Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

houdini1

fintail said:

Good read indeed. If only more people realized how disastrous this could (and probably will) be. There's zero history of such trade action helping the overall economy, and it won't be different this time.

So when's the recession, Q1 or Q2 of 2019?

And now Merkel and Trudeau are the effective leaders of the free world, as the supposed one meets with a fellow tinpot dictator.

ab348 said:

POTUS has also threatened tariffs on Canadian autos and parts which would likely be swiftly followed by Canadian tariffs on US-made versions of the same. It is sheer lunacy.

An excellent article in the NY Times magazine about the Canadian view, well worth a read: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/09/magazine/justin-trudeau-chrystia-freeland-trade-canada-us-.html

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

driver100

Trump might have floated the idea of tariffs one day, but that day is long forgotten....personally, I never heard that one.
If you counts services as well as goods the US has the advantage regarding tariffs. It can shift from year to year, but, comes out pretty even.
Take one example....Canada is the largest customer in the world for good coming from Ohio. Think what that will do to Ohio if there is a tariff placed on those goods. Another example is Canada buys a lot of orange juice from Florida.....tariffs will be placed on OJ, Canada can source it from Africa and Israel for example. NO ONE WINS A TRADE WAR. Free trade allows countries to profit at optimum levels by trading goods they do produce for goods they can't produce as efficiently.

driver100

Ab, read that article in the NY Times and it is a good summary of the situation.

Dino's posts are excellent............countries cooperate and work together, when they trade with each other. The G7 is now called the G6.....+1 (and I will add, bully).

dino001

houdini1 said:

fintail said:

Good read indeed. If only more people realized how disastrous this could (and probably will) be. There's zero history of such trade action helping the overall economy, and it won't be different this time.

So when's the recession, Q1 or Q2 of 2019?

And now Merkel and Trudeau are the effective leaders of the free world, as the supposed one meets with a fellow tinpot dictator.

ab348 said:

POTUS has also threatened tariffs on Canadian autos and parts which would likely be swiftly followed by Canadian tariffs on US-made versions of the same. It is sheer lunacy.

An excellent article in the NY Times magazine about the Canadian view, well worth a read: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/09/magazine/justin-trudeau-chrystia-freeland-trade-canada-us-.html

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

Probably because he wasn't serious - they knew it, he knew it, they knew that he knew, he knew that they knew that he knew.

snakeweasel

carnaught said:

Hmm, this is getting too much in the relm of politics for me to want to participate.

A big +1 on that.

houdini1

dino001 said:

houdini1 said:

fintail said:

Good read indeed. If only more people realized how disastrous this could (and probably will) be. There's zero history of such trade action helping the overall economy, and it won't be different this time.

So when's the recession, Q1 or Q2 of 2019?

And now Merkel and Trudeau are the effective leaders of the free world, as the supposed one meets with a fellow tinpot dictator.

ab348 said:

POTUS has also threatened tariffs on Canadian autos and parts which would likely be swiftly followed by Canadian tariffs on US-made versions of the same. It is sheer lunacy.

An excellent article in the NY Times magazine about the Canadian view, well worth a read: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/09/magazine/justin-trudeau-chrystia-freeland-trade-canada-us-.html

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

Probably because he wasn't serious - they knew it, he knew it, they knew that he knew, he knew that they knew that he knew.

Looks to me like he simply called their bluff and they folded. Brilliant strategy for President Trump to take the initiative and let them expose themselves like that.

dino001

houdini1 said:

Looks to me that he simply called their bluff and they folded. Brilliant strategy for President Trump to take the initiative and let them expose themselves like that.

I think it's more like the guy says fifteen things in one day, each of them contradicts another. Every time he acts like he didn't say the other other thing. Never said it, never ever. One day he'll claim that orange guy on TV is not him, it's a Chinese double, or at least "fake news CNN" changed the sound track.

houdini1

dino001 said:

houdini1 said:

Looks to me that he simply called their bluff and they folded. Brilliant strategy for President Trump to take the initiative and let them expose themselves like that.

