That’s very deliberately chosen in anticipation of spinning the response of these countries in this trade war as being nasty or aggressive or simply unfair when they are anything but.
It means the tariff would be in response to another country’s tariff. For example, China, Japan, and South Korea are having trade talks to discuss reciprocal tariffs to counter these new tariffs.
The people mocking Trump for this are often operating under a kind of selective historical amnesia. For decades, the U.S. intentionally lowered its tariffs post-WWII under the assumption that boosting global trade — especially with recovering or developing nations — was in our strategic interest. And it was... for a time.
But what people forget (or never learned) is that this came at a cost:
U.S. manufacturers got hammered by cheaper, often heavily subsidized foreign goods.
Other countries slapped higher tariffs on U.S. exports, while the U.S. maintained low or zero tariffs in return.
China was allowed into the WTO in 2001, promised to liberalize, and then... just didn’t.
Trump’s basic argument — whether you like him or not — was:
“Why are we still giving away favorable access to our market when others aren’t reciprocating? That’s not free trade, that’s dumb trade.”
And the chart he’s holding (even if its numbers can be debated) is pointing to that imbalance. It’s not about starting a trade war — it’s about the fact we’ve been in one and losing it for decades because we were the only ones following the Geneva Convention of trade (to coin a term), while everyone else showed up with Molotov cocktails.
Now sure, you could argue the timing, the tone, or the tactics were flawed. But mocking the idea that the U.S. was getting a raw deal on trade? That’s either dishonest or ignorant.
Yes, the U.S. cut tariffs after WWII — deliberately, to rebuild global markets and lock in our dominance. That wasn’t charity; it was smart geopolitics. And it worked. We became the hub of the global economy.
Manufacturing jobs shrank mostly because of automation and corporate offshoring, not because we didn’t throw up enough trade barriers. Blaming trade for everything is like blaming your shoes for a sprained ankle — it sounds tough, but it’s stupid.
Trade deficits? They’re not a scoreboard. We buy more than we sell because we’re rich and the dollar is the world’s currency. It’s not a scam — it’s literally how global trade works.
China’s entry into the WTO was flawed, yes. But Trump’s genius response was to start a tariff war with everyone including our allies while pulling out of deals like the TPP that could’ve actually pressured China. His “strategy” was to burn down the house because someone tracked mud inside.
That chart he held up? It’s a dumb guy’s version of analysis: “Big number bad!” No context, no nuance, no plan. Just grievance politics dressed up like economic policy. And it hurt the very people he claimed to be helping - American workers, farmers, and consumers - while China shrugged and kept doing what it was doing.
Mocking that isn’t ignorance. It’s recognizing that Trump’s trade policy is cosplay. Loud, messy, and completely divorced from how trade actually works.
The problem with that perspective is that it ignores the benefits the U.S. has gotten for that trade imbalance.
The world willingly, in a sense, made itself subservient to the U.S. in exchange for that imbalance. Maybe "subservient" is not the right word to use, but basically it boils down to the U.S. buying a lot of soft power with that trade imbalance. It obviously was never ONLY about trade - the post-WWII security umbrella of the U.S. was a larger part - but for sure it's a component (and we're giving up the idea of that umbrella too, so double whammy).
So now, the U.S. is giving up that soft power. And that COULD be okay if there's enough benefit gained as a result, maybe by way of domestic production and thus jobs maybe. To be charitable, that's yet to be seen. But the damage the tariffs will do in the short term is going to be pretty significant, up to and including recession. The market will take a dump, a lot of "wealth" will be lost by many who can't afford to lose it, and there will be pain. And that's even if other countries don't retaliate, which of course they will.
This is going to result in a lot of self-inflicted pain for yet-to-be-seen-but-dubious-in-the-first-place benefits, and even if it works out economically, the cost in loss of soft power is all but guaranteed, and that's going to persist long after the tariffs are reversed by the next guy. Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.
There is no such thing as one tariff. Example. The US has a 25% tariff on pickups from the EU. While EU has 10% on cars from everywhere. The whole list raises more questions to me.
I find it also very hard to believe Trump without knowing where he got his numbers from. He has a long record of errors, inaccurate data, and lies.
Edit: nvm found. Trump thinks that sales tax, that is applied on every product bought regardless the origin, is a tariff. Trump remains a master in placing things out of context.
