Trump's China grudge match may be spinning out of control

Nov 2012
40,418
11,668
Lebanon, TN
#21
And he has also used unprecedented presidential pressure on the fed to lower interest rates and stop the quantitative tightening and in fact return to quantitative easing. This isn't having a short term effect because of the YUUUUGE deficit spending but alas, the end is nigh. And it will be ugly.
So you are saying the Obama appointed Federal Reserve caved to trump... ROFLMBO. the Reason the fed did not raise interest rates, is last Quarter is because we are seeing economic Growth with very little inflation.

Get your head out of the dark
 
Mar 2013
9,475
10,190
Middle Tennessee
#22
Actually this may not be true for long, Local Soy Bean Farmers are getting contracts with India, Indonesia, Vietnam and SOKO replacing the China Contracts next year... And they are switching Crops to accommodate these new markets. YOu forget Farmers are not limited to ONE CROP.

once again as I said Trump has China Right where he wants them.

Blah blah blah blah !! At 10% on selected items Trumps trade war with China has already cost YOU AND I more $12 BILLION dollars in additional farm subsidies. We all know that doesn't begin to fully cover what our farmers lost. Now that Trump is more than DOUBLING the tariffs (10% to now 25%) and hitting almost everything China sells here, I'm sure any agreement about buying agricultural products is flying out the window even as we discuss it. Contracts for next year aren't going to help them this year or last year. If all those other countries were so lucrative why weren't we already selling to them ??

I'm all for sitting down with our trade partners and making sure we are all on level fields. But Trump's bull in the China shop, one size fits all, kill em all and let God sort em out, approach is very likely to cause real and lasting damage to our economy. We have not yet seen the full extent of China's response to this new round of tariffs.
 
Likes: leekohler2
Nov 2005
8,103
2,657
California
#24
I looked up the DJIA, it rebounded today. The Chinese currency value is set by the Chinese owned bank, the renminbi currency is also called policy currency, because the Peoples bank of China decides its value, which is a arm of the Chinese Government unlike the US Dollar that has a value that rises and falls with the market. The Chinese government can raise and lower the value of their currency because their currency is not traded on the free market like the United States. Therefore, when you look at the low value of the renminbi compared to the US dollar it does appear to be manipulation. Since the Chinese government can decide the value of their currency, without having to sell it to buy US dollars, it makes it very difficult to tell if they are or they are not. So, the reason they get that label is basically because of their system of only allowing their currency to fluctuate within strict margins as decided by the Peoples bank of China. I do understand that monetary policy on a international scale can be confusing. Sweden and Germany have been manipulating as well, the difference is we do not have near the trade inbalance with them.
I asked for concrete evidence.
Without surprise, you failed to give any...
Let's face the reality of the situation:
Reasonable people can and do disagree about how countries conduct their monetary policies: what price should the central bank fix, or at what pace should that fix evolve. But to label as manipulation the conduct of monetary policy itself betrays a fundamental confusion about the operation and goals of central banks. If Zhou Xiaochuan,governor of the People’s Bank of China, is a currency manipulator, then Janet Yellen is an interest-rate manipulator.
….
Movements in the nominal yuan exchange rate have almost no long-term impact on global flows of exports and imports or on broader considerations such as average wages. The exchange rate that matters for trade flows is the real exchange rate, i.e., the nominal exchange rate adjusted for local-currency prices in both countries.

The real exchange rate, in turn, reflects the deep forces of comparative advantage such as technology and endowments of labor and capital. These forces drive trade regardless of monetary policy.
….
Long-term movements in nominal exchange rates often have nothing to do with the evolution of global trade flows. In the generation after the Bretton Woods system dissolved, the dollar steadily depreciated against the Japanese yen, from its fix of 360 yen per dollar to an average of just 94 in 1995. Over that time did the U.S. swing into a massive trade surplus with Japan? No.

From $1.2 billion in 1970 the U.S. trade deficit with Japan rose by a factor of 50, to $59.1 billion in 1995. From 2004 to 2014 the dollar similarly depreciated—note, not appreciated—against the yuan by about 25%. Over that decade the U.S. trade deficit with China soared—not fell—from $161.9 billion to $342.6 billion.
Slaughtering the Myth of Chinese Currency Manipulation | The American Spectator | Politics is too important to be taken seriously.


