Pages

Showing posts with label wto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wto. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 08, 2025

Trading Blocs, Not Trade Wars: Why the World Isn’t Sliding Into a Great Depression



Trading Blocs, Not Trade Wars: Why the World Isn’t Sliding Into a Great Depression

In 1944, as the ashes of World War II still smoldered, a group of visionaries met at Bretton Woods to imagine a new world economy. At that time, global trade was minuscule. The entire world GDP was less than $10 trillion in today’s dollars, and much of that was locked within colonial empires, war-torn economies, and protectionist walls. Fast forward to today, and each of the world’s major regional trading blocs—on its own—is larger than the entire global economy of 1944.

This is a profound shift. It’s also why, despite all the hand-wringing about the weakening of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the rise of tariffs, the world is not on the brink of another Great Depression. Quite the opposite. We’re witnessing a decentralized reconfiguration of global trade into resilient, regionally integrated economies that are more shockproof than ever.

The Major Trading Blocs Powering the World Economy

Let’s look at some of the major regional trading blocs that now anchor global commerce:

  1. European Union (EU)

    • 27 nations, a common market, and a combined GDP of over $17 trillion

    • The most mature and sophisticated economic bloc in the world

    • A model for supranational governance and regulatory harmonization

  2. USMCA (United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement)

    • Formerly NAFTA, this North American bloc boasts a GDP of over $25 trillion

    • Integrated supply chains and shared standards across manufacturing, agriculture, and services

  3. RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership)

    • Covers 15 Asia-Pacific countries including China, Japan, and ASEAN nations

    • World’s largest free trade agreement by population and GDP (~$26 trillion)

    • A signal of Asia’s ascendancy and intra-regional trade strength

  4. Mercosur

    • South America’s largest trading bloc, led by Brazil and Argentina

    • Aims to harmonize tariffs, coordinate policies, and promote trade within Latin America

  5. African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)

    • Encompasses 54 African nations with a vision to create a $3.4 trillion single market

    • Could be transformative for intra-African trade, infrastructure, and industrialization

  6. CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership)

    • Includes countries like Japan, Canada, Australia, and several ASEAN members

    • A response to stalled WTO reforms and U.S. withdrawal from TPP

1944 vs. Today: A World of Difference

In 1944, the world was economically fragile, politically unstable, and deeply inward-looking. Protectionism and isolationism were dominant trends that contributed to the Great Depression and the rise of fascism. Trade was seen as a zero-sum game.

Today, every major regional bloc dwarfs the global economy of 1944. The EU, USMCA, and RCEP each possess GDPs several times larger than the entire postwar world economy. And unlike in the 1930s, nations have institutional memory. They know that when trade collapses, prosperity collapses—and extremism fills the void.

Regional “Mini-WTOs” Are Not the End of Globalization

Critics say the WTO is being sidelined, and they’re not wrong. Disputes over agricultural subsidies, intellectual property, and digital services have bogged down multilateral negotiations. The Appellate Body has been paralyzed for years. But this doesn’t mean global trade is dying—it means it's evolving.

Each regional trade agreement now functions like a “mini-WTO,” setting its own rules, mechanisms for dispute resolution, and enforcement frameworks. These aren’t replacements for the WTO—but they serve as buffers against chaos and laboratories for experimentation.

In fact, they may be the building blocks for a WTO 2.0—a more democratic, more inclusive, and more flexible system.

Why “Trade War” Is an Oxymoron

Let’s be clear: a trade war is a contradiction in terms. Trade is not war. It is a win-win proposition. It’s about comparative advantage, specialization, and mutual benefit—a truth first articulated by David Ricardo in the 19th century and confirmed by countless modern studies.

When countries raise tariffs to "punish" their trading partners, they inevitably hurt themselves. Input costs rise. Inflation ticks up. Jobs tied to exports vanish. And consumers bear the brunt of it all. So yes, while trade policy is sometimes wielded like a weapon, it is—ironically—a very blunt one that often boomerangs.

The Real Need: A New Global Trade Paradigm

Despite the resilience of regional blocs, the world still needs a global conversation—not about domination or “decoupling,” but about justice, sustainability, and shared prosperity. The Bretton Woods system worked for its time. But that time has passed.

What we need now is a new multilateral trade architecture that reflects:

  • Digital trade realities

  • Climate commitments

  • Labor and human rights

  • Equitable access for developing nations

Such a framework cannot be imposed. It must be co-created—with respect, mutual understanding, and visionary leadership.

