Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes - another thrilling installment in this epic tale with twists and turns... What happens next and what happens to any agreements that have been made on the back of his threatened tariffs?" It means a few things.. but a few things that need to be said first Normally the powers of tariff is not one the president has! The power of tariffs is held by the house…. However under the “international emergency powers act” (IEPA) the president can hold it if a national emergency is called or if a tariff is done on grounds of national security So… what happens last night is that about a dozen states had taken the president to court stating he was overstepping and abusing this power It went to the federal court of international trade which happens to be based in New York (you are going to hear the words judge shopping to attack this.. not true) And it was a 3 judge panel (it just happened to be 1 judge appointed by Reagan, 1 judge appointed by Obama and crucially 1 judge appointed by Trump in the first term) Anyway judges ruled 3-0 that Trump is overstepping this power and a lot of his reasoning for calling them national emergencies was incredibly weak So the ruling applies to everything… the 10% global tariff plus the additional ones announced on liberation day, and all the specific ones on Canada Mexico and China.. and all of the ones threatened on individual countries! The only ones that stay are the 25% tariffs on steel and aluminium (which is was agreed these fall under national security) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes, that's tricky because it could potentially void the trade deal with the UK (and others). Messy and uncertainty for businesses which is what they hate. Another Trump mess." Sort off….. but actually it could make what the uk agreed to a very smart move.. the 3 big carve out the uk got were on steel, aluminium and cars… those in theory would all still be lower even if everything else was removed The us side are going to absolutely want to renegotiate it now | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes - another thrilling installment in this epic tale with twists and turns... What happens next and what happens to any agreements that have been made on the back of his threatened tariffs?" Basically Trump will try to get a stay on this ruling from SCOTUS to prevent it from being applied at the moment (I don’t know if they will because it’s such a specialised court and it was a panel rather than a single judge) and then like everything else it will end up being appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes, that's tricky because it could potentially void the trade deal with the UK (and others). Messy and uncertainty for businesses which is what they hate. Another Trump mess." Was thinking the same. On the positive the opened markets have all rallied, see what uk indices do this morning. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are the American people really going to be willing to put up with 4 more years of the soap opera that is "Trump" (The them tune to the 80's comedy show SOAP playing in my head) " The whole trump argument is basically going to be a 4 year vengeance tour to see how far they can push the absolute power of the president | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are the American people really going to be willing to put up with 4 more years of the soap opera that is "Trump" (The them tune to the 80's comedy show SOAP playing in my head) The whole trump argument is basically going to be a 4 year vengeance tour to see how far they can push the absolute power of the president " I’ve enjoyed reading your insight into these things (was gonna PM to say the same) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are the American people really going to be willing to put up with 4 more years of the soap opera that is "Trump" (The them tune to the 80's comedy show SOAP playing in my head) The whole trump argument is basically going to be a 4 year vengeance tour to see how far they can push the absolute power of the president " But Fabio at least it will be the best ever, the most biggest economy since time began.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m glad the US courts blocked the tariffs, it cuts through all the recent hysteria about Trump being a dictator or how he will override the constitution to serve a third term. This is democracy in action. The US system has checks and balances that prevent the misuse of power... Although the outgoing POTUS and the pardon power remain in place "It's interesting to compare this process with Starmer's decision to give away the Chagos Island and gift billions to Mauritius. A huge and expensive decision by a Govt that won just over 30% of the vote with hardly any proper scrutiny or consultation, one legal challenge soon dismissed. Shows how weak our democracy is compared to the US. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m glad the US courts blocked the tariffs, it cuts through all the recent hysteria about Trump being a dictator or how he will override the constitution to serve a third term. This is democracy in action. The US system has checks and balances that prevent the misuse of power... Although the outgoing POTUS and the pardon power remain in place
It's interesting to compare this process with Starmer's decision to give away the Chagos Island and gift billions to Mauritius. A huge and expensive decision by a Govt that won just over 30% of the vote with hardly any proper scrutiny or consultation, one legal challenge soon dismissed. Shows how weak our democracy is compared to the US."It was a huge decision to leave the EU with around 38% of the voting public agreeing to do. The Labour party is in government and was voted in by the general public - like it or not, they have our mandate to make these decisions. Democracy mate! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m glad the US courts blocked the tariffs, it cuts through all the recent hysteria about Trump being a dictator or how he will override the constitution to serve a third term. This is democracy in action. The US system has checks and balances that prevent the misuse of power... Although the outgoing POTUS and the pardon power remain in place
It's interesting to compare this process with Starmer's decision to give away the Chagos Island and gift billions to Mauritius. A huge and expensive decision by a Govt that won just over 30% of the vote with hardly any proper scrutiny or consultation, one legal challenge soon dismissed. Shows how weak our democracy is compared to the US.
