Hacker News Reader

Comment by hiq | Hacker News Reader

I'd accept the negotiation angle if the tariffs had been only threats with clear demands to avoid them. Trump could have demanded that your 3) be fulfilled by June, otherwise tariffs would apply. Instead we get tariffs with quick retaliation e.g. from China, and I still see no negotiation in place.

The problem in general is that we are all, the US Congress included, guessing what the goal is.

View on HN

> The problem in general is that we are all, the US Congress included, guessing what the goal is.

I was guessing too until I took the time to investigate and found there is a method to the madness.

Now, did you really expect negotiation with China? Do you think that was the intention? You gotta think critically rather than just lazily or emotionally assume everything was a failure.

>Now, did you really expect negotiation with China? Do you think that was the intention?

I'm baffled by your comment. Didn't you just say that the tariffs are a negotiation tool?

I don't track geopolitics, especially the US, too closely, so I'm not the best person to go down that rabbit hole - especially since minds brighter than me here also struggle to understand what's happening. So I would appreciate if you explain what your mean instead of asking rethorical questions.

You've said "Instead we get tariffs with quick retaliation e.g. from China, and I still see no negotiation in place" and that was what I was responding to.

Regarding China's government there should be no expectation of negotiation because they have demonstrated over the years they will not play fair and shouldn't be trusted to do so now.

If you don't know that because you haven't tracked geopolitics, now you know, and can perhaps review your opinion about world trade, which is strongly related to geopolitics.

Now, regarding other countries, you can't say there is "no negotiation in place": https://www.npr.org/2025/04/06/nx-s1-5354134/vietnam-asks-tr...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com