I don't think permanently ruining our economic ties to Europe is a good idea

Can the US economy survive without Europe?

Fuck europtism

EU is basically meaningless to the US.

Canada, Mexico, and China are the ones that matter. And not coincidentally the ones we're shitting on the most.

Americans like to pretend Europe is this irrelevant hippie socialist backwater and not the largest economic bloc in the world

Eurocucks roleplaying us americans again

Kek. You're trying really hard now huh

women that hot owe me sex

that's a faggot

The US can just ask Russia to slow down the gas pipes to Europe to slow down their manufacturing.

And yet not a single company over in that shithole is larger than Home Depot. Really makes you think.

i don't want to die out of boredom so I will tell you something I did on IMGNAI recently

typed “romantic anime moment under the stars”

got cursed image of two refrigerators holding hands

cried

posted it anyway

it went viral

art is pain

Market caps being linked to reality is a good thing, Tesla being "worth more" than Toyota isn't.

Its not permanently ruined. Its just Trump being Trump, and TDS EUROS having TDS. Ideological reactions to economic issues never help, especially when fanned by the flames of the loudest, most obnoxious American in history.

mutts hate europeans because they remind mutts of how white they're not

Sure. Our economies are barely interlinked. They only export their wine, cheese and finished BMWs to us. What do we have to lose?

Thats a nice man you got there anon

The EU is the largest trading partner of the US and the biggest source of FDI you fucking tard

Its hard to take Europe seriously when i remember that Alabama is bigger than England

western europeans are some of the most out of touch, smug, sniff their own farts arrogant pricks in the entire world
i would vote trump in for a third term just to cause them to seethe

How does the GDP of Alabama compare to England?

What a retarded question, I don't even buy anything from Europe in the first place. Now trade with say Japan or China being neutered would have an impact, more Japan than China. Wtf does europe even produce? I'm pretty sure the only product I've ever purchased from a european country is parmesan, noodles, and some wines.

This is a legitimate question, what does europe produce? Now that I'm thinking about it I've almost never seen any products sold here from any european country other than Italy

bros...

I don't think permanently ruining our economic ties to Europe is a good idea

Fair enough. A lot of people don't either, but anyone with half a brain can tell that times are changing and a lot of the things changing don't have anything to do with Trump directly, or Europe, or international trade. Whether we're going into WW3, coming up on the long-awaited global economic collapse, or just slowly stagnating and dying under the crush of interest payments on the expanding debt, there was always going to be an end to the current system. Nobody was willing to be the person or movement that brought it about even though we all know intrinsically that all things end, and this system is getting very lean on opportunity and incentive, with whole swathes of people checking out of society. The unfortunate truth is, we need a major shake-up before we hit a wall here, and none of our more insightful leaders were willing to do that, or change things in any fundamental manner, because they were all on the benefits end of the current way of things. Now someone is changing it, and everyone is bitching and hawing about it like one man has that kind of power instead of realizing that this was the way the establishment wanted it, and everyone involved just wanted a scapegoat, which is why nothing is really being done about it. Here we are, so pick a side to sit and watch, and clap or jeer when things happen as seems appropriate for you. Its all above our pay grade, anyway.

Can the US Economy survive without Europe?

Yes. Not in its current form, but the US is actually rather blessed in that almost everything we could conceivably need on the planet exists somewhere within the geographical boundaries of the US or its territories. We just haven't had much incentive for people to develop any of it because we've been too busy paying chinks to make stuff instead of making it ourselves.

We are also ruining our ties to Latin America, Africa, and Asia. So I suppose if we are ok with only trading with Australia?

Europe is ... not the largest economic bloc in the world

Economically, the U.S. is larger than the entire EU. The EU used to be larger twenty years ago, but its economies have barely kept up with inflation and they even lost Bongistan.

We are also ruining our ties to Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

No we aren't. We have excellent ties with El Salvador, for example.

So I suppose if we are ok with only trading with Australia?

They're part of Asia, specifically China.

El Salvador

Kek

If we take the time to build an internal economy and supply our own needs, technically we would only need to trade with ourselves, really. You set up mines, oil wells, factories and retailers in various states and trade the goods you need along interstate lines from the states that make them to the states where they're sold. You'd see a large resurgence in work in the flyovers, where the cost of living is low and people are the most desperate for work, since a lot of the opportunities have dried up there in the years since we started offshoring our manufacturing. Really though, the US has everything it needs here, you'd just see some temporary disruptions while people catch up with those incentives. You'd have to find a way to make it clear to everyone that this is the new way of things, they can't just wait for Trump to get out of office - and if people want to do business here, these are going to be the rules from now on. People can't afford to lose America as a market in the world, even if it only turns inward - so the incentive to invest in feeding it is there, there are just a lot of loud (and rich) voices invested in international trade that want it to continue, when the US could easily sustain itself along internal lines.

