3 ms·

THe problem with this prediction is that there is an astronomical amount of money tied up in global trade. To stop that would be incredibly disruptive. Thats

THe problem with this prediction is that there is an astronomical amount of money tied up in global trade. To stop that would be incredibly disruptive. Thats not to say it won't happen (history has plenty of examples. WWI is a recent one). However for the "end of shipping" to happen we need those vested interests to stop being interested in literal trillions of dollars worth of trade. I can see a few scenarios where that happens, but russian embargoes isnt one of them. China attacking Taiwan, perhaps. Again there is a huge amount of rich people who don't really want that to happen, both inside and outside of china. Again, this isn't to say that Xi isn't stupid enough to try.

Barrera 4y ago
The point Zeihan makes is that world trade as we know it a recent invention. It exists purely as a result of the US commitment to protect trade from piracy around the world. Prior to that, the system was one of isolated empires each protecting their own routes. As the US is largely self-sufficient in energy and will likely start becoming self-sufficient in a great many things, it needs the rest of the world less and less. Those shipping lines, which mainly benefit the rest of the world, start to look like an expensive relic with each passing year. All it takes for an end of shipping is for the US to stop protecting shipping lines which mainly benefit foreign governments.
- bombcar 4y ago
  And this already exists in parts of the world the US doesn't bother with and shippers avoid them.
- KaiserPro 4y ago
  > world trade as we know it a recent invention I'm going to be very bold here, and say thats almost entirely incorrect. Any empire in the last 2000 years has depended on global trade. Before empire, in the bronze age, there is evidence of international trade. > it needs the rest of the world less and less. If we ignore the part where its almost entirely untrue that the USA is becoming self sufficient(its not, there is a reason why the Dollar is the international trade currency), It needs the world to export to. > Those shipping lines, which mainly benefit the rest of the world [citation needed] ~14% of the entire economy is spent on imports: https://www.statista.com/statistics/259096/us-imports-as-a-percentage-of-gdp/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/259096/us-imports-as-a-p... about 11% of GDP is tied to exports. (see previous link, fiddle to get exports.) > All it takes for an end of shipping is for the US to stop protecting shipping lines What shipping lines is it specifically protecting? Unless the ship is a US flag carrier, there is no legal obligation for the US to protect it. The % of global trade using US based ships is three tenths of fuck all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity... according to the US's own stats its 0.6% of all global shipping: https://www.bts.gov/content/number-and-size-us-flag-merchant-fleet-and-its-share-world-fleet https://www.bts.gov/content/number-and-size-us-flag-merchant... The US stopped all that >60 years ago. The things that stop global trade are disasters, wars, or weird autocracy fetishes (see expelling jews(middle ages), WWI, James I & Charles I being inept, north korea.) not "the natural order".

Barrera 4y ago

The point Zeihan makes is that world trade as we know it a recent invention. It exists purely as a result of the US commitment to protect trade from piracy around the world. Prior to that, the system was one of isolated empires each protecting their own routes. As the US is largely self-sufficient in energy and will likely start becoming self-sufficient in a great many things, it needs the rest of the world less and less. Those shipping lines, which mainly benefit the rest of the world, start to look like an expensive relic with each passing year. All it takes for an end of shipping is for the US to stop protecting shipping lines which mainly benefit foreign governments.

bombcar 4y ago
And this already exists in parts of the world the US doesn't bother with and shippers avoid them.
KaiserPro 4y ago
> world trade as we know it a recent invention I'm going to be very bold here, and say thats almost entirely incorrect. Any empire in the last 2000 years has depended on global trade. Before empire, in the bronze age, there is evidence of international trade. > it needs the rest of the world less and less. If we ignore the part where its almost entirely untrue that the USA is becoming self sufficient(its not, there is a reason why the Dollar is the international trade currency), It needs the world to export to. > Those shipping lines, which mainly benefit the rest of the world [citation needed] ~14% of the entire economy is spent on imports: https://www.statista.com/statistics/259096/us-imports-as-a-percentage-of-gdp/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/259096/us-imports-as-a-p... about 11% of GDP is tied to exports. (see previous link, fiddle to get exports.) > All it takes for an end of shipping is for the US to stop protecting shipping lines What shipping lines is it specifically protecting? Unless the ship is a US flag carrier, there is no legal obligation for the US to protect it. The % of global trade using US based ships is three tenths of fuck all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity... according to the US's own stats its 0.6% of all global shipping: https://www.bts.gov/content/number-and-size-us-flag-merchant-fleet-and-its-share-world-fleet https://www.bts.gov/content/number-and-size-us-flag-merchant... The US stopped all that >60 years ago. The things that stop global trade are disasters, wars, or weird autocracy fetishes (see expelling jews(middle ages), WWI, James I & Charles I being inept, north korea.) not "the natural order".