4 ms·

Questions that keep me awake: What is the endgame of this escalation of conflict between the US+Canada and China? If there's no endgame, why are politicians e

• nradov 8y ago
  The usual end game of this type of crisis is some kind of private negotiated deal which enables both sides to preserve public "face" while secretly giving up some concessions. Like when President Kennedy agreed to withdraw nuclear missiles from Turkey later as a quid pro quo to end the Cuban Missile Crisis.
  • lostlogin 8y ago
    But what happens when the stated positions of one side change by the day or even minute? The chest beating strongman typically has a position that is rigidly held and clear. It’s a situation with without precedent.
  • rat87 8y ago
    With Trump? unlikely
• ghostbrainalpha 8y ago
  I think its really simple. Cars made in China and sold in the U.S. have a 2% tariff. Cars made in the U.S. and sold in China have a 40% tariff. We need to balance that eventually. If we ignore it for another 40 years there won't be any American car companies. We don't have to have perfect balance tomorrow, or free trade exactly, its ok to allow them to exploit trade with us to some extent as there economy catches up with the west. But it is time for that assistance and trade imbalance to start to shrink. China has given no indication that they think we should be equal trading partners even after their country becomes the world leader in economy, scientific research, and military power.
  • lostlogin 8y ago
    The does sound fair and I agree with it, but the US hasn’t applied this to other countries and are smaller by population, economic, scientific and military measures, why should China apply it to the US?
  • 0xFFC 8y ago
    How about instead of negotiation a stupid trade deal, negotiate a smart one? For example, making sure a global minimum wage. One bullet and two aim. Making Chinese middle class more empowered, and the cost of making a car in China more.
  • rat87 8y ago
    Tarrifs tend to be complex and not mirrored on both sides for both items For instance when Europe put a tax on American chicken, America replied with a tax on their Trucks.
• shshhdhs 8y ago
  I'm not sure what the US' endgame is, but the overall endgame I expect is that in a couple decades, China (along with their allies) will challenge the primacy of the USD, which will be a split between the world backing two global currencies - the USD and RMB, and may see the decline and fall of the US world financial position.
  • mark_l_watson 8y ago
    I am a bit more optimistic about this. I think our US dollar with be a major part of special drawing rights (SDR) that will be the world’s currency for large financial transactions and this might happen sooner than later. I don’t think the US dollar gets abandoned, but we will lose some of our advantage of controlling the primary currency. I am disappointed that we don;t get along better with Russia and China. All three governments have major faults but it is in the interest of the world for super powers to get along. I still believe in a bright future caused by technological progress that will be a high tide lifting all boats. Yes, governments + corruption, etc. will be as bad as ever but I expect the lives of most people on this planet to get even better in the future.
  • aiisjustanif 8y ago
    China's goal is to own Indian Ocean trading route, and essentially own majority of Africa's Indian Ocean Coast (Including resources). The goal of US is to gain some foothole in becoming a major producer in manufacturing again. The end goal for both is to slow the other down, or reduce their military foot print by a major public/private deal. On a separate note the US just recently starting to pay attention to Africa's resources and wealth and China's recent grasp on it (railroads, Somalia's coast, education systems, etc). India and many countries of Africa will play a big role in what happens to US and China in terms of trade and future sanctions is another guess.
• xapata 8y ago
  Convergence. Per capita GDP becomes approximately equal in both countries. That's still a long time coming, or never.
• mark_l_watson 8y ago
  Since the beginning of history, elites has made money and accrued power by starting wars, often with ‘false flag’ operations. Think of Hitler’s people burning their government building, the US lying about the Tonkin Gulf incident to get us into a war. The list goes on, that is just two examples. Governments tend to be bad while almost universally people are good - that is my simplistic way of looking at the world, but it works for me. In my country, the USA, we have two parties who both support special interests and not interests of the common person. I argue that it is like this in most countries.
• csense 8y ago
  The US really helped China industrialize, they repaid the favor by screwing our economy by letting companies pay super-low wages and crap all over the environment, and stealing our tech to boot, so all the jobs moved there. US politicians basically ignored the situation until Trump got elected. The trade war is one thing he's done that's actually a step in the right direction. My idea is that we should tax the heck out of Chinese trade until they stop stealing our technology, pay their people better wages, get a freer political system, and stop challenging US global hegemony. If China won't, or can't, do those things, at least the taxes will make our government a pile of money and help us rebuild our economy by negating the unfair advantages China's behavior gains them.
  • zozbot123 8y ago
    At least some of these expectations are logically contradictory. And people in the U.S. might simply not realize how recent and historically-contingent "US global hegemony" really is. Prior to the commonly-acknowledged beginning of the US-URSS Cold War, the closest thing to a "global hegemony" were the UK - which had only just about shed outright political control of their former empire, "on which the sun never sets"!