I'm again glad you have zero role in the negotiations. As seen in the Panama thread as the 1st evidence.

Insult without an argument. Feel free to return when you have actual facts or at least a rebuttal of some sort.

"Reciprocal rights and duties" are not entities that are quantifiable like goods are.  That statement means each side is afforded the same rights and duties.  That example is taken in the same context as concealed carry reciprocity, where the right to carry in one state is reciprocal in another.

When talking about goods, reciprocal just means "in exchange", not necessarily of the same value.

I notice how you have me buying the lobster dinner ($$$$) and you buying the coffee ($).  In real life, I'm sure that's how you normally operate.   

In your example, you made it more ridiculous than it would actually be.  If I bought you a lobster dinner, then you would reciprocate by picking up my check the next time we dined out.  There has to be some level of similarity for it to be actually reciprocal.  Hence, meeting tariff with tariff, regardless of the percentage, would be reciprocal. 

Also, the "calculation" you found is ONLY for applying the policy to imported goods.  The percentage itself is what includes the currency manipulation imbalance.  There's no publicize equation for determining the percentage in a tariff.  That number is defined by the economists who analyze what amount would be needed to balance the overall importation imbalance.  There are more factors in that number than Trump pulling it out of the air.

if you believe the percentage is as simple as you posted -- "taking the deficit divided by US imports, with a minimum of 10 percent" -- then maybe take a class in international trade and economics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tariffs_in_the_United_States

We have driver's license reciprocity across the country. Would you still consider it reciprocal if Washington state recognized a Hawaii driver's license but placed restrictions that meant we couldn't drive certain things/places that Washington drivers could? Personally I wouldn't refer to that as reciprocal and that is the problem I have with the way Trump is presenting his tariffs. He comes off to Americans as simply matching tariff for tariff, he says they are taking advantage of us and we are just playing fair by matching their tariffs. That is misleading because he isn't matching the tariffs of countries. He even made a chart claiming the tariffs by other countries but the chart is very misleading. For example the chart lists Japanese tariffs as 46% but they are nowhere near that.

Reciprocate doesn't have to mean the same in every single way but it implies a level of proportionality. If you tariff me at 1% and I tariff you back at 100% that isn't reciprocal even if I claim it it as "a tariff for a tariff".

The other problem is that Trump is acting like trade deficits are unfair taking advantage of us. It is like he doesn't understand how trade works, not every country is going to import and export to each other the same value of goods. Japan isn't taking advantage of us because we import more of their stuff than they do of our stuff and it certainly isn't a tariff that Japan is placing on us.

What currency manipulation is he even talking about? All the countries on his list are manipulating their currencies to hurt us? What evidence is there of that?

In real life you think I skate by purchasing a coffee for a friend after they buy me an expensive dinner? Thats a rather low blow based on absolutely nothing 

We have driver's license reciprocity across the country. Would you still consider it reciprocal if Washington state recognized a Hawaii driver's license but placed restrictions that meant we couldn't drive certain things/places that Washington drivers could? Personally I wouldn't refer to that as reciprocal and that is the problem I have with the way Trump is presenting his tariffs. He comes off to Americans as simply matching tariff for tariff, he says they are taking advantage of us and we are just playing fair by matching their tariffs. That is misleading because he isn't matching the tariffs of countries. He even made a chart claiming the tariffs by other countries but the chart is very misleading. For example the chart lists Japanese tariffs as 46% but they are nowhere near that.

Reciprocate doesn't have to mean the same in every single way but it implies a level of proportionality. If you tariff me at 1% and I tariff you back at 100% that isn't reciprocal even if I claim it it as "a tariff for a tariff".

The other problem is that Trump is acting like trade deficits are unfair taking advantage of us. It is like he doesn't understand how trade works, not every country is going to import and export to each other the same value of goods. Japan isn't taking advantage of us because we import more of their stuff than they do of our stuff and it certainly isn't a tariff that Japan is placing on us.

What currency manipulation is he even talking about? All the countries on his list are manipulating their currencies to hurt us? What evidence is there of that?

