Reply With Quote
Trump Hits China With Tariffs on $200 Billion in Goods, Escalating Trade War
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/u...ffs-trade.html
TRASH has decided for $200B more on China
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/15/polit...war/index.html
Trump Hits China With Tariffs on $200 Billion in Goods, Escalating Trade War
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/u...ffs-trade.html
Twist in the U.S. Tariff Battle: ‘It’s Helping China Be More Compe ive’
In the Pearl River Delta, companies are racing even faster toward more advanced manufacturing and products
There is an unintended consequence of the White House’s trade battle with China: Companies in the Pearl River Delta, the center of China’s manufacturing might, are accelerating toward making higher-quality products to compete against American goods.
In response to tariffs, which make his goods more expensive, Michael Lu of LTS Group plans to trim costs by using more robots at his plants, which make lamps, bulbs and other lighting products sold at American stores. He is also moving low-skilled work elsewhere in Asia.
Left in Shenzhen will be his research and development operations and a team of skilled workers who make his company’s more complex products, such as smart lighting.
“The U.S. tariffs are pushing China toward making the higher-end stuff,”
“It’s helping China be more compe ive down the road.”
After building its economy on a mountain of inexpensive exports, from socks to toys to steel, China has been on a mission to upgrade its output.
Accelerating that process wasn’t exactly the goal of President Trump’s tariffs.
Meanwhile, the shift to higher-value products is well under way in the Pearl River Delta—one of the world’s largest cluster of urban areas, with nine cities.
Nearly four decades ago, Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping chose the region to be the vanguard for China’s economic liberalization.
In the years since, it has turned to making sophisticated electronics including smartphones and semiconductors.
In 2000, 17% of the region’s industrial output was classified as high-tech products, including electronics, biotech and aerospace components.
That rose to 44% last year,
Many of its clients make products on the $200 billion list of tariffs, which have left them searching for ways to cut costs—including asking Mr. Liao for less expensive chips.
His solution: Buy fewer chips from his chief American chip supplier,Qualcomm Inc., and steer more business to a Chinese supplier, Telink Semiconductor Co.
By 2019, he expects to buy half his chips from China, up from 20% last year.
Those purchases will help support a domestic semiconductor industry China is spending billions of dollars to nurture.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-twist...ive-1537194771
China says it will immediately retaliate when Trump tariffs take effect
Beijing struck back Tuesday against President Trump’s new tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports,
vowing it would immediately retaliate when they take effect and
threatening a protracted dispute that could raise the prices of household goods in both countries.
“In order to safeguard our legitimate rights and interests and the global free trade order, China will have to take countermeasures,”
The Chinese government will impose tariffs of up to 10 percent on an additional $60 billion in American goods following Trump’s escalation,
slapping higher border taxes on nearly all U.S. exports to China.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...nl_most&wpmm=1
'Heckuva job, Trashie"
o inflation.
Instant inflation, just add tariffs.
... and you still couldn't vote for a Democrat over Trump in the general.
I guess you are getting the trade policy you want then.
Trump will slap 10% tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods — and they will go to 25% at year-end
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/trum...escalates.html
It wont' be rich people who pay the largest percentage of their incomes to taxes, it will be the poor.
the poors though, right? You got yours, and they have only themselves to blame for not being born wealthy.
https://www.dw.com/de/die-sojabohne-...eit/a-45560078
The soybean as a boomerang in the trade war. (lit: trade dispute, but "trade war" is probably closer to authors intent-RG)
(google translation, pretty close)
Many US farmers now fear failures in soybeans. How right they are with their fears was recently seen in Kansas City. The US Soybean Export Council, an industry association of soybean farmers, had invited to a congress and a representative from China showed them what to expect: Mu Yan Kui, from one of the largest Chinese soybean processors, presented a six-point plan with which China's pig farmers want to reduce the feeding with soy.
27 million tons less
If the plan becomes reality and the typical soy ration for a Chinese pig falls from 20 percent of its feed to 12 percent - and a fifth of soybean soybeans are [not purchased/demanded] in other countries - then China needs 27 million fewer tons of soybeans per year , That's more than 80 percent of US imports to China for the feed material.
This is called "demand destruction".
The increased prices are going to change habits for Chinese pig farmers, and that change will reduce their demand for US Soy.
Permanently.
You are wrong here. It will not be a s game in the long run, and the demand for US soy will not need to be made up by other countries in a s game.
The demand will simply... go away.
is this what it means to treat the country like a business/corporation?
Using other people's money, eyup.
Alibaba will no longer bring 1 million jobs to the US, citing tariffs
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/19/1...s-jobs-tariffs
Trump doesn't talk as much about trade deficits anymore. Maybe because they're getting worse
President Trump built his trade policy on an obsession with cutting fat U.S. deficits with China, Mexico, Europe and others.
U.S. trade deficits have soared since he took office, driven up by strong consumer spending but also by the blizzard of tariffs he unleashed to lower deficits.
Eager to avoid anticipated higher prices, American businesses have responded to tariffs by ramping up imports from China and elsewhere.
The overall U.S. trade deficit rose 10% last year to $552 billion, after being flat the prior two years. The deficit surged another 7% this year through July.
“There’s no good answer for him; that’s why he’s not talking about it,”
“I watch trade deficits because to me, deficits are very important,” Trump said. But then he added a rare note of skepticism about deficits.
“They're not everything, and they're not exact,” he said.
“Sometimes you can have … a deficit and that's not such a bad thing.”
deficits are likely to keep growing.
Stronger economic growth, boosted in part by tax cuts, has given people more money to buy imported things, and American companies will keep trying to hedge against more and higher tariffs to come.
