Trade War with China
- Thread starter Ultra
- Start date
- Status
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I wonder if Trump read the article that said Mexico would be by far the primary benefactor of a Sino-US trade war. Soon after Trump slapped the tariffs on Mexico.
That is why moving your factories from China to Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia may not be such a great idea. You won't know when Trump slaps tariffs on them either.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Well, it’s pretty clear what Trump’s aim is - to get companies to set up production in the US.
First he starts a trade war with China; then he slaps tariffs on Mexico despite only just strong-arming them into a new NAFTA deal; he has also revoked most favourable trading status for India. Would not be a surprise if the likes of the Philippines and Vietnam are next on his hit list.
He is stubborn and stupid enough to slap tariffs and trade restrictions on every possible alternative manufacturing destination until setting up shop in the US becomes the only viable choice for anyone wanting access to the US market.
In the short to medium term, he may just get his wish for more manufacturing in the US; but that will come at a huge cost in increased consumer prices; higher inflation; reduced consumer choice and lower productivity etc (just look at the opportunistic profiteering activities of the US steel and aluminium industries in response to tariffs; and putting off much needed investment and reforms as a case study of where the US economy as a whole will be heading if he follows through with such a move).
The net result is he will create a walled garden where foreign companies set up factories to meet American domestic demand only; while the rest of the world practices increasingly free trade.
And in case any Trump supporters are too brainwashed to realise, that is a terrible position to be in. Just look up your recent history on the Cold War era trade and economics to see what parallels that is following.
Contrary to Trump’s simplistic views, trade benefits countries far more than just what the trade deficit figures shows.
America (or any country) purchase imports because it is cheaper than if they were to make it themselves domestically. So all of that trade is saving American companies and consumers money.
All trump’s protectionist job creation would do is eliminate that net saving and create inflation and inefficiency where America is spending considerably more resources to domestically produce things they could have bought in much cheaper.
All of that equals wasted capital investment and consumption; which equals lower growth and utility.
What Trump is doing will cause short to medium damage and pain to America’s trading partners, but all of that pales in comparison to the long term damage he is doing to America’s economy and competitiveness.
I know it’s a joke, but it is difficult to see how a Manchurian candidate could a better job of damaging America politically and economically.
First he starts a trade war with China; then he slaps tariffs on Mexico despite only just strong-arming them into a new NAFTA deal; he has also revoked most favourable trading status for India. Would not be a surprise if the likes of the Philippines and Vietnam are next on his hit list.
He is stubborn and stupid enough to slap tariffs and trade restrictions on every possible alternative manufacturing destination until setting up shop in the US becomes the only viable choice for anyone wanting access to the US market.
In the short to medium term, he may just get his wish for more manufacturing in the US; but that will come at a huge cost in increased consumer prices; higher inflation; reduced consumer choice and lower productivity etc (just look at the opportunistic profiteering activities of the US steel and aluminium industries in response to tariffs; and putting off much needed investment and reforms as a case study of where the US economy as a whole will be heading if he follows through with such a move).
The net result is he will create a walled garden where foreign companies set up factories to meet American domestic demand only; while the rest of the world practices increasingly free trade.
And in case any Trump supporters are too brainwashed to realise, that is a terrible position to be in. Just look up your recent history on the Cold War era trade and economics to see what parallels that is following.
Contrary to Trump’s simplistic views, trade benefits countries far more than just what the trade deficit figures shows.
America (or any country) purchase imports because it is cheaper than if they were to make it themselves domestically. So all of that trade is saving American companies and consumers money.
All trump’s protectionist job creation would do is eliminate that net saving and create inflation and inefficiency where America is spending considerably more resources to domestically produce things they could have bought in much cheaper.
All of that equals wasted capital investment and consumption; which equals lower growth and utility.
What Trump is doing will cause short to medium damage and pain to America’s trading partners, but all of that pales in comparison to the long term damage he is doing to America’s economy and competitiveness.
I know it’s a joke, but it is difficult to see how a Manchurian candidate could a better job of damaging America politically and economically.
if Trump wants American business entities to move back to continental US, good luck with that.
these companies outsourced their businesses / productions to Asia and China for good reasons:
1, high labour costs in USA,
2, strong and demanding trade unions,
3, too many lawyers looking for exploits.
to overcome the above 3 obstacles ain't easy.
these companies outsourced their businesses / productions to Asia and China for good reasons:
1, high labour costs in USA,
2, strong and demanding trade unions,
3, too many lawyers looking for exploits.
to overcome the above 3 obstacles ain't easy.
