The Real timschochet

Well anyhow I’m sure China will respond well to this threat right? Of course they’ll surrender…

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2025/04/07/stocks-trump-trade-war/82968270007/ Trump warns China: if they don’t remove their new 34% tariff by April 9, we will impose am additional 50% tariff on China.

And here is the rub: you and nearly everyone else I have read that have defended these tariffs, continue to assert that they are a means for the United States to negotiate better trade terms for ourselves. But Trump himself insists that they are an end to themselves designed to bring back manufacturing to America. And he has made this same argument for the past 40 years; it’s by far the most consistent issue he’s ever had. I hope you’re right. I suspect now that you aren’t. We’ll know relatively soon.

Logically I agree with you. But again we have the fact that Vietnam’s offer to remove all tariffs was rejected, and we have the second fact that Trump says the tariffs are here to stay until all “trade imbalances” are removed. Those two facts indicate to me that Trump is being illogical. Again, perhaps he will change his mind. I hope he does. But I wouldn’t be willing to guarantee that, would you?

I based that post on Trump’s statements on this subject made yesterday to reporters. What is the nature of your disagreement?

It’s only good news if the U.S. accepts the offer. So far we haven’t. Vietnam made a similar offer and we rejected it. Trump said yesterday that other nations offering to remove tariffs would not be enough; they have to do away with the “trade imbalance”.

Let’s take a look at this assertion: https://www.newsweek.com/vietnam-offer-remove-tariff-trump-trade-peter-navarro-2056149 Vietnam offered to remove all tariffs. The White House rejected it. Trump says he wants an end to the “trade imbalance.” But Vietnam, being a country with nowhere near the economy of the USA, cannot possibly have even trade with the USA. So the demand makes no sense. Which means there can be no deal and in Trump’s mind this is not about reciprocal tariffs. Now he could change his mind, but unless he does there aren’t going to be these deals you’re talking about. The tariffs are here to stay. Trump doesn’t want a deal with Vietnam, he wants Americans to buy products made in America instead of those imported from Vietnam.

What I wrote is that almost all economists believe these tariffs are a disaster. Perhaps that is absolutist, but the fact is I haven’t been able to find one who thinks otherwise. Now I have found plenty of political thinkers, some quite smart, who have defended these tariffs or who believe they will work for various reasons. (And some have made compelling arguments based on one principle- that principle being that Trump’s ultimate goal is to get other nations to lower their tariffs. If that is truly his goal, then perhaps this will work. But if it isn’t his goal then these arguments fail.) But no economists. At least not one that I can find. Is that nuanced enough for you?

Beat me to it.

Can you find an economist, independent of the White House, who approves of these tariffs? I can’t.

I agree that people shouldn’t sell. I agree that many who do are panicking. (Though others are simply making a different calculation.) It’s your assertion that it’s mostly liberals because they’re emotional- that’s the ridiculous part. If you truly believe this there is a deep flaw in your thinking, though it does explain some of your other beliefs.

You do realize that almost every conservative economist believes these tariffs are a total disaster right? And most of the Republican politicians that are willing to be honest do as well? Are they all liberal now too? Never mind, why do I bother?

You’re really arguing here that most of the folks selling their stocks are liberal? Seriously? What about all of the international stock exchanges that are tanking this morning? Are they all liberal too? Some of the nonsense I read here is just amazing.

Look I’m glad these guys are finally on board but where were they during the campaign? Trump said he was going to do this. They didn’t believe him.

To be honest, while I predicted these tariffs would be catastrophic for the economy, I thought that would be long term and take many months to show. I didn’t expect things to go south so quickly. This is damn scary.

That never happened.

Nope. It was the MAGA crowd.

Nope.

I had nothing to do with the Political forum being shut down. I wasn’t even around when it happened. It’s bullsh!t. I think it mostly happened because conservative posters reported everybody. It was pretty rare of me to report anyone; you had to be really offensive. But the Trumpers did it all the time. On purpose I think to get the whole thing shut down. There were a few libs too but it was 90% comservatives who were the problem.

No Ive watched them all. Please show me where in those videos they propose world wide across the board tariffs on all nations.

Lots of questions. I will try to answer you: 1. Kamala specifically warned us what would happen with these tariffs. She wasn’t the only one and her arguments were certainly not original. But she was right. 2. As a principle I am fine with short term pain for long term gain. However I dispute the fact that these tariffs will bring us long term gain. In this instance it’s short term pain for long term pain. I don’t see an upside. 3. Sometimes. I was pretty critical of Biden prolonging Trump’s previous tariffs. Overall I supported his economic policies. But it’s dumb of you to try and catch me in a double standard because even if I was guilty of that so what? It still wouldn’t make me wrong in this instance. If you believe these tariffs are a good thing then make your case rather than attack my consistency. 4. Yes Trump was a threat to democracy IMO. No the selection of Kamala as nominee was not a threat to democracy IMO. Neither of these issues have relevancy to the tariffs (well the first one might.) 5. I typically always shrug off the stock market no matter who is President. This is the first exception I can recall because the cause and effect is so direct. Never seen a case like that before. 6. Plenty. From my standpoint almost every aspect of Trump’s first few months have been a disaster. But nothing as bad as these tariffs.

Just stop with this. None of them ever advocated for across the board tariffs on all countries. It’s nonsense. Nobody has ever advocated for that in modern times. Stop trying to compare what Trump just did to anyone else. You’re being deliberately dishonest.

Well I don’t. But again, it doesn’t matter. Even if you’re right, we have one President who has chosen a disastrous path for this country and one candidate who would not have chosen that path. By default, with every other consideration put aside, that makes the candidate who would not have chosen that path preferable to the guy who did. And this is not a new argument for me; I made it long before the election.

Jerry I sure hope you’re right. If he backs off I will happily tell you that you were. ETA: that said there is already significant damage from these decisions that will be painful and take a long time to recover from.

Yes oh really. Once again you make the error, as so many people do, of conflating Trump’s current across the board tariffs (which you also swore he would never do) with his previous, limited tariffs. They’re not in the least comparable. Maybe Kamala would have kept the previous tariffs against China in place, as Biden did. Maybe she would have gotten rid of them. She was ambivalent about it. But we know for sure she would have never imposed across the board tariffs around the world and she spoke out very clearly against Trump’s plan: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna172627