Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Even if we have zero tariffs and countries like South Korea have 100% tariffs, we still benefit from free trade, but it's difficult to convince a steel worker who just lost his job as a result that he should take one for the team.Agreed...yet some economists keep claiming free trade is good and tariffs bad...even though we have never had free trade with most of our trading partners.i agree with free trade 100%, but China abuses it. They steal our intellectual property wholesale. They steal movies and show them to Chinese audiences without paying for them. They steal our patents. They publish copyrighted books without paying royalties. They ship aluminum to Mexico so they can send it accros the border without paying duty on it.Much like Japan and South Korea. Yet American economists seem to always sing the praises of Free Trade.Yeah, uh-huh, then perhaps you'd like to explain the fact that China has become a world economic power and has had a thriving economy for years behind the protection of high tariffs.
South Korea does the same thing. I had a friend in college who went to South Korea and bought all his text books for almost nothing.
So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
Not only that, but we can direct our industries to sell within, and to open new markets abroad, and we will be just fine. China like you say has become dependent on us, and if they get mad then let them seek new markets in which they can play their games on (good luck with that one). No one is as dumb or greedy as we have been in the past in which sold us out. We could actually turn our industry within, and serve every state in our vast nation, and would probably come out with the very same results we have been getting with this over seas trade. No fear, and it's time we stand up again in this world.So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
they over produce and then dumpYeah, uh-huh, then perhaps you'd like to explain the fact that China has become a world economic power and has had a thriving economy for years behind the protection of high tariffs.
They are hardly a economic power outside of GDP. The per capita income is more in line with a third world. They build public projects not because they are needed but to keep people busy.
all tariff revenue must go to pay to upgrade our infrastructure!So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
They are our bankerNot only that, but we can direct our industries to sell within, and to open new markets abroad, and we will be just fine. China like you say has become dependent on us, and if they get mad then let them seek new markets in which they can play their games on (good luck with that one). No one is as dumb or greedy as we have been in the past in which sold us out. We could actually turn our industry within, and serve every state in our vast nation, and would probably come out with the very same results we have been getting with this over seas trade. No fear, and it's time we stand up again in this world.So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
Competition provides better products at better prices. If you are going to close markets in the US then why should any country allow US products into their country. The US is a mature market and do not need things like heavy machinery. Tariffs punish companies who make their products in the US and sell overseas. Their prices will go up. China has not become dependent on us. They still hold a considerable amount of US Treasury bills. If they were to dump it, it would cause economic chaos in the US.
I have trouble believing you wrote that...........name the site.......Trump has no idea of whats at stakeAuthor Examines Six Myths About U.S. EconomyOver rated??If they dump the bonds they will hurt themselves as much as us.................it's a few trillion dollars...........what about our bonds?Not only that, but we can direct our industries to sell within, and to open new markets abroad, and we will be just fine. China like you say has become dependent on us, and if they get mad then let them seek new markets in which they can play their games on (good luck with that one). No one is as dumb or greedy as we have been in the past in which sold us out. We could actually turn our industry within, and serve every state in our vast nation, and would probably come out with the very same results we have been getting with this over seas trade. No fear, and it's time we stand up again in this world.
We would get a small bump in interest rates..........................and it would screw their own currency manipulation and lower their exports as well.
If they want to shoot themselves in the foot then........well yeah they'd could do it........but the damage is over rated.
Treasurys: Bond markets move because US depends on China as buyer
https://www.cnbc.com/.../treasurys-bond-markets-move-because-us-depends-on-china...
Jan 11, 2018 - China just reminded the United States that Beijing is its banker. ... On Thursday, the Chinese regulator soothed market worries when it said it was already diversifying its foreign exchange reserves, and its Treasury holdings are "market driven." ... Broadly, central banks are moving away ...
Myth No. 1: China is bankrolling the U.S.
