Trump's trade war with China

[Correll]

YOur inability to refute my point is noted. You ass.

Your point being trump policy can continue to fail and he has your complete support,

I dont' consider the longest economic expansion in history, to be a failure.

You must give Obama a lot of credit since most if it is his.

There's the irony. Now I don't give Obama credit for the economy Trump inherited, but deficits were declining and tax receipts gaining, and he did have at least some control over that. BUT EVEN TRUMP said he had to take on Jina while the economy was strong enough to sustain the growth killing aspect of tariffs. He didn't put enough pain on Jina to get it done in time though, and probably he screwed himself in bitching about Nato and in general being pissy to Europe instead of pushing their similar complaints on China to get a "coalition."

But by his own estimation, he was using the strong economy because Americans wouldn't feel the pain.

Nobody wins a trade war. Both sides suffer.

Funny, that Xi doesn't seem to know that.

 

[Correll]

1. No other nation has the ability to give China such a trade policy, nor is any other nation that stupid. Xi obviously wants to maintain that surplus, regardless of whether he increases trade with other nations, or whatever long term diplomatic plans he has.

China has a trade surplus with every nation it trades with, and for good reason. They are able to produce items cheaper than most other nations as we all take advantage of that. It is no different than why you go to the grocery store to buy your food instead of raising and growing all of your own. Others can do it cheaper than you could yourself and you take advantage of that.

China has an almost 2/1 trade imbalance with the world, they export far more than they import. The only industrialized nation that has a surplus with them is Japan, and that has much to do with their discrepancy in population.

China is actively working to expand its customer base, pumping money and resources into Africa, the final emerging market. While they do that, we pull back within our own borders and attack everyone that is not the US. China is happy for us to do this, as they fill the void we leave behind.

The worst thing that could happen to the US is for the world to find out they do not need us as much as they thought they did, and Trump is doing everything he can to show them they do not need us.

So, like I said, no other nation will be able to fill that void for them.

 

[Correll]

So, to be clear, you are dropping your point, that an end to the record setting 121 month expansion, can be considered "proof" that Trump's tariffs are "not working"?


Because that was what we were talking about. Your claim that the slowing economic proved that the Tariff were not working.


Which is a really stupid thing to claim, that a economy slowing after TEN FUCKING YEARS OF GROWTH, is evidence that something didn't work.


I just want to be clear, that you aren't going to just sideline that for a little bit, and then go back to it, as though it has not been utterly refuted.


You're not insanely dishonest like that are you.

Sounds like we got more growth from Obama...

I don’t see any indicator that trump policy has done anything good. Why do you support it?

So, are you dropping your previous claim, that the expansion, possibly ending at JUST OVER TEN FUCKING YEARS, is proof of a policy failing?

No. His policy has not brought the growth he claimed and we are actually slowing.

Got it. You are citing the US longest lasting economic expansion ever, at over TEN FUCKING YEARS, as proof of a trade policy failure.


Bold move, citing a massive success as evidence of failure.


You lose.

The trade policy in place prior to Trump is what brought us the economic expansion of TEN FUCKING YEARS, Yet all your Trump worshipers say we have to change because the trade policies were to terrible.

My concern is about the underlying trend in wages and jobs for the American workers, more than the current expansion.


Expansions come and go, but for the last 50 years, wages have lagged, especially at the lower end, and that needs addressed.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

If Trump wants to keep his strong stock market gains, he may want to stay off Twitter.

Days when Trump tweets a lot are associated with negative stock market returns, Bank of America Merrill Lynch said Tuesday in a report.

The brokerage’s chief equity strategist, Savita Subramanian, wrote in a note that “since 2016, days with more than 35 tweets (90 percent) by Trump have seen negative returns (-9bp), whereas days with less than 5 tweets (10 percent) have seen positive returns (+5bp) — statistically significant.” A basis point is 0.01 percent.

In other words, when Trump tweets more than usual, the stock market tends to fall.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/03/on-...stock-market-falls-investment-bank-finds.html

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump said on Tuesday that Chinese manufacturing would “crumble” if the country did not agree to the United States’ trade terms, as newly released data showed his trade war was hurting the factories that he had promised to protect.

Days after new tariffs went into effect on both sides of the Pacific, a closely watched index of American manufacturing activity signaled a contraction in United States factory activity for the first time since 2016.