In real life you think I skate by purchasing a coffee for a friend after they buy me an expensive dinner? Thats a rather low blow based on absolutely nothing 

Hypothetical nonsense.  I gave you an example, and you reply with nonsense about drivers licenses having restrictions in one state another doesn't have.  The reality is that all licensed drivers are allowed operate a motor vehicle in the class they are licensed to operate in all 50 states.  Drivers are required to follow the laws of each state they drive in.  For example, NC requires drivers to turn on headlights and tail lights anytime they have their windshield wipers on due to precipitation as a way to let other drivers see you in inclement weather.  The reciprocity is in the privilege to drive on the state's roads, not in the rules one must follow which may vary.  Therefore your analysis that this not exemplify reciprocity is 100% wrong. 

Have you ever taken a driver's license test and scored more than the bare minimum?  Most states allow you to use an out of state license for a period of time once you move into that state.  If you are visiting, you can drive without that state's license being issued. 

Driving privilege reciprocity allows a person to use a valid, unexpired foreign
license to operate a motor vehicle in Texas for up to one year or until a person
becomes a Texas resident, whichever date is sooner. Once a person becomes
a new Texas resident, they must apply for a Texas license within 90 days to
continue to drive legally. For more information, please review the Moving to
Texas page.

https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/driving-privilege-reciprocity

Driver's license reciprocity refers to agreements between states that allow
drivers to use their licenses across state lines without needing to obtain a
new license. Most states participate in the Driver License Compact, which
facilitates the exchange of information about traffic violations and license
suspensions, but some states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia are
not members.

How many pages on this thread do you intend to waste debating the definition of a single term that is already defined in law and in the English language?  Just because YOU disagree with the actual definition is no reason to waste our time with stupid and incorrect analogies.

Hypothetical nonsense.  I gave you an example, and you reply with nonsense about drivers licenses having restrictions in one state another doesn't have.  The reality is that all licensed drivers are allowed operate a motor vehicle in the class they are licensed to operate in all 50 states.  Drivers are required to follow the laws of each state they drive in.  For example, NC requires drivers to turn on headlights and tail lights anytime they have their windshield wipers on due to precipitation as a way to let other drivers see you in inclement weather.  The reciprocity is in the privilege to drive on the state's roads, not in the rules one must follow which may vary.  Therefore your analysis that this not exemplify reciprocity is 100% wrong. 

Have you ever taken a driver's license test and scored more than the bare minimum?  Most states allow you to use an out of state license for a period of time once you move into that state.  If you are visiting, you can drive without that state's license being issued.  https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/driving-privilege-reciprocity

How many pages on this thread do you intend to waste debating the definition of a single term that is already defined in law and in the English language?  Just because YOU disagree with the actual definition is no reason to waste our time with stupid and incorrect analogies.

I know how driver's license reciprocity works, my whole point was that it wouldn't be reciprocal if all sorts of uneven stipulations were placed upon license from other states. It is reciprocal because they are treated EQUALLY. If Hawaii drivers weren't allowed to drive in snow but Washington drivers were that wouldn't be reciprocity.

Talking about the rules of the road for different states doesn't even fit because it has nothing to do with recognizing the licenses from the other states, therefore your example is 100% wrong.

How many pages of this thread do you intend to waste by arguing Trump's tortured use of the word? I gave you reasons why Trump's tariffs are not what he claims them to be and all you can do is dispute the use of the word reciprocal. It is like a criminal saying he didn't steal, he was just borrowing.

I know how driver's license reciprocity works, my whole point was that it wouldn't be reciprocal if all sorts of uneven stipulations were placed upon license from other states. It is reciprocal because they are treated EQUALLY. If Hawaii drivers weren't allowed to drive in snow but Washington drivers were that wouldn't be reciprocity.

Talking about the rules of the road for different states doesn't even fit because it has nothing to do with recognizing the licenses from the other states, therefore your example is 100% wrong.

How many pages of this thread do you intend to waste by arguing Trump's tortured use of the word? I gave you reasons why Trump's tariffs are not what he claims them to be and all you can do is dispute the use of the word reciprocal. It is like a criminal saying he didn't steal, he was just borrowing.

He posted the definition.  You're choosing to ignore it like usual. This is why now a thread is going on about a topic that isn't too important.

Lets see what your next reply to this post will be.  I have a few guesses as you're very predictable.

I know how driver's license reciprocity works, my whole point was that it wouldn't be reciprocal if all sorts of uneven stipulations were placed upon license from other states. It is reciprocal because they are treated EQUALLY. If Hawaii drivers weren't allowed to drive in snow but Washington drivers were that wouldn't be reciprocity.