"Nearly all of our public debt is held by U.S. banks and by the American public. China holds around 10% of it and believe me they don't think they are doing us any favors by investing in Treasury bonds. Yet you read in the paper that you have to treat China with deference because they are such important holders of U.S. debt. How did China become the owner of so much U.S. debt? It's because Walmart bought a few hundred million dollars of things from China and had to pay them for it. So Walmart calls JP Morgan and puts those dollars in a China bank account run by JP Morgan in New York. That money then gets invested in Treasury bonds. The money didn't disappear and go to China. The money is still in the U.S. economy. Foreigners own about $23 trillion of American assets, but Americans own about $20 trillion of foreign assets. If foreigners buy U.S. Treasurys, that is fine for the U.S. financial system as a whole. Regardless of the size of our trade deficit, which is a separate debate, it is still a myth that Asian countries are bankrolling the U.S. and that we need China to lend us money to pay for our government's obligations. Countries that sell more goods and services to the U.S. than they buy from the U.S. end up with trade surpluses in dollars which must be held in dollar assets. These countries can only do three things with those dollars: buy U.S. goods, buy U.S. assets like government bonds, or exchange those dollars for another currency."
One thing to understand about President Donald Trump’s proposed new tariffs on China is that they are, in the first instance, a tax on U.S. producers and consumers. The revenue they’ll raise won’t come from China, but from the pockets of Americans who’ll have to pay more for Chinese goods.
Imposing this tax requires a strong justification, or at least an intelligible rationale. The Trump administration offers neither. It’s true that the U.S. has legitimate trade grievances with China, but there are much better ways of resolving them.
The White House says it will impose tariffs on $50 billion (or maybe $60 billion) of China’s annual imports to the U.S. Not quite yet, though: Details will follow in 15 days, and there’ll be 30 days for comments before any tariffs take effect. At the same time, the Treasury has been given 60 days to come up with new restrictions on investment by Chinese firms in the U.S.
Maybe Trump hopes these threats will lead China to make trade concessions and he will not need to actually put these tariffs in place. Conceivably, it could work out that way: Premier Li Keqiang said this week China will open its economy further, do more to protect intellectual property, and restrain its efforts to get foreign investors to transfer technology. If China follows through, that might be enough for Trump to declare victory and move on to his next adventure.
The danger is that Trump actually believes his own bombastic rhetoric about winning a trade war -- that the time for talking is past, that China’s promises are worthless, and that the administration will keep raising taxes on U.S. producers and consumers until the trade deficit with China is eliminated. That would be a lunatic growth-killing plan even if China didn’t retaliate. If China did push back, and raised tariffs of its own against U.S. exports, the impact on both countries’ growth would be worse.
Even if it doesn’t come to that, the other great cost of Trump’s approach is the threat it poses to the rules-based system of liberal trade -- one designed and built over decades by none other than the U.S.
The president may be deluding himself that he can change China’s behavior merely by bullying. A far better plan would be to bind an increasingly powerful China into this system as a matter of mutual advantage. This is a multilateral effort, involving the European Union and Japan, and it would be made more difficult by the unilateral rule-bending (or -breaking) that the Trump administration is proposing. How wise is it, really, to tell China, “Do as you’re told: Might is right”?
does need to be addressed -- and the existing system provides ways to do so. Oddly enough, the Trump administration acknowledges as much; it announced this week that the U.S. would launch a new case at the World Trade Organization on China’s rules for licensing technology, and it has also relied on the expertise of CFIUS, the committee on foreign investment, to block deals on national-security grounds.
Starting a trade war, however, is another matter entirely. That’s a plan with a likelihood of high casualties for both sides. No one is arguing that Trump lacks the authority to prosecute such a war. But he, and the American public, should be aware of what’s at stake.
T
I certainly DIDN"T write that Came from BloombergI have trouble believing you wrote that...........name the site.......Trump has no idea of whats at stakeAuthor Examines Six Myths About U.S. EconomyOver rated??If they dump the bonds they will hurt themselves as much as us.................it's a few trillion dollars...........what about our bonds?
We would get a small bump in interest rates..........................and it would screw their own currency manipulation and lower their exports as well.
If they want to shoot themselves in the foot then........well yeah they'd could do it........but the damage is over rated.
