this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
162 points (99.4% liked)

politics

25873 readers
3359 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Historically, China has been the top buyer of US soybeans by “a staggering margin,” says the American Soybean Association. This year, with US soybeans facing retaliatory tariffs amid the ongoing trade war, China is going elsewhere.

In a letter urging President Trump to cut a deal with China that removes China’s retaliatory duties and includes “significant soybean purchase commitments,” the ASA says China “currently has zero new crop export orders for US soybeans on the books for marketing year 2025/26.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 17 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Has anybody ever won a trade war?

I guess sometimes one side loses, which might have been the desired outcome, but that's not exactly the same as the other side winning.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I mean, just take a look at that graph of comparative exports from the US and Brazil in the article. There's your answer right there. Not only did Brazil massively leap ahead during Trump's last go at this in 2017, you also see that US imports never really recovered afterwards. Brazil took a commanding lead and held it. Even when the tariffs were gone, the damage was permanent.

The damage from this will be permanent too. Why take the risk that your whole supply chain will get thrown out of whack because some morons in Kansas elect an even bigger moron to lead their country? It's not worth it.

I'll bet dollars to donuts you can find similar versions of that chart for lots of other industries. Between his two terms, I think we're only just beginning to see the full scope of the damage Trump has done, and will do, to the US economy.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I mean, just take a look at that graph of comparative exports from the US and Brazil in the article. There's your answer right there. Not only did Brazil massively leap ahead during Trump's last go at this in 2017, you also see that US imports never really recovered afterwards. Brazil took a commanding lead and held it. Even when the tariffs were gone, the damage was permanent.

What damage? This oversimplified, "trade deficit bad" shit is so fucking stupid. We live in a global economy. This isn't a zero sum game.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I try to explain it people really carefully.

First ask them "what makes a country wealthy". The idiots always reply with "it's having lots of money".

Me. "Money is just numbers or pieces of paper that governments say is worth something. Real wealth is having the use of and control of resources. Resources are things like goods, labor, materials, production facilities, etc. So in trade if one country gets more money and other country gets more resources, the one receiving more resources wins."

I usually lose them at the first sentence, they are after all idiots.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Cool so what's the damage? How and why is it zero sum?

(It's not)

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Britain, we call it the opium wars.

But usually to win a trade war you need actual war on some level.

[–] Rambomst@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Idk, I'm sure some business or corporation will make a pretty penny out of it...