Patterico's Pontifications

4/2/2025

It all depends on what “liberation” means

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:51 pm

[guest post by Dana]

If Bill Clinton could challenge the meaning of “is,” then surely it behooves us to challenge the meaning of “liberation,” since it’s being used to rally the American people. yet I’m certainly not seeing it:

President Trump on Wednesday announced a baseline 10 percent tariff on imports from all foreign countries, as well as higher tariff rates for dozens of nations that the White House deemed the “worst offenders” when it came to trade barriers.

The 10 percent tariff will go into effect on Friday. About 60 countries facing a higher reciprocal tariff will see those rates go into effect on April 9 at 12:01 a.m. Trump also announced a 25 percent tariff on all foreign-made automobiles that will take effect at 12:01 a.m. April 3.

. . .

“***This is one of the most important days, in my opinion, in America’s history,” Trump said. “It’s our declaration of economic independence.”

Claiming he could have gone with a higher amount on countries with reciprocal tariffs (China, Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, India, South Korea, Thailand, Switzerland, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia and the European Union), Trump said he didn’t want to create too much of a hardship. The formula for these countries “will be calculated by combining the rate of tariffs and non-monetary barriers like currency manipulation, then divided in half.”

Re China:

Karoline Leavitt. . .confirms that the 34 percent tariff on China is ON TOP of the previous 20 percent. So that means the rate on China will be *54* percent when these tariffs take effect.

The White House has published an explainer about why Trump believes the tariffs are a good thing for America.

I can’t even. . .

Off the top of his head, read it and weep:

Trump’s reciprocal tariffs:

1) Impose hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes on Americans without public/congressional input

2) Are based on secret calculations that have little, if any, connection to actual foreign trade barriers

3) Ignore all US tariff/non-tariff barriers, which in some cases are quite high

4) Are justified by a “national emergency” that reflects a total misunderstanding of how trade deficits work

5) Disregard US trade agreement commitments, including ones made by Trump himself

6) Will make us all poorer, and likely do real & lasting harm to the US economy (incl in manufacturing)

7) Embolden our adversaries around the world

Higher taxes, more trade wars, unilateral tax hikes, etc. I ask you, liberate us from what?

P.S. Isn’t is just a bit on the nose that Russia is not on the White House list, while Ukraine is:

FULL LIST: Liberation Day pic.twitter.com/ZBiRuJBCAr

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 2, 2025

(*** – Let’s just bookmark this for later. . .)

-Dana

Comments (126)

126 Responses to “It all depends on what “liberation” means”

Hello and omg.
Dana (c6c2a3) — 4/2/2025 @ 3:54 pm
But he has a economics degree from Wharton! They must be so proud, especially now.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:01 pm
Americans are being “liberated” from buying affordable foreign goods.

The only foreign leader who could approve of what Trump did is Putin.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:02 pm
This is the kind of thing that leads to general strikes in other countries, with tractors blocking the Interstates.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:02 pm
The only foreign leader who could approve of what Trump did is Putin.

Putin did it, too, you know. No foreign goods for sale there, either (not counting China).
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:03 pm
Who the F is advising him on this? And where do they expect to work in the future?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:04 pm
This is the biggest middle-class tax hike in at least 40 years.
john (142c21) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:07 pm
Who the F is advising him on this? And where do they expect to work in the future?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:04 pm

Trump doesn’t need advisors to tell him to impose tariffs, he has long favored his “most beautiful word.”
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:09 pm
This is the kind of thing that leads to general strikes in other countries, with tractors blocking the Interstates.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:02 pm

That happens when countries lift tariffs, and free their economies to face competition, for example.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:12 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:12 pm

Specifically:

French farmers are mobilizing for widespread protests…….targeting the EU-Mercosur trade agreement. Backed by their government, they argue the deal threatens their livelihoods by allowing a surge of South American agricultural imports produced under less stringent environmental standards.

Protests are planned nationwide, including gatherings at prefectures and traffic circles. So far, protests have been small. One group blocked a highway southwest of Paris on Sunday night with tractors. Witnesses at Velizy-Villacoublay said that some 20 tractors stationed by placard-holding farmers overnight on the N118 freeway artery toward Paris had left by late Monday morning.
………
Leading the charge of the new protests in France are unions, who oppose provisions such as duty-free imports of beef, poultry and sugar, which they say create unfair competition. Coordination Rurale, a union linked to the far right, has promised an “agricultural revolt,” including food freight blockades beginning Tuesday in Auch and Agen, in southwestern France.
………
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:16 pm
Who the F is advising him on this?

One of them is Peter Navarro, a third-rate economist who found his way into the White House by a Jared Kushner Amazon search.
Lutnick, too, but he stopped making appearances after his stupid comments about Americans reacting to not receiving their Social Security checks.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:20 pm
This is the kind of thing that leads to general strikes in other countries, with tractors blocking the Interstates.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:02 pm

Don’t worry, our farmers will be bailed out:

………..
The early discussions offer a tacit acknowledgment that Mr. Trump’s expansive tariffs could unleash financial devastation throughout the U.S. agricultural industry, a crucial voting base that the president similarly tried to safeguard during his 2018 trade war with China.

While the president has not announced any details of an aid package, his advisers have signaled in recent days that he could follow a playbook similar to the one he used in his first term, when he directed billions in payments to farmers who saw their exports to China plummet amid a trade war with Beijing.

Such a rescue package ultimately proved expensive, with the government shelling out about $23 billion after China imposed high retaliatory duties on soybean, corn, wheat and other American imports beginning in 2018. That money came from a fund at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a portion of which can be used to respond to emergencies, including trade disputes.

Brooke Rollins, the agriculture secretary, said last week that the administration may look to offer emergency aid to farmers, telling reporters that Mr. Trump had asked her to “have some programs in place that would potentially mitigate any economic catastrophes that could happen” in a global trade standoff.
………..
One idea the administration has weighed is whether to offer new tariff relief through the Commodity Credit Corporation at U.S.D.A., according to the people familiar with the matter.

The Commodity Credit Corporation is a key U.S.D.A funding vehicle: It supplies the money for federal programs to support farm incomes, stabilize commodity prices and respond to natural disasters. While its finances are complicated, the entity may borrow up to $30 billion from the Treasury Department.

In Mr. Trump’s first term, the U.S.D.A. program doled out money based on a formula that projected agricultural losses. The funding salved some of the sting from the trade war — and offered a political boon to Mr. Trump entering an election year — but it also faced significant complaints from farmers that the aid was slow and hard to access.
……….