If we take the time to build an internal economy and supply our own needs, technically we would only need to trade with ourselves, really.

While this could be possible, we would need like 1 billion Americans.

Australia getting tariffed 10 percent on everything plus 25 percent on metals. Also the US under Trump is rugpulling their defence-industrial alliance and pushing all of Asia-Pacific closer to China economically.

If the EU, Canada and Japan can get their shot together to construct a new world trading order without the US and China Australia will be an an enthusiastic part of it.

Not really. We have 340 million, and the last time we were running trade entirely along internal lines, Pre-WW2, America had less than 120 million total. We already have almost triple that.

The economy doesn't need to sustain at its current levels, nor does line need to continue to go up - the only need in this equation is that enough supply lines are established that people can continue to consume, and our current economy as it sits produces many, many times more than people need. It overproduces so much that millions of cars go unsold, billions of tons of food and milk and alcohol go rotten or sour, even fuel sits around sometimes so long that it goes bad or dries up. We can afford some massive downsizing and still take care of everybodies' needs. Yeah, the investment class is going to take a huge hit, but after the smoke clears there's going to be a huge untapped market in America not getting everything that it needs, and that's a massive opportunity for new companies to get in where monopolies stood before. People will take them up on that opportunity if it means getting rich by owning a business and filling a need, and American banks will give them the loans to build those businesses, because without the US Tax base, the government that keeps those banks from going insolvent will go under. It'll all fix itself eventually, just not in a way that guarantees preserving the wealth of anyone outside of the top 2%. For the bottom 70% though, all the people who live paycheck to paycheck already, it'll be a godsend. They didn't have any stonks to begin with, they just want a decent place to work.

canada would never do that

t. canadian

american women will flood to other countries as economic refugees

and I will be here to support them (with my dick at $5 for a bj)

autarky good

Kek.
You realize two things. The post WWII economy relied on the US importing raw materials and exporting finished goods this required other countries to be unable to produce those finished goods. The economy of that period did not have autarky as a major feature. Secondly what you are describing is a massive decrease in US standard of living, possibly below middle income level. The US would literally be poorer than China.

We already have a massive decrease in standard of living that has brought most Americans below the middle income level. The statistics are misleading and deliberately so - once you exclude the richest thousand Americans, the remaining 340 million average their salaries below the poverty line in the US by almost 25%.

We're already in a crisis, and that's what the people bitching about their investments don't realize - we've been two more weeks (TM) away from a complete collapse for decades now, basically riding on a massive safety net and a lot of odd jobs, underemployment and cheap credit. Now that's all drying up, the international game is getting hostile as whole nations are in serious danger of becoming insolvent - and someone must fix this in some way, with the full understanding that it was always going to get worse before it gets better and yes, its going to be our generations alive today that have to learn to make due with less even though we don't want to.

However, any hope of upward mobility in the future because of hardship now is worth it, because the slow decline into irrelevancy absolutely smokes donkey dick. As to whether the US is poorer than China, I don't think it really matters that much when the US is capable of conquering China and turning them into a vassal state - which is what's likely to happen, assuming that China doesn't collapse in a decade or so all on its own, the more likely scenario.

The whole world economy is in serious danger of collapse. The best we can hope for now is that a hard course correction will bring something functional out of it in time to keep billions of people from dying of starvation.

Don't expect retards to have any notion of economic realities.
They have 450million+ consumers with decent purchasing power, plus the surrounding nations on the med, they're doing fine. They're a market the US does not want to lose, Bongistanis still consider themselves part of it and for trade purposes they still technically are, given the nature of their interconnected economies.
Throw them away at your peril, they will cooperate with your enemies if you push them away because of retarded ego.

I don't think it really matters that much when the US is capable of conquering China and turning them into a vassal state - which is what's likely to happen,

Do all Americans really think a war with a billion people is going to magically be easy when they make no ships and have no manufacturing in comparison.

We have 108 carriers once you count all the small ones, thousands of tanks, thousands of modern jet aircraft and thousands of nukes. Lack of manufacturing doesn't really matter unless we had intended to fight the kind of war that Russia is fighting right now, where we blow all those stocks in a protracted land invasion, instead of just using force multipliers to destroy all sources of power, food and clean water going into China or circulating in China along internal lines, and then let everybody starve - you don't have to fight a billion people, they'll literally eat each other.

Throw them away at your peril, they will cooperate with your enemies if you push them away because of retarded ego

if the EU even hinted at cozying up to china trump would threaten to pull out of NATO and decommission every single military base in western europe, then freeze all ukraine aid and give the country to the Russians
then he would put a 50% tariff on all oil and energy exports to the EU

How do you have a massive trade deficit with us if that's true

Cool. So they call it, eat the consequences and decouple from the US while rebuilding what they need without them. It hurts them more but it also hurts the US and they got nothing out of it and weakened themselves/lost allies for no reason. Very cool strats

108 carriers once you count all the small ones

what?

There are quite a lot of aircraft-capable ships in the USN, once you count all the little aircraft tenders, escort carriers, and all the aircraft carriers in mothballs. Its not just the carrier groups, there's enough aircraft carriers in service to solo the navies of the entire planet put together, assuming you can scrounge up enough aircraft and sailors to staff them all with.

Starting a nuclear war with a nuke holding country

Hope you liked living

Implying China would magically collapse because of air invasion

A defensive local war is substantially easier for the defender and China knows it, they pushed you back in Korea for a reason.
You can't even stop houthis from bombing ships, what makes you think you'd somehow manage a sustained crippling attack on China before they overwhelm you with plane numbers on the Chinese sea.
Russia also tried a capitation strike against Ukraine, didn't stop them fighting or even stop them manufacturing everything, it's delusional to think they have no supplies or backups.
I think you underestimate the sheer number of buildings manufacturing things in China, you cant get them all, at best you can kettle it using allies in the region for years till they start either waiting till you run out of ammo or start outpacing your plane numbers.
The US does not produce enough missiles and bombs for such a campaign.
Not even the dumbest pro US retard on Anon Babble that post US acquisition orders would think it would be "easy", carriers are for projecting sea power, they do not have sustainment against a peer land power that can see where the carriers are with satellites and has a rather large sub fleet, with the potential to dump hundreds of thousands of mines and USVs into the region.

you are delusional
in this situation it is more likely the EU collapses than achieves independence

Hope you liked living

Fair. But in the event of a full nuclear exchange, everybody loses, so China still doesn't win.

As for the rest of it, the US could accomplish a lot without any of the rules of war, considerations for money and economics, and our own politicians getting in the way. Once you're no longer concerned with mass casualties, you can accomplish much more - especially once you factor in the difficulty of defending static targets on the ground (Pinpointed by satellite recon) from a heavily armed mobile force primarily centered around aircraft. You wouldn't even have to sustain an offensive in the long term - if you can simply bomb enough of the infrastructure in China to make them food and power negative, and then withdraw to the outer rings of islands and keep anything else from coming in, the massive weight of their population will crush itself as people run out of food, water and fuel. People who are going hungry cease to work, people who don't have fuel for the planes cease to fly - and again, its not about manufacturing, the US has already overproduced missiles, bombs, guns, planes, everything required for a massive international war by a factor of twenty or more - we haven't turned off the war taps since WW2, and what's been used up in Ukraine is effectively just a sales sample on old 60s-80s gear. There are bunkers all over the US, build in the Cold War in case of a nuclear attack, that are now packed to the gills with military storage in almost every state. You can even buy some of the older ones with all the equipment surplus still inside.

All you'd have to do is go '73 Easting on China and flood them with one decapitating strike that places them in a position of not being able to rebuild enough, fast enough to feed themselves. Having a billion people will immediately turn into the world's biggest liability as people turn on each other trying to determine who's going to get to eat tomorrow and who's going to be dinner.

You'd have to find a way to make it clear to everyone that this is the new way of things, they can't just wait for Trump to get out of office

But they can wait for him to leave office and they can even vote democrap if they promise to leave businesses alone

BUILT FOR BIG BLACK COCK

to get to a 108 you'd have to count every destroyer or frigate with a helipad as a "carrier"
the USN doesn't have a 108 "carriers"
you can't be so retarded as to lump in a fucking tender with a proper flat top
even if you where to include amphibius assault ships because yes a F 35 B and C can land and take of from them, those haven't the facilities to support an air wing or conduct operation. Putting aircraft on them would also make them mission in effective for their intended role.
idk what you are taking but it's some strong stuff

the EU collapses

for the EU to collapse a lot of it's member states would want it to
non of them want that because their economies have intertwined so much that ending the EU would cause their economies to tank by at least a quarter
it will collapse bro's like you are retards

Exiting the EU doesn't even make a whole lot of sense even if all the populists get horny thinking about it
It would be like Trump's tariff BS, you can see how it just made the UK poorer

