Trade war back again?

That is because you put yourself above your country. I thought democrats love taxes. Apparently not when created by Trump.

 

That never works. Too many cooks spoil the broth. This is an American problem and will take an American solution. Other countriest can make their own deals with china.

 

Exactly right Joe. What good is a multi-lateral deal like NAFTA when Canada is a first world trading partner and Mexico is a third world trading partner. They can't be treated in the same manner. Bi-lateral trade deals are much better. This problem with multi-literalism also points up why creating the World Trade Organization was such a huge mistake.

 

Bush did what bush usually did. He caved under pressure and didn't give the tarrifs time to work. The steel industry is something we can't let disappear in this country. We can never let ourselves become completely dependent on foreign steel. It's a national security issue and if we have to pay a bit more for steel so be it.

 

Lol ... but "Mr. Dealmaker" is unfortunately not in the position to make demands in negotiations!

Neither in the Iran deal ... nor in the punitive tariffs, nor in NATO, not in China, not in Syria, not in Russia ...

Face realities:

1. Bush has unilaterally terminated the Iran deal and demands that everyone else do that ... and if not, he punishes the companies (from Europe) who are holding the deal.

2. Trump levies punitive tariffs on steel and aluminum because he is supposed to protect the 140,000 steel workers in foundries ... but endangers the 6,500,000 workers in the steel processing industry!
Trump announces he does not want to see any German Mercedes cars on 5th Avenue anymore ... but ignores the fact that Mercedes and everyone else in the US have factories and work directly to 35,000 Americans and indirectly through subcontractors to 150,000 people in the US !
Trump and his fans complain that 10% oo US cars are due in the EU, but only 2.5% in the US on EU cars ... but does not mention that it's the other way round for pickups: On US pick Ups we pay 14,5% ... but in the US are 28% on EU Pick Ups!

Oh yes ... how was it with fair competition, etc.?
The USAF was looking for a successor to the fleet of tankers because they are getting too old. In the competition: A model of Airbus and a model of Boing! Who won the competition on a purely technical basis, according to the decision of the experts? Airbus! Who knocked that over and the plane had to be taken from Boing? The US Senate! Very fair ...

3. Trump claims that the US pays too much in NATO because most do not fulfill their obligations and invest at least 2% of their income in defense.
It is true that most do not do that ... in my country it is only 1.3% ... and the requirement to meet the 2% is justified.
But ... White House wise guy asserts it costs the US taxpayer a lot of money ... bullshit, not 1 cent!
Neither does the US have more work to do because they have to take on other people's obligations for non-performance, and certainly not pay the US money to pay the others for their defense.
Like ... Trump, of course, counts every penny of US defense spending here ... that includes things that have nothing to do with NATO. Or since when does the cost of US stationing in Japan and South Korea ... include both NATO members, eh?

 

He did not terminate it. He withdrew from it.

I wasn't aware that any metal tariffs had been enacted. I assumed the threat was a negotiating strategy. When were they enacted?

That must be reason we don't see European trucks on our highways. We see plenty of Japanese ones, though.

No fairness involved. America first.

It causes us money that it shouldn't cause because we have take a greater share of NATO's activities than if the other members had a full military complement.

Good point we should withdraw our military from all the EU countries. Poland wants the U.S. military and is willing to pay for it.

How do NATO members pay for U.S. troops in Asia?

 

nope, how does pay more put myself above country? How does tariff help when every economist say the opposite. If GM has better quality passenger car than Japanese car or better value, ill buy a GM. As soon as we purchase something base on our national identity, that market is ruined, company stop innovate, they become less competitive because they know they have customer anyway.

 

Nonsense ... you have withdrawn ... with idiotic reasons that have nothing to do with the deal + even more idiotic false claims ... and you demand that all others do the same and announcing further new sanctions to come aside the old one reactivated!
I call this terminating ....

Against the EU? Form today - June 01. 2018 on!
There were no negotiations wanted by Trump...

