[Godstud]

It can be bad, but increasing taxes and tariffs merely causes the exporters to do the same to your goods. This can quite backfire on you, and cause things to increase in price, thereby removing the benefits of the tax. It's not a well-thought out response to a trade deficit, and as mentioned, many don't think a trade deficit is a bad thing. But... what do those pesky economists know, anyways?

[Hong Wu]

It can be bad, but increasing taxes and tariffs merely causes the exporters to do the same to your goods. This can quite backfire on you, and cause things to increase in price, thereby removing the benefits of the tax. It's not a well-thought out response to a trade deficit, and as mentioned, many don't think a trade deficit is a bad thing. But... what do those pesky economists know, anyways?

Maybe you're right. It's unfortunate that despite being a billionaire businessman and President, that Donald Trump can't appreciate these nuances. All of the rich people and professionals working the American stock market see it not being roiled by this dangerous talk so apparently none of them understand it either. It's unfortunate, it's like Draugmphf is steering us towards a cliff and no one does anything.

[Zagadka]

Maybe you're right. It's unfortunate that despite being a billionaire businessman and President, that Donald Trump can't appreciate these nuances.

There is a difference between business and economics, like between tactics and strategy. This is where electing someone with very little experience at a major part of the job comes in.

[One Degree]

Many like to use Economics as if it is separate from politics. The rationale is what ever makes the most money is preferred. They conveniently forget this is just an opinion and argue as if it is part of the Ten Commandments.
Tariffs are an internal concern. We should not interfere in internal concerns. Trade alliances or any alliance are a form of domination over those excluded. If we actual supported a real United Nations then all other agreements would be a violation. A world of equal autonomous nations is threatened by alliances or special consideration of any kind. A tariff on aluminium is not an attack on any country. It is an internal consideration.

[Godstud]

Economics is often very separate from politics. That is why Trump's attack on Canadian steel has new Conservative Premier Ford, backing Liberal PM Trudeau.

A tariff on aluminium is not an attack on any country.

That is completely false if it affects another country.

If Canada were to increase tariffs on something, the US would retaliate, even though it's an "internal matter". Nothing is internal when it comes to trade, and if it affects trade, it's not internal.

Your views on this are extremely simplistic, and very inaccurate.

[One Degree]

Economics is often very separate from politics. That is why Trump's attack on Canadian steel has new Conservative Premier Ford, backing Liberal PM Trudeau.

That is completely false if it affects another country.

If Canada were to increase tariffs on something, the US would retaliate, even though it's an "internal matter". Nothing is internal when it comes to trade, and if it affects trade, it's not internal.

Ford backing Trudeau clearly demonstrates the internal dimension of tariffs. A country should not retaliate simply with spiteful tariffs. That is ‘war by other means’. Tariffs should only consider the impact on your own country. If you are not selling enough of your product to one country then find new customers. A tariff only affects the consumers in that country therefore it is strictly internal.

[Godstud]

A country should not retaliate simply with spiteful tariffs.

That's exactly what the USA is doing because of Trump. In fact, if tariffs only affected the country placing them, the idea that they'd be spiteful is impossible.

Tariffs should only consider the impact on your own country.

They don't however. That's now how it works. You are directly affecting trade between the two countries, by placing tariffs.

If you are not selling enough of your product to one country then find new customers.

When they do, the same products in your country go up in price, and it costs your consumers more. The whole point of them importing them, is that they are competing effectively(cheaper) than your own home-grown items.

A tariff only affects the consumers in that country therefore it is strictly internal.

It also affects the people selling the items to the consumers, as they have to increase the prices to maintain profit margins, and as a result will sell less because they are less competitive.

Just so you're clear on the meaning...
Tariff: a tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.

[One Degree]

Why do you think it is a bad thing to change trade between two countries? You say economics is separate but your argument is our political alliance should prevent any economic change. Why should I care that a tariff that benefits my country is not so great for your country? If politics and economics are separate then this should not be a problem.
It is our alliances and special considerations that create the idea that I should consider the impact on you. Trump is systematically destroying each of these special arrangements. Many call him a naive idiot while disregarding the consistency of what he is doing. He is a Nationalist and he is pursuing a Nationalist policy.
He boldly proclaims “America First”, yet many accuse him of stupidity for doing exactly what he said he was going to do. It is stupid not to recognize the reality of what he is doing is exactly what he said he would do.

[Godstud]

Why should I care that a tariff that benefits my country is not so great for your country?

Because my country can put a tariff on something you import/export, and hurt you just as much, or even more, by causing things in your country to increase in price. Canada increasing a tariff on Softwood lumber, for instance, to 18% would increase most housing costs in the USA. I suppose it's OK, though, since that would be an internal affair in Canada?

Trade is supposed to be beneficial to both parties. You, and Trump, can't seem to see that, for some odd reason.

If politics and economics are separate then this should not be a problem.

When politics attempts to meddle in economics, there are often problems because political gain is not usually synonymous with economic gain. You can put in a few trade tariffs and make lots of gullible, uneducated Americans happy... Happy, that is, until they discover how much it will actually cost them.

Trump is systematically destroying each of these special arrangements.

Destroying friendships and alliances that are extremely long-lived and beneficial to both, is both short-sighted, and illogical.

It is stupid not to recognize the reality of what he is doing is exactly what he said he would do.

It is stupid to assume that what he's doing is good for Americans.

[One Degree]

Because my country can put a tariff on something you import/export, and hurt you just as much, or even more, by causing things in your country to increase in price. Canada increasing a tariff on Softwood lumber, for instance, to 18% would increase most housing costs in the USA. I suppose it's OK, though, since that would be an internal affair in Canada?

Trade is supposed to be beneficial to both parties. You, and Trump, can't seem to see that, for some odd reason.

When politics attempts to meddle in economics, there are often problems because political gain is not usually synonymous with economic gain. You can put in a few trade tariffs and make lots of gullible, uneducated Americans happy... Happy, that is, until they discover how much it will actually cost them.

Destroying friendships and alliances that are extremely long-lived and beneficial to both, is both short-sighted, and illogical.

It is stupid to assume that what he's doing is good for Americans.

It is good for Americans and your objections all come down to him rejecting liberal globalism. Higher prices are irrelevant to becoming more self sufficient and providing jobs for all levels of your population. Globalism has eliminated jobs that many Americans need. This is true of all countries and they will gradually be forced to realize it. Economic theories of global trade do not include the wide range of needs and abilities of each country’s citizens. China can make it cheaper, but that does nothing to help the factory class of the US.
These are two totally different ideological approaches and you can not judge Trump’s nationalist approach by the guidelines of your globalist approach.

[Godstud]

How is the price of your homes increasing good for Americanism?

Globalism is the reason Americans have so much stuff at such cheap prices. It's almost ridiculous for Americans to attack their very consumption.

China can make it cheaper, but that does nothing to help the factory class of the US.

Why should they? Do Americans worry about Chinese factory workers if they can get an item for $5 cheaper? Hell no! Americans will buy the cheapest item, and usually that means it was made in a Chinese factory where the workers made a lot less money than if it was made in America. I am sure American workers are often the last thing people think of when buying an iPhone.

These are two totally different ideological approaches and you can not judge Trump’s nationalist approach by the guidelines of your globalist approach.

Yes, you can. America has a globalist economy. It relies on trade, and that's part of the reason that USA has a trade deficit.

[One Degree]

@Godstud said...

How is the price of your homes increasing good for Americanism?

You are kidding? The rise in home prices is extremely beneficial to all the Americans with mortgages higher than the current selling price of their homes.

[Godstud]

How does increased construction prices of homes help Americans? American suppliers have to charge more because they pay more. Everyone else pays more, as a result, and that doesn't mean your property values rise in relation to costs. I guess your next statement tells me a lot about your lack of understanding...

The rise in home prices is extremely beneficial to all the Americans with mortgages higher than the current selling price of their homes.

Please read what you wrote, as it makes no fucking sense whatsoever! Americans paying more for houses that are worth less, sure doesn't help any Americans who can do math.

If your house costs more to build, it's going to cost you more to buy. That means you'd make less money selling it, and pay more to build it. That's not very good, no matter where you are.

[One Degree]

How does increased construction prices of homes help Americans? American suppliers have to charge more because they pay more. Everyone else pays more, as a result, and that doesn't mean your property values rise in relation to costs. I guess your next statement tells me a lot about your lack of understanding...

Please read what you wrote, as it makes no fucking sense whatsoever! Americans paying more for houses that are worth less, sure doesn't help any Americans who can do math.

If your house costs more to build, it's going to cost you more to buy. That means you'd make less money selling it, and pay more to build it. That's not very good, no matter where you are.

