[IvorySmith]

Allegedly, Trump's trade tariffs have worsened unrest in China. Calls for political reform have been made.

How was this worsened by the tariffs?
-China imports 70% of their food (https://www.cfr.org/article/china-in...-thats-problem)

-Massive unemployment [200 million, possibly]


- Recent estimates, based on the actual U.S. tariffs imposed on China as of early April, are even more negative, predicting a 2.4 percent decline in GDP in 2025 alone.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/china-...on-day-tariffs

------------------------------------------------------
Beijing [China], April 16 (ANI): Three democracy-supporting banners were displayed on an overpass in Chengdu, a city in southwestern China, early Tuesday morning.

According to a post on X cited by Radio Free Asia (RFA), this exhibit seemed to draw inspiration from 'Bridge Man' Peng Lifa, who displayed similar banners on Beijing's Sitong Bridge, igniting the White Paper protests in November 2022.

During these protests, held across multiple Chinese cities, demonstrators showcased blank sheets of paper to signify the lack of voice given to them by authorities, amid frustrations over pandemic restrictions and diminishing freedoms.

The messages on the banners stated, "Without political system reform, there will be no national rejuvenation,"
https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other...le/ar-AA1D2iTs
-----------------------------------------------------

US tariffs on Chinese imports could put as many as 16 million jobs at risk in China, especially in the manufacturing of goods for retail and wholesale, said analysts at the US investment bank Goldman Sachs.

https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-e...-goldman-sachs

---------------------------------------------------------

Curious:
This isn't really being reported on mainstream media. What is being reported are the "hands off" protests in America. Are the riots in China actually happening? Are the protests in America actually happening? Are either happening to the extent to which they're being reported?

This channel, Business Basics, has great videos (if they are true) on the protests/riots in China right now. However, I have to wonder if it is simply propaganda insisting on the positive affects our tariffs have had on China (positive being that they're our adversaries.)


It seems to me that the trade war is hurting China, and it is hurting America, such is the natural course of tariffs. Maybe the question is: which country's political system is more authoritarian to be able to withstand the unrest during the economic turmoil? Will the U.S. succeed in ousting the CCP? Will the CCP succeed in ousting Trump?

I'm hoping that someone who knows more about China than I do can verify whether or not the youtube video (again: ) is accurate or just propaganda.

Thanks.

[IvorySmith]

U.S. attempting to confiscate land in the United States purchased by the CCP for reparations related to origins of COVID-19.

[kellyhound]

High tariffs are never good as certain sectors will see higher unemployment etc. on both sides imo.

Even if China stops purchasing feed grain and oilseeds from the US, it will not affect China's food supply.” Brazil was by far China's largest supplier of soybeans last year, with exports totalling nearly US$36.5 billion, followed by the US on just over US$12 billion, according to Chinese customs data.

Crude oil and coal etc. they just gonna buy from other countries, just like soyabeans.
Didn't work in the past. https://carnegieendowment.org/china-...us-job-market?

By April 17, net sales of US soya beans dropped by 50 percent compared with the previous week. That was driven by a 67 percent fall in weekly soya bean exports to China, which, until recently, was America’s biggest export destination for the legume.

According to Piergiuseppe Fortunato, an adjunct professor of economics at the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland, “China’s retaliatory tariffs will hit US farmers hard. Some may go out of business.” He added that all sectors with exposure to China would come under strain.

In 2023, the US exported roughly $15bn of oil, gas and coal to China. Losing that market would hit US energy firms.

Since the start of Trump’s tariff war, cargo shipments have plummeted. According to Linerlytica, a shipping data provider, Chinese freight bookings bound for the US fell by 30 to 60 percent in April.

The drastic reduction in shipping from America’s third largest trading partner – after Canada and Mexico – has not yet been felt. In May, however, thousands of companies will need to restock their inventories.

According to Bloomberg News, retail giants Walmart and Target told Trump in a meeting last week that shoppers are likely to see empty shelves and higher prices from next month. They also warned that supply shocks could roll out to Christmas.

Electronic appliances, such as TV sets and washing machines, made up 46.4 percent of US imports from China in 2022. The US also imports a lot of its clothing and pharmaceutical product ingredients from China. The price of these goods will begin to rise from next month.

