South Korea cut a deal with Trump. It didn't matter.
Under the agreement, new South Korean steel export restrictions were put in place and more U.S. automakers could export their cars to South Korea.
The president hailed it as "a historic milestone," a "great deal for American and Korean workers" and a "fair and reciprocal" deal. That was probably overselling what amounted to a modest rewrite of a pre-existing trade agreement, but South Korea was happy to play along if it meant buying peace and quiet.
When Trump took office in January, South Korea seemed well-positioned to weather the looming tariffs the president was eager to implement. But it was not to be. Earlier this week, Trump announced he would impose a 25% tariff on South Korean exports starting Aug. 1, unless its government agreed to even more concessions.
The new threat sent a message that resonated far beyond Seoul: Trump can't be trusted.
Foreign leaders have already noticed that nobody is safe from the mercurial temperament of the U.S. president and his endless appetite for tariffs and and a light-switch approach to flipping them on and off. So far in his second term, Trump has broken more trade deals than forged new ones, and the goalposts are constantly moving. The president inked a sweeping deal with Canada and Mexico in his first term, then turned around and launched another trade war earlier this year.
The behavior might earn the 'dealmaker-in-chief' a new nickname: the 'dealbreaker-in-chief.'
On Monday, Trump blasted out letters to over a dozen trade partners threatening to reimpose tariffs on Aug. 1 if they didn't cut new trade agreements. South Korea was among the countries put on notice for a 25% tariff, and more are being posted on social media through the week.
'We invite you to participate in the extraordinary Economy of the United States, the Number One Market in the World, by far,' Trump said in the letter addressed to South Korean President Lee Jae-myung. Notably, the president left wiggle room to adjust the tariffs up or down based on his feelings about the outcome of the negotiations.
It was a far cry from the trade agreement with South Korea in 2007, the U.S.'s first bilateral trade pact with a major Asian power, negotiated over 10 months under the second Bush administration in an environment where free trade was ascendant in both parties. It went into force five years later.
While Washington viewed that deal as key to its approach to the Pacific, the current fight is just one of dozens that Trump has started in recent weeks on large and small nations alike. South Korean officials are working hard to come up with an agreement that would please Trump, but progress has stalled as there's little clarity on what he even wants as the endgame.
'We are doing our best to bring about a result mutually beneficial to both sides, but we have been unable to establish what each side exactly wanted from the other side,' Lee said last week.
While past presidents viewed South Korea as a valuable military ally against North Korea, an isolated totalitarian state that occasionally makes threats against the U.S., Trump sees it as a freeloader taking advantage of incompetent American leadership. In his first term he referred to the updated 2012 trade agreement with South Korea as "a horrible deal" and "a Hillary Clinton disaster" that was a "one-way street."
South Korea will probably have to accept the fact that Trump's idea of a good trade deal is a one-way street in his favor. The Trump administration touted a new accord with Vietnam last week that kept a 20% tariff on Vietnamese imports while clearing the way for U.S. exports to Vietnam to face no import taxes. Stephen Miran, a Trump economic adviser, praised it as an 'extremely one-sided' deal.
But that doesn't mean it's a good deal for the U.S. exactly. After all, it's U.S. companies that will be forced to pay those tariffs. For smaller businesses that have long worked with Vietnamese counterparts to, say, build the furniture that they sell, the trade deal locks in higher prices for the near future and years of hassle as they try to reorient their supply chains.
Trump has brought back mercantilism, the outdated economic theory that a nation's wealth and power were measured by exporting more than it imported. The U.S. and other world powers largely moved away from that model and toward more and more free trade after the Great Depression and World War II, when they realized that trade barriers hurt more than they helped.
Anti-tax conservative activist Grover Norquist summed it up in a discussion of tariffs at an April event with journalist Steve Clemons.
'In trade wars, all the casualties are friendly,' he said. 'Everybody doesn't shoot across World War I trenches at other guys. They shoot down the trench at their own team.'
