Trump Reciprocal Trade Act

[AHZ]

Former President Donald Trump unveiled a plan during a speech in Columbus, Georgia, to tariff and tax products from other nations at the same rate American goods are charged.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/06/15/donald-trump-details-plans-reciprocal-trade-act-level-tariffs/
Speaking on Saturday at what was his first public appearance after being indicted on 37 federal counts relating to documents he took to Mar-a-Lago at the end of his presidency, Trump laid out his vision for a “reciprocal” trade and tariff policy:
To save our economy from Joe Biden’s inflation catastrophe and economic disaster, I will deliver tax cuts, energy price cuts, and interest rates cuts – the likes of which you have never seen before, except in the Trump administration, actually. We will pass the Trump Reciprocal Trade Act, which means if a foreign country charges tariffs or taxes on our products, we will charge their products at the exact same rate. It’s called “an eye for an eye.”

[AHZ]

Do you people have a problem with RECIPROCAL TRADE?

if so, why are you america last?

[fj1200]

So he'll rejoin TPP?

[Gunny]

So he'll rejoin TPP?
I'm wondering where he thinks he's going to pass it. As mimeographed handouts on the Capitol steps? Iffy the Republican't's hold the House much less take the Senate as well. Then he has to deal with the majority in the GOP that don't support him.

Oh wait ... we've already seen this movie

[Black Diamond]

I'm wondering where he thinks he's going to pass it. As mimeographed handouts on the Capitol steps? Iffy the Republican't's hold the House much less take the Senate as well. Then he has to deal with the majority in the GOP that don't support him.

3 reasons he pushimg it

Pennsylvania Michigan and Wisconsin.

[AHZ]

So he'll rejoin TPP?
that's not what i read.

seemed to be about at least RECIPROCAL TARIFFS.

is that really nonsensical to you plebes?

[AHZ]

3 reasons he pushimg it

Pennsylvania Michigan and Wisconsin.


all americans benefit from reasonable trade policy.

[Gunny]

3 reasons he pushimg it

Pennsylvania Michigan and Wisconsin.I am thinking more along the lines of his not getting much of anything through Congress last time so he's making a promise he can't deliver on. He had to resort to EOs and realigning funds.

I also cannot say off the cuff I am for a one-size-fits-all trade policy. I did support some of his individual trade policies, depending on who and what, as it should be. Slapping a one-size-fits-all on Nations that are our allies (if we have any left:rolleyes:) , and are barely scraping by as it is, is not my idea of "fair" anything. I support fair trade vice reciprocal. The latter just sound childish and petty.

[AHZ]

I guess nobody told ALL THE OTHER NATIONS that tariffs cause great depressions always.......:smoke:


we're the lone genius nation smart enough to see the intrinsic good of sending all the jobs away and losing control of even our most important supply chains........

[AHZ]

Dum Dum Sauce!
:dance::dance::dance::dance::dance::dance:

[Gunny]

I guess nobody told ALL THE OTHER NATIONS that tariffs cause great depressions always.......:smoke:


we're the lone genius nation smart enough to see the intrinsic good of sending all the jobs away and losing control of even our most important supply chains........Nobody suggested that. Except you.

[AHZ]

Nobody suggested that. Except you.


fj is always using "protectionism caused the depression" as his main argument.

[Gunny]

fj is always using "protectionism caused the depression" as his main argument.Address fj then.

[AHZ]

Address fj then.


you addressed me saying "nobody said it", so i addressed you back, as is the human custom, COCO.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QPXZHHpTDYY/maxresdefault.jpg

[Gunny]

you addressed me saying "nobody said it", so i addressed you back, as is the human custom, COCO.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QPXZHHpTDYY/maxresdefault.jpg
In context, "nobody suggested that" is me, in response to your response to me. I don't see an fj. Then, you know that:rolleyes:

As stated before: fj and I don't necessarily agree on trade. What we DO agree on is you shouldn't be allowed to handle the family checkbook.

[fj1200]

that's not what i read.

seemed to be about at least RECIPROCAL TARIFFS.

is that really nonsensical to you plebes?