Any payouts to farmers will offset new revenue raised by the tariffs, which the Republicans want to use to extend the expiring tax cuts. And consumers will still be paying increased prices and having their tax dollars transferred to farmers.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:26 pm
As I pointed out here, it’s gonna be a rough Thursday on Wall Street. Buckle up.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:34 pm
Trump’s tariff numbers are made up. Paul Krugman (first-tier economist, third-tier pundit, but this is economics)…

I guess it’s just possible that when we get details about the Trump tariffs they will be lower than what he just announced, but based on what he said, he’s gone full-on crazy. It’s not just that he appears to be imposing much higher tariffs than almost anyone expected. He’s also making false claims about our trading partners — not sure in this case whether they’re lies, because he may be truly ignorant — that will both enrage them and make it very hard to back down.

Basically, he’s claiming that the rest of the world is placing very high tariffs on U.S. products, and that he’s imposing “reciprocal” tariffs that are only half what they impose on us.
[…]
The left column show the tariffs others are supposedly charging on US products — and it’s completely crazy. Focus on the European Union. The EU, like the United States, has generally low tariffs; the average tariff it charges on US goods is less than 3 percent.

So where does this 39 percent number come from? I have no idea. Many people speculated that Trump would count value-added taxes as tariffs, even though they aren’t — European producers selling to the EU market pay the same VAT as US producers, so it doesn’t discriminate and therefore isn’t protectionist. But even if you get that wrong, EU VAT rates are in the vicinity of 20 percent, so you still can’t get anywhere close to 39 percent.

It should no surprise that a court-affirmed con man is trying to con the world with bogus numbers to justify the 2nd or 3rd largest tax hike in our history.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:38 pm
Again, giving plenary tariff-setting authority to the president was a bad idea when presidents were only using it to buy votes. Now, however, it’s metastasized.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:13 pm
Here’s JP Morgan’s hot take, none of it good.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:40 pm
The rationale is obviously wrong. It appears to be a ratio of the trade deficit. But since he’s moved to an end goal of the elimination of tariffs across the board, this will actually result in an increase in free trade and a lowering of barriers generally. Which I would view is a good thing, although it’s not remotely like what he promised his supporters during the election.

Although many of his supporters seem to adopt the approach of whatever Trump accomplishes is what Trump was promising all along and the best thing ever. This could also result in an increase in people who want free trade. We’ll see
Time (676186) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:42 pm
The smallest of brushbacks:

A handful of Republican senators broke with President Trump on trade policy, joining with Democrats to pass a resolution aiming to undo the president’s 25% tariff on Canadian imports.

The 51-48 vote to approve the measure took place just hours after Trump imposed a 10% baseline tariff on all imports to the U.S., and higher rates for some nations. It marked a significant rebuke of the president’s expansive effort to overhaul U.S. trade policy with friends and foes alike.

The resolution, led by Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.), would end an emergency declaration Trump used to impose tariffs on Canadian goods—the first time, along with a similar move on goods from Mexico, that a president had ever used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs.

Under federal law, Congress has the power to cancel national emergencies declared by the president. But the current proposal has been blocked in the GOP-led House, and Trump could veto any measure that makes it to his desk, making Wednesday’s vote largely symbolic.

Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky joined with all Democrats in backing the resolution. Paul, who is a co-sponsor of the bill, has argued that tariffs are a tax and that only Congress—not the president—can impose taxes under the Constitution.
…………
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.) has worked to stop defections, telling Senate Republicans to stay in line behind the party’s standard-bearer and vote against the resolution. While Republicans have a 53-47 Senate majority, the unified GOP front is starting to crack on trade as Republicans in some states—particularly those with agricultural interests or ties to Canada—warn about local impacts and voter backlash.
…………
The House has taken a step to tie its own hands, inserting language in a procedural measure that prevents it from using the powers it has to cancel the Feb. 1 tariffs. There are still pathways for the resolution in the House, albeit unlikely ones. GOP leadership could decide to bring the measure to the floor, or rank-and-file members could try to force a vote on a similar or identical measure using a discharge petition, if they collected 218 signatures.
…………
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:58 pm
Trump Tariffs Hit Antarctic Islands Inhabited by Zero Humans and Many Penguins

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump announced the US was imposing reciprocal tariffs on a small collection of Antarctic islands that are not inhabited by humans, as part of a global trade war aimed at asserting US dominance. The Heard and McDonald Islands, known for their populations of penguins and seabirds, can only be reached by sea.

………(T)he Heard and McDonald Islands, which are, incidentally, not countries—were listed on sheets of paper distributed to reporters.

One of the sheets claims that the Heard and McDonald Islands currently charge a “Tariff to the U.S.A.” of 10 percent, clarifying in tiny letters that this includes “currency manipulation and trade barriers.” In return, the sheet says that the US will charge “discounted reciprocal tariffs” on the islands at a rate of 10 percent.

The islands are small. Their reported 37,000 hectares of land makes them a little larger than Philadelphia. According to UNESCO, which designated the islands as a World Heritage Site in 1997, they are covered in rocks and glaciers. Heard Island is the site of an active volcano, and McDonald Island is surrounded by several smaller rocky islands. The islands are home to large populations of penguins and elephant seals.
………….
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 6:06 pm
Trump is not only economically illiterate, he’s mathematically innumerate, and it’s completely absurd, insane and stupid.

The column “Tariffs Charged to the USA” aren’t tariffs, they’re the ratio of US exports to US imports. I mentioned the 39% number above regard EU tariffs (the average tariff rate is actually 3%), but it’s US exports of $236 billion ÷ US imports of $606 billion = 39%.

This is one of Trump’s stupidest and most dishonest charts in history, as historical as holding up his daughter’s Bible in front of St. John’s Church in June 2020. This president still have the first f–king clue about trade deficits and surpluses.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 6:14 pm
From JP Morgan today:

“On a static basis, today’s announcement would raise just under $400 billion in revenue, or about 1.3% of GDP, which would be the largest tax increase since the Revenue Act of 1968,” he wrote. “We estimate that today’s announced measures could boost PCE prices by 1-1.5% this year, and we believe the inflationary effects would mostly be realized in the middle quarters of the year.”

