[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Nope. Binary condition - there are or there are not. Yesterday there were, today there are not. Tomorrow… ?

EDIT: Sure, there is a promise of more ignorance to come, but that is a given.

So a TV show nor a hockey or baseball game cannot be paused? Ignorance is a closed mind that cannot contemplate this may have a very beneficial result for everyone and was truly needed as indicated by numbers of elected officials over the past 25-30 years. But then again, what do all those people know?

[Rainger99]

Originally Posted by Whatnext

Those rates only kicked in if imports exceeded a certain amount.
To date, those amounts have not been exceeded, and no US exporter has paid them.

I believe that is true. But from what I have read, most American companies can’t afford to get into the business because as soon as they are successful, the tariffs kick in.

It takes a fair amount of work and money to set up a business to export goods to a foreign country.

I don’t think too many people are interested in selling a product to a country where as soon as you get the supply chain set up and are successful, the other country then puts enormous tariffs on additional products that you try to sell - effectively putting the American company out of business in Canada as soon as it hits the Canadian quota.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Equal trade requires equal resources, equal need, and equal ability to pay. When you are the largest economy in the world there isn’t much that will be equal. Unfortunately, that requires a level of understanding that is beyond “fairly simple”.

Disagree. Why should a country/company charge based on a sliding scale of "equity?" A company / country should charge based on cost of R&D, labor, production, marketing, shipping, taxes/levies, and then a "fair" amount of profit. IMHO, that's no greater than 10%, preferably 5%.

If a buyer cannot afford the producer's costs plus profit, then they should not or cannot purchase. The cost of the good should not be altered on a sliding scale based on a potential consumer's inequality of resources, need, ability to pay, etc.

Honestly, how does one quantify consumers' "Need?" Many needs are just wants. What about quantifying the consumer's ability to pay? No buyer says, "Sure, I can afford to pay triple for product X, hang on a second while I crack my wallet wide open."

What you are promoting is not a capitalist system of trade. I don't know what you are proposing beit some kind of socialism or communism, but it is certainly not capitalist.

I'm not a former free-trade minister or anything like that, so my opinion on the matter is just that.

[mraines]

Originally Posted by MicRoDrafting

UNFORTUNATELY
the Tariffs are NOT going
to be dropped anytime soon

you appear to be missing the
picture behind the purpose …

… to TANK the World Economy
and Create a Great Depression,

the likes we have
never seen before

Unfortunately, too many here have blinders on and cannot see this.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

...

What you are promoting is not a capitalist system of trade. I don't know what you are proposing beit some kind of socialism or communism, but it is certainly not capitalist.

I'm not a former free-trade minister or anything like that, so my opinion on the matter is just that.

Not proposing anything of the sort.

I was trying to state that it is unrealistic to expect a trade balance between the US and nearly any other country. The US has a lot more people than say Madagascar. Even if the per capita trade balance was equal, the US would have a trade deficit simply due to our larger population. There is nothing that Madagascar can do to change that regardless of how high the tariffs are set.

We can set truly reciprocal tariffs to get to a level playing field. That level might be 0% tariff or it might be 20% tariff but it can be the same. What is not possible is to set a tariff high enough to force a small country to purchase as much from the US as we purchase from them.

What higher tariffs can do is increase the price to the US consumer until they can no longer afford the imported product. An increase in prices is the definition of inflation. Driving inflation up and raising the price of a product until it is out of reach of the consumer can't be good for America.

[rsmurano]

1 day means nothing. We need substantial changes in place to see any pivot. We are not there yet

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I believe that is true. But from what I have read, most American companies can’t afford to get into the business because as soon as they are successful, the tariffs kick in.

It takes a fair amount of work and money to set up a business to export goods to a foreign country.

I don’t think too many people are interested in selling a product to a country where as soon as you get the supply chain set up and are successful, the other country then puts enormous tariffs on additional products that you try to sell - effectively putting the American company out of business in Canada as soon as it hits the Canadian quota.

I do think you nailed it!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Aces4

It's fairly simple and I'll spell it out for those that don't understand. The process is used to create equal trade with other countries whether it be their tariffs, VATS, excise fees, or non-tariff barriers. Obviously, it will fluctuate depending on the country with whom they are speaking. As reiterated today, this is to make all countries successful.. including us.

Actually, the plan is to make America weaker and create chaos. This can be proven by the really BAD action of the bond market, where among other things, Japan sold all or a large quantity of US bonds. Other countries also did the same. This shows a worldwide doubt in the direction that the US is going.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Aces4

And that's why each case will be negotiated separately for those who have not been paying attention.

Cause a problem and then take CREDIT for fixing it. You can't fool ALL the people ALL the time.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I believe that is true. But from what I have read, most American companies can’t afford to get into the business because as soon as they are successful, the tariffs kick in.

It takes a fair amount of work and money to set up a business to export goods to a foreign country.

I don’t think too many people are interested in selling a product to a country where as soon as you get the supply chain set up and are successful, the other country then puts enormous tariffs on additional products that you try to sell - effectively putting the American company out of business in Canada as soon as it hits the Canadian quota.

Canada is our friend and BEST trading partner. Any MINOR imperfections in trade can be BEST taken to International Court for resolution. Disrupting world trade (and making enemies out of friends) just BLOWS BACK on the US's reputation as a STABLE trading partner. Already we have alienated Japan enough to pull their money out of US bonds. That scare CAUSED the US to yesterday do an only PARTIAL pull back in Tariffs. The US is causing World Economic chaos. I wonder which country benefits most from all that?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by rsmurano

1 day means nothing. We need substantial changes in place to see any pivot. We are not there yet

As a general principle that is true, but the market direction now is very much DOWNWARD.

[daniel200]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Pause................not Reversal.................BIG difference.

You are funny.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Nope. Binary condition - there are or there are not. Yesterday there were, today there are not. Tomorrow… ?

EDIT: Sure, there is a promise of more ignorance to come, but that is a given.

"Binary condition - there are or there are not."...............well if this is your belief, then there never were any so definitely there was no reversal.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by daniel200

You are funny.

Thank you.

[JohnN]

So what I've learned from this thread:
Don't listen to Rainger, don't listen to anyone,
we really don't know (but it looks bad to me)