It also causes inflation and with inflation lower and middle income families will feel that. Not the rich though as they can always buy expensive goods from elsewhere.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/...winning-so-far

U.S unemployment rate is around 4.2 percent. It went up 0.3% since last Month and is around 7 and a half million people.

How many vacant jobs are there in the US?
About 7.6 million, as of February 2025. The number of job openings decreased by 877,000 from February 2024.

There are roughly 500,000 unfilled manufacturing jobs and 2 million in construction and forestry, driven by a lack of interest from younger generations (Millennials and Gen Z) in these roles due to perceptions of undesirable working conditions or lack of awareness.

Healthcare, a consistent growth sector, added 54,000 jobs in March 2025 but remains chronically understaffed.

Long-term trends, such as an aging population and early retirements also reducing the pool of available workers.

Many job openings require specific skills or qualifications that the current workforce may lack. The rapid adoption of technologies like AI and automation demands workers with advanced technical skills, while low-skill jobs in sectors like construction struggle to attract candidates.

Immigration restrictions, particularly in states like Florida, have reduced the supply of foreign-born workers who historically filled low-skill roles, worsening shortages in industries like construction.

A lack of affordable, high-quality childcare continues to limit workforce participation, particularly for women.

There's a cycle where workers cannot return to jobs due to childcare constraints or high(er) costs and childcare providers struggle to staff their own operations.

The above also counts for other (North) Western Countries like E.U.

Recent policy changes, such as proposed tariffs and federal workforce reductions (e.g., 275,000 DOGE-related layoffs), create uncertainty that may cause employers to hesitate in filling roles or workers to delay reentering the job market. Conversely, federal job cuts could push some workers into the private sector.

DOGE chief Elon Musk’s promised a pot of savings from his “efficiency” operation has shrunk from $2 trillion to $1 trillion to what he now claims is $150 billion, or 7.5% the amount initially promised.

Now new estimates suggest that the way Musk has gone about his cost-cutting crusade might cost nearly as much as, if not more, than what he claims to have saved taxpayers as DOGE hasn’t been cheap for the federal government: firings, re-hirings, lost productivity, and paid leave of thousands of workers will cost upward of $135 billion this fiscal year.

At the Internal Revenue Service, a DOGE-driven exodus of 22,000 employees would cost about $8.5 billion in revenue in 2026 alone, according to figures from the Budget Lab at Yale University.

Put those two figures together and you’re approaching $145 billion in costs. And that’s not counting the legal fees the federal government is incurring to defend against dozens of lawsuits contesting DOGE’s authority.

Moreover, the estimated lost revenue from the IRS cuts would be a recurring phenomenon.

Mega-billionaire Elon Musk has posted a “wall of receipts” online that he claims shows how much money he has saved taxpayers with his cost-slashing “Department of Government Efficiency” operation. But it turns out that ledger is riddled with massive amounts of misinformation and inaccuracies that dramatically exaggerate — or, to put it less charitably, deceive — the public about how much money Musk’s “efficiency” initiative is saving.

Musk said on his wall of receipts that DOGE saved $8 billion from a single canceled contract at the Department of Homeland Security. It turned out that contract was for just $8 million.

A listed $1.9 billion cut at the Treasury Department actually took place under President Joe Biden. An analysis found that 40% of contracts cut by DOGE aren’t expected to save the government any money, according to the administration’s own data.

The original top five items listed on the “wall of receipts” have been deleted after scrutiny from reporters revealed they were incorrect. Among other things, those items included three $655 million cuts at the U.S. Agency for International Development that was actually a single cut that was counted three times, and a $232 million cut at the Social Security Administration that turned out to actually be a much smaller $560,000 project.

Musk’s wall of receipts also showcases yet another example of how farcical it is to say DOGE is about making the government run “efficiently.” The wall of receipts lists dozens of blanket purchase agreements, or BPAs, on its list of canceled spending. But BPAs aren’t actual orders; they’re “more like a catalog of things the government might buy,”. Listing BPAs exaggerates canceled spending, because the money allocated for them wasn’t necessarily going to be spent.