That's the point of a trading bloc. Free trade, or reduced tariffs, among members. Besides the reciprocal trade argument falls flat to me because what is comparatively advantaged to one country isn't necessarily comparatively advantaged to another. A lowered tariff on lambs from New Zealand doesn't do anyone any good unless we're willing to lower tariffs on US beef for example. I think to often that supposed free traders demand "fair trade" and use reciprocal tariffs to claim being for free trade when in actuality they're not really for it at all.

We should grant unilateral free trade access to any smaller undeveloped economies such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act.

[AHZ]

In context, "nobody suggested that" is me, in response to your response to me. I don't see an fj. Then, you know that:rolleyes:

As stated before: fj and I don't necessarily agree on trade. What we DO agree on is you shouldn't be allowed to handle the family checkbook.


i was telling you fj suggested it.

i was talking about fj to you.

[Gunny]

That's the point of a trading bloc. Free trade, or reduced tariffs, among members. Besides the reciprocal trade argument falls flat to me because what is comparatively advantaged to one country isn't necessarily comparatively advantaged to another. A lowered tariff on lambs from New Zealand doesn't do anyone any good unless we're willing to lower tariffs on US beef for example. I think to often that supposed free traders demand "fair trade" and use reciprocal tariffs to claim being for free trade when in actuality they're not really for it at all.

We should grant unilateral free trade access to any smaller undeveloped economies such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act.FTR, when I say fair trade, I meant the bolded.

[AHZ]

That's the point of a trading bloc. Free trade, or reduced tariffs, among members. Besides the reciprocal trade argument falls flat to me because what is comparatively advantaged to one country isn't necessarily comparatively advantaged to another. A lowered tariff on lambs from New Zealand doesn't do anyone any good unless we're willing to lower tariffs on US beef for example. I think to often that supposed free traders demand "fair trade" and use reciprocal tariffs to claim being for free trade when in actuality they're not really for it at all.

We should grant unilateral free trade access to any smaller undeveloped economies such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act.

this is not about a trading bloc.

it's about reciprocal and separate agreements with each nation on a nation to nation basis.

blocs are dumb, as you said. even if you didn't say that, that's the truth of the matter.

[fj1200]

this is not about a trading bloc.

it's about reciprocal and separate agreements with each nation on a nation to nation basis.

blocs are dumb, as you said. even if you didn't say that, that's the truth of the matter.

So the proposed act is nothing but a desire to be seen as being for "fair trade" while actually being protectionist. That's about what I said above. Tariffs are a solution in search of a problem. At worst they destroy economies, at best they cost domestic consumers in higher prices.

[fj1200]

And how is he going to manage to deliver energy prices cuts and interest rate cuts?

[AHZ]

So the proposed act is nothing but a desire to be seen as being for "fair trade" while actually being protectionist. That's about what I said above. Tariffs are a solution in search of a problem. At worst they destroy economies, at best they cost domestic consumers in higher prices.


it is fair to tariff those who tariff us, at the very least.

[fj1200]

it is fair to tariff those who tariff us, at the very least.

Fair if you want to make your domestic consumers pay more. As I said it's a solution in search of a problem which pretty well sums up populist rhetoric.

It's also not indicative of global leadership, it's indicative of fear-based, pandering "leadership."

[fj1200]

Interest rate cuts?

[AHZ]

Fair if you want to make your domestic consumers pay more. As I said it's a solution in search of a problem which pretty well sums up populist rhetoric.

It's also not indicative of global leadership, it's indicative of fear-based, pandering "leadership."


it's worth paying more to not be taken over by slave states like china.

your shortsighted idiocy is the road to serfdom.

[Kathianne]

it's worth paying more to not be taken over by slave states like china.

your shortsighted idiocy is the road to serfdom.

What about the poor people that don't have the ability to 'pay more?' Too bad for them?

[AHZ]

What about the poor people that don't have the ability to 'pay more?' Too bad for them?


at least they will have jobs. and they will be able to afford food because of that.

cheap prices on useless crap is NOT the manna you think it is.

[Kathianne]

at least they will have jobs. and they will be able to afford food because of that.

cheap prices on useless crap is NOT the manna you think it is.
False presumption, not supported by facts. No jobs guaranteed from tariffs. No return to America due to tariffs.

[AHZ]

False presumption, not supported by facts. No jobs guaranteed from tariffs. No return to America due to tariffs.


tariffs keep jobs by keep production domestic.

nothings a guarantee in life. we can only go by history and intelligence.

