I think this is right. Threaten everyone, vast majority play ball, China bows up and gets isolated. Fairly predictable, especially if you got some allies quietly in your corner beforehand. If end result is we have better trade agreements generally and weaned ourselves off cheap Chinese goods (instead spreading across several other friendlier countries, combined with a little onshoring), that's a huge win. And it's one you want to get before we have the next global disruption (covid, war, etc.).whiterock said:LOL I've been telling the Panicans they're missing it. And they did.muddybrazos said:
Trump just did a 90 day pause on tariffs on everyone but China and raised them 125%. Bitcoin immediately rips back into the 80s!! LFGlmao - Trump frontran his own announcement to pause tariffs by saying it's a "GREAT TIME TO BUY!" 3 hours before huge news for stocks hit.
— Coffeezilla (@coffeebreak_YT) April 9, 2025
this is levels of insanity we've never seen before. pic.twitter.com/efTsO4qlkA
Stand back & look at the tectonic plates here. Trump put tariffs on everyone and told all trade partners not to retaliate but to reach out to negotiate. 75+ nations did exactly what he asked. But China retaliated. Then Trump upped the ante to +100%. China responded yesterday with strong words: "If the U.S. insists on further escalating its economic and trade restrictions, China has the firm will and abundant means to take necessary countermeasures and fight to the end." Having baited China into the battle, he then announced a 90-day pause on everyone else and left China holding the bag. And there China sits in a battle it cannot win against the largest economy on earth, the second largest economy on earth, and dozens of other developed and developing countries.
A couple of days ago on this thread, I observed that Trump was attempting to make the world choose between economic alliance with China, or an economic alliance with the USA. That's where we are now. All of our trading partners that matter (a coalition of over 60% of world GDP) are choosing to deal with us. . And we will have as a precondition NO trans-shipments of Chinese goods thru their economies. China has an economy built to export; and just lost (or is at risk of losing) most of its export markets. It's like being dressed up for the ball when a game of touch football broke out.
China has an 17% share of US imports. So a 100% tariff on Chinese goods will have a macroeconomic impact of +2.55% on consumer prices. Easily offset by tax cuts..... We are a huge consumer market. China is not. We can get others to make what China makes. And it would be far better to diversify that production across 2-10 different countries rather than a single behemoth who is a near-peer rival. But nobody who chooses to disengage from the USA could possibly hope to find markets to replace us. We. Hold. All. The. Cards. China has very few.
So simple. Why did so few see it?
April 2nd Reciprocal Tariffs
347,255 Views |
3994 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by RD2WINAGNBEAR86
I didn't think you had an answerwhiterock said:that right there is the mother of all faulty premises.ron.reagan said:If the message is to build in America how the hell are we going to have free trade?whiterock said:look at our top 5 largest trade partners, all running surpluses with them. 4 of them have already made offers to drop tariffs if we drop ours. Only China is pushing back.Redbrickbear said:If that was the case then the Chinese foreign minister would not be screaming bloody murder...and he isMothra said:Red's idea that this is going to hurt China is absurd. China is going to make a killing on this.Porteroso said:That is a great personal policy for you to have as an individual, but it is a long term restructuring policy of the global economy policy to have, as a country. The question has to be asked, what evidence is there that America will be better off if we effectively close ourselves off to global trade?Redbrickbear said:Porteroso said:It will all trickle back to the consumer. Whether you pay more for made in USA, or more because Chinese goods are 54% more expensive, you are paying more. Tariffs are effectively a tax upon consumers.ScottS said:...except the tariffs Trump put on are paid by other countries. Could it be past to the comsumer, yes but you might just buy something US made instead. You don't have to pay the tariff.boognish_bear said:JUST IN: πΊπΈ JPMorgan says President Trump's tariffs are the largest US tax hike since 1968.
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 3, 2025
Pay more so Americans can have better jobs? Count me in
Not to mention you are going to pay no matter what system you chose.
Even without tariffs you pay....in the real life sense of societal break down and via helping Communist China rise to be a world power.