“Everybody in their right mind is thinking about how they can get products to the U.S. and store them,”
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...19-story.html#
"deficits BAD, I'm the only one to fix them. Believe me"
Huge deficits for Trash's "deficit fixit" policies? "not exact" = fake news
Dude, you ALWAYS correlate wealth with birth rite.....not everyone that has money was born into it but you absolutely refuse to acknowledge that and EVERY time it’s brought up, you comment as though ALL of them were born with a silver spoon. Even the Forbes top 400, only 30% were born into the money. Just pointing it out.
Anatole Kaletsky: China's advantage is demand management
https://www.project-syndicate.org/co...letsky-2018-09Trump’s surprisingly successful rhetorical technique of “shout loudly and carry a white flag” helps to explain the consistent inconsistency of his foreign policy. The US-China trade war is likely to provide the next example.
Eric Schmidt, ex-Google CEO, is predicting Internet will split in two, one operated from China, and one operated by USA/the West.
USA can't beat China, because USA LIES to itself with many myths that were never true, and/or certainly not true now,
so USA is too flabby, naive to take on China as a serious equal, even as a superior.
China's economy is run by their oligarchy that defines national industrial strategy,
while the USA is run by its (Capitalistic) oligarchy whose strategy is exclusively self-enrichment by amassing Capital
The Cost of Trump’s Economic Nationalism: A Loss of Foreign Investment in the United States
his policy of economic nationalism has taken a toll in another important sphere:
Net inward investment into the United States by multinational corporations—
both foreign and American—
has fallen almost to zero.
this shift of corporate investment away from the United States will
decrease long-term US income growth,
reduce the number of well-paid jobs available, and
accelerate the shift of global commerce away from the United States.
https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investm...estment-united
So sick of WINNING!
It's Friedman, but anyway, he has some facts (not fact checked)...
Trump to China: ‘I Own You.’ Guess Again.
The Chinese are catching up to the U.S. in many ways, and the president grasps only part of the reason.
Early in the movie “Crazy Rich Asians” a Chinese-Singaporean father admonishes his young kids to finish their dinner, saying,
“Think of all the starving children in America.”
rich China today — its luxury homes, cars, restaurants and hotels —
is really rich, rich like most Americans can’t imagine.
who will set the key rules of the global order in the 21st century:
the world’s long-dominant economic and military superpower, America, or its rising rival, China.
And this test is playing out with a blossoming full-scale trade war.
it’s just “too late” for America to tell China what to do anymore on issues like trade,
because China is now too big and powerful.
as one top tech executive pointed out to me:
“China is not a ‘near peer’ anymore. It is a peer.”
five years ago China had only two of the
world’s largest publicly traded tech companies,
while the U.S. had nine.
Today, China has nine of the top 20 — Alibaba, Tencent, Ant Financial, Baidu, Xiaomi, Didi, JD.com, Meituan and Toutiao —
and the U.S. has 11.
Twenty years ago, China had none.
The total value of China’s internet economy is already bigger than America’s.
“If data is the new oil, then China is the new Saudi Arabia,” remarked Kai-Fu Lee
we have three huge assets that China doesn’t have, and is unlikely to acquire them anytime soon.
We should be doubling down on our strengths:
immigration,
allies and
values
Instead, Trump is squandering them.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/25/o...er=rss&emc=rss
Trump trade adviser was asked if he’s worried about price increases. His answer wasn’t reassuring.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro offered a simple message to American concerned about paying higher prices for goods thanks to the president’s trade war — “trust in Trump.”
... if he’s “worried” that “American consumers — who do pay the tariffs, it’s not governments — are going to be looking at a pretty pricey Christmas shopping season.”
“I think, Neil, we need to put this in context,” Navarro said. “I think it’s trust in Trump.”
Cavuto followed up by pressing Navarro for a more substantial answer.
Navarro responded by making a case that
the relatively low prices Americans are used to paying are “the creation of unfair trade practices” and actually “have a high cost.”
https://thinkprogress.org/peter-nava...-3da0d74dbb5a/
So Navarro/Trash/Mnuchin are removing low prices for Americans, so they can punish China.
China is selling "high cost" at a low price (at a loss?) to Americans, so it can maintain for decades an "unAmerican" annual growth rate, including 6% in 2018 while being punished by Trash.
Trust in Trash, he always is upfront and truthful.
Funny, no one has mentioned that it looks like a new US/Mexico/Canada trade deal got done.
Guess salacious gossip is more fun.
Of course NAFTA has been mentioned.
Tell us all the differences, head cheerleader.
Nope. Do your own research head. Google is pretty easy to use.
NAFTA2 is only marginally different from NAFTA1
sorry we already mentioned your big news, scoop. Take your meds.
The NAFTA rework was mostly done during the TPP negotiations. Good for Trump in that he inched the ball over the goal line, I guess.
I am surprised that Canada gave in before the midterms. I guess that is what government is like when it serves the people over it's leader's ego, kinda hard to wrap one's mind around at this point.
Mobility in income is a myth for the US. the data show that people born poor, generally stay poor.
The Forbes top 400 is sort of a bad sample though, to draw any conclusions from about how people improve themselves. Neither scientific, nor large enough across income levels.
socio/economic mobility in USA is now LOWER than in Western Europe.
the demographic stats are clear and long-term
why? universal health care, free or very cheap education, a truly safe safety net, investment in public transport and infrastructure, worker protections, paid maternity leave, etc, etc. aka, ING civilization delivered by social democracy
on all every big check box, USA loses, and USA is getting much worse under the jackboot of Capital.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
