US & UK - Similar Delusions on Trade

From the Economist: Britain and America suffer from similar delusions on trade - excerpt:

NO TWO countries are doing more to strain the fabric of modern trade than America and Britain. President Donald Trump wants to rewrite the terms of America’s trade relationships with everyone from Mexico to South Korea. After its vote to leave the European Union, Britain faces having to negotiate fresh trade deals with both the EU and countries beyond.

The pair’s tone on trade is different: one wants to put “America First”, the other to create a “global Britain”. But both visions are predicated on the idea of striking swift, bilateral deals, and each has identified the other as the perfect partner. At a meeting of G20 leaders this month, Mr Trump spoke of a “powerful deal, great for both countries”, which would be done “very, very quickly”. On July 24th Liam Fox, Britain’s international trade secretary, met his American counterparts to start talks about a post-Brexit agreement. A day later the president tweeted his excitement: “Working on major Trade Deal with the United Kingdom. Could be very big & exciting. JOBS!”

Click to expand...

Once again, because his attention-span is highly limited, Donald Dork is looking desperately for a Quick-Fix Deal that he can plaster all over the nightly-news. (The guy is stumbling from one fiasco to another because he is inadept as a PotUS.)

And this one will be the latest - only because Trade Deals (which his Little Mind cannot seem to grasp) are a major political issue in any country on earth that makes cars. And Why?

Because it can greatly enhance economic activity or, otoh, reduce it. It all depends upon nationally held views of the matter.

At present, Americans seem upset that "jobs have been shifted to Mexico". Yes, some have - but to the benefit of American industry. If making electric cable-groups for cars is cheaper in Mexico then American motor-car companies have a vested interest in doing it. Why?

Because making an "All-American car" will price it out of the market as Americans flock to Far East model cars that are cheaper.

Incorporating some lesser expensive elements "Made Abroad" into an essentially American-made car helps further sales in America (their principal market) - thus protecting American car-manufacturing jobs ...

Lafayette said:

From the Economist: Britain and America suffer from similar delusions on trade - excerpt:


Once again, because his attention-span is highly limited, Donald Dork is looking desperately for a Quick-Fix Deal that he can plaster all over the nightly-news. (The guy is stumbling from one fiasco to another because he is inadept as a PotUS.)

And this one will be the latest - only because Trade Deals (which his Little Mind cannot seem to grasp) are a major political issue in any country on earth that makes cars. And Why?

Because it can greatly enhance economic activity or, otoh, reduce it. It all depends upon nationally held views of the matter.

At present, Americans seem upset that "jobs have been shifted to Mexico". Yes, some have - but to the benefit of American industry. If making electric cable-groups for cars is cheaper in Mexico then American motor-car companies have a vested interest in doing it. Why?

Because making an "All-American car" will price it out of the market as Americans flock to Far East model cars that are cheaper.

Incorporating some lesser expensive elements "Made Abroad" into an essentially American-made car helps further sales in America (their principal market) - thus protecting American car-manufacturing jobs ...

Click to expand...

I would not blame the countries per say, but the conservative parties of said countries. They live in the past, pure and simple. The Tories running things, still believe in Empire and ignore that most of its former Empire absolutely hate the British (on a nation level) and have zero reason to help the UK come out of the deep dark wilderness they have chosen to enter. They keep coming with the "but we are the 5th largest economy" bs over and over.. yes and most of that economic might is based on consumer spending.

Moreover, from the Washington Post (here):

“The president made a speech last Friday on Long Island in which he pushed Congress to devote more resources to fighting illegal immigration, including transnational gangs.”

When introduced in April the bill was roundly criticized by more than 1,000 economists. There is near-uniformity among respected economists that immigrants do not “steal” jobs from native-born Americans (in part because they have different skill sets and in part because they make the economy bigger), have almost no impact on domestic wages (except for non-high school graduates, where the impact is less than 2 percent) and are essential to keep the economy growing. By reducing the number of immigrants by a half a million, the bill would shrink the U.S. economy and exacerbate the problem of an aging workforce (immigrants statistically are younger than the native-born population).

Click to expand...

With an unemployment rate in the US of 4.3%, it is bumping against the lower-limit. There is a percentage of the population that is unemployable.

What can be done is expand the employment category? Howwzat?

The unemployment rate is based upon interviews (conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) that ascertain as to whether individuals actually made an effort to be employed, but were not. That is, for instance, they had job interviews but no results. They are thus qualified as unemployed.

Those "thinking about looking for a job" (their response when interviewed) are not counted as "unemployed".

However - and this is psychologically important - those who are thinking about looking for a job can be pushed to do so when Job Opportunities are shown to be positive and not negative or neutral.

Lafayette said:

Moreover, from the Washington Post (here):

With an unemployment rate in the US of 4.3%, it is bumping against the lower-limit. There is a percentage of the population that is unemployable.

What can be done is expand the employment category? Howwzat?

The unemployment rate is based upon interviews (conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) that ascertain as to whether individuals actually made an effort to be employed, but were not. That is, for instance, they had job interviews but no results. They are thus qualified as unemployed.

Those "thinking about looking for a job" (their response when interviewed) are not counted as "unemployed".

However - and this is psychologically important - those who are thinking about looking for a job can be pushed to do so when Job Opportunities are shown to be positive and not negative or neutral.

Click to expand...

US unemployment numbers have always been bull****... all of them. As long as you have a system where you can go "out of the system", and the number is based on polls and not actual numbers.. then it is flawed.

US unemployment is FAR higher than the official number and yes the U-6 number. It is like trying to do a census in Saudi Arabia.. almost impossible, because when the census people go around and ask how many people are in the house hold, the male of the family often does not report the amount of women in the household.

But as always in politics, the numbers are nice and easy to manipulate for whatever political gain you want. Oh and other unemployment numbers across the world are often not much better.. take Spain, their 17,8% unemployment (yes it is down that much), is based on how many people are paying into social security.. problem is here, there is a huge underground economy, that does not pay into the system. Add to that, that self employed are not counted correctly either. Or in Denmark, who like most Scandinavian countries, have very accurate unemployment numbers. We catagories every citizen. Problem is, it can be rather easy to move between those categories. For example, you are unemployed and are put into some educational program to get you new skills. You are still unemployed, but you are moved to the student category and it lowers the unemployment numbers. So....

Fox was fired as defence secretary a decade back because he had permitted a "friend" (Adam Werrity) to accompany him on foreign visits and attend top level meetings though he had no security clearance. He's been returned to the cabinet as a hardline Brexiteer, though roundly despised by many. Several commentators insist that his full title is still "The Disgraced" Liam Fox.... Concerns about chlorinated chicken are the least of his worries. He attempted to reassure an audience, claiming it must be safe, since Americans have been eating it for years without harm, and a heckler shouted out "They just elected Trump!"

jdog21 said:

Shouldnt you be looking at the labor proticipation rate then. The numbers arnt scewed but they dont take into account the amount of people who dont have to work or dont want to work. It includes all people in wokring age.

Click to expand...

Sure, but even that is bull****. Why? Because you dont ask every single person on why they are not working. For example, the participation rate in the US is used by the GOP hacks constantly to bash the Dems... what they dont tell you is the comparison historically (big surprise..) and what reasons that it is at 63% at the moment.

The participation rate was last time this "low" in 1977 and before that it was ALWAYS lower.. why was that? Why is it that the participation rate started to shoot up after 1965, and start declining again in the early 2000s? What on earth could that be... baby boomers.

Yes the baby boomers.. they entered the jobs market in the early 1960s and worked their asses off to bankrupt us all, and then started retiring early or really in the early 2000s and that has only accelerated.

So when the right comes with their participation rate bull****.. it is just that.. BULL****. The only thing it shows is that the baby boomers are retiring.

But but what about women.. they do account for half (over half actually) of the population. Yes, their participation has grown as well over the years, but still lag behind the men. Their participation rate has also fallen. Reason.. simple, in a household, it is the man that earns the more money (on average) due to discrimination, so in a downturn or when kids come, it is the woman who stays at home.

Regardless, the changes there are insignificant relative to the massive retirement of baby boomers, which explain a bulk of the supposed low participation rate... no it is not low. It is low if you compare it to the Reagan years and to the end of Bush Jr.. sure, but it is not low to before Reagan, and the common thread in it all is baby boomers.

So in closing, the participation rate might be important to pathetic bankers and greedy wall street assholes who can manipulate markets because of our ignorance, but the fact of the matter is the participation rate aint going to go up to its height of 67% any time soon. It might stabalize around 62-63% and the difference between the 59% in 1963 and 62% today is more women in the work force. Personally I suspect that it will fall a tad more unless immigration picks up. The baby boomers are a huge portion of the working population.