There is no free lunch....and even free trade has its long term costs....and those costs will come due
As I've said, if this ends up being mostly tariffs on China, and we get better deals with most other countries, I can be for that. But as it was proposed, it's a declaration of economic war upon the free market, and that will not go well.
Lost in this is what Republicans used to say was a core value: the free market. If Trump does negotiate in good faith and get many countries to eliminate their tariffs upon US goods, the free market will benefit. If he does not negotiate, and no matter what a country like Vietnam says (they say they will eliminate all tariffs on US goods.... that's a wrap, right?), he goes forward with tariffs, this will be a major blow to free trade not only globally, but especially in the USA.
No President or Congress has ever taken it upon themself to declare war on free trade, not even the most liberal. To have this done by a Republican, and backed by conservatives, is yet another total flip flop driven by the GOP's total admiration for their Dear Leader.
[China's foreign minister has accused the US of "two-faced" behaviour, condemning the imposition of tariffs on Chinese goods and warning against the "law of the jungle" that could emerge from Donald Trump's "America First" policy.
Speaking at the sidelines of China's annual parliamentary gathering, Wang Yi said China would "firmly counter" US pressure. "No country should think that it can suppress China and maintain good relations," he added.
Wang's comments came days after the US president announced an increase on tariffs on Chinese imports.]
Then look at where we have the most aggressive tariffs employed. Why are so many places with such small amounts of trade hit with such extraordinary tariffs? (check the relationship many of those countries have with China).
One could argue that the whole program being run here is economic isolation of China, to freeze them out of a quarter of the world economy by making it effectively impossible for them to not just transship but to move production to escape our tariffs. Only by investing HERE will China be able to play in the US market. Why does China not want to do that? (because they want the jobs in China rather than America.....)
I think it's more he stumbled into it when he saw the tariff reactions, but I agree with your hopeful outcomes. It would be a positive for the U.S. and its allies. There's still going to be some pain in the interim due to a transition, but this objective I can actually see a clear strategic purpose.Robert Wilson said:I think this is right. Threaten everyone, vast majority play ball, China bows up and gets isolated. Fairly predictable, especially if you got some allies quietly in your corner beforehand. If end result is we have better trade agreements generally and weaned ourselves off cheap Chinese goods (instead spreading across several other friendlier countries, combined with a little onshoring), that's a huge win. And it's one you want to get before we have the next global disruption (covid, war, etc.).whiterock said:LOL I've been telling the Panicans they're missing it. And they did.muddybrazos said:
Trump just did a 90 day pause on tariffs on everyone but China and raised them 125%. Bitcoin immediately rips back into the 80s!! LFGlmao - Trump frontran his own announcement to pause tariffs by saying it's a "GREAT TIME TO BUY!" 3 hours before huge news for stocks hit.
— Coffeezilla (@coffeebreak_YT) April 9, 2025
this is levels of insanity we've never seen before. pic.twitter.com/efTsO4qlkA
Stand back & look at the tectonic plates here. Trump put tariffs on everyone and told all trade partners not to retaliate but to reach out to negotiate. 75+ nations did exactly what he asked. But China retaliated. Then Trump upped the ante to +100%. China responded yesterday with strong words: "If the U.S. insists on further escalating its economic and trade restrictions, China has the firm will and abundant means to take necessary countermeasures and fight to the end." Having baited China into the battle, he then announced a 90-day pause on everyone else and left China holding the bag. And there China sits in a battle it cannot win against the largest economy on earth, the second largest economy on earth, and dozens of other developed and developing countries.
A couple of days ago on this thread, I observed that Trump was attempting to make the world choose between economic alliance with China, or an economic alliance with the USA. That's where we are now. All of our trading partners that matter (a coalition of over 60% of world GDP) are choosing to deal with us. . And we will have as a precondition NO trans-shipments of Chinese goods thru their economies. China has an economy built to export; and just lost (or is at risk of losing) most of its export markets. It's like being dressed up for the ball when a game of touch football broke out.
China has an 17% share of US imports. So a 100% tariff on Chinese goods will have a macroeconomic impact of +2.55% on consumer prices. Easily offset by tax cuts..... We are a huge consumer market. China is not. We can get others to make what China makes. And it would be far better to diversify that production across 2-10 different countries rather than a single behemoth who is a near-peer rival. But nobody who chooses to disengage from the USA could possibly hope to find markets to replace us. We. Hold. All. The. Cards. China has very few.