I think it's more like the guy says fifteen things in one day, each of them contradicts another. Every time he acts like he didn't say the other other thing. Never said it, never ever. One day he'll claim that orange guy on TV is not him, it's a Chinese double, or at least "fake news CNN" changed the sound track.

So you ran out of facts to discuss and just want to personally attack President Trump?

berri

Hoovernomics led to the great depression in the 1930's. A big piece of it was tariffs and trade restrictions. Many republicans do not support this approach, so it will be interesting how it all plays out. If it stands, it will be interesting to see Canada, Europe and Mexico tilt toward more trade with Asia and a move of some of their monies from Wall Street to other financial centers outside of the US. I really think our G7 moves were dumb and not thoroughly thought out as to potential consequences. Most S&P 500 listed (large) US corporations do 20-35% of their sales revenues and profits outside of the US. That may take a big hit if things don't calm down.

dino001

houdini1 said:

dino001 said:

houdini1 said:

Looks to me that he simply called their bluff and they folded. Brilliant strategy for President Trump to take the initiative and let them expose themselves like that.

I think it's more like the guy says fifteen things in one day, each of them contradicts another. Every time he acts like he didn't say the other other thing. Never said it, never ever. One day he'll claim that orange guy on TV is not him, it's a Chinese double, or at least "fake news CNN" changed the sound track.

So you ran out of facts to discuss and just want to personally attack President Trump?

I just follow his lead.

houdini1

I think it is a tempest in a teapot. People are screaming that we are in a trade war, when the reality is, we are only in the middle of normal trade discussions.

dino001

houdini1 said:

I think it is a tempest in a teapot. People are screaming that we are in a trade war, when we are only in the middle of normal trade discussions.

My understanding is the steel and aluminum tariffs are in force already. Steel price almost doubled in a year in anticipation combined with increased general demand. That's more that just a normal negotiation. That's a pistol drawn and shot fired, and a small hole in a wall. It can be patched up, but it could be called "normal" perhaps in neighborhoods overrun by gangs, not in Hamptons. In other times wars were declared in more respectful manner than this weekend's one leader's public name calling of another ally's leader.

BTW, the prices might even go down a bit if nothing more is added, as 30 percent actual tariff does not translate into 100 percent price move, but those things are always determined by the "last ton". That's of course assuming we don't get another volley of "normal negotiations".

berri

Negotiations that start out bitter, often have less than optimal results.

Some facts are lost in all this rhetoric. First and foremost, Balance of Trade is an unadjusted figure. Simple Exports minus Imports. Obviously, this does not take into consideration per capita population, income or GDP differences between countries. You would expect a large developed economy like the US to generally run a trade deficit with a smaller country like France for example. The real issue is tariffs that reflect protectionism and the like (and the US does it too). Those individual instances should be the focus, not a generalized BoT argument. It is interesting that our White House seems to be looking the other way on China, giving them a big break in all of this. Yet, China is probably the biggest example, as well as a profligate thief of proprietary data. You do have to wonder if their are some pocketbook vested interests influencing this leniency on China, while we jump all over western allies. Here is another big concern, Canada has much more natural resource capacity than the US. So we crap hard on them, not thinking that they may decide to deal with China more on these resources if we keep jerking them around. Any such trade change will be at the expense of US needs. Then there is the US auto industry. Like it or not, our globalism over the decades resulted in a NAFTA supply chain. You can't just cut this supply chain all of a sudden without serious financial and production impact on Detroit (and the transplants as well). Finally, a hard move to protectionism will jack up domestic prices at the expense of middle America. As I said before, this is a not thought out temper tantrum that may have some longer term consequences than expected. In general, people don't take well to a constant barrage of bullying and name calling. Our leadership needs to start acting like adults.

ab348

Another good read on what supposedly happened behind the scenes at the recent G7 conference from the Toronto Star:

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/06/10/what-led-to-trumps-outburst-against-trudeau-behind-the-scenes-at-the-g7.html

roadburner

dino001 said:

Hey, Honorable Burner (or just about, I guess) - can I make make "Sport" mode to boot automatically on a engine restart? After a year, my car "adjusted" to my rather cautious driving and now it got lazy and latent in downshifts in Comfort mode at times when I actually need it. It feels like it's telling me "I don't know, you usually don't do this, so why now", pretty annoying actually. I thought changing to "Sport" mode would do the trick and it did, but it comes back to "Comfort" on each engine restart. I don't see an explicit option or instruction how to make it start on Sport. I know "Sport+" always resets itself, but I thought "Sport" will stay. I played with drivers profiles, but to no avail.

