Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trump's Trade War Defeat
#21
Let's see if he will win this:

China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey have all requested that the WTO set up a panel of adjudicators to judge the legality of steel and aluminium tariffs which U.S. President Donald Trump imposed in March.
Reply
#22
(10-20-2018, 02:30 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Let's see if he will win this:

China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey have all requested that the WTO set up a panel of adjudicators to judge the legality of steel and aluminium tariffs which U.S. President Donald Trump imposed in March.

Problem here is that if their complaint sticks, the WTO will have to apply all this on to the plaintiffs as well. Trump is probably daring the WTO to rule against him, because that will grant him all sorts of publicity concerning his campaign against the Bureaucracy. Of which the WTO is a part.

And keep in mind, that if he loses, he will shoot the WTO the finger and go his own way. Remember, the US is subsidizing those countries, ever since WWII, and if he withdraws those funds, the deficit would shrink even further. Removing military bases from Europe alone would cause severe economic losses. I have no doubt that Everything Trump does he has already done an analysis concerning each and every move. After all, its how successful businesses/corporations remain in business and are profitable.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#23
Trump's decisions are just a reflexion of his emotional jitter of the moment.
He feels that something could be percieved as wrong and his immediate reaction is to sithdraw from treaties other US presidents took years to elaborate.

Fortunately, it's not important for Trump that his decisions are followed by effect or not. He doesn't try to achieve anything.
What's important for Trump is to exists in the medias.

Trump is perhaps one of the very few POTUS who has nothing to do. He could sit back in his armchair and eveything would be fine. No crisis, no war, economy is shining... He doesn't have anything to do!
The worse nightmare for a wannabe politician media star.

He would have loved for example to have been POTUS during the 2009-2012 economic crisis. He had to envy and jealous Obama for this.
Well, maybe that's what motivated Trump to suddenly jump into the presidential race.
Thought unfortunately for both of them, managing a crisis was not what Obama liked. Obama instead would have loved to have a booming economy and increase spending for leftist or environementalist projects. Had Trump been POTUS 8 years before and Obama today, both would have been happy. The opposite happened.

So he tries this and that. Whatever makes the headlines. The press talks about him and he's happy. A few months later he can boast great achievements while his action had absolutely no effect. And since the absence of effect means that the situation remains good, he can claim credit for good governance and be reelected.

I think the countries filing at the WTO want simply to pressure the US into stopping Trump's stupidity.

Because Trump by his constant erratic behavior could one day break an equilibrium reached after decades of sophisitcated agreements.

See the The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty thread I'm going to open in a moment...

So if tariffs doesn't crash the economy or at least the srtock exchange, what about restarting the Cold War era arm race?
Trumps would realy try everything...

See new thread on this topic.
Reply
#24
Effect of Trump's trade war?

Trade deficit with China rises to record high

S19  

reuters Wrote:The trade deficit continues to deteriorate despite the Trump administration’s protectionist trade policy  Banghead

Keywords: record high, all-time high, highest on record.  
Reply
#25
(11-02-2018, 05:13 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Effect of Trump's trade war?

Trade deficit with China rises to record high

S19  

reuters Wrote:The trade deficit continues to deteriorate despite the Trump administration’s protectionist trade policy  Banghead

Keywords: record high, all-time high, highest on record.  

As a Free Trading Liberal, I have seen all this 'trade deficit" mumbo jumo for decades now, and know it for what it really is: Mumbo Jumbo.

First of all, the 'so called' trade deficit is really a Trade Imbalance, which is perfectly healthy. Anytime an entity pays cash for something, there is a 'trade imbalance', because there is no trade for equal objects. And that makes no sense. What all this is is an effort to make economic interplay look like a form of economic warfare. And it isn't. Its how economics is applied all over the world.

When I see all this "End of the World" hype that the Whore Media keeps screaming about, it just shows me that the Whores writing the articles either know nothing about economics, OR are lying in order to scare others into protectionism.

NOTE: when you go to the grocery store, and purchase food, you are paying for that food with monetary assets. That is a trade imbalance, and is how the world works.

This lady uses the same analogy in her article: Why Trade Deficits Really Don’t Matter Very Much

And here's more articles that prove my point that anyone using the "Evils of Trade Deficits" is either ignorant, or dishonest. Spiteful

America's Trade Deficit Is Still Growing, And that's just fine.

Mr. Trump, Here's Why Trade Deficits Are Good

Worried about trade deficits? Don’t, they’re ‘job-generating foreign investment surpluses for a better America’

Trade Deficits Don't Matter - And Today's Foolish Idea To Deal With Them
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#26
(11-02-2018, 05:13 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Effect of Trump's trade war?

Trade deficit with China rises to record high

Not to worry, just a temporary setback, meanwhile under the pressure of trump cards, Chinese companies are laying off thousands, soon to be millions.

Like this Chinese automaker is laying off 18k.  It is Chinese, am I right?

----

Now, more seriously.  But of course, trade deficits do matter, it is rather obvious.   Having "trade imbalance" with any particular country may be perfectly healthy indeed, but having imbalance with the entire world is not.  The extra goods that come in to the US must be paid for somehow, otherwise they would not be sold! And if there are no material goods to offer in exchange, the only option is to buy on credit, this is what has been happening for a long time now.  Well, nobody can afford unlimited growth of credit debts, the borrower eventually goes bankrupt.. or has to murder the creditor(s).   The rising wave of hatred toward China in the US is nothing but the normal  hatred of a debtor to a creditor, justification of a planned murder. 

Except... at this time the US is militarily stronger than China, but insufficiently so to risk a war. Both countries need time, and the Chinese are much more capable planners ... this makes an of a war in say 2025 even more questionable... the US will likely lose such a delayed war even if Russia stays out of the fight.   

Are there other options ?  

But of course:

1.  Re-industrialize the US and return to competitive capitalist model from the current socialist. 
  (Trump is talking about it, not really doing anything, and this is even more questionable than a war on China.)

2.  Create a positive cash flow by improving the balance with everyone by a bit... raping everyone a bit, if I may say so.
 (Trump is doing this, so far he successfully raped Mexico, Canada and the KSA.  But raping Mexico and Canada more seriously is just not possible without socially destabilizing these countries ... and doing this in due course would make it impossible for the US to be even a regional power. And KSA has its limits too...)

3.  Kill and loot someone else, this idea is as American as an apple pie.... it was done so many, many times already.
  Lately :  Iraq,  Libya,  Syria.   The first two did not help all that much, the third was a total disaster for the US.   
  Who is out there to rape?  
  Russia? Not quite possible, despite best efforts over many years now.
  Iran? Not enough gain, and very costly...at best a temporary relief.... albeit Trump is surely thinking.
  Africa, Latin America, Middle East : no worthy objects ... albeit Trump is busy with his Yemen genocide project.... Yemen is not large enough to help the US, only large enough to help the KSA... but the KSA may die from indigestion first.
  Mexico, Canada -- untouchable.
   
  Well, this leaves one and only one target: Europe. Rich enough to make it worth looting and weak militarily ... Europe already gave the US two very profitable world wars, it can give one more.  And it will, regardless of who is running the US, Trump or some Clintohonthas.... it is the best option on the table...  it will give the US reprieve of 10... or 15 ... or maybe even 25 years ... 

  it is all so simple, really. S6
Reply
#27
mv Wrote:nobody can afford unlimited growth of credit debts

No no! The US can. The US doesn't need any of your 3 options above. They can borrow in infinite numbers.
23 trillions is close to infinity. If they could reach such number, it means nobody pays attention anymore on how deep in debt they are.

It's probably the only country in the world to be able to do that.

They will borrow indefinitely (or at least until the end of civilisation). It's option 4/.
The most difficult with this option is that you have to force yourself to never take care. One of the solution would be stopping keeping records of the debt level and pretend it's always zero. That's what debtors to the US already do. They lend to the US as if there weren't already a cosmic size debt.

I have no debt but if I want to borrow it will cost me 10% annually. The US has a $23 trillion debt, yet can borrow at 2.4%. Finds the error.
Reply
#28
(11-03-2018, 08:11 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: They will borrow indefinitely (or at least until the end of civilisation). It's option 4/. .

Nobody can.  Servicing the borrowings eventually drains all the money from the budget.  At this time US debt is serviceable but only because the interest rates are artificially low.  
Current result :  no growth in the US since 2008. 
This is the slow death scenario, vs. the fast death that would occur if the rates come up.

And the EU is in the same boat.

It may be that the current ugly anti-Chinese hysteria is the result of China not increasing their investments into the US debt, not of anything else.



A bit of an offtopic:

I've been researching family history for the last couple of years ... found many amusing things, including a direct ancestor from 200 years ago who believed in borrowing.   At the time he was employed as a mayor of a major city (provincial capital) and he borrowed freely, seemingly interest-free, because you do not refuse when a powerful person asks you for money. 

Eventually, he moved to the next job -- six feet under -- and the creditors suddenly remembered all the money he owed them.

Historical records from that period are very sketchy, so I even do not know the exact dates of his rule, and the city history museum managed not to have a list of their mayors (?!)... but the materials of the court case survived, and it was rather interesting to read them.

Basically, Shiite hit the fan ...
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#29
Jack Ma, Alibaba CEO Wrote:The U.S.-China trade war is the most stupid thing in this world
link

I disagree. Brexit comes first.



mv Wrote:It may be that the current ugly anti-Chinese hysteria is the result of China not increasing their investments into the US debt, not of anything else.
Yes it could be. So far it has been sort of a compensation. But the Chinese are not interested anymore and also started to need their money.
I'm sure that if Xi offers to buy a quantity of T-bonds (Trump Bonds), Trump will take it as "a fair deal".

mv Wrote:six feet under -- and the creditors suddenly remembered all the money he owed them.

That's true almost every time. And also with countries.
Once the US will disappear, everybody will ask their money back. As long as it still there everybody think it's safe investment. Go figure.

mv Wrote:And the EU is in the same boat.
Yes and no. The EU as a juridical body has no debt. All the debts are national. If it's true that the combined debt of all EU states is not far from the US debt, the EU itself doesn't owe anything to anyone.
But they are buying national treasury bonds to help indebted countries like Italy and Spain (I think the program was about to end soon).

Some people would like that the EU starts to borrow the same way the US borrows, allowing a multi-trillion pile up of debt on top of existing national debts. Fortunately rational Germany disagrees.
Reply
#30
Quote:Once the US will disappear, everybody will ask their money back. As long as it still there everybody think it's safe investment. Go figure.

Not quite.  Once the US disappears, there will be no money to get back.

But dumping US debt right now in large amounts is not a good option: it will devalue the debt.  China, for example, cannot dump 1 trillion dollars that the US owes them in one step.  Russia -- which owned only about $100 billion at the peak -- dumped nearly all of it and is out of trouble.... but this was a much lesser amount.


So China is staying put : the amount of debt they own is not increasing or decreasing.  Same for most others... the US debt increases are now financed exclusively by the US ! -- meaning Feds -- meaning dollar is being devalued rapidly.

Quote:I'm sure that if Xi offers to buy a quantity of T-bonds (Trump Bonds), Trump will take it as "a fair deal".

I suspect Trump already suggested this,... only problem is that Xi is not stupid.  

===

As for the EU : yes, of course, it is country by country, and some are in much worse shape than others. Italy is deep Shia, Brits are in deepening Shia, French are relatively ok, Germany is somewhere in the middle.
Reply
#31
mv Wrote:Not quite. Once the US disappears, there will be no money to get back.

But that was the point, mv: People starts to worry about getting their money back when there is no money left.
It happens in all financial crisis.

mv Wrote:,... only problem is that Xi is not stupid.
I think Trump should stick with playing with Kim Yun Un and the likes. He shouldn't try to play in the big yard.
Reply
#32
A WIN BY WASHINGTON STANDARDS

reuters Wrote:Trump last month hailed a renegotiated trade pact

Yeah. S20 my  Hiney 
By Washington's standard (the White House in DC not the  first president) and by people expectations in reality are two, very very different things.

US farmers Wrote:Please buy our soybeans
S7
... S28

U.S. automakers Wrote:U.S. automakers and parts suppliers on Thursday urged the Trump administration to end steel and aluminum tariffs on Mexico and Canada and warned that potential U.S. national security tariffs on automotive imports would lead to widespread job losses.

....

And the failure of the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) to lift steel and aluminum tariffs have also cost the industry billions of dollars and trade turmoil in general has paralyzed investment decisions, they said.  
S17
link reuters
Reply
#33
Harvesting in a trade war: U.S. crops rot

WmLambert Wrote:You can't blame Trump

No: That would be immoral. S2
Reply
#34
I saw a similar story about soybeans today.

Since it is not conceivable that they are destroying both wheat and soybeans and the stories are very similar, I conclude these are fakes and the orang is correct in grading himself with an A+. S6
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#35
(11-22-2018, 03:06 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Harvesting in a trade war: U.S. crops rot

WmLambert Wrote:You can't blame Trump

No: That would be immoral. S2

In principle I agree with you Fred.  However, what is going on is really a war: a trade war in which PRC has been winning by default.  And not with just the US, but other countries that exchange trade with them.  Its all about prohibitive tariffs imposed by one on to the other.  As a true Liberal, I'm a certified "Free Trader". but it really takes two to tango well, and that has not been the case of late.

While The Donald is free with words/tweets, he has carefully studied the terrible trade imbalance with the Chinese, and he is determined to hunker down and make major changes.  And he is holding his nose and do what he really doesn't like.  But he is doing this from a Strategic position, because he knows it's a Win-Win in the long run with the US.  China is in deep economic Schist, and their debt to GDP ratio is horrible, making the US's ratio look like small fries.  The Chinese cannot keep this up.

Further, we are entering the next Grand Solar Minimum, and guess who suffers most during them?  If you say "The Chinese" YOU WIN!  Every Chinese dynasty throughout history has collapsed during a GSM, and there is no reason to think differently this time around.  Chinese crops are failing due to cold climate.  They have been investing heavily in Africa for some time, because they are aware of their precarious position.  But I doubt they can prevail.  They are going to have to capitulate, and soon, or............................ Shock

This is why Trump is playing high stakes poker here.  He has at least a Straight Flush, if not a Royal Straight Flush, and knows it.  And PRC knows it as well.  They have already been trying to cut a deal with him by making outside concessions, but The Donald is holding out for The Real Concessions.   After all, he is paying farmers for their losses, because the stakes are high and he is holding such a great hand.  

If PRC doesn't play ball AND come to the table with meaningful concessions, they are in Deep Kimchi, as we used to say in Korea.   S5
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#36
(11-22-2018, 03:20 PM)mv Wrote: I saw a similar story about soybeans today.

Since it is not conceivable that they are destroying both wheat and soybeans and the stories are very similar, I conclude these are fakes and the orang is correct in grading himself with an A+. S6

[Image: dmrb20703.jpg]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#37
I see a milk substitute for sale in Kroger's made from almonds. (I like the sweetened, vanilla-flavored.) It tastes even better than soymilk. Some people are sensitive to soy products. Meanwhile, there are other plant sources of protein besides soybeans. It is easy to get sufficient protein, since even if some beans are low in the amino acid methionine, corn has plenty, while being low in lysine. Put them together, and they complement each other. The body breaks the proteins down into amino acids, stores them in the bile, and recombines them as needed. Eat beans and grains, and you will always get plenty of balanced protein. (Although if you are going to eat beans, I also recommend Beano!) S1
Reply
#38
(11-22-2018, 04:56 PM)Ron Lambert Wrote: I see a milk substitute for sale in Kroger's made from almonds. (I like the sweetened, vanilla-flavored.) It tastes even better than soymilk. Some people are sensitive to soy products. Meanwhile, there are other plant sources of protein besides soybeans. It is easy to get sufficient protein, since even if some beans are low in the amino acid methionine, corn has plenty, while being low in lysine. Put them together, and they complement each other. The body breaks the proteins down into amino acids, stores them in the bile, and recombines them as needed. Eat beans and grains, and you will always get plenty of balanced protein. (Although if you are going to eat beans, I also recommend Beano!) S1

