Because the same argument used about why the US should not retaliate applies in spades to these economiess more depent on selling to the USA then the USA is on selling too them
I love the way people simply ignore fact and cling to the “Free Trade” dogma.
The customer (the USA) has other options, the seller “such as China” does not have other markets nearly as profitable. Therefore there is build in leverage on the customers side, which we refuse to use.
We can do without China much easier then they can do without our market. However, because we follow this ridiculous “Manage d Trade” policy, we never use our leverage to stop their unfair trade and currency practices.
Manged Trade is the notion we can use US Trade policy to help achieve US Foreign Policy goals. It made sense in the Cold War, it is anachronistic notion now.
In the case of consumer electronics what is the other option? Or textiles. Or furniture.
...the seller “such as China” does not have other markets nearly as profitable.
Or the rest of the world either, assuming that President Trump will not direct his trade ire solely against Mexico and China.
Therefore there is build in leverage on the customers side, which we refuse to use.
And that leverage is to either tax it with a tariff, which U.S. consumers would pay, or refuse to import it, which would leave U.S. consumers without.
We can do without China much easier then they can do without our market.
Cutting off trade would have a terrible impact on both China and the U.S.