I don't think setting Sport Mode as the default can be coded, but I'll keep checking.

dino001

Agree with Berri. My problem with current "strategy" it seems it starts big on words against the real predator (China) and ends up in real actions against somebody who is perceived as less able to defend themselves (Canada). The first real action were penalties on Canadian timber, now we have tariffs on European and Canadian (amongst others) steel/aluminum. It's kind of like schoolyard bully talking big game how he's going to show this other nasty boy from another neighborhood and but ending up beating up the nerd who just happened to cross the street for not wearing a hat. Everybody wins, I guess. Bully shows his "strength" and people get entertainment.

dino001

roadburner said:

dino001 said:

Hey, Honorable Burner (or just about, I guess) - can I make make "Sport" mode to boot automatically on a engine restart? After a year, my car "adjusted" to my rather cautious driving and now it got lazy and latent in downshifts in Comfort mode at times when I actually need it. It feels like it's telling me "I don't know, you usually don't do this, so why now", pretty annoying actually. I thought changing to "Sport" mode would do the trick and it did, but it comes back to "Comfort" on each engine restart. I don't see an explicit option or instruction how to make it start on Sport. I know "Sport+" always resets itself, but I thought "Sport" will stay. I played with drivers profiles, but to no avail.

I don't think setting Sport Mode as the default can be coded, but I'll keep checking.

That's what I read on the Internet, too.

28firefighter

dino001 said:

roadburner said:

dino001 said:

Hey, Honorable Burner (or just about, I guess) - can I make make "Sport" mode to boot automatically on a engine restart? After a year, my car "adjusted" to my rather cautious driving and now it got lazy and latent in downshifts in Comfort mode at times when I actually need it. It feels like it's telling me "I don't know, you usually don't do this, so why now", pretty annoying actually. I thought changing to "Sport" mode would do the trick and it did, but it comes back to "Comfort" on each engine restart. I don't see an explicit option or instruction how to make it start on Sport. I know "Sport+" always resets itself, but I thought "Sport" will stay. I played with drivers profiles, but to no avail.

I don't think setting Sport Mode as the default can be coded, but I'll keep checking.

That's what I read on the Internet, too.

If I had to guess, it is related to EPA gas mileage requirements.

dino001

28firefighter said:

dino001 said:

roadburner said:

dino001 said:

Hey, Honorable Burner (or just about, I guess) - can I make make "Sport" mode to boot automatically on a engine restart? After a year, my car "adjusted" to my rather cautious driving and now it got lazy and latent in downshifts in Comfort mode at times when I actually need it. It feels like it's telling me "I don't know, you usually don't do this, so why now", pretty annoying actually. I thought changing to "Sport" mode would do the trick and it did, but it comes back to "Comfort" on each engine restart. I don't see an explicit option or instruction how to make it start on Sport. I know "Sport+" always resets itself, but I thought "Sport" will stay. I played with drivers profiles, but to no avail.

I don't think setting Sport Mode as the default can be coded, but I'll keep checking.

That's what I read on the Internet, too.

If I had to guess, it is related to EPA gas mileage requirements.

Other people claim it's to protect the engine. Sport mode has more aggressive engine mapping and transmission shifts (both in terms of rpm points and shift time itself), so if somebody starts the car and guns it from cold, it may develop problems. But I don't know.

driver100

dino001 said:

houdini1 said:

I think it is a tempest in a teapot. People are screaming that we are in a trade war, when we are only in the middle of normal trade discussions.

