What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

TRADE THREAD- President Trump signs Phase One of China agreement, China promises to double its purchases in 2020 (4 Viewers)

Weebs210 said:
And if China negotiates in a timely matter you will say what?
Click to expand...
I will say great. That would be the best possible outcome right now. So I hope it happens. Now that Trump has made this decision, I hope it turns out for the best. 

But there is strong reason to believe that it won’t. 

 
Weebs210 said:
????? Success will be the new negotiations. 
Click to expand...
Here are what the likely outcomes will be:
US export volumes will fall
US import prices will rise
Jobs in US manufacturing will be lost
Consumers will experience more inflation on goods

But there could be negotiations and if there are that would constitute...success?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedmondLonghorn said:
Here are what the likely outcomes will be:
US export volumes will fall
US import prices will rise
Jobs in US manufacturing will be lost
Consumers will experience more inflation on goods

But there could be negotiations and that will constitute...success?
Click to expand...
I understand what you think will happen. Only time will tell at this point.

 
Sinn Fein said:
We screwed the pooch when we abandoned TPP - and let China step into the void - but without all of the restrictions TPP would have required. 
Click to expand...
This was my argument two years ago when I supported Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders, whom you supported, did everything he could to destroy TPP. And Bernie’s dangerous rhetoric on this issue, IMO, is at least partly responsible for where we are today, because all Trump has done is incorporate it. 

 
I expect a good bit of coverage on Boeing here in SC -- not gonna be good --to think cheetoe visited the plant here too

 
Weebs210 said:
I get it, you think it is a bad policy.
Click to expand...
It isn't merely bad policy, it is using a framing hammer as a flyswatter, when the fly is on your own head.

The very real issue of Chinese IP theft is really just a pretext here. Trump has been anxious to more towards protectionism for literally years, even though he doesn't have a clue how any of this works. And his drooling fans are sure it will work because everything Trump touches has to work, according to him and them.

 
timschochet said:
This was my argument two years ago when I supported Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders, whom you supported, did everything he could to destroy TPP. And Bernie’s dangerous rhetoric on this issue, IMO, is at least partly responsible for where we are today, because all Trump has done is incorporate it. 
Click to expand...
When it comes to trade and macroeconomics, Bernie is practically as clueless as Trump. 

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
It isn't merely bad policy, it is using a framing hammer as a flyswatter, when the fly is on your own head.

The very real issue of Chinese IP theft is really just a pretext here. Trump has been anxious to more towards protectionism for literally years, even though he doesn't have a clue how any of this works. And his drooling fans are sure it will work because everything Trump touches has to work, according to him and them.
Click to expand...
So you don't think Chinese IP theft is a big deal? If you do, what would your solution be?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Weebs210 said:
So you don't think Chinese IP theft is a big deal?
Click to expand...


RedmondLonghorn said:
It isn't merely bad policy, it is using a framing hammer as a flyswatter, when the fly is on your own head.

The very real issue of Chinese IP theft is really just a pretext here. Trump has been anxious to more towards protectionism for literally years, even though he doesn't have a clue how any of this works. And his drooling fans are sure it will work because everything Trump touches has to work, according to him and them.
Click to expand...
Were you dropped on your head, or just born this way?

 
timschochet said:
This was my argument two years ago when I supported Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders, whom you supported, did everything he could to destroy TPP. And Bernie’s dangerous rhetoric on this issue, IMO, is at least partly responsible for where we are today, because all Trump has done is incorporate it. 
Click to expand...
My issue with the trade agreements is that we (collective we) were not doing enough with the wealth it generated - that wealth was going to the proverbial 1% - what we need is to share that wealth in ways that invests in the labor force here in the US.

I am in favor of free trade - to the extent is is the efficient use of resources - but we have not been very efficient with our resources.  Clinton would not have addressed that any more than Trump is going to address that issue.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
When it comes to trade and macroeconomics, Bernie is practically as clueless as Trump. 
Click to expand...
Yeah - Bernie understood the impacts of how we implemented free-trade - the advantage really flowed to the 1%, but he did not really understand how to effect the right change - investing the wealth generated from free trade into our workforce, and infrastructure, so that we could efficiently use all of our resources.

 
Sinn Fein said:
My issue with the trade agreements is that we (collective we) were not doing enough with the wealth it generated - that wealth was going to the proverbial 1% - what we need is to share that wealth in ways that invests in the labor force here in the US.

I am in favor of free trade - to the extent is is the efficient use of resources - but we have not been very efficient with our resources.  Clinton would not have addressed that any more than Trump is going to address that issue.
Click to expand...
That has literally nothing to do with trade itself.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
That has literally nothing to do with trade itself.
Click to expand...
Yes and no.

