• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NYT: Trump’s Trade War Escalation Will Exact Economic Pain, Adviser Says

Roadvirus said:
The alternative of course is letting China continue to walk all over us while we lie there and take it.
Click to expand...

Please define "walk all over us?"
 
MTAtech said:
Please define "walk all over us?"
Click to expand...

Currency manipulation
Doing zilch over intellectual property violations
Cyber/HUMINT spying of American corporations (especially Defense companies) to commit industrial/military espionage

That's just for starters. Anything else you'd like to know?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Strangely enough, if you substitute "the United States of America" for "China" that is EXACTLY the position that the Japanese felt that they had been placed in before WWII.
Click to expand...

Oh boo hoo for the Japanese. They were committing horrific war atrocities in China and everywhere else they had invaded. They deserved it.
 
Roadvirus said:
Currency manipulation
Doing zilch over intellectual property violations
Cyber/HUMINT spying of American corporations (especially Defense companies) to commit industrial/military espionage

That's just for starters. Anything else you'd like to know?
Click to expand...

It would be hard, these days, to find an economist who feels China is a currency manipulator. China has been pushing its currency up, not down. Since the middle of 2014 it has sold over $1 trillion from its reserves to prop up the renminbi, under pressure from capital flight by Chinese companies and savers.

We know that China is a bad actor with regard to intellectual property. According to the deal being hammered out in March, the deal did little to address real complaints about Chinese policy, which mainly involve China’s systematic expropriation of intellectual property. Nor would it do much to address Donald Trump’s pet although misguided peeve, the imbalance in U.S.-China trade. The Trump trade policies are particularly incoherent. The issue of cyber-hacking and corporate spying wasn't even raised as a demand.

If Trump wanted to deal with most of those issues he shouldn't have cancelled the Transpacific Trade Agreement, that actually did address these issues.
 
MTAtech said:
I'm not too worried about the movement of jobs. Before 1900, 80% of employment was on farms. Somehow, we were able to bring that down to 3% and still have found work for those people displaced. What it did was cause geographical disruption as workers moved to cities to take advantage of factory jobs. Movement away from rural areas is why today those areas are more like ghettos of the 1970s, which were inner cities. Rural areas are where the new drug problems exist, mainly due to economic despair.
Click to expand...
Great point.

We seem to be seeing the ghetto-izing of rural areas, and the gentrification of former slums. It's really become an odd juxtaposition, including the majority of welfare and disability now being handed-out to rural areas, to say nothing of agricultural welfare via subsidies. And yet those in these areas are often against education or moving, but instead praying for the government to give them "jobs". It really seems to have come full circle of sorts, from the 60's/70's to the new millennium.
 
JustHanging said:
Cardinal, don't forget,

Farm bankruptcies are surging as Trump's trade war drags on

Gotta figure that large agricorps are making out like bandits buying up bankrupt farms for pennies on the dollar. They're likely contributing large to Trump somehow. And Trump has kept as may potential payment centers/income streams alive as possible, whether they're renting suites at his hotels, or being charged for throwing grand parties at Mar-Logo.


Trump may not have been a billionaire when he came to office, but he will be one many times over when he leaves. No wonder he doesn't want to show his tax returns LOL.
Click to expand...
Undoubtedly!
 
Of course it will. I hardly think many on either side of the political isle would argue for complete protectionist economics over a global economy. However to not address intellectual property alone after railing against China's practices for years, would be disingenuous and unrealistic. This is an animal that must be addressed. What better time to do so than during the best economy in decades? Other than tariffs how else do you get China to agree to a better deal for us, and by it's nature a worse deal for them? While tariffs may not be a long term answer, it is the only carrot we have. Anyone have another way to get China to sign a bad deal for them...anyone?
 
Roadvirus said:
Currency manipulation
Doing zilch over intellectual property violations
Cyber/HUMINT spying of American corporations (especially Defense companies) to commit industrial/military espionage

That's just for starters. Anything else you'd like to know?
Click to expand...
That is a fair point. Though it doesn't seem to be a high-point of the negotiations, unless I missed something.
 
MTAtech said:
......
We know that China is a bad actor with regard to intellectual property. According to the deal being hammered out in March, the deal did little to address real complaints about Chinese policy, which mainly involve China’s systematic expropriation of intellectual property.....
Click to expand...

