Tariffs have various long term effects that are useful. One is shifting where that manufacturing is done and in the longer term it could bring it back, depending on the cost of doing it in a different, non China, country. But another long term effect is geopolitical - China is in a more difficult economic position than the US and tariffs will make it difficult for them to keep building their military and difficult to envision war. It will also weaken their authoritarian government, which has an interest in annexing Taiwan and also in undermining the US, Europe, and other free societies. The other benefits of tariffs matter - it isn’t just about the short term effects (of inflating costs or whatever).
> One is shifting where that manufacturing is done and in the longer term it could bring it back, depending on the cost of doing it in a different, non China, country.
Unfortunately, the taxes in question are also targeting imports from Canada and Mexico, two countries that are firmly in the US sphere of influence, and the beneficiaries of these new taxes will be countries in SEA which are increasingly in China's sphere of influence. This is a geopolitical own-goal from an administration with no coherent strategy.
> Unfortunately, the taxes in question are also targeting imports from Canada and Mexico, two countries that are firmly in the US sphere of influence
It is a negotiation tactic with those two countries. It is meant to get changes on issues like border security, but also fairness given existing tariffs are often unbalanced. But also, there are a lot of imports from those countries that are basically Chinese tariff evasion.
> It is a negotiation tactic with those two countries.
It is an incoherent and amateur negotiation tactic. If the US can't secure the southern border on its own, what makes anyone think that Mexico is going to be able to do a better job at that? Naturally, we are ignoring for the moment that the majority of illegal immigration does not happen at the border in the first place. As for fairness, maybe Trump should have addressed that when he timidly rubber-stamped NAFTA 2 during his first term. And you're not going to beat "Chinese tax evasion" in this way without charging these taxes on every country on Earth.
These import taxes are performative posturing. Please stop trying to paint them as part of some brilliantly motivated campaign.
I think that bullying mostly works when you don't have a potential consumer base that's bigger than the bully. I know it's not going to last long, but over the night shift from "America good, China bad" to "well, China at least doesn't belittle us every minute, so screw the states" has been very interesting to watch up here in Canada.
Grabbing territories by force or economic coercion seems like a despotic thing to do, doesn't it. Even threatening to do so would probably make people trust you less and be less likely to cooperate, I would think.
Indeed, undermining elections in Europe and other free societies is bad too. Doing so might ruin any business and other longstanding relations you have with those countries!
If current American government cared about weakening authoritarian governments, it would be supporting them less. If it cared about not undermining Europe, Canada, and other free societies, it would not be attacking them.
It does not seem like Canada wants to be 51 state nor it seems like Europe feels empowered after Trump started to support Putins expansion.