My understanding is the steel and aluminum tariffs are in force already. Steel price almost doubled in a year in anticipation combined with increased general demand. That's more that just a normal negotiation. That's a pistol drawn and shot fired, and a small hole in a wall. It can be patched up, but it could be called "normal" perhaps in neighborhoods overrun by gangs, not in Hamptons. In other times wars were declared in more respectful manner than this weekend's one leader's public name calling of another ally's leader.

BTW, the prices might even go down a bit if nothing more is added, as 30 percent actual tariff does not translate into 100 percent price move, but those things are always determined by the "last ton". That's of course assuming we don't get another volley of "normal negotiations".

Dino.....you got it, and if I am correct you just got your American citizenship a year or two ago. You are the kind of citizen the US needs, you are a credit to your country. Announcing tariffs and applying them instantly and saying it is a security issue is basically, an act of war or at least extremely aggressive, especially when applied to your so called friends........hate to be an enemy but they actually get better treatment.
This was done to save the steel workers jobs, but jeopardizes many times more jobs. Auto makes will pay the extra tariffs to use imported steel, US isn't geared up to produce it. That will add 2.5% to the cost of cars and will mean counter tariffs. How many jobs will that cost....far more than the steelworkers jobs?

berri

Well, I believe it was US steel who just restarted some steel mills in Illinois near St. Louis. When they shutdown some years back 1200 lost their jobs. The rehiring is only around 300. Technology and automation will preclude a lot of those jobs from coming back, but the marketplace reduction in competition will jack up consumer prices. I think we're being scammed by our leadership.

driver100

The E400 reverts to Comfort when it is started up, even if turned off in SPORT mode.
I think it is also for safety reasons.....another driver gets in and puts the car in Drive not noticing it is in SPORT mode...and the car takes off like a rocket.

fintail

Your old place has a 4.4 on google, and even the Autonation stores here have 4.0 or more.

I think a lot of that goes both ways - terrible customers, terrible sales groups.

isellhondas said:

I can tell you that in at least one part of our country, the local Honda Dealers have HORRIBLE surveys on Yelp and it's obvious that they don't care! all they care about is moving cars and they will pull whatever tricks are necessary. A lot of greedy customers don't care either! If there is a great store with excellent reviews some people would buy at the worst possible store in order to save 100.00! I have met and dealt with some of these people and I have ZERO respect for them!

fintail

I see no evidence of that idea. A complete dissolving of tariffs would assume completely level playing fields without other subsidy or meddling. As we know how the US subsidizes its dairy industry (one of the roots in this dopey drama), a truly level playing field doesn't exist. Funny how this is being spun to be a positive - here's one for the self-titled bootstrappers, 45 is Jim, not Dagny.

Can you name examples in history where trade wars have created net gains for people?

All of this is a nice distraction from Stormy and Mueller though, isn't it? Time to heap some praise on Jinping, Duterte, and Putin now!

houdini1 said:

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

houdini1

fintail said:

I see no evidence of that idea. A complete dissolving of tariffs would assume completely level playing fields without other subsidy or meddling. As we know how the US subsidizes its dairy industry (one of the roots in this dopey drama), a truly level playing field doesn't exist. Funny how this is being spun to be a positive - here's one for the self-titled bootstrappers, 45 is Jim, not Dagny.

Can you name examples in history where trade wars have created net gains for people?

All of this is a nice distraction from Stormy and Mueller though, isn't it? Time to heap some praise on Jinping, Duterte, and Putin now!

houdini1 said:

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

If you see no evidence that President Trump proposed no tariffs, I suggest you google the subject and get up to speed.

fintail

Thanks. I remember these basic finance principles from my school days 20 years ago

I see a lot of theoretical material, and I can just as easily say "maybe" the margins can absorb the regressive trade theories of our corrupt new regime, and they can absorb it to keep volumes and market share - as those no doubt irk the authoritarians the most, how their markets have been usurped by others. I never claimed there wouldn't be pain, but these firms could theoretically eat lower profits and stick it to those trying to create new barriers. It would not destroy these firms. If it comes to it, I'd like to see them go for it, just to spite the current leadership.

