Though you seem quite amused by US liberals that haven't enough national pride, or respect for the office that Trump occupies to provide him the same courtesy. I don't think you want to align yourself with US liberals. I know you're a nationalist, and tariffs as a precursor to suspension of trade would be a step towards both US & German nationalist reforms. I don't see how you and I are on opposite sides of limited foreign dependency.
As nationalist i dont accept one sided hits against my nation. And i certainly dont accept my country losing face. Trump wants force us without offering something. And we wont accept that.
Yes. Mass transportation requires highly skilled workers. Busses and railwayx use vehicles. I've explained my thinking. Strike back ... walk away entirely. A sovereign economically independent nation has the right, and the obligation to defend, and preserve it's nations interests. Trump has ... so I'm thinking, why hasn't the EU? Tariffs are business decisions not political platforms. Do what's good for the EU and stop portraying business decisions as retaliation.
We do that as well. We strike back and put tariffs on american products. Why buy florida orange juice when spanish one is better for us?
Well I think the issue is that you're insulted ... period. Trump tariffs target trade deficits not the countryresidents or their beliefs & principles. Germany, biggest EU economy, largest deficit. Nothing mean spirited, it's data. I like Irish whiskey, French champagne, and Swiss chocolate. I pay a premium for them. Spanish juice is your preference ... enjoy.
Oh putting tariffs on our products and justify this with national security is not targeting us? The steel and aluminium tariffs have minimum effect for us, but we dont accept this insult. What kind of alliance is this?
Then don't except it. No ones even asked. The US has traded off little bits of it's economic might for decades. Mostly in exchange for obsolete strategic weapons placement. The weapons aren't what's obsolete. The need for foreign deployment is. I have less interest in defending the EU, than I have in economically subsizing it via foreign aid or trade deficits. It should take little time to produce hypersonic nuclear platforms. Obama set aside $1 trillion for nuclear upgrades. US bases on foreign soil are obsolete. So are the trade offs.
YOu cant its that simple, if the UK wants to keep trading with the EU without tariffs as it is now it has to accept the EU rules. Hardest hit would be the UK. Again You cant set tariffs against 1 EU country thats simply wont work, you have to set against them all meaning the EU would put tariffs on 43% of UK exports , guess who will be hit the hardest?
Not really imposed, most EU countrys wanted largely the same. And merkel was able to form a new gov no, she will remain in power as long as she remains in power in germany .
At higher prices, UK companies buy there because its the best for them, so this adds another extra cost. And its more like 13% (240billion pounds out of an 1.8 trillion pound GDP) Yes, of course Its 13% of UK GDP vs 3.5% of EU GDP. What you fail to grasp is you wont be dealing with germany you will be dealing with the EU. You cannot impose tariffs on just germany, EU has a unified market that simply wont work. Economies and interlincted and complex what trump is doing will probably hurt the US more in the long run then help it. Trump is doing this for electoral purposes not to actually imrpove the US economy (or he doesnt have a clue and did something stupid thats possible as well) EU will never allow this, if UK wants acces to the EU market it will have to agree to not set tariffs. The UK already stated this Not really but thats probably is way to complicated to explain here. But might I suggest you look at apple to see how a modern economy and modern companys in it works? Thats what brittain tried and failed its olution was brexit . No germany cannot withdraw from certain agreements without lossing its membership to the EU. Thats simply the way it works there are no "fines" at that level. SO yes it can withdraw but no it cant violate EU rules and agreements in that way and still remain in the EU.
Not to much any more, mostly aluminum, copper and plastic and steel. But over 25 million tons of steel is recycled every years along with all the other materials used to build a new one.. In fact the steel recycling industry is 16th largest in the U.S.
