this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
191 points (97.0% liked)

News

28599 readers
3201 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Trump escalated his trade war with China by raising tariffs to 125%, even as he dropped tariffs on other nations to ease recession fears.

China retaliated with 84% tariffs on U.S. goods, triggering a high-stakes standoff with both sides refusing to back down.

Experts warn the escalating tit-for-tat threatens global markets and diplomacy. Trump’s team calls China a “bad actor,” while Beijing frames the U.S. as a bully.

Each side believes time favors them, making de-escalation unlikely. Business leaders urge talks, but neither leader wants to appear weak.

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago

I think the title is simply incorrect. This isn't a game of chicken. In reality the Chinese government was ready for Trump's tariffs because he played the tariff card the last time he was in office. They have a lot of strong tools at their disposal, and they will use those as they need to.

It's somewhat ridiculous for Americans to say that China needs to make a deal when Trump is the one who created the recent problem. If you want to talk about trade imbalances, we can talk about trade imbalances, but massive tariffs that escalate overnight have nothing to do with reasonable international negotiation.

Actually the article has good information in it, but the title itself is meh.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 89 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is why you don't elect a FUCKING REALITY SHOW ACTOR AS PRESIDENT.

[–] j0ester@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Butt… butt… me egg prices.

[–] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

our elections are a sham and there are a lot of disenfranchised voters that not allowed to vote here and the candidate that wins is always preselected

voters here take all the blame for the actions of our sold-out elections

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 13 points 3 days ago

Are you using the US or China as your "here?" Because I don't think it's quite that bad in the US, but I don't think anyone blames the voters in China.

[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 60 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Business leaders urge talks, but neither leader wants to appear weak.

Trump already backtracked on tariffs for most of the world and the timing makes it look like the severity of China's retaliation is the reason. He already looks weak.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Trump looks weak by every act he does, from smearing on his orange clown makeup in the morning to vomiting out thin-skinned unhinged screeds over Xitter at night, and every insecure bullying coward act in between. He's the weakest president the US has ever had, by a mile.

[–] jaxxed@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Many analysts think that the bond selling is what scared the Trump government, as they have said that they want to rebalance the economy, but not loose the $ hegemony. The Chinese hold a lot of bpnds, but haven't threatened to sell th yet - the Japanese sold US bonds.

The Chinese and the Americans need each other. The Americans can't afford to make things, and the Chinese need the American market to buy things, as they make too many things. The Chinese can't afford to have the US market disappear yet.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He will backtrack when new inflation figures hit. It might take 3-6 months, but China definitely has the stronger hand, by far.

Trump can avoid the inflation by allowing Chinese goods to come through countries like Vietnam or Mexico. This is basically the status quo.

It allows Trump to save face without huge inflation for US consumers.

[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We pay tarrif based on country of manufacture not where it ships from. Trust me I’m looking everywhere for loopholes right now.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago

Correct, so what China does is ship almost completed stuff to Vietnam, they do the final piece of manufacturing and export that.

It's not as easy as a transshipment, but for the longer term it works out.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 34 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And China will not blink first, because at the end of the day it’s running a command economy. This is like having a stare down with a bullet train while standing on the tracks.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 14 points 3 days ago

He picked a fight that he must lose.

[–] aldfin@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

This is awful for the global economy and it’s definitely looking more and more like these tariff tantrums from the US is just a dying empire desperately trying to fight against its eventual demise. China has already overtaken the US in many areas and it is really showing.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

China can pursue trade deals elsewhere, especially since the US is leaving a trade void by being so unreliable. Nobody trusts the US, nor should they considering they started it. It's pretty clear who's at a bigger disadvantage.

[–] skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 2 days ago

China won't flinch, they're already working with the EU to bring down tariffs on EVs, and for the first time ever, with Japan and South Korea for trade stuff. The EV tariff setup was a deal we (the US) brokered with the EU originally to starve China out of the market so they didn't become a dominant force in transportation. Now China will be the dominant force on Earth while the US becomes an underfunded backwater country with last-place in everything. Chinese products are already predominant in most countries on the entire planet.

We handed them the solution to the problem they dug themselves into while we starve ourselves out.

It's pretty obvious who will win. One is ruled by a dictator. The other by someone who wishes he was a dictator.

[–] Mateoto@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The last one was just a grifter move to funnel more cash to his billionaire buddies.

This time, it’s more strategic — the goal is to weaken China. The alliance between Russia, Iran, and China is built on a shared opposition to the U.S. and Western democracy. But Trump’s return throws a wrench into that dynamic.

Putin sees an opportunity: Isolate and economically hurt China, and improve Russias own leverage on the global stage — all while using Trump as a tool once again.

[–] capital_sniff@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Putin is operating like it is last century. Trump is operating like it is two centuries ago.

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Russia has no cards to play against China unfortunately. Putin can't even move his Far East troops out of Vladivostok for fear of China and a two-front war.

[–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 3 points 2 days ago

But who will fart first?

[–] snf@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago
[–] DarkDecay@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't feel good about the group of amateurs trump has surround himself with. They will be eaten alive by anyone with actual economic and trade strategies

[–] CheeryLBottom@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Like Mark Carney, current Prime Minister of Canada ;)

[–] DarkDecay@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Yes. Someone like him would be great