Talking about the rules of the road for different states doesn't even fit because it has nothing to do with recognizing the licenses from the other states, therefore your example is 100% wrong.

How many pages of this thread do you intend to waste by arguing Trump's tortured use of the word? I gave you reasons why Trump's tariffs are not what he claims them to be and all you can do is dispute the use of the word reciprocal. It is like a criminal saying he didn't steal, he was just borrowing.

You're obviously being a fool with the sole purpose of trolling.

YOU are the one who brought up driving, which just like concealed carry reciprocity has nothing to do with how tariffs work.

But i'm tired of trying to teach you.  You can lead a fool to knowledge, but you can't make him think.

You're obviously being a fool with the sole purpose of trolling.

YOU are the one who brought up driving, which just like concealed carry reciprocity has nothing to do with how tariffs work.

But i'm tired of trying to teach you.  You can lead a fool to knowledge, but you can't make him think.

There is no teaching some people.  So continue what you do by posting facts that counter his post.  Then all can see who the fool is.

The trade war with China will be a difficult one to win.  I've used this phrase before here and China has been winning the "economic war" for decades.  They produce cheap products that consumers want at the price point.  A lot of things are "made in China".  Add to it that they've been hoarding our $100 bills.  China gets away with cheap labor cause they don't care about wages or have as many safety requirements that are enforced like how the US does.

Their government also can control their flow of info and to some extent, what the world sees.  Look at the covid numbers that the WHO reported as an example.  None of the mainstream media reported on the taking of peoples pets if someone in the household had covid, etc...

Another thing China has going in their favor is that their culture is about saving face.  Regardless of the ramifications of their actions, they rather look good.  Then add in the control of info I mentioned above to assist this or deflect the real damages.

I'm thinking back to 2016 on how Trump was very adamant about bringing manufacturing back to the US.  Why didn't he do the tariff thing in his 1st term? Prob cause he had to deal with all the BS court cases and fake news and stuff.  Maybe he was setting the pace to do the tariff thing later.  By getting the US used to buying USA made products, he has more cards in his deck when negotiating with China.  I remember in his 1st term, we were selling China soy and rice cause their crops were all messed up due to pollution.

1 downfall of cheap China stuff is the quality.  Some years ago, multiple condos had an arsenic problem with their cabinets all from China and different contractors/manufacturers.  Then I would rather feed my child packaged food from the US, Japan, or Korea before a made in China food product.  This isnt' to say that all their exports are poor quality, but enough that it has the stereotype.

I posted this before, but a guy I know is a business man and what he buys cost about $1K USD per unit.  That same type of unit made in the USA would cost him $10K. So even with the increase in price, he still would buy from China over the US.

BIgger companies would have to reduce their prices like say Apple. Most won't pay $2500 for a new iPhone, $1200 or so is what people are willing to spend.  So enter the Samsung (Korea) Android market increasing units sold I would assume.  I remember seeing some years ago the mark up on Tesla's.  The Model Y cost about $30K to make. $18K in parts and $12K in labor/equipment cost.  How much does a Nike shoe cost to make in China or an iPhone?  I saw an interview with Wozniack the guy who was 1 founder of Apple and he said the cost to make an iPhone is like $100 or less.  I'm not sure how true this is as he's been out of the game well before the iPhone was created.

The trade war with China will be a difficult one to win.

First, the US empire nor any other nation on Earth can win a trade war against China for the simple reason that no country can produce a consumer product at a lower price point than China.  This should not be surprising for any economic historian as China HAS ALWAYS been a top economic powerhouse throughout many periods of its 5,000-year history.

Second, China and the rest of BRICS have already anticipated Trump's moves and have been preparing for that eventuality for the last few years.  In the case of Russia, despite being kicked out of the G7 and the US imperial financial system entirely since fighting the US imperial proxy war against them, the parallel system of BRICS seems to be holding up adequately.  If Russia has no signs of economic collapse, does anyone think just tariffs alone will stop China's economic rise?

Trump's tariffs against China like sanctions against Russia will do some harm but will not bring those two nations to their knees.  If fact, Trump's tariffs are more self-defeating as they will more likely cause domestic unemployment and higher prices, thus, adding to the "misery index" made famous during the Carter Administration.