I use almond milk as one of the ingredients in my ice creaming making. I have a nice machine that can make up to two quarts of homemade ice cream without having to do it the old fashioned way.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#39
No arguments here, I simply dislike soy in general. S6

I'd be very careful about making any predictions about the outcome of the current trade war, scenarios are many. Not betting, but if I were to, I'd surely bet on China.

And I'd be yet more careful with predictions of the possible results of the ice age. That it is happening, no question now, and it is quite likely a bigger one than the Little IA (Maunder) was. In fact, I'm sorry that we have no real data for the 1st millennium ... how deep was the ice age in the 5th-8th centuries? Anyway, the coming one is deep, perhaps 8C temp drop average, and this will hit everyone. Together with the shortage of energy, hit big.
But the unknowns are too many, for instance, even if the IA onset is indeed 2020 as I hear now, how long it will take till the temperature drop has an effect?

At a temperature drop of 2-3C, the smart idea for China would be to colonize North America.... at a temperature drop of 8c, North America is worthless, and indeed, Africa smells nice.

Regardless, I think the trade war will conclude before the onset of the Ice Age.
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#40
Here is a bit more on the Trump's war.  There are more than three BIG problems, but here are three.

1. China is a stronger player. IMF stats for 2017:

[Image: 85a28f305e95555e21319f4df4e0eb4b.jpg]

Actually the data here is misleading for two reasons: US total has lots of vaporware in it (financial services, overbloated software companies), should be divided by about half (industrial GDP under 12); and then one should subtract accumulated debt from the total.  Likewise, the UK number should be considerably reduced, little manufacturing, and a lot of banking, France is actually a larger economy!  In passing, notice the positioning of Russia -- due to beneficial results of anti-Russian sanctions... goes to the point of unpredictability of sanction/tariff politices.  And notice that Juncler's promise -- no EU country in the G7 by 2030 -- is very close to the fulfillment already.

2.  China is currently the strongest industrial power, the US is one of the big agricultural powers.  We saw what happens with the US agricultural production, no longer welcome in China. The counterpart effect is what happens to the Chinese industrial production, welcomed but tariffed in the US. Well, see here.   This is entirely logical, US business depends on the Chinese imports, and they want to survive Trump!  Perhaps a good indicator of Trump's success in his war on the US business will be the stock price of Walmart, shall it collapse we can claim Trump's success.

3.  In any war, one should define the goal.  The Orang did not specify one, instead he used kindergarten rhetoric of fairness... good enough for brainwashed faithful, perhaps....  But indeed:  trade balance can be fixed by either US increasing its exports to China (not possible -- US does not produce anything China wants).. or but cutting Chinese exports to the US (in which case the unbalance will be shifted to the US trade with other countries -- no difference to the US!).  Meanwhile, tariffs.... it is an extra income, and significant, for the US treasury .. but just who do you think is/will be paying them?  The answer is obvious: Trump effected a huge tax increase, perhaps the largest tax increase in the history of the US!

More generally : tariffs are a weapon, of limited usability, and when used by amateur apes are just as likely to misfire than to achieve anything.
Successful use of tariffs is generally limited to the situations when a country wants to build up domestic production and thus makes imports more costly.  Examples are the EU tariffs  on agricultural production (France is the main beneficiary, US et al are loser, I think the Orang calls this unfair), or Putin use of counter-sanctions which caused the current rapid growth.    Without a re-industrialization in the US, Orang's wars are pointless.

[Image: 220px-Orang_Utan%2C_Semenggok_Forest_Res...laysia.JPG]
Sodomia delenda est

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)