Boom. You can't out tariff us. Period. This Trump knows.

[CaptUSA]

It could have a huge effect on US farmers.

Here ya go, Zip. It's a freebie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_good

[Zippyjuan]

Here ya go, Zip. It's a freebie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_good

So the US should buy more Pepsi instead of Coke? What sort of "substitution' are you suggesting?

[Swordsmyth]

Does this also apply to all of the tariffs that the US enacts?

It depends on the products targeted.
Not all products are so interchangeable.

[Swordsmyth]

It could have a huge effect on US farmers. If China buys less, who will buy more from us to make up the difference? China buys more than a third of US soybeans. But maybe the Netherlands will buy more?

Soybean export destinations, bushels – week ended April 13–USDA



https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-soybean-tariff/

The same people who would have bought the soybeans China bought instead of ours.

[phill4paul]

Idea: Let the Fed/Gov buy the soy and give a bushel to each welfare program recipient instead of debit cards. Win/win.

[H_H]

Does this also apply to all of the tariffs that the US enacts?

Of course not. Pop quiz, Wonka: what does this reasoning apply to? Any guesses?

[H_H]

It will so have a huge effect on US farmers. Lookie this pie. Colors! Lookie these words I paste.

See, this is the problem with conversing with midwits, people with IQs of 105-120 who are smart enough to see pretty clearly they are more sophisticated than many simpleminded conservatives, but not quite smart enough to take it to the next level. To ever truly understand a subject. Or even a message board post! Nor do they have any interest in doing so. Nor, in truth, do they have any reason to. No incentive. So I can't really blame them.

Well, I can. I do. But I can also understand them. Far better than they understand themselves, at that.

Here Juan-o swoops in and makes a post and he really thinks it is decisive. Truly. He thinks "well this post is absolutely devastating; look at all the Solid, Irrefutable, Numeric evidence and also Respectable and Acceptable sources that all points to the same conclusion I make. I'm right. No question." And he thinks that any honest reader should be able to see that and change his opinion accordingly.

Meanwhile he actually has understood precisely zero of my post. He has addressed precisely zero. He's just on a totally different level.

This is why so many people get frustrated with Juan and his fellow garbage-libs. It's annoying. For me, at first he was interestingly novel, and then irritating for a short time, and now just boring. You see it in this very post: I always have to go up (or down) a metalevel or just completely change the subject in order to have any hope of making a halfway interesting reply. No-effort-investment midwits are just boring.

Booooorring

[CaptUSA]

So the US should buy more Pepsi instead of Coke? What sort of "substitution' are you suggesting?

I was giving you free ammo for your argument. When the costs of one product go up or the availability goes down, people will find substitute goods.

[TheCount]

Of course not. Pop quiz, Wonka: what does this reasoning apply to? Any guesses?

Arbitrary cases based on political convenience.

[Madison320]

Well then, if it's lots, you should be able to point some out rather easily.

I've done that many times.

Second try:

Prove me wrong by answering these simple questions:

Are you against the minimum wage.

Are you against anti-trust laws

Are you against discrimination laws.

Are you against progressive taxation (not taxation in general but the fact that it's progressive)?

Are you in favor of a gold standard?

[Ender]

Completely agree with DiLorenzo on this:

Fake Populism
By Thomas DiLorenzo

July 26, 2018

President Trump is known as a “populist” president who was elected by appealing to “the forgotten man” (and woman) – the hard-working, taxed-to-death middle class people whose interests are usually diametrically opposed to the political elites of both parties. The label of populism seems especially appropriate with regard to his foreign policy of pursuing peace with Russia and North Korea, judging by the vicious and apoplectic reaction to it by the deep state elite, some of whom have called for the president’s execution for treason. You know an American president is doing the right thing when he is so viciously attacked by the James Gang – Clapper and Comey.

But the lynchpin of President Trump’s economic policy – protectionist tariffs on steel, aluminum, solar panels (Huh?), and washing machines, among other things, is quintessentially non-populist. It is the exact opposite of populism, as protectionism always is and always has been, because it benefits a few politically well connected corporations and their employees and shareholders by plundering the masses with government-mandated price increases. The lack of competition caused by protection also usually leads to lower-quality products.
More than 60 percent of the average automobile consists of steel and aluminum. Consequently, the president’s tariffs on steel and aluminum will increase American car prices, rendering American automakers less competitive in international competition. There will be a decline of American jobs, profits, and shareholder wealth. The same is true of all other products made of steel and aluminum. It’s hard to imagine any economic policy that is more anti-populist than that.

