China to retaliate with tariffs on 128 U.S. products beginning Monday

[innonimatu]

Trumpian fantasy of bringing back fifty cents an hour stamp mill operating jobs to the midwest would be called losing if only his supporters didn't have the brains that God would give to termites.

Keep going that way, you're sure to win the votes of those termites for the next election!

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Keep going that way, you're sure to win the votes of those termites for the next election!

Those termites aren't going to vote for anyone but Trump and his ilk. That's life. Trying to pander to them is unnecessary and pointless. All that is required is forming a majority, not unanimity.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Keep going that way, you're sure to win the votes of those termites for the next election!

You do know these people elected G.W.Bush twice ?
I dont think its possible to get through to them, many will just have to be burnt directly by the Trump administration.

They wanted a wall that will be paid by mexico
Health insurance for everyone that will be cheap but not socialist
Coal jobs to come back
Crack down on illegals but no new immigrants to replace cheap labour
Tax cuts and a balanced budget

 

[Hrothbern]

Interstingly GOP senators were also backing Trump saying that Argicultrual industry is ready to sacrifice for the good of America. I have a feeling this tune will change once they start to feel what it actually means.

I guess so too.

Back in 1980, the grain embargo to the Soviet-Union from Carter, the Farm Bureau supported the embargo at the start but after the grain price went down only 10% they became against it. The next Presidential election, with Carter sticking to it and Reagan promising to end it, it played a role in Reagan winning.

On that domestic US automation/mechanisation. IDK. The average equipment age in the US is pretty high, meaning lots of outdated production efficiencies. I guess driven by a general attitude to squeeze cost instead of more moving forward by investing in higher output machinery.

All in all I guess Trump is doing his typical act of bullying negotiations that will satisfy both his voter base (promises) as imo realise to some degree real improvements for his America First doctrine.

 

[FriendlyFire]

China fires back at Trump with threat of tariffs on 106 U.S. products, including soybeans

BEIJING — China responded to Trump’s latest trade move by announcing tariffs on 106 U.S. products, including soybeans, airplanes and cars, in the latest escalation of what risks becoming a tit-for-tat trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

The plan, which was announced Wednesday, would see China slap 25 percent levies on a range of U.S. goods worth about $50 billion dollars. Though China said the timing depends on U.S. moves, the news had an immediate impact on markets, including the soybean market.

Soybeans on the Chicago Board of Trade immediately dropped as much as 4.2 percent, while wheat and corn futures also slid, Bloomberg reported.

Shi Yinhong, a professor of international affairs at Renmin University in Beijing, said that China’s move has signaled the country’s willingess to go “tit for tat” in a trade war.

What comes next, he said, “depends on President Trump.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...445cc4dfa5e_story.html?utm_term=.906454d5d087

The US so heavily subsidies their arigculture but with the illegal cheap labour crack down it might well put on the pain for the farmers.
Honestly US could cut back its aquifer based farmer as it will deplete the ground water which should really be saved for droughts and so much food wastage due to the distored market where prices are so low thanks to subsidies
At this point the US was better off joining the TPP

 

[Hrothbern]

The US so heavily subsidies their arigculture but with the illegal cheap labour crack down it might well put on the pain for the farmers.
Honestly US could cut back its aquifer based farmer as it will deplete the ground water which should really be saved for droughts and so much food wastage due to the distored market where prices are so low thanks to subsidies
At this point the US was better off joining the TPP

Highlevel & technocratic it would I guess not hurt when the US would rationalise her agriculture.
In terms of climate/environment/sustainability and less efficient farms in scale and less arable and watery soils.

The original post WW2 benefits of developing more backward areas with agricultural subsidies does not really work anymore and that the lower food price trickled on would benefit the poorer population segments is also gone down the drain meanwhile with the ultra processing food industry between the farmers and consumers getting the benefits of subsidies. Food also being a smaller percentage of total spending of poor people compared to post WW2.
The original strong focus of the EU in developing agricultural with subsidies has over the last half century also shifted more and more towards scientific development of better crops (smart subsidies) and other ways to develop rural backward areas with more focus on tourism etc.

For the US:
Agriculture generates roughly 1% GDP and employs 2% of all jobs !
Agriculture gets roughly 20 Billion subsidy for 4 million jobs => 5,000 per job (the wages/income for normal farmers and workers already low and not generating much prosperity and tax)
Roughly 9% of trade export of goods is foods, feeds and beverages (that is 6% of total export trade)

Downsizing stupid money in agricultural and aiming at industry expansion in more contributing sectors in terms of GDP and valuable jobs (especially where it imports a lot of Chinese stuff) seems to me a good long term strategy.
From simple consumer goods like fridges and cars to the 4th industralisation wave.

So... if a Trump drags the Republicans along that rational path, he has my blessing.
But IDK whether the local Republican politicians can stomach the farmer voters backlash (I guess most farmers vote Republican).

 

[innonimatu]

scientific development of better crops (smart subsidies)

it's not "smart subsidies", its capture by some large corporations selling that.

and other ways to develop rural backward areas with more focus on tourism etc.

And those picturesque rural backwater areas, do you know what happens to them when you terminate agriculture there because it doesn't pay?
Across the whole of southern Europe, they overgrow the trails and scare off the tourists whom, it turns out, do not like real nature so much as "manicured" nature, nature transformed for the convenience of (low-density) human populations. Things like trails, not having to run away from the bears, etc. And they they burn every few years.

This shift of focus has been a disaster here, unmitigated by any tourism. I strongly suspect it'll be a disaster in other places also.

 

[Zelig]

And those picturesque rural backwater areas, do you know what happens to them when you terminate agriculture there because it doesn't pay?
Across the whole of southern Europe, they overgrow the trails and scare off the tourists whom, it turns out, do not like real nature so much as "manicured" nature, nature transformed for the convenience of (low-density) human populations. Things like trails, not having to run away from the bears, etc. And they they burn every few years.

This shift of focus has been a disaster here, unmitigated by any tourism. I strongly suspect it'll be a disaster in other places also.

I wish backcountry, bear-filled nature here had fewer people traipsing around.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Dow Plunges 350 Points as Trump Announces U.S. “Can’t Lose” on Tariffs Because We’ve “Already Lost”

This is what Winning an easy trade war looks like
Thanks Obama !

 

[innonimatu]

Bears are nice to look at but not nice to have around, I always though.

But I only ventured into such a territory once anyway, and saw none.

This is what Winning an easy trade war looks like
Thanks Obama !

Ow, the proprietor class loss some tiny fraction of its wealth, how bad.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Ow, the proprietor class loss some tiny fraction of its wealth, how bad.

Good news everybody
The Tariffs actually kick off in May, so there is a slim chance it could be headed off. Thankfully the Trump has surrounded himself with yes men

Moody's economist: Trump trade war will cost 190,000 jobs
In addition to the multi-day bloodbath on Wall Street, the U.S.-China tariffs war will cost 190,000 American jobs thus far and shave a smidgen of GDP growth from the economy, projects Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.

https://www.axios.com/economist-tru...360-0d8f5f65-8334-45f7-a2e6-d8251d5c5884.html

 

[Zelig]

Bears are nice to look at but not nice to have around, I always though.

But I only ventured into such a territory once anyway, and saw none.

They're not really a big deal. You take some precautions (carry bear spray, hike in groups, maintain the sound of human voices while hiking, don't eat or keep food/scented products in tent, either hang food or use a bear canister), after which the remaining risk puts bears way down the list of things I worry about when hiking.

 

[EnglishEdward]

As for China, they seem to have played the best possible game given the conditions created by others for them. That is another thing Trump got right when he stated that the others were "taking advantage" of the US's trade policies.

And China has enjoyed an enormous trade surplus with the USA for a long time now.

And human nature being what it is, after a while they regard enjoying that trade surplus as situation normal and a
moral right. And so they react indignantly when Trump proposes some modest and probably largely ineffectual tariffs.