So simple. Why did so few see it?
But the problem is, a commitment without a contract is non-binding (and even in the case of contracts, it's not binding apparently according to Trump). So all a country or industry has to do is tell Trump what he wants to hear, and then wait for the next guy to come along.whiterock said:I'm talking macroeconomics. C + I + G + T = GDPMothra said:What are you referring to here? The non-binding commitment of some countries/industries to invest in the US?whiterock said:the $4.5T in new investments announced thus far will more than offset the drop in consumption AND the budget cuts.boognish_bear said:Even with the tariffs fully in place, any recession might be shallow enough β and early enough in the electoral cycle β for the White House to decide it's worth just riding it out.https://t.co/38HSsTs6ZA
— Axios (@axios) April 9, 2025
The total of investments planned for other countries that have been redirected to the USA exceeds $4.5T (given that the number is over a week old). Not all of that will hit the books in 2025, but it doesn't have to to cover the planned US spending cuts of $1T.
So if G drops by $1T but I increases by $1T, the net impact to GDP is zero.
That solves the immediate problem of how to achieve the desired level of budget cuts without causing a severe recession.
Not sure how this accomplished anything.
Indeed. It will be spun as part of a plan, when it likely wasn't. Public reaction was simply too negative, and he succumbed to the pressure.ATL Bear said:I think it's more he stumbled into it when he saw the tariff reactions, but I agree with your hopeful outcomes. It would be a positive for the U.S. and its allies. There's still going to be some pain in the interim due to a transition, but this objective I can actually see a clear strategic purpose.Robert Wilson said:I think this is right. Threaten everyone, vast majority play ball, China bows up and gets isolated. Fairly predictable, especially if you got some allies quietly in your corner beforehand. If end result is we have better trade agreements generally and weaned ourselves off cheap Chinese goods (instead spreading across several other friendlier countries, combined with a little onshoring), that's a huge win. And it's one you want to get before we have the next global disruption (covid, war, etc.).whiterock said:LOL I've been telling the Panicans they're missing it. And they did.muddybrazos said:
Trump just did a 90 day pause on tariffs on everyone but China and raised them 125%. Bitcoin immediately rips back into the 80s!! LFGlmao - Trump frontran his own announcement to pause tariffs by saying it's a "GREAT TIME TO BUY!" 3 hours before huge news for stocks hit.
— Coffeezilla (@coffeebreak_YT) April 9, 2025
this is levels of insanity we've never seen before. pic.twitter.com/efTsO4qlkA
Stand back & look at the tectonic plates here. Trump put tariffs on everyone and told all trade partners not to retaliate but to reach out to negotiate. 75+ nations did exactly what he asked. But China retaliated. Then Trump upped the ante to +100%. China responded yesterday with strong words: "If the U.S. insists on further escalating its economic and trade restrictions, China has the firm will and abundant means to take necessary countermeasures and fight to the end." Having baited China into the battle, he then announced a 90-day pause on everyone else and left China holding the bag. And there China sits in a battle it cannot win against the largest economy on earth, the second largest economy on earth, and dozens of other developed and developing countries.
A couple of days ago on this thread, I observed that Trump was attempting to make the world choose between economic alliance with China, or an economic alliance with the USA. That's where we are now. All of our trading partners that matter (a coalition of over 60% of world GDP) are choosing to deal with us. . And we will have as a precondition NO trans-shipments of Chinese goods thru their economies. China has an economy built to export; and just lost (or is at risk of losing) most of its export markets. It's like being dressed up for the ball when a game of touch football broke out.
China has an 17% share of US imports. So a 100% tariff on Chinese goods will have a macroeconomic impact of +2.55% on consumer prices. Easily offset by tax cuts..... We are a huge consumer market. China is not. We can get others to make what China makes. And it would be far better to diversify that production across 2-10 different countries rather than a single behemoth who is a near-peer rival. But nobody who chooses to disengage from the USA could possibly hope to find markets to replace us. We. Hold. All. The. Cards. China has very few.