And why are then these German Mercedes Cars on 5th Avenue for Trump a problem when the Japanese cars are in reality?

But be aware if others do the same against you ... I can still remember how outraged and angry the USA was when nearly the complete NATO (if not building own tanks as the UK and France) chose the German Leopard 2 tank to take into inventory insteed the American M1A1/ A2 tank in the 1990's ... and even at least when Canada chose for the Leopard 2A7 insteed the latest M1 tank, the USA was angry!

Bullsh**!!! you have taken lesse rand lesser NATO activities and dutiers in Europe and you give a crap on it in reality!
Look on the US Forces in Europe, what do we have from the US Army what has a noteable combat strength?
There is only the 2n Armored Cavalry Regiment in Germany and this Brigade with 100 M1A2 in Poland. Aside this? Nothing!
And in the Air? 3 Fighter Wings with not even 9 Squadrons in Europe ... and more: Many of them are in duty for Syria conflict!

It's not surprising either ... the Polish government is one of the Trump fans ... but you know that the Polish government wants to abolish independent courts and the freedom of speech and press de facto?

Anyway, my blessing, you have to move from Germany to Poland with all the stuff ... maybe you'll do something for NATO then ... or to leave totally! I'm so over with these fairy tale BS of US Forces save Europe, when there is not really something noteable what safes Europe really!

[QUOTE}How do NATO members pay for U.S. troops in Asia?[/QUOTE]

Misunderstanding ... but simple calculation:

In the United States, military expenditures account for about 3.1% of the gross domestic product of the United States. Trump then says ... "Looks you evil Europeans, we spend 3.1%, but you?"

It is true, it must / should be 2% with each and that's only a few!

But it is also correct that in these 3.1% in the US, the cost of the military in Japan, South Korea, on Guam, etc. are included ... why? Since when do Asian countries belong to NATO?
So you have to work on the US budget first and calculate out the things that have nothing to do with NATO!

Conversely ... we Germans and above all France are involved in the fight against the terrorists in Mali / Africa. However, according to Trump we can not include the costs in the bill for the 2%!

If we are not allowed to cover our expenses in Africa that have nothing to do with NATO, why is that allowed to the US to count, eh?

 

yea, now every country are align together and ready for tariff war with US. hows that working for ya. Just because you want deal country individually doesn't mean they wont align together to deal with you. In fact now its US vs EU/China/Canada/Mexico where before was US/EU/Canada/Mexico vs China/Russia

 

So glad you are a soothsayer. I bet you are of course...wrong.

In regards to china having a longer view than trump....hell, you should know they have a longer view than the politicians in both parties in the US and it is not limited to just trump. Your bias is....well, it is affecting your thinking far too much. And when you say things like that it can make other things you say suspect.

 

It has been going on for decades. As an example Texas rice farmers could export rice to Japan with a huge price reduction to Japanese consumers. The Japanese government forbids the importation of Texas rice. Governments all over the planet mess with business competition. So Texas rice farmers sell their product elsewhere. The same is possible for all businesses everywhere. The U.S. may be the largest market but it certainly isn't the only one.

Incidentally the example used elsewhere about Mercedes Benz and increasing the tariffs on German cars is nonsense. Mercedes Benz manufactures cars in Alabama. They are not subject to any tariff at all.

 

depend on type of car. for example BMW manufacture SUV here, but other type of BMW are manufacture overseas

 

If these tariffs go into effect and stay in effect BMW will build plants in the US to manufacture those kinds of cars or they will do like Fiat did many years ago and abandon the US market. (Fiat has since returned to the US market.) That's rather the point of the tariff after all.

 

the opposed, german will retaliate against US on this. ppl will still buy BMW cause its one of the best luxury car in the world.

 

And BMW will build the cars it sells in the US in US plants. They may even export vehicles to Europe from their US plants like Mercedes does.

 

Then you should ignore them.

Face realities:

1. Bush has unilaterally terminated the Iran deal and demands that everyone else do that ... and if not, he punishes the companies (from Europe) who are holding the deal.[/quote]

Competition is hard.

