Happy Liberation Day? And Trump’s Great Speech on Tariffs

[LevelUP]

Happy Liberation Day?

Well, we know the globalists aren't happy about this historical tariff increase. 

Here’s The Full List Of Trump's Reciprocal Tariffs Announced Wednesday
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohann...wednesday/

Donald Donna Trump's great speech on tariffs.






China tariff live updates: Trump says Vietnam is negotiating a deal, Nike shares rise
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/04/trump-ta...e-war.html

China’s commerce ministry said Friday that the country will impose a 34% levy on all U.S. products, which is why the markets fell on Friday.

Donald Trump triggers race to offer US concessions before tariffs hit
https://www.ft.com/content/0431ef42-7386-4e19-935e-a06ae40f474c

[NotJoeBiden]

[LevelUP]

He's tariffing the dogs!

He's tariffing the cats!

He's tariffing the penguins in Antarctica!
https://www.tiktok.com/@mmpllcnews/video...8794982702





The Penguins getting ready for a military strike in retaliation for the tariffs:
Operation Happy Feet

[Duneranger]

I think anyone with an ounce of economic sense knew stocks would initially tank. I’m not worried at all. Good time to buy.

The point is, we have been screwed by other countries and their tariffs for far too long. Something needed to change. Our goodwill and coffers have been plundered by our “allies” for a loooong time.

People who are upset about tariffs are okay with us getting screwed with the status quo.

[Vle045]

Saying we’ve been “screwed” by our allies isn’t accurate. The U.S. has benefited from many of those trade deals. Tariffs like these are basically a hidden tax—we pay more, the government collects the revenue, and the real winners are the top 1% who get more tax cuts funded by the rest of us.

Yes, tariffs can be useful when applied strategically and to protect key industries. But slapping tariffs on imports like coffee—things we don’t produce enough of—is just plain idiotic. If you think Trump is doing any of this to help you, his base, or the country, you’re being played. This is about power and money for him and his billionaire friends—and the bill will land on our laps.

But sure, keep cheering while they pick your pocket.

[NotJoeBiden]

Huh? I could have sworn a few months ago you were against across-the-board tariffs like this and said that people were overreacting at the concept of him implementing them.

Ooh wait, that’s right, you were and did say that.

Tariffs CAN be beneficial for certain sectors of the economy.  Tariffs across the board not so much. We don't KNOW how he will implement an actual tariff plan. Dems are just spinning their wheels trying to drum up ANYTHING to make him look bad.

[Duneranger]

Huh? I could have sworn a few months ago you were against across-the-board tariffs like this and said that people were overreacting at the concept of him implementing them.

Ooh wait, that’s right, you were and did say that.

Tariffs CAN be beneficial for certain sectors of the economy.  Tariffs across the board not so much. We don't KNOW how he will implement an actual tariff plan. Dems are just spinning their wheels trying to drum up ANYTHING to make him look bad.

Lmao, there is a massive difference between tariffs with two even trading partners and retaliatory/negotiation tariffs in unfair trading situations.

You are being completely disingenuous here. But yes keep using out of context quotes.

If you are okay with America pay 70%-200%+ tariffs while other countries pay a fraction of that, you are insane.

Good job at using out of context quotes, CNN would love you.

---

Saying we’ve been “screwed” by our allies isn’t accurate. The U.S. has benefited from many of those trade deals. Tariffs like these are basically a hidden tax—we pay more, the government collects the revenue, and the real winners are the top 1% who get more tax cuts funded by the rest of us.

Yes, tariffs can be useful when applied strategically and to protect key industries. But slapping tariffs on imports like coffee—things we don’t produce enough of—is just plain idiotic. If you think Trump is doing any of this to help you, his base, or the country, you’re being played. This is about power and money for him and his billionaire friends—and the bill will land on our laps.

But sure, keep cheering while they pick your pocket.

This is complete utter delusion. There are no winners other than foreign entities when they slap massive tariffs on consumer and manufactured goods. The purpose of the “free trade” mantra post WW2 was to eliminate the need for tariffs except in specific circumstance. Well other countries haven’t played that game and thus the cost is passed onto the consumer. 

The mental gymnastics that the US govt gets a net positive income flow from increased import tariffs is literally mental gymnastics not based in reality. If that was the case, every country would follow suit with an escalation of tariffs to increase tax revenue. Pro tip: they don’t. Shocker.

There is no specific tariff on anything specific other than cars. There is a base tariff on countries and depending on the current tariff deficit, an adjustment.

Yes yes, the status quo was working out so great for the little man before wasn’t it?

[Vle045]

You’re not wrong that free trade wasn’t perfect—but pretending these blanket tariffs are helping “the little guy” is just not grounded in reality either. Tariffs are still a tax on us—the consumers and small businesses that have to pay more for goods.

You say there are no winners—but billionaires benefiting from tax cuts funded by tariff revenue would probably disagree. And yes, governments do get revenue from tariffs—it’s literally how they work. It just comes at a cost to the rest of the economy. That’s not mental gymnastics, that’s Econ 101.

