The Trade deal with England feels like the "Special Relationship"

[underpants]

England/Britain and the US have a “special relationship”, if one state makes a big move the other is obligated to go along. This often deals with military actions and like any special relationship neither state uses is regularly.

Trump needs some deal. Something. Anything. Even he knows these vague promises are wearing thin. We run a trade surplus with England, it is by far the poorest country in Europe, so this is low hanging fruit.

There a scene in “W” that’s depicts this. Bush and Rice take Tony Blair for a walk in the woods at Camp David I think. Blair is expressing all the reservations everyone had - proof? occupying force (UK history)? etc. finally Bush stops and says, “We’re going”. You can see on Blair’s face that he knows he has to go along.

It feels like that to me.

[VMA131Marine]

1. The UK is not even close to being the poorest country in Europe

The UK ranks sixth in GDP globally at $2.67T, just ahead of #7 France, which has a slightly larger population. The only country in Europe with a larger GDP is Germany at $4.7T.

However, on a GDP per capita basis, the UK ranks 18th at $55,000/person/year. Surprisingly, this is half of the GDP per capita of Ireland at $108,000.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

[underpants]

5. These still list it as the UK.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. Ireland's GDP is a bit odd, because many multinationals use it as their EU headquarters

because it has an advantageous tax regime. This means there's "income" there which then gets paid abroad to a parent company, typically in the USA. If you look at Gross National Income ("equal to gross domestic product (GDP), plus factor incomes received from non-resident by residents, minus factor income paid by residents to non-resident" ), it's more or less equal with the US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_%28nominal%29_per_capita (still comfortably above UK's GNI per capita, though).

[genxlib]

2. To me this feels like fruit of the same poison tree

After isolating themselves with the idiotic Brexit, they need all the trade partners they can get.

We are both drowning in isolationism so we will cling to each other.

All from the same warped ideology.

[Bread and Circuses]

3. Actually UK is desperate....since BREXIT

The Tories crashed the UK Economy and left the EU, Now the Labor Party is back in charge after 12 plus years of Tory Corruption.

The UK has suffered since BREXIT, the government needs to make a trade deal to help their citizens.
If US is receptive, they will sign it, UK is in a desperate situation. That’s why they are talking with #47.


They are out on their own, no longer part of the EU.

[róisín_dubh]

4. Umm, we're not the poorest country...

in Europe, for gods sake.
Our economy is positively fucked thanks to 14 miserable years of Tory rule and Brexit. But the UK has zero obligation to do anything for Trump and Starmer should hold his ground.
He needs to lead from the left and stop pandering to the right wing and centrists in the UK.
My opinion, FWIW as a US immigrant to the UK

[Wounded Bear]

7. Everything trump does is for show. I'm not expecting much...

beyond the usual "biggest deal ever" hype he usually throws out when he buys a new suit off the rack.

[underpants]

8. Heard on radio. No actual deal. It's a concept of a deal. 🙄

[Wounded Bear]

9. Not surprised at all...

Actually nice to see World leaders not buy into trump's schtick.

[Kid Berwyn]

10. Tangerine Traitor said he's done the deal.

Then spends no time reflecting on how what he said has no basis in reality, but, hey!

Tariffs are for losers the little people to pay. In this case, Jolly Old still has to fork over an additional 10-percent.

When you're king, all ya gotta do is say something. Poof! Like magic, it becomes, like, real.

Wish I was king. Poof! No more MAGA. Don't ask about the orange stain.

[Johonny]

11. Torres already trashing the deal because

It keeps import us tariffs on their goods high, much higher than before. I don't know it passes there when the math is so bad like it is. It looks like a huge defeat for labor.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

12. Maddow Blog-Trump's 'trade deal' with the United Kingdom isn't yet an actual trade deal

Last edited Fri May 9, 2025, 02:18 PM - Edit history (1)

The president said he’s reached a “conclusive” and “comprehensive” trade deal with the U.K. Reality suggests otherwise.

Whether Navarro understands this or not, Trump's "conclusive trade deal" with the UK is neither conclusive nor a trade deal:

Link to tweet

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-trade-deal-united-kingdom-isnt-yet-actual-trade-deal-rcna205623

It’s easy to understand why Donald Trump might be embarrassed by his lack of second-term trade deals. About a month ago, Peter Navarro, the White House’s top trade adviser, boasted in March, “We’re going to run 90 deals in 90 days.” Navarro added that such a plan “is possible” in part because “the boss is going to be the chief negotiator.”....

On Wednesday night, the president used his social media platform to announce that the White House had struck a “MAJOR TRADE DEAL.” The following morning, he added that a “full and comprehensive” trade agreement is in place with the United Kingdom, which was soon followed by another online item in which Trump claimed, “Together with our strong Ally, the United Kingdom, we have reached the first, historic Trade Deal since Liberation Day.”

It all sounded rather exciting — right up until the public learned that the “trade deal” isn’t an actual trade deal, at least not yet. NBC News reported:

The U.S. is working toward finalizing a narrow trade deal with the United Kingdom, President Donald Trump said Thursday, a small step as the White House pursues an aggressive tariff agenda across the globe. According to a document furnished by the U.K., the agreement will see duties on U.K. car imports reduced from 27.5% to 10%, while tariffs on U.K. steel imports will be dropped. In return, the U.K. is lowering trade barriers on U.S. beef imports and ethanol.

The emerging picture is one in which the White House has settled on a non-binding framework for a possible future deal with the United States’ 11th largest trading partner. This sets the stage for a series of additional talks — negotiations that will likely last months — that may or may not lead to an agreement......

The problem, of course, is that the first part of the claim is plainly at odds with the second: If an agreement is still taking shape and is likely to undergo a series of changes, then the new framework obviously is neither “conclusive” nor “comprehensive.”

In his first term, Trump had an unfortunate habit of wildly exaggerating the scope and scale of his narrow trade agreements. In his second term, the Republican is apparently picking up where he left off.

[republianmushroom]

13. Yup, you nailed it.

[Tickle]

14. U.S.-U.K. trade agreement offers significant benefits for American farmers, particularly those in the beef and ethanol s

Trying to add something positive

Key Benefits for U.S. Farmers
Expanded Beef Export Opportunities:
The United Kingdom has agreed to eliminate its 20% tariff on U.S. beef imports within a quota of 1,000 metric tons and establish a new duty-free quota of 13,000 metric tons. This change is expected to substantially increase U.S. beef exports to the U.K., providing American cattle producers with access to a lucrative market.
Feedstuffs

Increased Ethanol Exports:
The U.K. will remove its 19% tariff on U.S. ethanol imports, allowing up to 1.4 billion liters of duty-free American ethanol into the British market. This move is anticipated to boost U.S. ethanol exports by over $700 million, benefiting corn growers and ethanol producers.
Streamlined Customs Procedures:
The agreement includes provisions to expedite U.S. exports through U.K. customs, reducing bureaucratic delays and facilitating faster delivery of American agricultural products

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. trump did not disclose his "agreement" or deal because there was no deal. This was an agreement to agree

This "trade deal" was not a real deal but an agreement to agree that was by its own terms non-binding. In my world, this is called a letter of intent and this "trade deal" has the same non-binding language that is in all letters of intent'

Link to tweet