Rather than letting Donald Trunp have a moral win, after all he is not going to be President for that long, and otherwise
enjoying their massive surplus, they think that they can bounce him, by imposing their own tariffs.

It seems to me that is really quite unwise for China.

It may merely result in the US Houses uniting around or taking over President Donald Trump's direction
(albeit hopefully not his personality), and proposing more effective measures to reduce the trade deficit.

 

[FriendlyFire]

So Trumps plan is to keep placing tariffs because the Chinese can only retaliate with a maxium of $130 Bil in kind ?
Someone should inform the idiot that China can just stop buying US bonds or increase the Tarriffs once again on US exports to even higher amounts.

And this is just after Trumps advisors were out trying to spin, Trumps Not trade war as just a negosiation tactic and that this was the consulation period subject to change
Both sides are digging now, Chinese want concession for concession

Trump Considers $100 Billion in More Tariffs on Chinese Goods

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Thursday the United States would consider slapping an additional $100 billion in tariffs on the Chinese, on top of the $50 billion the White House has already authorized, escalating a trade dispute with China.

Mr. Trump said in a statement that he was responding to “unfair retaliation” by China, which published a list on Wednesday of $50 billion in American products that would be hit by tariffs, including soybeans and pork, a direct reaction to the $50 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods that the White House detailed on Tuesday.

“Rather than remedy its misconduct, China has chosen to harm our farmers and manufacturers,” Mr. Trump said, adding that he has instructed the United States trade representative to determine if another $100 billion in tariffs were warranted and, “if so, to identify the products upon which to impose such tariffs.”

Ben Sasse, a Republican senator from Nebraska, said Mr. Trump was “threatening to light American agriculture on fire.”

The total of these three actions is now so large that China would have trouble finding enough American goods to penalize if it sought to impose a proportional retaliation

“China can’t respond in kind even if it places higher tariffs on every nickel of U.S. exports, as U.S. goods exports to China were only $130.4 billion,”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/...ina.html?hp&target=comments#commentsContainer

 

[stinkubus]

China can't really stop buying US treasuries so long as they are exporting to us. There's no other safe vehicle for billions in reserves.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

China can't really stop buying US treasuries so long as they are exporting to us. There's no other safe vehicle for billions in reserves.

Famous last words

 

[stinkubus]

What else are they going to do with all the dollars they earn from their exports? They can either buy American products or invest in the US. China has strict capital controls regarding foreign investment by their citizens. Treasuries end up being one of the only attractive options.

 

[innonimatu]

It doesn't matter anyway, the Federal Reserve could but those treasuries instead even if no foreigners did. The only consequence would be a trend towards devaluation of the dollar, which would hamper Chinese exports. There is no way the Chinese can win a "trade war".

By making this an issue and goading his enemies to take it up as an issue, Trump can score an easy political win. I'm telling you again, the guy is smart, contrary to what the press insists on. And his political opposition is so tremendously incompetent that he'll manage to win the next election.

 

[FriendlyFire]

What else are they going to do with all the dollars they earn from their exports? They can either buy American products or invest in the US. China has strict capital controls regarding foreign investment by their citizens. Treasuries end up being one of the only attractive options.

Well US treasuries are easy money for the Chinese, but I suspect that Trump may well push the Chinese far enough to hit back this way

 

[Lexicus]

Famous last words

It's an accounting identity. @stinkubus is right. It's why there will be no 'run' on US debt by China, it would cripple them far worse than it would impact us. There may be a slow shift away from China purchasing US treasuries for many different reasons but a slow shift is fairly easy to deal with.

China has strict capital controls regarding foreign investment by their citizens. Treasuries end up being one of the only attractive options.

Worth pointing out that those controls are frequently circumvented by well-connected people who often park money in US real estate. If (royal) you think foreign criminals laundering money in the US is somehow only a problem related to Trump, think again!

 

[Zelig]

I'm telling you again, the guy is smart