“The U.S. trade war with the world has blown open a great big hole in manufacturers’ confidence,” Chris Rupkey, the chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank, reported. “The manufacturing sector has officially turned down and is falling for the first time this year as the China tariffs and slowdown in exports has really started to bite.”

As usual, speaking only to his gullible base, Trump tries to refute facts with mindless rhetoric.



Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

We are doing very well in our negotiations with China. While I am sure they would love to be dealing with a new administration so they could continue their practice of “ripoff USA”($600 B/year),16 months PLUS is a long time to be hemorrhaging jobs and companies on a long-shot.

"Hemorrhaging jobs and companies???" Trump doesn't know we are full employment? Like I said, he only talks to his fans. Besides, due to his trade war, the full employment scenario may not continue much longer. Our President will cause loss of employment, not China.

On Jan. 29, 2018, the Dow stood at 26,439.

The stock market took another major hit today. The Dow lost 285 points, ending up at 26,118.

"China’s Supply Chain will crumble and businesses, jobs and money will be gone!" Trump tweeted today.

His dwindling number of fans are totally silent on the issue.

Trump Says China Will Suffer as Data Shows Trade War Hurting U.S. helped with this report.

 

[Correll]

Trump said on Tuesday that Chinese manufacturing would “crumble” if the country did not agree to the United States’ trade terms, as newly released data showed his trade war was hurting the factories that he had promised to protect.

Days after new tariffs went into effect on both sides of the Pacific, a closely watched index of American manufacturing activity signaled a contraction in United States factory activity for the first time since 2016.

“The U.S. trade war with the world has blown open a great big hole in manufacturers’ confidence,” Chris Rupkey, the chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank, reported. “The manufacturing sector has officially turned down and is falling for the first time this year as the China tariffs and slowdown in exports has really started to bite.”

As usual, speaking only to his gullible base, Trump tries to refute facts with mindless rhetoric.



Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

We are doing very well in our negotiations with China. While I am sure they would love to be dealing with a new administration so they could continue their practice of “ripoff USA”($600 B/year),16 months PLUS is a long time to be hemorrhaging jobs and companies on a long-shot.

"Hemorrhaging jobs and companies???" Trump doesn't know we are full employment? Like I said, he only talks to his fans. Besides, due to his trade war, the full employment scenario may not continue much longer. Our President will cause loss of employment, not China.

On Jan. 29, 2018, the Dow stood at 26,439.

The stock market took another major hit today. The Dow lost 285 points, ending up at 26,118.

"China’s Supply Chain will crumble and businesses, jobs and money will be gone!" Trump tweeted today.

His dwindling number of fans are totally silent on the issue.

Trump Says China Will Suffer as Data Shows Trade War Hurting U.S. helped with this report.

Short term pain to deal with a long term injury.

 

[Brain357]

Yes. the end of a ten year expansion is proof of Trump screwing up on tariffs unless you can point to what else has caused the end of expansion. We have full employment. Without the tariffs, real wages were going up. No inflation to speak of. Fairly low rates, and credit card rates are not hindering consumer buying. In real estate, if anything we had a shortage of affordable first buyer homes.

The millennials continued to be being screwed, but that's really a generational carryover from the last recession.

It sure can when we have trillion dollar deficits. Historically low fed rate. Huge tax cut, Cuts in regulation, Your policy leading us to recession, you might want to rethink it.

You can't sanely claim that a policy is leading to recession, when the recession is delayed by at least FIVE YEARS PAST THE NORMAL TIME.


It would be like pointing to a man that died at 140, and using him as an example of what NOT to do, to take care of yourself.

Since we are already doing everything we do to get out of a recession, what will we do when we have one?

I'm more concerned about long term underlying trends.


But your point is a valid concern.


I'm glad you dropped your silly idea of citing success as proof of failure.


I think we should drastically curtail our military commitments so we can massively cut our military spending.

Cutting military spending won’t help us out of recession,

Correct. I was agreeing with your point about spending a lot during an expansion, what to do when the cycle turns and you are in a recession.

If we had reduced commitments/spending over the LAST 10 years of growth, then we would have lower spending now, that could be increased then.

Yes if we had good leadership that would have happened. Trump chose not to. Obama was clearly not good for the debt, but Trump increased his deficits during a strong economy. He's probably spending to cover up the damage done by his trade war.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. No other nation has the ability to give China such a trade policy, nor is any other nation that stupid. Xi obviously wants to maintain that surplus, regardless of whether he increases trade with other nations, or whatever long term diplomatic plans he has.