2. Trump levies punitive tariffs on steel and aluminum because he is supposed to protect the 140,000 steel workers in foundries ... but endangers the 6,500,000 workers in the steel processing industry!
Trump announces he does not want to see any German Mercedes cars on 5th Avenue anymore ... but ignores the fact that Mercedes and everyone else in the US have factories and work directly to 35,000 Americans and indirectly through subcontractors to 150,000 people in the US !
Trump and his fans complain that 10% oo US cars are due in the EU, but only 2.5% in the US on EU cars ... but does not mention that it's the other way round for pickups: On US pick Ups we pay 14,5% ... but in the US are 28% on EU Pick Ups!

Oh yes ... how was it with fair competition, etc.?
The USAF was looking for a successor to the fleet of tankers because they are getting too old. In the competition: A model of Airbus and a model of Boing! Who won the competition on a purely technical basis, according to the decision of the experts? Airbus! Who knocked that over and the plane had to be taken from Boing? The US Senate! Very fair ...

3. Trump claims that the US pays too much in NATO because most do not fulfill their obligations and invest at least 2% of their income in defense.
It is true that most do not do that ... in my country it is only 1.3% ... and the requirement to meet the 2% is justified.
But ... White House wise guy asserts it costs the US taxpayer a lot of money ... bullshit, not 1 cent!
Neither does the US have more work to do because they have to take on other people's obligations for non-performance, and certainly not pay the US money to pay the others for their defense.
Like ... Trump, of course, counts every penny of US defense spending here ... that includes things that have nothing to do with NATO. Or since when does the cost of US stationing in Japan and South Korea ... include both NATO members, eh?[/QUOTE]

Misunderstanding ... but simple calculation:

In the United States, military expenditures account for about 3.1% of the gross domestic product of the United States. Trump then says ... "Looks you evil Europeans, we spend 3.1%, but you?"

It is true, it must / should be 2% with each and that's only a few!

But it is also correct that in these 3.1% in the US, the cost of the military in Japan, South Korea, on Guam, etc. are included ... why? Since when do Asian countries belong to NATO?
So you have to work on the US budget first and calculate out the things that have nothing to do with NATO!

Conversely ... we Germans and above all France are involved in the fight against the terrorists in Mali / Africa. However, according to Trump we can not include the costs in the bill for the 2%!

If we are not allowed to cover our expenses in Africa that have nothing to do with NATO, why is that allowed to the US to count, eh?[/QUOTE]

Then I assume the will sell a lot of SUV's

 

what if they want BMW sport sedan

 

They can't, only their growing middle/owner class will be able to. China would rather export than import anything (other than raw materials) in consumer goods. They already sneak in products that they cannot buy from the west in china. It has a big black market involved. I got this from a westerner who lives there and posts videos about china on you tube and has done it for years.

In free trade what is usually used to keep china in trade surplus may be non tariff trade barriers, a very old way of limiting imports.

 

Thats not my problem

Free traders want to take the standard of living away from
American workers and give it to the chinese

Screw that

 

They will have to settle for an SUV made in Spartanburg South Carolina or pay more or buy another brand. How complicated can this be?

 

Free traders don't understand that free trade doesn't exist. Our trading partners have higher tariffs than we do. We are in the process of correcting that and they don't like it. What a surprise.

 

that basically lower the competitiveness of the company, whats the point of invest into innovation when they can jack up the price of inferior products and force ppl to buy. how simple is that!!

 

Simple but incorrect.

 

Nonsense. Building cars in the US does not lower BMW's competitiveness.

 

really, its simple, if you want to buy BMW import from EU vs local ford/lincoln, but due to 25% tariff, you choose ford, while that encourage ford not to spend extra to increase its quality cause they know they can sell it anyway here. that mean its competitiveness in the world is lowered.

This is already happen in the steel market. after the tariff, steel industry jack up the price, which force many farmer who want to purchase storage bin cancel their order.