[robroys woman]

I think this is a good move. That being said, here comes price inflation.

[mindburglar]

Haha China! Good luck. It’ll be 200 bln by next Friday.

[rjsimmon]

China cannot afford to lose America as a trade partner, so their ‘retaliation’ will not be much to consider. It is only to save face.

[MichaelCorleone]

All I can say is the global economy and the flow of merchandise, money and capital is very complex and the dynamics are changing all the time.

I trust the ‘trio’ of President Trump, Peter Navarro, and Wilbur Ross to navigate their way around it.

[central_va]

25% of $50bn is $12.5bn. When compared to a trade deficit of $400bn (3% of the overall deficit)it is only a small dent. But a good start.

[central_va]

"I keep asking the establishment shills why America has some moral obligation to tolerate foreign countries imposing higher tariffs upon us than we impose upon them. Seems facially unfair, right? So, there’s got to be a really good reason because how can you support our working people facing a higher obstacle to trade than the foreigners do? I’m just wondering what’s wrong with a level playing field. Fair is fair, right? But I never get a good answer."

Link here.

[escapefromboston]

This is bad news, the price of my rat poison filled tooth paste is going to go through the roof

[DoodleDawg]

The US will impose further tariffs if China retaliates, the White House said.

If they retaliate? You mean when they retaliate.

[Beautiful_Gracious_Skies]

The Dollar Store’s now the Buck ‘n Quarter Store.

[NoLibZone]

Dang.

If this continues it will soon be cheaper to make things in the US.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Winning!

[Vaduz]

Good old boy club kickback scam takes ass kicking great news.

[Grampa Dave]

If US tariffs are bad for the US economy, why is no one discussing why country X’s current and retaliatory tariffs are bad for X’s economy?

http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3669470/posts?page=5#5

Thanks to: kosciusko51 for this anti tarriff shredding reality!