6 ms·

Of all the nutty, anxiety-inducing and self-destructive things administration is doing right now, this trade war with China leaves me least concerned. In fact I

by vbtemp 8y ago

Of all the nutty, anxiety-inducing and self-destructive things administration is doing right now, this trade war with China leaves me least concerned. In fact I'm curious to see where it leads. Change my mind?

tpfour 8y ago
This was an interesting read: https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/we-know-what-causes-trade-deficits https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/we-know....
- vbtemp 8y ago
  Thanks
Quarrelsome 8y ago
do you realise that global tariffs was a strong factor into the build up of the Great Depression? To me, its the most concerning aspect of all of Trump's activity as it has the capacity to strongly influence global events.
martythemaniak 8y ago
Generally speaking, you're trading economic growth and progress for "lols". Changing you mind is completely meaningless unless we know what you're actually after. If the outcome you're after is "lols", or it's politically-correct phrasing "getting tough on China", then why would anyone try to change your mind?
- vbtemp 8y ago
  Everyone except you responded with something well-reasoned and interesting. Does that change your mind about your ill-considered and rude response to me here?
  - martythemaniak 8y ago
    Isn't it ruder to assume that you think exactly as I do? And why do you take offense at someone asking about your intent? An action is meaningless in isolation and without context. Even something as "obvious" as killing a person cannot be right or wrong without being aware of the context in which it occurred and taking into account the intent of the person. So we're discussing an action "trade war" and you're asking, essentially, is it right or wrong. You can't get a good answer without revealing what you're actually after. Other people merely assumed your intent, whereas I asked you about it. There's a lot of this assumed intent these days, where people can't possibly imagine someone thinking differently than them. So if work with the "economic growth and standard of living increase" intent, then Trump's trade war is idiotic, and we can then show that in many different ways. But Trump's supporters don't share this intent, they're perfectly fine with sacrificing economic growth for other outcomes, mostly about trying to protect their dominant group status. In light of that intent, the same action makes a ton of sense. People should keep in mind that others don't think as they do.
- daenz 8y ago
  Why are you assuming they're arguing in bad faith when nothing they've said implies that? I'm interested in a solid answer to his question as well.
- p7hwfizeONj 8y ago
  Op never said anything about 'lols'. I'm cautious but this is one area where I think the administration might be doing something correctly (but I don't know). We lost a lot of manufacturing and it should have been OK because we could just move up the value chain to tech. Between the great firewall, restrictive cloud rules, partnership requirements, and IP transfers that hasn't worked out. I don't know if the policies are best but I agree with the statement that as far as all the administrations policy proposals, this is one example of where I'm willing to take a wait-and-see approach.
thinkcontext 8y ago
It has the potential for the most dramatic long term consequences as it could dramatically speed up China's rise. China's economy is where future growth is, to get access to that growth capital will reallocate itself around these trade barriers to China's advantage if they persist. Also, part of the reason the US dollar is the chief world trading currency and the US Treasury is considered the world's safest investment is open trade policy. This preferential place in the world financial system gives the US economy major advantages, including low interest rates. Attacking the entire world at the same time is a really bad plan. The chance of wringing concessions from China would be much greater if the US would make common cause with the EU, Japan, etc. But the opposite is happening, the rest of the world is moving on w/o the US as we saw with TPP and the recent EU / Japan deal. Expect to see things like China start canceling deals w/ Boeing and inking new deals with Airbus. Finally, there's a military dimension to this. China is raising tariffs on US oil at the same time it is saying it won't respect Trump's sanctions on Iran. Its unlikely anything would happen in the immediate term but if this situation persists its not far fetched to imagine things getting tense.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

by vbtemp 8y ago

tpfour 8y ago

This was an interesting read: https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/we-know-what-causes-trade-deficits https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/we-know....

vbtemp 8y ago
Thanks

Quarrelsome 8y ago

do you realise that global tariffs was a strong factor into the build up of the Great Depression? To me, its the most concerning aspect of all of Trump's activity as it has the capacity to strongly influence global events.

martythemaniak 8y ago

Generally speaking, you're trading economic growth and progress for "lols". Changing you mind is completely meaningless unless we know what you're actually after. If the outcome you're after is "lols", or it's politically-correct phrasing "getting tough on China", then why would anyone try to change your mind?

vbtemp 8y ago
Everyone except you responded with something well-reasoned and interesting. Does that change your mind about your ill-considered and rude response to me here?
- martythemaniak 8y ago
  Isn't it ruder to assume that you think exactly as I do? And why do you take offense at someone asking about your intent? An action is meaningless in isolation and without context. Even something as "obvious" as killing a person cannot be right or wrong without being aware of the context in which it occurred and taking into account the intent of the person. So we're discussing an action "trade war" and you're asking, essentially, is it right or wrong. You can't get a good answer without revealing what you're actually after. Other people merely assumed your intent, whereas I asked you about it. There's a lot of this assumed intent these days, where people can't possibly imagine someone thinking differently than them. So if work with the "economic growth and standard of living increase" intent, then Trump's trade war is idiotic, and we can then show that in many different ways. But Trump's supporters don't share this intent, they're perfectly fine with sacrificing economic growth for other outcomes, mostly about trying to protect their dominant group status. In light of that intent, the same action makes a ton of sense. People should keep in mind that others don't think as they do.
daenz 8y ago
Why are you assuming they're arguing in bad faith when nothing they've said implies that? I'm interested in a solid answer to his question as well.
p7hwfizeONj 8y ago
Op never said anything about 'lols'. I'm cautious but this is one area where I think the administration might be doing something correctly (but I don't know). We lost a lot of manufacturing and it should have been OK because we could just move up the value chain to tech. Between the great firewall, restrictive cloud rules, partnership requirements, and IP transfers that hasn't worked out. I don't know if the policies are best but I agree with the statement that as far as all the administrations policy proposals, this is one example of where I'm willing to take a wait-and-see approach.

thinkcontext 8y ago

It has the potential for the most dramatic long term consequences as it could dramatically speed up China's rise. China's economy is where future growth is, to get access to that growth capital will reallocate itself around these trade barriers to China's advantage if they persist. Also, part of the reason the US dollar is the chief world trading currency and the US Treasury is considered the world's safest investment is open trade policy. This preferential place in the world financial system gives the US economy major advantages, including low interest rates. Attacking the entire world at the same time is a really bad plan. The chance of wringing concessions from China would be much greater if the US would make common cause with the EU, Japan, etc. But the opposite is happening, the rest of the world is moving on w/o the US as we saw with TPP and the recent EU / Japan deal. Expect to see things like China start canceling deals w/ Boeing and inking new deals with Airbus. Finally, there's a military dimension to this. China is raising tariffs on US oil at the same time it is saying it won't respect Trump's sanctions on Iran. Its unlikely anything would happen in the immediate term but if this situation persists its not far fetched to imagine things getting tense.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]