China has a trade surplus with every nation it trades with, and for good reason. They are able to produce items cheaper than most other nations as we all take advantage of that. It is no different than why you go to the grocery store to buy your food instead of raising and growing all of your own. Others can do it cheaper than you could yourself and you take advantage of that.

China has an almost 2/1 trade imbalance with the world, they export far more than they import. The only industrialized nation that has a surplus with them is Japan, and that has much to do with their discrepancy in population.

China is actively working to expand its customer base, pumping money and resources into Africa, the final emerging market. While they do that, we pull back within our own borders and attack everyone that is not the US. China is happy for us to do this, as they fill the void we leave behind.

The worst thing that could happen to the US is for the world to find out they do not need us as much as they thought they did, and Trump is doing everything he can to show them they do not need us.

So, like I said, no other nation will be able to fill that void for them.

And like I said, you are wrong. They are already finding ways to fill the void. This trade war just might fundamentally change the entire agriculture sector in this country, it is one of our strengths, but there is no market out there to replace a billion Chinese.

 

[Brain357]

YOur inability to refute my point is noted. You ass.

Your point being trump policy can continue to fail and he has your complete support,

I dont' consider the longest economic expansion in history, to be a failure.

You must give Obama a lot of credit since most if it is his.

There's the irony. Now I don't give Obama credit for the economy Trump inherited, but deficits were declining and tax receipts gaining, and he did have at least some control over that. BUT EVEN TRUMP said he had to take on Jina while the economy was strong enough to sustain the growth killing aspect of tariffs. He didn't put enough pain on Jina to get it done in time though, and probably he screwed himself in bitching about Nato and in general being pissy to Europe instead of pushing their similar complaints on China to get a "coalition."

But by his own estimation, he was using the strong economy because Americans wouldn't feel the pain.

Sounds reasonable.


After all, if you have an absurd trade imbalance, it should be addressed at some point. Right?

Should it? They are sending us real resources and in return getting paper. Many economists will tell you that isn't a problem.

 

[Brain357]

Your point being trump policy can continue to fail and he has your complete support,

I dont' consider the longest economic expansion in history, to be a failure.

You must give Obama a lot of credit since most if it is his.

There's the irony. Now I don't give Obama credit for the economy Trump inherited, but deficits were declining and tax receipts gaining, and he did have at least some control over that. BUT EVEN TRUMP said he had to take on Jina while the economy was strong enough to sustain the growth killing aspect of tariffs. He didn't put enough pain on Jina to get it done in time though, and probably he screwed himself in bitching about Nato and in general being pissy to Europe instead of pushing their similar complaints on China to get a "coalition."

But by his own estimation, he was using the strong economy because Americans wouldn't feel the pain.

Nobody wins a trade war. Both sides suffer.

Funny, that Xi doesn't seem to know that.

How do you mean? Both sides seem to be losing.

 

[Brain357]

1. No other nation has the ability to give China such a trade policy, nor is any other nation that stupid. Xi obviously wants to maintain that surplus, regardless of whether he increases trade with other nations, or whatever long term diplomatic plans he has.

China has a trade surplus with every nation it trades with, and for good reason. They are able to produce items cheaper than most other nations as we all take advantage of that. It is no different than why you go to the grocery store to buy your food instead of raising and growing all of your own. Others can do it cheaper than you could yourself and you take advantage of that.

China has an almost 2/1 trade imbalance with the world, they export far more than they import. The only industrialized nation that has a surplus with them is Japan, and that has much to do with their discrepancy in population.

China is actively working to expand its customer base, pumping money and resources into Africa, the final emerging market. While they do that, we pull back within our own borders and attack everyone that is not the US. China is happy for us to do this, as they fill the void we leave behind.

The worst thing that could happen to the US is for the world to find out they do not need us as much as they thought they did, and Trump is doing everything he can to show them they do not need us.

So, like I said, no other nation will be able to fill that void for them.

Do they need it filled? Do they really need our paper?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Sounds like we got more growth from Obama...

I don’t see any indicator that trump policy has done anything good. Why do you support it?

So, are you dropping your previous claim, that the expansion, possibly ending at JUST OVER TEN FUCKING YEARS, is proof of a policy failing?

No. His policy has not brought the growth he claimed and we are actually slowing.

Got it. You are citing the US longest lasting economic expansion ever, at over TEN FUCKING YEARS, as proof of a trade policy failure.


Bold move, citing a massive success as evidence of failure.


You lose.

The trade policy in place prior to Trump is what brought us the economic expansion of TEN FUCKING YEARS, Yet all your Trump worshipers say we have to change because the trade policies were to terrible.

My concern is about the underlying trend in wages and jobs for the American workers, more than the current expansion.


Expansions come and go, but for the last 50 years, wages have lagged, especially at the lower end, and that needs addressed.

Wages always lag, they only go up quickly when there is a shortage of workers,as we have now. That will not last,Trump's trade war may end it sooner.

 

[Brain357]

Sounds like we got more growth from Obama...

I don’t see any indicator that trump policy has done anything good. Why do you support it?

So, are you dropping your previous claim, that the expansion, possibly ending at JUST OVER TEN FUCKING YEARS, is proof of a policy failing?

No. His policy has not brought the growth he claimed and we are actually slowing.

Got it. You are citing the US longest lasting economic expansion ever, at over TEN FUCKING YEARS, as proof of a trade policy failure.


Bold move, citing a massive success as evidence of failure.


You lose.

The trade policy in place prior to Trump is what brought us the economic expansion of TEN FUCKING YEARS, Yet all your Trump worshipers say we have to change because the trade policies were to terrible.

My concern is about the underlying trend in wages and jobs for the American workers, more than the current expansion.


Expansions come and go, but for the last 50 years, wages have lagged, especially at the lower end, and that needs addressed.

I think that problem isn't trade, it is more to do with the decline in Unions. Manufacturing jobs paid well because of unions, not because manufacturing is such a hard or skilled job. The service industry needs unions.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Short term pain to deal with a long term injury.

What does China have to give up in order for you to consider the pain worthwhile?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So, are you dropping your previous claim, that the expansion, possibly ending at JUST OVER TEN FUCKING YEARS, is proof of a policy failing?

No. His policy has not brought the growth he claimed and we are actually slowing.

Got it. You are citing the US longest lasting economic expansion ever, at over TEN FUCKING YEARS, as proof of a trade policy failure.


Bold move, citing a massive success as evidence of failure.


You lose.

The trade policy in place prior to Trump is what brought us the economic expansion of TEN FUCKING YEARS, Yet all your Trump worshipers say we have to change because the trade policies were to terrible.

My concern is about the underlying trend in wages and jobs for the American workers, more than the current expansion.


Expansions come and go, but for the last 50 years, wages have lagged, especially at the lower end, and that needs addressed.

I think that problem isn't trade, it is more to do with the decline in Unions. Manufacturing jobs paid well because of unions, not because manufacturing is such a hard or skilled job. The service industry needs unions.

Unions were at least partially responsible for so many jobs leaving the country, they priced themselves out of being competitive.

 

[Brain357]

1. No other nation has the ability to give China such a trade policy, nor is any other nation that stupid. Xi obviously wants to maintain that surplus, regardless of whether he increases trade with other nations, or whatever long term diplomatic plans he has.

China has a trade surplus with every nation it trades with, and for good reason. They are able to produce items cheaper than most other nations as we all take advantage of that. It is no different than why you go to the grocery store to buy your food instead of raising and growing all of your own. Others can do it cheaper than you could yourself and you take advantage of that.

China has an almost 2/1 trade imbalance with the world, they export far more than they import. The only industrialized nation that has a surplus with them is Japan, and that has much to do with their discrepancy in population.

China is actively working to expand its customer base, pumping money and resources into Africa, the final emerging market. While they do that, we pull back within our own borders and attack everyone that is not the US. China is happy for us to do this, as they fill the void we leave behind.

The worst thing that could happen to the US is for the world to find out they do not need us as much as they thought they did, and Trump is doing everything he can to show them they do not need us.

So, like I said, no other nation will be able to fill that void for them.

And like I said, you are wrong. They are already finding ways to fill the void. This trade war just might fundamentally change the entire agriculture sector in this country, it is one of our strengths, but there is no market out there to replace a billion Chinese.

Our decline in manufacturing will not be good for jobs. Just like a decline in exports due to tariffs is not good for manufacturing.

 

[Brain357]

No. His policy has not brought the growth he claimed and we are actually slowing.

Got it. You are citing the US longest lasting economic expansion ever, at over TEN FUCKING YEARS, as proof of a trade policy failure.


Bold move, citing a massive success as evidence of failure.


You lose.

The trade policy in place prior to Trump is what brought us the economic expansion of TEN FUCKING YEARS, Yet all your Trump worshipers say we have to change because the trade policies were to terrible.

My concern is about the underlying trend in wages and jobs for the American workers, more than the current expansion.


Expansions come and go, but for the last 50 years, wages have lagged, especially at the lower end, and that needs addressed.

I think that problem isn't trade, it is more to do with the decline in Unions. Manufacturing jobs paid well because of unions, not because manufacturing is such a hard or skilled job. The service industry needs unions.

Unions were at least partially responsible for so many jobs leaving the country, they priced themselves out of being competitive.

That was helped by Republicans who demonized them and made it much more acceptable to buy products not made in the USA. I will agree they often went too far, but not having them is much worse than them going too far.

 

[Correll]

You can't sanely claim that a policy is leading to recession, when the recession is delayed by at least FIVE YEARS PAST THE NORMAL TIME.


It would be like pointing to a man that died at 140, and using him as an example of what NOT to do, to take care of yourself.

Since we are already doing everything we do to get out of a recession, what will we do when we have one?

I'm more concerned about long term underlying trends.


But your point is a valid concern.


I'm glad you dropped your silly idea of citing success as proof of failure.


I think we should drastically curtail our military commitments so we can massively cut our military spending.

Cutting military spending won’t help us out of recession,

Correct. I was agreeing with your point about spending a lot during an expansion, what to do when the cycle turns and you are in a recession.

If we had reduced commitments/spending over the LAST 10 years of growth, then we would have lower spending now, that could be increased then.

Yes if we had good leadership that would have happened. Trump chose not to. Obama was clearly not good for the debt, but Trump increased his deficits during a strong economy. He's probably spending to cover up the damage done by his trade war.

Agreed. Both Trump and Obama. And before that. All of them.


Since the end of the Cold War, we have been just coasting, sticking with massive and expensive commitments, that were made to stop World Communism, but now serve no purpose.


Both Bill Clinton and GHWBush, imo, deserve the lion's share of that blame.

 

[Brain357]

Since we are already doing everything we do to get out of a recession, what will we do when we have one?

I'm more concerned about long term underlying trends.


But your point is a valid concern.


I'm glad you dropped your silly idea of citing success as proof of failure.


I think we should drastically curtail our military commitments so we can massively cut our military spending.

Cutting military spending won’t help us out of recession,

Correct. I was agreeing with your point about spending a lot during an expansion, what to do when the cycle turns and you are in a recession.

If we had reduced commitments/spending over the LAST 10 years of growth, then we would have lower spending now, that could be increased then.

Yes if we had good leadership that would have happened. Trump chose not to. Obama was clearly not good for the debt, but Trump increased his deficits during a strong economy. He's probably spending to cover up the damage done by his trade war.

Agreed. Both Trump and Obama. And before that. All of them.


Since the end of the Cold War, we have been just coasting, sticking with massive and expensive commitments, that were made to stop World Communism, but now serve no purpose.


Both Bill Clinton and GHWBush, imo, deserve the lion's share of that blame.

You have lost me there. GHW Bush was a pretty forgettable president. Clinton decreased deficits and ended with a surplus. Now the younger Bush increased deficits and entered us in 2 wars so that's the most to blame.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

How stupid is Trump?

"We don't even know what's coming at us. All we know is it's possibly the biggest. I have -- I'm not sure that I've ever even heard of a Category 5. I knew it existed. And I've seen some Category 4's -- you don't even see them that much,"

There have been four Cat 5 hurricanes since Trump took office, Irma, Maria, Michael, and Dorian.

Trump then turned to his Twitter feed.



Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump


In addition to Florida - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated. Looking like one of the largest hurricanes ever. Already category 5. BE CAREFUL! GOD BLESS EVERYONE!

7:51 AM - Sep 1, 2019

Everyone else in the country knew Trump missed by 300 miles. We all know Dorian is turning north as it heads for Florida.

To avoid panic in Alabama, the National Weather Service told the people of Alabama what they already knew. Trump was wrong again.

The next day Trump doubled down on his gaffe. "I suggested yesterday at FEMA that, along with Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina, even Alabama could possibly come into play, which WAS true," Trump tweeted.

"They made a big deal about this when in fact, under certain original scenarios, it was in fact correct that Alabama could have received some 'hurt.' Always good to be prepared!" Trump added.

The entire country knew Dorian would not "hurt" Alabama, but not Trump.

Geez, Trump is an idiot. Can he be impeached for being stupid?