HAS ALWAYS =/= "throughout many"

First, the US empire nor any other nation on Earth can win a trade war against China for the simple reason that no country can produce a consumer product at a lower price point than China.  This should not be surprising for any economic historian as China HAS ALWAYS been a top economic powerhouse throughout many periods of its 5,000-year history.

Second, China and the rest of BRICS have already anticipated Trump's moves and have been preparing for that eventuality for the last few years.  In the case of Russia, despite being kicked out of the G7 and the US imperial financial system entirely since fighting the US imperial proxy war against them, the parallel system of BRICS seems to be holding up adequately.  If Russia has no signs of economic collapse, does anyone think just tariffs alone will stop China's economic rise?

Trump's tariffs against China like sanctions against Russia will do some harm but will not bring those two nations to their knees.  If fact, Trump's tariffs are more self-defeating as they will more likely cause domestic unemployment and higher prices, thus, adding to the "misery index" made famous during the Carter Administration.

First, the US empire nor any other nation on Earth can win a trade war against China for the simple reason that no country can produce a consumer product at a lower price point than China.  This should not be surprising for any economic historian as China HAS ALWAYS been a top economic powerhouse throughout many periods of its 5,000-year history.

Second, China and the rest of BRICS have already anticipated Trump's moves and have been preparing for that eventuality for the last few years.  In the case of Russia, despite being kicked out of the G7 and the US imperial financial system entirely since fighting the US imperial proxy war against them, the parallel system of BRICS seems to be holding up adequately.  If Russia has no signs of economic collapse, does anyone think just tariffs alone will stop China's economic rise?

Trump's tariffs against China like sanctions against Russia will do some harm but will not bring those two nations to their knees.  If fact, Trump's tariffs are more self-defeating as they will more likely cause domestic unemployment and higher prices, thus, adding to the "misery index" made famous during the Carter Administration.

China isn't the only one to use underpaid workers or poor quality materials.  But, they probably do have a higher volume of workers.  If the US stopped buying Chinese made products, then would other countries who can make them for a similar price would step up.  These countries are making deals now due to the tariffs.

First, the US empire nor any other nation on Earth can win a trade war against China for the simple reason that no country can produce a consumer product at a lower price point than China.  This should not be surprising for any economic historian as China HAS ALWAYS been a top economic powerhouse throughout many periods of its 5,000-year history.

Second, China and the rest of BRICS have already anticipated Trump's moves and have been preparing for that eventuality for the last few years.  In the case of Russia, despite being kicked out of the G7 and the US imperial financial system entirely since fighting the US imperial proxy war against them, the parallel system of BRICS seems to be holding up adequately.  If Russia has no signs of economic collapse, does anyone think just tariffs alone will stop China's economic rise?

Trump's tariffs against China like sanctions against Russia will do some harm but will not bring those two nations to their knees.  If fact, Trump's tariffs are more self-defeating as they will more likely cause domestic unemployment and higher prices, thus, adding to the "misery index" made famous during the Carter Administration.

Other growing 3rd world nations are undercutting China FYI. Vietnam and Bangladesh come to mind, entering higher level markets and serving as alternative sources for America to import cheap goods from.

You're obviously being a fool with the sole purpose of trolling.

YOU are the one who brought up driving, which just like concealed carry reciprocity has nothing to do with how tariffs work.

But i'm tired of trying to teach you.  You can lead a fool to knowledge, but you can't make him think.

Strawman, I didn't say license reciprocity were like tariffs, the point was about the meaning and application of the word reciprocal. The whole issue was that Trump's tariffs were not fair or matching and the only way to defend them was to nitpick the word reciprocal so Trump could be right on some technical level.
You don't have a good rebuttal so you call me a troll. I'd call that a win on my part. 

Meanwhile this whole shake up of markets is not looking good, even a number of republicans are criticizing them. Maybe 3 years from now we will have way more manufacturing and we can look back and say Trump was right but right now I would not bet money on Trump's vision working out well.

Strawman, I didn't say license reciprocity were like tariffs, ...

Then why are you even arguing with a drivers license based argument?

Reciprocity has multiple contexts.  But you had to muddy the water by trying to prove reciprocity for tariffs is like reciprocity for drivers licenses.  Now you're admitting they are not the same, which was my original point after you said reciprocity means the sides are equal.