So simple. Why did so few see it?
If you know of Art of the Deal that is how its done. Btw, how did you get kicked in the nuts? This is basically been going on a grand total of about 3 or 4 business days. Thats it.ron.reagan said:He didn't have to kick everyone in the nuts first to do this if that was his goalRealEstateBear said:
Everybody against China. Here we go. Destroy the commie *******s
Maybe, but not sure it matters. At a minimum, China could've chosen to act differently (but what were the odds).ATL Bear said:I think it's more he stumbled into it when he saw the tariff reactions, but I agree with your hopeful outcomes. It would be a positive for the U.S. and its allies. There's still going to be some pain in the interim due to a transition, but this objective I can actually see a clear strategic purpose.Robert Wilson said:I think this is right. Threaten everyone, vast majority play ball, China bows up and gets isolated. Fairly predictable, especially if you got some allies quietly in your corner beforehand. If end result is we have better trade agreements generally and weaned ourselves off cheap Chinese goods (instead spreading across several other friendlier countries, combined with a little onshoring), that's a huge win. And it's one you want to get before we have the next global disruption (covid, war, etc.).whiterock said:LOL I've been telling the Panicans they're missing it. And they did.muddybrazos said:
Trump just did a 90 day pause on tariffs on everyone but China and raised them 125%. Bitcoin immediately rips back into the 80s!! LFGlmao - Trump frontran his own announcement to pause tariffs by saying it's a "GREAT TIME TO BUY!" 3 hours before huge news for stocks hit.
— Coffeezilla (@coffeebreak_YT) April 9, 2025
this is levels of insanity we've never seen before. pic.twitter.com/efTsO4qlkA
Stand back & look at the tectonic plates here. Trump put tariffs on everyone and told all trade partners not to retaliate but to reach out to negotiate. 75+ nations did exactly what he asked. But China retaliated. Then Trump upped the ante to +100%. China responded yesterday with strong words: "If the U.S. insists on further escalating its economic and trade restrictions, China has the firm will and abundant means to take necessary countermeasures and fight to the end." Having baited China into the battle, he then announced a 90-day pause on everyone else and left China holding the bag. And there China sits in a battle it cannot win against the largest economy on earth, the second largest economy on earth, and dozens of other developed and developing countries.
A couple of days ago on this thread, I observed that Trump was attempting to make the world choose between economic alliance with China, or an economic alliance with the USA. That's where we are now. All of our trading partners that matter (a coalition of over 60% of world GDP) are choosing to deal with us. . And we will have as a precondition NO trans-shipments of Chinese goods thru their economies. China has an economy built to export; and just lost (or is at risk of losing) most of its export markets. It's like being dressed up for the ball when a game of touch football broke out.
China has an 17% share of US imports. So a 100% tariff on Chinese goods will have a macroeconomic impact of +2.55% on consumer prices. Easily offset by tax cuts..... We are a huge consumer market. China is not. We can get others to make what China makes. And it would be far better to diversify that production across 2-10 different countries rather than a single behemoth who is a near-peer rival. But nobody who chooses to disengage from the USA could possibly hope to find markets to replace us. We. Hold. All. The. Cards. China has very few.
So simple. Why did so few see it?
I was referring to the hundreds of countries/islands/penguinsScottS said:If you know of Art of the Deal that is how its done. Btw, how did you get kicked in the nuts? This is basically been going on a grand total of about 3 or 4 business days. Thats it.ron.reagan said:He didn't have to kick everyone in the nuts first to do this if that was his goalRealEstateBear said:
Everybody against China. Here we go. Destroy the commie *******s
ron.reagan said:I was referring to the hundreds of countries/islands/penguinsScottS said:If you know of Art of the Deal that is how its done. Btw, how did you get kicked in the nuts? This is basically been going on a grand total of about 3 or 4 business days. Thats it.ron.reagan said:He didn't have to kick everyone in the nuts first to do this if that was his goalRealEstateBear said:
Everybody against China. Here we go. Destroy the commie *******s
Again it was 3 or 4 business days.