Lafayette said:

From the Economist: Britain and America suffer from similar delusions on trade - excerpt:


Once again, because his attention-span is highly limited, Donald Dork is looking desperately for a Quick-Fix Deal that he can plaster all over the nightly-news. (The guy is stumbling from one fiasco to another because he is inadept as a PotUS.)

And this one will be the latest - only because Trade Deals (which his Little Mind cannot seem to grasp) are a major political issue in any country on earth that makes cars. And Why?

Because it can greatly enhance economic activity or, otoh, reduce it. It all depends upon nationally held views of the matter.

At present, Americans seem upset that "jobs have been shifted to Mexico". Yes, some have - but to the benefit of American industry. If making electric cable-groups for cars is cheaper in Mexico then American motor-car companies have a vested interest in doing it. Why?

Because making an "All-American car" will price it out of the market as Americans flock to Far East model cars that are cheaper.

Incorporating some lesser expensive elements "Made Abroad" into an essentially American-made car helps further sales in America (their principal market) - thus protecting American car-manufacturing jobs ...

Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with "Made in America"

If liberals would stop and think about what trump is proposing they would see that it is good for Americans even if offends foreigners

PeteEU said:

US unemployment numbers have always been bull****... all of them. As long as you have a system where you can go "out of the system", and the number is based on polls and not actual numbers.. then it is flawed.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ on that one.

Unemployment is not just a statistic that can be deduced from government statistics. Moreover, there is no government agency that is officially looking at Employment.

I like posting in this forum the two data-points that constitute the employment situation - the first is pure Unemployment as percent of total workforce. Just as important, however, is the Employment-to-population Ratio, which indicates "sentiment". Sentiment is important. Whyzzat?

Because economics - in it hell-bent rush into statistical prediction overlooks it. And yet, it is sentiment is important to understand what Consumers "think they want to do". They don't always do what they think, but if most people "don't think" they want to do/have something that something is important to know from a policy-making POV ...

PeteEU said:

But as always in politics, the numbers are nice and easy to manipulate for whatever political gain you want. Oh and other unemployment numbers across the world are often not much better.

Click to expand...

Anyone familiar long-enough with "the numbers" knows that they do not systematically change according to any given PotUS suggesting to the agency collecting them that they should be favorable to their administration. That sort of manipulation aint gonna work with the number of economists who are familiar with the process. They'll spy in a microsecond any bizarre changes employed for making the forecasts.

So, it (your remark) is untrue unless one is dead-set against statistical interpretation of the numbers. Which simply means a "closed mind" ...

I'm fairly sick of non-American's who think they know what's best for the U.S.A. :roll:

I'm not arrogant enough to think I know enough about France, Denmark, or the U.K. to tell them how to handle their politics, trade, etc.; and IMO members should not be worried about what happens here in the U.S.A. when they seem unable to handle their own internal issues.

You know, like "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?" :coffeepap:

Mac77 said:

I see nothing wrong with "Made in America"

If liberals would stop and think about what trump is proposing they would see that it is good for Americans even if offends foreigners

Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with "Made in XXX country of your choice".

However there is a fact that most people are not told. To make a product in America, the products price has to increase considerably.

Take the iPhone. We all know it is made in asia. To make that 100% in the US, it would require the following.

1) Setting up factories in the US.
2) Finding people to run those factories, and that means educated people.. impossible at the moment. So you would have to import workers, at least for a generation until the US work force has the necessary competence to do the job.
3) Because of the two above, the price of the product would go up.. by a lot.

Estimates by independent sources say from 80 to 150 dollars per phone. Considering the next iPhone made in China, is going to cost 1000 dollars, then hmmm.

It is even worse when it comes to other products. Cloths for example. American workers do not want to work under the conditions in China, nor the wages. So that means higher costs, which means higher prices for cloths. Gone are the 5 dollar T-Shirt (or whatever the price is), and welcome the 15-30 dollar minimum price for the "cheap" T-shirt line.

So countries have some choices..

1) Degrade your living standard for portions of your population so that you can compete with China on wages and conditions (yea right, like that is going to happen).

2) Pay higher prices... err okay, considering the bitching that goes on when gas goes up a couple of cents, then good luck with that..

Which will you choose?