He continued: “The resulting hit to purchasing power could take real disposable personal income growth in 2Q-3Q into negative territory, and with it the risk that real consumer spending could also contract in those quarters. This impact alone could take the economy perilously close to slipping into recession.”
Dana (583900) — 4/2/2025 @ 6:29 pm
Erick Erickson, Trump supporter…

If you want to encapsulate Donald Trump’s economic vision, a 10% baseline tariff puts the United States in the territory of an African third-world nation. Every single developed nation on planet earth has a baseline tariff of less than 10%, and most of those nations, contrary to what you might believe, exempt the United States from paying tariffs due to trade agreements Trump just scuttled.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 7:26 pm
Tyler Cowen, conservative economist: “This is perhaps the worst economic own goal I have seen in my lifetime.”

It seems by a crude formula: A given nation’s trade deficit with the U.S. divided by that nation’s exports to the U.S.

There is a base rate of 10 percent, to be applied to the UK, Costa Rica, and some other friendly nations. For India, it is 26 percent For Japan, it is 24 percent. For the European Union, it is 20 percent.

The most incomprehensible are those on Vietnam (the new tariff rate is 46 percent); Sri Lanka (44 percent); South Korea (25 percent); Cambodia (49 percent); and Taiwan (32 percent).

Are those not some of the major countries we are expecting to hold China at bay? Do we not want Chinese manufacturing to end up moving to those and other countries, so we are less dependent on the Middle Kingdom? What could possibly justify the fact that Taiwan, which is a U.S. ally being threatened by China, now faces almost the same tariff as China (34 percent)?

Trump calls these “reciprocal tariffs,” and the claim is that we are taxing foreign nations at only half the rate they are taxing our imports. The numbers are illusory, however, some of them apparently made up (Brazil at only ten percent?) and others counting a VAT as a net tax on American imports, which it is not.

In any case, we will be moving into a future with higher prices, less product choice, and much weaker foreign alliances. The tanking of the stock market, and other possible asset price repercussions, may tip America into recession and increase joblessness.

This is perhaps the worst economic own goal I have seen in my lifetime. I cannot think of any credentialed economist colleague—Democrat, Republican, or independent—who would endorse it. And I haven’t even mentioned the risk that some foreign nations will retaliate against American exporters, damaging our economy all the more.

You might think there is something to be said for a reciprocal approach to tariffs. Usually it consists of cutting off your nose to spite your face, but if it can sometimes work it requires a president (and Congress) who is predictable and trustworthy.

That is not how foreign nations view the current administration.

If you are wondering about the trade treatment of Canada and Mexico, that remains cloaked in mystery. The threatened 25 percent rate on those two nations, from earlier in Trump’s second term, violates the NAFTA redo that was negotiated by Trump himself. Why trust in reciprocity here?

Oh, did I mention that tariffs, according to the Constitution, are supposed to be the province of Congress, not the president? Congress did voluntarily turn some of this authority over to the executive branch, but no one at the time expected anything like the current assault on the American consumer and voter.

It’s worse than own goal. Trump’s formula is simpleton and absurd, the work of a f-cking moron, and this f-cking moron happens to be the guy with the power to execute this insanity.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/2/2025 @ 10:20 pm
republican conservatives don’t like tariffs because it cuts down on shipping jobs out of the country for higher profit. Democrat party leaders: our donors will make less money so will donate less money to counter progressives small dollar donation from voters who are primarying us.
asset (71119c) — 4/2/2025 @ 11:03 pm
Lobbyists have been doing well — for themselves — out of the Loser for some time.

The Wall Street Journal has a story today [January 6, 2020] about the ties between President Trump’s trade adviser, Peter Navarro, and the biggest steel company in the U.S. — Nucor Corp. It is particularly interesting in light of the stiff steel tariffs successfully pushed by Navarro, which he championed ever since he joined the administration.

(Nucor has an interesting, and mostly commendable, history. Which makes its turn to Navarro even more dismaying.)
Jim Miller (98ff5b) — 4/3/2025 @ 3:44 am
Reminder: You can explain much of the Loser’s behavior by assuming he is Putin’s patsy. (The Czar does not wish the US well.)
Jim Miller (98ff5b) — 4/3/2025 @ 4:00 am
we dodged a bullet when he declared the official language of the United States to be English and not Swedish, but he can still change his mind.

And there’s still the Executive Order requiring every person who enters a federal building to change their underwear twice a day and to wear it on the outside to make it easier to check.
nk (9dd06e) — 4/3/2025 @ 4:56 am
I wonder how many Trumpers woke up to see losses in their 401k accounts this morning and if that makes a difference to them? At some point, I would think that this would be jarring enough to shake them from their blind devotion to the president. Also, interesting that we haven’t seen any of our Trump supporters commenting on this thread. That may just be a coincidence with real life demands taking priority, or it may not.
Dana (3821d5) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:15 am
Just like we’ve been told countless times this blog can discuss what it wants to, and ignore what it doesn’t, we can all comment here on what interests us.
lloyd (0c7709) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:31 am
Trump wasn’t elected because folks are craving tariffs. He was elected for other reasons, which he is delivering on. Had Nevertrump not been apologists for border chaos, wacko judges, anti-Semitism, justice as a campaign tool, a bureaucracy run amok, etc., Trump wouldn’t exist. Reap the whirlwind. Look in the mirror.
lloyd (0c7709) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:38 am
President DeSantis sounds pretty good right now. No? Still failing your purity test??
lloyd (0c7709) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:45 am
Doublethink, the mental capacity to simultaneously accept mutually contradictory beliefs, takes longer for some people.

Give them time.

They’re still working out that Mr. Trump actually lowered the price of eggs when they went from $3.99/dozen to $6.99/dozen.
nk (9dd06e) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:48 am
@13

As I pointed out here, it’s gonna be a rough Thursday on Wall Street. Buckle up.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/2/2025 @ 4:34 pm

Yup.

As of 0950 central:
-1,522.97 (3.61%)today
whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:50 am
@15

Again, giving plenary tariff-setting authority to the president was a bad idea when presidents were only using it to buy votes. Now, however, it’s metastasized.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:13 pm

If this doesn’t get Congress to claw this back from the executive… it will always be something in a President’s toolbox.
whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:51 am
@31

President DeSantis sounds pretty good right now. No? Still failing your purity test??

lloyd (0c7709) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:45 am

Not just DeSantis, but President Nikki Haley too.

The problem, my good friend, is that the collective “we”(GOP primary voters, consultants AND candidates) couldn’t put our differences aside and recognize that the primary race was always going to be a Trump v. not-Trump choice. The collective “we” couldn’t coalesce behind a “not-Trump” candidate early enough. (which if we’re honest precludes DeSantis because he jumped in too late).
whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:57 am
@32 nk discovers inflation. Always four years too late to an issue….
lloyd (a03ad6) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:14 am
Mr. Trump is a very stable genius, and if he says a 54% tariff on OEM auto parts is going to make Fentanyl unaffordable to American drug addicts, then he knows what he’s talking about.
nk (9dd06e) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:16 am
This is funny — but it would be even funnier were he not in a responsible position.
Jim Miller (f60672) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:16 am
I believe that Trump is as fully mentally incapacitated due to advanced age as Biden is claimed to be.

