kunst nugget wrote: » That's never going to happen. If Britain crash out of the EU, which is looking more and more likely, America is going to completely ride the UK when it comes to any trade deal because they'll have the upper hand and the UK will be desperate.
ELM327 wrote: » My post was a straight one line answer to a straight one line question. No need for the rhetoric.
amandstu wrote: » I think the idea is for it to boost the local economy .I doubt goods can be made cheaper although perhaps they can in some cases if the manufacturing methods evolve. That "idea" may not be why the tariffs were introduced though. I feel they have been introduced for political (and personal) gain.
derb12 wrote: » On another note, the Manafort trial has been postponed by a week but a list of 5 witnesses given temporary immunity has been released. One of them is a fella called Conor O’Brien who used to work for KWC.
weisses wrote: » amandstu wrote: » I think the idea is for it to boost the local economy .I doubt goods can be made cheaper although perhaps they can in some cases if the manufacturing methods evolve. That "idea" may not be why the tariffs were introduced though. I feel they have been introduced for political (and personal) gain. I wonder what type of work force they need to hire to operate the production lines and work the lands
irishash wrote: » Anybody know why immunity is granted here?
robinph wrote: » And we don't know who it is that has been given immunity from prosecution already. Could be that Muller has already effectively "pardoned" Cohen, so Trump can't do it in order to try and get him to keep his mouth shut.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Economic nationalism (ie tarrifs) are hit and miss. Some sectors gain, some don’t. And if Chinese goods are too expensive then companies may build in the US. Plenty of counties use this kind of economic protectionism including the EU. Or use it to protect industry or agriculture. In fact there’s a guy in prison in Ireland for importing garlic as apples, or onions.
weisses wrote: » Do you seriously believe that making these goods on US soil with all the extra costs that go ends up cheaper for the consumer then the imported goods with a higher tariff ?
ELM327 wrote: » Well clearly that depends on the current price disparity and the level of tariff doesnt it. A 50% tariff may work out cheaper to build in US even with more expensive labour costs
Leroy42 wrote: » That is true, but then the costs of the products themselves must go up. So the consumer gets hit. Leading to inflation. Leading to real wage decreases. I
ELM327 wrote: » Absolutely the customer will get hit, which is why I would not be for these tariffs. But as the leader of the free world, Trump gets to make his own decisions.
spacecoyote wrote: » Yes, potentially cheaper to build in the US, but still more expensive than it was before he created the mess. So, if it cost $1 before, and now it costs $1.50, due to a 50% tariff, and it costs $1.40 to produce in the US. You're now getting it cheaper in the US, relative to the tariff price, but more expensive relative to where you were before. They had a piece on CNN about a nail factory in the rust belt recently & how they were being hurt by the tariffs. They had a staff of 500, but have had to shut down parts of their plant & let go of 80 people because of the steel tariffs. They are losing massive amounts of business because their raw material costs have jumped due to Trumps trade war. That's a direct hit to the area of America that swung the election. He might be able to ride it our short term, but unless there is progress, there is surely only so much pain that these people can take.
ELM327 wrote: » Can the market take $1.40 as a price in a sustainable way? If so then the jobs and manufacturing has been moved back to the US and the tariff was successful.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Successful in the sense of 40% inflation on this item. Now add all those 40%s up - it's a tax on US consumers to subsidize non-viable US jobs. Phrased that way, Republicans would be much less keen.
ELM327 wrote: » Again: I'm not in favour of these tariffs or tariffs in general as they block free trade.
ELM327 wrote: » But as the leader of the free world, Trump gets to make his own decisions.
Sn@kebite wrote: » I always thought irish people were very down to earth types. But the amount of pretentious, sycophantic, self-important millenial nonsense in this thread is awful.
mcmoustache wrote: » I don't think you understand what those words mean.
Captain Obvious wrote: » Hate to break it to you but that title no longer really applies. You can't be a leader of the free world if no other country is following you.
irishash wrote: » derb12 wrote: » On another note, the Manafort trial has been postponed by a week but a list of 5 witnesses given temporary immunity has been released. One of them is a fella called Conor O’Brien who used to work for KWC. Another is John Brennan, former CIA director. So I am a little ignorant on why people such as these need immunity. Is it to do with actions they did while in former posts that may be considered as legally shaky? Anybody know why immunity is granted here?
ELM327 wrote: » Absolutely the customer will get hit, which is why I would not be for these tariffs.But as the leader of the free world, Trump gets to make his own decisions.
listermint wrote: » That moniker disappeared with the DoDo's It has no relevance in 2018
ELM327 wrote: » With the Dodo's what?
listermint wrote: » Really do i have to explain what a dodo is.... ?
ELM327 wrote: » Considering you used the genitive tense, the " ' " in "Dodo's" (sic) is used to refer to possession. Therefore there should be a noun next.
ELM327 wrote: » Successful in terms of Trump's stated aim of bringing back blue collar jobs.