7 ms·

Trump's whole schtick is to come in with an incredibly aggressive posture (cancel NAFTA!), extract some concessions, then take a victory lap. When the concessio

Trump's whole schtick is to come in with an incredibly aggressive posture (cancel NAFTA!), extract some concessions, then take a victory lap. When the concessions don't come he gives up quickly (see the government shutdown). He has no real plan or capacity for a protracted and painful trade war. He hasn't made the case to his people or his allies for what the goal even is, and whatever support he has will evaporate when the pain becomes serious, assuming he doesn't just fold first.

disease 7y ago
You are right on everything except his support. His followers will support him unconditionally.
WillPostForFood 7y ago
First China tariffs were in January 2018, when do you start to consider the trade war protracted? I’d say it is already painful and protracted.
- jhpriestley 7y ago
  Painful would be the 35 percent GDP contraction that Cuba endured, without regime change, after the USSR fell, under continuing US sanctions. Or the hyperinflation and food rationing that Venezuela has endured, without regime change, under US sanctions. Do you think Trump could lead the USA through that kind of pain?
jaimex2 7y ago
China is more or less out of options already though. Their economy is trashed to the point they are already devaluing their currency. HK situation certainly isn't helping either. In the meantime every tariff they add just serves Trump's goal of keeping jobs in America ( or at least that is how he will pitch it). Were already seeing plenty of companies pack up shop in China.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
duxup 7y ago
He already could have taken a victory lap and done effectively nothing with the first offer from China. He chose to double down. I'd say there is no plan and it is just the randomness of a capricious old man. That's a glib take I admit, but I really think that all indications are we're dealing with a very glib president.
- inflatableDodo 7y ago
  There is either no plan, or there is a plan to utterly trash the US and it is working.
  - duxup 7y ago
    I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another considering the way things have played out / information available. But as for any intent to "trash the US", at least as far as a trade fight goes I'm not convinced that any other trade fight plays out any differently. Personally I would do things differently, but the results may be the same.
    - inflatableDodo 7y ago
      Not having the trade fight plays out differently. edit - I thought I'd respond to this bit as well - >I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another When the President of the US is comparing China with the head of the Federal Reserve, in order to claim that the Federal Reserve is a domestic enemy, while systematically poisoning relations with any country that hosts a US military base, Denmark/Greenland being just the latest example, then I think it is possible to distinguish the two. Someone being random tends not to travel in a specific direction unless it is the path of least resistance.
- imchillyb 7y ago
  I don't believe that you are considering that President Trump is a master negotiator. It's what he's known for in the business world. His hard-nosed deals bring profits for his investors, and massive revenue streams. Call him whatever you will, and demean him to the world, it still won't change facts; he's an extraordinarily profitable businessman, with extreme revenue returns. ::shrug:: The proof is in the pudding so to speak. Our President's actions will prove themselves, one way or another.
simonh 7y ago
That’s seems to be happening over NAFTA, you’ll likely just end up with a somewhat update NAFTA 2, which I’m sure will be the best trade deal in the history of trade deals, unlike the largely identical previous NAFTA. I think the China tariffs are different. Both sides have doubled down, then doubled down again. It’s even possible both Trump and China see this as an opportunity to reduce their dependency on each other. China also may calculate thus could take some excess heat out of their economy. If there is a down turn, which many observers have been predicting anyway, they can blame Trump and make enduring austerity a patriotic issue. A similar dynamic is playing out with Brexit. A no deal exit may be hugely damaging to both sides. But they each calculate they can blame it on the other side, and even paint anyone complaining about the effects as unpatriotic. That won’t necessarily persuade the complainers, but as long as it plays well to the politicians own support base that may not matter enough electorally.
tonyedgecombe 7y ago
In general yes but the consensus seems to be that China has been a problem and although Trump hasn't necessarily gone about it in the right way something needed to be done. My guess is the people around him are quite happy for this to continue.
rrggrr 7y ago
Not a trade war. The Trump administration goal is nothing short of regime change in China; and it's a goal the next President (Trump, Warren, etc.) will likely continue. By 'regime' I mean an end to Chinese 'destiny' based policy, even if it requires a change in CCP leadership. That's not to say the CCP will be displaced, rather the balance of power internally may change. HN readers are hip to the reasons why this needs to happen. Internally, China is destroying its people's savings, purchasing power, environment and health to achieve China's 'great destiny'. Externally, China has created all manner of artificial economic inefficiencies. This includes debt enslavement of African and central Asian nations, dumping of goods, and theft of IP at a monolithic scale. It's true that the full case has yet to be made to the American people. It's also true the US cannot do this alone and the EU (China's largest trading partner) may have to join the fight. And, it is the case that a 'trade deal' may be reached between Trump and China that falls short. None of this is going to alter the larger national (global) security objective of 'helping' China compete for resources in a less zero sum manner.
- theseadroid 7y ago
  >Internally, China is destroying its people's savings, purchasing power, environment and health to achieve China's 'great destiny'. More reference is needed. As a Mandarin Chinese my impression so far is otherwise.
  - rrggrr 7y ago
    RMB declining in open market against USD. China issues much debt in USD and pays interest in USD. What should be 1 unit of debt is 6 or 7 units of debt because of currency differential & risk premium. China purchases many imports in USD. To keep RMB well under USD, China must sell USD and buy RMB in open market. This has happened for many years. In sum, as long as China subsidizes domestic market the effect of all of this is not felt to most Chinese. However, this becomes very, very, very, very costly. Look at food prices in China as one example. When there is a rebalance / reconciliation the RMB savings will be hurt. China hopes to prevent this by gold purchase and Belt & Road growth. Very difficult situation. Bad management of economy.

disease 7y ago

You are right on everything except his support. His followers will support him unconditionally.