Just stop.

Then why are you even arguing with a drivers license based argument?

Reciprocity has multiple contexts.  But you had to muddy the water by trying to prove reciprocity for tariffs is like reciprocity for drivers licenses.  Now you're admitting they are not the same, which was my original point after you said reciprocity means the sides are equal.

Just stop.

He doesn't know how.  Which is why threads go on and on and on longer than they need to.  Maybe people in real life let him get away with being wrong, but not here.

now back to the topic and not beating a dead horse over word meanings.....

President Trump announced a 90-day pause on tariffs for over 75 countries,
reducing the rate to 10% to facilitate trade negotiations, while increasing tariffs
on Chinese goods to 125%. This decision came after significant market
volatility and was intended to encourage dialogue with trading partners.

China isn't the only one to use underpaid workers or poor quality materials.  But, they probably do have a higher volume of workers.  If the US stopped buying Chinese made products, then would other countries who can make them for a similar price would step up.  These countries are making deals now due to the tariffs.

Wrong, those tiny countries do not have any of the vast capacity that China does.  In fact, those nations are producing at or near its own production limits as we speak.  If they try to expand from what they are doing now, their cost per unit will go up.

This situation was similar for domestic ammo manufacturers.  If you recall, when everyone was facing ammo shortages a few years ago, those companies that did try to expand operations got burned once the ammo crises died down.  Whether you want to accept it or not, Chinese manufacturing will be a major part of the global economy from here on out.  For American consumers, this is a good thing as no one is willing with many fewer people having the money to pay for things that are not in some capacity manufactured in China.

Wrong, those tiny countries do not have any of the vast capacity that China does.  In fact, those nations are producing at or near its own production limits as we speak. If they try to expand from what they are doing now, their cost per unit will go up.

This situation was similar for domestic ammo manufacturers.  If you recall, when everyone was facing ammo shortages a few years ago, those companies that did try to expand operations got burned once the ammo crises died down.  Whether you want to accept it or not, Chinese manufacturing will be a major part of the global economy from here on out.  For American consumers, this is a good thing as no one is willing with many fewer people having the money to pay for things that are not in some capacity manufactured in China.

That's not how basic economics works. 

Price Elasticity is the ratio between the percentage change in the quantity demanded (Qd) or supplied (Qs) and the corresponding percent change in price.

The price elasticity of demand is the percentage change in the quantity demanded of a good or service divided by the percentage change in the price.

The price elasticity of supply is the percentage change in quantity supplied divided by the percentage change in price.

Economies of Scale is when the average cost of producing each individual unit declines as total output increases. 

So, basically, if US consumer demand shifts from China to other countries, even if they are currently at maximum output, there are many options to increase production that won't necessarily increase price.  One way is to increase labor hours by paying overtime to current employees or hiring more.  if production doesn't exceed demand, the additional units produced should not cost more.  In fact, depending on the expansion details, the unit price can actually decrease as the cost per unit decreases and total volume increases. 

Costs include fixed and variable costs.  The fixed costs will be spread across many more units, so if variable costs per unit remain constant, the unit cost is less.

Wrong, those tiny countries do not have any of the vast capacity that China does.  In fact, those nations are producing at or near its own production limits as we speak.  If they try to expand from what they are doing now, their cost per unit will go up.

This situation was similar for domestic ammo manufacturers.  If you recall, when everyone was facing ammo shortages a few years ago, those companies that did try to expand operations got burned once the ammo crises died down.  Whether you want to accept it or not, Chinese manufacturing will be a major part of the global economy from here on out.  For American consumers, this is a good thing as no one is willing with many fewer people having the money to pay for things that are not in some capacity manufactured in China.

"Wrong"? This is the only part that was a statement: "China isn't the only one to use underpaid workers or poor quality materials.  But, they probably do have a higher volume of workers."

The other part was a question as "if" and "would" words were used. 

So is China the only one who uses under paid workers and poor quality materials?  And/or do they not have a higher volume of workers?

Other growing 3rd world nations are undercutting China FYI. Vietnam and Bangladesh come to mind, entering higher level markets and serving as alternative sources for America to import cheap goods from.

I seriously don't think they can undercut China.  For it to be true, those countries must produce at a price point lower than China which is very unlikely.