The US market is a case of lower profits being compensated for by higher volumes, and different expectations of standard equipment. I never said taxes were the "only" reason, but when sales tax alone in Germany is ~20%, it adds up. I don't see how that relates to the simple fact of MB purchasing the 25 year rule.

dino001 said:

Each economic activity has its expected rate of return. When the rate is reduced for one reason or another and the markets are liquid (majority of companies are traded on stock exchanges), capital will escape to support activities that will support better rates of return until the price reflects the new return. In other words, not only the profits go down, but also investors will be willing to pay proportionally less for those profits. In simplest terms, if company was earning a dollar per share per year and the inve

BTW, I now recall hearing about that whole 500SEL issue on one of the car shows (this was before my time in the US). When it comes to pricing difference between Europe and US, taxation account for perhaps 20 percent. The rest is just the pricing strategy. They take much more from Europeans (or they'll deliver to them much less for the same price - the same models reach much lower down market) than Americans.

fintail

Link or it didn't happen.

Then we can discuss the idea of zero tariffs (with the presence of other subsidies) being completely delusional. It's almost like some leaders just inherited their way into wealth.

If you see no evidence that President Trump proposed no tariffs, I suggest you google the subject and get up to speed.

houdini1

fintail said:

Link or it didn't happen.

Then we can discuss the idea of zero tariffs (with the presence of other subsidies) being completely delusional. It's almost like some leaders just inherited their way into wealth.

If you see no evidence that President Trump proposed no tariffs, I suggest you google the subject and get up to speed.

Do your own research, or stay uninformed.

driver100

houdini1 said:

fintail said:

I see no evidence of that idea. A complete dissolving of tariffs would assume completely level playing fields without other subsidy or meddling. As we know how the US subsidizes its dairy industry (one of the roots in this dopey drama), a truly level playing field doesn't exist. Funny how this is being spun to be a positive - here's one for the self-titled bootstrappers, 45 is Jim, not Dagny.

Can you name examples in history where trade wars have created net gains for people?

All of this is a nice distraction from Stormy and Mueller though, isn't it? Time to heap some praise on Jinping, Duterte, and Putin now!

houdini1 said:

President Trump floated the idea to do away with all tariffs between the G7 members, yet no one wants to take him up on that proposal. If other members are concerned that they are currently getting the shaft, why wouldn't they like no tariffs at all? Seems like a better deal for Canada too, if they now have a trade deficit under the current deal.

If you see no evidence that President Trump proposed no tariffs, I suggest you google the subject and get up to speed.

He said it once....but, it was quickly forgotten. Then he imposed the high tariffs on steel and aluminum.

btw, the US has high tariffs on many goods...., such as 350 percent on smoking tobacco, 130 percent on peanuts and 99 percent on prepared groundnuts

Mr_Shiftright

The USA put itself into this trade deficit situation when it went along with encouraging the U.S. dollar to be the global reserve currency. This gives US consumers amazingly low interest rates and of course, stimulates growth.

The steel industry are the world's biggest crybabies. The % of GDP related to U.S. steel production is just...piddling. All past presidents simply ignored the steel industry because they knew the level of exaggeration, and would never consider tariffs.

dino001

driver100 said:

Dino.....you got it, and if I am correct you just got your American citizenship a year or two ago. You are the kind of citizen the US needs, you are a credit to your country. Announcing tariffs and applying them instantly and saying it is a security issue is basically, an act of war or at least extremely aggressive, especially when applied to your so called friends........hate to be an enemy but they actually get better treatment.
This was done to save the steel workers jobs, but jeopardizes many times more jobs. Auto makes will pay the extra tariffs to use imported steel, US isn't geared up to produce it. That will add 2.5% to the cost of cars and will mean counter tariffs. How many jobs will that cost....far more than the steelworkers jobs?

I appreciate your kind words. Time flies - it's been five years already since I took the oath of the citizenship...

ab348

driver100 said:

Ab, read that article in the NY Times and it is a good summary of the situation.

Dino's posts are excellent............countries cooperate and work together, when they trade with each other. The G7 is now called the G6.....+1 (and I will add, bully).