As I understand it the main reason given for the collapse in the latest rounds was China had agreed to change it's law in regard to intellectual property and then decided to back out of that already agreed upon point. Am I mistaken?
 
TheDeplorable said:
Of course it will. I hardly think many on either side of the political isle would argue for complete protectionist economics over a global economy. However to not address intellectual property alone after railing against China's practices for years, would be disingenuous and unrealistic. This is an animal that must be addressed. What better time to do so than during the best economy in decades? Other than tariffs how else do you get China to agree to a better deal for us, and by it's nature a worse deal for them? While tariffs may not be a long term answer, it is the only carrot we have. Anyone have another way to get China to sign a bad deal for them...anyone?
Click to expand...
Good post.

But the flip-side is those companies that went over gave China access to their IP, voluntarily. The American corps did it through greed, and now they're barking about it looking for relief. No one told them to sell their soul ...
 
Re: NYT: Trump’s Trade War Escalation Will Exact Economic Pain, Adviser Says

Bottom paragraph......Sources have said the trade talks hit an impasse after China tried to delete commitments from a draft agreement that said its laws would be changed to enact new policies on issues from intellectual property protection to forced technology transfers.

Trump calls trade war with China 'little squabble,' says talks ongoing - Reuters
 
Chomsky said:
Good post.

But the flip-side is those companies that went over gave China access to their IP, voluntarily. The American corps did it through greed, and now they're barking about it looking for relief. No one told them to sell their soul ...
Click to expand...

Thank you for the kind word. I lurked here for about a year before finally committing to engaging. Just couldn't handle the facebook ignorance and intolerance from both sides of the isle any longer. I look forward to many engaging discussions.

I will agree the world markets embraced China with open arms and turned a blind eye to unscrupulous worker and environmental practices, and still continues to do so today out of a desire for access to that population/market/workers. Greed meh ok sure.
 
TheDeplorable said:
Thank you for the kind word. I lurked here for about a year before finally committing to engaging. Just couldn't handle the facebook ignorance and intolerance from both sides of the isle any longer. I look forward to many engaging discussions.

I will agree the world markets embraced China with open arms and turned a blind eye to unscrupulous worker and environmental practices, and still continues to do so today out of a desire for access to that population/market/workers. Greed meh ok sure.
Click to expand...
Well, I hope you enjoy your stay here.

I picked DP out of many forums I looked at, because of what I perceived as the high quality of the moderation. But nothing's perfect, and politics can be a Wild West.

Keep a thick skin, a calm demeanor, and try not to become calloused! ;)
 
Roadvirus said:
Oh boo hoo for the Japanese. They were committing horrific war atrocities in China and everywhere else they had invaded. They deserved it.
Click to expand...

Since you missed the point, would you please re-read the post, this time attempting "reading for comprehension"?
 
MTAtech said:
It would be hard, these days, to find an economist who feels China is a currency manipulator. China has been pushing its currency up, not down. Since the middle of 2014 it has sold over $1 trillion from its reserves to prop up the renminbi, under pressure from capital flight by Chinese companies and savers.

We know that China is a bad actor with regard to intellectual property. According to the deal being hammered out in March, the deal did little to address real complaints about Chinese policy, which mainly involve China’s systematic expropriation of intellectual property. Nor would it do much to address Donald Trump’s pet although misguided peeve, the imbalance in U.S.-China trade. The Trump trade policies are particularly incoherent. The issue of cyber-hacking and corporate spying wasn't even raised as a demand.

If Trump wanted to deal with most of those issues he shouldn't have cancelled the Transpacific Trade Agreement, that actually did address these issues.
Click to expand...

Mr. Trump had absolutely no option but to cancel the TPP since it was something that Mr. Obama approved of.
 
TheDeplorable said:
Of course it will. I hardly think many on either side of the political isle would argue for complete protectionist economics over a global economy. However to not address intellectual property alone after railing against China's practices for years, would be disingenuous and unrealistic. This is an animal that must be addressed. What better time to do so than during the best economy in decades? Other than tariffs how else do you get China to agree to a better deal for us, and by it's nature a worse deal for them? While tariffs may not be a long term answer, it is the only carrot we have. Anyone have another way to get China to sign a bad deal for them...anyone?
Click to expand...

A tariff allows a country that is doing something that you don't want them to do to continue selling their goods to your country with your own citizens then paying higher prices so that your country's government can have more money without the politically inadvisable need to publicly admit that your own country's government has raised taxes. It also has the advantage of pouring a whole lot of money into the hands of "the owning class".

An embargo attempts to prohibit a country that is doing something that you don't want them to do by making it impossible for that country to sell its goods. It does, however, have the disadvantage of lowering the profits that "the owning class" receive. Equally unfortunate, the only way to make an embargo truly effective is to prohibit any other country from trading with the country that you have a dispute with, and that means putting embargoes on the goods from any other country that doesn't go along with what your government tells their government to do. And, of course, those other countries are just likely to return the favour so that your country can't sell its goods in them and that does, however, have the disadvantage of lowering the profits that "the owning class" receive.

Of the two possibilities, the fact that one of them has the disadvantage of lowering the profits that "the owning class" receives will show you that there is only one logical and obvious course of action to follow.

NOTE:- For the purpose of simplifying the debate, the possibility of actually increasing the efficiency of your own economy/industries is NOT to be considered as that would mean that your own country's industries would have to devote a significant portion of their gross profit to reinvestment and modernization (which would lower the profits that "the owning class" receives).
 
MTAtech said:
New York Times: Trump’s Trade War Escalation Will Exact Economic Pain, Adviser Says
Relevant snippets:

My comment: So, even Larry Kudlow now admits the trade war will hurt Americans. “In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Both sides will suffer on this.”

My comment: Whenever investors suspect that Donald Trump will really go through with his threats of big tariff increases, provoking retaliation abroad, stocks plunge. Every time they decide it’s just theater, stocks recover. Markets really, really don’t like the idea of a trade war.
My Comment: Trump fundamentally doesn't know how tariffs work. Consumers pay the tariffs, not the country of origin.
My Comment: The wealthy and corporations got tax-cuts and the American consumer gets higher prices due to tariffs. Moreover, any growth aspect of the tax-cuts has worn off -- just in time for the contraction effects of the tariffs to kick in.

General comment:
In some ways, China really is a bad actor in the global economy. In particular, it has pretty much thumbed its nose at international rules on intellectual property rights, grabbing foreign technology without proper payment. And to be fair, Trump officials do sometimes raise the intellectual property issue as a justification for getting tough.

But if getting China to pay what it owes for technology were the goal, you’d expect the U.S. both to make specific demands on that front and to adopt a strategy aimed at inducing China to meet those demands.

In fact, the U.S. has given little indication of what China should do about intellectual property. Meanwhile, if getting better protection of patent rights and so on were the goal, America should be trying to build a coalition with other advanced countries to pressure the Chinese; instead, we’ve been alienating everyone in sight. Not for nothing, this issue was addressed in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that Trump cancelled on day one.
Click to expand...
I was furious when we did that. Years of work down the drain for US foreign policy; a massive self-inflicted wound based on ignorance.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
 
MTAtech said:
New York Times: Trump’s Trade War Escalation Will Exact Economic Pain, Adviser Says
Relevant snippets:

My comment: So, even Larry Kudlow now admits the trade war will hurt Americans. “In fact, both sides will pay,” Mr. Kudlow said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Both sides will suffer on this.”

My comment: Whenever investors suspect that Donald Trump will really go through with his threats of big tariff increases, provoking retaliation abroad, stocks plunge. Every time they decide it’s just theater, stocks recover. Markets really, really don’t like the idea of a trade war.
My Comment: Trump fundamentally doesn't know how tariffs work. Consumers pay the tariffs, not the country of origin.
My Comment: The wealthy and corporations got tax-cuts and the American consumer gets higher prices due to tariffs. Moreover, any growth aspect of the tax-cuts has worn off -- just in time for the contraction effects of the tariffs to kick in.

General comment:
In some ways, China really is a bad actor in the global economy. In particular, it has pretty much thumbed its nose at international rules on intellectual property rights, grabbing foreign technology without proper payment. And to be fair, Trump officials do sometimes raise the intellectual property issue as a justification for getting tough.

But if getting China to pay what it owes for technology were the goal, you’d expect the U.S. both to make specific demands on that front and to adopt a strategy aimed at inducing China to meet those demands.

In fact, the U.S. has given little indication of what China should do about intellectual property. Meanwhile, if getting better protection of patent rights and so on were the goal, America should be trying to build a coalition with other advanced countries to pressure the Chinese; instead, we’ve been alienating everyone in sight. Not for nothing, this issue was addressed in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that Trump cancelled on day one.
Click to expand...