You appear to be unaware of the US housing bubble.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_ ... ing_bubble

[Godstud]

You seem to be unaware that this is a very BAD thing. Making it worse isn't going to help Americans afford their homes, is it?

[Unthinking Majority]

Godstud is right that people shouldn't confuse the loss of the Liberal Party in Ontario as a backlash against Trudeau's federal Liberal government.

The Liberals in Ontario have ruled for the last 15 years politics and had horribly mismanaged numerous aspects like the electricity power grid, where overbuilding of powerplants for sometimes corrupt political reasons and expensive multi-decade energy contracts means electricity bills in the province have risen horribly for all people and businesses. The party is filled with corrupt scumbags.

The Liberals have managed to make Ontario have the highest debt of any subnational government in the world. Despite this, the Liberals came into the election promising universal daycare, pharmacare, and dental care, which the province obviously can't afford. The NDP are even further to the left and promises the same things + free college tuition etc.

Doug Ford is a lying corrupt scumbag with a high school education and runs his dad's multi-million sticker/label company. The polls for his PC government dropped when he started opening his dumb mouth during the debates. But people are pinning their hopes on his party to try to get this province's finances in order, though it seems like a very tough task.

[Unthinking Majority]

For all the efforts to downplay this, there are polls for Canada too and they all seem to suggest that Trudeau is done, so it does extend past Ontario to at least some degree.

It's too early to say Trudeau is "done". His honeymoon period is well over, and voters have realized he's certainly not his father, but he still remains popular by many, and the alternatives from the other parties isn't great either. If the election were held today he might win with a minority government, maybe not a strong majority again.

Trudeau's main problem is that his politics are more left-leaning than most Canadian voters, who themselves tend to lean mostly left-of-center. He's a strong "social justice" advocate, and his top policy priorities read like he's a 1st-year university student. His top priorities are gender equality, climate change, pot legalization etc. Whereas most voters probably care more about the economy, rising housing prices etc. He's a famous rich kid & never has had to worry about these things or finding a job so he doesn't care as much.

[Godstud]

The Liberals in Ontario have ruled for the last 15 years politics and had horribly mismanaged numerous aspects

The Conservatives in AB had done much the thing that the Liberals did in Ontario. They paid for it, as well, when the NDP came into power. Thankfully, NDP seems to have gone quite conservative on economic issues, and have backtracked a bit environmental promises, which were a bit over the top.

I still like what PM Trudeau is doing, even though, like most politicians, he sometimes overdoes it and puts his foot in it. Still, his leadership is strong and he handles the world stage reasonably well. Our previous PM Harper had all the charisma of a wet paper bag, so it's easy to see how media became a bit enamoured of PM Trudeau.

He's not followed thru on some promises I would have liked, but I am a bit more realistic than some. You simply cannot do everything you promise. It's like promising the kids you'll go to Disneyland, but then you don't get that raise, and the car gets some problems, so you end up breaking that promise.

[Beren]

it's like Draugmphf is steering us towards a cliff and no one does anything.

That's what happened under Bush II, Trump's presidency is pretty much like a remake basically. At the beginning Bush and Putin seemed like best friends too while Israel and Saudi Arabia were preferable to Europe. The Bush administration was at odds with France and Germany like Trump, it was even worse because Blair, Berlusconi and Aznar openly formed a pro-US alliance within the EU. After his own historic tax cuts Trump only needs to start his own big war (in the Middle East supposedly) to keep up with the Bush-Cheney legacy. And the stock market had performed pretty well in Bush's second term before the plunge, although it would have been hard to outperform the Clinton years.

[Albert]

@Hong Wu
Btw Wu I forgot to mention.

I personally are in agreement with you that the election in Ontario I think show a general trend. I believe there is good change Trudeau will be out of government in Oct 2019.

It is still too early to tell exactly if this is a populist serge in Canada like has been witnessed all over the western world or is this just a political shift. Yet considering this is a historical result in Ontario, no other party lost so badly in history of Ontario elections, considering that Ford was labeled as populist; this very much resembles a populist surge we see happening around the western world today.

Also considering recent polls that suggest Trudeau and liberals will lose the election if held today. We might be heading for interesting elections in 2019. One term Canadian governments are rare, so that to will be an upset in itself if Trudeau loses.

That is the thing, Canadian politics are very stable, there is little much of sensationalism or polarization that goes on here in Canada. So it is hard to tell what will be.