Winning the trade war - Trump is using tariffs to advance a radical free-trade agenda


Trump is working for a situation where the government has less role. In order to do that, because other governments are already heavily involved, Trump is threatening to get his government involved in order to reach an agreement where they can agree to all reduce government control (regarding tariffs).

It seems to be working with the Europeans. Next stope Mexico and Canada.



He only needs to crack it with one group, then the rest will cave and renegotiate.

I remain shocked at how many are in denial of the basic facts, that we have been getting a raw deal and than using tariffs is reasonable response to bring people to the negotiating table. Asking nicely just doesn’t work when money is on the line.



Who has been getting a raw deal? I don’t buy from people who give me a raw deal. The last thing I need is some incompetent government bureaucrat telling me I am getting a raw deal. Just what exactly is this raw deal?

1 Like


Companies trying to export are getting a raw deal, didn’t know you were an exporter.

Your verbiage is as a consumer, not an exporter. Possibly you personally are delighted at your prices paid at whole foods. High prices in spite of historically low import trade barriers.



So we should harm consumers to help exporters? I am against any form of government redistribution.

1 Like


Yes, you’ve made that clear on multiple occasions. Fortunately your parochial view is in the minority. We don’t need people making decisions that ignore the reality of how the world actually works, people pushing an idealized set of regulations that are not reciprocated.

Incidentally, that’s largely were our past trade deal fell down, we went open kimono and Mexico was supposed to increase their wages, worker protections, and environmental protections to be more in synch with our own business environment. It didn’t happen, they didn’t reciprocate.



And your point is?



That your viewpoint ignores the real world and free trade theory.
You seem to be focused on getting lower prices even if your neighbor industries are shut out of exporting to the source of your favorite products. Free trade assumes the trade is practical and unconstrained in both directions, not just one way.

1 Like


Actually free trade does not assume reciprocity. If we are willing to buy shoes from China we are better off, regardless of whether or not they buy anything from us. If we weren’t better off, we wouldn’t buy from them.

I buy haircuts from a guy who buys nothing from me and probably never will. I am not being harmed by that deal.

1 Like


If the Chinese provide goods and take the money the US give them and then fund US government debt then the US is in a very vulnerable position.

The analogy would be if the hairdresser took the money you gave him and then used that to fund your kids debt. It would put your kids at a very vulnerable position. It is not unreasonable to want to stop that process and want the hairdresser to be reciprocal and use the money you gave him to support your kids jobs, not encourage an irresponsible and growing debt splurge.



I would phrase it more bluntly.

  • You buy haircuts instead of paying your mortgage,
  • your hair dresser has in turn been making your payments, and is slowly taking ownership of the equity in your home.

This irresponsible behavior will leave you homeless, if continued.

1 Like


The real solution is to stop borrowing money, then you will never be vulnerable. But that requires discipline, much better to threaten the barber to cover for your own bad behavior.



I agree the think to do would be to not borrow money but there is what is called the deep state which funds itself off tax payers funds and when that is not enough, future fax payers funds. Despite attempts by the electorate to end this, government keeps on giving itself money.

The other thing is that the barber wants to buy your kids house so that they will work for him. In this example the barber (Chinese) know exactly what they are doing.

1 Like


The “deep state”?
Everyone here who champions Trump’s tax cut must be part of that “deep state”.



Why? I assume most of the deep state doesn’t want tax cuts. It wants more tax to give itself more power.

1 Like


Who needs taxes if you can just borrow and saddle others with the debt?



Two reasons :slight_smile:

1 Because the amount of wealth the state needs to give to itself each year has skyrocketed to such an extent that you need to take a large part of it from the people actually creating it, as they create it.

  1. It is a power game. The less people get to keep their own wealth but are forced to hand it over to the government the more dependent they are on the government giving it back to them.
1 Like


How does any o fhts exonerate those supporting Trump’s tax cut?



You’ve gone in a different direction now. We can talk about this if you like.
I am not sure about using the word ‘exonerate’, it sort of sets the scene from the start that the people wanting tax cuts are somehow guilty. I would not agree with that framing of the issue.



No that is the direction that started in:
Your original statemtn on the deep state was:

That definition applies perfectly well to the Trump tax cut supporters.

You have gone on to elaborate on the attributes of your deep state group.

But that elaboration doesn’tchange the fact that Trump tax cut supporters are people who fund their tax cut off of future taxpayers funds.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit