By Matt Underwood EU considers $108 billion in retaliatory tariffs on US over Trump’s Greenland threat, FT reports, and it seems like a long-awaited moment has finally arrived. The frustration has been building, and the consensus seems to be that appeasement just isn’t working with this particular “orange megalomaniac.” It’s a sad reality, but many believe the only language he understands is the language of consequences. The discussion has gone beyond mere contemplation. Now, it’s about action.
The sentiment is clear: fight fire with fire. This isn’t just about tariffs; it’s about a comprehensive approach to make the US feel the sting financially. The suggestion is to target the bank books, hoping to galvanize Republicans to take a stand and actually consider impeachment. One idea proposes export taxes, dumping US treasuries, and getting other nations like Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea involved. The goal is to cripple American businesses, even shutting down Trump’s ventures, hitting him where it hurts most: his wallet. It’s the only way to get his attention, to make him understand that his actions have repercussions.
The consensus calls for strong retaliatory measures, especially aimed at the tech industry. Some advocate for a 100% tariff on advertising revenue from platforms such as X, Google Ads, Microsoft products, and Oracle + Amazon cloud services. The generated funds could then be funneled into building a trans-EU army. There’s also a suggestion to outright ban X from the EU. The time for niceties, according to this perspective, is over.
The prevailing attitude is to send a clear message: the EU is done dealing with Trump. Some suggest that a permanent break in relations with the US is needed until he is gone. The thought is that the current situation is incredibly stupid, and that Europe has finally realized that appeasement did more harm than good. The argument is that Europe has tried to preserve the US-European alliance, but patience has run out. The view is Trump behaves like a bully who thinks his targets will endlessly tolerate his behavior. Instead of tariffs which penalize your own citizens, the most effective tactic would be to completely cut off trade.
Furthermore, a recurring theme is the necessity of absolute and unwavering responses. The idea is to make the punishment significant and lasting, applying it at full force and for an extended period, regardless of Trump’s reactions. This is the only way to deal with this kind of behavior, through resolute action and seriousness. It’s akin to parenting, where clear boundaries, rules, and consistent consequences are essential. Trump, in this context, is seen as someone who demands more and more, and whose boundaries always shift.
The discussion continues with a desire to hit where it hurts most, with a long list of potential targets, including Facebook, LinkedIn, and X, as well as companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Oracle. There is also the call to overhaul ITAR enforcement and establish an EU-focused system independent of the US. Additional suggestions include extra income tax on US equities, dumping US treasuries, and pricing commodities in Euros. The aim here is to make the US markets feel the heat.
The article turns to concrete examples of what could be considered, starting with escalating the capital gains on US equities, potentially by 10% per month, with an eventual 20% VAT on buying or selling US equities. The underlying belief is that these measures would tank the US markets. The article also suggests banning social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.
There is a sense of inevitability in the idea that Trump would attempt to take Greenland, highlighting the perceived recklessness of his actions. Also, there’s a strong desire for sanctions against Trump, his associates, and their families. This reflects a desire to make it painful for those who enabled the situation. There’s even a suggestion to tariff Tesla, focusing on the EV trade with China, reflecting a broader strategy of strategic economic adjustments.