Trump is in government and was voted in by the general public - like it or not, he has a mandate to make these decisions.
Democracy mate!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m glad the US courts blocked the tariffs, it cuts through all the recent hysteria about Trump being a dictator or how he will override the constitution to serve a third term. This is democracy in action. The US system has checks and balances that prevent the misuse of power... Although the outgoing POTUS and the pardon power remain in place
It's interesting to compare this process with Starmer's decision to give away the Chagos Island and gift billions to Mauritius. A huge and expensive decision by a Govt that won just over 30% of the vote with hardly any proper scrutiny or consultation, one legal challenge soon dismissed. Shows how weak our democracy is compared to the US.
Trump is in government and was voted in by the general public - like it or not, he has a mandate to make these decisions.
Democracy mate!
"But it turns out that he doesn't... Law of the land Mate! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? " Is there a point to your post? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? Is there a point to your post?" Your OP suggests that a major event has taken place. The performance of the markets today would suggest otherwise. Main US indices up .3%. Should we not be seeing bigger rises on the back of such major news? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? Is there a point to your post? Your OP suggests that a major event has taken place. The performance of the markets today would suggest otherwise. Main US indices up .3%. Should we not be seeing bigger rises on the back of such major news?" What it means is that he will need to go through the proper processes to implement a change in tarrifs… the shock and awe of the liberation day/reciprocal tariffs approach is dead! They are not saying he doesn’t have a few emergency tariff tools, what they are saying is that he can’t use the term “national emergency” to then generally threaten For example the tariffs on steel and aluminium stay because those were applied under section 230, which is national security (basically same sort of reasons the British government took over British steel) The tariffs on auto car parts stay because those were done under section 301 an offshoot of the USMCA agreement There is other sector stuff under section 230 which he could pass… pharma is likely next, timber is probably coming What the have said is that you cannot use the international economic emergency powers act as a tool for long term policy! So he threatened Nike with a 500% tariff if they didn’t move production… he can’t do that!!! Last couple of days he threatened Apple with a 25% tarrifs on iPhones if they didn’t move manufacturing back to the us… he can’t do that! They used the excuse “National emergency” because of the imbalance of the trade deficit to try and put on the 10% global tariff plus the higher reciprocal tariffs, but the 10% global tariff doesn’t differentiate between those countries that you have a surplus with and those who you have a deficit with That where he seriously overstepped General power to determine tariffs is held by congress, not the executive If he wants the 10% global tariff he can try and get congress to pass it… it would fail, but he could try | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? Is there a point to your post? Your OP suggests that a major event has taken place. The performance of the markets today would suggest otherwise. Main US indices up .3%. Should we not be seeing bigger rises on the back of such major news? What it means is that he will need to go through the proper processes to implement a change in tarrifs… the shock and awe of the liberation day/reciprocal tariffs approach is dead! They are not saying he doesn’t have a few emergency tariff tools, what they are saying is that he can’t use the term “national emergency” to then generally threaten For example the tariffs on steel and aluminium stay because those were applied under section 230, which is national security (basically same sort of reasons the British government took over British steel) The tariffs on auto car parts stay because those were done under section 301 an offshoot of the USMCA agreement There is other sector stuff under section 230 which he could pass… pharma is likely next, timber is probably coming What the have said is that you cannot use the international economic emergency powers act as a tool for long term policy! So he threatened Nike with a 500% tariff if they didn’t move production… he can’t do that!!! Last couple of days he threatened Apple with a 25% tarrifs on iPhones if they didn’t move manufacturing back to the us… he can’t do that! They used the excuse “National emergency” because of the imbalance of the trade deficit to try and put on the 10% global tariff plus the higher reciprocal tariffs, but the 10% global tariff doesn’t differentiate between those countries that you have a surplus with and those who you have a deficit with That where he seriously overstepped General power to determine tariffs is held by congress, not the executive If he wants the 10% global tariff he can try and get congress to pass it… it would fail, but he could try " Except the tariffs are staying in place pending an appeal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just do it and later on we can backtrack or blame the judges for applying the law as per the constitution.." That's exactly what he planned for. If it had worked, he would have taken the credit. Since it hasn't, he lets the judiciary reverse the changes, and then he can blame "the liberal left" for the failure. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just do it and later on we can backtrack or blame the judges for applying the law as per the constitution.. That's exactly what he planned for. If it had worked, he would have taken the credit. Since it hasn't, he lets the judiciary reverse the changes, and then he can blame "the liberal left" for the failure." His base will swallow that but as Fabio said on here he appointed one judge, one was an Obama pick and the other Bush's choice? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? Is there a point to your post? Your OP suggests that a major event has taken place. The performance of the markets today would suggest otherwise. Main US indices up .3%. Should we not be seeing bigger rises on the back of such major news? What it means is that he will need to go through the proper processes to implement a change in tarrifs… the shock and awe of the liberation day/reciprocal tariffs approach is dead! They are not saying he doesn’t have a few emergency tariff tools, what they are saying is that he can’t use the term “national emergency” to then generally threaten For example the tariffs on steel and aluminium stay because those were applied under section 230, which is national security (basically same sort of reasons the British government took over British steel) The tariffs on auto car parts stay because those were done under section 301 an offshoot of the USMCA agreement There is other sector stuff under section 230 which he could pass… pharma is likely next, timber is probably coming What the have said is that you cannot use the international economic emergency powers act as a tool for long term policy! So he threatened Nike with a 500% tariff if they didn’t move production… he can’t do that!!! Last couple of days he threatened Apple with a 25% tarrifs on iPhones if they didn’t move manufacturing back to the us… he can’t do that! They used the excuse “National emergency” because of the imbalance of the trade deficit to try and put on the 10% global tariff plus the higher reciprocal tariffs, but the 10% global tariff doesn’t differentiate between those countries that you have a surplus with and those who you have a deficit with That where he seriously overstepped General power to determine tariffs is held by congress, not the executive If he wants the 10% global tariff he can try and get congress to pass it… it would fail, but he could try " Appeals court puts tariffs decision on hold. Are you sure about all that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Court decision is a game changer. Stock market movements so far today: FTSE 100: -0.04% FTSE 250: +0.27% Dow Jones: +0.01% Nasdaq: +0.81% Dax: -0.31% Cac: -0.02% Who knew some unknown court could have such a massive impact? Is there a point to your post? Your OP suggests that a major event has taken place. The performance of the markets today would suggest otherwise. Main US indices up .3%. Should we not be seeing bigger rises on the back of such major news? What it means is that he will need to go through the proper processes to implement a change in tarrifs… the shock and awe of the liberation day/reciprocal tariffs approach is dead! They are not saying he doesn’t have a few emergency tariff tools, what they are saying is that he can’t use the term “national emergency” to then generally threaten For example the tariffs on steel and aluminium stay because those were applied under section 230, which is national security (basically same sort of reasons the British government took over British steel) The tariffs on auto car parts stay because those were done under section 301 an offshoot of the USMCA agreement There is other sector stuff under section 230 which he could pass… pharma is likely next, timber is probably coming What the have said is that you cannot use the international economic emergency powers act as a tool for long term policy! So he threatened Nike with a 500% tariff if they didn’t move production… he can’t do that!!! Last couple of days he threatened Apple with a 25% tarrifs on iPhones if they didn’t move manufacturing back to the us… he can’t do that! They used the excuse “National emergency” because of the imbalance of the trade deficit to try and put on the 10% global tariff plus the higher reciprocal tariffs, but the 10% global tariff doesn’t differentiate between those countries that you have a surplus with and those who you have a deficit with That where he seriously overstepped General power to determine tariffs is held by congress, not the executive If he wants the 10% global tariff he can try and get congress to pass it… it would fail, but he could try Appeals court puts tariffs decision on hold. Are you sure about all that?" They put a stay on the decision being applied straight away as in the decision it gave the government 10 days to also work out how to repay already collected tariff money The appeal to the 2nd federal circuit, that should come back fairly quickly as what they a doing is not re litigating the case as such, but if there is any serious fundamental incorrect way the law has been applied…. That’s where the 49 page summary is brilliant because it broke it all down in simple English Again at this stage it will be a 3 judge panel, if again it’s 3-0 .. they could judge it doesn’t go any further and lift the stay or they could allow another appeal to SCOTUS (who are not obligated to take it if they don’t want to) Yep, government were always going to appeal whatever the decision was (although the decision went a lot further than was ask | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are the American people really going to be willing to put up with 4 more years of the soap opera that is "Trump" (The them tune to the 80's comedy show SOAP playing in my head) " Get away from the TDS deep breath, think about the popular vote that put President Trump in office. President Trump is fulfilling the promises he made. No drama there, however when the left starts intervening and tries to rule from the bench, then we have left wing drama. My advice, don't worry about, the whole of the UK has plenty more drama, and is in a lot worse shape. Worry about getting your left wing out and making the UK the UK again! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are the American people really going to be willing to put up with 4 more years of the soap opera that is "Trump" (The them tune to the 80's comedy show SOAP playing in my head) The whole trump argument is basically going to be a 4 year vengeance tour to see how far they can push the absolute power of the president " Nope, just doing a reset of the country, as the American people wanted. Upholding justice, inflicting justice where required, cleaning up the confusion on what a woman and a man is. Getting indoctrination centers under control, such as Harvard, and Columbia. To just name a couple. Worry about the UK, it affects your life a lot more than the US and definitely is in a worse state and falling each day new illegal immigrants show up The US will be fine | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Nope, just doing a reset of the country, as the American people wanted. Upholding justice, inflicting justice where required, cleaning up the confusion on what a woman and a man is. Getting indoctrination centers under control, such as Harvard, and Columbia. " I so wondered when Trump vs Harvard would turn up here…. Rumour has it that Trump jr was rejected by Harvard, Columbia and Stanford hence why he is on the revenge tour (and trump finally got into NYU) Columbia caving to the demands of trump did surprise me, but their endowment is only 2bn …. Harvard endowment is way more than that and are the one academic institution that can fight the government all the way and money be no object (and have most of the good lawyers available) The way that Trump is trying to twist the screw is making me laugh…. We need a list of your international students… You would already have that list as you would have needed to grant them visas! We are going to take action because you use DEI to discriminate! Actually, Harvard is the one school you can’t levy that at, because if you are good enough to get in ,they are so rich they will give you a scholarship amount enough that you can go! They don’t need DEI to fiddle any figures! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This legal dispute is just one small aspect of a wider constitutional battle that's been going on since the Reagan era. This battle is about the notion of "unitary executive theory" and it mostly rests on arguments about how to interpret Article Two of the US Constitution. The key argument is about what the extent of the vesting clause in Section 1 is... "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. " Section 2 describes these powers as... "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." Section 4 of Article 2 also places limits on the executive... "The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." However, since the Reagan administration conservative judges along with the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society have pushed to interpret the Constitution as giving ever more power to the President. This culminated in 2019 when Trump declared "I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.". " Basically all you needed to say is that tariffs come under the power of the purse! And the power of the purse is held by congress… not the executive branch! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically all you needed to say is that tariffs come under the power of the purse! And the power of the purse is held by congress… not the executive branch! " I was trying to say that tariffs are only a tiny part of the agenda being pursued by Trump and his cronies. You mentioned Harvard but again his attack on education is just another aspect of a wider plan. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically all you needed to say is that tariffs come under the power of the purse! And the power of the purse is held by congress… not the executive branch! I was trying to say that tariffs are only a tiny part of the agenda being pursued by Trump and his cronies. You mentioned Harvard but again his attack on education is just another aspect of a wider plan. " Absolutely… it’s like when he went after the law firms that either went after people post January 6th, or are representing democrats in his revenge tour! Some caved to his demands!… 3 firms decided to fight it saying it was directed to affect their business, scare potential clients away and make life harder to defend clients they already have! Went all the way up to SCOTUS.. the firms got a 7-2 decision in their favour! He is going after Harvard because if you can get the institution to cave, then everyone else then will fall into line… DOJ and DHS have explicitly said that… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically all you needed to say is that tariffs come under the power of the purse! And the power of the purse is held by congress… not the executive branch! I was trying to say that tariffs are only a tiny part of the agenda being pursued by Trump and his cronies. You mentioned Harvard but again his attack on education is just another aspect of a wider plan. Absolutely… it’s like when he went after the law firms that either went after people post January 6th, or are representing democrats in his revenge tour! Some caved to his demands!… 3 firms decided to fight it saying it was directed to affect their business, scare potential clients away and make life harder to defend clients they already have! Went all the way up to SCOTUS.. the firms got a 7-2 decision in their favour! He is going after Harvard because if you can get the institution to cave, then everyone else then will fall into line… DOJ and DHS have explicitly said that… " It’s not really surprising that the government is taking these “universities” on. They have become hotbeds of antisemitism and radicalisation where the vast majority of students who simply wish to go about their business quietly and get an education continually find their studies being disrupted by extremists. Unfortunately they have brought the education system into disrepute. Harvard regularly comes towards the bottom of any university free speech index. I imagine an awful lot of otherwise intelligent and educated students must be wondering whether it’s worth their bother getting into massive debt just to spend years surrounded by disruptive morons (and that’s just the lecturers). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Trump's new 50% import tax on steel and aluminium will come into effect on Wednesday. It will replace the 25% import tax that the US president announced earlier this year. What's all this about? He changes his mind as often as I change my socks but the impact on industry, the economy and individuals is much more hard hitting! Will he be allowed to do this or will the courts stop him? With Trump it is one thing after the other - does he do this intentionally to destabilise the global economy or is he simply a buffoon who thinks he can do whatever he wants and has absolute power? " On steel and aluminium tariffs he won’t be stopped… these ones are done under section 301 (national security) Best comparison I can give is how the uk government have taken over British steel for national security reasons … particularly makers of the high grade steel needed for example the us defence industry There is an interesting “however” and it’s one of those things that comes under “the law of unintended consequences “ We saw what happened last time because Trump did exactly the same thing with steel in his first term So… whilst the tariffs certainly saved steelworkers jobs, which to give Trump credit he said would do during his first campaign, the tariff was set at a level where it protected American high grade steel at home, but make lower grade steel from overseas so expensive it was cheaper to buy American! Brilliant you say!! Job done! Tariff’s worked! Not quite! Because the difference between American steel and overseas steel was so large, American steel producers put up prices knowing this was pure profit and they could sell below what importers could! So whilst it protected high grade steel… the price for everyday steel went up So for example…. Any us car parts prices went up, the price of us auto manufactured cars went up! The interesting thing is they did a study into the effects of steel tariffs.. so whilst it saved steelworkers jobs , the loss of jobs in other sectors meant it became a net deficit for the us economy Which is why in the end Biden removed them… unintended consequences | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Trump's new 50% import tax on steel and aluminium will come into effect on Wednesday. It will replace the 25% import tax that the US president announced earlier this year. What's all this about? He changes his mind as often as I change my socks but the impact on industry, the economy and individuals is much more hard hitting! Will he be allowed to do this or will the courts stop him? With Trump it is one thing after the other - does he do this intentionally to destabilise the global economy or is he simply a buffoon who thinks he can do whatever he wants and has absolute power? On steel and aluminium tariffs he won’t be stopped… these ones are done under section 301 (national security) Best comparison I can give is how the uk government have taken over British steel for national security reasons … particularly makers of the high grade steel needed for example the us defence industry There is an interesting “however” and it’s one of those things that comes under “the law of unintended consequences “ We saw what happened last time because Trump did exactly the same thing with steel in his first term So… whilst the tariffs certainly saved steelworkers jobs, which to give Trump credit he said would do during his first campaign, the tariff was set at a level where it protected American high grade steel at home, but make lower grade steel from overseas so expensive it was cheaper to buy American! Brilliant you say!! Job done! Tariff’s worked! Not quite! Because the difference between American steel and overseas steel was so large, American steel producers put up prices knowing this was pure profit and they could sell below what importers could! So whilst it protected high grade steel… the price for everyday steel went up So for example…. Any us car parts prices went up, the price of us auto manufactured cars went up! The interesting thing is they did a study into the effects of steel tariffs.. so whilst it saved steelworkers jobs , the loss of jobs in other sectors meant it became a net deficit for the us economy Which is why in the end Biden removed them… unintended consequences " Going to slightly correct myself… steel and aluminium tariffs come under section 230, not 301 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Trump's new 50% import tax on steel and aluminium will come into effect on Wednesday. It will replace the 25% import tax that the US president announced earlier this year. What's all this about? He changes his mind as often as I change my socks but the impact on industry, the economy and individuals is much more hard hitting! Will he be allowed to do this or will the courts stop him? With Trump it is one thing after the other - does he do this intentionally to destabilise the global economy or is he simply a buffoon who thinks he can do whatever he wants and has absolute power? On steel and aluminium tariffs he won’t be stopped… these ones are done under section 301 (national security) Best comparison I can give is how the uk government have taken over British steel for national security reasons … particularly makers of the high grade steel needed for example the us defence industry There is an interesting “however” and it’s one of those things that comes under “the law of unintended consequences “ We saw what happened last time because Trump did exactly the same thing with steel in his first term So… whilst the tariffs certainly saved steelworkers jobs, which to give Trump credit he said would do during his first campaign, the tariff was set at a level where it protected American high grade steel at home, but make lower grade steel from overseas so expensive it was cheaper to buy American! Brilliant you say!! Job done! Tariff’s worked! Not quite! Because the difference between American steel and overseas steel was so large, American steel producers put up prices knowing this was pure profit and they could sell below what importers could! So whilst it protected high grade steel… the price for everyday steel went up So for example…. Any us car parts prices went up, the price of us auto manufactured cars went up! The interesting thing is they did a study into the effects of steel tariffs.. so whilst it saved steelworkers jobs , the loss of jobs in other sectors meant it became a net deficit for the us economy Which is why in the end Biden removed them… unintended consequences Going to slightly correct myself… steel and aluminium tariffs come under section 230, not 301" Excellent explanation | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