This isn’t some brilliant power play—it’s a lazy, broad-stroke approach that hits American families harder than anyone overseas. But sure, let’s pretend this is all about helping the little guy, not consolidating power and wealth.

---

As for your reply to “NotJoeBiden”…. You keep dodging the real issue. Blanket tariffs without a targeted, strategic plan hurt us—not China, not the EU, not whoever we’re supposedly “punishing.” You said before that these kinds of tariffs were bad, and they still are. Calling them “retaliatory” doesn’t suddenly make them smart policy.

And let’s not pretend this is about fairness. If the goal was to fix trade imbalances, there’d be a focused, multilateral strategy. Not broad tariffs that raise prices for American families while billionaires get more tax cuts.

You can toss around “CNN” and “insane” all you want, but it doesn’t make your argument stronger. It just makes it louder.

[Duneranger]

You’re not wrong that free trade wasn’t perfect—but pretending these blanket tariffs are helping “the little guy” is just not grounded in reality either. Tariffs are still a tax on us—the consumers and small businesses that have to pay more for goods.

You say there are no winners—but billionaires benefiting from tax cuts funded by tariff revenue would probably disagree. And yes, governments do get revenue from tariffs—it’s literally how they work. It just comes at a cost to the rest of the economy. That’s not mental gymnastics, that’s Econ 101.

This isn’t some brilliant power play—it’s a lazy, broad-stroke approach that hits American families harder than anyone overseas. But sure, let’s pretend this is all about helping the little guy, not consolidating power and wealth.

---

As for your reply to “NotJoeBiden”…. You keep dodging the real issue. Blanket tariffs without a targeted, strategic plan hurt us—not China, not the EU, not whoever we’re supposedly “punishing.” You said before that these kinds of tariffs were bad, and they still are. Calling them “retaliatory” doesn’t suddenly make them smart policy.

And let’s not pretend this is about fairness. If the goal was to fix trade imbalances, there’d be a focused, multilateral strategy. Not broad tariffs that raise prices for American families while billionaires get more tax cuts.

You can toss around “CNN” and “insane” all you want, but it doesn’t make your argument stronger. It just makes it louder.

"Multilateral strategy" is a meaningless buzz word. If there were some grand strategy,y would it have been done decades ago. But no, just like with the useless UN and toothless NATO, we have had to foot the bill for years with lopsided tariffs disproportionately.

Right,  so I suppose other countries just have not caught on with this. If they were smart, they would have asked for increased tariffs from the US long ago right? Because it pads their revenue intake yeah? Oh wait...

Retalitory tariffs absolutely get other countries to the negotiating table. The US throwing up its hands at funding Ukraine brought the EU to actually try and do something didn't it? Where were these talks of peace before the US slush fund almost dried up? No where. There was no impetus to act when the US was always picking up the slack with its broad hegemonic influence and wallet.

You have not explained at all why these actions are a net negative long term for the US.  Export tariffs absolutely and objectively raise revenue for a country, gaslighting and trying to claim that accepting higher import tariffs for other countries makes the govt richer while not affecting the US populace is actually an insane proposition.  

"You say there are no winners—but billionaires benefiting from tax cuts funded by tariff revenue would probably disagree."

That is some crazy roundabout logic.  Yes, only billionaires are positively affected when increased government revenue allows governments to less the tax burden on the populace. Let's continue to pay higher tariffs so we keep revenue lower and sustain higher tax revenue from the people

WILD

[Vle045]

Ah yes, lots of smoke, no strategy.

Multilateral strategy isn’t a buzzword—it’s how grown-ups deal with complex trade relationships. But sure, let’s pretend that every international agreement since WWII was just America getting duped because it doesn’t fit the “We pay, they win” narrative.

Also—maybe crack a book on global trade while you’re at it. Tariffs are one piece of a much bigger puzzle. Exchange rates, labor costs, the value of a country’s currency, intellectual property protections, and supply chain interdependence all factor into trade. Pretending it’s just “tariff go up, America win” isn’t strategy—it’s economic fan fiction.

And wow, now we're arguing that paying more as consumers somehow benefits the little guy because... billionaires might get tax cuts? That’s some top-tier trickle-down cosplay. Spoiler alert: it doesn’t trickle. We just get soaked.

Yes, retaliatory tariffs can have a place—when they’re part of a coherent, targeted plan. What we’re doing now is like flipping tables and calling it negotiation.

Keep tossing around “insane” and “CNN” though. That always screams “well-thought-out position,” not “grasping for a Fox segment.”

But hey, if paying more so billionaires can pocket the difference makes you feel patriotic—carry on. That level of willful ignorance is exactly what they’re counting on.

---

Oh, I forgot…. You keep saying I haven’t explained the long-term downside—so here it is, again, slowly: blanket tariffs increase consumer costs, disrupt small businesses, trigger retaliatory tariffs that hurt our exporters, and provide no actual plan to fix structural trade issues. But if the goal is just vibes and revenue optics, mission accomplished.