Trump's Trade War

[HenryJames 65,887]

 

[4th&Five 41,457]

so they respect us again?

[hayden_horn 11,360]

Quote

Mr. Juncker grabbed the opportunity to argue that both sides need to refrain from further punitive tariffs or they would foolishly harm themselves.

“If you want to be stupid,” he told Mr. Trump, “I can be stupid, as well.”

lulz

[Bateshorn 9,898]

I may just be an unfrozen cave man lawyer, but the agreement to negotiate sure does look like the terms we were discussing with the Europeans under Hussein.

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

3 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I may just be an unfrozen cave man lawyer, but the agreement to negotiate sure does look like the terms we were discussing with the Europeans under Hussein.

Now but now a white president is doing it, so it's legit. 

[Storm the Field 5,271]

9 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I may just be an unfrozen cave man lawyer, but the agreement to negotiate sure does look like the terms we were discussing with the Europeans under Hussein.

President Macho Genius just threw his weight around and....got the EU to re-engage on a less comprehensive version of TTIP than he had previously scuttled. 

Edited July 26, 2018 by Storm the Field

[Bozo_Casanova 26,277]

17 hours ago, F250 said:

A trade deficit means we have a surplus of capital that is due to the inflow of foreign investment. This a good thing as it's a sign of a healthy economy. There is nothing wrong with a trade deficit. Trade deficits accompany economic expansions. Our domestic demand for goods and services is outpacing our domestic supply so we import, in turn we receive foreign investment from the money spent on imports. In other words, the money we spent on imports returns back to our economy plus our consumers benefit from the lower cost of out sourcing the production of goods and services. It's a win/win situation.

Anyways, David Dennison is correct. Backing out of a chaotic situation you created isn't fixing things.

 

This is an elegant explanation for something I've tried to explain to Swam and others before, and so is @DixonHur's post above. Unfortunately, swam don't potato economics.

Edited July 26, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[Huckleberry 32,694]

There's a reason he's not Learned@Texas

[HenryJames 65,887]

Swam@TexasState

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

Quote

“Suddenly Trump came out into our group and asked, ‘So, where are we now? Where is the statement?’ ” the EU official said. “We said, ‘We haven’t seen it yet, because your people are still negotiating among themselves.’ ”

Outside the Cabinet Room, where the meetings took place, the push to stage the unplanned announcement was under way. White House officials and Marines in dress uniform worked quickly to set up podiums and display the U.S. and EU flags at the edge of the Rose Garden. Journalists were called to the event with little warning or information and stood in the garden for close to an hour, waiting for any sign of the U.S. and EU officials.

A child is leading our country.  Good job idiots.

[Dolemite 143]

 

[Swam@Texas 112]

And here's a detailed explanation on why the DO matter, especially in the wake of/as a contributor to the loss of manufacturing jobs. 

Quote

To start, it’s not inherently a problem for a country to have a trade deficit. For example, a fast-growing economy pulls in more imports as it expands, which pushes a country’s international trade account toward deficit. In that context a trade deficit is good for the economy, allowing the country to consume and invest more than if it maintained balanced trade. This was the story in 2000 when, after four years of strong growth, the American economy had an unemployment rate of 4 percent and a trade deficit that amounted to 3.7 percent of GDP.

But that story ended after the recession in 2001. The economy didn’t get back the jobs it lost in 2001 until January of 2005—then the slowest employment recovery since the Great Depression (it’s since been outdone in slowness by the recovery following the Great Recession). The trade deficit during this period continued to rise—the dollar was then over-valued, making U.S. goods less competitive internationally—eventually peaking at almost 6 percent of GDP in 2005 and 2006. In the early aughts, then, the growing deficit was not associated with a strong economy but a weak one. ...

What effect does all this have on American workers? Trade deficits, even in times of strong growth, have negative, concentrated impacts on the quantity and quality of jobs in parts of the country where manufacturing employment diminishes. Even the economists who argue (incorrectly, we believe) that the trade deficit doesn’t affect the total number of jobs do admit that it affects the composition of jobs. There is, for example, a lot of research confirming that deindustrialization in the Rust Belt is partly a result of the fact that America meets its domestic demand for manufactured goods by importing more than it exports. One oft-cited academic study found that imbalanced trade with China led to the loss of more than 2 million U.S. jobs between 1991 and 2011, about half of which were in manufacturing (which worked out to 17 percent of manufacturing jobs overall during that time).* Further, the economist Josh Bivens found that in 2011 the cost of imbalanced trade with low-wage countries cost workers without college degrees 5.5 percent of their annual earnings (about $1,800). Far from a small, isolated group, these workers represent two-thirds of the American workforce.