I am always impressed with Dino's posts as well. Perhaps, Driver, we should make him an honorary Canadian. Moved, and seconded?

dino001

driver100 said:

btw, the US has high tariffs on many goods...., such as 350 percent on smoking tobacco, 130 percent on peanuts and 99 percent on prepared groundnuts

Don't forget about 25% on light trucks, aka "chicken tax". US is also using any excuse in the book not to allow certain agricultural products under guise of sanitary or health concerns. One example I remember there was a Polish "Buffalo" vodka (with a picture of European buffalo on its label) with a single long grass straw inserted. It was banned because the grass "caused cancer". At the end they removed the grass straw from those bottles going to America.

dino001

Mr_Shiftright said:

The USA put itself into this trade deficit situation when it went along with encouraging the U.S. dollar to be the global reserve currency. This gives US consumers amazingly low interest rates and of course, stimulates growth.

The steel industry are the world's biggest crybabies. The % of GDP related to U.S. steel production is just...piddling. All past presidents simply ignored the steel industry because they knew the level of exaggeration, and would never consider tariffs.

I think it extends to majority of raw material industries. These are very tough boom and bust businesses with often stupid managements (those guys are often like roosters, taking credit for a sunrise), notoriously misallocating capital (investing and canceling investments at exactly wrong times). They don't have control over pricing of their own product. What's worse, they often do face "bad players", usually government-owned monopolies from countries like Venezuela, Belarus, China etc. where those are often not profit-driven enterprises, but "job programs". I'd say penalizing those players is rational, but it way too often ends up like those steel tariffs - you hurt way too many wrong people, as instead of being a "laser scalpel", the tariffs are used like a mace.

dino001

fintail said:

The US market is a case of lower profits being compensated for by higher volumes, and different expectations of standard equipment. I never said taxes were the "only" reason, but when sales tax alone in Germany is ~20%, it adds up. I don't see how that relates to the simple fact of MB purchasing the 25 year rule.

That's right - that's why I gave you an example. My old 328 wagon in the same/comparable configuration (equipment, engine) would have cost around double in 2011 (both US and German taxes included). My current 2018 Grand Coupe in same/similar configuration costs a German around 45 percent more with all taxes. This means it's not just taxes. After all I also pay sales tax here (6 percent) and there is a small tariff (2.5%). My both cars were made in Germany, which means all labor or other than VAT taxes are paid there. German VAT is 19%. Therefore, the net tax difference is only 19-2.5-6 = 10.5 percent. Yet, even with relatively low dollar to euro exchange rate, German would pay at least 40-45 percent more for the same car as I did. So the rest is just their pricing strategy and other costs (like fixed costs of distribution, etc.). Reportedly Swiss have to pay even more and BMW is trying to deny warranties on private imports from Germany to Switzerland and/or ban it administratively altogether.

berri

Zero tariffs isn't going to happen and Congressional special interests in this country are part of the reason. Becoming isolationists isn't going to happen and doesn't work. The US isn't the generator of all good ideas and isn't always right. Spewing this kind of stuff is is all just a bunch of marketing hype and con jobbing to those who actually believe it can. The US needs allies if it doesn't want to end up subservient to China down the road. Seldom does "on your own" create a better result than working with others. When little children have disagreements they yell, name call and get into public fights. Grown ups are supposed to know better. Beware the credibility of a loudmouth...

dino001

I think what's lost on this whole issue is that after WWII, to avoid another worldwide depression and genocidal dictators taking hold, they signed General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), which later became WTO. The idea of those is not that there will be no tariffs, but that there will be a civilized and orderly process of instating, lifting and negotiating them. It also created a mechanism of dispute resolution. We can argue whether it's fully effective (most likely it's not) and many countries, including "Gyna" found ways to cheat the system and it is an real problem. Unilateral actions with rising duties for "security" reasons hitting people unrelated to "cheating Gyna" is not going to solve this. Now we're hearing that auto industry is "national security". What's next - coat button factories? We obviously need those for our soldier's uniforms, so it's certainly "national security". How about toilet tissue? Oh, if Gyna cuts that one off, we will certainly suffer unspeakable terror. Have to have tariffs to that, too.