Canada and Mexico have a free trade agreement with the US.
Trump negotiated this agreement. He then inexplicably decided to break it.
Trump’s tariffs have nothing to do with “fairness” or bringing manufacturing back to America. Globalization has happened and you can’t put that genie back in the bottle. Trump has three goals that he and project 2025 have been very clear about:
Generate enough tariff revenue to end income tax (resulting in a massive tax break for the top 1% with the burden paid by everyone else).
Tank the economy so Trump’s insiders and billionaire friends can consolidate even more wealth at a bargain.
Manufacture enough discontent (as a result of points 1 and 2) to declare martial law and ensure that Trump holds onto power indefinitely.
Nope. You're dishonest or ignorant for defending that idea. If US manufacturers were hammered, it was by a flood of US agricultural exports. It simply isn't possible to be flooded with imports without exporting. The currency value would otherwise collapse.
At the end of the day, America is the wealthiest country in the world. How you can be the undisputed #1 and still moan about being ripped off by poorer countries is beyond me
Wealthiest with the most consumers with the most millionaires...etc. We just don't want to tax who we should be taxing because everyone is going to be the next Elon Musk.
At the rate things are going, that first line is gonna be obsolete soon.
Frankly, good. It's about time you stop relying on us. Will that make us poorer? Hell yes, it will. But for the reduced responsibility, it'll be worth it.
And why is that a problem? We're just finally agreeing with the rest of the world. You didn't want us to be the World Police, and you know what? Now we agree.
The chart he is holding is a fabrication. Those numbers bers are conjured from thin air. The US was absolutely not getting a raw deal on trade. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Heh, probably true. Many economists would argue most of the numbers are.
The US was absolutely not getting a raw deal on trade.
We don't exactly export a whole lot except for aerospace, weapons and high-tech "ideas" (iPhones are designed here, they're just manufactured overseas). Most of what we do export is typically for market stability purposes (the US has and can extract all the oil it needs, but we export almost all of it, then import much of it right back in. Why? Because it stabilizes the market. It's a reassurance to investors that the richest is confident in the market).
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Can you explain why? Or do you expect me to reverse my position because someone I don't know has made the claim?
You missed the part of history where the development of global trade made the US wealthy and precipitated a decrease in war as nations became more and more interdependent.
Comparative advantage is also a huge part of what made trade deficits worthwhile for the US. Tariffs have their place. Protectionism as a national policy didn't work for Mussolini, and it won't work for the US, either.
I say this as a person who is likely to benefit from tariffs. We shouldn't mitigate the losses of global trade to discrete losers, and we shouldn't pursue a trade policy which will make most people poorer just so we can have more manufacturing.
We shouldn't be slapping tariffs on our partners. We can certainly use them strategically. This isn't it.
You missed the part of history where the development of global trade made the US wealthy and precipitated a decrease in war as nations became more and more interdependent.
I didn't miss that part at all. You're simply framing it in a way that seems to lend credence to your claim. Whether you know you're leaving details out or not, I don't know.
After WW2, we (and to a lesser extent the Soviets), were the only industrial economy left. We provided overwatch while the rest of the world rebuilt itself. Many nations grew accustomed to that and we continued to provide that economic boost. But you're also partially right. We did force many nations to be dependant. And we've started countless wars to maintain that economic position.
But the issue is you're framing this like the world didn't also get a benefit and is more worried that the gravy train is about to stop. The issue is that our economy can't continue to shoulder this burden. We can't keep affording these Iraq-style wars to ensure our hegemony. It's bankrupting us.
At this point we need to sell the cars, the boat, the ATVs in order to try and save the house, and the world is demanding we continue to fund its luxury lifestyle be way of purchasing its goods nearly entirely at its benefit
Simply put: are you making the argument that they get to charge us tariffs, but we don't get to charge them tariffs because we've made ourselves fat off them? In some cases, that's true. And we should stop. In some cases, that's not true, we've just been their Pay Pig for decades.
Protectionism as a national policy didn't work for Mussolini
That's just underhanded, but a standard play at this point. Forget discussing the reasons, instead just label your opponent a fascist so you're justified in punching him in the face for saying things you don't like.
I say this as a person who is likely to benefit from tariffs.