Pain? maybe in the short term. China needs us ten time more than we need them. We can get cheap good manufactured in a dozen other countries, there is no replacement for the US market. Now even Chuck Schumer and NYT are supporting Trumps moves with China.

Steve Bannon and Tom Friedman agree Trump right to hit China on trade

Schumer Says Trump Should Stay Strong On China
 
Last edited:
Casca XV said:
Pain? maybe in the short term. China needs us ten time more than we need them. We can get cheap good manufactured in a dozen other countries, there is no replacement for the US market. Now even Chuck Schumer and NYT are supporting Trumps moves with China.

Steve Bannon and Tom Friedman agree Trump right to hit China on trade

Schumer Says Trump Should Stay Strong On China
Click to expand...

You do realize that the US comprises around 5% of the POTENTIAL world market, don't you? You do realize that that means that around 95% of the POTENTIAL world market is NOT the United States of America, don't you?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
You do realize that the US comprises around 5% of the POTENTIAL world market, don't you? You do realize that that means that around 95% of the POTENTIAL world market is NOT the United States of America, don't you?
Click to expand...

you do realize that the US economy is 3 times the size of China's and they are in second place to us.
 
Casca XV said:
you do realize that the US economy is 3 times the size of China's and they are in second place to us.
Click to expand...

I realize that their GDP is second to that of the USA, yes. The US economy isn't 3 times as big, and that of China is growing rapidly. A few more trade wars, and China just might catch up.
 
Casca XV said:
you do realize that the US economy is 3 times the size of China's and they are in second place to us.
Click to expand...

1. United States

Nominal GDP: $19.39 trillion [US 1.614 times that of China]
GDP (PPP): $19.39 trillion
GDP per capita: $59,500 [US 3.563 times that of China]

2. China

Nominal GDP: $12.01 trillion
GDP (PPP): $23.15 trillion [China 1.194 times that of the US]
GDP per capita: $16,700

That means that the US economy is NOT "three times larger" than the Chinese economy, only that, statistically, each individual American has more money to spend than each individual Chinese.

However, even that STATISTICAL fact might be somewhat modified by the pattern of "wealth distribution" in each of the two countries. (To illustrate, if you have "Country A" with 100 people and a GDP per person of $200 and "Country B" with 100 people and a GDP of $100 it certainly does appear that the people in "Country A" are better off than the people in "Country B". HOWEVER, when you dig into the data you find that the ACTUAL income for 99 of the people in "Country A" is $10 and for the remaining one person it is $19,010 while in "Country B" the ACTUAL income of 99 people is $90 and for the remaining one person it is $10,90 it looks like a random individual picked from "Country B" will, in fact, have a higher income than a random individual picked from "Country A".)
 
Re: NYT: Trump’s Trade War Escalation Will Exact Economic Pain, Adviser Says

TU Curmudgeon said:
1. United States

Nominal GDP: $19.39 trillion [US 1.614 times that of China]
GDP (PPP): $19.39 trillion
GDP per capita: $59,500 [US 3.563 times that of China]

2. China

Nominal GDP: $12.01 trillion
GDP (PPP): $23.15 trillion [China 1.194 times that of the US]
GDP per capita: $16,700

That means that the US economy is NOT "three times larger" than the Chinese economy, only that, statistically, each individual American has more money to spend than each individual Chinese.

However, even that STATISTICAL fact might be somewhat modified by the pattern of "wealth distribution" in each of the two countries. (To illustrate, if you have "Country A" with 100 people and a GDP per person of $200 and "Country B" with 100 people and a GDP of $100 it certainly does appear that the people in "Country A" are better off than the people in "Country B". HOWEVER, when you dig into the data you find that the ACTUAL income for 99 of the people in "Country A" is $10 and for the remaining one person it is $19,010 while in "Country B" the ACTUAL income of 99 people is $90 and for the remaining one person it is $10,90 it looks like a random individual picked from "Country B" will, in fact, have a higher income than a random individual picked from "Country A".)
Click to expand...

You are right, I was looking at an article from the mid point of the Obama 8 years. Back then our economy was 3 times larger than China's. Back then they were rapidly overtaking us, Under Trump that trend is slowly reversing.Eric Cantor says U.S. economy is three larger than China's | PolitiFact Virginia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom