RE: Utter catastrophe7 Apr 2025 17:22
Because it can either:
1. protect an industry that is critical to national security or strategy - such as farming. You need food in a war and you really don’t want to be reliant on imports to feed your people.
2. Protect a sector against dumping by overseas manufacturers shipping below cost goods to your market and destroying domestic production in the process.
Otherwise I agree - what’s the point?
Which is why the West, that doesn’t do dumping and has fairly high production costs tariff about the same once you average it out.
UK goods tariffs on U.S. are about 3.8%, US reciprocally is about 3.4% - so you negotiate those tariffs to be free or equitable. It’s not that hard.
UK and U.S. have about an equal trade.
What you don’t do if you can think about anything other than cheating at golf, ⛳️ is slam 10% on the UK and think it’s fair- it’s not. It’s a penalty. A penalty for being fair. It’s a protectionist Tax.
What the orange one is doing is forgetting that people buy things they want - US wants European goods, but US goods like cars made in U.S. are not that suitable for Europe due to high fuel consumption, size etc etc
So…… basic economics…. Who’s at fault in an equitable tariff landscape when one party does better than the other?
Is it the consumer who simply doesn’t want what you make or the producer for not making what people want to buy?
Ford,GM etc get this - they make European standard cars in Europe. No tariffs. Then export them back America for those who DO want to buy them.