Does making America Great mean every other country is underfoot?

1. 80

   Credence2posted 4 weeks ago

   https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/24/business … index.html
   
   Trump is using his tariffs to get other nations to submit to his political objectives and may well have nothing to do with economic parity. Sovereign nations have the right to buy from whom ever they wish, without reprisals from the United States.
   
   How would America like it if it were told by a foreign power that it could not buy from another nation without being subject to a penalty. What would we say?
   
   Such absolute gall, who does this guy think that he is?

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Trump’s use of tariffs is a strategic tool aimed at leveling the playing field in global trade, not simply a way to strong-arm other nations into political submission. For decades, the U.S. has been taken advantage of through unfair trade practices, lopsided tariffs, currency manipulation, and subsidies that allow foreign competitors to undercut American businesses. Trump is fighting to correct these long-standing imbalances and ensure that American industries, workers, and farmers are competing on fair terms.
      
      Many of the countries that complain about Trump’s tariffs have long imposed their own trade barriers on U.S. goods while enjoying free access to American markets. China, for example, has engaged in intellectual property theft, forced technology transfers, and trade imbalances that have cost the U.S. millions of jobs. The European Union has imposed high tariffs on American cars for years, yet expects to export their own vehicles to the U.S. tariff-free. These are the very types of double standards Trump is addressing.
      
      To your point about sovereign nations having the right to buy from whomever they want—absolutely, but trade is a two-way street. The U.S. also has the right to defend its economic interests and set conditions on trade relationships. If another country wants unrestricted access to the American market while engaging in unfair practices, why should the U.S. continue to play along? Other nations have used tariffs and trade restrictions to protect their own economies for years. Trump is simply saying that America will no longer sit back and allow itself to be taken advantage of.
      
      If a foreign power were to impose trade restrictions on the U.S. in retaliation, we would push back—just as any nation would. But the difference is that for years, the U.S. has allowed unfair trade practices to persist with little resistance. Trump’s tariffs aren’t about exerting power for power’s sake; they are about restoring fairness and putting American workers and businesses first. That’s not "gall"—that’s leadership.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

         You are missing the point, Sharlee
         
         “President Donald Trump said Monday that he will impose tariffs of 25% on any nation that buys oil from Venezuela”
         
         Not every nation in the world has an imbalance in trade relative to the US.
         
         “In 2024, the United States had trade surpluses with 132 nations and deficits with 101, meaning that the majority of nations have a trade imbalance (either a surplus or deficit”
         
         So, what gives Trump the right to apply tariffs to those nations where we have a trade surplus? Regardless of what you say, this is just a strong arm tactic that has more to do with controlling other nations’ sovereignty and political alliances while punishing Venezuela rather than addressing the matter of the economics of trade imbalances.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            Now, on the broader point about trade imbalances, tariffs aren’t just about trade deficits or surpluses; they’re also a tool for economic and geopolitical leverage. The U.S. has used economic sanctions and tariffs for decades to curb funding to hostile regimes. Venezuela’s government, under Maduro, has been accused of human rights abuses, election fraud, and drug trafficking. The idea behind such tariffs would be to disincentivize support for a dictatorship, not just to manipulate trade balances.
            
            Yes, it’s a strong-arm tactic—but that’s what global power politics often looks like. The U.S. has interests beyond simple trade numbers, including national security, energy independence, and regional stability. If a country is propping up an adversary, why wouldn’t the U.S. use economic tools to influence that behavior? Sovereignty goes both ways—other nations can choose to defy the U.S., but they’ll have to deal with the consequences of that decision. That’s how leverage works.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Willowarborposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

               A tool for leverage? And we are supposed to suffer for that as citizens? In higher prices? What about negotiation?

               replyreport
            2. 80

               Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

               To think that we use to lead by presenting world a fine example and having our commitments to values and principles motivate and inspire others.
               
               Seems like I remember that in the early 1960s we had a trade embargo on Cuba. In spite of the fact that we had issues with Castro and Cuba, we did not penalize the rest of the planet for the fact that they did not view Cuba and Castro with the same ideological or geopolitical attitude. Even the Canadians had a  normalized relationship with Cuba.
               
               It is only the Trump administration and its assessment of things that should be the guide for the entire world regarding its relative relationship to Venezuela?  I don’t like that attitude and find it arrogant on its face. If I were President of Bolivia, I would tell Trump to “take a flying leap”. I trade with whom ever I want and if you want to raise tariffs, I will reciprocate. Prices for all of our goods are going to rise and I will knock Trump unconscious regarding his failure to rein in higher prices for American consumers. So, I will come at him from that angle as a result or his arrogance and shortsightedness. Subjugation and bullying of sovereign nations is just going to make most of them determined to do what they want in spite of Trump’s bullying.
               
               I don’t want to be a part of a nation where “might make right”. I thought that we were better than that. The “leverage” you speak of simply translates into international bullying.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Oh, come on. Acting like Trump’s approach to Venezuela is some unprecedented, unilateral power grab ignores decades of U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. has always used economic pressure as leverage—whether it’s sanctions, trade agreements, or military alliances. You mention the 1960s trade embargo on Cuba, but that was exactly an example of the U.S. trying to strong-arm another country into compliance. The difference now? Instead of pretending to play nice while twisting arms behind closed doors, Trump is blunt about it.
                  
                  And let’s not act like Venezuela is some innocent victim of “bullying.” The Maduro regime is corrupt, authoritarian, and responsible for one of the worst humanitarian crises in modern history. If you think Trump’s stance is pure arrogance, fine—but what’s the alternative? Letting dictatorships flourish because we’re afraid of being called “bullies”? You think it’s arrogant to put pressure on Venezuela, but what about the arrogance of turning a blind eye while millions of Venezuelans flee starvation and oppression?
                  
                  As for your hypothetical Bolivian president “knocking Trump unconscious” over tariffs—give me a break. Every country plays the same economic game. If Bolivia or any other nation wants to trade freely with Venezuela, they can, but they’ll have to accept the economic consequences. That’s how global trade works. It’s not “might makes right”; it’s policy choices have consequences. If Trump is using U.S. economic strength as leverage, he’s doing what leaders should do—advocating for American interests instead of rolling over for dictators.
                  
                  At the end of the day, calling it “international bullying” is just a way to complain about Trump’s methods while ignoring that the U.S. has been playing this game for a long time. The only difference? Trump doesn’t sugarcoat it.

                  replyreport