Yeah, have fun with that. When we are already losing in trade business with you, why is it that you think doing less business with you is a threat that scares anyone? Do it. He has already told you that if you do he will slap tarrifs on German cars so fast it will make your head spin. If you think Merkel has the balls for this fight, tell her to step up. Big talker... German Newspaper Die Welt reported on the dismal state of the Bundeswehr (the unified armed forces of Germany and their civil administration) last week and the numbers are staggering. (Translated from German – may be imprecise.) Thus, the total stock of Leopard 2 main battle tanks is 244th In 2017, an average of 176 were available, the remainder was in the repair or was stored in depots. Of these 176 tanks, 105 were actually ready for use, which makes a quota of on average 60 percent – and yet nothing is said about the extent to which maintenance and spare parts supply are actually sustainable… In the Panzerhaubitze 2000 it is already close again: In the inventory of the Bundeswehr, there is this artillery gun 121 times. But only 75 are available, 42 operational (56 percent). Even more dramatic looks at the army aviators. The total stock of the NH90 transport helicopter is 58. In 2017, 37 of these were available on average, while only 13 were available (35 percent). Four of them are in action in Mali – which incidentally means that hardly any staff is available for training at home. Failure to withdraw the NH90 from Mali in the middle of the year will stall the ability for years to come. So the Germans have 95 operable tanks at any given time and less than 200 working Armored Personnel Carriers. Their Air Force is in serious trouble. They have roughly forty operable fighter jets, a good portion of which are already committed to operations around Turkey and Syria. And then there’s the Navy. Shall we talk about the German submarine force? It’s going to be a short discussion. Coming into this winter they had one (!) operable submarine. Sadly, that one grounded on the rocks a few months ago so their total fleet of subs currently stands at… zero. How did things get to this point? A recent interview with the German Defense Minister included some choice quotes. One of them was the explanation that Germany hasn’t paid as much attention to the military because “we are surrounded by friends.” The alternate and somewhat more dismal explanation is, “because we just don’t care.” Germany’s Parliamentary Armed Forces Commissioner, Hans-Peter Bartels, gave a blistering interview to DW this month, citing numerous shortcomings, and they go beyond a lack of heavy machinery. He said that the Army lacked sufficient protective vests, winter clothing and tents to be able to take part in a major NATO training mission. The soldiers are “under stress” and lacking discipline or leadership in too many cases because the German Army has 21,000 vacant officer posts. So will that be changing? Hey… Germany has politics just like we do. Spending two percent of their GDP on the military is a big ask and will require a lot of votes. Don’t hold your breath. And in the meantime, if something serious flares up in that region you may be waiting a while for the German cavalry to arrive. https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/27/heck-happened-germanys-military/ You are fooling no one. And You are on Notice.
Maybe if Merkel absorbs EU losses the EU stands with her. Either way the US doesn't stand to lose anything. The math is pretty simple, and I've posted the figures 3 times.
You have 95 operable tanks at any given time and less than 200 working Armored Personnel Carriers in your whole fkn country. You have roughly forty operable fighter jets, a good portion of which are already committed to operations around Turkey and Syria. The German submarine force? Coming into this winter they had one (!) operable submarine. Sadly, that one ran aground on the rocks a few months ago so your total fleet of subs currently stands at… zero. None. Zip. Noda. Nothing. Germany’s Parliamentary Armed Forces Commissioner, Hans-Peter Bartels, gave a blistering interview to DW this month, citing numerous shortcomings, and they go beyond a lack of heavy machinery. He said that the Army lacked sufficient protective vests, winter clothing and tents to be able to take part in a major NATO training mission. The soldiers are “under stress” and lacking discipline or leadership in too many cases because the German Army has 21,000 vacant officer posts.
The German military over the past couple of decades has gotten fat and lazy drinking beer and eating sausages. In Afghanistan the Germans didn't even go outside the wire. That's what usually happens with any country's military when liberals are in charge of the government.
Anyway, back to trade... the German's are smart good people, they will figure it out. Shame on us for letting us get taken advantage of for so many years. Trump will tell them straight and they will do the right thing. Americans and Germans make good partners. President Trump, surrounded by steel workers in the Oval Office, signed a memo imposing tariffs on steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) that are imported to the United States. He carved out two exceptions to the tariffs: Canada and Mexico would be temporarily exempted from the tariffs, pending the outcome of the ongoing renegotiation of NAFTA. The U.S. will likely insist that products imported tariff-free into the U.S. use steel produced within NAFTA. So idea posted here that Germany would ship their steel to Mexico to be imported here, well, Trump saw you coming a mile away. He directed USTR (U.S. trade representative) Robert C. Lighthizer to negotiate with those military allies that want to be excluded from the tariffs, but such exclusions would require trade reciprocity. The Trump administration is expert at using economic leverage to produce negotiated outcomes that benefit the United States. This announcement marks a victory for the trade deficit hawks in President Trump's inner circle of economic advisers, including Wilbur Ross, Trump's secretary of commerce, and University of California at Irvine economics professor Peter Navarro, who was recently elevated to the ranks of the president's top-level advisers. The economic recovery being produced by President Trump's tax cuts and deregulation is at stake. During the fourth quarter of 2017, real GDP grew at a 2.5% clip, which is good compared to growth rates during the Obama years, but it could have been much better. Here are the contributions to growth during the fourth quarter: Consumption 2.6% Fixed Investment 1.3% Change in Inventories -0.7% Government Purchases 0.5% Net Exports -1.3% Total 2.5% The reduction of inventories by 0.7% is not of concern. It simply means that business inventories declined by 0.7% of our GDP, probably because businesses were selling more than they had anticipated. The concerning factor is the worsening net exports (i.e., trade balance), which reduced GDP growth by 1.3% of our GDP. If not for the worsening trade balance, GDP growth would have been an outstanding 3.8% during the fourth quarter. The same countries that produced the most steel in the world produced the largest trade deficits in the United States (deficits shown as negative trade balances): Country Steel Production millions of tonnes U.S. Trade Balance millions of dollars China 808.4 -316,273 Japan 104.8 -58,286 India 95.6 -19,455 Russia 70.8 *-10,016 South Korea 68.6 -18,977 Germany 42.1 -52,886 Italy 23.4 -27,061 Taiwan 21.8 -14,739 Mexico 18.8 -59,286 France 14.4 -12,454 Spain 13.6 *-4,646 Canada 12.6 -13,765 *goods only, does not include services The biggest steel-producing country in the world in 2016 was China, which accounted for about half of the world's steel production and more than half of the U.S. trade deficit. Imposing tariffs on such products is a way to balance trade. What of fears of a trade war? Most of the above countries are already participating in a trade war with the United States, except that the United States has not been fighting back. The governments of these countries have been manipulating the terms of trade to enhance their exports to the United States and keep out U.S. products. As a result, we get debt, and they get the new factories and the R&D that needs to locate near factories. The policy goal as we move forward with these tariffs should be to balance the U.S. overall global trading position. The American working class has suffered tremendously as the result of imbalanced global competition. Trump's fixing that, and it's long overdue. https://www.americanthinker.com/art...s_acting_in_the_best_interest_of_the_usa.html
We have done them no favors by carry this load for them. They are capable of standing on their own two feet, providing their own National Defense, and if we let them take advantage of us on trade, well, shame on us.
I don't like what you are doing with NATO. As for trade, shame on us, not you. I spent some time in Germany, what a wonderful nation and even more wonderful people. I couldn't have treated better and your manufacturing is absolutely the class of the world. I don't dispute that, and I wish you, the German People and Germany, all the best.
That's what Trump told the Germans. Germany has become a welfare queen sucking off the American taxpayers since May of 1945. Bring our troops home. That what was suppose to have happened after Reagan won the Cold War. But no, someone wanted to expand NATO and restart the Cold War.
It was Clinton's Secretary of State Allbright who hates all Russians who convinced Clinton to expand NATO and restart the Cold War. But Cold War ll officially began under the Obama administration and crooked Hillary.
Yes. When the Russian's green-lighted reunification of Germany and unified Germany in NATO, Papa Bush promised them that NATO would never be expanded Russia's border. Bill Clinton broke this promise.