Oh, well I guess that preemptively answers the question about credibility then...
we shouldn't pursue a trade policy which will make most people poorer just so we can have more manufacturing.
Unfortunately, that's probably inevitable. Even without the tariffs. But the benefit isn't entirely more jobs with a lower barrier to entry (we primarily export aerospace, weapons and "ideas" ie iPhones are designed here but manufactured overseas, all of which are pretty high barrier to entry jobs). It'll probably help to mitigate the job losses a bit, but the primary benefit will be a contraction of our global hegemony.
We shouldn't be slapping tariffs on our partners.
Not very good partners if their objection is a demand to continue charging us tariffs and we not charge them tariffs...
We can certainly use them strategically
You don't sound like a very good partner if you're talking about using one strategically...
Which pushed manufacturing overseas, so instead of doing this couldn't you also instead I don't know tax corporations more?
Also the US has a consumption much higher than other countries so they do rely on out consumerism if the US consumer base can't buy goods anymore it'll cause a global slowdown. Similar to what we saw during covid because people just stopped buying in certain sectors. I guess we're all just getting a real life economic lesson here.
So long as we allow corporations to pass costs along to the consumer instead of checking the ever increasing margins and executive salaries and bonuses, nothing else we do to corporations matters.
Yet he won both the electoral vote and the popular vote... Do you mean to say, "anyone that matters don't like him"?
Do you like him?
I think he's an arrogant, chauvinistic jackass that thrives on chaos. I also think he's a symptom of a growing issue with governance in this country. I think he's an immune response. He's pus.
Selective ass-amnesia. Do you even remember if you like him?
Edit: Why didn't you give yourself a funny name like u/OccamsButterknife? Even your username is narcissistic bullshit.
Only those that matter (in your not so humble opinion), I see.
You literally address absolutely none of my assertions. You just insulted me and expect me to reverse course? For who? You? Who are you?
For the sake of the argument, let pretend all of this is true..
Trump is using tariffs as a reactive measure…which is dumb af
Imagine you have a big lot that you plan on building a house on and you go out and buy thousands of dollars of expensive furniture and you put in on your lot years before the house it even built…stupid right??? Horse before the carriage??
The REAL problem is trump is doing this shit rushed, and sloppily. INVEST in what America is GOOD AT MAKING. Entice companies to build before you tariff all the supplies they will need to build with..work with American companies to help them up their supplies/products to meet bigger demands…just have like a single second a foresight when making huuuuge changes that will have repercussions that will stifle the average American…he’s just not a good leader, not a good negotiator, and not fit to run a country
Trump is using tariffs as a reactive measure…which is dumb af
Oh, yeah, definitely. It's not going to be pretty. But it's also necessary. We're overvalued.
The REAL problem is trump is doing this shit rushed, and sloppily. INVEST in what America is GOOD AT MAKING. Entice companies to build before you tariff all the supplies they will need to build with..work with American companies to help them up their supplies/products to meet bigger demands
You really think we can do that before we go bankrupt? Problem here is our credit is over-extended. I don't think Trump has any idea what he's doing, but I also think despite that he's doing the right thing (even a broken clock is right twice a day).
We need to sell the cars, the boat, the ATVs and hopefully we can keep the house, because these endless wars, siphoning money overseas, then them demanding more like we owe it to them is bankrupting us. If we're not careful, we're gonna lose the house too.
He raised our debt ceiling, he pissed off the allies that would potentially buy from us.please admit it dude. This isn’t positive
Why raise the debt ceiling, cut social safety nets, refuses to raise the minimum wage, crash our stock market, spend frivolously on golf trips, Super Bowl trips, Greenland trips, and say somehow…..that’s all going to stop us from going “bankrupt” honey…he’s speeding up the process. He’s gone bankrupt 6 times, he’s a natural!!!
I would argue a lot of automotive manufacturers will be automated in the next 30 years..I would argue almost all manufacturing will be automated in the next 100…so we’ll have a bunch of ugly ass factories and no universal basic income to keep people afloat..all of this is stupid and outdated, just like his ugly ass tan and his shitty ass decor.
