81–90 of 120 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would sort of prove Trump's point though. "See, they knew their trade practices were unfair - they're not even fighting back".
Trumps blather means nothing - the idea is to speak to the American people, not Trump.
How can our allies, that Trump is hurting for political gain, abide by that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds a whole lot more like a national security issue than the tariffs. Could also use tariffs to try and hit the states that voted for Trump the hardest.
Well, not so much states that voted for Trump, but small-population states that rack up lots of Senate votes. Put punitive tariffs on corn, soybean, and pork exports, and you'll have a dozen senators imploring Trump to back off.
Can anyone point to an historical case study where protective tariffs resulted in a better economic or social outcome? I can’t help but recall the saying: “When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers soon will.” Not that I think the United States is going to war with Canada, but the (German-dominated) EU and China are less certain.
Tariffs on general goods like steel, food, or oil just increase costs for the whole population.
People suffer->People elect a person with an ability to corrupt social discourse and/or the legislative body -> Time passes -> System breaks down.
The undermining and corruption can be subtle at first and likely takes time, but it spreads eventually to every corner. Trade suffering is just a symptom of a bigger problem: A lack of healthier political discourse.
Take India for example, where strong men and goons in the 20th century figured why just play second fiddle to politicians, lets become them. Today roughly 2/3rd or more members of the upper and lower houses of Parliament have criminal cases against them. It is somewhat democratic(ish) and free market(ishhh).
If people don't make the hard choices who will? If they don't care about the system of checks and balance in the name of "fairness" and no more "PC" who will? A lot of this has to do with education and a understanding of why the system of checks and balances is worth fighting for.
Addendum to what Ben Franklin said, "Those who give up their voices to forgo democratic norms over short term gains, might just end up loosing all those things (voices, democracy and gains)"
Tariffs, and protectionism, are such an extreme measure. It should only be used against countries that you're going to war with. They should never be used in the course of normal trade. America is like 50 countries with open border & free trade policy between them. Can you imagine what would happen if states decided to impose tariffs on each other?
I think you mean sanctions, not tariffs or quotas. There is not a single country that does not apply tariffs or quotas.
Opinion: Trade sanctions against America won’t work. Sanctioning Trump himself might. https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trade-sanctions-against-amer...
That sounds a whole lot more like a national security issue than the tariffs. Could also use tariffs to try and hit the states that voted for Trump the hardest.
These tariffs were targeted at congressional leaders:
" "The idea is, you look at a map of the congressional districts of the United States, you look at which members of Congress are in leadership positions and then you look at the big industries in those districts and then you draw up your list accordingly," she said. "And this list was clearly drawn up with this in mind." (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/steel-tariff-maple-syrup-toi...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If NAFTA talks don't work out, folks like you and me with our TNs are actually going to start worrying about how we're going to keep our jobs. And here I thought Canada wasn't one of Trump's "shithole countries".
I'm not exactly sure how the United States trying to walk back an agreement (NAFTA) and slapping tariffs on our allies makes Canada a "shithole country". If anything, it makes us the shitty neighbor.
Donald Trump is objectively (ranked by presidential historians of all political parties) as the worst president in the 242 year history of the US. It will be work to get back what we can of what we've lost.
Trump is not a good president, don't get me wrong, but that's just not good science.
Donald Trump is objectively (ranked by presidential historians of all political parties) as the worst president in the 242 year history of the US. It will be work to get back what we can of what we've lost.
That implies an equal number of each party or general affiliation - it wasn't. 9 of the 166 respondents considered themselves conservative. Trump is not a good president, don't get me wrong, but that's just not good science.
And the self-identified conservatives rated him in the bottom five, too.