But he hides it better.

Whereas Biden was born with a speech impediment, Trump has always been a cunning linguist.
nk (9dd06e) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:21 am
Nevertrump not been apologists for border chaos, wacko judges, anti-Semitism, justice as a campaign tool, a bureaucracy run amok, etc., Trump wouldn’t exist.
Bullshyte and lies, because conservatives who oppose Trump favor strong border enforcement, support conservative judges, support Israel, support the rule of law, and support smaller government.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:22 am
NeverTrumpers support this guy’s position on tariffs.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:29 am
My view of a certain brand of Trumper comes from an old cartoon.

There’s middle-aged heavy-set man in a sleeveless undershirt sitting in arm-chair and holding a can of beer on the chair arm.

Clockwise from him is a middle-aged heavy-set woman in a house dress sitting on a sofa and clipping her toenails.

A toenail clipping flies across the room and lands on the man’s lap.

A second toenail clipping flies across the room and lands on arm of the chair on which he is holding the beer can.

The man does not react to either.

Finally, a third toenail clipping lands right in the beer can.

The man says: “Edna, that’s disgusting!”

He continues: “You will never win the toenail-clipping contest with aim like that.”
nk (9dd06e) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:38 am
Krugman…

America created the modern world trading system. The rules governing tariffs and the negotiating process that brought those tariffs down over time grew out of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act, devised by FDR in 1934. The growth in international trade under that system had some negative aspects but was on balance very good for America and the world. It was, in fact, one of our greatest policy achievements.

Yesterday Donald Trump burned it all down.

Krugman showed via Yale Budget Lab that Trump’s shiny new tariffs are higher than the disastrous Smoot-Hawley regime. Also, Trump’s crude simpleton formula only included goods, not services.

There’s so much wrong with this approach that it’s hard to know where to start. But one easy thing to point out is that the Trump calculation only considers trade in goods, while ignoring trade in services. This is a big omission. Notably, the European Union runs a substantial surplus with us if you only look at trade in goods — but this is largely offset by an EU deficit in services trade:

So if Trump’s people had plugged all trade with the EU, not just trade in physical goods, into their formula they would have concluded that Europe is hardly protectionist at all.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:47 am
Again, giving plenary tariff-setting authority to the president was a bad idea when presidents were only using it to buy votes. Now, however, it’s metastasized.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/2/2025 @ 5:13 pm

If this doesn’t get Congress to claw this back from the executive… it will always be something in a President’s toolbox.

whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 7:51 am

All of the Senate Republicans (with the exception of McConnell, Murkowski, Paul, and Collins) voted yesterday to support the President’s emergency declaration imposing tariffs on Canada. And back in March the Republican majority in the House adopted a rule which prevents any consideration of a resolution to undo Trump’s emergency declarations to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China without approval of the Republican leadership through the end of 2026.

“Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.”

The gambit removes the ability for any House members to use an expedited process to force a vote on repealing the tariffs.
……….
Democrats already had legislation teed up: House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) introduced such resolutions on March 6, starting that 15-day clock.

But the new language approved by the House essentially pauses that clock, saying that days from now until the end of the year do not count.

Where is the support in Congress “to claw this back from the executive”? It doesn’t exist.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:57 am
Treasury Secretary Bessent has issued a statement regarding the stock markets.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:02 am
First, here’s the breakdown of the US Trade Representative formula, which basically served to blowing smoke to cover how clown show it really is.

Second, Trump’s chart is a scam. “Tariffs Charged to the US” aren’t tariffs and certainly weren’t “charged” to the US, so the title of the column is a lie. It’s fundamentally dishonest.
The other column, titled “USA Discounted Reciprocal Tariffs” is equally a lie. There’s no “discount” when when tariffs are hiked above Smoot-Hawley levels, and there’s no “reciprocal” when “tariffs charged” column is a lie. This fraud of a ill-conceived chart tells us exactly who Trump is, and America is going to pay unless Congress intervenes, which they won’t.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:03 am
Lie back and enjoy it:

………
“My advice to every country right now is do not retaliate. Sit back, take it in, let’s see how it goes. Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation,” (Treasury Secretary) Bessent said Wednesday in an interview on “Special Report” shortly after the announcement. “If you don’t retaliate, this is the high-water mark.”

Notably absent on the list of countries subject to tariffs were Mexico, Canada, Russia and Belarus.

Bessent said the United States doesn’t trade with Russia or Belarus because they are sanctioned.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, however, found in 2024 that the United States’ total goods trade with Russia was an estimated $3.5 billion.

U.S. goods exports to Russia in 2024 were $526.1 million, down 12.3 percent from 2023 and U.S. goods imports from Russia totaled $3.0 billion in 2024, down 34.2 percent from 2023, according to the government agency.
……….

More:

(Russia) was left off of a list of dozens that have much smaller trade imbalances with America, but were still slapped with tariffs of up to 50%. Trade between Russia and the U.S. has dropped significantly since the imposition of numerous rounds of sanctions by Washington as punishment for the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine. However, Russia still sells enriched uranium and some chemicals to America.

President Trump’s administration is amid a major rapprochement with Moscow that could see the biggest reset in relations since the fall of the Soviet Union. Leaving Russia out of the tariff firing line could give Trump more leverage in his effort toward peace.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that numerous sanctions on Russia had already precluded meaningful trade. But bilateral trade between the U.S. and Russia stands at $3.5 billion, far larger than other countries which incurred tariffs. Iran, which has similar sanctions and even less trade, was slapped with a 10% tariff. Syria, which is also sanctioned and has very limited trade with the U.S., has tariffs as high as 41%.
………..
“Trump and Putin are in a sort of bromance right now,” (said Alexandra Prokopenko, a fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin). “It seems these ceasefire talks are not going as fast as the Trump administration expected, and they want to have more leverage.”
##########
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:15 am
Wembley, I finally got around to posting my reply in the open thread
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:17 am
I noticed that when Trump does something that’s very hard to defend on its own merits some people like to pretend that Trump didn’t win a plurality of the GOP primary. They like to ignore the fact that even if you added all of the never Trump votes to DeSantis‘s total Trump still beat him. They also like to ignore the fact that DeSantis didn’t make much of a fight of it, and dropped out quickly.

