How will Trump's trade tariffs affect Poland?

If anyone cared to actually read the ruling, the court made several statements in Trump's favor. While imposing new tarrifs is off the table, he can cancel every single trade agreement he wants.

Of course he can -,no problem.

Then who is going to sign the next agreement with him if they now know he's a timewaster ?

If the agreement can only last for up to 150 days, nobody will sign an agreement. The Congress may not want to extend it or make it permanent.

Well then the Americans can send their dumb fool Trade Secretary, Lutnick to negotiate. I am sure respectable Euro politicians are going to be eager to have their photo taken with this Epstein connected filthy liar.

It's not the trade agreement that lasts 150 days, but the laying of tariffs on imports.

How this will play out is a guess.

Another interesting (for lack of better term) legal aspect is how Section 122 of the Trade Act allows tariffs for 150 for urgent trade imbalances and economic emergencies.

How is a trade imbalance defined? What is the economic emergency?

Yes, but taco chump is such a twat that he'll just set tariffs at 14.99% and claim he can have another 150 days.


This ends with the Dems retaking the House and the Senate in November, after which there will be somewhat less chaos for two years. Until then I'm keeping my exposure to ETFs that track US indices limited (and not putting more in there than I currently have).

Finally someone who actually read the ruling instead of celebrating headlines. One tool got limited. That's not the end of executive trade power.

Now I understand why you stopped coming around here dealing with the hyperbolic Eurotards drowning in TDS gets old fast.


The PF comedy show never stops!

Know their place? Even the Chief of NATO made it abundantly clear Europe cant stand on its own without U.S. backing.

The U.S. still anchors NATO, still underwrites European security, and still runs the reserve currency. That's the "place."

You don't get to lean on that for decades and then suddenly act like you're putting America in its corner. Keep dreaming chumps! Hahaha

Europe could go it alone, but it would mean higher taxes, deeper cuts elsewhere, and a major political shift most voters haven't actually signed up for, except for PF morons. This is the only place that posts such nonsence.....

PolAM is spot on about your little group thepary sessions....ROFTL!!!!!!!

• 
  keepdreaming.jpg
  

Maybe something like this ?

Golden Cow will put up tariffs

Markets will react badly

Golden Cow will remove tariffs

His corrupt friends will make money betting on the exact timing

That has already happened 3x the last year

If the Supreme Court's vote against the tariffs had been 5-4, the government's competence wouldn't be in question. But a 6-3 vote suggests they don't know what they're doing.

A 6-3 vote doesn't mean incompetence, it means the Court interpreted one statute differently. That's how law works.

You don't like the outcome, so you're pretending it proves chaos.

It's Sunday night in Poland and you're obsessing over U.S. Supreme Court vote margins. For someone who claims America is irrelevant, it sure lives in your head rent free.


Too funny! You don't have evidence, you have a conspiracy theory you keep replaying.

Three times? Or three times in your imagination? LoL Keep Dreaming!

Trump will struggle to reimpose those stupid tariffs that are harming America much more than they are harming the rest of the world.

There is plenty of evidence - stock movements leave very clear records

Anyway the US has already backed down on their new tariffs because over the weekend they told the EU and Britain that they old deals still stand. So that is completely clear LOL

Even little ole Britain has told the Americans to get their own story straight and that previous agreements have to be upheld. No sense discussing until the Washington clown show has finished

But that's to Britain's disadvantage - no?

What I asked earlier, and what AntV was responding to... was what is the incentive for others to maintain less profitable trade agreements AFTER THE REMOVAL OF THE AMERICAN STICK.

-//-

Last year - things were clear.

1) You may not feel it's fair, or deserved - but America is preparing to hit you with tariffs.

2) In order to avoid being structurally disadvantaged versus your Swiss or Cambodian or Nigerian neighbors - you negotiate hard and fast with America for any kind of a deal. It's not pleasant, and is reminiscent of a mafia shakedown - but you do it anyway out of a sense of pragmatic self interest.

3) You clinch a deal and give yourself a pat on the back: "My exports may be subject to additional tariffs now, making them less competitive - but at least I avoided an even higher level of barriers."

4) A year goes by, and the American instrument of coercion is made void by its own courts.

5) Does it mean you locked your country into potentially decades of a disadvantageous trade deal, because you bought Trump's bluff in the first year of his presidency?

-//-

Do you see what I mean?

The UK may still "benefit" over the next 150 days - because it negotiated a 10% tariff deal, and the new ones are worth 15%.

But in 150 days - hypothetically - others might drop to 0% while Britain will be saddled with its "winning" agreement of 10%.

Perhaps I misunderstand something...

A further point is that 15% for others, and 10% for Britain, is still murderously bad for Britain. Currently, China and Brazil are being viewed as the biggest winners of the USSC decision.

At 100%+ tariffs on China, and 50%+ on Brazil - a hypothetical Britain can still compete. At 15% on China, and 10% on Britain - Britain is dead.

Quote today from the FT:

Andy Haldane, president of the British Chambers of Commerce, told the BBC on Monday:

"The perversity of what happened at the weekend was that those who got good deals, the allies, have been most disadvantaged."

Why worry about stocks?

Don Jr. and Eric and Jared have made a lot more money from private markets - than whatever they could have hoped to make off public ones.

Qatari and UAE investments into their inane crypto and tech start-ups?

Large "Trump"-branded developments in the Middle East.

Howard Lutnick's old firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, making a killing betting against tariffs.

And so on, and so forth.

-//-

If your dad is the president of the United States, you don't need to play clever little trading strategies like Nancy Pelosi...

People will literally bring you dump trucks of money, if you simply promise a meeting with your dad, or a favorable mention.

