What does no additional tariffs mean

It is almost a double agenda with the administration now.  They are absolutely coupling the economic agenda with the forcing of the country onto the EV usage.

Raiders, when you make a comment and I respond to it there is no need to ask the same question that you rebutted originally-

No need to start a new thread when there are already some old tariff threads.

If there is no need to start a new thread for this instance, using your logic there is no need to start any thread of any sort because there are old threads. Keep on point, you made the comment and I responded to it.

Were you shaking your fists at the sky when higher MPG mandates were being made in the past? Were you shaking your fists when regular gas (leaded) was being  phased out for a lower emission alternative? How about when corn gas was being phased in to lower emissions?

There is a reasonable purpose for an EV and yeah it is new and it has tons of issues but the potential benefits MIGHT be worth considering, I would wait a long time myself before buying an EV because they need to work the kinks out and get a faster charging option and national coverage..but the idea of shifting to EVs is not such a horrible thing, it makes the US less constrained to the OPEC monopoly and can potentially help the environment in the long run but its far from being ready for prime time and I am not sure that LI is going to be the way that EV's succeed long term. It might end up going the Honda path, still a long ways to go.

@wallstreetcappers

 No real need to start a NEW thread on basically the same topic is what I am saying.

But a new president and new administration -- so, I can see a new one I guess if you like to.  That is the point I was making.  If you do not like an old one brought back up on the topic --simply start you a new one.

Are you making those mandates the same as tariffs?  If so, why exactly?

But on some of them, absolutely.  The corn thing for sure was a disaster.

'Might be worth considering' is not justification for a mandate at all.  

The constraint simply shifts to other suppliers that would be needed -- that is also not reason enough for mandates.

There are currently to very many issues that are needed to be in place instead of mandating a switch over.

This is all agenda-driven.

@wallstreetcappers

 The question is still the same.  Are you for the tariffs?  If so, why; if not, why not?

Etc., etc.

@Raiders22

 Two comments-

Mandates are not final, they are statement makers so mandates to me are grandiose noise especially long term mandates which can be repealed or erased in seconds.

Ive addressed tariffs before, they are also nothing burgers for several reasons. First, China has 10000 work arounds to any tariff and who is validating that they take place? Especially with goods which are manufactured in one location and can be shipped from numerous locations I think tariffs are a waste of time. Second if a tariff does actually take place who ends up bearing the burden of the tariff? The consumer is the end payer of a tariff, then you say that oh it protects US companies blah blah well how does it protect a US company? Is the government taking those tariffs and using dollar for dollar to pay for subsidies to US companies so they can compete? no....of course not. 

Tariffs are jawboning waste of time stupid antics that politicians use to get dumb voters to vote for them. If you want to isolate then close trade, that is the only tariff that has any altruistic impact, anything else there is a work around for goods and services. 

@wallstreetcappers

 Cool.  Then we mostly agree on the tariffs. 

The mandates are different to me and I always question if there is an agenda behind them -- there almost always is.

Very rarely is it worthwhile -- even if they are temporary and short term -- long term.

Even the MPG thing can be seen that way.  This is something that did not need to be mandated.  You can see the 'need' to do it back in the '70s.  But whom all else did it hurt in the long run, etc.

Now they are wanting it to be 49 MPG and now it looks even more for pushing the EV agenda.

The ethanol thing had completely disastrous side effects. 

So often -- even dismissing the costs pushed down to the consumer -- the bad will outweigh the good with the mandates, temporary or not.

Belligerence isn’t bliss it’s a catapult to the pinnacle ,

with these tariffs attempting to break up the marriage between my morality and my linguistical ….

if it doesn’t meet the merits of the acting faction and it’s fantastic captain and that’s not being dramatic cuz that shit is fact and it’s barbarically tragic cuz it’s literal ….

shit it’s a simple brew ,

it’s just a few ingredients ,

get a symposium of know it alls and blokes that Pinocchio grow their noses when they release their views spewing them in speech that’s “ clicks “ 

done mean spiritedly when they disagree with what they read and think

It’s uneven script , full of hypocrisy and chaos ,

So you can tax my lower back but I’ll just do squats and with no problems I’ll get cocked and then get my frame up

so go ahead and charge me , or levy me a toll ,

cuz the cost and the fee is an expense that I’m ready to recompense and offset with the strength of my breath and the ejected tremendousness that flows……