Trump's Trade War

[TornACL 7792]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

They're well aware of that. Helping the rich get richer (and making the poor poorer) is the goal for them, not the means to some other end.

I enjoy the middle class Republicans who think they're much wealthier than they actually are, so they mistakenly believe that these policies benefit them.

[Biff Tannen 46163]

45 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

One of these days middle class Republicans are going to realize that helping the rich get richer does nothing for the economy.

But for that to happen I guess they would have to understand something about economics.

Um, I was told it trickles down.  But I think it's just piss.

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

13 minutes ago, TornACL said:

I enjoy the middle class Republicans who think they're much wealthier than they actually are, so they mistakenly believe that these policies benefit them.

See this all the time.

[bad_teammate 13511]

1 hour ago, Larry T. Spider said:

It’s not about them, it’s about the American economy losing hundreds of billions of dollars due to the mad mad in charge. I get that you don’t give a shit if it hurts the rich, but the problems won’t stop there. People that can least afford to lose jobs will be out of work. Anybody will a retirement account will also be hurt.

That was my point. Look at the post I was responding to.

[wildcat09 29579]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

So why have they fallen hard only on the Asian side?

Hundreds of billions of dollars worth of stock buybacks from the tax cuts have kept the stock market afloat for now.

Edited July 6, 2018 by wildcat09

[swraith 348]

^^^ maybe.


Intellectually I oppose the implementation of these tariffs. But empirically, the US equities markets do not reflect any significant concern about the tariffs. Until we see equities sell offs that might reflect Wall St predicting a recession, the continued hyperbolic news coverage seems over blown.

I don’t support the tariffs, but this isn’t the political hill to die on. Pick other political battles to fight.

[kevwun 16437]

People getting laid off isn't overblown.  They lost their jobs because Trump can't keep his stupid mouth shut.

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

They took his job?

 

[TwiceHorn 32076]

On 6/29/2018 at 2:18 PM, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I guess Abbott was in the camp of "I don't think Trump literally means what he says", until Trump literally means what he says.

Nah, he's in the GOP camp, which means "I have no clue why anyone votes for me or who they are, but they voted for Trump, so  . . . ."

[Tuco 5093]

^^^ maybe.


Intellectually I oppose the implementation of these tariffs. But empirically, the US equities markets do not reflect any significant concern about the tariffs. Until we see equities sell offs that might reflect Wall St predicting a recession, the continued hyperbolic news coverage seems over blown.

I don’t support the tariffs, but this isn’t the political hill to die on. Pick other political battles to fight.

I think you underestimate the stupidity of Wall Street and the absurd pro-Republican propaganda which are the business news channels. FoxBusiness makes FoxNews look like MSNBC.

[GRHorn 105]

5 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Do you think the current market effects are going to be the extent of the repercussions felt in the US? Does it matter which country sees more drastic results? Are you aware new Chinese tarriffs went into effect at 12:01 this morning? Do you think there will be more or less actions by foreign states to counter current US trade practices?

stop being lazy. Even die hard trump supporters realize this will hurt

1)no

2)yes

3)yes

4)probably more

I never said it wouldn’t hurt.  There’s gonna be winners and losers. I would prefer there’d be no tariffs anywhere, honestly.

The stock markets are not the be all, end all, but they are one indicator of capital flows and the initial verdict is that the trade war is far worse for China and Asia.

 

[GRHorn 105]

20 minutes ago, Tuco said:

 

I think you underestimate the stupidity of Wall Street and the absurd pro-Republican propaganda which are the business news channels. FoxBusiness makes FoxNews look like MSNBC.

 

I’m not sure how you think Wall St could be affected “Pro-Republican propaganda”.  These people are just about making money.  The opinions of Lou Dobbs and the Money Honey mean nothing as far as moving markets.  Cmon man. 

[Horn Dog 10158]

If trump’s trade war can simultaneously....

- get China’s attention and stop them from ripping off our nation’s intellectual property

- leave his hardcore MAGA supporters bankrupt and destitute 

- rip the party of Putin into shreds and walking the desert for a generation 

-decrease the number of BMW driving assholes on the road

...well, then I may have to rethink my opposition.  

[swraith 348]

I think you underestimate the stupidity of Wall Street and the absurd pro-Republican propaganda which are the business news channels. FoxBusiness makes FoxNews look like MSNBC.

If someone claims they have changed their investment portfolio asset allocation to reflect a full blown recession, then I give them major props for putting their money where their mouth is.

It is easy to claim the economy or equity markets will suffer from these tariffs. It is entirely another level of commitment to risk your personal wealth on such a claim or risk your job (if you are in the hedge fund business). So far, we have seen individual stocks suffer from the tariffs. But the broader equity indexes and macro economic indicators do not reflect the tariff news coverage.

[Ghost of LL 15698]

If someone claims they have changed their investment portfolio asset allocation to reflect a full blown recession, then I give them major props for putting their money where their mouth is.

It is easy to claim the economy or equity markets will suffer from these tariffs. It is entirely another level of commitment to risk your personal wealth on such a claim or risk your job (if you are in the hedge fund business). So far, we have seen individual stocks suffer from the tariffs. But the broader equity indexes and macro economic indicators do not reflect the tariff news coverage.

For the record, I talked to my broker today. I’m going to a significantly more conservative than the portfolio has been. I’m still heavily in equities, but it’s being shifted to more conservative equities. And with interest rates going up, I’m going to be holding more in a cash position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SDG 3336]

How did China's economy do in 2008 when our housing bubble burst?  From what I recollect they were hit pretty hard because of how much of their economy and citizen investments are tied to ours.  If that remains true than a trade war may not be as bad as some here suggest...          

[Goredho 17652]

On 6/23/2018 at 3:10 PM, Cacti said:

 

It appears that China—as well as our allies and neutral countries—take a different view; that is, they seem to think that a “win-lose scenario” works just fine, as long as they have a trade surplus with us.

Look, Trump’s approach is confrontational, unsophisticated and brutish, and while those tactics may be successful or tolerable in the business world it is doubtful they will succeed on the international, political stage. But why is it not acceptable to at least try to have more favorable terms for us? We’ve currently running deficits with the E.U., with N.A.F.T.A., with China (of course), as well as with Japan, Vietnam, South Korea, Taiwan, and so forth. And we’ve tolerated this trade one-sidedness for over forty years; isn’t it past time to at least try and restore some sense of balance?

Tolerated?  We are a shallow people addicted to consumption.  We’ve demanded it.

[David Dennison 19534]

8 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

They're well aware of that. Helping the rich get richer (and making the poor poorer) is the goal for them, not the means to some other end.

So they'd rather get poorer as long as the poors don't get less poor.

What a bunch of assholes.

[GRHorn 105]

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

For the record, I talked to my broker today. I’m going to a significantly more conservative than the portfolio has been. I’m still heavily in equities, but it’s being shifted to more conservative equities. And with interest rates going up, I’m going to be holding more in a cash position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a reasonable approach to take, even without a threat of a trade war. 

[David Dennison 19534]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

Ask all of the American companies who manufacture goods in China.

[wildcat09 29579]

42 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

Hence why China is already taking efforts to team up with everyone else in the world that we’re also pissing off to isolate us.

[zork 629]

11 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

They took his jerb?

 

fify

[TornACL 7792]

8 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

This smacks of cutting off your nose to spite your face. 

[retread 2951]

Those lib tears tho

[Redneck Mutha 8176]

7 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Hence why China is already taking efforts to team up with everyone else in the world that we’re also pissing off to isolate us.

Correct.  Taking on China alone isn't a great idea in the short term, and it may have worked in the long run (although I have strong doubts about that).  But when we start fucking with the EU, CAN, MEX, they will all work together and just freeze us out.

More and more companies will follow Harley's lead, taking a hit up front to move production to Europe and Asia, which will pay off for them in the long run.  China will also help expedite these moves by attracting companies with incentives, low cost labor, and better trade deals that they have with the rest of the world - our former trade partners.  The long term impacts of this will fuck the American economy bigly.

[ChickenSandwich 9958]

Excluding China, how many EU countries combined does it take to match the spending of the US economy?  

Do Mexico and Canada move the import/export needle on their own in regards to trading from European countries?

how does China’s investment in US debt play into this. Same nose/face/spite situation?  Lots of moving parts. 

[Redneck Mutha 8176]

8 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

If the Chinese want to go on for indefinitely, which could easily happen if they team up with other countries, are American consumers prepared to suffer higher product prices at home and American companies prepared to suffer lower demand for their products overseas indefinitely?  

Harley has already made plans to ensure they don't lose market share outside the US.  Expect more and more companies to follow their lead. 