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Walmart is selling a $22 stylus pen for $12, and shoppers call it a 'solid Apple Pencil alternative'
TheStreet aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission. Walmart is selling a $22 stylus pen for $12, and shoppers call it a 'solid Apple Pencil alternative' originally appeared on TheStreet. It's the final days of the Walmart Deals event, which means now is your last chance to score savings across all categories, including tech. Originally $22, the Zyerch Stylus Pen is 47% off for the Walmart Deals event, bringing the price down to just $12. If you are a tablet owner, a stylus pen comes in handy for everything from drawing to taking notes. This stylus pen has a 4.5-star rating at Walmart with over 100 perfect reviews. "Zyerch Stylus Pen exceeded all my expectations," one reviewer wrote. "It connects instantly with my iPad and works flawlessly for drawing, note-taking, and everyday navigation. The fast charging is super convenient," they added. This stylus pen is compatible with most iPads and other touchscreen devices. It works like using a regular pen and comes with extra replacement tips if needed. No Bluetooth connection is required to use the stylus pen; it just needs to be charged through the USB-C port, and there is a touch control on the top to turn it on. The stylus pen has a small tip measuring 1.5 millimeters for precise writing or drawing and is 7 inches long. The side of the pen is magnetic to easily attach it to the side of your device, so you don't lose it. Plus, the stylus pen has tilt sensitivity that adjusts the thickness of your 300 Walmart shoppers have given this stylus pen perfect ratings, and multiple shoppers compare it to a more expensive version. "Great value for anyone looking for a solid Apple Pencil alternative," another reviewer wrote. "It feels smooth and natural on the iPad screen, with no lag or skipping." The Walmart Deals event ends July 13, and at nearly half off, the Zyerch Stylus Pen is a solid deal to add to your shopping cart. Walmart is selling a $22 stylus pen for $12, and shoppers call it a 'solid Apple Pencil alternative' first appeared on TheStreet on Jul 12, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jul 12, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
7 Key Signs Hybrid Cars Aren't the Right Purchase for You
As the overall trajectory of the automotive market continues to lean toward electric vehicle (EV) companies, carmakers are trying to plug into the hybrid car market. Though they have sprung up around the world and traditional carmakers are retooling their lineups, EVs still face an uphill battle in a lot of ways. Learn More: For You: The pace at which EV sales are growing has fallen short of industry expectations. With electric specifically, Americans seem to remain cautious regarding their high prices, limited battery ranges and insufficient charging infrastructure. Hybrid cars offer numerous benefits to drivers — including reduced emissions, savings at the pump, savings on regular maintenance and through tax credits and incentives, unmatched fuel economy and resale value. Hybrids (but not plug-in hybrids [PHEVs]) are also becoming more reliable. Depending on an individual's needs, driving habits and priorities — including things like size, features and budget — hybrids might not be the right choice for everyone. Here are seven signs that a hybrid car might not be the best purchase for you. Generally speaking, hybrids tend to cost more than comparable gas-powered vehicles (but less than EVs). So, if you're on a tight budget or prioritize upfront affordability, a hybrid might not be the best choice for you. Although hybrid owners often justify the higher purchase cost of their vehicle by saying that they'll make that up eventually with fuel savings, this might take longer than buyers think. Many drivers who choose to buy eco-friendly and fully electric motor power want to lessen their impact on the environment. With a hybrid, you are still partially dependent on fossil fuels as it runs on both electricity and gas. Additionally, hybrids still have some environmental impact during the manufacturing process and vehicle battery pack disposal. Consider This: Although automakers are expanding performance capabilities and building quality designs throughout their lineups all the time, hybrids are manufactured to improve fuel efficiency and lower carbon emissions. Because of this, they generally have slower top-end acceleration than traditional models. If power and handling are must-haves, you might be disappointed at your hybrid options. Hybrid cars have two sources of power (the gas engine and the electric motor), so there is less regular wear and tear on the car's engine — and typically fewer trips to the mechanic. However, as Kia noted on their website, when repairs are needed, it may be difficult to find an affordable mechanic who specializes in hybrid technology. Luckily, batteries can last more than 150,000 miles. But when they finally go, they are expensive to replace. Both hybrid and electric vehicles tend to thrive in stop-and-go city traffic, where their regenerative braking systems come into play. If your daily commute takes significant miles or is mainly spent on the highway, or if you're a strictly Sunday driver — popping out to the grocery store once a week or driving only short distances — paying more for a hybrid vehicle might not be worth your while. Don't worry. You can absolutely tow with your hybrid, but because fuel engines — which are necessary for towing and hauling — are frequently smaller in these models, towing capacity is lower. The Hyundai Ioniq and the Toyota Prius weren't exactly engineered to create the power needed to move your car, the people with you and a heavy load. In many cases, it costs more to insure a hybrid because they're worth more than traditional ICE vehicles. Due to specialized technology and higher damage claim and repair costs, you can expect to pay more on average — an estimated 7% to 11% more — to insure a hybrid vehicle or electric car as compared to its traditional gas-powered counterpart. David Nadelle contributed to the reporting for this article. More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 8 Common Mistakes Retirees Make With Their Social Security Checks The 10 Most Reliable SUVs of 2025 This article originally appeared on 7 Key Signs Hybrid Cars Aren't the Right Purchase for You
Forbes
26 minutes ago
- Forbes
Why The Future Of Remote Work Is Still Local
Companies have settled on the hybrid model to embrace both the benefits of working from home and ... More maintaining company culture. While most workers remember a time when daily commutes were the norm, millions of people joined the job market since 2020, and all they have known – up until the return-to-office (RTO) movement – is working from home. According to the AI-powered education data company Admissionsly, there are approximately 4.16 million new graduates a year entering the job force. That means up to 20 million recent graduates only know working from home (WFH), remote work, or have never been to the office five days a week. If you asked me five years ago about WFH, I would have told you that companies would exclusively hire remote employees indefinitely. Companies' talent pools increased exponentially (literally to all 50 states) and included strong candidates from lower-cost-of-living areas. It was a gift that kept on giving: more candidates at a cheaper price. Plus, companies could save money by decreasing or eliminating their commercial real estate footprint. Companies may spend upwards of 20% of their revenue on office space and commercial property. Time is the one asset you can never get back. WFH gave people hours of their time back because they didn't have to commute to and from their offices. On average, remote workers save 55 minutes per day, according to the U.S. Career Institute, by eliminating their commute. That was extra time to work, spend time with their kids, or have breakfast and dinner in peace. Those small perks were vital during such a tough time. And, on a side note, imagine how much better it was for our climate that we didn't have thousands of cars sitting in traffic! Lastly, many people, ironically, felt a sense of freedom and excitement (discounting the fear of a killer virus) because they could work from anywhere. I know people who traveled the country in an Airstream, sometimes working in one state one day and another the next. Some people, primarily younger and without children, traveled the world working through VPNs. Many people and families decided to finally make the move to their dream home, which was usually out of the city and into more remote areas of the country. Well, my prediction in 2020 was wrong. On May 5, 2023, the RTO debate began when the World Health Organization officially declared the pandemic over. But was it ever a debate? The statistics say WFH wasn't as common as you might believe. It Seemed Like Everyone Was Working Remotely, Right? Except for first responders, I felt all private workers were WFH 100% of the time. Only about 7.3% of employed Americans were working remotely before the pandemic, according to George Washington University Professor Hilary Silver. However, by the end of 2020 – the height of the pandemic – the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated only 22% of US workers were working remotely 100% of the time. The Federal Bank of Atlanta estimated it was only 15% by January 2021. Many more were working partly from home. Gallup's June 2022 poll found 70 million, 56% of full-time employees, said they can do their job remotely. Another five in 10 (35 million) worked at home part of the time. A large portion of the U.S. working population was already working the hybrid model. WFH Versus RTO is a Corporate Culture Battle Culture is a collection of values, principles, and beliefs that a group of people share. Before the pandemic, our corporate culture was based on a straightforward social contract: you commute to the office Monday through Friday. You take paid time off or sick time when you're not in the office. Pretty simple. After the pandemic, what changed was not our expectation that we would have the ability to work remotely exclusively; instead, it was our understanding of what it means to work remotely. The question became: how many days a week are we going back into the office? How safe was it to have people crammed into an office at the same time, while there were still seasonal spikes in COVID cases? How could we create hygienic and safe work environments? The simple social contract we had pre-pandemic was not nullified. It was renegotiated. And my prediction that WFH and exclusively remote work was the future was inherently flawed. Cities are heavily reliant on workers commuting. I live in New York City, and the pandemic brought the five boroughs back to the 1980s. Small businesses shut down, restaurants were closed, and the theater district was decimated. NYC lost its soul and culture. The same goes for the other major cities in the U.S., especially San Francisco, which has only recently regained its normalcy. The commercial real estate industry is vital to the U.S. economy. If people aren't going to offices, leases are broken, and loans default, we would have another Great Recession. We need businesses to pay rent. Office space attracts commuters, who purchase breakfast and lunch from local businesses, who in turn pay taxes that support their local municipalities' infrastructure and growth. It's a positive feedback loop. And, most importantly, human interaction. Humans are social beings. Zoom and Teams meetings and happy hours saved our sanity in 2020 and 2021, but there's nothing more important to mental health than physically being around other people, whether you like them or not. Along those lines, CEOs of companies of all different sizes are using company culture as the main reason for creating RTO policies. I, professionally, believe that companies can only maintain, control, and enhance their cultures by having people in the office interacting, gossiping, brainstorming, and engaging in all the activities we were doing before 2020. I also professionally believe the company culture reason is being overused, abused, and twisted. The New Social Contract: The Hybrid Model As a recruiting professional, I can say that my recruiting strategy is back to where it was pre-pandemic: focusing on finding local candidates. I do executive recruitment and contingent staffing. Contingent staffing is a fancy term for temporary workers and contractors. Temporary and contract workers are the only subset of U.S. workers who can work remotely. This comes down to both cost and efficiency; temps and contractors are working on specific projects that have a beginning and an end. Companies engage contractors to help with projects that need to be completed without having to bring on permanent employees who require benefits, paid time off, and are eligible for bonuses. From an executive recruitment standpoint, I work primarily in financial services, so I can say that, based on empirical evidence, foreign banking organizations are my only clients that require their employees to be in the office five days a week. My fintech and crypto clients are the only ones that are open to fully remote employees. However, they are becoming less open to that option. They want people in the office. As a corporate culture, we have settled on a hybrid model, which we refer to as either two or three days a week in the office. The other days are WFH days. This is common across industries, as a Pew Research Center report in January indicated that 75% of survey respondents have employers who require some time in the office, and 72% of workers even indicated they prefer hybrid as opposed to working remotely full-time. Company culture only exists when people are in the office at the same time. Many companies have hybrid models that require employees to be in the office two or three days a week. It is useless and inefficient (and perhaps counterproductive) to have people come in on random days or whenever they choose. You are not building a company culture if employees come in on Mondays or Fridays to be on virtual calls all day. I highly recommend that, as you refine your RTO policy, you make sure that employees are in the office on the same days so they can interact in person, build relationships, maintain a healthy mindset through socialization, and get face time with executives who make decisions on promotions. Having people waste time commuting only to spend time doing what they could have done at home is going against the new corporate culture and social contract.