Need to see the deposit slips.whiterock said:the $4.5T in new investments announced thus far will more than offset the drop in consumption AND the budget cuts.boognish_bear said:Even with the tariffs fully in place, any recession might be shallow enough β and early enough in the electoral cycle β for the White House to decide it's worth just riding it out.https://t.co/38HSsTs6ZA
— Axios (@axios) April 9, 2025
The wider public is still not going to get it, even after Trump just paused the tariffs on everyone but China. https://t.co/hYmxJgCyoQ
— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) April 9, 2025
He is one smart SOB.Redbrickbear said:The wider public is still not going to get it, even after Trump just paused the tariffs on everyone but China. https://t.co/hYmxJgCyoQ
— FischerKing (@FischerKing64) April 9, 2025
In this particular instance, he was dealt a very nasty hand that he is trying to come back from. Biden screwed this country to hell and back
Facebook Groups at; Memories of: Dallas, Texas, Football in Texas, Texas Music, Through a Texas Lens and also Dallas History Guild. Come visit!
https://t.co/cXwqmkMyxA pic.twitter.com/Kuow5v4YdY
— Maarek (@Maarblek) April 9, 2025
Once again, Ackerman makes sense. Methinks he is coming around
Time is not Chinaβs friend.
— Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) April 9, 2025
Every U.S. company that sources products in China is in the process of finding alternative suppliers.
Supply chains are time consuming and can be expensive and challenging to move.
Once moved, they are sticky.
Tick tock.
Facebook Groups at; Memories of: Dallas, Texas, Football in Texas, Texas Music, Through a Texas Lens and also Dallas History Guild. Come visit!
Mothra said:Indeed. It will be spun as part of a plan, when it likely wasn't. Public reaction was simply too negative, and he succumbed to the pressure.ATL Bear said:I think it's more he stumbled into it when he saw the tariff reactions, but I agree with your hopeful outcomes. It would be a positive for the U.S. and its allies. There's still going to be some pain in the interim due to a transition, but this objective I can actually see a clear strategic purpose.Robert Wilson said:I think this is right. Threaten everyone, vast majority play ball, China bows up and gets isolated. Fairly predictable, especially if you got some allies quietly in your corner beforehand. If end result is we have better trade agreements generally and weaned ourselves off cheap Chinese goods (instead spreading across several other friendlier countries, combined with a little onshoring), that's a huge win. And it's one you want to get before we have the next global disruption (covid, war, etc.).whiterock said:LOL I've been telling the Panicans they're missing it. And they did.muddybrazos said:
Trump just did a 90 day pause on tariffs on everyone but China and raised them 125%. Bitcoin immediately rips back into the 80s!! LFGlmao - Trump frontran his own announcement to pause tariffs by saying it's a "GREAT TIME TO BUY!" 3 hours before huge news for stocks hit.
— Coffeezilla (@coffeebreak_YT) April 9, 2025
this is levels of insanity we've never seen before. pic.twitter.com/efTsO4qlkA
Stand back & look at the tectonic plates here. Trump put tariffs on everyone and told all trade partners not to retaliate but to reach out to negotiate. 75+ nations did exactly what he asked. But China retaliated. Then Trump upped the ante to +100%. China responded yesterday with strong words: "If the U.S. insists on further escalating its economic and trade restrictions, China has the firm will and abundant means to take necessary countermeasures and fight to the end." Having baited China into the battle, he then announced a 90-day pause on everyone else and left China holding the bag. And there China sits in a battle it cannot win against the largest economy on earth, the second largest economy on earth, and dozens of other developed and developing countries.
A couple of days ago on this thread, I observed that Trump was attempting to make the world choose between economic alliance with China, or an economic alliance with the USA. That's where we are now. All of our trading partners that matter (a coalition of over 60% of world GDP) are choosing to deal with us. . And we will have as a precondition NO trans-shipments of Chinese goods thru their economies. China has an economy built to export; and just lost (or is at risk of losing) most of its export markets. It's like being dressed up for the ball when a game of touch football broke out.