Treasurys: Bond markets move because US depends on China as buyer
https://www.cnbc.com/.../treasurys-bond-markets-move-because-us-depends-on-china...
Jan 11, 2018 - China just reminded the United States that Beijing is its banker. ... On Thursday, the Chinese regulator soothed market worries when it said it was already diversifying its foreign exchange reserves, and its Treasury holdings are "market driven." ... Broadly, central banks are moving away ...
Myth No. 1: China is bankrolling the U.S.
"Nearly all of our public debt is held by U.S. banks and by the American public. China holds around 10% of it and believe me they don't think they are doing us any favors by investing in Treasury bonds. Yet you read in the paper that you have to treat China with deference because they are such important holders of U.S. debt. How did China become the owner of so much U.S. debt? It's because Walmart bought a few hundred million dollars of things from China and had to pay them for it. So Walmart calls JP Morgan and puts those dollars in a China bank account run by JP Morgan in New York. That money then gets invested in Treasury bonds. The money didn't disappear and go to China. The money is still in the U.S. economy. Foreigners own about $23 trillion of American assets, but Americans own about $20 trillion of foreign assets. If foreigners buy U.S. Treasurys, that is fine for the U.S. financial system as a whole. Regardless of the size of our trade deficit, which is a separate debate, it is still a myth that Asian countries are bankrolling the U.S. and that we need China to lend us money to pay for our government's obligations. Countries that sell more goods and services to the U.S. than they buy from the U.S. end up with trade surpluses in dollars which must be held in dollar assets. These countries can only do three things with those dollars: buy U.S. goods, buy U.S. assets like government bonds, or exchange those dollars for another currency."
One thing to understand about President Donald Trump’s proposed new tariffs on China is that they are, in the first instance, a tax on U.S. producers and consumers. The revenue they’ll raise won’t come from China, but from the pockets of Americans who’ll have to pay more for Chinese goods.
Imposing this tax requires a strong justification, or at least an intelligible rationale. The Trump administration offers neither. It’s true that the U.S. has legitimate trade grievances with China, but there are much better ways of resolving them.
The White House says it will impose tariffs on $50 billion (or maybe $60 billion) of China’s annual imports to the U.S. Not quite yet, though: Details will follow in 15 days, and there’ll be 30 days for comments before any tariffs take effect. At the same time, the Treasury has been given 60 days to come up with new restrictions on investment by Chinese firms in the U.S.
Maybe Trump hopes these threats will lead China to make trade concessions and he will not need to actually put these tariffs in place. Conceivably, it could work out that way: Premier Li Keqiang said this week China will open its economy further, do more to protect intellectual property, and restrain its efforts to get foreign investors to transfer technology. If China follows through, that might be enough for Trump to declare victory and move on to his next adventure.
The danger is that Trump actually believes his own bombastic rhetoric about winning a trade war -- that the time for talking is past, that China’s promises are worthless, and that the administration will keep raising taxes on U.S. producers and consumers until the trade deficit with China is eliminated. That would be a lunatic growth-killing plan even if China didn’t retaliate. If China did push back, and raised tariffs of its own against U.S. exports, the impact on both countries’ growth would be worse.
Even if it doesn’t come to that, the other great cost of Trump’s approach is the threat it poses to the rules-based system of liberal trade -- one designed and built over decades by none other than the U.S.
The president may be deluding himself that he can change China’s behavior merely by bullying. A far better plan would be to bind an increasingly powerful China into this system as a matter of mutual advantage. This is a multilateral effort, involving the European Union and Japan, and it would be made more difficult by the unilateral rule-bending (or -breaking) that the Trump administration is proposing. How wise is it, really, to tell China, “Do as you’re told: Might is right”?
does need to be addressed -- and the existing system provides ways to do so. Oddly enough, the Trump administration acknowledges as much; it announced this week that the U.S. would launch a new case at the World Trade Organization on China’s rules for licensing technology, and it has also relied on the expertise of CFIUS, the committee on foreign investment, to block deals on national-security grounds.
Starting a trade war, however, is another matter entirely. That’s a plan with a likelihood of high casualties for both sides. No one is arguing that Trump lacks the authority to prosecute such a war. But he, and the American public, should be aware of what’s at stake.
T
Secondly, whoever wrote that has an Opinion of Trump doesn't know what he's doing............
I've given evidence on why we need to take on China............to preserve jobs here in the United States.......
I also shown the EU taking similar measures as Trump............Do all the countries in the EU not know what they are doing also...............
We cannot allow countries like China to not play by the rules of the WTO and screw us over.
. The problem is that the business men of America did this to us for greed purposes. They took advantage of a weak nation caught up in bullcrap issues and cultural rot that took the eyes off the ball. Meanwhile the global idea was to move what was taking place in the 1800's south to the communist nation, and bring in the illegals from Mexico to have labor abused without their actual hands being tied to it in China, and being brazing enough to have the illegals exploited right in front of us as we were told that they are just doing the jobs American's won't do.It is Time to Stand Up to China
Do you remember when China was accepted into the World Trade Organization in 2001? Presidents Clinton and Bush, as well as many other public policy leaders, predicted that it would improve the U.S.-China trade balance and would encourage China to abandon communism for free-market capitalism, both of which would benefit America.
I don’t know how they got it so wrong. After 15 years, we can say from experience that none of those predictions have come true.
The U.S. deficit with China has ballooned from $83 billion in 2000 to $366 billion in 2015. This is a total of $3.6 trillion in deficits with China. During this same period, the U.S. lost 5 million manufacturing jobs.
..
The Free Trade position is completely insane.
They said it would improve the trade balance.
Why? I thought trade deficits didn't matter?
And then it the opposite of their stated goals happened. Doesn't that mean it's a failed policy? So why not reverse it?
What Chinese goods do we absolutely have to have that we can't produce here in America, and sell to our American citizens again ?? Is this whole trade thing a huge hype that is being played on the AMERICAN people who believe the bullcrap? Natural resources and aggricutural goods are enough to keep this nation going for hundreds of years into the future. This globalism is a mess that was started with good intentions, but has gotten out of hand over the years with China. So here we are now having to deal with it before it gets any worse.Trump has no idea of whats at stakeAuthor Examines Six Myths About U.S. EconomyOver rated??If they dump the bonds they will hurt themselves as much as us.................it's a few trillion dollars...........what about our bonds?Not only that, but we can direct our industries to sell within, and to open new markets abroad, and we will be just fine. China like you say has become dependent on us, and if they get mad then let them seek new markets in which they can play their games on (good luck with that one). No one is as dumb or greedy as we have been in the past in which sold us out. We could actually turn our industry within, and serve every state in our vast nation, and would probably come out with the very same results we have been getting with this over seas trade. No fear, and it's time we stand up again in this world.
We would get a small bump in interest rates..........................and it would screw their own currency manipulation and lower their exports as well.
If they want to shoot themselves in the foot then........well yeah they'd could do it........but the damage is over rated.
Treasurys: Bond markets move because US depends on China as buyer
https://www.cnbc.com/.../treasurys-bond-markets-move-because-us-depends-on-china...
Jan 11, 2018 - China just reminded the United States that Beijing is its banker. ... On Thursday, the Chinese regulator soothed market worries when it said it was already diversifying its foreign exchange reserves, and its Treasury holdings are "market driven." ... Broadly, central banks are moving away ...
Myth No. 1: China is bankrolling the U.S.