If you are looking at it from a micro-point of view, than you are correct.  The US is wealthier when we have free trade.  But from a macro-point of view - we are wasting that wealth, because it is accumulating into so few people.  So, the bulk of the country is pissing away the advantages of free trade, by not being able to efficiently allocate our labor/resources.  In the long-term, that is a problem.  And the funds to do that, in theory, should be coming from the advantage we generated by buying stuff built in other countries.

So, it all ties together.

 
RedmondLonghorn said:
Essentially, yes. Except for your use of the term "roughly".

When you get into the serious :nerd:  stuff of the balance of payments, you become aware that the current accounts (which include the trade surplus or deficit) are only half of the equation. There is also the capital account, which must exactly offset whatever occurs in the current account.

I have to admit, while I am pretty solid in my understanding of microeconomics and finance, I even get a little sketchy on macro when it comes to some of this stuff. It can be hard to grasp.

I suspect people glom onto the trade surplus or deficit because it is easier to understand, but, in so doing, they are prone to misinterpretation, because it is only part of the picture.

For instance, a corollary of we have been running a trade deficit for years is we have been running a surplus in the capital account for years. Which one sounds more worrisome?

The reality is, as usual, that neither is necessarily good or bad. There are pros and cons to both. 
Click to expand...
@proninja even he admits he is not an expert on macro economics yet he is trying to tell me exactly what will happen. Okay.

 
Weebs210 said:
@proninja even he admits he is not an expert on macro economics yet he is trying to tell me exactly what will happen. Okay.
Click to expand...
Way to misrepresent what I said!

I understand the basics just fine, thanks. I admitted that there are some theoretical nuances of how the balance of payments work that I am not rock solid on. 

What I am very well-versed on is the evidence in terms of protectionism. I am also pretty current on what actual subject matter experts have to say. See, I live in a world where having expertise and being educated is actually a positive. I realize that is probably a foreign idea to witless MAGA cultists though.

 
Sinn Fein said:
My issue with the trade agreements is that we (collective we) were not doing enough with the wealth it generated - that wealth was going to the proverbial 1% - what we need is to share that wealth in ways that invests in the labor force here in the US.

I am in favor of free trade - to the extent is is the efficient use of resources - but we have not been very efficient with our resources.  Clinton would not have addressed that any more than Trump is going to address that issue.
Click to expand...
That's just wrong, everyone benefited from free trade with China from the Wal-Mart shopper to the American Farmer..most of these would not be your 1%ers

 
Look Sinn Fein, I’m glad you support free trade- now- and I’m not going to beat you over the head with the past. On the other hand, it shouldn’t be rewritten, either. The Bernie fans such as yourself were all over TPP, same as the Trump supporters, and they tore into the few of us who tried to defend it. Hillary herself came out against TPP in the weakest, most cowardly move of her campaign. 

 
timschochet said:
Look Sinn Fein, I’m glad you support free trade- now- and I’m not going to beat you over the head with the past. On the other hand, it shouldn’t be rewritten, either. The Bernie fans such as yourself were all over TPP, same as the Trump supporters, and they tore into the few of us who tried to defend it. Hillary herself came out against TPP in the weakest, most cowardly move of her campaign. 
Click to expand...
Not that it really matters but not everybody who supported Bernie was against TPP.  You really do generalize a lot.  It’s fine to slam Bernie for it as it’s valid criticism.

 
proninja said:
I think @RedmondLonghorn is deeply credible on economic issues. To the point that when he disagrees with me it forces me to re evaluate my thoughts, despite the fact that we've had fairly divergent political opinions over the last decade or so. 

Who do you think is the most credible Trump supporter on these same issues? 
Click to expand...
Smoo?

 
Phil Elliott said:
China targeting Ginseng on potential retaliatory tariffs. Ginseng? Really? 
Click to expand...
i have heard that china is doing this to punish red states well wisconsin went trump and it accounts for a huge amount of american ginseng production so who knows brohan who knows take that to the bank

 
Matthias said:
Sinn's overall point is correct. The fundamental basis of preferring free trade, and low regulations generally, is an expansion of economic activity. But the preference for a growing economy is completely agnostic on how the benefits are distributed. But society should have some interest in deciding how it is. And that, if the structure is such that the benefit inures to only a small group, society should question if a sharing of the benefit is justified. And probably answer yes.
Click to expand...
But it isn’t a trade issue. The issues he is raising are fundamentally taxation issues and social spending issues. Unless he is advocating for some kind of central planning for the economy, which I would assume he is smart enough not to be.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
OP/ED: Explaining Why Donald Trump Going To Prison Would Be Good For America (7/12/22 21:26 PST)
Replies
3
Views
347
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
Newsweek: "Democrats Have Forgotten The Working Class. It Will Cost Them" (7/14/22 14:39 PST)
Replies
19
Views
922
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
Biden Administration Considering Sending Gas Rebate Cards To Millions Of Americans (6/18/22 19:28 PST)
Replies
43
Views
1K
AAABatteries
AAABatteries

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top