Like it or not Trump is what the plurality of the GOP primary voters wanted far more than they wanted any of the other options.

Trump is what a plurality of the general election voters wanted.

Democracy is giving us what we asked for good and hard
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:19 am
Trump is a marketing genius. If I had been asked to explain his policy on this, I would have put together a long, detailed explanation of how he’s calculating a surrogate for barriers to entry and using US import tariffs as a counterweight to that, and how what he’s calling tariffs is actually an aggregate A various things. My explanation would’ve taken a lot of work to put together and been hard to explain. Trump just simplified it down to they have tariffs. He’s lying. Words mean things and he’s using them in a way that is not correct or honest.

But it’s probably more effective from a marketing standpoint than my approach would’ve been.

I also would’ve been constrained by feeling some need to be consistent with what I said I wanted to do. Trump needs no such thing.
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:23 am
I’m glad the partisan divide isn’t by populist / non-populist. I’m also glad that Trump is the one leading populist policies. I think his policies are bad, and are going to result in bad outcomes, and I think the way he’s doing it is going to make that happen very very quickly, which will hopefully create a backlash to this type of protection is nonsense and move us towards Free trade as a goal. Trump’s language about all of this stuff being payback and reciprocity could accelerate us towards that.

Hell, for all, I know Trump Wanted free trade all along, I knew that he had to come in as a populist frame. It is payback get the support of the masses and then at the end of the day when what was left was a significant reduction in trade barriers. The populist type would think that they won.
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:25 am
Performance Art:

…….
Under the Cantwell–Grassley Trade Review Act of 2025, any tariffs imposed by the president would expire after 60 days unless Congress voted to approve them. Congress also would have the power to terminate tariffs at any time by voting to pass a resolution of disapproval.
……….
“For too long, Congress has delegated its clear authority to regulate interstate and foreign commerce to the executive branch,” said (Senator Chuck Grassley)……

Cantwell, in her statement, said the country’s founding fathers gave Congress clear constitutional authority over war and trade. “Arbitrarily tariffs, particularly on our allies, damage U.S. export opportunities and raise prices for American consumers and businesses,” she said. “As representatives of the American people, Congress has a duty to stop actions that will cause them harm.”
#########

They are just realizing this now? The bill has a less than zero chance of being enacted into law. Even if passed by the Senate (a 50-50 proposition), it will never make it to the floor of the House, let alone to the President’s desk for his expected veto.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:26 am
I saw a funny one online “ Maga thinks they want manufacturing jobs, they don’t, what they want is an economy like we used to have when 30% of the workforce was represented by unions and workers were able to claim a greater share of profits from the owners and managers.”
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:26 am
Like it or not Trump is what the ~~plurality~~ vast majority of the GOP primary voters wanted far more than they wanted any of the other options.

FIFY. Trump won 76.4% of Republican primary votes; followed by Nikki Haley at 19.7%.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:32 am
Link for Republican primary voting.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:33 am
“Trade is bad”, and now Trump has acted on that scribble.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:40 am
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:40 am

I love this bullet from the top of the article:

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders denied that current aides to Donald Trump believe he is an imbecile.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:43 am
Liberation from some money, although Trump will claim it means…what?

Liberation from foreign tariffs?

Liberation from needing to import essentials?
Sammy Finkelman (920ecf) — 4/3/2025 @ 10:24 am
Liberation from sanity. Have you seen the movie Harvey (1950) with James Stewart:

Elwood P. Dowd: Well, I’ve wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it.
nk (62c296) — 4/3/2025 @ 10:45 am
The midterms will now occur in the middle of a recession. Assuming they happen.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:41 am
FIFY. Trump won 76.4% of Republican primary votes; followed by Nikki Haley at 19.7%.

Haley dropped out March 6th, so those numbers include quite a few primaries where Trump was unopposed.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:45 am
what they want is an economy like we used to have when 30% of the workforce was represented by unions and workers were able to claim a greater share of profits

Yet Trump is dismantling government jobs, which are all unionized and pay better than the same jobs in the private sector.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:47 am
@48

Wembley, I finally got around to posting my reply in the open thread

Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:17 am

My retort is in that thread.
whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:49 am
But it’s probably more effective from a marketing standpoint than my approach would’ve been.

Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene II

Brutus gives a rational explanation of how Caesar’s death preserved the Republic.
Antony riles up the crowd, winning the argument handily.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:53 am
NASDAQ down 5%
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:54 am
Hell, for all, I know Trump wanted free trade all along

Yeah, sometimes I try to believe that Trump is trying to force the issues.

Massive tariffs to get our partners to see that their constant gaming of the system to gain advantage can have unwanted results, and to rebuild a truer free market system where nationalist barriers aren’t imposed on the down-low.

Massive deportations to get Congress’s mind right so that a wholesale reform of the broken immigration system can occur.

Offering peace to Russia to make them give up on territorial expansion, then having them reject it utterly. Followed by NATO in Ukraine, more in sadness than in anger.

But I am not going to bet on any of that.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:59 am
There is also the problem of capital flows being free while labor flows cannot be. While I admit that, in the long run, this is a positive force, people eat and vote in the short run so some accommodation there is a practical necessity.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:03 pm
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 9:19 am

The demise of DeSantis occurred simultaneously with the first indictments against Trump, indictments you and Nevertrump thought were awesome.

This is fact you will never be able to explain away with revisionist history.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:18 pm
Your initial claim was that we ended up with Trump because Desantis failed some purity test….

Which explanation are you offering? That Desanstis was rejected because he failed the purity test or that Trump’s base abandoned RD because Trump was charged with various crimes?

Also, can you clairify if you think the criminal investigations were intended to make him more popular and help him with the primary because the Dems thought he’d be easier to defeat, to make him less popular so he’d be easier to defeat, or to prevent him from running by making him a convicted felon and ineligible?

Curious which one of those three you adhere to, since they’re somewhat mutually exclusive.
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:38 pm
@54, RIP, thank you. It’s nice to see FIFY used in a friendly and helpful way for once.
Time (f4dec1) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:39 pm
I also think that Trump should force another issue with Mexico as part of any immigration treaty — the unfair and unequal treatment of Americans in Mexico. Among other things, equal legal rights and property ownership to all legally resident Americans there. They claim a sensitivity due to 19th century American encroachment, particularly in Texas and California, but ignore American sensitivity to what appears to be a concerted push for Mexican ownership in US border areas.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:48 pm
first indictments against Trump, indictments you and Nevertrump thought were awesome.

