What does "Trade wars are good, and easy to win" mean?

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

I apparently don’t understand what Trump says when he says or tweet things, because there is apparently ALWAYS something different that Trump means. I guess you have to be part of some sort of secret club to get the meaning of something, or maybe it is subjective.

So, you have this Trump tweet:

When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don’t trade anymore-we win big. It’s easy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 2, 2018

I have not found once anyone EVER say a trade war was good, or there were actually winners. I haven’t seen anyone say that reducing trade made anyone richer. Maybe a win is that you have done more damage to them than they have done to you, but you are still in a hole. Also, I haven’t found anyone, outside of Trump, who has said that a trade war is easy to win. Trade wars are usually reference to when trade breaks down and more and more walls are built, so that each side hurts the other’s economy more. Unlike a normal war, with winners and losers, and treaties and peace, tradewars don’t go that way. It is called a war, because sides suffer.

So, I am not getting it. Or maybe am I? Is it pretty much Trump says: “Bring it on. You will hurt a lot and we will make you suffer until you give us what we want. We don’t need you as much as you need us, so you will play by our rules. We win, because you will hurt more than us”. Is that what is meant by: “Trade wars are good, and easy to win.” It is more posturing talk than anything else, and you aren’t to take what he said on face value, accurate, or any reflection of reality? What is the reality is what is meant or the intention, not the words. Is that correct?

Pardon my asking, because I just rather work on things of direct value than try to take on learning another language embedded in English. A lot of other people are like this also. What you have with the media is taking Trump’s words at face value, Wall Street dropping hundreds of points also for doing so, rather than bothering to take their time to understand what he is really saying. Those who support Trump apparently do, but since I don’t, it is foreign to me, so I ask.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[DarkRyuParticipant 2354]

We’re getting f~~~ed in the ass constantly by other countries taking our jobs. They tax our goods coming into their country, but we don’t tax their goods coming into ours? It makes absolutely NO sense. Trump is just trying to level the playing field.

Other countries have had an ENORMOUS advantage over us for 20+ years now, and what has it given us? Are things “cheap?” F~~~ NO! S~~~’s more expensive than it ever has been, and a few bastard narcissists at the top have gotten rich while f~~~ing everyone else. We’re totally dependent on other countries for basic s~~~ because we don’t make ANYTHING here anymore! We need to be self sufficient.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

I am noticing, when I ask a question like this, I don’t get an answer to the question, but an explanation why someone is ticked off that is remotely connected to it. I don’t even see the will be better off state here at all. Is a win that both sides end up the same, with both having less than there was before?

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[RemovedParticipant 4676]

Supply and demand. The U.S. is offering everything constantly, reducing their value, while other countries are reducing their reciprocation, making non-U.S. goods increase in value. This is winning, by increasing the demand of the U.S. goods, while decreasing the the supply.

[JakeParticipant 908]

I’m an Australian so maybe I don’t understand but that said to me its fine to treat others with the same rules like if you cannot own land in their country the same for them its not a trade war as such its equality what goes around comes around

[RomulusParticipant 4667]

I am not a Trump defender and I cant begin to decipher what he may be thinking when he posts some tweet. But I will fashion an answer to your more direct question.

I have not found once anyone EVER say a trade war was good, or there were actually winners.

While not calling it a “trade war”  many countries engage in laws and restrictions on trade, and also provide for tariff that they simply call another name. They do this because they believe it is in their national interest.

For example, in China the government is majority owner in many industries. These Chinese industries are subsidized. They export and sell products below cost in order to keep folks employed in certain sectors. They steal intellectual property. They restrict ownership of a lot of industries for foreign firms. They have high import “taxes” on some products. Import taxes can be seen as another name for tariffs.

Many countries have VAT taxes on imported goods. That’s a form of tariff but isn’t called such. So if a country is imposing a 10 or 12 percent tax on the stuff you import to their country and the US say, has no such VAT tax, perhaps the US decides to impose a tariff to even the playing field for US companies.

In India, in order to prompt domestic industry, there are really high taxes on imported finished goods. But if you import it as a raw material and do the value added work in India, no such tax.

In general, there is no such thing as free trade actually. Free trade agreement are actually really about agreeing to the restrictions on trade. What each country can accept in order to get something else they want. The agreements usually cover such things as how much some products or class of products will be taxed and quotas set, and basically run to thousands of pages setting the conditions for trade. How many, what type, the taxes or import duties.

I haven’t seen anyone say that reducing trade made anyone richer.

Trade wars can make lot of folks lots of money. That why domestic industries are always hiring lawyers to lobby congress for them. If you have a dairy farm in Canada, you bet you don’t want your government to decide to open your country to unrestricted imports of US dairy products. The end result would be no dairy industry in Canada. They would simply be over run with US milk products because of the sheer size of US firms. Everyone in Canada pays a few pennies more for a gallon of milk, the Canadian farmers stay in business. Economist argue about the relative effect on the over-all economy but its not clear if there is a net gain in wealth as a result of this or not. Folks disagree.

The US domestic solar panel industry is engaged in such a fight now. They want to restrict the import of cheap Chinese solar panels because they say they need more time to get the US domestic production up and running efficiently. There are tariffs in place now to raise the cost on the Chinese imports of these panels and should it stay in place that would be a “win” for the domestic markers of solar panels. Some people think this is a good idea, protecting an infant industry until it can get more efficient.

The reason there are Japanese car makers in the US is because we put such heavy quotes on imported cars in the 80s that the Japs built plants in the US to get around these costs.

So, yes, there are winners (and losers) in trade wars.

outside of Trump, who has said that a trade war is easy to win.

I’m not defending the way Trump decides to express his views. But with respect to your comment….yes, trade wars can be messy, wars are usually not easy to win. But the point is “war” is a loaded term and most of these are battles, not wars.

And the country that loses the battle is the country that has the most to lose. Usually. By that I mean, if you ship a billion dollars of product to me and I ship 100 dollars of product to you, and I put a tariff on some of your products, and you retaliate, well, I stand to lose 100 dollars. you risk a billion. Who has the most to lose.

Some trade war battles are quite easy to win. The US has import quotas on sugar, the Dominican Republic doesn’t like it, it is harmful to its domestic sugar production industry. They are not in a position to do anything about it, or retaliate. The US restricts the import of certain softwoods from Canada. Canada doesn’t like it but wishes to sell lots of wheat so it puts up with it. Those are “trade war” battles if you will and are easy to win. But put a tariff on Russian oil and they are big enough to put some on your products that can hurt bad.

I agree an all-out war where things spin out of control can be very harmful.

Again, I’m not a Trump defender and I cant say why he chooses to express things in the way he does. But in response to your question, yes, there are “trade war” battles going on all the time, that’s what trade agreements are all about, and yes, countries win some and lose some.

How can a woman be expected to be happy with a man who insists on treating her as if she were a perfectly normal human being.

[joetechParticipant]

I think what he’s saying is that if we’re in a trade war with a country that heretofore has been raking us over the coals, it hurts them more than it hurts us. Think about it. If you’re loosing money on every transaction and you stop doing business with that entity who really loses when the business stops?

"Don't follow in my footsteps...I stepped in something."

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

As I stated in another thread here.

Some fools lie and claim that import tariffs are “unAmerican”. The Founding Fathers originally envisioned their government would be funded by import tariffs.

Import tariffs are more American than apple pie.

Trade Wars can be easy to win once you realize the other side pushing globalism loses their shirt if the nations start trade wars with each other.

For example. If there is a trade war, a company cannot ship the products they produce in third world nations using cheap slave labor to richer nations to sell those products at inflated prices.

The trade wars will promote more higher paying jobs in the U.S., which will benefit the nationalists by them having more money in their pockets. Or, the trade wars cause the economy to grind to a halt, which will collapse the welfare state, which will benefit that nationalists.

President Trump has made it clear he is more interested in money flowing to main street Americans, instead of global wall street pockets.

[It’sallbsParticipant]

What does America import most of?

If one is going to introduce high tarriffs then one needs to ensure the country is self sufficient and can rely on domestic produce of food and goods.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[It’sallbsParticipant]

Faust For Science wrote:

The trade wars will promote more higher paying jobs in the U.S

That’s not what happened in 1930 after Smoot Hawley.

America would undoubtadely lose a trade war with China.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

It’sallbs wrote:

That’s not what happened in 1930 after Smoot Hawley.