[GRHorn 105]

There's lots of ways China can retaliate.  Looks like they're trying currency devaluation.  Yuan down 5% vs the dollar this year.  That will have unintended consequences as well.  Hopefully Trump and Xi can sit down again for some chocolate cake some time in the next year and come to a new arrangement.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

11 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Ultimately there’s way more imports from China for us to tax than vice versa.  So, how far do the Chinese wanna go?

Ultimately, there are way more purchases from HEB for us to tax than vice versa. So how far do the Butts want to go?

Edited July 7, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[FondrenRoad 4378]

14 hours ago, swraith said:

 

If someone claims they have changed their investment portfolio asset allocation to reflect a full blown recession, then I give them major props for putting their money where their mouth is.

It is easy to claim the economy or equity markets will suffer from these tariffs. It is entirely another level of commitment to risk your personal wealth on such a claim or risk your job (if you are in the hedge fund business). So far, we have seen individual stocks suffer from the tariffs. But the broader equity indexes and macro economic indicators do not reflect the tariff news coverage.

 

The overall equity market hasn't reflected economic reality in quite some time. It may as well be baseball card collecting. Stock values are influenced by earnings, but not controlled by them. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

It's not just about which country it will hurt more, but which country is willing to endure the consequences longer.   I wouldn't bet on China buckling first simply because its people are suffering more. 

[GRHorn 105]

2 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

The overall equity market hasn't reflected economic reality in quite some time. It may as well be baseball card collecting. Stock values are influenced by earnings, but not controlled by them. 

Valuations have been stretched around the world the last few years.  That’s not the point.  The point is the divergence that’s happened since trade war talk really amped up. 

[Hefeweizen 5444]

7 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Valuations have been stretched around the world the last few years.  That’s not the point.  The point is the divergence that’s happened since trade war talk really amped up. 

You're trying way too hard to excuse stupid behavior.  Your tribe isn't winning.  More American manufacturers now have an incentive to move production out of country, to avoid tariffs.  Do you think that will increase jobs in the US?  I'm guessing not.  Service industries should continue to flourish, as will knowledge based consulting.  But manufacturing is going to go down the tubes with tariffs.  We already have high production and labor cost.  The last thing we need is additional tariffs.  

 

But  keep sipping libtard tears, they will keep you healthy when Trump's economy (which is a stupid concept, but tariffs are the one way a president can directly press on the scales) crashes and burns.  And it will, unfortunately for all of us.

[Brisketexan 106889]

You're trying way too hard to excuse stupid behavior.  Your tribe isn't winning.  More American manufacturers now have an incentive to move production out of country, to avoid tariffs.  Do you think that will increase jobs in the US?  I'm guessing not.  Service industries should continue to flourish, as will knowledge based consulting.  But manufacturing is going to go down the tubes with tariffs.  We already have high production and labor cost.  The last thing we need is additional tariffs.  
 
But  keep sipping libtard tears, they will keep you healthy when Trump's economy (which is a stupid concept, but tariffs are the one way a president can directly press on the scales) crashes and burns.  And it will, unfortunately for all of us.

The argument here is akin to arguing that the guy who ends up losing two limbs wins, because the other guy lost three limbs.

Go back to the beginning. It’s stupid to cut off limbs. If you end up missing two limbs, you’re worse off than when we started.

[Hornius Emeritus 12801]

Can anybody think of a historical instance in which wealth was increasingly concentrated in fewer and fewer hands that did not result in revolt/revolution?

[GRHorn 105]

22 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

You're trying way too hard to excuse stupid behavior.  Your tribe isn't winning.  More American manufacturers now have an incentive to move production out of country, to avoid tariffs.  Do you think that will increase jobs in the US?  I'm guessing not.  Service industries should continue to flourish, as will knowledge based consulting.  But manufacturing is going to go down the tubes with tariffs.  We already have high production and labor cost.  The last thing we need is additional tariffs.  

 

But  keep sipping libtard tears, they will keep you healthy when Trump's economy (which is a stupid concept, but tariffs are the one way a president can directly press on the scales) crashes and burns.  And it will, unfortunately for all of us.

You must be hallucinating. It’s common on this board.

I haven’t tried to excuse the tariffs. I said I wished there were no tariffs.  When I cited the effects on the markets, I was merely pointing out things actually resulting from the tariffs.  It’s interesting because it’s not exactly what a lot of people would have expected.  Take that for what you will, but try not to put words in my mouth, or say I’ve stated things that I didn’t. 