I invite you to find a single post of mine that said the NY Stormy Daniels charges were anything but Trumped-up. As for the documents case, one had to be intentionally obtuse to deny Trump’s guilt. But those were later.

I consider myself Nevertrump as I never voted for the man and never will, but I viewed the first charges in NY as garbage all along.

Our host thought they were great though. I can’t remember Time’s take, but you are conflating a lot of folks here.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:57 pm
Which explanation are you offering? That Desanstis was rejected because he failed the purity test or that Trump’s base abandoned RD because Trump was charged with various crimes?

Two things can’t both be true? Interesting. Umm… no. I like to think there’s a better answer in you.

DeSantis was getting knocked around by establishment Republicans the moment he entered the race. Handing Trump a bloody shirt to wave around was the final nail. He had support from nobody at that point.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:57 pm
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 12:57 pm

It’s not about you.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:01 pm
Time, the consensus seems to be that the early NY charges, being utter crap, made Trump’s position stronger and opposition a bit anti-Republican. Later charges muddled this issue some among those still paying attention, but the initial NY charges were purely political and colored all the rest to most voters.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:01 pm
It’s not about you.

You slandered a bunch of people, including me. If you don’t like that, be more specific in your claims.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:02 pm
Dow -3%
NASDAQ -5.3%
S&P -2.6%

Apple -10%
AMD -9%
Amazon -9$
Boeing -10%
BofA -11%
Ford -5%
GM -4%
Google -4%
Micron -16%
Nvidia – 7%
TSMC – 7%
Uber -6%
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:11 pm
Slandered. OK. I guess… sorry?

I’ve been called a Nazi, fascist, terrorist, etc here. Not really phased by it.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:11 pm
I’ve been called a Nazi, fascist, terrorist, etc here. Not really phased by it.

Not by me. I may have had some harsh things to say, but I’m generally not a name-caller and I think I’ve gotten some of the same from those that are.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:12 pm
The point being was that Nevertrump was quite divided over the NY cases, many viewing them as counterproductive and helpful to Trump. There’s a reason why Trump got the other cases delayed, but let the NY ones play out.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:14 pm
I appreciate that. I’m not a name caller either.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:15 pm
Since you voted for stupid Hitler at least three times, complaining that you didn’t have options is kind of hilarious.

Many people were saying the really bad horrible things he was saying were actually things he was telling you he was doing, and now he’s doing it.

It’s shocking because it’s always the worst decision possible, but it shouldn’t be shocking that he’s doing it, he’s been actively doing it and telling people he was going to do it for a decade.

That you keep memory holing all the experience we had with these turds, and you still keep parroting it for LOLZ, or something.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:15 pm
I do admit to think Trump is stupider than dirt, however. A poor standard-bearer for people who deserved a better one.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:15 pm
One other thing to note re DeSantis.

If he had gotten the nomination, most of Nevertrump still would’ve voted Harris.

If Haley got the nomination, I and most others on my side would’ve voted for her.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:18 pm
@82 Did you ever explain why you named yourself after a Nazi?
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:20 pm
Closing bell:

U.S. markets slid Thursday in their steepest declines since 2020, as investors grappled with the threat that President Trump’s new tariff plan will trigger global retaliation and hurt the economy.

Major stock indexes dropped as much as 6%. Stocks have lost roughly $3.1 trillion in market value Thursday, their largest decline since March 2020.

The Dow industrials dropped 1679 points, or 4%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq, which powered the market higher for years, was down 6%, pulled lower by big declines in Nvidia, Apple and Amazon.com. The S&P 500, which fell 4.8%, and the other benchmarks, suffered their sharpest declines since the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The dollar meanwhile slipped to its lowest level of the year, a sign of unease over the growth outlook and fears that the flow of international funds into the country will be sharply curtailed. Inflation expectations rose.
………
President Trump took the selloff in stride. “I think it’s going very well,” Trump said in response to a question about his tariffs Thursday afternoon. “The markets are going to boom.”
…………
The U.S. dollar sank more than 2% against the euro, Japanese yen and Swiss franc. Oil and gold both fell and investors dashed for the safety of Treasurys, a response to fears that the tariffs will tip the economy toward recession.
…………

The numbers:

DJIA -1,679.39 points;-3.98%

NASDAQ -1,050; -5.97%

S&P 500 -274.45; -4.84%

Russell 2000 -134.82; -6.59%
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:21 pm
The election for those here that picked a side, seemed to be more-of-a-bad-deal vs radical change, and focused on the open Southern border and the continent’s poor flooding into our cities.

When the major parties offer us 1 vs 1 (scale of 10) elections, I’s vote a minor party. But some will find a way to convince themselves that a “1” is really a “3.” What was your excuse?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:22 pm
“Massive tariffs to get our partners to see that their constant gaming of the system to gain advantage can have unwanted results, and to rebuild a truer free market system where nationalist barriers aren’t imposed on the down-low.”

Many of the countries targeted by tarrifs had essentially a 0% tariff with the US, due to trade agreements. The numbers on the document Trump is showing off are straight up lies/made up numbers.
Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:22 pm
Did you ever explain why you named yourself after a Nazi?

And, actually, a pretty stupid Nazi. I guess Schultz would have been worse.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:23 pm
One other thing to note re DeSantis.

If he had gotten the nomination, most of Nevertrump still would’ve voted Harris.

If Haley got the nomination, I and most others on my side would’ve voted for her.

Most of NeverTrump strongly disliked Trump personally, for his ignorance, venality and his constant lies. They would not have had the same aversion to DeSantis, and most would have voted for him. More would have voted “present” than voted for Harris.

If Haley had gotten the nomination, quite a few centrists would have joined all the Republicans and she would have won in an actual landslide.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:28 pm
FIFY. Trump won 76.4% of Republican primary votes; followed by Nikki Haley at 19.7%.

Haley dropped out March 6th, so those numbers include quite a few primaries where Trump was unopposed.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 11:45 am

Even if she stayed in race, the overall result would have remained the same. The only primaries where she performed well allowed Democrats to vote in Republican primaries. She couldn’t even win her home state.

Regarding Ron DeSantis, he tried to be Trump without his charisma. He was about as exciting as a dead fish washed up on a Florida beach.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:28 pm
If Haley had gotten the nomination, quite a few centrists would have joined all the Republicans and she would have won in an actual landslide.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:28 pm

Facts really not in evidence.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:29 pm
If Haley had gotten the nomination, quite a few centrists would have joined all the Republicans and she would have won in an actual landslide.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:28 pm

Yeah, well that first step is the most important.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:32 pm
Congress waking up over tariffs

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), the only grain farmer in the Senate, joined with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D., Wash.) to introduce a bill on Thursday that would allow Congress to remove tariffs put in place by any president with a simple majority vote.