President Trump’s tariffs have already instigated retaliation by other countries that have placed higher tariffs on American goods. If this doesn’t stop soon, Al Gore may have to send President Trump another framed photo of Congressmen Smoot and Hawley, authors of the notorious Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1929, as he did when he debated Ross Perot. The Smoot-Hawley tariff spawned an international trade war that reduced the volume of world trade by two-thirds in the subsequent three years.

President Trump announced his fake populist economic agenda in a speech in Louisville, Kentucky on March 20, 2017. He chose Louisville because he claims that his inspiration for his brand of “populism” is Henry Clay, the nineteenth-century mercantilist politician. He hailed Clay as “a great statesman” and highlighted Clay’s lifelong advocacy of protectionist tariffs while also calling him a free trader!

As leader of the Whig Party Henry Clay was the personification of political elitism, mercantilist economics, and anti-populism. His “American System,” so named by Alexander Hamilton, was a system of plunder of the common man and woman for the benefit of the politically connected: protectionist tariffs, corporate welfare (“internal improvement subsidies”), and a national bank run by politicians, the worst idea in all of American economic history. That is why his fiercest enemies were the Jeffersonians of his day, which by that time came to be known as the “Jacksonians.” As Murray Rothbard wrote in (p. 91), “The Jacksonians were libertarians, plain and simple. Their program and ideology were libertarian; they strongly favored free enterprise and free markets, but they just as strongly opposed special subsidies and monopoly privileges conveyed by government to business or any other group. They favored absolutely minimal government . . .”

The Jacksonians “eventually managed to put into effect various parts of their free-market and minimal-government economic program,” wrote Rothbard, “including a drastic lowering of tariffs, and for the first and probably the last time in American history, paying off the federal debt.”

Henry Clay’s “System” was the exact opposite of this in every way. As described by Edgar Lee Masters in Lincoln the Man (p. 27) describing the man who Abe Lincoln credited with being the fount of all of his political ideas:

“Clay was he champion of that political system which doles favors to the strong in order to win and to keep their adherence to the government. His system offered shelter to devious schemes and corrupt enterprises . . . . He was the beloved son (figuratively speaking) of Alexander Hamilton with his corrupt funding schemes, his superstitions concerning the advantage of a public debt, and a people taxed to make profits for enterprises that cannot stand alone. His example and his doctrines led to the creation of a party [the Whigs] that had no platform to announce, because its principles were plunder and nothing else.”

Henry Clay died in 1850 but the corrupt Hamilton/Clay/Lincoln “American System,” which was really the rotten British system that the American colonists fought an eight-year war to secede from, was finally cemented into place during the War to Prevent Southern Independence. As Rothbard wrote in (p. 10):

“The Civil War, in addition to its unprecedented bloodshed and devastation, was used by the triumphal and virtually one-party Republican regime to drive through its statist, formerly Whig, program: national government power, protectionist tariff, subsidies to big business, inflationary paper money, resumed control of the federal government over banking, large-scale internal improvements, high excise taxes, and, during the war, conscription and an income tax. Furthermore, the states came to lose their precious right of secession and other states’ powers as opposed to federal government powers.”

In light of this, perhaps President Trump should take down that giant portrait of Andrew Jackson that hangs in the oval office and replace it with one of Hamilton, Clay, or better yet – King George III.

[TheCount]

I've done that many times.

Still no links.

Second try:

Prove me wrong by answering these simple questions:

Are you against the minimum wage.

Are you against anti-trust laws

Are you against discrimination laws.

Are you against progressive taxation (not taxation in general but the fact that it's progressive)?

Are you in favor of a gold standard?

When I see inquisition lists of questions like this, it just reminds me of the dozens of times that i attempted to talk to other autists, only to discover that felt they had determined my political opinions based on my lack of purity on some other, completely unrelated issue, and that any answers that I gave were deemed insufficient and/or false. Are you asking because you care, and the answers could actually change your mind, or because you're hoping that, when confronted by direct questions, the magic power of vbulletin will force me to tell some dark truth that I don't want to reveal?

[EBounding]

Could it actually work?

U.S., Europeans Agree to Iron Out Trade Differences
Trump, Juncker agree to hold off on further tariffs as they work to reduce trade barriers

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker turned down the heat on a trade dispute between two of the world’s largest economic powers, suggesting Wednesday they would hold off on further tariffs while they talk through their differences.