And, just as important, listing BPAs obscures the fact that they exist for the precise purpose of keeping costs down. They involve negotiated rates from vetted vendors for likely purchases — they’re arrangements for saving money and moving procurement more quickly.

Musk listed at least $1 billion value in canceled contracts from BPAs. The BPA cancellations are a perverse two-for-one deal: they allow Musk to exaggerate savings and demonize the kinds of deals that would allow the government to save money.

On some level DOGE is having an extraordinary effect on the government. At the same time, it’s also true that Musk regularly peddles misinformation about what he’s doing and how much money he’s saving.

In fact, even Musk’s non-credible topline claim of having saved $65 billion so far through DOGE cuts amounts to only about 0.9% of the 2024 federal budget.

Trump made a big mistake by appointing Musk imo.

Monopoly power is escalating extreme wealth and inequality worldwide. Monopoly men—billionaires that lead corporations that largely control markets, set the rules and terms of exchange with other companies and workers, and set higher prices without losing business or personal wealth.

[marcos_69]

Well if the tariffs are bad, then the countries that have tariffs against the US should drop them.

[William May]

Originally Posted by marcos_69 ↗

Well if the tariffs are bad, then the countries that have tariffs against the US should drop them.

Look up the huge successes of the Smoot-Hawley act back in the 1930's. THAT was a massive effort with TREMENDOUS results!

[Pyramid_Head]

Trump is not fucking around and China is finding out.

[IvorySmith]

My slight understanding of tariffs are this:
If someone in the U.S. can manufacture and sell a basket for 6$, but in the U.S., we can buy a basket manufactured and sold by the UK for 5$, then those who bought the basket for less now have 1$ more to spend on something else, and the UK basket manufacturer now has 5$ to buy U.S. goods.
If tariffs raise the cost of the UK basket to 7$, then demand in the U.S. will cause the 6$ U.S.-made basket to increase in cost, meaning that there is no extra money to spend elsewhere, and the UK basket maker no longer has the money to spend on U.S. products. Tariffs hurt everyone.
However, if they're used strategically (like against the soviets), then one country could outlast another, and benefit in the long run. But no one benefits in the short run.

That's my loose understanding, but it seems to make sense. Maybe someone can correct me.

That said, I think the world is teaming up against China on this one.

[JonE(vil)]

There's a bloke at my work from Taiwan, quiet, but i ask him when I see him what's happening.
China's economy is in bad shape and getting hit harder
He said before the tarrifs, the China had built alot of stuff, buildings and infrastructure, but there hasn't in been a increase in jobs. So it seems there bottom has fallen out construction. Manufacturing has continued, but only remains steady.
As for unrest, yes, the people are getting angry, but the media there is pointing the finger at the US. Hence all those ai generated 'factory' videos and bullshit idiots saying you can buy stuff directly from the factory. It's really just plain diversion. Interestingly, he said Walmart said to the Chinese government, "if you want us to continue buying your products, you will have to pay the tarrif."
was the reply along with, then you won't get anything.
Hence why they turned up at the white house the day.
Taiwan is going to get a deal regarding tarrifs soon, but China will happily crush any dissent and wait for the us to cave.
Taiwan has shipped some chip manufacturing to the US, but is really struggling to find people qualified to work.

[IvorySmith]

I can't help but notice the similarities between this and 20th century Japan.

When the Empire of Japan was land grabbing in the 1930's and 40's, they were heavily reliant on imports. The United States heavily sanctioned them and put tariffs on their goods. The result was that food became scarce, as did the means for their continued expansion. They had no way out except to preemptively attack the US pacific fleet.

Today looks a lot like that. How much economic hardship will China take?
2 courses of military action are presumed: 1: China invades Taiwan; 2: China attacks everyone.

In scenario 1, the United States and friends of Taiwan will slowly be pulled into the war with China.

In scenario 2, China gets a headstart.

If they're desperate, they very well could just jump to scenario 2.

Considering what is going on in Israel, Yemen, Ukraine, and the South China Sea, this very closely parallels other world wars, and could be nearing the stage of peer-on-peer, rather than just proxy wars.

[pokerplay]

Are they just mad they can’t pronounce tallif?