tbirdmarco

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DTVdeR8FUGg&t=0s

explorerx4

Not a geopolitical expert, but it seems like Canada and Mexico are kind of ungrateful.
Trump is doing all the heavy lifting, trying to negotiate the denuclearization of North Korea.
Their missiles might be targeting Washington DC, but who knows how good their guidance systems are, they may hit Ottawa, Toronto, or Mexico City by mistake.
Canada and Mexico would get the benefit, much larger than any tariffs would cost, while doing nothing.

berri

Personally, I think of all those nations, Germany may be the biggest mooch. They have the largest GDP, but some heavy tariffs and spend a small share for defense thanks to US military. But Europe gives the US added clout in things like sanctions. Cut out Europe and go alone; well most would just move their money elsewhere in the world from Wall Street banks taking away US leverage in sanctions. I think Trump is raising some valid points, but using negotiation tactics from real estate development that are not likely to work in the world of geopolitics. A southerner might use the term, "quit being ugly". I think his message gets lost when he behaves like he did in Canada.

oldfarmer50

fintail said:

The profit margins must be so high on most of the highline imports, German anyway, that the makers could probably absorb most of a tariff and have that be it.

If the makers of cars that people actually desire want to play hardball, it would be amusing if they threatened to shut down their US manufacturing bases - say they'll pull out, demolish the facilities, and leave those low tax low amenity areas spinning in the wind. As the corrupt cowards at the helm want to go it alone anyway, maybe the rest of the world will adapt. Might put a fear of something in someone. Or if the regime wants to play, threaten to end the moronic 25 year private import rule, which was bought and paid for by MB.

Consumers never win in a trade war. A trade war has even less precedent going for it than trickle down theory. It's as if this regime is just a bunch of cronies and not people with actual real world experience. Oh wait...

Not a fan of tariffs but free trade can't be a one way street. The Canadian tariff on dairy products for example is over 250%. Lot of hard pressed farmers in my area could use a level playing field.

IIRC the Smoot-Haley tariff in the late 20s was a proximate cause of the Great Depression so I hope these current ones are just a negotiating tactic.

Mr_Shiftright

berri said:

Personally, I think of all those nations, Germany may be the biggest mooch. They have the largest GDP, but some heavy tariffs and spend a small share for defense thanks to US military. But Europe gives the US added clout in things like sanctions. Cut out Europe and go alone; well most would just move their money elsewhere in the world from Wall Street banks taking away US leverage in sanctions. I think Trump is raising some valid points, but using negotiation tactics from real estate development that are not likely to work in the world of geopolitics. A southerner might use the term, "quit being ugly". I think his message gets lost when he behaves like he did in Canada.

There again, the situation in Germany is America's own creation. We demanded that they gear their military to be completely compatible with American equipment, tactics and strategy, and that was in our own best interests at the time. We'll all use the same anti-tank weapons, don't worry, we'll cover the air power, you just be the initial punching bag until we get there.

Germany could certainly go off on her own and build up an impressive military power---but Italy, Greece and other EU nations couldn't, or wouldn't be willing to---thereby leading to various outcomes in Europe, none of them all that attractive---either military weakness, severe economic austerity, or an extremely dominant Germany (not that that has ever been a problem).

China is probably going to have a larger economy than the U.S. in 10-15 years anyway.

dino001

berri said:

Personally, I think of all those nations, Germany may be the biggest mooch. They have the largest GDP, but some heavy tariffs and spend a small share for defense thanks to US military. But Europe gives the US added clout in things like sanctions. Cut out Europe and go alone; well most would just move their money elsewhere in the world from Wall Street banks taking away US leverage in sanctions. I think Trump is raising some valid points, but using negotiation tactics from real estate development that are not likely to work in the world of geopolitics. A southerner might use the term, "quit being ugly". I think his message gets lost when he behaves like he did in Canada.

Not so sure if I want German military become large and competitive with American. History is not very favorable to that. Considering what happens to Germans every time they start feeling powerful, I think it may be worth to pay the price for Germany being not self suficient in terms of defense.