China has an 17% share of US imports. So a 100% tariff on Chinese goods will have a macroeconomic impact of +2.55% on consumer prices. Easily offset by tax cuts..... We are a huge consumer market. China is not. We can get others to make what China makes. And it would be far better to diversify that production across 2-10 different countries rather than a single behemoth who is a near-peer rival. But nobody who chooses to disengage from the USA could possibly hope to find markets to replace us. We. Hold. All. The. Cards. China has very few.
So simple. Why did so few see it?
Gasparino: Let's be clear what happened, who capitulated here and why? You know, I don't want to say this because I am a patriot, I am an American, but it is The White House who capitulated based on everything I hear and all my sources pic.twitter.com/jR1YlMHxvP
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 9, 2025
New on @MSNBC: The White House will not release the list of 75 countries that have reached out on trade deals, despite requests from NBC News.
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) April 9, 2025
President Trump says he doesnβt blame Chinaβhe blames "stupid" former US presidents for the bad deals. pic.twitter.com/9eQ3fkpbvt
— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 9, 2025
LETβS MAKE A DEAL: President @realDonaldTrump touts his tariff strategy for pushing 75+ nations to the table, saying it takes βgutsβ to reverse decades of unfair trade hurting American workers. pic.twitter.com/O4cTICgQLa
— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 9, 2025
Maybe today's rebound will help these numbers in the next poll...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/where-trumps-approval-rating-president-stands-brand-new-national-poll
Where Trump's approval rating as president stands in a brand new national poll
Trump stands at 41% approval and 53% disapproval in a Quinnipiac University national survey conducted April 3-7 and released on Wednesday
Americans' concerns over the economy, and specifically inflation and tariffs, appear to be partially fueling the downward trend of President Donald Trump's approval ratings in a new national poll.
Trump stands at 41% approval and 53% disapproval in a Quinnipiac University survey conducted April 3-7 and released on Wednesday.
The president stood at 46%-43% approval/disapproval in a Quinnipiac poll conducted during his first week back in the White House, in late January. And Trump was slightly underwater at 45%-49% in mid-February. But the president's approval ratings are basically unchanged from Quinnipiac's previous survey, which was in the field early last month.
Most, but not all, of the most recent national public opinion surveys indicate Trump's approval ratings in negative territory, which is a slide from the president's poll position when he started his second tour of duty in the White House.
According to the new Quinnipiac poll, Trump stands at 40% approval and 55% disapproval on his handling of the economy. And asked how the president is dealing with the issue of trade, only 39% of respondents said they approved, while 55% gave Trump a thumbs down.
In the wake of Trump's blockbuster announcement last week to impose tariffs on dozens of countries across the globe, nearly three-quarters thought the tariffs would hurt the U.S. economy in the short term, while just over half said the move by the president would also hurt the nation's economy in the long term as well.
"A large majority of voters acknowledge the tariffs are delivering a bruising body blow to the economy in the near term. Will time reduce the pain? Some think it will, but a majority don't envision that happening," Quinnipiac University polling analyst Tim Malloy emphasized.
Given a list of four economic issues and asked which one worries voters the most right now, 47% of those questioned in the poll said the price of food and consumer goods, with one-in-five saying the cost of housing or rent, 17% saying the stock market, and 6% pointing to their job situation.
"In a rare moment of political unanimity, Democrats, Republicans and independents in equal numbers worry most about the prices of what they eat and what they buy," Malloy noted.
According to the poll, voters were divided over which party they think cares more about the needs and problems of people like them.
A third of respondents said the Democratic Party, with an equal amount (33%) saying the Republican Party. Thirty-one percent answered that neither party cared more.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/where-trumps-approval-rating-president-stands-brand-new-national-poll
Where Trump's approval rating as president stands in a brand new national poll
Trump stands at 41% approval and 53% disapproval in a Quinnipiac University national survey conducted April 3-7 and released on Wednesday
Americans' concerns over the economy, and specifically inflation and tariffs, appear to be partially fueling the downward trend of President Donald Trump's approval ratings in a new national poll.
Trump stands at 41% approval and 53% disapproval in a Quinnipiac University survey conducted April 3-7 and released on Wednesday.