The 1930’s under FDR saw massive government regulation of the market which strengthened the economic depression factors of that time.

If FDR has not been crippled and dying from illness, he would have become a dictator as Stalin and Hitler. Actually, if FDR has not been ill, he would have been able to keep Stalin and Hitler civil with each other (the three of them held meetings together), and they would have carved up the world into a new world order of tyranny by the 1940’s.

Contrary to what historical revisionism as claimed. During the 1930’s, FDR consider both Stalin and Hiler to be his friends until the start of World War II.

Even with his illness, FDR was responsible for the starvation of millions of Americans due to the anti-business policies he created.

These regulations destroyed businesses, farms, jobs at all levels.

On the other hand, President Trump has been destroying regulations and creating more tax cuts, this combined with import tariffs will help to create more higher paying jobs in the U.S.

It’sallbs wrote:

America would undoubtadely lose a trade war with China.

That is an assumption. China has a lot of investments around the world that would be threatened if there was a global trade war.

The question is which is more important to those whom control China? Their egos? Or, their wealth?

It’sallbs wrote:

What does America import most of?

If one is going to introduce high tarriffs then one needs to ensure the country is self sufficient and can rely on domestic produce of food and goods.

That is the wrong question. The right question is what does the U.S. export?

The top three items the U.S. exports is food, oil and natural gas, and firearms. In that order. These are basic necessities for modern civilization.

Even if the greenback U.S. dollar system used in the global economy collapse, the U.S. still has some cards to play on the global market.

I wonder if NATFA has any agreements within it that would force Canada and Mexico to support the U.S. in a trade war with China?

While Canada would not be a major factor, China exports a lot of their goods into Mexico to side step U.S. duties directly shipping into the U.S. and use NATFA to export through Mexico into the U.S.

Such a move would economically hurt China.

[narrow road travelerParticipant 1680]

IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) wrote:

I apparently don’t understand what Trump says when he says or tweet things, because there is apparently ALWAYS something different that Trump means. I guess you have to be part of some sort of secret club to get the meaning of something, or maybe it is subjective.

So, you have this Trump tweet:

<p dir=”ltr” lang=”en”>When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don’t trade anymore-we win big. It’s easy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 2, 2018

<script async=”” src=”https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js” charset=”utf-8″></script>

I have not found once anyone EVER say a trade war was good, or there were actually winners. I haven’t seen anyone say that reducing trade made anyone richer. Maybe a win is that you have done more damage to them than they have done to you, but you are still in a hole. Also, I haven’t found anyone, outside of Trump, who has said that a trade war is easy to win. Trade wars are usually reference to when trade breaks down and more and more walls are built, so that each side hurts the other’s economy more. Unlike a normal war, with winners and losers, and treaties and peace, tradewars don’t go that way. It is called a war, because sides suffer.

So, I am not getting it. Or maybe am I? Is it pretty much Trump says: “Bring it on. You will hurt a lot and we will make you suffer until you give us what we want. We don’t need you as much as you need us, so you will play by our rules. We win, because you will hurt more than us”. Is that what is meant by: “Trade wars are good, and easy to win.” It is more posturing talk than anything else, and you aren’t to take what he said on face value, accurate, or any reflection of reality? What is the reality is what is meant or the intention, not the words. Is that correct?

Pardon my asking, because I just rather work on things of direct value than try to take on learning another language embedded in English. A lot of other people are like this also. What you have with the media is taking Trump’s words at face value, Wall Street dropping hundreds of points also for doing so, rather than bothering to take their time to understand what he is really saying. Those who support Trump apparently do, but since I don’t, it is foreign to me, so I ask.

It’s his white flag to the NWO. He’s a rino flying the flag.

Shrub jr. stated that the gulf war would be a walk in the park. Shrub jr. made a lot of other NWO brash claims. Those statements were referred to as ‘shrubisms’.

This is another reminder that the NWO wants Men to bleed, pay, and sell their soul. For a taste of what NWO has been eating since it’s inception.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. --Sun Tsu

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

Narrow, you are saying Trump has given up fighting the NWO?

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[It’sallbsParticipant]

Faust For Science wrote:

That is the wrong question. The right question is what does the U.S. export?

Actually no both are the right question.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[Author]

Posts