Speaking of price, United Kingdom gave all their patents and opened all its trade routes to the US as part of the compensation for its support against Germany in 1941 and after. Not well known fact by Americans, who think it was all done “for free”. This was existential decision for the Brits and price was obviously worth it, but one can hardly call it free. It also had tremendous post-war benefits to the US, as it was the only intact (if not strengthened) industrial economy and had the world for itself for at least 20 years.

I get slightly annoyed when Americans say Europeans are somehow ungrateful for the American sacrifice and protection. Don’t get me wrong, 420 thousand lost soldiers was a real sacrifice, but compare it with Polish 6 million lost citizens, 17 percent of the population, economy in complete ruins, and nation sold (forfeit) by Roosevelt to Stalin as a part of war loot, you will understand what real losses are, not to mention a feel of bitter betrayal by an ally. It was only Ronald Reagan and his successful quest against the Soviets that erased this bitter feel and restored faith in America’s positive role among people in my old country. I don’t want to sound callous or insensitive, as I’m sure many of you have family members who bravely served or laid their lives in places they didn’t know for cause they might have not fully understood, but trusted their leaders it was important, but from where I stand, US got heck of a deal for those lost boys. If not the fact that every life is precious, on global scale one could say it was a real bargain.

stickguy

got a nice bonus today. got the mail in, and there was an envelope from the IRS that appeared to be a check. So, opened it up to figure out why since I wasn't expecting one. I actually had filed an amended return a few months ago after getting a revised tax statement from Vanguard. And at this point, had forgotten all about it, so a pleasant surprise!

Hey, $50 is $50!

qbrozen

Can I have it to pay the $50 ticket I just got because my wife didn't renew her registration?

  

dino001

stickguy said:

got a nice bonus today. got the mail in, and there was an envelope from the IRS that appeared to be a check. So, opened it up to figure out why since I wasn't expecting one. I actually had filed an amended return a few months ago after getting a revised tax statement from Vanguard. And at this point, had forgotten all about it, so a pleasant surprise!

Hey, $50 is $50!

Did they pay you any interest? If so, it is income for this year. Just bizarre.

explorerx4

@dino001,
What did your old country do to protect themselves from aggressive neighbors?
France tried, but failed(Maginot Line).

snakeweasel

dino001 said:

got a nice bonus today. got the mail in, and there was an envelope from the IRS that appeared to be a check. So, opened it up to figure out why since I wasn't expecting one. I actually had filed an amended return a few months ago after getting a revised tax statement from Vanguard. And at this point, had forgotten all about it, so a pleasant surprise! Hey, $50 is $50!

Did they pay you any interest? If so, it is income for this year. Just bizarre.

The general rule is if they pay your refund 45 days after the due date or the date you filed whichever is later then interest is paid.

driver100

dino001 said:

driver100 said:

Dino.....you got it, and if I am correct you just got your American citizenship a year or two ago. You are the kind of citizen the US needs, you are a credit to your country. Announcing tariffs and applying them instantly and saying it is a security issue is basically, an act of war or at least extremely aggressive, especially when applied to your so called friends........hate to be an enemy but they actually get better treatment.
This was done to save the steel workers jobs, but jeopardizes many times more jobs. Auto makes will pay the extra tariffs to use imported steel, US isn't geared up to produce it. That will add 2.5% to the cost of cars and will mean counter tariffs. How many jobs will that cost....far more than the steelworkers jobs?

I appreciate your kind words. Time flies - it's been five years already since I took the oath of the citizenship...

When you get to my age....everything is twice as long ago as you thought it was.

I agree with Ab.....you are the kind of citizen we can use in our country - I will sponsor you.

driver100

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

Ab, read that article in the NY Times and it is a good summary of the situation.

Dino's posts are excellent............countries cooperate and work together, when they trade with each other. The G7 is now called the G6.....+1 (and I will add, bully).

I am always impressed with Dino's posts as well. Perhaps, Driver, we should make him an honorary Canadian. Moved, and seconded?

Definitely.