For some of us who possess common sense and are well versed in globalization, we realize how incredibly destructive the Trump tariffs truly are, and we acknowledge the fact that they are a tax hike on the American public. 

 

So what were Reagan’s views on trade policy? Reagan was not a doctrinaire policymaker. The key to understanding his approach is the three P’s: principle, pragmatism and politics.

 

On principle, there is no question as to where Reagan stood. In 1982 he said, “Free trade serves the cause of economic progress, and it serves the cause of world peace.” In 1985 he said that “our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets — free trade.”

He was equally firm in opposing protectionism. “We should call it destructionism,” he argued. “It destroys jobs, weakens our industries, harms exports, costs billions of dollars to consumers, and damages our overall economy.” He called demands for high tariffs and import restrictions “a familiar bit of flimflammery in American politics.”

 

One Reagan rebuke, in a speech he gave in 1988, has resonance today. “Protectionism is being used by some American politicians as a cheap form of nationalism,” he warned. “We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends — weakening our economy, our national security and the entire free world — all while cynically waving the American flag.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/opinion/trump-reagan-tariffs-canada.html?smid=nytcore-android-share

 

“Emergencies are like war, famine, tornado,” said Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the sole Republican sponsor of the resolution rejecting the tariffs on Brazil in Mr. Trump’s trade war. “Not liking someone’s tariffs is not an emergency. It’s an abuse of the emergency power, and it’s Congress abdicating their traditional role in taxes.”

 

Joining Mr. Paul in supporting the measure were four other G.O.P. senators who have expressed concern that the tariffs could cause economic pain in the United States: Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

 

Asked before the vote why more of his Republican colleagues were not willing to support the measure, Mr. Paul answered: “Fear.”

 

“The prosecution of a friend of the president — how is that an emergency that threatens the United States? It doesn’t,” Mr. Kaine said.

Wow Spidey. What brought that on? Try to let go or move back if you can.🙃🙃

Tariffs per se are not the problem. They're a good solution in many cases. The problem is Trump's incoherent and knee-jerk planning, his utter lack of strategic preparation, and his apparent void of anything resembling tactical design.

10 minutes ago, Lucky Bones said:

Wow Spidey. What brought that on? Try to let go or move back if you can.🙃🙃

Never seen him cut/paste from so many sources in a single post. 

It's not benefical to compare Reagan's and Trump's policies. 

 

Reagan ruled at the dawn of globalization and Trump at  its decline. Completely different set of circumstances, different markets, different economies. What was good in Reagan's day is not necessarily good in Trump's day.

All the lefties suddenly love Reagan 😄

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

All the lefties suddenly love Reagan 😄

Not so much a matter of loving Reagan as it is to point out Trump's massive ignorance.

ronald reagan applied milton friedman's knowledge

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

For some of us who possess common sense and are well versed in globalization, we realize how incredibly destructive the Trump tariffs truly are, and we acknowledge the fact that they are a tax hike on the American public. 

 

So what were Reagan’s views on trade policy? Reagan was not a doctrinaire policymaker. The key to understanding his approach is the three P’s: principle, pragmatism and politics.

 

On principle, there is no question as to where Reagan stood. In 1982 he said, “Free trade serves the cause of economic progress, and it serves the cause of world peace.” In 1985 he said that “our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets — free trade.”

He was equally firm in opposing protectionism. “We should call it destructionism,” he argued. “It destroys jobs, weakens our industries, harms exports, costs billions of dollars to consumers, and damages our overall economy.” He called demands for high tariffs and import restrictions “a familiar bit of flimflammery in American politics.”

 

One Reagan rebuke, in a speech he gave in 1988, has resonance today. “Protectionism is being used by some American politicians as a cheap form of nationalism,” he warned. “We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends — weakening our economy, our national security and the entire free world — all while cynically waving the American flag.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/opinion/trump-reagan-tariffs-canada.html?smid=nytcore-android-share

 

“Emergencies are like war, famine, tornado,” said Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the sole Republican sponsor of the resolution rejecting the tariffs on Brazil in Mr. Trump’s trade war. “Not liking someone’s tariffs is not an emergency. It’s an abuse of the emergency power, and it’s Congress abdicating their traditional role in taxes.”

 

Joining Mr. Paul in supporting the measure were four other G.O.P. senators who have expressed concern that the tariffs could cause economic pain in the United States: Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

 

Asked before the vote why more of his Republican colleagues were not willing to support the measure, Mr. Paul answered: “Fear.”

 

“The prosecution of a friend of the president — how is that an emergency that threatens the United States? It doesn’t,” Mr. Kaine said.

Still waiting DOC 

Meanwhile in in South Korea, King... Lord... God-King Trump gets his golden crown!

 

"The Cheonmachong gold crown symbolizes the Devine connection between the authority of The White House Mar-A-Logo the heavens and the sovereignty on Earth."

 

☝️
Trump thinking....."All I got from the Japan PM was to stupid golden putter!"  

 

World leaders now know how to handle (King) Trump - just buy him!!!

11 hours ago, connda said:

World leaders now know how to handle (King) Trump - just buy him!!!

 

Gift-giving has been the way of the world since the beginning of time. 

 

4 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Gift-giving has been the way of the world since the beginning of time. 

