM
From: combjelly	2 Recommendations Recommended By bentway CentralParkRanger Respond to of 364647

Pointing a .45 at someone's head can be considered a great negotiating tactic, I suppose. It doesn't mean it actually is. It isn't like tariffs are new. They were a key part of mercantilism. The thing is, during the 1800s, the hard lessons of mercantilism started to become apparent. A key part of maintaining an economic edge across a wide range of products is access to cheap materials and labor. That meant the leading nations had to engage in wars across the whole globe to access and maintain those things. It also become economic to destroy your opponents ability to compete by diplomatic means, up to and including warfare. By the 1800s, technology had made those wars increasingly expensive and damaging. Technology also made preparing for those wars increasingly more expensive. A major factor in bankrupting the British Empire was it trying to maintain its naval dominance. The Ship of the Line/ironclad/dreadnought/battleship race was so expensive that the world got together in the interwar period to try to reign in the cost. And then the aircraft carrier made them irrelevant in WWII. For lots of reasons, a new game was needed. Along with monarchies, mercantilism was tossed on the ash heap of history. Now you want to argue that we were wrong. We need to got back to, not only mercantilism and the Great Powers Game, but apparently monarchies, or a modernized version of such, as the only way forward. As with much of Mump, I have read this book before. I don't see the point in a reboot.

To: i-node who wrote (329750)	4/5/2025 6:43:37 PM
From: koan	Respond to of 364647

Well, then he is lying, again, because his team has said over and over they are not for negotiations. So which is it? < No, it is anticipated that, like China, they will respond by opening negotiations. No one running a trade surplus is off-limits. Perhaps a deal can be struck where Bangladesh buys more American goods, or perhaps some other "offset" will be suggested.

To: i-node who wrote (329750)	4/5/2025 9:22:44 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 364647

" it is anticipated that, like China, they will respond by opening negotiations." China strikes back at Trump with own tariffs, export curbs Reuters reuters.com › world › china-impose-tariffs-... 1 day ago — China's finance ministry matched U.S. duties with additional tariffs of 34% on all U.S. goods from April 10, on top of the 10%-15% tariffs it ... == "We are trying to raise a trillion dollars" Do it by taxing the income of the rich, not by a sales tax on the poor.