Speaking in a joint news conference in the Rose Garden on Wednesday, the two leaders agreed to begin discussions on eliminating the tariffs and subsidies that hamper trade across the Atlantic, and to resolve the steel and aluminum tariffs the Trump administration had imposed this year as well as the retaliatory tariffs the European Union imposed in response.

The package of measures announced by Messrs. Trump and Juncker would have the EU buying more liquefied natural gas and soybeans from the U.S., and the two sides would begin a “dialogue to reduce differences on regulatory standards between the two economies,” Mr. Trump said. The two sides also suggested they would hold off on further tariffs—a nod to Mr. Trump’s threats to apply tariffs on imported cars.

While the two sides said the deal was contingent on negotiating in good faith, there was no schedule set to complete the talks, meaning that what amounted to a temporary truce could turn into a permanent one—or fall apart if one side accuses the other of lagging behind. To complete a deal, the EU would also face the difficult task of forging a consensus among all its 28 members, including both France and Germany, who often have divergent trade priorities.

Through the deal, the Trump administration seeks to reduce trade barriers to lower the $152 billion U.S. deficit in merchandise trade with the EU, while European counterparts want an end to repeated threats of new tariffs and other measures to restrict access to the U.S. market.

The proposed pact comes a day after the Trump administration faced criticism on Capitol Hill for its use of tariffs. The GOP-controlled Congress in recent days has spoken out against the prospect that the Trump administration could apply new tariffs on imported autos on top of aluminum and steel tariffs, with lawmakers considering legislation to counter the president’s initiatives.

Before the Oval Office meeting, EU trade representatives had paid visits to Capitol Hill in an effort to recruit allies to pressure Mr. Trump to cut a deal. EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström also came to Washington to meet with U.S. lawmakers, trying to gauge the chances that the Republican-led Congress would advance legislation, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R., Utah), who last week sent a letter to Mr. Trump warning of legislation if he didn’t pull back from his threats to apply more tariffs, told Ms. Malmström that senators were evaluating their options, the person said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Hatch said he encouraged the commissioner to work with Mr. Trump, taking steps including the reduction of tariffs.

Mr. Trump had been scheduled to meet with lawmakers from farming states after his talks with the European delegation. Instead, a hastily planned Rose Garden event was announced following the talks, with podiums and flags rushed outside the Oval Office for the announcement.

Lawmakers were also asked to attend the event, Mr. Trump specifically calling each of them out by name and declaring his love for American farmers.

News of a deal was welcomed in Congress. “This is an important first step,” said House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R., Texas), who was part of a group that met with Mr. Trump at the White House immediately after the president’s meeting with the EU chief wrapped up. “This could lead to exempting Europe from steel and aluminum tariffs.”

Mr. Juncker, meanwhile, came bearing gifts for Mr. Trump, offering to engage in extensive reviews of barriers for U.S. goods to reach European markets. Mr. Juncker also gave Mr. Trump a picture of the military cemetery in his native Luxembourg where U.S. Gen. George Patton, who led U.S. troops in France and Germany at the end of World War II, is buried.

On the picture, Mr. Juncker wrote “Dear Donald, let’s remember our common history,” the EU official said later Wednesday during a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.

The effort to set aside the trade fight with the EU would help the U.S. focus its economic firepower more specifically on China, which Mr. Trump and his advisers see as the bigger trade priority.

The EU also has concerns about China, and had expressed hopes, earlier in the Trump administration, that it could join forces with the U.S. for a unified front in addressing Chinese trade practices. The U.S. alleges that China pressures U.S. companies to transfer technology to their Chinese partners and unfairly subsidizes its companies, leading to a massive U.S. trade deficit.

Before the Trump-Juncker meeting, Qualcomm Inc. said it planned to scrap its $44 billion purchase of Dutch chip maker NXP Semiconductors NV because it couldn’t get approval in China, adding yet another irritant to the U.S-China trade fight.

China and the EU have retaliated against U.S. tariffs with their own levies on U.S. farmers, a core Republican constituency. The U.S.-EU deal specifically calls for the EU to import more soybeans, a crop targeted by Chinese tariffs.

The U.S. and the EU, as part of their agreement, agreed to try to use the World Trade Organization to deal with issues of intellectual-property theft, government pressure on companies to transfer technology to local partners, and excess capacity in many industries—the heart of the U.S. concerns about China. That would be a big change in tactics for the U.S., which has relied mainly on unilateral actions—including tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods—to get Beijing to change course.