The president stood at 46%-43% approval/disapproval in a Quinnipiac poll conducted during his first week back in the White House, in late January. And Trump was slightly underwater at 45%-49% in mid-February. But the president's approval ratings are basically unchanged from Quinnipiac's previous survey, which was in the field early last month.
Most, but not all, of the most recent national public opinion surveys indicate Trump's approval ratings in negative territory, which is a slide from the president's poll position when he started his second tour of duty in the White House.
According to the new Quinnipiac poll, Trump stands at 40% approval and 55% disapproval on his handling of the economy. And asked how the president is dealing with the issue of trade, only 39% of respondents said they approved, while 55% gave Trump a thumbs down.
In the wake of Trump's blockbuster announcement last week to impose tariffs on dozens of countries across the globe, nearly three-quarters thought the tariffs would hurt the U.S. economy in the short term, while just over half said the move by the president would also hurt the nation's economy in the long term as well.
"A large majority of voters acknowledge the tariffs are delivering a bruising body blow to the economy in the near term. Will time reduce the pain? Some think it will, but a majority don't envision that happening," Quinnipiac University polling analyst Tim Malloy emphasized.
Given a list of four economic issues and asked which one worries voters the most right now, 47% of those questioned in the poll said the price of food and consumer goods, with one-in-five saying the cost of housing or rent, 17% saying the stock market, and 6% pointing to their job situation.
"In a rare moment of political unanimity, Democrats, Republicans and independents in equal numbers worry most about the prices of what they eat and what they buy," Malloy noted.
According to the poll, voters were divided over which party they think cares more about the needs and problems of people like them.
A third of respondents said the Democratic Party, with an equal amount (33%) saying the Republican Party. Thirty-one percent answered that neither party cared more.
J.R. said:Need to see the deposit slips.whiterock said:the $4.5T in new investments announced thus far will more than offset the drop in consumption AND the budget cuts.boognish_bear said:Even with the tariffs fully in place, any recession might be shallow enough β and early enough in the electoral cycle β for the White House to decide it's worth just riding it out.https://t.co/38HSsTs6ZA
— Axios (@axios) April 9, 2025
Indeed. Most of that will happen, if for no other reason than the businesses involved cannot risk crossing the orange man bad.
Here's the problem he's working. No matter how much economists and investors bristle at the idea that trade policy always serves national security policyβ¦..it does.
We should've never let it get this point pic.twitter.com/r088HH5103
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 9, 2025
I and others have noted this previously.
A common critique is: why impose tariffs before building out the capacity to replace imports?
— Tanvi Ratna (@tanvi_ratna) April 3, 2025
But that assumes tariffs are the end goal. Theyβre not.
Theyβre the starting gunβa way to force movement both inside the U.S. and around the world.
It's a common critique because it is an accurate critique.whiterock said:
I and others have noted this previously.A common critique is: why impose tariffs before building out the capacity to replace imports?
— Tanvi Ratna (@tanvi_ratna) April 3, 2025
But that assumes tariffs are the end goal. Theyβre not.
Theyβre the starting gunβa way to force movement both inside the U.S. and around the world.
This was from yesterday
JUST IN: πΊπΈπ¨π³ US Dollar reaches its highest value against the Chinese Yuan since 2007.
— Whale Insider (@WhaleInsider) April 8, 2025
The stock market has felt like crypto the last few weeks
The Nasdaq just had its best day since 2001
— Morning Brew βοΈ (@MorningBrew) April 9, 2025
It's the index's 2nd best day in HISTORY pic.twitter.com/ONeps7Bo17
BREAKING: πΊπΈ $5.5 trillion added to the US stock market today. pic.twitter.com/OcE3uCUb53
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 9, 2025
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessentβs statement about Canada and Mexico also having their tariffs reduced to 10% has turned out not to be accurate.