 

Statutory Regulations: Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act

Congress has codified procedures for handling foreign gifts through the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act (FGDA), enacted in 1966 (5 U.S.C. § 7342). This statute provides practical guidance while implementing the Emoluments Clause, particularly for gifts of "minimal value." Key provisions applicable to the President include:

• Definition of a Gift: Any item, service, or benefit provided by a foreign government or its representative, excluding items for official use or under diplomatic customs.
• Minimal Value Threshold: As of 2023, minimal value is defined as $480 or less (adjusted periodically for inflation). Gifts below this threshold may be accepted, retained, or used without congressional consent, provided they align with diplomatic hospitality.
• Gifts Exceeding Minimal Value:
  • Acceptance is prohibited without congressional consent.
  • Such gifts must be surrendered to the employing agency (for the President, typically the White House or Department of State).
  • Disposition options include:
    • Forfeiture to the U.S. government.
    • Deposit in the National Archives or a presidential library.
    • Sale, with proceeds remitted to the U.S. Treasury.
    • Return to the donor if feasible.
  • The recipient may purchase the gift at fair market value to retain it personally.

The public will be told by Spokeswoman Levine that the putter and gold crown are worth exactly $480 each! 

14 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Gift-giving has been the way of the world since the beginning of time. 

 

The problem is that sometimes it's bribery. 

10 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

The problem is that sometimes it's bribery. 

 

Not so sure about that.

Since the deals they are making are worth billions ... 

No gift can come 1% close to the benefits both countries are deriving from the agreement.

So cynical. It's just a nice gesture. 

 

39 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Not so much a matter of loving Reagan as it is to point out Trump's massive ignorance.

By using 50 year old arguments from when the world was a completely different place? Talk about ignorance😅

5 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

The problem is that sometimes it's bribery. 

You mean like a Qatari jet?

Trump is obviously furious about it, and instructions have been sent to the MAGA echo chamber, so the argument must be effective! 🤣

22 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

By using 50 year old arguments from when the world was a completely different place? Talk about ignorance😅

Trump claimed that the Canadian ad was dishonest. It wasn't.

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

By using 50 year old arguments from when the world was a completely different place? Talk about ignorance😅

The world’s moved on — but they’re still playing the same old movie.
Reagan and his family endured poverty and unemployment during the Great Depression, watching neighbors lose everything.
He saw how the Smoot–Hawley Tariff turned the world upside down — and spent his political life determined never to make that mistake again.

A trust-fund baby turned economic arsonist, reviving the very failures that once broke the world and branding them ‘America First.’
Because citing history isn’t ignorance — it’s memory.
And the real ignorance is pretending the warning signs don’t apply to you.

Here’s the kicker:
The same inflated P/E ratio has appeared only twice in the past century, once in 1929, prior to the Great Depression, and again during the dot-com boom.
Both ended the same way.
Back then, stocks traded at thirty times earnings before the fall.
Today, they’re pushing forty.
Coincidence?

2 hours ago, Cameroni said:

It's not benefical to compare Reagan's and Trump's policies. 

 

Reagan ruled at the dawn of globalization and Trump at  its decline. Completely different set of circumstances, different markets, different economies. What was good in Reagan's day is not necessarily good in Trump's day.

 

This graph tells that exact story:

 

How long can a country continue to import over half a $Trillion a year more than it exports?

 

You may also mention that the Cold War was still going on, Europe's economy still hadn't recovered from WW2, and the 1980s US could afford to get bent over the bargaining table (and fund the lion's share of NATO) to keep allies onboard.  We can't afford to keep that up, either.

 

 

21 minutes ago, impulse said:

You may also mention that the Cold War was still going on, Europe's economy still hadn't recovered from WW2, and the 1980s US could afford to get bent over the bargaining table (and fund the lion's share of NATO) to keep allies onboard.  We can't afford to keep that up, either.

 

Ah the good ole 80s, was there ever a better time in history? The Karate Kid was still good, Michael Jackson and Prince still alive  and the US President was telling jokes.

3 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Ah the good ole 80s, was there ever a better time in history? The Karate Kid was still good, Michael Jackson and Prince still alive  and the US President was telling jokes.

 

And who can forget Patrick Swayze in Red Dawn and Tom Cruise in Top Gun? 

 

Not a single cross dressing character in either.

 

 

That motorcycle. 

 

Take my Breath Away, you could still make out with older chicks without risking ridicule...

If you paid attention to this reformed, in part, plagiarist with a 50 year grudge against Trump, we would  be broke being herded into camps while the Chicoms laugh at us and the world treats us like garbage and the market crashed and...

 

Sort of like the screeching of the climate hoaxers. Are we flooded yet?

 

 

12 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

with a 50 year grudge against Trump

 

Like that Pritzker, Trump could have just saved the world single-handedly from Alien destruction and  Pritzker would say "But do we really need his help"?

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

The problem is that sometimes it's bribery. 

The Biden administration was well versed in that concept.

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

The problem is that sometimes it's bribery. 

not sometimes.... but always

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

For some of us who possess common sense and are well versed in globalization

You sound like Johnny and his vaccines mantra.  From your first sentence, you are right and those who think opposite/differently are wrong...very elitist of you. 

1 minute ago, howlee101 said:

You sound like Johnny and his vaccines mantra.  From your first sentence, you are right and those who think opposite/differently are wrong...very elitist of you. 

The dude has been continuously wrong since before you were here, trust us.  Someone every Village must have/

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

This graph tells that exact story:

 

How long can a country continue to import over half a $Trillion a year more than it exports?

 

You may also mention that the Cold War was still going on, Europe's economy still hadn't recovered from WW2, and the 1980s US could afford to get bent over the bargaining table (and fund the lion's share of NATO) to keep allies onboard.  We can't afford to keep that up, either.

 

 

However, US multinationals are repatriating earnings with around the same amount as the trade deficit, from their foreign operations.

 

And that's pure money, not goods, used to finance shareholders in the US, investments in the US, as well as US taxes.