Well, he certainly looks well in this presser. The decision is both terrible and makes him more powerful than ever. He's a good boy. The decision is political correctness.

But never fear citizens, I am now adding an additional 10% global tax, uh tariff, for you all!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER (read directly from script).

Truly incredible stuff. Good job everyone.

EDIT: Trump: "Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under Section 122, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged"

aTmAg, welcome back!


Meanwhile....
Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 empowers the U.S. President to impose temporary, targeted import surcharges of up to 15% or import quotas to address serious balance-of-payments deficits. These measures last for a maximum of 150 days unless Congress authorizes an extension. It allows rapid, unilateral action without prior investigations.

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

We citizens do have a right to representation. Since the tariffs mostly come out of our pockets as hidden taxes, we should have plenty of say.

aTmAg said:

---

Sims said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

How about we give the free market a shot for a change?

---

This has been addressed ad infinitum.

That's not the reality we live in.

China basically uses their productive economy as an arm of their military. I wouldn't hesistate for a minute to say that 90+% of the tariff discussion is targeting China directly or indirectly. There is no scenario where unfriendly nations are going to, on one hand, seek our demise, and on the other, promote and participate in fair trade.

Gavin Newsome is creating a CCP wetdream wherein he is hamstringing the entire west coast fuel supply. You think the CCP is not at the very least influencing the green movement? How convenient that refineries on the west coast are shutting down as a China picks up talk about Taiwan invasion. Where's the supply going to come from? India? Russia? We're not going to be trucking it over the Rockies.

There's no free market geo-politically.

---

We either adopt the free market, or face an economic catastrophe in the future. You can try to hand wave away that reality horse much you want, but it won't change anything.

---

I'm all in for free market. Let me know when the rest of the world agrees and we'll get started.

The only reason to go first is if you want to wither away to nothing.

So, we have been getting ripped off in trade for years and Congress did nothing. While corporations and congressional members got rich. No relationship, right? Now the black robes say only congress can do tarrifs. How convenient. This nation is being destroyed by greed and perversion. I think it is beyond hope. The greedy *******s care nothing about the will of the people. Falling off the bone done.

Liberal media was euphoric when the SCOTUS decision came out. I also looked at foreign press, they were all smiles.

Then Trump came on and said 10% for all and he won't back down, the liberal media seems grumpy again.

Oh this one was good "I don't think they meant it" - Trump

Maybe they'll use Ctrl-Z

infinity ag said:

---

Liberal media was euphoric when the SCOTUS decision came out. I also looked at foreign press, they were all smiles.

Then Trump came on and said 10% for all and he won't back down, the liberal media seems grumpy again.

---

TOTALLY OWNED HAHA TAKE THAT AMERICANS

Sims said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Sims said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

How about we give the free market a shot for a change?

---

This has been addressed ad infinitum.

That's not the reality we live in.

China basically uses their productive economy as an arm of their military. I wouldn't hesistate for a minute to say that 90+% of the tariff discussion is targeting China directly or indirectly. There is no scenario where unfriendly nations are going to, on one hand, seek our demise, and on the other, promote and participate in fair trade.

Gavin Newsome is creating a CCP wetdream wherein he is hamstringing the entire west coast fuel supply. You think the CCP is not at the very least influencing the green movement? How convenient that refineries on the west coast are shutting down as a China picks up talk about Taiwan invasion. Where's the supply going to come from? India? Russia? We're not going to be trucking it over the Rockies.

There's no free market geo-politically.

---

We either adopt the free market, or face an economic catastrophe in the future. You can try to hand wave away that reality horse much you want, but it won't change anything.

---

I'm all in for free market. Let me know when the rest of the world agrees and we'll get started.

The only reason to go first is if you want to wither away to nothing.

---

Exactly the point.
If we play the FM game, EVERYONE has to play by the same rules. No one does. FM does not exist, never has.

We are just being idiots, esp these fake conservatives.

ETFan said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Liberal media was euphoric when the SCOTUS decision came out. I also looked at foreign press, they were all smiles.

Then Trump came on and said 10% for all and he won't back down, the liberal media seems grumpy again.

---

TOTALLY OWNED HAHA TAKE THAT AMERICANS

---

wow easy man... you are all excitable today!

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

American producers of imported goods and end consumers bear the burden of tariffs.
This is an economic policy we know didn't work anymore by the 1890s. And it didn't work again when the government tried in the 1930s or again in the 1970s.

eric76 said:

---

We citizens do have a right to representation. Since the tariffs mostly come out of our pockets as hidden taxes, we should have plenty of say.

---

The problem is, for many years that 'representation' chose to allow regulations that pushed companies, or their suppliers, out of the U.S.

It became normalized, letting other countries benefit and have more leverage. We became lazy in looking out for what benefited the U.S, and let other countries dictate more of the terms. We became more dependent.

Going back to the way things were isn't a solution.

Sims said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Sims said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

How about we give the free market a shot for a change?

---

This has been addressed ad infinitum.

That's not the reality we live in.