Chlorinated Chicken imports from the US is a major glitch in trade with the EU. Given the Demand for chicken-based products it is a very healthy commercial product.

But not one chlorinated chicken makes it into the EU. In fact, the only European country to import them (I think) is Switzerland - I've seen US "butterball turkeys" on sale between Thanksgiving and Christmas in supermarkets there ...

Captain Adverse said:

I'm fairly sick of non-American's who think they know what's best for the U.S.A. :roll:

I'm not arrogant enough to think I know enough about France, Denmark, or the U.K. to tell them how to handle their politics, trade, etc.; and IMO they should not be worried about what happens here in the U.S.A.

Click to expand...

Well that is because you are an American and dont understand how much US politics we are fed in Europe. Hell I would in many cases actually claim we get more US politics news than national politics news. So you can accuse us of whatever, but the average European knows a hell of a lot about US politics (relative) to what Americans know about European politics. For example.. US presidential elections are live across Europe. UK elections are not, nor French nor Danish.. although you can access it if you want. Even before Trump, we got daily US political updates.. because what the US does effects everyone.

PeteEU said:

Well that is because you are an American and dont understand how much US politics we are fed in Europe. Hell I would in many cases actually claim we get more US politics news than national politics news. So you can accuse us of whatever, but the average European knows a hell of a lot about US politics (relative) to what Americans know about European politics. For example.. US presidential elections are live across Europe. UK elections are not, nor French nor Danish.. although you can access it if you want. Even before Trump, we got daily US political updates.. because what the US does effects everyone.

Click to expand...

...and this is a reflection of what, that your own citizens care less about their own internal or E.U. politics/policies than they do about American politics?

That's sounds like an internal problem to me. :shrug:

Captain Adverse said:

...and this is a reflection of what, that your own citizens care less about their own internal or E.U. politics/policies than they do about American politics?

That's sounds like an internal problem to me. :shrug:

Click to expand...

In many ways yes, because what the US does, means that our internal/EU policies/politics have to react to. We got plenty of problems over here, but they are impacted by what the US does. The great crisis of the last decade was a classic example. A US problem turned very quickly into multiple problems over here and these problems were made worse because of the US issue. That is why we care so much (relatively speaking). No other country has such a serious impact on the world (at the moment).

Mac77 said:

I see nothing wrong with "Made in America"

If liberals would stop and think about what trump is proposing they would see that it is good for Americans even if offends foreigners

Click to expand...

For the US as well as Britain, this slowly backs us away from being involved in a purely globalist world that has drained both our economies.

Mac77 said:

I see nothing wrong with "Made in America"

Click to expand...

So you buy 100% American then right?

If liberals would stop and think about what trump is proposing they would see that it is good for Americans even if offends foreigners

Click to expand...

What is good for Americans is Trump out of office since neither him nor the GOP can govern.

Praxas said:

So you buy 100% American then right?

What is good for Americans is Trump out of office since neither him nor the GOP can govern.

Click to expand...

No

I wish I could find more American products to buy

But many of the products we need are no longer made in America

We need more manufacturing here for the jobs it provides to our workers, national security and to reduce our trade deficit

WCH said:

For the US as well as Britain, this slowly backs us away from being involved in a purely globalist world that has drained both our economies.

Click to expand...

Globalism is bad for our economy and bad for our national sovereignty

Lafayette said:

Moreover, from the Washington Post (here):

With an unemployment rate in the US of 4.3%, it is bumping against the lower-limit. There is a percentage of the population that is unemployable.

What can be done is expand the employment category? Howwzat?

The unemployment rate is based upon interviews (conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) that ascertain as to whether individuals actually made an effort to be employed, but were not. That is, for instance, they had job interviews but no results. They are thus qualified as unemployed.

Those "thinking about looking for a job" (their response when interviewed) are not counted as "unemployed".

However - and this is psychologically important - those who are thinking about looking for a job can be pushed to do so when Job Opportunities are shown to be positive and not negative or neutral.

Click to expand...

I don't think that there is any question among professionals about the generally positive economic effect of immigration. There is also no question about its being negative, where it is done poorly. This has been the case in the USA over the past years and it is this that is causing the trouble and should be angering the legal immigrants. They should mobilize against the negligence that has allowed a breathtaking illegal population.