Quickie
Colonel
It's time to set up truly international technical bodies. The present ones are showing themselves to be unreliable and political.
IEEE lifts Huawei employees' peer review, editorial restrictions
WASHINGTON, June 2 (Xinhua) -- The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) announced Sunday that it had lifted restrictions on employees of Huawei and its affiliates to edit and peer-review IEEE's research papers.
The move came after the New York-based international technical organization decided Wednesday to bar Huawei staff from participating the research paper peer-review process because of the U.S. Department of Commerce's export control restrictions on Huawei.
The IEEE's initial restrictive approach triggered extensive criticism from the international research community. The China Computer Federation said Thursday that it would suspend cooperation with the IEEE's publications division.
In the new statement, the IEEE said employees of Huawei and its affiliates may participate as peer reviewers and editors in its publication process as it has received the requested clarification from the Department of Commerce on the application of the export control restrictions to the IEEE's publication activities.
All the IEEE members, regardless of their employers, can continue to participate in all of the activities of the IEEE, according to the statement.
IEEE lifts Huawei employees' peer review, editorial restrictions
WASHINGTON, June 2 (Xinhua) -- The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) announced Sunday that it had lifted restrictions on employees of Huawei and its affiliates to edit and peer-review IEEE's research papers.
The move came after the New York-based international technical organization decided Wednesday to bar Huawei staff from participating the research paper peer-review process because of the U.S. Department of Commerce's export control restrictions on Huawei.
The IEEE's initial restrictive approach triggered extensive criticism from the international research community. The China Computer Federation said Thursday that it would suspend cooperation with the IEEE's publications division.
In the new statement, the IEEE said employees of Huawei and its affiliates may participate as peer reviewers and editors in its publication process as it has received the requested clarification from the Department of Commerce on the application of the export control restrictions to the IEEE's publication activities.
All the IEEE members, regardless of their employers, can continue to participate in all of the activities of the IEEE, according to the statement.
The thing is, even if Trump is successful in using tariffs to get American producers to move back to the US, these producers won't be competitive in other world markets. By walling off your market, you also lose access to other markets because that's how the laws of economics work.
@plawolf I believe they are doing so deliberately, and it is not as bad a strategy as you think.
Despite posturing and having a larger military right now, US knows it cannot compete with China’s larger economy and industry head on. They know this very well, because Imperial Japan tried it against them and failed in WW2.
Instead, they are trying to make a “walled garden” like you say, and try to hold out China or at least delay it for decades.
The Soviets showed that it was a valid strategy for resisting a long time and competing on even ground with economically and industrially more powerful rivals.
If America creates an iron curtain where US standards are the only way, they can keep fighting from that bubble. The Soviets had horrible consumer goods, but it didn’t slow them down because they enforced the Soviet standard and didn’t tolerate more advanced ones. In the same way, US not having 5G or very little electronics manufacturing potential once China cuts them off won’t hurt them if there is no better alternative domestically to compare to.
Despite posturing and having a larger military right now, US knows it cannot compete with China’s larger economy and industry head on. They know this very well, because Imperial Japan tried it against them and failed in WW2.
Instead, they are trying to make a “walled garden” like you say, and try to hold out China or at least delay it for decades.
The Soviets showed that it was a valid strategy for resisting a long time and competing on even ground with economically and industrially more powerful rivals.
If America creates an iron curtain where US standards are the only way, they can keep fighting from that bubble. The Soviets had horrible consumer goods, but it didn’t slow them down because they enforced the Soviet standard and didn’t tolerate more advanced ones. In the same way, US not having 5G or very little electronics manufacturing potential once China cuts them off won’t hurt them if there is no better alternative domestically to compare to.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
It is interesting that while most economies are focussing in how to move up the value chain, Trump is attempting to force the US economy in the other direction. Essentially a of my opposition to Trump's policies stem from me being a US consumer and involvement in the US tech and financial sector, I see myself being directly worse off in the future as a result of his idiotic policies. To me, that's a lot more important than issues like IP theft and China surpassing the US as worlds biggest economy or decline of US power and influence on the international stage.
- Status