Grassley’s office said the bill was part of his longstanding work on trade policy and not specifically a response to Trump’s actions.

“We have to wait and see the impact” of the new tariffs, Grassley told reporters. “I’m not surprised at the impact today, but we’ve got to wait a few days and get a longer-term impact.”

Late Wednesday, four Senate Republicans helped Democrats pass a measure aiming to reverse a previously announced 25% tariff on Canadian imports, and Democrats said they were planning more such measures to challenge Trump’s policies. None of the proposals are likely to become law, but they serve to help gauge GOP pushback.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), who backed the Canada measure, said on X that tariffs are “bad policy, and trade wars with our partners hurt working people most,” pointing to the expected hit to farmers, bourbon makers and car manufacturers in his state. He said that “at a time when Americans are tightening their belts, we would do well to avoid policies that heap on the pain.”

…

Other GOP lawmakers indicated their support for the president’s agenda might have a breaking point.

“Tariffs are like whiskey,” Sen. John Kennedy (R., La.) said on Fox News. “A little whiskey under the right circumstances can be refreshing. Too much whiskey under the wrong circumstances and you end up drunk as a goat. We just don’t know right now.”

Sen. Jerry Moran (R., Kan.) told CNN it was too soon to gauge the impact of the tariffs, but he said he “would have thought they would be less dramatic, less significant and more targeted. I think we ought to be focused on our economic adversaries, and be less damaging to our economic allies.”

Democrats said they believed they could win over more Republicans. Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.), the lead author of the measure to undo the tariffs on Canadian goods, said he was planning to introduce similar measures aimed at a related suite of tariffs on other countries.

“As the economic reality sets in, we could get more,” Kaine said of GOP votes.

People who didn’t sell today or tomorrow are going to have a long weekend of angst. I expect Monday to be even worse.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:38 pm
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:38 pm

As I posted above, this is just too little, too late. The bill has a less than zero chance of being enacted into law. Even if passed by the Senate (a 50-50 proposition), it will never make it to the floor of the House, let alone to the President’s desk for his expected veto.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:41 pm
Facts really not in evidence

Only to those who insist on measuring the unknown. But look at the numbers for “I hate these choices” for either Biden-Trump or Harris-Trump.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:41 pm
let alone to the President’s desk for his expected veto.

After the market crashes, minds will change.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:42 pm
Did you ever explain why you named yourself after a Nazi?

I know that explaining how Hogan’s Heroes is not a documentary, shouldn’t be complicated, but I know the Bund has a severe mental challenge as a prereq.

Werner Klemperer was actually a jew.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:49 pm
Without Trump, you don’t get the super early debate and Biden’s unfitness doesn’t become obvious until it’s much too late to replace him. Even a weirdo worm like DeSantis probably wins after that.
Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:50 pm
let alone to the President’s desk for his expected veto.

After the market crashes, minds will change.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:42 pm

Neither the Grassley or Kaine efforts will make it to House floor, as Mike Johnson walking on the razor’s edge, just a few votes away from removal. As I noted here, the House adopted a rule that prevents quick consideration of resolutions that overturn emergency declarations.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:51 pm
But look at the numbers for “I hate these choices” for either Biden-Trump or Harris-Trump.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:41 pm

Doesn’t mean they would have voted for Haley. Non-voting is also an option to “I hate these choices”.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:52 pm
let alone to the President’s desk for his expected veto.

After the market crashes, minds will change.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:42 pm

1) I’ll take that bet.

2) By then it will be too late, the damage will have been done.

3) As I mentioned, I don’t see Mike Johnson allowing either the Kaine or Grassley efforts coming to the House floor for a vote.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:57 pm
Without Trump, you don’t get the super early debate and Biden’s unfitness doesn’t become obvious

Oh, it was already obvious to most of the news media. But they were lying to us. Without Trump they probably would not have had the motivation.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:57 pm
IF I said the sun would rise tomorrow, Rip would talk about “Facts not in evidence” or maybe that “The sun doesn’t really ‘rise'”, but he’d be unable to leave it alone.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:59 pm
IF I said the sun would rise tomorrow, Rip would talk about “Facts not in evidence” or maybe that “The sun doesn’t really ‘rise’”, but he’d be unable to leave it alone.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:59 pm

Since it is a scientific fact that due to rotation of the Earth the sun does appear to “rise”, probably not.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:01 pm
The key to the DOJ fluctuating… is not necessarily the sign day spread… but, over the next few days.

FYI… year – to – year, the DOJ is still up by +1,418.79 ↑ (3.63%)past year.

Friday and Monday after the weekend should tell us much more.
whembly (b7cc46) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:01 pm
IF I said the sun would rise tomorrow, Rip would talk about “Facts not in evidence” or maybe that “The sun doesn’t really ‘rise’”, but he’d be unable to leave it alone.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:59 pm

Since I would agree with you on that point, I wouldn’t say anything.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:03 pm
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 4/3/2025 @ 1:49 pm

But you chose his Nazi character, not him.
lloyd (57f218) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:04 pm
“Signalgate” is not quite over:

The Pentagon’s inspector general has launched an investigation into Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s use of the Signal messaging app to discuss U.S. military operations in Yemen with other national security officials.
……..
“The objective of this evaluation is to determine the extent to which the Secretary of Defense and other DOD personnel complied with DOD policies and procedures for the use of a commercial messaging application for official business,” acting Pentagon Inspector General Steven Stebbins said Thursday in a memo sent to Hegseth and his deputy, Stephen Feinberg.

Stebbins said the watchdog agency would also look at whether Hegseth complied with the Pentagon’s rules for communicating classified information over proper channels and followed federal laws on retaining records. The group’s Signal messages were set to delete in up to four weeks.
………..
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:07 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:07 pm

Stebbins to be fired in 3,2,1……
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:09 pm
https://www.newser.com/story/366653/trumps-tariff-formula-is-surprisingly-simple.html

…The White House posted an explainer with complicated-looking formula, but the BBC unpacks it to find a “simple” one beneath. As does CNN, which explains it succinctly:

“The country’s trade deficit divided by its exports to the United States times 1/2. That’s it.”

China provides an example: The US buys more goods from China than it sells, resulting in a deficit of $295 billion. The total amount China exports to the US is $440 billion. Dividing 295 by 440 results in 67%, and half of that results in the 34% tariff levied on the nation.