But as the average Shaggy liberal lawyer couldn't care less about the plight of America's middle class -- wrongly assuming Barack Hussein Obama, II was correct in saying those manufacturing jobs weren't coming back -- there can be no acknowledgement of learned economists making an argument of why trade deficits DO matter and why Trump's victories in trade wars with the EU and China will eventually benefit most Americans. Here are some folks who understand that, though. Their steel mill has opened up two blast furnaces since The Donald went to Washington. 

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/12/trump-trade-deficit/509912/

[Brisketexan 104,557]

I love when folks ignore the punch line.

 

 

 

The goal of trade policy should thus be to push back on U.S. trade deficits without distorting current trade flows. Large tariffs like the ones Trump has proposed won’t work, nor will preventing offshoring one company at a time, as he did with some of the jobs that the air-conditioning company Carrier was going to shift to Mexico.[/Quote]

 

Love the Steel mill jobs. And how many downstream jobs have been lost because of the tariffs and price increases? Net job analysis, that’s what matters.

 

[FWD 297]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

I may just be an unfrozen cave man lawyer, but the agreement to negotiate sure does look like the terms we were discussing with the Europeans under Hussein.

Yeah, Trump dropped the threat of auto tariffs and agreed to re-open the TTIP talks that he had scuttled earlier. Europe got both things they wanted and didn't give anything up. It was unilateral disarmament by Trump, which means he is going to focus on China and didn't want to fight a two-front trade war.

[kevwun 15,620]

Until he also caves in to China and gets nothing out of the deal.  It's how operates.

Edited July 26, 2018 by kevwun

[TornACL 7,675]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

TARIFF = SAD FACE

TRADE WAR = ANGRY FACE

TRADE DEAL = TWO HAPPY FACES HOLDING HANDS

 

[TornACL 7,675]

I have to say, I always enjoy when Swam is pressed on his knowledge of a subject. He can never succinctly articulate his point, so he throws a link to an article that fails to even address the issue at hand. And then has the audacity to challenge people to read it and "educate yourself".

Quite the grasp of the issue, my man! Good job, good effort!

[seven 1,366]

Swamism is a mental disease 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Seems like Trump is desperately trying to delay the consequences of his terrible policies until after the elections, at which point he will go right back to what he was doing.   EU should press its advantage, but I guess they don't think it's worth the risk to their economies. 

[F250 28,679]

This is a good article on why Trump's trade war is detrimental to U.S. trade.

 

 

[F250 28,679]

51 minutes ago, TornACL said:

I have to say, I always enjoy when Swam is pressed on his knowledge of a subject. He can never succinctly articulate his point, so he throws a link to an article that fails to even address the issue at hand. And then has the audacity to challenge people to read it and "educate yourself".

Quite the grasp of the issue, my man! Good job, good effort!

Not only did the article not address the issue he is arguing but he seems to be oblivious to the irony of him even posting that link.

There have been numerous references to the Cato Institute and The Economist in this thread made by "Anti-Trump Libtards." Swam then links an article to The Atlantic written by two economists that work for left leaning think tanks. on top of that, one of them was an economic advisor for uncle Joe during the Barack Hussein Obama administration!

Swam needs to get a fucking ethos.

[Brisketexan 104,557]

This is a good article on why Trump's trade war is detrimental to U.S. trade.
 
 

Well, but the Economist is a libtard rag, cuz they don’t fellate Trump, so....

[Huckleberry 32,694]

3 hours ago, F250 said:

Swam needs to get a fucking ethos.

He has one, it's (R)ism.

Swam is the kind of person who if he had Swam4PennState would defend Joe Paterno until his very last breath. There is team and then there is everything else.

[DixonHur 11,170]

11 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

He has one, it's (R)acism.

Swam is the kind of person who if he had Swam4PennState would defend Joe Paterno until his very last breath. There is team and then there is everything else.

Fify

[JimmyJames 12,271]

Good to see swammy back. The idiocy on the board is much less amusing without him. 

His main argument in this thread appears to be that Obama’s middle name is Hussein. Confusing, but I guess accomplishes it’s simple minded goal. 

So I guess swam supports trade wars, worldwide economic depression, and all that results from it. As long as he can somehow blame Obama Hussein. 

Will someone please tell me he only swam at UT and didn’t actually earn a degree? Please? 

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, but the Economist is a libtard rag, cuz they don’t fellate Trump, so....

Dude.  It says "liberal" right in the headline.  Moose out front and such.

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

Jackass on NPR this morning trying to defend the tariffs got owned by the interviewer.  He just reverted back to bullshit talking points over and over when he couldn't answer her questions.  First tried straight up lying and when she called him out on it, he got frustrated and just kept repeating how the Chinese are very unfair.

 

[Swam@Texas 112]

You're right... you're right.... we should only listen to ONE side of the economic argument, such as what Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman offer. Anyone else is just completely unqualified to comment on the situation, especially when they restrict their arguments to presenting numeric data. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

"A global recession with no end in sight..." 

[Brisketexan 104,557]

6 minutes ago, Swam@Texas said:

You're right... you're right.... we should only listen to ONE side of the economic argument, such as what Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman offer. Anyone else is just completely unqualified to comment on the situation, especially when they restrict their arguments to presenting numeric data. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

"A global recession with no end in sight..." 

What I love about Swam is that he doesn't even read what he posts, thinking it supports him.  He must have an unlimited supply of petards.

[American Swindle 102]

Tariffs are a crony tool the state uses to protect industries that would otherwise not thrive in the free market.  

Obama did it for the tire industry and now Trump is slapping duties on stuff coming from China (hell, i got a note from my vendor that a 10% tariff was going to be slapped on hand soap and Toilet Seat Covers) as well as steel and aluminum.

It's a political move and protects very few while the consumer loses.  Fuck Tariffs.  

 

 

[American Swindle 102]

21 minutes ago, Swam@Texas said:

You're right... you're right.... we should only listen to ONE side of the economic argument, such as what Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman offer. Anyone else is just completely unqualified to comment on the situation, especially when they restrict their arguments to presenting numeric data. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

"A global recession with no end in sight..." 

Paul Krugman can smoke a turd.  He's a fan boy of the Federal Reserve and gets shellacked by Austrian Economists on a weekly basis.  Check out this podcast when you have a moment to learn more: https://contrakrugman.com/category/podcasts/

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

29 minutes ago, Swam@Texas said:

You're right... you're right.... we should only listen to ONE side of the economic argument, such as what Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman offer. Anyone else is just completely unqualified to comment on the situation, especially when they restrict their arguments to presenting numeric data. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

"A global recession with no end in sight..." 

No, you're right and have always been. All of the government-supplied economic numbers are fake.   The economy is as terrible as you always said it was under Obama, real unemployment is skyrocketing, and the debt is all that matters and is bigger than ever.   New York is an economic and crime wasteland unde DeBlasio, just as you predicted.   Seattle is in ruins, as is California.    And let's not forget that the payday lenders have been slayed! 

Edited July 27, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[Washpark 176]

4 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Jackass on NPR this morning trying to defend the tariffs got owned by the interviewer.  He just reverted back to bullshit talking points over and over when he couldn't answer her questions.  First tried straight up lying and when she called him out on it, he got frustrated and just kept repeating how the Chinese are very unfair.

 

it was peter navarro. i listened to that too. this is how the press should handle outright lies by calling it out.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Washpark

[kopp0e 1,135]

22 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

so they respect us again?

Of course, as now the world has to pay more for canned Coca-Cola products, as announced today...

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

56 minutes ago, Washpark said:

it was peter navarro. i listened to that too. this is how the press should handle outright lies by calling it out.

Exactly.  I don't see why it is so hard.  Why are people afraid of telling liars they are lying?

[Brisketexan 104,557]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Exactly.  I don't see why it is so hard.  Why are people afraid of telling liars they are lying?

Because "civility!"

See, telling repeated, shameless lies, well, that's polite and no problem.

But daring to call out a lie? Well, that's rude and not civil.

I thought you got the memo.  It's on Fox News letterhead, it went around.

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

We need to get J Peterman into all the WH press briefings.

[F250 28,679]

5 hours ago, Swam@Texas said:

You're right... you're right.... we should only listen to ONE side of the economic argument, such as what Nobel Prize winners like Paul Krugman offer. Anyone else is just completely unqualified to comment on the situation, especially when they restrict their arguments to presenting numeric data. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

"A global recession with no end in sight..." 

You are a perfect example of the saying, "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything."

[Gil Bang 25,897]

Peter Navarro has always been a jackass.  

[Grandioso 2,592]

Screeching, flailing, and arbitrarily reneging on deals may have worked for Trump, Inc. but it's hardly a coherent national policy. It's like he's me trying to play Sim City for the first time.

