Donald Trump escalates tariff threat as he doubles down on protectionism: Ex-president’s latest broadside warns countries to stick with the dollar or face 100% levy (www.ft.com)

submitted 2 days ago by UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Donald Trump is escalating his threats to increase tariffs on imports if he wins a second term in the White House, reviving fears of renewed trade wars that hit the global economy during his presidency.

The Republican candidate, seeking to win blue-collar votes in swing states pivotal to November’s presidential election, has doubled down on his protectionist rhetoric, delivering blunt warnings of tariffs to US trading partners including the EU.

On Saturday, Trump went further, promising tariffs of 100 per cent on imports from countries that were moving away from using the dollar — a threat that could engulf many developing economies too.

“I’ll say, ‘you leave the dollar, you’re not doing business with the United States. Because we’re going to put a 100 per cent tariff on your goods,’” he said at a rally in Wisconsin.

“If we lost the dollar as the world currency, I think that would be the equivalent of losing a war,” he told the Economic Club of New York on Thursday.

https://archive.ph/2b2zp

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago

I'm starting to think differently about this. Everyone previously thought he didn't understand tariffs, and that's obviously still true, but I'm thinking he has someone manipulating him into going down this path because there is a major upside to some otherwise overlooked and under sourced industry based in the US. Like Stephen Miller is sitting on some underwater shares of US mining companies or whatever.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

He wouldn't be the first person to employ tariffs in order to encourage domestic development. A big part of the American Revolution revolved around northern industrial towns fighting for protectionist laws to discourage UK dumping their industrial surplus into colonial markets. Pennsylvania iron-mongers were some of the fiercest opponents of the British merchantalist system.

Prior to FDR, the primary method of US tax collection was tariffs on imports. And a big reason the policy ended was due to Europeans immolating all their industrial capital across two World Wars.

Like Stephen Miller is sitting on some underwater shares of US mining companies or whatever.

These goons are rarely so far-sighted. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's simply taking money up front from domestic lobbyists in the extraction industry. A big pivot to domestic fracking happened thanks to Bush/Obama/Trump era fossil fuel companies deluging state and national legislatures and governors with contributions to open up more public land for drilling.

[-] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago

Why are you so sure it is domestic? The rhetoric plays to his jingoistic, isolationist base. But he is easily manipulated by foreign powers. China and Russia, and others would welcome a crumbling US. And Putin likely has other leverage on him

Though yes, there are certainly those within the US itself that would herald in its fall if they found it enriched themselves

this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024

73 points (98.7% liked)

politics

18992 readers

2295 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News