WillPostForFood 7y ago

First China tariffs were in January 2018, when do you start to consider the trade war protracted? I’d say it is already painful and protracted.

jhpriestley 7y ago
Painful would be the 35 percent GDP contraction that Cuba endured, without regime change, after the USSR fell, under continuing US sanctions. Or the hyperinflation and food rationing that Venezuela has endured, without regime change, under US sanctions. Do you think Trump could lead the USA through that kind of pain?

jaimex2 7y ago

China is more or less out of options already though. Their economy is trashed to the point they are already devaluing their currency. HK situation certainly isn't helping either. In the meantime every tariff they add just serves Trump's goal of keeping jobs in America ( or at least that is how he will pitch it). Were already seeing plenty of companies pack up shop in China.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

duxup 7y ago

He already could have taken a victory lap and done effectively nothing with the first offer from China. He chose to double down. I'd say there is no plan and it is just the randomness of a capricious old man. That's a glib take I admit, but I really think that all indications are we're dealing with a very glib president.

inflatableDodo 7y ago
There is either no plan, or there is a plan to utterly trash the US and it is working.
- duxup 7y ago
  I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another considering the way things have played out / information available. But as for any intent to "trash the US", at least as far as a trade fight goes I'm not convinced that any other trade fight plays out any differently. Personally I would do things differently, but the results may be the same.
  - inflatableDodo 7y ago
    Not having the trade fight plays out differently. edit - I thought I'd respond to this bit as well - >I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another When the President of the US is comparing China with the head of the Federal Reserve, in order to claim that the Federal Reserve is a domestic enemy, while systematically poisoning relations with any country that hosts a US military base, Denmark/Greenland being just the latest example, then I think it is possible to distinguish the two. Someone being random tends not to travel in a specific direction unless it is the path of least resistance.
imchillyb 7y ago
I don't believe that you are considering that President Trump is a master negotiator. It's what he's known for in the business world. His hard-nosed deals bring profits for his investors, and massive revenue streams. Call him whatever you will, and demean him to the world, it still won't change facts; he's an extraordinarily profitable businessman, with extreme revenue returns. ::shrug:: The proof is in the pudding so to speak. Our President's actions will prove themselves, one way or another.

simonh 7y ago

That’s seems to be happening over NAFTA, you’ll likely just end up with a somewhat update NAFTA 2, which I’m sure will be the best trade deal in the history of trade deals, unlike the largely identical previous NAFTA. I think the China tariffs are different. Both sides have doubled down, then doubled down again. It’s even possible both Trump and China see this as an opportunity to reduce their dependency on each other. China also may calculate thus could take some excess heat out of their economy. If there is a down turn, which many observers have been predicting anyway, they can blame Trump and make enduring austerity a patriotic issue. A similar dynamic is playing out with Brexit. A no deal exit may be hugely damaging to both sides. But they each calculate they can blame it on the other side, and even paint anyone complaining about the effects as unpatriotic. That won’t necessarily persuade the complainers, but as long as it plays well to the politicians own support base that may not matter enough electorally.

tonyedgecombe 7y ago

In general yes but the consensus seems to be that China has been a problem and although Trump hasn't necessarily gone about it in the right way something needed to be done. My guess is the people around him are quite happy for this to continue.

rrggrr 7y ago

Not a trade war. The Trump administration goal is nothing short of regime change in China; and it's a goal the next President (Trump, Warren, etc.) will likely continue. By 'regime' I mean an end to Chinese 'destiny' based policy, even if it requires a change in CCP leadership. That's not to say the CCP will be displaced, rather the balance of power internally may change. HN readers are hip to the reasons why this needs to happen. Internally, China is destroying its people's savings, purchasing power, environment and health to achieve China's 'great destiny'. Externally, China has created all manner of artificial economic inefficiencies. This includes debt enslavement of African and central Asian nations, dumping of goods, and theft of IP at a monolithic scale. It's true that the full case has yet to be made to the American people. It's also true the US cannot do this alone and the EU (China's largest trading partner) may have to join the fight. And, it is the case that a 'trade deal' may be reached between Trump and China that falls short. None of this is going to alter the larger national (global) security objective of 'helping' China compete for resources in a less zero sum manner.

theseadroid 7y ago
>Internally, China is destroying its people's savings, purchasing power, environment and health to achieve China's 'great destiny'. More reference is needed. As a Mandarin Chinese my impression so far is otherwise.
- rrggrr 7y ago
  RMB declining in open market against USD. China issues much debt in USD and pays interest in USD. What should be 1 unit of debt is 6 or 7 units of debt because of currency differential & risk premium. China purchases many imports in USD. To keep RMB well under USD, China must sell USD and buy RMB in open market. This has happened for many years. In sum, as long as China subsidizes domestic market the effect of all of this is not felt to most Chinese. However, this becomes very, very, very, very costly. Look at food prices in China as one example. When there is a rebalance / reconciliation the RMB savings will be hurt. China hopes to prevent this by gold purchase and Belt & Road growth. Very difficult situation. Bad management of economy.