If you can simply bomb enough of the infrastructure in China to make them food and power negative

I've seen retards like you argue this shit on Anon Babble for decades. "Bomb the 3 gorges dam flood the country" posters are funny sure but the reality is during war people produce more, not less. They have too many cars and oil resources to kill a nation that large with just hitting infrastructure, they also control all solar manufacturing infrastructure, if they have to only work in the day and cant produce more steel, they'll survive even if they have to strip their country for metals like the UK did. They have hundreds of buildings full of steel they can pull down for more steel, millions of tons of infrastructure they can use for copper wires etc, their food sources are sustainable enough for a few years even if you cut them off. It's hard to kill a nation without killing the people and its hard to kill the people.

Even if you tries you have to get right up to the chink coast if you want to hit deep within it's rivers too, which isn't exactly easy given the circumstances, and moving such a fleet would be spotted by chink sats weeks in advance as you cross all your carriers from the other sides of the world so they'd be "ready" (noone can truly be ready) for you.

China could also just detonates nukes against your fleet, given that it's defensive they'd be more than justified.

You do not have the projection power to defeat China, just like they would never be able to defeat you without world cooperation. You are just too far apart and too similarly powerful. I honestly believe you would struggle to win against a single European country either without land invasion.

the continental populists don't want to leave the EU.
they know they can get a whole lot more done from within the EU
just look at how her euro exit position cost Le Pen massive votes during the last French presidential election

A lot of them do and you gave an example of a politician who previously did

yes because we are talking about a hypothetical scenario where the US goes full isolationist and pulls out of NATO, withdraws all military from europe, applies crippling tariffs to EU energy exports, and ukraine becomes western russia
and your response is "oh well that would suck but you know we would just rebuild and be fine"
im not saying the european union would for sure collapse I am saying an EU collapse is more likely than a nothing burger which is just an insane position to take
if russia invaded poland would EU member states defend it? In this scenario russia would cut off all remaining energy exports to the EU which along with severe US energy export tariffs would simply be a death blow. We are talking a 1/3 to 75% of all EU oil, LNG, and coal just gone. What if they dangled this energy as a bargaining chip to border states like hungary, romania, bulgaria???

You seem to be under the impression that european states are paper thin ramshackle huts on the brink of collapsing, this is simply incorrect, they are massive economies with the ability to adapt and their military is capable of handling russia, it just won’t be fun. This situation is just bad for everyone.

A lot of them do

they don't, they make statements to rally eurosceptics behind them selves and grab headlines
just look at Meloni, very critical of the EU before she got into power. Now very co-operative within and generally pro-EU.
They want shift in how power is divided between the member states and the EU and a more right wing EU policy in general. Not to get rid of it.
if anything crisis makes the EU more integrated I don't see how this crisis or your hypothetical crisis is going to do the opposite

if russia invaded poland would EU member states defend it?

Yes, the Spanish have troops in the Baltic countries. You'd think they'd not act if Poland gets attacked?
the combined security guarantee is of value to every EU member outside of maybe the BeNeLux but they have troops in the Baltics and the rest of eastern Europe as well so yea.

We are talking a 1/3 to 75% of all EU oil, LNG, and coal just gone

it isn't, it's about 1/3 of IMPORTS the EU can compensate by importing more for the middle east and south america.

bargaining chip to border states like hungary, romania, bulgaria???

they get multiple times more money from the EU than you could give them in energy
also keep in mind that the EU have a very extensive internal power and gas grid.

If russia invaded poland would EU member states defend it?

Yes, because they'd be nipping the problem in the bud. You don't let a shark take bites out of you one at a time retard.

you already lost the UK and there is already huge populist sentiment against issues like immigration and economic imbalance which can easily escalate to full blown separatism. You all made fun of trump yet trump lite clones are getting 30, 40% of the vote, even winning elections in some of your major countries

their military is capable of handling russia

the only military worth anything in the EU is france

yet they reject a ukraine bid for EU membership and let the russians run rampant. Total EU energy imports from Russia is down, what, 1% since the invasion?? They spend more money on russian oil than aid for Ukraine
not like europe has a history of appeasement against foreign dictators invading countries... that's definitely never ever happened before.....

you already lost the UK

we don't miss them, but they miss us

huge populist sentiment against issues like immigration

yes, against immigration economic imbalance not so much
and none of those parties and movements want out of Europe. They want Europe to keep the shitskins out (that includes you Romerez).
they also aren't getting 30-40% of the vote
they are stuck around 20-25%

france

yea the Poles, Italians, Spanish and Fins don't have armies