[Kathianne]

tariffs keep jobs by keep production domestic.

nothings a guarantee in life. we can only go by history and intelligence.
No proof that tariffs keep jobs in country, much less proof that they do not destroy more jobs than created.

[AHZ]

No proof that tariffs keep jobs in country, much less proof that they do not destroy more jobs than created.


that's nonsensical.

why do so many other nations use tariffs at this very moment?

are they dumb?

[Kathianne]

that's nonsensical.
Your saying so, doesn't make it so.

[AHZ]

Your saying so, doesn't make it so.


you saying it ain't so, doesn't make it not so.

[AHZ]

Your saying so, doesn't make it so.


Do you believe in debtor's prisons?

[fj1200]

it's worth paying more to not be taken over by slave states like china.

your shortsighted idiocy is the road to serfdom.

None of that is happening.


tariffs keep jobs by keep production domestic.

nothings a guarantee in life. we can only go by history and intelligence.

History doesn't support your narrative. Tariffs inhibit new jobs based on new comparative advantages.


that's nonsensical.

why do so many other nations use tariffs at this very moment?

are they dumb?

Yes.

[AHZ]

None of that is happening.



History doesn't support your narrative. Tariffs inhibit new jobs based on new comparative advantages.



Yes.


comparative advantage is oftentimes illegitimate.

for instance, a comparative advantage on cheap labor just means human slavery and civil rights abuses.

products from that envirment should not be allowed on international markets.

capitalism is not a system of morality, thats why we still need laws against child pornography.

[fj1200]

comparative advantage is oftentimes illegitimate.

for instance, a comparative advantage on cheap labor just means human slavery and civil rights abuses.

products from that envirment should not be allowed on international markets.

capitalism is not a system of morality, thats why we still need laws against child pornography.

And that's the problem with protectionist arguments. Take a scenario which is A. rare, and B. already against our trade policy to make the case for tariffs. And then at the end of one red herring you invoke another fallacy; a supposed argument about the morality of capitalism that nobody was making. And then your "solution" of tariffs doesn't even address slave labor.

You're not good at this.

[AHZ]

And that's the problem with protectionist arguments. Take a scenario which is A. rare, and B. already against our trade policy to make the case for tariffs. And then at the end of one red herring you invoke another fallacy; a supposed argument about the morality of capitalism that nobody was making. And then your "solution" of tariffs doesn't even address slave labor.

You're not good at this.


china is a slave labor nation.

we should actually cut all trade you're right.

but tariffs are at least a partial measure and a clear benefit.

but im with you. full boycott of china would be best.

[fj1200]

china is a slave labor nation.

we should actually cut all trade you're right.

but tariffs are at least a partial measure and a clear benefit.

but im with you. full boycott of china would be best.

:rolleyes: No. You don't get to create positions for me. Because... why? You're amazingly bad at this.

[AHZ]

:rolleyes: No. You don't get to create positions for me. Because... why? You're amazingly bad at this.


Im beating you.

[Black Diamond]

Im beating you.

Without reading the thread I'm betting you aren't.

[AHZ]

Without reading the thread I'm betting you aren't.


low information voter.

[Black Diamond]

low information voter.

You just beat yourself. Again.

[AHZ]

You just beat yourself. Again.


that's because i'm the best.

the only thing better than me is me tomorrow.

[Gunny]

that's because i'm the best.

the only thing better than me is me tomorrow.Your entire argument on this page, in YOUR own words, is a Soviet-style, totalitarian nationalist.

[Kathianne]

Your entire argument on this page, in YOUR own words, is a Soviet-style, totalitarian nationalist.

Yep. Noticed awhile ago he's most definitely a Trump like conservative, aka socialist at best.

Only difference is Trump didn't implement those types of policies, he may well if he gets in again.

[Gunny]

Yep. Noticed awhile ago he's most definitely a Trump like conservative, aka socialist at best.

Only difference is Trump didn't implement those types of policies, he may well if he gets in again.When the state provides the labor for industry (or don't eat -- odd how he went Darwin in a single day:rolleyes:) so labor can purchase from the state the goods it needs to survive at the state's prices because the state has frozen out all competitors, and do it in the name of the state it sounds a LOT like the USSR to me.

[fj1200]

Im beating you.