PeteEU said:

Well that is because you are an American and dont understand how much US politics we are fed in Europe. Hell I would in many cases actually claim we get more US politics news than national politics news. So you can accuse us of whatever, but the average European knows a hell of a lot about US politics (relative) to what Americans know about European politics. For example.. US presidential elections are live across Europe. UK elections are not, nor French nor Danish.. although you can access it if you want. Even before Trump, we got daily US political updates.. because what the US does effects everyone.

Click to expand...

That is because local politics in the European countries are not something the political parties can want discussed and use US politics as a diversion and try to brush over local politics with frail populism, while agitating against stupid Turks, American policies or NGOs saving refugee boat people.

The fact that these deals are such that it is thought of that a renegotiation of terms is necessary, is testament to how egregious the terms of these agreements are to the US and British people. It then goes without saying (though I will say it anyway) that the fault doesn't fall to the feet of those that are trying to renegotiate but to those who had negotiated the deals in the first place.

It would be ridiculous to think that countries who gain the most, who have created for themselves favorable terms in these deals would somehow be willing, nay, enthusiastic about renegotiating the terms. Why would they? It's working out marvelously for them. However, this in no way implies explicitly or implicitly that the renegotiation of these deals is somehow "wrong-headed". Trump and May, will undoubtedly be demonized for their efforts because it is precisely those who are doing the damning who stand to gain most from keeping the status quo.

The Economist is a globalist mouthpiece. Much like Foreign Affairs and any other "reputable" publication. Why are these publications reputable? Because each say the other is. Why do they say it? Because they are all drinking from the same well. They all are competing against each other but all have accepted the global order structured by their benefactors. Those whom keep the lights on and give them their comfortable salaries to continue promoting the benefits and tenets of the system that is working marvelously for all of them, but not for all of us.

Captain Adverse said:

I'm fairly sick of non-American's who think they know what's best for the U.S.A. :roll:

Click to expand...

And vice versa.

The problem isn’t globalization or automation instead it’s instead the increase of wealth and power to the economic elite during the last couple of decades at the expense of the people. For example, Americans workers have gotten stagnated or even declining real wages during the last couple of decades.

For most workers, real wages have barely budged for decades | Pew Research Center

My country Sweden have also seen increased inequality during the last couple of decades while thanks to strong unions Swedish works at least gotten real wages increases.

https://translate.google.se/transla...lloneutveckling---internationellt/&edit-text=

The Swedish Trade Union Confederation - The Collective Agreement

That this also the solution that people organize for a more equal society.

The same with trade deals that the problem is often not that county A benefit more than country B instead it’s the trade deals is often written to benefit the economic elite in both country A and B. So, you need people in country A and B working together for trade deals that benefit the people instead of the economic elite.

Also, nationalistic movement can make things even worse. For example, how Trump try to use a nationalistic rhetoric to get people to support him even if he proposes more neoliberal policies that benefit the economic elite, like for example massive tax cuts for the wealthy.

Or how Brexit can lead to the UK can try to compete with EU members states by lowering taxes for corporation and the wealthy that already got massive tax cuts during the last couple of decades. It can also lead to that UK can try keep financial companies in the UK by lessen regulation and oversight over its tax havens. Thereby making it easier for wealthy people to hide their money and avoid taxes.

WCH said:

For the US as well as Britain, this slowly backs us away from being involved in a purely globalist world that has drained both our economies.

Click to expand...

you are so wrong on every level Britain is one of the biggest winners in the EU ... pre EU the UK was on a downward spiral, mass strikes the economy was going down the pan but with the help of the EU and Scotland's oil ... the Uk gradually turned things around (meanwhile Norway's oil over the years have built up a $900 billion surplus oil fund) ... and when Brexit is finalised it will not be Britain leaving the EU it will be England Wales and most likely N Ireland to ...

Back to America yes America first and made in America ... keep up the rhetoric and protectionism ... it will only be Americans buying those products and no one else

Godric1970 said:

you are so wrong on every level Britain is one of the biggest winners in the EU ... pre EU the UK was on a downward spiral, mass strikes the economy was going down the pan but with the help of the EU and Scotland's oil ... the Uk gradually turned things around (meanwhile Norway's oil over the years have built up a $900 billion surplus oil fund) ... and when Brexit is finalised it will not be Britain leaving the EU it will be England Wales and most likely N Ireland to ...

Back to America yes America first and made in America ... keep up the rhetoric and protectionism ... it will only be Americans buying those products and no one else

Click to expand...

Nothing but American suits me just fine.