— VisegrΓ‘d 24 (@visegrad24) April 9, 2025
Their tariffs will remain at 25% pic.twitter.com/OMkLDRUlTb
And tariffs are OFF, for now. pic.twitter.com/XGu43lXUPY
— Paul Leigh-Some Rascal on the Internet π§πΊπΈπΊπ¦ (@Pleightx) April 9, 2025
boognish_bear said:
The stock market has felt like crypto the last few weeksThe Nasdaq just had its best day since 2001
— Morning Brew βοΈ (@MorningBrew) April 9, 2025
It's the index's 2nd best day in HISTORY pic.twitter.com/ONeps7Bo17BREAKING: πΊπΈ $5.5 trillion added to the US stock market today. pic.twitter.com/OcE3uCUb53
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 9, 2025
So if China wants to liquidate USDβ¦β¦. Run the permutations.
There's no way they can punish anyone but themselves.
π¨ Canada agrees to negotiate new trade deal with the United States
— DOGE NEWS- Department of Government Efficiency (@realdogeusa) April 10, 2025
Facebook Groups at; Memories of: Dallas, Texas, Football in Texas, Texas Music, Through a Texas Lens and also Dallas History Guild. Come visit!
JUST IN: π»π³πΊπΈ Vietnam agrees to negotiate new trade deal with the United States.
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 10, 2025
JUST IN: π¨π³πΊπΈ China says it is willing to negotiate tariffs but will "fight to the end" if the US refuses to compromise.
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 10, 2025
Assassin said:π¨ Canada agrees to negotiate new trade deal with the United States
— DOGE NEWS- Department of Government Efficiency (@realdogeusa) April 10, 2025
Trump was just lucky.
With luck like that...KaiBear said:Trump was just lucky.Assassin said:π¨ Canada agrees to negotiate new trade deal with the United States
— DOGE NEWS- Department of Government Efficiency (@realdogeusa) April 10, 2025
Facebook Groups at; Memories of: Dallas, Texas, Football in Texas, Texas Music, Through a Texas Lens and also Dallas History Guild. Come visit!
JUST IN: πΊπΈ Donald Trump says "no other President would have done what I did... Somebody had to do it. It had to stop because it's not sustainable."
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 9, 2025
"Last year, China made $1 trillion off trade with the United States... Now I've reversed it." pic.twitter.com/Z5kW2fNyh9
JUST IN: π¨π³ Chinese yuan falls to lowest level in 18 years. pic.twitter.com/eqGmmjnRIo
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) April 10, 2025
Ain't workingScottS said:Waco1947 said:ScottS said:Waco1947 said:Trump Tariffs are poor way to get them. I agree more goods from Mexico and South America because labor is cheaper and supply physically closer to USRobert Wilson said:Agreed. And that doesn't mean we need to move everything to the western hemisphere. E.g. I'm good with t-shirts and tennis shoes being made in Vietnam, but critical goods / components (especially those that take a long time to spin up production) need to be within reach in the event of another major global disruption.Redbrickbear said:Robert Wilson said:And Mexico, Vietnam etc will benefit if China does not play ball.BearFan33 said:Deals with countries are starting and the info is getting out. Those in the front of the line (Israel, Vietnam, Japan, maybe UK) will get better deals than those at the end of the line (China).boognish_bear said:
I'm not sure why there is some bounce back happening⦠But it's a good thingBREAKING: Dow futures extend gains to over +1,000 points with the S&P 500 set to open over +2% higher. pic.twitter.com/iOcaEr74qm
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 8, 2025
We don't have to "onshore" all the manufacturing to get a benefit. Having certain manufacturing functions moved from China (bad trade partner and geopolitical enemy across an ocean) to Mexico (better trade and geopolitical partner, not across an ocean) is also a win.
Amen
People keep forgetting a big part of this new program is moving our very vulnerable trade lines from Asia (threat of China, Russia, Iran, etc) and moving them to the Western Hemisphere.....where the powerful USA armed forces can protect them better in the event of any major conflict or crisis.
What if in 1941 all our factories and manufacturing had been in Europe or Asia? The USA would have been in a really bad spot during WWII
I think the markets have settled into this. They've baked in some disruption but also realize Trump is essentially forcing everyone to the table, and that the stragglers will be few (maybe substantively just China).
1947! Is opposed to something Trump is doing. Shocking. Why are you for them?
To get the negotiations and remove the high tariffs imposed on US companies.
Waco1947 ,la