I'm not sure how you determine that amount. That being said, I don't disagree that there has to be some punitive measures. The danger of course is that whatever we decide to impose will backfire on us. We are still dependent on China for a ton of things. And there is a danger that they call our debt. So we are in agreement that something has to be done, the challenge will be do make a measured response that won't do long term damage to us.
How should we punish China?
- Thread starter MAGA MAN
- Start date
I'm not sure how you determine that amount. That being said, I don't disagree that there has to be some punitive measures. The danger of course is that whatever we decide to impose will backfire on us. We are still dependent on China for a ton of things. And there is a danger that they call our debt. So we are in agreement that something has to be done, the challenge will be do make a measured response that won't do long term damage to us.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
He posted his argument.
I suggest NOT doing that. For now I would do nothing. We don't have all the facts, and depending on how those facts play out we should determine an appropriate response. It's too early right now to be worrying about that, IMHO.
countryboy
Verified User
The facts are already playing out. What do you suggest we do?
countryboy
Verified User
Nonsense, there are friendlier countries that can manufacture dog toys and cheap HD TVs. China should definitely be cut out of the loop, completely.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
I think it is fairly easy to determine the amount, at least a valid approximation. Look at the trend in GDP.
What do you mean by "back fire"?
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
I heard that there is a country very able to do all of that. I'm not sure how to spell it, but it's pronounced "you-sah".
Statement one is obvious. If you default on your debt, you will be a poor credit risk, and you will have to pay a higher interest rate as a result. Statement two follows statement one. The worse the credit risk, the higher the interest rate. Statement three is an opinion that I can't quantify. However, look to what happened to Icelands economy when it defaulted on it's debt. Iceland isn't an important player like the US. You would immediately see much higher interest rates, a highly devalued dollar, loss of confidence in US markets, a whole mix of bad results. When Iceland defaulted, their currency dropped 50%, their stock market lost 90% of it's value, and unemployment tripled. The credit rating for Icelands debt dropped from A to BBB. If we did the same, it would be an utter cluster.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
I know I won because of the logical argument that I presented and you can't dispute...
It's a bad time for an all out trade war. China cares far less about it's workforce than we do.
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
Posturing moron who got made a fool out of now tying to make himself look intelligent by using a Shakespearean term.
Typical Dorky move.
No they aren't. We don't know to what extent China covered up, lied, and acted with intent. Until we do, there is no rush to take action. We have enough on our plate right now.
countryboy
Verified User
yes we can manufacture cheap plastic junk, and do manufacturer a good bit of it. But is that the best use of our time and talents?
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
I think that your argument is basically sound, however you ignore the fact that the US dollar is the de-facto world standard. I agree that there will be some negative impact, just not to that extent. The key is to mitigate that impact via a quid pro quo argument (payback for damages caused). If done correctly it could mitigate it to the point of no impact at all.
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
Explain the logic behind the concept of one paying back money one loaned someone else, Dorky.
Nothing to dispute because by its total lack of any logic whatsoever, it disputes itself for me.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
Yes I think that it is. Modern manufacturing isn't as labor intensive at it was, and of course the supply chain effect is a huge benefit.
If they agree, sure. But I don't see China taking any responsibility for this. We'll see how this plays out, but I appreciate your willingness to consider my points, even when you don't agree with them.
That's not proof of your claims. It's nothing but a mixture of false assumptions and more speculation and opinionated prediction based upon unsourced deflections about Iceland.
I doubt you can quantify any of your assertions.
Can you prove these claims or not?
It appears that all of your statements are opinions that you can't quantify.