Is Trump trying to do to China what Reagan did to USSR?

[Taz]

If Trump had a brain, he'd bar all Chinese goods from entering our country. Give everyone a year to switch manufacturing...

Are you really this stupid or is it just an act for the internet?

Because simply paying more for Chinese goods won't get anything done.

 

[pknopp]

Ronald Reagan effectively took out the Soviets by engaging them in an arms race which they could not economically compete in. Is Trump employing a similar strategy on China? - engaging them in a trade war in order to maintain the the US as the world economic power.

Reagan’s plan was intentional, strategic and decisive. Trump seems to shoot from the hip, flip and then flop. But will it work? His trade/currency war is causing an economic slow down across the globe. How long can he maintain the pressure, and can he stave off the recession long enough to get re-elected?

For the record- I don’t believe Trump is anything like the great RR.

I think that's a decent analogy. Esp given that Lighthizer is the architect of Trump's strategy. The problem is, the EU did a deal on EU companies having to share less IP to enter Chinese markets, while Trump was busy insulting EU leaders.

Reagan had the UK merrily on board, France was a non-player and Germany pretty much did what it was told.

So Reagan had more or less a bilateral confrontation, while Trump is facing three-dimensional chess.

I think the internal conditions are different, but I am not sure if that helps the Chinese leadership or hurts it.

During the waning days of the Soviet Union, The Russian population was still poor, still dealing with good shortages, but due to the liberalization of Glasnost and Perestroika they finally got to see how shafted they were. The impact of the Eastern Bloc also pulling away is something China does not have to deal with.

However, China's people are far more affluent than the Russians were, however they actually have far less political power.

Trade is the key here. The US has the goods the Chinese people want, the ones used by the Chinese leadership to placate them and make them accept their limited political power.

The only thing we have that they wanted was produce and they can get that elsewhere. They already are.

So the only thing we trade with them is soybeans?

Also, they are having issues getting enough soybeans from other sources.

They quit buying them. They have not collapsed.

How soybeans became China's most powerful weapon in Trump's trade war

They can buy soybeans. They only purchased them from us because it helped offset the trade imbalance. They could have got them elsewhere before.

 

[pknopp]

The problem with Trump's position is that the rest of the world is still going to engage and trade with China.

Not when their products cost 30% more....

It's already happening.

You idiots crack me up....only a fraction of the tariffs are in place right now....lol

Enact the rest. Go for it.

 

[Rambunctious]

The problem with Trump's position is that the rest of the world is still going to engage and trade with China.

Not when their products cost 30% more....

It's already happening.

You idiots crack me up....only a fraction of the tariffs are in place right now....lol

Enact the rest. Go for it.

After Christmas....when the crop fields are dormant...and the kids have their toys...then the hurt will descend on China....Trump is wise...

 

[pknopp]

The problem with Trump's position is that the rest of the world is still going to engage and trade with China.

Not when their products cost 30% more....

It's already happening.

You idiots crack me up....only a fraction of the tariffs are in place right now....lol

Enact the rest. Go for it.

After Christmas....when the crop fields are dormant...and the kids have their toys...then the hurt will descend on China....Trump is wise...

If it's so great, why not now?

 

[martybegan]

Ronald Reagan effectively took out the Soviets by engaging them in an arms race which they could not economically compete in. Is Trump employing a similar strategy on China? - engaging them in a trade war in order to maintain the the US as the world economic power.

Reagan’s plan was intentional, strategic and decisive. Trump seems to shoot from the hip, flip and then flop. But will it work? His trade/currency war is causing an economic slow down across the globe. How long can he maintain the pressure, and can he stave off the recession long enough to get re-elected?

For the record- I don’t believe Trump is anything like the great RR.

I think that's a decent analogy. Esp given that Lighthizer is the architect of Trump's strategy. The problem is, the EU did a deal on EU companies having to share less IP to enter Chinese markets, while Trump was busy insulting EU leaders.

Reagan had the UK merrily on board, France was a non-player and Germany pretty much did what it was told.

So Reagan had more or less a bilateral confrontation, while Trump is facing three-dimensional chess.

I think the internal conditions are different, but I am not sure if that helps the Chinese leadership or hurts it.

During the waning days of the Soviet Union, The Russian population was still poor, still dealing with good shortages, but due to the liberalization of Glasnost and Perestroika they finally got to see how shafted they were. The impact of the Eastern Bloc also pulling away is something China does not have to deal with.

However, China's people are far more affluent than the Russians were, however they actually have far less political power.

Trade is the key here. The US has the goods the Chinese people want, the ones used by the Chinese leadership to placate them and make them accept their limited political power.

The only thing we have that they wanted was produce and they can get that elsewhere. They already are.

So the only thing we trade with them is soybeans?

Also, they are having issues getting enough soybeans from other sources.

They quit buying them. They have not collapsed.

How soybeans became China's most powerful weapon in Trump's trade war

They can buy soybeans. They only purchased them from us because it helped offset the trade imbalance. They could have got them elsewhere before.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Figures you are rooting for China in all this.

 

[Agit8r]

Maybe we could wreck China's economy. China could also wreck our economy. There's no winning such a war.

 

[Terri4Trump]

Sorry, you missed the analogy. Trump is not engaging in a military spending battle the way Reagan did. He appears to be engaging in a trade/currency war to slow the (inevitable?) growth of China to the number one economic power, and perhaps the Yuan becoming the world reserve currency.

My mistake. Hmmmm. Well, I think that would require a long term commitment, and there is no telling that Trump's successor would follow his lead.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ronald Reagan effectively took out the Soviets by engaging them in an arms race which they could not economically compete in. Is Trump employing a similar strategy on China? - engaging them in a trade war in order to maintain the the US as the world economic power.

Reagan’s plan was intentional, strategic and decisive. Trump seems to shoot from the hip, flip and then flop. But will it work? His trade/currency war is causing an economic slow down across the globe. How long can he maintain the pressure, and can he stave off the recession long enough to get re-elected?

For the record- I don’t believe Trump is anything like the great RR.

I think that's a decent analogy. Esp given that Lighthizer is the architect of Trump's strategy. The problem is, the EU did a deal on EU companies having to share less IP to enter Chinese markets, while Trump was busy insulting EU leaders.

Reagan had the UK merrily on board, France was a non-player and Germany pretty much did what it was told.

So Reagan had more or less a bilateral confrontation, while Trump is facing three-dimensional chess.

I think the internal conditions are different, but I am not sure if that helps the Chinese leadership or hurts it.

During the waning days of the Soviet Union, The Russian population was still poor, still dealing with good shortages, but due to the liberalization of Glasnost and Perestroika they finally got to see how shafted they were. The impact of the Eastern Bloc also pulling away is something China does not have to deal with.

However, China's people are far more affluent than the Russians were, however they actually have far less political power.

Trade is the key here. The US has the goods the Chinese people want, the ones used by the Chinese leadership to placate them and make them accept their limited political power.

Spot on analysis. The question becomes can the will for political power among the Chinese people substitute for the desire of the Russian people to have more goods. The events/unrest in Hong Kong seem to suggest it’s possible.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

If Trump had a brain, he'd bar all Chinese goods from entering our country. Give everyone a year to switch manufacturing...

You mean if he had your brain he’d effectively shut down the economy.

So charging us more for stuff from China is better? Umm... no.

The tariffs will cause you to pay more.

 

[pknopp]

I think that's a decent analogy. Esp given that Lighthizer is the architect of Trump's strategy. The problem is, the EU did a deal on EU companies having to share less IP to enter Chinese markets, while Trump was busy insulting EU leaders.

Reagan had the UK merrily on board, France was a non-player and Germany pretty much did what it was told.

So Reagan had more or less a bilateral confrontation, while Trump is facing three-dimensional chess.

I think the internal conditions are different, but I am not sure if that helps the Chinese leadership or hurts it.

During the waning days of the Soviet Union, The Russian population was still poor, still dealing with good shortages, but due to the liberalization of Glasnost and Perestroika they finally got to see how shafted they were. The impact of the Eastern Bloc also pulling away is something China does not have to deal with.

However, China's people are far more affluent than the Russians were, however they actually have far less political power.

Trade is the key here. The US has the goods the Chinese people want, the ones used by the Chinese leadership to placate them and make them accept their limited political power.

The only thing we have that they wanted was produce and they can get that elsewhere. They already are.

So the only thing we trade with them is soybeans?

Also, they are having issues getting enough soybeans from other sources.

They quit buying them. They have not collapsed.