China basically uses their productive economy as an arm of their military. I wouldn't hesistate for a minute to say that 90+% of the tariff discussion is targeting China directly or indirectly. There is no scenario where unfriendly nations are going to, on one hand, seek our demise, and on the other, promote and participate in fair trade.

Gavin Newsome is creating a CCP wetdream wherein he is hamstringing the entire west coast fuel supply. You think the CCP is not at the very least influencing the green movement? How convenient that refineries on the west coast are shutting down as a China picks up talk about Taiwan invasion. Where's the supply going to come from? India? Russia? We're not going to be trucking it over the Rockies.

There's no free market geo-politically.

---

We either adopt the free market, or face an economic catastrophe in the future. You can try to hand wave away that reality horse much you want, but it won't change anything.

---

I'm all in for free market. Let me know when the rest of the world agrees and we'll get started.

The only reason to go first is if you want to wither away to nothing.

---

Well Europe has a free trade zone.
The economic solution to dumping is to buy as much of that good as possible and bankrupt the seller. SO if China wants to dump subsidized steel into the marketplace, the rational decision is for every other country to buy as much as possible. Eventually, China will not be able to keep up with production because it will run out of other people's money.

Tariffs are Trump's version of making the so-called evil foreign corporations pay their fair share

tysker said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

American producers of imported goods and end consumers bear the burden of tariffs.
This is an economic policy we know didn't work anymore by the 1890s. And it didn't work again when the government tried in the 1930s or again in the 1970s.

---

It's not a long-term solution, no doubt. But economic policies of the past that forced American producers to rely on production overseas aren't a solution either. We created the situation we're in, and it took the pandemic to really see the consequences of letting other countries dictate our supply.

Funny. SC overturns Trump and the liberal dipsh**s shriek "Trump clearly was doing illegal stuff!"

SC overturns Biden and same liberal dipsh**s shriek "SC is a threat to muh democracy and should be impeached!"

Reagan conservatives and CMs are so predictable in their lies.

tysker said:

---

Tariffs are Trump's version of making the so-called evil foreign corporations pay their fair share

---

Tariffs are Trumps way of raising taxes on Americans while pretending the taxes are against everyone but Americans.

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being… pic.twitter.com/B3bv5f5KW1

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 20, 2026

Sounds like he found another way to skin a cat.

eric76 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Tariffs are Trump's version of making the so-called evil foreign corporations pay their fair share

---

Tariffs are Trumps way of raising taxes on Americans while pretending the taxes are against everyone but Americans.

---

I'm sure you and ETFan felt the exact same about that "tax" Obamacare foisted upon us, right?

AggieBucksJB said:

---

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being… pic.twitter.com/B3bv5f5KW1

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 20, 2026

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

American producers of imported goods and end consumers bear the burden of tariffs.
This is an economic policy we know didn't work anymore by the 1890s. And it didn't work again when the government tried in the 1930s or again in the 1970s.

---

It's not a long-term solution, no doubt. But economic policies of the past that forced American producers to rely on production overseas aren't a solution either. We created the situation we're in, and it took the pandemic to really see the consequences of letting other countries dictate our supply.

---

But now the countries that increased production so that American companies could diversify their supply chains are also being hit with tariffs. So what's the point?

JWinTX said:

---

eric76 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Tariffs are Trump's version of making the so-called evil foreign corporations pay their fair share

---

Tariffs are Trumps way of raising taxes on Americans while pretending the taxes are against everyone but Americans.

---

I'm sure you and ETFan felt the exact same about that "tax" Obamacare foisted upon us, right?

---

Yeah, we're the only two against baseless tariffs (psst, taxes) on Americans that haven't run through congress.

JWinTX said:

---

eric76 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Tariffs are Trump's version of making the so-called evil foreign corporations pay their fair share

---

Tariffs are Trumps way of raising taxes on Americans while pretending the taxes are against everyone but Americans.

---

I'm sure you and ETFan felt the exact same about that "tax" Obamacare foisted upon us, right?

---

You clearly don't know Eric if you are asking that as a serious question.

AggieBucksJB said:

---

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being… pic.twitter.com/B3bv5f5KW1

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 20, 2026

Sounds like he found another way to skin a cat.

---

Sounds like the administration had this card in their pocket and ready to play…

Stock market just shot up as soon as he made this announcement…

2040huck said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

2040huck said:

---

Lame duck is on the way out.

---

Lame duck is on camera right now taking a hellacious duck **** on congress and the Supreme Court. You should watch, it's great!

And keep screaming "lame duck". Gives Rs even more justification to go ahead and end the filibuster. You probably didn't think that part through though. It's worth noting.

---

LOL He can barely read the speech he was given Worth noting

---

It's worth noting you voted for a guy that couldn't do that years before you voted for him.

Quote:

---

Sounds like the administration had this card in their pocket and ready to play…

Stock market just shot up as soon as he made this announcement…

---

Everyone already knew this would be the initial response and the stock market jumped immediately at 9 AM on the news of the Supreme Court striking down the decision. That was all on the IEEPA tariffs being invalidated.