[Brew 3049]

The people on the different sides of this have been interesting. One of my largest agriculture clients just came out nationally against the tariffs. This family has been devout R’s for as long as I can remember but they are putting significant money behind the D’s this year. On the flip side, my largest client is in the steel business and they have become Trump's biggest supporters. The effect on the back pocket dictates loyalty in these large entities.

[atomheartbevo 90642]

9 hours ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

Can anybody think of a historical instance in which wealth was increasingly concentrated in fewer and fewer hands that did not result in revolt/revolution?

I can’t think of a time when so many people thought they were wealthier, or at least more well off, than they actually are.

For that matter, I can’t think of a time when so many in the lower classes actually think they will be able to reach middle/upper class.

Both of these groups will be heavily disappointed at some point.

[zork 629]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I can’t think of a time when so many people thought they were wealthier, or at least more well off, than they actually are.

For that matter, I can’t think of a time when so many in the lower classes actually think they will be able to reach middle/upper class.

Both of these groups will be heavily disappointed at some point.

Is that because the SHTF at some point driving them/us into an abyss? (even metaphorically like september 2008 Lehman Brothers super crash X what multiple)  Or just that when they reach 55 or 60 years old, or whatever age, and they might realize they didn't achieve all they thought?  Where are you going with the 'heavily disappointed' part and what percentages of what demographics are you guessing?

[F250 29199]

42 minutes ago, Brew said:

The effect on the back pocket dictates loyalty in these large entities.

As was discussed previously in this thread, tariffs are a huge incentive for rent seeking behavior. One of my biggest problems with Trump is that he has actively encouraged rent seeking from the get go. This should be troubling for anyone that is a fan of the free market.

 

 

 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

200 billion more

 https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/10/politics/ustr-new-china-tariffs-trump/index.html

Quote

The Trump administration is readying another round of tariffs on Chinese goods worth $200 billion.

Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Tuesday released a list of additional goods that could face 10% tariffs after a public comment period. It includes seafood, fruit and vegetables, yarn, wool, rain jackets and baseball gloves.

 

[Incredulity 11876]

On 7/7/2018 at 9:19 AM, FondrenRoad said:

The overall equity market hasn't reflected economic reality in quite some time. It may as well be baseball card collecting. Stock values are influenced by earnings, but not controlled by them. 

Its my father, circa 1986.

[Washpark 176]

Quote

 

The president’s latest move was criticised by Orrin Hatch, the Republican senator who chairs the powerful finance committee. “Although I have supported the administration’s targeted efforts to combat China’s technology transfer regime, tonight’s announcement appears reckless and is not a targeted approach,” he said.

In an unusually strident warning, Kevin Brady, the Texas Republican who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, said that despite the rising economic risks there were no serious trade discussions going on between China and the US and no plans for talks soon. He urged Mr Trump to meet directly with Xi Jinping, Chinese president, to hammer out a solution.

Mr Brady said: “With this announcement, it’s clear the escalating trade dispute with China will go one of two ways — a long, multiyear trade war between the two largest economies in the world that engulfs more and more of the globe, or a deliberate decision by President Trump and President Xi to meet and begin crafting an agreement that levels the playing field between China and the US for local farmers, workers and businesses.”

 

https://www.ft.com/content/fd907b80-8493-11e8-96dd-fa565ec55929

 

[retread 2951]

For Hatch ever to ascribe any forethought or deep understanding to the DOTUS WH is laughable.

[Pig Bellmont 8885]

 

[Js1 87178]

Are we still winning the trade war?

Mission accomplished?

[retread 2951]

'level playing field' ... once they go out of business

 

[Royalfan5 2384]

Just now, retread said:

'level playing field' ... once they go out of business

 

Off 50% from record levels in the middle of world wide drought in 2012. Now back to late Bush era levels, while Brazil sells soybeans 1.60 higher than ours because of the tariffs. And the done poorly for the last 15 years is complete bullshit, give the massive incomes in 10,11,12, and decent years after that. 

[Hefeweizen 5444]

There's lots of ways China can retaliate.  Looks like they're trying currency devaluation.  Yuan down 5% vs the dollar this year.  That will have unintended consequences as well.  Hopefully Trump and Xi can sit down again for some chocolate cake some time in the next year and come to a new arrangement.  

Winning even more today. Will we ever get tired of winning so bigly?