Five years ago, then-President Barack Obama formally launched similar broad trade talks with the EU under Mr. Juncker’s predecessor. The talks made little progress, and the Obama administration subsequently focused on the Trans-Pacific Partnership with Asian countries. Mr. Trump blocked the pact immediately after taking office last year.

Under the previous negotiations with the EU to form a Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, many European officials were unwilling to change rules that limit U.S. agricultural exports to the bloc, while the Obama administration declined Brussels’ requests to align its financial regulations with Europe’s. Still, the Trump administration never formally rejected TTIP.

Ms. Malmström, in a meeting with Mr. Hatch, Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, also floated the idea of reaching an industrial bilateral agreement, the person familiar with the matter said. The term generally refers to cutting tariffs on manufactured goods. The senators didn’t have an immediate reaction, the person said, in part because she didn’t provide details.

Whether the deal with the EU goes further and will result in zero tariffs on autos and trucks is an open question. The joint statement put out by the EU and U.S. said that zero-tariff initiative involved “non-auto industrial goods.”

Mr. Brady said that before the White House meeting, he had urged Ms. Malmström to agree to zero tariffs on automobiles, saying such a concession would be “a big step forward.” But lowering auto tariffs to zero faces political hurdles both in the U.S., which has its own 25% tariff on imported light trucks, and in the EU, which imposes 10% tariffs on auto and light-truck imports.

After the announcement with Mr. Juncker, the president arrived to a closed-door meeting with GOP lawmakers, said Rep. Mike Conaway (R., Texas), who attended.

Lawmakers told the president they were worried about retaliatory tariffs on farmers back home. “He seemed legitimately concerned,” said Mr. Conaway, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. “He will keep negotiating.”

[Zippyjuan]

Completely agree with DiLorenzo on this:

But the lynchpin of President Trump’s economic policy – protectionist tariffs on steel, aluminum, solar panels (Huh?), and washing machines, among other things, is quintessentially non-populist. It is the exact opposite of populism, as protectionism always is and always has been, because it benefits a few politically well connected corporations and their employees and shareholders by plundering the masses with government-mandated price increases. The lack of competition caused by protection also usually leads to lower-quality products.

More than 60 percent of the average automobile consists of steel and aluminum. Consequently, the president’s tariffs on steel and aluminum will increase American car prices, rendering American automakers less competitive in international competition. There will be a decline of American jobs, profits, and shareholder wealth. The same is true of all other products made of steel and aluminum. It’s hard to imagine any economic policy that is more anti-populist than that.

The US now officially has the highest prices for steel in the world.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/24/new...ffs/index.html

Steel prices in the United States are 60% higher than the rest of the world, Bitzer told analysts on Tuesday.

It is already hitting auto makers- those will be passed along to consumers via higher prices. Trump was going to put tariffs on imported cars to protect them. That is on hold for now.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/25/this...utomakers.html

Detroit automakers had a really bad day Wednesday as investors hammered Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler after all three scaled back their 2018 earnings forecasts due largely to rising prices for raw materials.

General Motors, the largest U.S. automaker, suffered its worst intraday drop in years, falling more than 8 percent Wednesday despite beating Wall Street estimates. Rival Fiat Chrysler plunged 16 percent Wednesday after missing earnings estimates, announcing the sudden death of CEO Sergio Marchionne and reducing earnings guidance for the year. Shares of Ford, which announced earnings after the markets closed, were under pressure all day.

All three are again trading down Thursday with Ford falling under $10 a share for the first time since 2012.

GM said a higher-than expected jump in commodity costs and unfavorable exchange rates in Brazil and Argentina will cost it an extra $1 billion this year. Ford’s second-quarter earnings plunged by almost 50 percent and the company lowered its 2018 earnings projections.

Ford’s Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks said its commodity costs during the quarter were about $300 million higher from last year, attributing about half of that to the U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum. The tariffs are expected to eat up about $600 million in profit this year, he said.

This is all in the name of National Security.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Still no links.

You can start with my sig line.

When I see inquisition lists of questions like this, it just reminds me of the dozens of times that i attempted to talk to other autists,...

So it happens a lot to you, does it?

[Zippyjuan]

Trump avoided the media following his EU meeting citing "Bad weather". It was clear and sunny.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...eaves-for-iowa

Trump ducks media, cites bad weather despite clear skies as he leaves for Iowa

President Trump departed the White House on Thursday for a trip to Iowa and Illinois without facing the news media, citing bad weather despite clear skies in the nation's capital.

The president typically reaches Air Force One by taking a helicopter from the White House to Joint Base Andrews, a setting that allows the media to shout questions while he walks across the South Lawn. Trump often stops to take those questions.