Windy City Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Sounds like the administration had this card in their pocket and ready to play…

Stock market just shot up as soon as he made this announcement…

---

Everyone already knew this would be the initial response and the stock market jumped immediately at 9 AM on the news of the Supreme Court striking down the decision. That was all on the IEEPA tariffs being invalidated.

---

They know the truth, the tariffs are not going away, they just wont be under IEEPA.....one appointed official per trade partner would need to sign off, its not hard.

tysker said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

American producers of imported goods and end consumers bear the burden of tariffs.
This is an economic policy we know didn't work anymore by the 1890s. And it didn't work again when the government tried in the 1930s or again in the 1970s.

---

It's not a long-term solution, no doubt. But economic policies of the past that forced American producers to rely on production overseas aren't a solution either. We created the situation we're in, and it took the pandemic to really see the consequences of letting other countries dictate our supply.

---

But now the countries that increased production so that American companies could diversify their supply chains are also being hit with tariffs. So what's the point?

---

I think the point is to change the environment we've been in for decades, which has discouraged companies from producing in the U.S. and discouraged American buyers from purchasing in the U.S. We've allowed that to go on as if it wasn't going to have long-term consequences. I'm not trying to argue tariffs are the solution. I'm honestly not sure it's something that can be changed, since as soon as the other party is in they will push more policies and regulations that force companies to take their business elsewhere - much like we've seen in California and New York on a domestic level.

FireAg said:

---

AggieBucksJB said:

---

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being… pic.twitter.com/B3bv5f5KW1

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 20, 2026

Sounds like he found another way to skin a cat.

---

Sounds like the administration had this card in their pocket and ready to play…

Stock market just shot up as soon as he made this announcement…

---

Stocks are as of this moment down (but hovering essentially at the same level) from where they were when SCOTUS announced their opinion.

And certainly, they've had Section 122 but Section 122 is limited to 150 days, 15% maximum tariff and is extremely blunt in that it must be applied equally to all.

Like I said on the other thread, they didn't spend a year going down the IEEPA route because they had easy solutions elsewhere.

AggieIce said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieIce said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

How about we give the free market a shot for a change?

---

Reactive Tariffs is closer to free market than this

---

No tariffs, small government, lower taxes, and elimination of the welfare state is even closer.

---

I'm talking about things that actually have a realistic chance of occurring…

---

It would have a chance of happening if more people pushed for it. And it would help if conservatives didn't give up so easily. No wonder the marxists are winning. The right is too weak to even put up a fight.

tysker said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

tysker said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

ha ha trump is not backing down!

He will impose tariffs but call it something else.

---

Just call them taxes.
Taxation without representation has worked so well for leadership like Trump

---

While ideally I'd prefer we not impose more tariffs, what right do the countries we're 'taxing' (who are also trying to get the most of out us) have to representation?

---

American producers of imported goods and end consumers bear the burden of tariffs.
This is an economic policy we know didn't work anymore by the 1890s. And it didn't work again when the government tried in the 1930s or again in the 1970s.

---

It worked great and no income tax. Worship at the throne of foreign govts and business in collusion. I think that is actually the definition of fascism. Screw the will of the people, right?

tysker said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

You are not making the least bit of sense. How are tariffs socialism?

---

Government ownership of the means of production is socialism. Trump just said (again!) that he saved Intel, after the US government bought a controlling share of the company. My friend, you need to keep up

---

Do you understand what the word controlling means? My friend, controlling isn't 10%.

The US received a 10% stake in Intel for $8.9 billion paid for with the CHIPS grant money. That act from 2022 was to boost American chipmaking.

shiftyandquick said:

---

Trump obviously acted illegally. He cited fentanyl at first, which was a bold-faced obvious lie.

He needs to follow the law when trying to ruin the economy through tariffs. He needs to go through Congress and get Congress to agree to ruin the economy.

---

Look at all the inflation he has caused. Also, the stock markets are a blood bath. We need Biden back. What does Trump know about business and negotiations. We need someone talented and articulate like Kamala to get us on the right path.

What an idiot. TDS is literally eating your brain. Just stop.

FireAg said:

---

AggieBucksJB said:

---

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being… pic.twitter.com/B3bv5f5KW1

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 20, 2026

Sounds like he found another way to skin a cat.

---

Sounds like the administration had this card in their pocket and ready to play…

Stock market just shot up as soon as he made this announcement…

---

Under Section 122, those tariffs are only allowed for 150 days, unless extended by Congress.

Quote:

---

I think the point is to change the environment we've been in for decades, which has discouraged companies from producing in the U.S. and discouraged American buyers from purchasing in the U.S.

---

Trying to wish away the power of economics is never a smart plan. The cost of American Labor has discouraged companies from manufacturing in the U.S. for the most price competitive industries. That is not changing anytime soon.

Buyers will pay for quality in certain areas but don't want to to pay 25-30% more for consumer electronics and other items simply due to a political slogan.