RayC

China appears to favour a different form of negotiation. https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelshulman/2025/04/09/us-rally-at-risk-as-china-may-be-dumping-treasuries/

I was wondering what was the point of Trump's tariff 'strategy': So it is to cheese off the Europeans. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Anyway, I think that it's fair to say 'Job done'. The 'strategy' has also cheesed off the rest of the world as well for good measure. Oh, and caused turmoil on the world's financial markets - including the US's - and concern amongst multinational companies, many (most?) of whom are American. The 'benefits' are seemingly endless. So that's what success looks like!

A reset was proposed. It was called the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Some studies estimated that TITP would boost the EU and US GDPs by up to 2%. Trump scuppered TTIP during his first term. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/free-trade-between-eu-and-us-match-made-heaven

So Trump's strategy is to (re)negotiate trade deals with +/-150 nations/ trading blocs simultaneously? Good luck with that. Far from causing nations to turn away from China, if Trump doesn't withdraw tariffs sooner rather than later, he will deliver the ASEAN countries (and others) into China's lap.

Given that the EU bloc is the US's biggest trading partner, maybe Trump should get the best china out and invite v.d. Leyden round for tea. If not, the other China might try its' own reset of world trade. Btw: Brussels is the capital of Belgium but also where the (majority of) EU institutions are HQ'ed hence the use of Brussels to mean the EU.

What has a poster's nationality got to do with anything?

And?

What disgraceful behaviour was that? Not allowing the UK the same benefits but none of the obligations and responsibilities of membership? In any event, surely the EU's behaviour during the negotiations shouldn't have mattered: After all, the EU needed the UK more than the UK needed the EU😂

In the medium/ long term markets may well bounce back (unless they don't!); however, one conclusion that can be drawn now is that Trump's tariff policy has introduced unnecessary uncertainty and instability into the world's financial markets where it didn't previously exist.

Just noticed this. Another example of Two-tier justice in the UK .... oh, hold on ...

'Nero fiddles while Rome burns', or more accurately, 'Trump plays golf while the world's stock markets implode'.

I don't think that many people are surprised that Trump has imposed tariffs, but the expectation was that the tariffs would be targeted, both in terms of what countries and what sectors would be affected. The size of the tariffs is also much larger than expected.

You must have missed @bannork's post explaining how the electoral process works in the EU.

So if @bannork's explanation of the process is incorrect, can you please explain how elections to the various EU institutions do actually work. Thanks.

A more nuanced view of Russia's economic performance under Putin. https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/rise-stagnation-russias-economy-during-putins-tenure-2023-12-08/

If you define Ukraine's desire to join the EU as poking Russia in the eye then I agree. Whataboutery.

No one has poked Russia in the eye. Indeed, any poking has been done by Russia with their constant attempts to disrupt elections, etc in Western democracies. For the simple reason that with the break-up of the Soviet Union, Ukraine and Georgia became sovereign nations. This independence should have allowed them to make decisions without interference from Moscow. Sadly, as we all know, that has not been the case.

Upon becoming independent, sovereign countries one of the first acts by most of the former Warsaw Pact countries was to apply for membership of NATO (and the EU). They did this of their volition. They were not forced into doing so by the West. What has happened in Ukraine and Georgia is down to Russia being unable to accept that her former satellite states see their future being secured - both economically and militarily - from Brussels rather than Moscow. When you boil it all down, it is as simple as that.

On that basis, Europe shouldn't have had anything to worry about in the past decade, as Russia was not being threatened with invasion and she was free to pursue her own (domestic) economic policies. Unfortunately, events since 2014 have proven otherwise.

Russia's power - such as it is - lies in the fact that it possesses a nuclear arsenal. That has been the case for 60+ years. However, France and the UK are also nuclear powers - albeit with smaller arsenals than Russia - both of whom currently have enough weaponry to wipe out Moscow and St. Petersburg. Therefore, unless Putin is mad - and I agree with you, I don't think that he is - the threat of MAD does little more than maintain an equilibrium in Europe; it doesn't offer much of an advantage for Russia in a negotiation/ conflict.

And therein lies the problem. Russia's economy has been in relative decline this century. Ukraine's desire to turn away from Moscow and throw in its' economic lot with the West - in the guise of the EU - was the final straw for Putin, hence the invasion. The Europeans are not the only ones with delusions of grandeur. Russia is a fading power with limited influence on the world stage, a fact that Putin apparently seems unable to accept. Perhaps Russia has no desire for war with The West, but her actions show that she is prepared to risk it.

But Russia wouldn't do that of course as they are led by the peaceful democrat, Mr. Putin, who is careful not to impinge on the sovereignty, or show any aggression towards other nations.

Then I assume that you won't have any difficulty in listing some examples of EU legislation relating to products which are more onerous for importers than for domestic EU producers. For example, what extra burden is placed upon overseas car manufacturers or farmers compared with their EU counterparts?

No doubt there is more than one European supporter of Trump but a very tiny - and decreasing - number of Europeans would want Trump to be any near the government of their nations.

I'll add to your list of grievances. You forgot to mention that the DCI in 'Adolescent' is .. horror ... black and his sidekick is a woman (probably a lesbian)! What's a white, hetrosexual male to do when the odds are so stacked against him? I'll leave you to wallow in your self-pity.