But White House aides informed the press corps Trump would motorcade to Andrews due to "bad weather," a setting that makes the president unavailable to take questions.

The motorcade is used when weather conditions make it unsafe for the president to fly on the Marine One helicopter. But it was 77 degrees and partly cloudy at the time of Trump's departure at 9:21 a.m., according to AccuWeather.

When pressed by reporters, the White House cited "fog" as the reason for the bad-weather call. A "weather watch" advisory on Joint Base Andrews's website said the base is "open for normal operations."

Fake news.

Trump was off to the Midwest to try to reassure farmers who are being hurt by counter tariffs imposed on the US by countries in response to tariffs Trump imposed on them.

[phill4paul]

Trump avoided the media following his EU meeting citing "Bad weather". It was clear and sunny.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...eaves-for-iowa



Fake news.

Trump was off to the Midwest to try to reassure farmers who are being hurt by counter tariffs imposed on the US by countries in response to tariffs Trump imposed on them.

There was dense fog in the AM.

WFO BALTIMORE MD./WASHINGTON D.C. Warnings, Watches and Advisories for Thursday, July 26, 2018

_____

DENSE FOG ADVISORY

URGENT - WEATHER MESSAGE

National Weather Service Baltimore MD/Washington DC

859 AM EDT Thu Jul 26 2018

...DENSE FOG ADVISORY WILL EXPIRE AT 9 AM EDT THIS MORNING...

https://www.wavy.com/ap-top-news/va-...-82/1325242583

He departed 21 minutes after the advisory was lifted. How long do you think putting together travel plans take? Can they be changed in an instant?

[Zippyjuan]

There was dense fog in the AM.



https://www.wavy.com/ap-top-news/va-...-82/1325242583

He departed 21 minutes after the advisory was lifted. How long do you think putting together travel plans take? Can they be changed in an instant?

Looks like fog alert was lifted before 8:00AM- about a hour and a half before he was to depart. According to his schedule, that came more than an hour before he was scheduled to leave the White House at 9:00 AM. https://factba.se/topic/calendar

https://www.wric.com/ap-top-news/va-...-74/1325135232

DENSE FOG ADVISORY

URGENT - WEATHER MESSAGE

National Weather Service Baltimore MD/Washington DC

751 AM EDT Thu Jul 26 2018

...DENSE FOG ADVISORY IS CANCELLED...

The National Weather Service in Baltimore MD/Washington has

cancelled the Dense Fog Advisory.

Fog has lifted across the area.

[phill4paul]

Looks like fog alert was lifted before 8:00AM- about a hour and a half before he was to take off.

https://www.wric.com/ap-top-news/va-...-74/1325135232

Oh, my, Gawd! A full hour and a half! You got him Zip. Maybe the tentative plans were for the fog and when asked if he would like to change everything up he simple said "naw." Couldn't be could it? Possibly?

[H_H]

Of course not. Pop quiz, Wonka: what does this reasoning apply to? Any guesses?

Arbitrary cases based on political convenience.

While I suppose all reality seems arbitrary and capricious to an ideologue ("Why, oh why, can't it just cooperate with my beauteous theories!"), I don't know what the "political convenience" claim is supposed to mean. Been downing too much fizzy lifting drink? When I can't even puzzle it out (or make a good or funny guess) you have to admit the chance you're just being completely incoherent. What is the accusation here? Like, these actions of Ding Dong Xie were somehow suspiciously "convenient" to the "political" career of me, Helmuth?

We're in Cahoots! I'm a Chinese agent!

[H_H]

Of course not. Pop quiz, Wonka: what does this reasoning apply to? Any guesses?

Arbitrary cases based on political convenience.

Anyway, too tiresome to wait for solipsistic singing slavers to answer. Obvious answer is: the reasoning applied to the particular situation upon which it was applied. Nothing more, nothing less. Pretty simple! Feel free to do your own analysis on the question. Which is, to help you midwits out:

What will be the effect of China increasing tariffs on US-origin (and only US-origin) soybeans?

Analyze away, Wonka! Juan already explained how it absolutely will have this huge, earth-shattering effect rocking American farmers to their core. And probably ruining them. Now he backed that up really solidly with colorful pies and Washington/Huffington Post quotes if I recall, but maybe you can give him some extra cover from the right flank. Best of!

Whatcha won't be doin is 'standing nor 'dressing a single iota that I said. Bu das coo.

