No you don’t. You have “frameworks”, “proposals”, etc.. When and if Trump actually has a deal in hand and publishes the details along with those pics he likes to show of him and other countrie’s emissaries actually signing them, then and only then can you believe his bull*hit.
For all practical purposes, they are signed deals. That is how the US, EU, UK, and Japan are touting them. The rates and investments agreed to are what will be followed through on, unless or until changed.
Trump says he's made 200 deals, a claim you bought into.
Both the EU and Japan are saying they have no power to enforce the investments by private corporations.
Back down to 2 deals then, or as @MAGAnificent calls it 200 deals.
I have not personally counted them or claimed an exact number. However, the deals he has made that I know of are significant. And the average rate is 15%. Every nation that has not made a deal by now knows what their rate will be. Too bad Canada is not among the deals. Had they at least tried, they would not be stuck with a 35% rate.
I disagree here; it was companies like Triumph, Morris Garage, Jaguar, Morgan, Austin, Healy and others that put British cars on the map. Leyland took over in 1960 and it was downhill from there
However, the incentive for corporations is clearly there. Building in the US exempts them from the tariffs.
Not as long as they need to import the raw materials to produce whatever. Those materials are tariffed.....
You are not exactly being honest. I have made no such claims. You were far more straightforward and objective prior to tariffs becoming the subject.
Indications are that many of those raw materials for use in specific manufacturing in the US will be exempt as well or at least tariffed at that is not going to kill the investments. You seem to think that any tariff at any rate is fatal to a business. We have been buying products where some raw materials are tariffed at some rate for decades.
You really don't have the facts straight....
Copper, steel and aluminum are tariffed at 50% from all countries.
They don't understand the tariffs.
www.ft.com
Wrong again! Van der Layen was very succinctly explaining, after being ripped by her constituents, that there are 27 members who must sign separately which makes Trump’s contention he has a “deal” with the E U just another bit of Trump bullchit. WHEN the deals are actually signed, instead of “for all practical purposes”, then and only then can Trump or you brag about deals Trump has not got y”yet”
Then talk to Trump. I have never made that claim. I have no idea of the actual count.
Politicians overpromising is not newsworthy. Why do you take everything so literally. I suspect that Trump will get the price of prescription drugs lowered. 1500% would be highly doubtful. My opinion on windmills is that they are nowhere close to cost effective or feasible on a large scale. I see EVs in much the same way. As for Covid, I have not yet contracted it, however if I do, I'll see a doctor. And so far, I am keeping up with the vaccine shots. I only use bleach when I do laundry.
Your opinion is noted and disregarded. None of the so-called MAGA crowd support everything Trump says. I for instance disagree with the concept of Canada becoming our 51st state. That would be a roughly 50 electoral vote gifts to the democrats. And you may have noticed on this forum and in the news that some of the MAGA crowd are frustrated at the delays in the Epstein files getting released. I would like to see that occur as soon as possible. I think you are just butthurt that Trump gets any support at all.
Don't you realize that lowering the price 100% means the drugs would be free? Anything more than that means the pharmacy pays you when you pick up your prescription.
Most of the consumer electricity in Scotland is wind generated, and it's cheaper than in New York State.
I have never suggested a 100% discount. I would be happy with most favored nation status pricing.
It may or may not work out in relatively tiny Scotland. It will not work here, at least large scale. I am not totally against the concept of windmill power. If I still lived out in the Mojave Desert in California, I would by now have installed a single residence level windmill to take advantage of the Santa Ana winds for power generation. I just do not think windmill farms are economically efficient or feasible. It just gives climate change whackos the opportunity to say: "Look! Green energy!"
No, you said 1500% would be doubtful.
So double-down on hundreds of years old low-tech energy solutions while the rest of the world researches and innovates their way into the future. Because the oligarchs who sell stuff to burn to make steam (Gawd, still?) have convinced you that anything else is a waste of time and money.
It may or may not work out in relatively tiny Scotland. It will not work here, at least large scale. I am not totally against the concept of windmill power. If I still lived out in the Mojave Desert in California, I would by now have installed a single residence level windmill to take advantage of the Santa Ana winds for power generation. I just do not think windmill farms are economically efficient or feasible. It just gives climate change whackos the opportunity to say: "Look! Green energy!"