"Nearly all of our public debt is held by U.S. banks and by the American public. China holds around 10% of it and believe me they don't think they are doing us any favors by investing in Treasury bonds. Yet you read in the paper that you have to treat China with deference because they are such important holders of U.S. debt. How did China become the owner of so much U.S. debt? It's because Walmart bought a few hundred million dollars of things from China and had to pay them for it. So Walmart calls JP Morgan and puts those dollars in a China bank account run by JP Morgan in New York. That money then gets invested in Treasury bonds. The money didn't disappear and go to China. The money is still in the U.S. economy. Foreigners own about $23 trillion of American assets, but Americans own about $20 trillion of foreign assets. If foreigners buy U.S. Treasurys, that is fine for the U.S. financial system as a whole. Regardless of the size of our trade deficit, which is a separate debate, it is still a myth that Asian countries are bankrolling the U.S. and that we need China to lend us money to pay for our government's obligations. Countries that sell more goods and services to the U.S. than they buy from the U.S. end up with trade surpluses in dollars which must be held in dollar assets. These countries can only do three things with those dollars: buy U.S. goods, buy U.S. assets like government bonds, or exchange those dollars for another currency."
One thing to understand about President Donald Trump’s proposed new tariffs on China is that they are, in the first instance, a tax on U.S. producers and consumers. The revenue they’ll raise won’t come from China, but from the pockets of Americans who’ll have to pay more for Chinese goods.
Imposing this tax requires a strong justification, or at least an intelligible rationale. The Trump administration offers neither. It’s true that the U.S. has legitimate trade grievances with China, but there are much better ways of resolving them.
The White House says it will impose tariffs on $50 billion (or maybe $60 billion) of China’s annual imports to the U.S. Not quite yet, though: Details will follow in 15 days, and there’ll be 30 days for comments before any tariffs take effect. At the same time, the Treasury has been given 60 days to come up with new restrictions on investment by Chinese firms in the U.S.
Maybe Trump hopes these threats will lead China to make trade concessions and he will not need to actually put these tariffs in place. Conceivably, it could work out that way: Premier Li Keqiang said this week China will open its economy further, do more to protect intellectual property, and restrain its efforts to get foreign investors to transfer technology. If China follows through, that might be enough for Trump to declare victory and move on to his next adventure.
The danger is that Trump actually believes his own bombastic rhetoric about winning a trade war -- that the time for talking is past, that China’s promises are worthless, and that the administration will keep raising taxes on U.S. producers and consumers until the trade deficit with China is eliminated. That would be a lunatic growth-killing plan even if China didn’t retaliate. If China did push back, and raised tariffs of its own against U.S. exports, the impact on both countries’ growth would be worse.
Even if it doesn’t come to that, the other great cost of Trump’s approach is the threat it poses to the rules-based system of liberal trade -- one designed and built over decades by none other than the U.S.
The president may be deluding himself that he can change China’s behavior merely by bullying. A far better plan would be to bind an increasingly powerful China into this system as a matter of mutual advantage. This is a multilateral effort, involving the European Union and Japan, and it would be made more difficult by the unilateral rule-bending (or -breaking) that the Trump administration is proposing. How wise is it, really, to tell China, “Do as you’re told: Might is right”?
does need to be addressed -- and the existing system provides ways to do so. Oddly enough, the Trump administration acknowledges as much; it announced this week that the U.S. would launch a new case at the World Trade Organization on China’s rules for licensing technology, and it has also relied on the expertise of CFIUS, the committee on foreign investment, to block deals on national-security grounds.
Starting a trade war, however, is another matter entirely. That’s a plan with a likelihood of high casualties for both sides. No one is arguing that Trump lacks the authority to prosecute such a war. But he, and the American public, should be aware of what’s at stake.
T
. So we are being blackmailed by China ? Trade is supposed to be good and fair thing, but as Trump explains we have been screwed over big time.Not only that, but we can direct our industries to sell within, and to open new markets abroad, and we will be just fine. China like you say has become dependent on us, and if they get mad then let them seek new markets in which they can play their games on (good luck with that one). No one is as dumb or greedy as we have been in the past in which sold us out. We could actually turn our industry within, and serve every state in our vast nation, and would probably come out with the very same results we have been getting with this over seas trade. No fear, and it's time we stand up again in this world.So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
Competition provides better products at better prices. If you are going to close markets in the US then why should any country allow US products into their country. The US is a mature market and do not need things like heavy machinery. Tariffs punish companies who make their products in the US and sell overseas. Their prices will go up. China has not become dependent on us. They still hold a considerable amount of US Treasury bills. If they were to dump it, it would cause economic chaos in the US.
When has Trump ever played by the rules during the last 45 years?I have trouble believing you wrote that...........name the site.......Trump has no idea of whats at stakeAuthor Examines Six Myths About U.S. EconomyOver rated??If they dump the bonds they will hurt themselves as much as us.................it's a few trillion dollars...........what about our bonds?
We would get a small bump in interest rates..........................and it would screw their own currency manipulation and lower their exports as well.
If they want to shoot themselves in the foot then........well yeah they'd could do it........but the damage is over rated.
Treasurys: Bond markets move because US depends on China as buyer
https://www.cnbc.com/.../treasurys-bond-markets-move-because-us-depends-on-china...
Jan 11, 2018 - China just reminded the United States that Beijing is its banker. ... On Thursday, the Chinese regulator soothed market worries when it said it was already diversifying its foreign exchange reserves, and its Treasury holdings are "market driven." ... Broadly, central banks are moving away ...
Myth No. 1: China is bankrolling the U.S.
"Nearly all of our public debt is held by U.S. banks and by the American public. China holds around 10% of it and believe me they don't think they are doing us any favors by investing in Treasury bonds. Yet you read in the paper that you have to treat China with deference because they are such important holders of U.S. debt. How did China become the owner of so much U.S. debt? It's because Walmart bought a few hundred million dollars of things from China and had to pay them for it. So Walmart calls JP Morgan and puts those dollars in a China bank account run by JP Morgan in New York. That money then gets invested in Treasury bonds. The money didn't disappear and go to China. The money is still in the U.S. economy. Foreigners own about $23 trillion of American assets, but Americans own about $20 trillion of foreign assets. If foreigners buy U.S. Treasurys, that is fine for the U.S. financial system as a whole. Regardless of the size of our trade deficit, which is a separate debate, it is still a myth that Asian countries are bankrolling the U.S. and that we need China to lend us money to pay for our government's obligations. Countries that sell more goods and services to the U.S. than they buy from the U.S. end up with trade surpluses in dollars which must be held in dollar assets. These countries can only do three things with those dollars: buy U.S. goods, buy U.S. assets like government bonds, or exchange those dollars for another currency."
One thing to understand about President Donald Trump’s proposed new tariffs on China is that they are, in the first instance, a tax on U.S. producers and consumers. The revenue they’ll raise won’t come from China, but from the pockets of Americans who’ll have to pay more for Chinese goods.
Imposing this tax requires a strong justification, or at least an intelligible rationale. The Trump administration offers neither. It’s true that the U.S. has legitimate trade grievances with China, but there are much better ways of resolving them.
The White House says it will impose tariffs on $50 billion (or maybe $60 billion) of China’s annual imports to the U.S. Not quite yet, though: Details will follow in 15 days, and there’ll be 30 days for comments before any tariffs take effect. At the same time, the Treasury has been given 60 days to come up with new restrictions on investment by Chinese firms in the U.S.
Maybe Trump hopes these threats will lead China to make trade concessions and he will not need to actually put these tariffs in place. Conceivably, it could work out that way: Premier Li Keqiang said this week China will open its economy further, do more to protect intellectual property, and restrain its efforts to get foreign investors to transfer technology. If China follows through, that might be enough for Trump to declare victory and move on to his next adventure.
The danger is that Trump actually believes his own bombastic rhetoric about winning a trade war -- that the time for talking is past, that China’s promises are worthless, and that the administration will keep raising taxes on U.S. producers and consumers until the trade deficit with China is eliminated. That would be a lunatic growth-killing plan even if China didn’t retaliate. If China did push back, and raised tariffs of its own against U.S. exports, the impact on both countries’ growth would be worse.
Even if it doesn’t come to that, the other great cost of Trump’s approach is the threat it poses to the rules-based system of liberal trade -- one designed and built over decades by none other than the U.S.
The president may be deluding himself that he can change China’s behavior merely by bullying. A far better plan would be to bind an increasingly powerful China into this system as a matter of mutual advantage. This is a multilateral effort, involving the European Union and Japan, and it would be made more difficult by the unilateral rule-bending (or -breaking) that the Trump administration is proposing. How wise is it, really, to tell China, “Do as you’re told: Might is right”?
does need to be addressed -- and the existing system provides ways to do so. Oddly enough, the Trump administration acknowledges as much; it announced this week that the U.S. would launch a new case at the World Trade Organization on China’s rules for licensing technology, and it has also relied on the expertise of CFIUS, the committee on foreign investment, to block deals on national-security grounds.
Starting a trade war, however, is another matter entirely. That’s a plan with a likelihood of high casualties for both sides. No one is arguing that Trump lacks the authority to prosecute such a war. But he, and the American public, should be aware of what’s at stake.
T
Secondly, whoever wrote that has an Opinion of Trump doesn't know what he's doing............
I've given evidence on why we need to take on China............to preserve jobs here in the United States.......
I also shown the EU taking similar measures as Trump............Do all the countries in the EU not know what they are doing also...............
We cannot allow countries like China to not play by the rules of the WTO and screw us over.
Ask all of Trump’s advisers who begged him not to do it.China is already kicking our ass.So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?
China loses in any trade war, they are far more dependent on our willingness to buy their crap.
Trump doesn’t read. Doesn’t understand history.
Has no idea Hoover’s tariffs helped cause the Great Depression.
I see you have no response to those who know 1000 times more than Trump begged him not to do it.
But you’re good. You blindly defended the indefensible which is your cult’s duty.
You didn't answer his question.
"So if tariffs don’t work, then why is China doing it?"
. The problem is that the business men of America did this to us for greed purposes. They took advantage of a weak nation caught up in bullcrap issues and cultural rot that took the eyes off the ball. Meanwhile the global idea was to move what was taking place in the 1800's south to the communist nation, and bring in the illegals from Mexico to have labor abused without their actual hands being tied to it in China, and being brazing enough to have the illegals exploited right in front of us as we were told that they are just doing the jobs American's won't do.It is Time to Stand Up to China
Do you remember when China was accepted into the World Trade Organization in 2001? Presidents Clinton and Bush, as well as many other public policy leaders, predicted that it would improve the U.S.-China trade balance and would encourage China to abandon communism for free-market capitalism, both of which would benefit America.
I don’t know how they got it so wrong. After 15 years, we can say from experience that none of those predictions have come true.
The U.S. deficit with China has ballooned from $83 billion in 2000 to $366 billion in 2015. This is a total of $3.6 trillion in deficits with China. During this same period, the U.S. lost 5 million manufacturing jobs.
..
The Free Trade position is completely insane.
They said it would improve the trade balance.
Why? I thought trade deficits didn't matter?
And then it the opposite of their stated goals happened. Doesn't that mean it's a failed policy? So why not reverse it?
TDS................when has China played by the rules is the correct response.................and when will people here stop holding up the white flag.............Your starting to make us sound like the French in WWII............When has Trump ever played by the rules during the last 45 years?I have trouble believing you wrote that...........name the site.......Trump has no idea of whats at stakeAuthor Examines Six Myths About U.S. EconomyOver rated??If they dump the bonds they will hurt themselves as much as us.................it's a few trillion dollars...........
We would get a small bump in interest rates..........................and it would screw their own currency manipulation and lower their exports as well.
If they want to shoot themselves in the foot then........well yeah they'd could do it........but the damage is over rated.
Treasurys: Bond markets move because US depends on China as buyer
https://www.cnbc.com/.../treasurys-bond-markets-move-because-us-depends-on-china...
Jan 11, 2018 - China just reminded the United States that Beijing is its banker. ... On Thursday, the Chinese regulator soothed market worries when it said it was already diversifying its foreign exchange reserves, and its Treasury holdings are "market driven." ... Broadly, central banks are moving away ...
Myth No. 1: China is bankrolling the U.S.
"Nearly all of our public debt is held by U.S. banks and by the American public. China holds around 10% of it and believe me they don't think they are doing us any favors by investing in Treasury bonds. Yet you read in the paper that you have to treat China with deference because they are such important holders of U.S. debt. How did China become the owner of so much U.S. debt? It's because Walmart bought a few hundred million dollars of things from China and had to pay them for it. So Walmart calls JP Morgan and puts those dollars in a China bank account run by JP Morgan in New York. That money then gets invested in Treasury bonds. The money didn't disappear and go to China. The money is still in the U.S. economy. Foreigners own about $23 trillion of American assets, but Americans own about $20 trillion of foreign assets. If foreigners buy U.S. Treasurys, that is fine for the U.S. financial system as a whole. Regardless of the size of our trade deficit, which is a separate debate, it is still a myth that Asian countries are bankrolling the U.S. and that we need China to lend us money to pay for our government's obligations. Countries that sell more goods and services to the U.S. than they buy from the U.S. end up with trade surpluses in dollars which must be held in dollar assets. These countries can only do three things with those dollars: buy U.S. goods, buy U.S. assets like government bonds, or exchange those dollars for another currency."
One thing to understand about President Donald Trump’s proposed new tariffs on China is that they are, in the first instance, a tax on U.S. producers and consumers. The revenue they’ll raise won’t come from China, but from the pockets of Americans who’ll have to pay more for Chinese goods.
Imposing this tax requires a strong justification, or at least an intelligible rationale. The Trump administration offers neither. It’s true that the U.S. has legitimate trade grievances with China, but there are much better ways of resolving them.
The White House says it will impose tariffs on $50 billion (or maybe $60 billion) of China’s annual imports to the U.S. Not quite yet, though: Details will follow in 15 days, and there’ll be 30 days for comments before any tariffs take effect. At the same time, the Treasury has been given 60 days to come up with new restrictions on investment by Chinese firms in the U.S.
Maybe Trump hopes these threats will lead China to make trade concessions and he will not need to actually put these tariffs in place. Conceivably, it could work out that way: Premier Li Keqiang said this week China will open its economy further, do more to protect intellectual property, and restrain its efforts to get foreign investors to transfer technology. If China follows through, that might be enough for Trump to declare victory and move on to his next adventure.
The danger is that Trump actually believes his own bombastic rhetoric about winning a trade war -- that the time for talking is past, that China’s promises are worthless, and that the administration will keep raising taxes on U.S. producers and consumers until the trade deficit with China is eliminated. That would be a lunatic growth-killing plan even if China didn’t retaliate. If China did push back, and raised tariffs of its own against U.S. exports, the impact on both countries’ growth would be worse.
Even if it doesn’t come to that, the other great cost of Trump’s approach is the threat it poses to the rules-based system of liberal trade -- one designed and built over decades by none other than the U.S.
The president may be deluding himself that he can change China’s behavior merely by bullying. A far better plan would be to bind an increasingly powerful China into this system as a matter of mutual advantage. This is a multilateral effort, involving the European Union and Japan, and it would be made more difficult by the unilateral rule-bending (or -breaking) that the Trump administration is proposing. How wise is it, really, to tell China, “Do as you’re told: Might is right”?
does need to be addressed -- and the existing system provides ways to do so. Oddly enough, the Trump administration acknowledges as much; it announced this week that the U.S. would launch a new case at the World Trade Organization on China’s rules for licensing technology, and it has also relied on the expertise of CFIUS, the committee on foreign investment, to block deals on national-security grounds.
Starting a trade war, however, is another matter entirely. That’s a plan with a likelihood of high casualties for both sides. No one is arguing that Trump lacks the authority to prosecute such a war. But he, and the American public, should be aware of what’s at stake.
T
Secondly, whoever wrote that has an Opinion of Trump doesn't know what he's doing............
I've given evidence on why we need to take on China............to preserve jobs here in the United States.......
I also shown the EU taking similar measures as Trump............Do all the countries in the EU not know what they are doing also...............
We cannot allow countries like China to not play by the rules of the WTO and screw us over.