[H_H]

When I see inquisition lists of questions like this, it just reminds me of the dozens of times that i attempted to talk to other autists, only to discover that felt they had determined my political opinions based on my lack of purity on some other, completely unrelated issue, and that any answers that I gave were deemed insufficient and/or false.

Ha! Except for me! You remember that one time you actually (kinda) told me something about your views? I like, accepted it and junk. Good times, man. Good times. But then I decided you're too hated here and too conventional (read: boooorring) to be nice to. Maybe you're going to turn over a new leaf and start posting like a human being instead of an obnoxious algorithm? Change my mind, Wonka!

[TheCount]

You can start with my sig line.

Yes, please do.

So it happens a lot to you, does it?

Just you. I used the plural because I don't know how many Bolton interns run your account.

[Madison320]

Still no links.


When I see inquisition lists of questions like this, it just reminds me of the dozens of times that i attempted to talk to other autists, only to discover that felt they had determined my political opinions based on my lack of purity on some other, completely unrelated issue, and that any answers that I gave were deemed insufficient and/or false. Are you asking because you care, and the answers could actually change your mind, or because you're hoping that, when confronted by direct questions, the magic power of vbulletin will force me to tell some dark truth that I don't want to reveal?

Inquisition? It's not like I'm asking you for personal information like your annual salary. Geez. Actually I was going to give you a thumbs up if you answered those questions. It's not like I picked hard questions, like abortion for example. They're no brainers for free market libertarians. I did, however, pick questions where anti free market liberals almost always disagree with free market libertarians. Hmmm....

Here, I'll even give you the answers to the test!

Are you against the minimum wage. <yes>

Are you against anti-trust laws.<yes>

Are you against discrimination laws.<yes>

Are you against progressive taxation (not taxation in general but the fact that it's progressive)? <yes>

Are you in favor of a gold standard? <yes> (Although really the answer is to let the free market determine the currency, however over time the free market has chosen gold)

[Swordsmyth]

Bloomberg reports that the Trump administration is set to increase a proposed 10% tariff on $200 billion in Chinese imports to 25% - "ratcheting up pressure on Beijing to return to the negotiating table." If enacted, it would mean overall tariffs of $505 billion on Chinese imports.

The U.S. imposed 25 percent tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese products in early July, and the review period on another $16 billion of imports ends Wednesday. President Donald Trump has threatened an additional $200 billion with levies of 10 percent, a level the administration may raise to 25 percent in a Federal Register notice in coming days, one of the people said. The change isn’t final yet and may not go forward after a public review, the people said. -Bloomberg

Here's what the market thought after hours - completely wiping out the gains from Apple's earnings announcement:

The Yuan, meanwhile, reversed on the news:


More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...morning-report

[TomtheTinker]

Or they dump all of their Treasuries, continue devaluing the yuan (which is more damaging to the trade deficit than tariffs can fix and is causing the dollar to soar, thus making our exports even tougher), then declare the yuan/rmb gold backed and practically overnight turn the FRN dollar into just another 3rd world currency. Bye bye petrodollar reserve status.

Sorry but China actually holds the cards now. I'd argue by intentional design by the global bankers but that won't matter much if the FRN dollar loses 50% of it's current purchasing power and suddenly everything is twice as expensive as it was last month.

The fact this argument is hardly even made here in the tariff discussion really says something.

[Swordsmyth]

The fact this argument is hardly even made here in the tariff discussion really says something.

China doesn't have enough gold to back up such a strategy and their corrupt centrally planned economy wouldn't survive long enough to pull it off.

[devil21]

The fact this argument is hardly even made here in the tariff discussion really says something.

It's a hypothetical scenario but a scenario the media could run with if instructed to.

It's rumored that, in reality, the Chinese have put their Treasury holdings up as collateral for cash loans and have no intention of paying the loans back. That would explain why the yuan is being devalued and dollar demand has been rising and Chinese have quietly been buying up everything in the US that's not nailed down. Instead, the banks that made the loans will quietly take the collateral Treasuries and send them back to the Fed via reverse repo operations. Financial engineering at its finest.

China doesn't have enough gold to back up such a strategy and their corrupt centrally planned economy wouldn't survive long enough to pull it off.

Still posting economic ignorance even after I set you straight? smh

[Swordsmyth]

Still posting economic ignorance even after I set you straight? smh

Your claim that the amount of gold doesn't matter is pure nonsense.

[devil21]

Your claim that the amount of gold doesn't matter is pure nonsense.

OK, I'm game. Explain to me how/why the amount of gold matters in order to peg a currency to gold.