I will admit that you debate like trump; Which is to say like a blithering fool. The first debate against biden? No wonder he lost. trump lost to a guy who probably doesn't remember his name some days.

[fj1200]

And I still don't know how he's going to reduce interest rates. :dunno:

It's withering policies like in the OP that I need to wonder who has better policies. Oh how will I ever know...

[AHZ]

And I still don't know how he's going to reduce interest rates. :dunno:

It's withering policies like in the OP that I need to wonder who has better policies. Oh how will I ever know...


tariffs are more important. and he's right on the trail of that all important policy.

you would rather destroy the country than cross the desires of multinational coporations and banks.

that's what makes you a fascist.

[fj1200]

tariffs are more important. and he's right on the trail of that all important policy.

you would rather destroy the country than cross the desires of multinational coporations and banks.

that's what makes you a fascist.

You say words but they are essentially garbage. You don't understand what trump says, you don't understand what I say, and you don't understand definitions of words you use.

[AHZ]

You say words but they are essentially garbage. You don't understand what trump says, you don't understand what I say, and you don't understand definitions of words you use.


You just cant hand the truth of your own ignorant brainwashed fascism.

[fj1200]

You just cant hand the truth of your own ignorant brainwashed fascism.

You don't know truth. You spew garbage when it becomes clear that you can't argue err, discuss your way out of a wet paper bag.

[AHZ]

You don't know truth. You spew garbage when it becomes clear that you can't argue err, discuss your way out of a wet paper bag.


You have failed to define the garbage you speak about.

all i see is trump being right and most others being globalist fascist sellouts.

[fj1200]

You have failed to define the garbage you speak about.

all i see is trump being right and most others being globalist fascist sellouts.

Defined here. \/


tariffs are more important. and he's right on the trail of that all important policy.

you would rather destroy the country than cross the desires of multinational coporations and banks.

that's what makes you a fascist.

Additionally the garbage is you defining anyone that doesn't accept your populist drivel as globalist/fascist/whatever when you don't understand the definitions of the words you use.

[AHZ]

Defined here. \/



Additionally the garbage is you defining anyone that doesn't accept your populist drivel as globalist/fascist/whatever when you don't understand the definitions of the words you use.


they define themselves as globalists.

[Kathianne]

You say words but they are essentially garbage. You don't understand what trump says, you don't understand what I say, and you don't understand definitions of words you use.
It's very much like watching a train wreck and every once in awhile someone jumps out of his car and says, "Look what that f'ing train did!"

[fj1200]

they define themselves as globalists.

That's not really a good defense of your word salad post which is to be expected when you spew garbage.

[Kathianne]

That's not really a good defense of your word salad post which is to be expected when you spew garbage.

But consistent. You're 'with him' or you're populist. Very leftist, very Alinsky.

[AHZ]

That's not really a good defense of your word salad post which is to be expected when you spew garbage.


it is a good rebuttal to your assertion I"M making up terms that aren't real.

[fj1200]

it is a good rebuttal to your assertion I"M making up terms that aren't real.

The only words you're using that aren't real are your spelling mistakes. Generally you're using correctly spelled words but using them incorrectly because you don't know the definitions.

[AHZ]

The only words you're using that aren't real are your spelling mistakes. Generally you're using correctly spelled words but using them incorrectly because you don't know the definitions.


wrong.

im communicating quite well.

people like you, who don't have truth on their side, have word games instead.

[fj1200]

wrong.

im communicating quite well.

people like you, who don't have truth on their side, have word games instead.

:confused: To whom? Other supporters of populist drivel who happened to stumble across your incomprehensible ramblings?

[Kathianne]

:confused: To whom? Other supporters of populist drivel who happened to stumble across your incomprehensible ramblings?
To be fair, there are one or two here that seem to find him enlightened, sometimes.

[fj1200]

To be fair, there are one or two here that seem to find him enlightened, sometimes.

Granted. Blind squirrel theorem or infinite monkey theorem? I'm open to either.

[AHZ]

:confused: To whom? Other supporters of populist drivel who happened to stumble across your incomprehensible ramblings?


anyone who can read.

[Kathianne]

anyone who can read.

You are not reading the room.

[AHZ]

You are not reading the room.


At least i can read english.

[Kathianne]

At least i can read english.

That is not evident.