How soybeans became China's most powerful weapon in Trump's trade war

They can buy soybeans. They only purchased them from us because it helped offset the trade imbalance. They could have got them elsewhere before.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Figures you are rooting for China in all this.

I'm simply stating facts and more places than Russia and the U.S. can grow soy beans.

 

[TomParks]

I talked to a farmer who is still growing fields of soybeans and I asked what he would do with them since China quit buying. He told me it hasn't hurt his sales at all the soybeans are being shipped to South America then sold to China.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Sorry, you missed the analogy. Trump is not engaging in a military spending battle the way Reagan did. He appears to be engaging in a trade/currency war to slow the (inevitable?) growth of China to the number one economic power, and perhaps the Yuan becoming the world reserve currency.

My mistake. Hmmmm. Well, I think that would require a long term commitment, and there is no telling that Trump's successor would follow his lead.

You’re right, it will be long term, and the Chinese are playing the long game. I worry that as the election approaches they will reek havoc in our markets in order to influence the vote.

 

[pknopp]

I talked to a farmer who is still growing fields of soybeans and I asked what he would do with them since China quit buying. He told me it hasn't hurt his sales at all the soybeans are being shipped to South America then sold to China.

Someone needs to fill in the rest of the farmers. What are you doing tomorrow?

On the front lines: Trade war sinks North Dakota soybean farmers - Reuters

 

[BlindBoo]

Did Raygun manufacture a lot of the stuff he sold in the USSR?

Besides it was decades of in the making, and the USSR didn't fall until 3 years after Raygun left office.

 

[BlindBoo]

China is holding a 20 trillion dollar debt card over us.

That is extremely funny.

 

[bendog]

China is holding a 20 trillion dollar debt card over us.

That is extremely funny.

Yeah I'm not sure where he's going with that. Esp since Trump is enamored with the Russia economy of no imports and making do with ersatz domestically produced substitutes.

 

[EduardBernstein]

Trump is trying to do to China what should have been done years ago...but we have elected cowards prior to Trump....China is out of control....

Chinese are good Communists who love Jews. I support China above the Nazi terrorists in the USA targeting Jews at synagogues.

 

[pknopp]

Farmers just love Trump.

NEWSER) – Trouble in the heartland for the Trump administration? The Department of Agriculture says it pulled all of its staff from a tour of corn and soybean fields in the Midwest after a credible threat was made against an employee. Sources tell Reuters that the threat was made in a phone call from an angry farmer.

Feds Pull Crop Tour Staff After Threat From Farmer

 

[martybegan]

Ronald Reagan effectively took out the Soviets by engaging them in an arms race which they could not economically compete in. Is Trump employing a similar strategy on China? - engaging them in a trade war in order to maintain the the US as the world economic power.

Reagan’s plan was intentional, strategic and decisive. Trump seems to shoot from the hip, flip and then flop. But will it work? His trade/currency war is causing an economic slow down across the globe. How long can he maintain the pressure, and can he stave off the recession long enough to get re-elected?

For the record- I don’t believe Trump is anything like the great RR.

I think that's a decent analogy. Esp given that Lighthizer is the architect of Trump's strategy. The problem is, the EU did a deal on EU companies having to share less IP to enter Chinese markets, while Trump was busy insulting EU leaders.

Reagan had the UK merrily on board, France was a non-player and Germany pretty much did what it was told.

So Reagan had more or less a bilateral confrontation, while Trump is facing three-dimensional chess.

I think the internal conditions are different, but I am not sure if that helps the Chinese leadership or hurts it.

During the waning days of the Soviet Union, The Russian population was still poor, still dealing with good shortages, but due to the liberalization of Glasnost and Perestroika they finally got to see how shafted they were. The impact of the Eastern Bloc also pulling away is something China does not have to deal with.

However, China's people are far more affluent than the Russians were, however they actually have far less political power.

Trade is the key here. The US has the goods the Chinese people want, the ones used by the Chinese leadership to placate them and make them accept their limited political power.

Spot on analysis. The question becomes can the will for political power among the Chinese people substitute for the desire of the Russian people to have more goods. The events/unrest in Hong Kong seem to suggest it’s possible.

The thing is the Chinese do not have the Western hesitation on mass violent response to disruption. Even the soviets preferred KGB limited responses to what we saw in Hungary in 1956 and Prague in 1968. I was actually shocked it took them as long as they did to respond to Tienanmen square back in 1989.