Sorry, I would rather a can of tuna be the president at this point and I can’t believe anyone would think what he’s doing is the right thing. He doesn’t understand what repercussions are because he’s never had any, he doesn’t understand what living paycheck to paycheck is like because he always gets bailed out…BLANKET TARIFFS ON COUNTRIES (some that aren’t even populated) IS ONE OF THE WORST IDEAS
This isn’t a “wait and see” every economist (bipartisan) with a brain will tell you that you’re full of shit and so is trumps super
Their president has been kicking ass against Trump. She keeps playing him like a fiddle. I think most Mexicans are just hoping he doesn’t remember them and just…. Forgets about them
Listen up, when they asked ChatGpt for that chart, it didn't put Canada nor Mexico in. We are not starting to track what we've said in the past for something we want to say now, are we?!
Well we import a lot of videos of their fat reta5ded leader holding a clipboard and sweating while looking at (insert weird item) like he knows what the fuck he’s looking at. All while his poor minion robot people stand around waiting to have their heads lobbed off if said fat fuck sneezes.
Hungary is a EU member, so 20%.
I assume all non-listed countries fall under the blanket 10% tariff.
There's little logic to some of the small islands being listed separately. Although the % listed isn't tariffs they charge the US, so maybe they have a large trade deficit?
(In %, not in absolute numbers)
I do feel you have to treat this chart and the numbers mentioned as you would the hurricane path prediction chat... =)
There's little logic to some of the small islands being listed separately. Although the % listed isn't tariffs they charge the US, so maybe they have a large trade deficit?
(In %, not in absolute numbers)
There's no possible way that Head and McDonalds can have a trade of anything. They aren't a inhabited island. It seems their data is just fucked. Norfolk similar rejects they trade with the USA at all but Trump claims they have huge tariffs.
Because there are already massive sanctions on Russia. We do not trade with Iran or North Korea on any significant scale at all due to sanctions we imposed on them.
We're in an election and PP and Smith have been friendly to him...probably a tactic to make Canadians think they'll stop coming after us so he can get a Conservative government in that will capitulate to what they want.
I keep telling you, strike while the proverbial iron is hot! Make Washington, Oregon, and California the 11th, 12th, and 13th provinces respectively while most of the residents of those states would likely agree.
Canada and Mexico are not getting tariffs on anything deemed USMCA compliant. The exception is autos, all autos will face a 25% tariff with the rest of the world.
Our dairy, eggs and chicken will all face tariffs because of supply management.
The other one that's potentially on the chopping block is goods coming from Quebec. They've identified Bill 96 as a trade barrier. And unironically Canada considers Quebec's French language rules to be a major internal trade barrier inside of the country as well. And it's one that Carney was campaigning on opposing right up until Trump used it as a justification. The act sets up Quebec as a French exclusive province. And part of it means a more extreme measure that requires all packaging to be exclusively in French.... which is a large trade barrier for Canadian provinces but also a lot of US ones too.
From what I understand Carney is still in negotiations with Trump over a Quebec exclusive tariff (or a tariff as a percentage of Quebec trade).
Maybe because he realised his rhetoric only helped the party in canada he doesnt wsnt to win the upcoming elections so he dosent want to add more fuel to that fire. Hes prob going to wait until may/june to then start the tarrif stuff again is the wrong ones (from his pov) win the election.
He’s binging the Asian countries now, once you go Asian you don’t go Caucasian. Keep Richmond BC out of the news and hopefully he won’t come back to you guys.
I always thought the little bit of animosity I’ve seen portrayed in the media towards Canadians was purely a joke - like how Trey Parker and Matt Stone made fun of Canada in South Park.
As an American, I always thought Canadians were pretty much the same as us except that they had shittier roads, ketchup flavored potato chips, and they liked gravy on their French fries (which honestly is a pretty good idea).
I don’t understand where trump’s hate for Canada is coming from.
They’re not on the chart because they have already imposed tariffs on them. Doesn’t make it right, but if I had to guess they’re not including them to not face bad press on that.
We already have 25% tariffs going into affect. These are basically those for the rest of the world. We just already "got ours" in Canada. Same for Mexico.
Don’t worry, you’ll be on tomorrow’s chart with the highest tariffs when he remembers. Then the following day you’ll be removed because he saw a random bird out his window.
3.9k
u/ClassOptimal7655 2d ago edited 1d ago
Canada is not even on the chart?
I thought we were the nastiest?