Another point of contention is the fact that China does not follow international law in regards to labor or the environment. That puts us at an unfair advantage in labor costs alone when it comes to trade. Exporting pollution and ignoring human rights abuses over cheap labor is greedy consumerism plain and simple. I think its time we make a stand against that. Wouldnt you agree with that?
Talk about people in glass houses using grenade launchers...
Regarding Pollution, two things...
1) Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions
Their total emissions are under double ours, but our per capita emissions are over double theirs.
In other words, while their total value is higher, our emissions per person is over twice theirs.

2) Trump Will Withdraw U.S. From Paris Climate Agreement
So the very idea of us whining about Chinese pollution as Trump pulls us out of the Paris Agreement is repugnantly hypocritical!

Regarding INTERNATIONAL labor laws, what the heck do you even think you even think you are talking about?
What law are you referencing?
Who passed that law?


Yes, the deficit is out of hand. I can not argue that. At the same time, the economy is booming right now.
Geezus. You repeat those two facts but you fail to recognize how they go together.
One of the reasons the economy didn't grow as fast under Obama was because he was cutting the deficit. The government spending can be a huge boost for the economy, and he was dialing it back to reduce the deficit.

Trump takes the helm and instead of recognizing that simple fact he jumps incredibly quickly to deficit spending which causes more of an increase in the economy.


Now that the Democrats hold the House lets see what kind of deficit reducing budget they can come up with
You are a walking propaganda talking point, aren't you...

As I said, with one minor caveat:
Par for the course, the right habitually blames any Democratic sitting president for not eliminating the deficit, even though they are lowering the deficit.
Republican president after Republican president which increases the deficit gets ignored by the right (unless they can find a way to blame it on Dems)...
 
May 2019
255
55
USA
#25
I asked for concrete evidence.
Without surprise, you failed to give any...
Let's face the reality of the situation:

Slaughtering the Myth of Chinese Currency Manipulation | The American Spectator | Politics is too important to be taken seriously.



Talk about people in glass houses using grenade launchers...
Regarding Pollution, two things...
1) Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions
Their total emissions are under double ours, but our per capita emissions are over double theirs.
In other words, while their total value is higher, our emissions per person is over twice theirs.

2) Trump Will Withdraw U.S. From Paris Climate Agreement
So the very idea of us whining about Chinese pollution as Trump pulls us out of the Paris Agreement is repugnantly hypocritical!

Regarding INTERNATIONAL labor laws, what the heck do you even think you even think you are talking about?
What law are you referencing?
Who passed that law?



Geezus. You repeat those two facts but you fail to recognize how they go together.
One of the reasons the economy didn't grow as fast under Obama was because he was cutting the deficit. The government spending can be a huge boost for the economy, and he was dialing it back to reduce the deficit.

Trump takes the helm and instead of recognizing that simple fact he jumps incredibly quickly to deficit spending which causes more of an increase in the economy.



You are a walking propaganda talking point, aren't you...

As I said, with one minor caveat:
Par for the course, the right habitually blames any Democratic sitting president for not eliminating the deficit, even though they are lowering the deficit.
Republican president after Republican president which increases the deficit gets ignored by the right (unless they can find a way to blame it on Dems)...
I avoid op-eds as evidence of anything. Op is short for opinion. Fine, if you do not think that the ruling party of china deciding the value of its currency instead of the free market is not manipulation that is your opinion. To even say well, per person we put off more carbon than China is a gross misrepresentation of the subject. We put off more carbon per person because we, per person, own more stuff. Were better off, per person than China. So, the carbon or pollution that is put off from China comes from their industrial base. That being what manufactures the stuff we buy. So, that is a very poor and misleading argument to even make in my opinion.

The "right" can do whatever. I tend to understand that the President has but a role in the budget and that the House or Representatives is the purse of government. If you want to just throw labels at people you disagree with that is your perrogative. I tend to address the person and their opinions instead of attempting to assign them one like you did.
 

Similar Discussions