The EU parliament just halted the old deal because of the Supreme Court ruling. Looks like TACO time again.

The West cannot build democracy in a lawless wasteland. We learned that in Afghanistan.

If Russians really want to live in a healthy democracy, with rule of law and low corruptiom, they will have to try even harder after the fall of Putin's regime. Noone can do the job for them.
Poland was in a similar bad position. The transformation was difficult and painful in Poland too. Here too the Western companies did not always invest with good faith.

And yet we did get butthurt against the West and did not choose a tsar to lead us. Perhaps it was thanks to a different political culture which the 44 years of Soviet reign did not completely root out.

Innate passion for democracy.

That is insane - what is even worse is that nobody is able to talk him out of it

Who's to blame?

Communist China had the good wits to not engage with any of the buffoonery - after taking in all of the surrounding context.

Nobody held a gun to Britain's or the EU Commission's head - when they rushed headlong to do a deal with Trump.

-//-

Even little children, are told by their parents how to deal with bullies.

The advice from parents is not: "Run to the bully first, and offer to share more of your candy - so he doesn't later take it all".

Somehow, when it comes to smart, big adults - these rules don't apply - and it's considered totally acceptable to crawl around on all fours in front of the bully.

-//-

Those that spent all of last year arguing with Trump and fighting back against his racketeering approach - are now winners.

Those that folded early and for no good reason - now are faced with the decision of living with sh*tty new trade agreements, or entering into a world of uncertainty where the new ones don't work while the old ones are dead.

The meme is literally TACO - TRUMP ALWAYS CHICKENS OUT. Yet Starmer and Von Der Leyen can pat themselves on the back, as being the two absolute geniuses that took Trump seriously and ended up CHICKENING OUT BEFORE TRUMP.

A rare and winning Trump trade.

Bravo!

Trump.

From the very moment he took office, he started treating international politics as some sort of dominance contest, trying to exploit the fact that Europe depends on US security guarantees and market access. However, USA depends heavily on European capital markets, industrial inputs, aerospace components, and consumer demand in many areas, and the EU's single market is almost half-a-billion consumers, so when dealing with business this size it's nonsensical to talk about it as a "bully vs bullied" metaphor - it's a bargaining interaction between peers.

Von der Leyen came to the conclusion that acting early and getting slightly suboptimal but stable terms can be sensible from the risk-management point of view, and she acted accordingly. Women usually tend to go for security when in doubt. Anyways, if Trump continues with his retarded adversarial treatment of Europe, the geopolitical cost to the USA will be immense in the long-run. It's almost as if he was indeed a Russian asset, no matter how ridiculous it may sound to some.

Trump's tariff fiasco and a new tariffs agenda: America Pays First.

He has no plan and no brains to make America any better.

And the statute of limitations for securities fraud is six years.

I suppose this is why the Commission folded so quickly.

They decided - continued American involvement in European security - was worth the humiliation of being forced to rip up perfectly good old agreements, and sign new, more disadvantageous ones.

-//-

I suppose it's all Russia's fault then?

If Russia did not threaten Europe, then it would be free to ignore American security extortion - and would be able to retaliate in the trade wars in a way that more closely resembles China's successful approach.

-//-

So then the Russian threat to Europe is real enough - that it's worth foregoing hundreds of billions of dollars of trade opportunities... just to be protected by America?

Truly a Schrodinger's Russia...

Drunks, paupers, with rusting weapons and rotten industry - yet capable of destroying Europe were it not for Uncle Sam!

You guys never chose for yourself Tsars, ever since the last Jagiellonian died. So for like 500 years... you've been working at your little democratic experiment.


Yeah... "different political culture" is one way to put it!

Ukrainians are the same way.

Freedom-loving assh*les!

Poland had many elected kings. So democratically elected.

Yes, that's why I ended on the Jagiellonians.

An elected king, is like a baptized Jew.

Humans cannot elect a king - only God can anoint him.

A king isn't a puppet to some magnate's interests, but is responsible before God for the protection of ALL his people.

Written by AI

The weird part is the random insult (retarded adversarial treatment) jammed into otherwise polished prose. Nice try:)


Tell that to Iran , where he took out Soleimani and blew the $hit out of their nuke program.

Tell that to Maduro's Venezuela?

Tell it to China , where he launched the first serious trade confrontation in decades.

Tell it to NATO members, who finally started meeting their defense spending targets because Trump kept calling them out. That's leverage, not cowardice.

If anyone's a chicken, it's pussified Europe.

Decades of underfunding defense, hiding under the U.S. security umbrella, then acting brave online.

Tough talk is easy when someone else has been paying for your protection for decades.

Broke ass Eurotards couldnt afford to fight their way out of a wet paper bag! LOLOLOL

LOL Don't judge others by your standards.


On direct order from Israel. How does it feel to be reduced to Israel's lapdogs? :)

It was one of the reasons but certainly not the most important one. As I mentioned before women tend to play it safe when in doubt, so Von der Leyen decided that she wants any deal rather than insecurity. Of course Starmer did the same but he's a socialist, and socialists are for all intents and puproses women (psychologically).


Partially, I suppose you could say that. The problem with the EU is that women and socialists (which, as I mentioned before, is psychologically the same thing) have way too much political power. Imagine if men were in charge of the Union. How differently we would deal with all the Putins and Trumps of this world. Aaah, one can dream.


Have I ever said that about Russians? No, and I don't believe they are.


Well, there is this possibility (rather distant but still) that some of your nukes might actually still work, so yes you are capable. That's why more European countries will be forced to have their own nuclear deterrent. Apart from that - you know my opinion: if Russia tried conventional war against European NATO (even without any American support), she would be owned like no b*tch in the long history of prostitution has been owned before.