Aluminum? Uh....20%!!! Soybeans!!! /steps on own dick/ Shit, I guess give the farmers 10 billion dollars! I need another loan. Uh,....what's next?

[Bozo_Casanova 26,277]

it was peter navarro. i listened to that too. this is how the press should handle outright lies by calling it out.

Peter Navarro is a regional-class jackass crackpot who got called up to the majors because Don Jr liked the title of his book.

 

The only reason he wasn’t universally regarded as a clown before 2016 is because he was only regionally regarded as a clown in the greater San Diego area and Inland Empire, unknown outside of it.

[Gil Bang 25,897]

22 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Peter Navarro is a regional-class jackass crackpot who got called up to the majors because Don Jr liked the title of his book.

 

The only reason he wasn’t universally regarded as a clown before 2016 is because he was only regionally regarded as a clown in the greater San Diego area and Inland Empire, unknown outside of it.

Every single fucking word is 100% truth.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26,277]

14 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

Every single fucking word is 100% truth.  

Sadly it's not. I went back and checked. It's even dumber: It was Jared Kushner. He was apparently struck by the title of Navarro's book, "Death by China", while browsing on Amazon and cold called him to ask him to join the team. 

[Brisketexan 104,557]

Sadly it's not. I went back and checked. It's even dumber: It was Jared Kushner. He was apparently struck by the title of Navarro's book, "Death by China", while browsing on Amazon and cold called him to ask him to join the team. 

On the bright side, I know how I’m gonna get on the next idiocracy president’s radar. You can check out my new book, “how to be the awesomest President EVER!” on Amazon.

[Biff Tannen 45,491]

Should be "Most Awesomest" and "EVAR"

[Brisketexan 104,557]

Should be "Most Awesomest" and "EVAR"

“Thanks to my contributing editor Biff Tannen!”

[F250 28,679]

4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Sadly it's not. I went back and checked. It's even dumber: It was Jared Kushner. He was apparently struck by the title of Navarro's book, "Death by China", while browsing on Amazon and cold called him to ask him to join the team. 

Shit, that is worse than learning to govern by reading wikipedia articles and you this administration seems like the type to just Google shit rather than rely on experts with book learning.

 

[zork 629]

Anyone have the actual details/results from the EU-US trade meeting last week?

[FWD 297]

11 minutes ago, zork said:

Anyone have the actual details/results from the EU-US trade meeting last week?

The most detailed breakdown I've seen is from this FT article:

https://www.ft.com/content/efc1bb08-90f1-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421

Donald Trump’s Rose Garden truce with the EU  has, in the short term, avoided any escalation of a transatlantic trade war and been welcomed from Berlin to Washington by those fearing the economic consequences. But a long-term peace remains distant and vulnerable to the whims of the US president. 

 

The ceasefire announced by Mr Trump and the EU’s Jean-Claude Juncker at the White House on Wednesday calls for discussions over how to reduce tariffs and other trade barriers related to industrial goods other than cars, and to mount a joint push to reform the World Trade Organization.  

 

In a victory for Mr Juncker, it puts further tariffs — including Mr Trump’s threatened 20 per cent levy on auto imports— on hold while talks proceed. Yet it is unclear what the US president gets out of it other than a short-term political win at a time when he is under fire over his trade policies at home.

 

... read more at https://www.ft.com/content/efc1bb08-90f1-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421 

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2018 by FWD

[zork 629]

25 minutes ago, FWD said:

The most detailed breakdown I've seen is from this FT article:

https://www.ft.com/content/efc1bb08-90f1-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421

Donald Trump’s Rose Garden truce with the EU  has, in the short term, avoided any escalation of a transatlantic trade war and been welcomed from Berlin to Washington by those fearing the economic consequences. But a long-term peace remains distant and vulnerable to the whims of the US president. 

 

The ceasefire announced by Mr Trump and the EU’s Jean-Claude Juncker at the White House on Wednesday calls for discussions over how to reduce tariffs and other trade barriers related to industrial goods other than cars, and to mount a joint push to reform the World Trade Organization.  

 

In a victory for Mr Juncker, it puts further tariffs — including Mr Trump’s threatened 20 per cent levy on auto imports— on hold while talks proceed. Yet it is unclear what the US president gets out of it other than a short-term political win at a time when he is under fire over his trade policies at home.

 

... read more at https://www.ft.com/content/efc1bb08-90f1-11e8-b639-7680cedcc421 

 

 

 

thanks for copying some of it.  It is behind a paywall or register wall that doesn't interest me enough to be a subscriber like Snacks .

Edited July 28, 2018 by zork