White House explainer:

https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations

…Consider an environment in which the U.S. levies a tariff of rate τ_i on country i and ∆τ_i reflects the change in the tariff rate. Let ε0 represent the passthrough from tariffs to import prices, let m_i>0 represent total imports from country i, and let x_i>0 represent total exports. Then the decrease in imports due to a change in tariffs equals ∆τ_i*ε*φ*m_i<0. Assuming that offsetting exchange rate and general equilibrium effects are small enough to be ignored, the reciprocal tariff that results in a bilateral trade balance of zero satisfies: …

Newser did not explain how the WH calculations reduce to a simple formula or how variables were filled in to so reduce it.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:19 pm
This sounds like it could effect eBay. Or maybe it doesn’t apply there. In any case many items sold on eBay labeled from China are actually shipped from “Greater China” which seems to mean Equatorial Guinea. But maybe that’s getting tariffed to (or maybe not)

https://www.newser.com/story/366615/temu-shein-loopholes-days-are-numbered.html

A loophole that allowed millions of Americans to buy cheap, tariff-free goods from online Chinese retailers like Temu and Shein is being closed as part of President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff actions. In an executive order Wednesday, Trump eliminated the “de minimis” exemption for packages worth under $800 from China, including Hong Kong, effective May 2, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to the White House, shipments sent through the international postal system will be “subject to a duty rate of either 30% of their value or $25 per item (increasing to $50 per item after June 1, 2025).”
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:25 pm
….The most incomprehensible are those on Vietnam (the new tariff rate is 46 percent); Sri Lanka (44 percent); South Korea (25 percent); Cambodia (49 percent); and Taiwan (32 percent)…. Do we not want Chinese manufacturing to end up moving to those and other countries, so we are less dependent on the Middle Kingdom?

To Trump, it’s all the same whether imports come from China or from another country that may not hold to the same foreign policy all the time.

I guess you could consider South Korea and Taiwan to be military threatened or possibly blockaded one day by China.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:38 pm
The “de minimus” rules are an issue on eBay forums, and not just wrt China. The Canadian situation is more concerning since about half of foreign SALES on the US site go to Canada and the tariffs are so confusing that few, if any eBay sellers can compute them.

Let’s say I sell a $10 book to a Canadian buyer. The book was printed in the US on paper sourced from Canada. What are the Canadian tariffs now? Will they change if Trump wakes up on the other side of the bed?
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:41 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 8:57 am

Where is the support in Congress “to claw this back from the executive”? It doesn’t exist.

They don’t want a test vote that could split the Republicans and effect other issues,

Of course to really reverse this they need 2/3 although Trump would cave in before it reaches that point.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:44 pm
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:41 pm

the tariffs are so confusing that few, if any eBay sellers can compute them.

eBay computes state sales taxes, so the problem should be that of eBay’s.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:46 pm
Today Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said BOTH that U.S. farmers would sell more exports (which is a possible way how things might eventually play out, although Trump doesn’t seem to be doing what Lutnick predicts) AND that prices (meaning in the U.S.A. presumably) would drop.

I’d expect prices to drop a bit in Europe if more American grown food could be sold there, but the opposite in the U.S.A. Unless he’s projecting more food would be grown.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:54 pm
People who would state “I hate these choices” may still vote for one or the other.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 2:56 pm
https://singjupost.com/transcript-of-president-trump-remarks-at-liberation-day-event-april-2-2025/?singlepage=1

We had virtually no inflation for four years, but after transitioning over to sleepy Joe, went from almost nonexistent to the highest in the history of our country. They had the highest inflation in the history of our country, brought up by energy and bad spending and bad policy and lot of bad things happened.

When Trump says something that he knows is wrong, he tends to repeat himself.

This is mot true.

It was the highest rate of inflation in 30 to 40 years. But not in thenhistory of the United States.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/3/2025 @ 3:03 pm
@28 More wealthy voted for Harris then trump. Most stocks are owned by wealthy. Working class is going from democrat to republican as donor class tells democrat leaders social justice OK, economic populism not ok if you want our $$$ to fend off Bernie and the left party base.
asset (7c67b9) — 4/3/2025 @ 3:44 pm
Meanwhile, the EU uses fines instead of tariffs to deal with American social media. Apparently, unless censored, they contain information that destabilizes European “democracy.” Why is it always “outside agitators”?

It’s not like the US can retaliate against EU-based social media. Maybe we should just cut off their access to all of ours, for the own good.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 4:56 pm
Of course to really reverse this they need 2/3 although Trump would cave in

Again, due to INS v Chadha’s failure to respect normal severability rules. The entire set of Emergency Powers laws should have been nullified once the check against those powers was killed.

And if they can get 2/3rds, it would be just as easy to pass a Legislative Veto amendment.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 4/3/2025 @ 5:02 pm
Noted White House economist explains why Trump’s tariffs are good:

……….
(Karoline) Leavitt on (NewsNation’s Morning in America today) not only argued costs would not go up, but she predicted wages would increase as she pushed people to buy American products.

“It’s the golden rule for the golden age of America as for prices and what the American public can expect. They can expect price stability. They can expect to buy American. It’s a patriotic thing to do, and, most importantly, they can expect their wages to go up,” she said.
………

There’s not going to be any pain for American-owned companies and American workers, because their jobs are going to come back home, and again, as for prices, President Trump is working on tax cuts to put more money back into the pockets of Americans. He is working on massive deregulatory efforts, which we know has already saved American taxpayers millions of dollars in just two months.

And we’re also working on driving down the cost of energy with a Trump energy boom, just like we saw in his first term, the President effectively implemented tariffs in his first term while driving down the cost of living. This is a proven economic formula that works, and the American people should trust in Trump. That’s why they elected him back to the White House.

#########
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 4/3/2025 @ 5:02 pm
If he had gotten the nomination, most of Nevertrump still would’ve voted Harris.

Bullshyte. NeverTrump doesn’t extend beyond one Donald J. Trump.
Paul Montagu (b69d31) — 4/3/2025 @ 6:45 pm
most importantly, they can expect their wages to go up,

If both prices and wages go up, isn’t that usually considered inflation?
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/4/2025 @ 12:37 pm
The question is: ow big a proportion of the electorate is NeverTrump. But the definition is people not inclined to vote for the Democrat.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 4/4/2025 @ 2:21 pm

4/2/2025

It all depends on what “liberation” means

126 Responses to “It all depends on what “liberation” means”

Leave a Reply

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out