[Official] US announces new tariffs on most countries

Other presidents that are reprehensible?
The specific quote, first paraphrased by another contributor to this thread and upon which you have just elaborated, has been attributed to Donald Trump.
But it is manifestly obvious that Mr Trump is not the only US President that has been involved in scandalous behaviour of one kind or another, nor is he the only male on the planet who has used such objectionable language in an unguarded moment.
It is questionable, for example, whether anything Mr Tump has done in his personal life is really worse than many of the antics we associate with Bill Clinton.
Mr Trump's indiscretions, in contrast to those of his predecessors, have been greatly magnified by virtue of his having been in the public eye in the era of the Internet and social media and this has enabled his enemies and opponents to portray him as a monster. Unfortunately for them, their endeavours failed to gain traction with the majority of American voters.

No, I said European leaders had not behaved as if "international trade and commerce is a war that has to be won, regardless of the impact on other nations or a country's own economy and workforce".
Did you buy a job lot of straw men in a bankruptcy sale, or something?

BBC Updates:
The US will impose 104% tariffs on some Chinese goods from tonight, the White House confirms
It comes after China refused to meet Trump's deadline to withdraw its own retaliatory levy on the US
Meanwhile, US stocks have rallied after days of turmoil, but analysts warn confidence in the markets remain fragile
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cp8vyy35g3mt
The US is also set to impose so-called "reciprocal" tariffs on about 60 of the "worst offending" countries tonight
Some Americans welcome tariffs, others fear a recession, North America correspondent Nomia Iqbal writes
Following Elon Musk's "moron" comment targeted at US trade envoy Pete Navarro, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt says "boys will be boys"

Careful, that bumper box of straw men won't last forever.

This is not the place to discuss the policies of the UK Labour Party, except to reiterate that you are attempting to draw a false comparison between two entirely different sets of circumstances. There are other threads dedicated to the policies and performance of the UK Government.
However, I am constrained to point out that you have - once again - either misunderstood or attempted to misrepresent what I wrote. My exact words were: "One must allow for a degree of rhetoric, provided that the policies are clear and that there are obvious steps being taken to implement them within a defined timescale." (Reply 180)
This thread is about President Trump's tariffs. He was abundantly clear before, during and after the election campaign about his intention to impose tariffs as and when he deemed it appropriate to do so. And so he has, within the first three months of taking office. I think most people, regardless of their opinion on the policy itself, would judge that to be an administration delivering on its election promises.

What we are now seeing are various nations, businesses and individuals scrambling to gain advantage over each other in a new economic order where the rules of the game have fundamentally changed. Meanwhile, speculators are having a field day, as they always do in times of market turbulence.
The emerging consensus, as former Conservative Chancellor Lord Lamont commented on a BBC radio broadcast yesterday, is that in future there will likely be "shorter supply chains" and more "regional" trade.
As I have been at pains to point out, an appreciation of the rationale behind the tariff policy is not confined to the hard-right, as so many of President Trump's opponents are inclined to believe. I noted another excellent Guardian article, written by Dr James Meadway of the Progressive Economy Forum, no ally of the Trump administration.
Here’s one key thing you should know about Trump’s shock to the world economy: it could work
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/07/donald-trump-world-economy-shock-us
"Perhaps the rolling market chaos will become too much. Perhaps the administration will blink first. There is no guarantee this extraordinary gamble will work, not even for those in the clique around Trump. But it would be a mistake to assume it cannot work – and however the pieces now land, they will not return to their old places."

I agree with your position.
I think one point that was mentioned to me is the own goal committed by some of the investors who reacted emotionally to dump some key stocks, only for them to be picked up by other investors for cheap.
If I had a broker who dumped key stocks during this time, he would have his P45 in the post by the end of the week.

Any idea which Chinese goods?

wut?
Why would you think the investors are different people?
I sold two thirds of my Barclays holding from between £2.98 and £3.12 (ex-divi). Would I buy them back at £2.55? Sure thing. But many other boats have been lowered too, so its not the top of my own buy list.
Obviously I now wish I'd liquidated my holding. But hindsight is great.
What's a 'key stock' anyway? One with a large position in the portfolio you mean? That was one of mine, would you really be angry that your broker sold shares for more than their current value?

That’s if you would be able to buy those baskets of stocks esp Tech, Finance, Emerging Markets, Oil & Gas etc.
What's a 'key stock' anyway? One with a large position in the portfolio you mean?
A key stock are the companies with substance that dominant the markets like the Magnificent 7: Tesla, Nvidia, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Meta
That was one of mine, would you really be angry that your broker sold shares for more than their current value?
Yes, I would. Our broker held our stocks and did not sell. We lost some value but wanted to keep the portfolio.

Pretty sure it's you that raised Labour policy...

Have me as your broker, I sold none of Tesla, Nvidia, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Meta... as I didn't own any. Wildly overvalued.

So, although you still seem to be struggling to come up with anything specific against Clinton, Kennedy, etc, you still claim that whatever it might be, it is necessarily worse than being a convicted felon, committing sexual assault, and being an adjudged rapist.
The fact that people are happy to have a sex attacker and convicted fraudster as a president rather than a black woman merely speaks volumes about them and their prejudices.

No, not in this thread.

Chinese tariffs now doubled. Brexit was an deliberate act of self-harm inflicted on Britain by Brexiters but choosing inflation, choosing supply disruption and choosing economic harm on American businesses for no compelling economic reason easily trumps Brexit in terms of sheer stupidity.

I can't see any reference to "VAT on private school fees", "promise not to increase National Insurance" or "cutting disability benefits" by any other poster on this thread before you raised these things in post 151.
Happy to be corrected.

If you examine Reply 151 you will see that I am merely responding to another contributor who had attempted, in Reply 135, to equate comments that I had made in this thread with comments pertaining to an entirely different set of circumstances in another thread, which happens to relate to the UK Labour Government.
It was the other contributor who first raised the matter, not me.

Post 135 makes no reference to policies.