Real talk: is there such a thing as a non-tariff response to what the US is doing that doesn’t amount to, essentially, rolling over while the US to curb stomps us? What’s the alternative? Because 70% seems low.
I’m highly skeptical of the impact this would have, I don’t think the US would feel it much at all. Those isolated places are about it but that probably wouldn’t last long and I doubt US leadership cares much.
Plus that and a lot of the other stuff people are suggesting are single-use weapons. We can only do them once. Be wary of using such measures so early into this.
Real talk: is there such a thing as a non-tariff response to what the US is doing that doesn’t amount to, essentially, rolling over while the US to curb stomps us?
There’s definitely more drastic responses. Rather than simply imposing a tariff, you could go really extreme and throw up a full blown embargo of US goods. You could put a tax on exports (lumber and energy) equivalent to their tariff on imports, further discouraging trade on those goods because you know the US buyers are working against an inelastic good. You could threaten to withdraw from NAFTA or start entering into friendlier trade agreements with US rivals (start doing more business with China or start selling direct to Cuba or Nicaragua or Venezuela).
Retaliatory tariffs are just seen as equal-and-opposite and therefore a legitimate reprisal. The other stuff would be (not unfairly) seen as an escalation and likely upset more than just the Trump base of support.
Real talk: is there such a thing as a non-tariff response to what the US is doing that doesn’t amount to, essentially, rolling over while the US to curb stomps us? What’s the alternative? Because 70% seems low.
Recalling all Canadian hockey players in the American hockey league?
Cutting off the power we supply to them.
Isolated places like Point Roberts would be screwed, and the rest of the US would feel it too.
I’m highly skeptical of the impact this would have, I don’t think the US would feel it much at all. Those isolated places are about it but that probably wouldn’t last long and I doubt US leadership cares much.
Plus that and a lot of the other stuff people are suggesting are single-use weapons. We can only do them once. Be wary of using such measures so early into this.
There’s definitely more drastic responses. Rather than simply imposing a tariff, you could go really extreme and throw up a full blown embargo of US goods. You could put a tax on exports (lumber and energy) equivalent to their tariff on imports, further discouraging trade on those goods because you know the US buyers are working against an inelastic good. You could threaten to withdraw from NAFTA or start entering into friendlier trade agreements with US rivals (start doing more business with China or start selling direct to Cuba or Nicaragua or Venezuela).
Retaliatory tariffs are just seen as equal-and-opposite and therefore a legitimate reprisal. The other stuff would be (not unfairly) seen as an escalation and likely upset more than just the Trump base of support.