A Starting Point for the Conversation

The book Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy offers exactly this: a fresh, holistic approach to what global trade can become in the 21st century. Not a zero-sum scramble for markets, but a collaborative blueprint for planetary prosperity.

In Conclusion

No, we’re not headed for another Great Depression. And no, globalization hasn’t died. It’s being restructured—region by region, bloc by bloc, partnership by partnership. The world is too interconnected, too experienced, and frankly too smart to return to the mistakes of the 1930s.

Let’s stop using the language of war for the practice of peace.

Let’s rethink trade—not to dismantle it, but to elevate it into something worthy of our shared future.



व्यापारिक युद्ध नहीं, व्यापारिक संघ: क्यों दुनिया एक और महामंदी की ओर नहीं बढ़ रही है

1944 में, जब द्वितीय विश्व युद्ध की आग बुझी ही थी, कुछ दूरदर्शी नेताओं ने ब्रेटन वुड्स में एक नई वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था की कल्पना की। उस समय वैश्विक व्यापार नगण्य था। पूरी दुनिया की GDP, आज के डॉलर में, $10 ट्रिलियन से भी कम थी—और उसका बड़ा हिस्सा उपनिवेशों, युद्धग्रस्त अर्थव्यवस्थाओं और संरक्षणवाद की दीवारों में बंद था।

आज, प्रत्येक प्रमुख क्षेत्रीय व्यापारिक संघ—अपने-अपने दम पर—1944 की पूरी वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था से बड़ा है।

यह एक गहरी और परिवर्तनकारी सच्चाई है। यही कारण है कि, भले ही आज WTO (विश्व व्यापार संगठन) कमजोर हो रहा हो और टैरिफ बढ़ रहे हों, फिर भी दुनिया एक और महामंदी के कगार पर नहीं है। बल्कि, हम देख रहे हैं कि वैश्विक व्यापार क्षेत्रीय स्तर पर अधिक लचीला और टिकाऊ हो रहा है।

दुनिया के प्रमुख व्यापारिक ब्लॉक

यह रहे वे प्रमुख क्षेत्रीय व्यापारिक संघ, जो आज वैश्विक व्यापार की रीढ़ हैं:

  1. यूरोपीय संघ (EU)

    • 27 देश, एक साझा बाजार, और कुल GDP $17 ट्रिलियन से अधिक

    • सबसे विकसित और परिष्कृत व्यापारिक ब्लॉक

    • कानून और नियमन में गहन समन्वय का मॉडल

  2. USMCA (अमेरिका-मेक्सिको-कनाडा समझौता)

    • पूर्व में NAFTA, अब $25 ट्रिलियन से अधिक की संयुक्त अर्थव्यवस्था

    • विनिर्माण, कृषि और सेवा क्षेत्रों में गहरी आपूर्ति श्रृंखला

  3. RCEP (क्षेत्रीय व्यापक आर्थिक भागीदारी)

    • चीन, जापान और ASEAN देशों समेत 15 देश

    • दुनिया का सबसे बड़ा व्यापार समझौता (~$26 ट्रिलियन GDP)

    • एशिया के भीतर बढ़ते व्यापार का संकेत

  4. Mercosur (दक्षिण अमेरिका व्यापारिक संघ)

    • ब्राज़ील और अर्जेंटीना के नेतृत्व में

    • टैरिफ समन्वयन और साझा व्यापारिक नीतियों की दिशा में प्रयास

  5. AfCFTA (अफ्रीकी महाद्वीपीय मुक्त व्यापार क्षेत्र)

    • 54 अफ्रीकी देश, $3.4 ट्रिलियन का संभावित एकल बाजार

    • महाद्वीप के आंतरिक व्यापार और औद्योगिकीकरण के लिए ऐतिहासिक अवसर

  6. CPTPP (ट्रांस-पैसिफिक साझेदारी समझौता)

    • जापान, कनाडा, ऑस्ट्रेलिया और ASEAN देशों सहित

    • WTO की विफलताओं के जवाब में विकसित किया गया

1944 बनाम आज: एक दुनिया, दो तस्वीरें

1944 में दुनिया आर्थिक रूप से टूटी हुई थी। संरक्षणवाद, राष्ट्रीयवाद और युद्ध की छाया में दुनिया सिमटी हुई थी। उस समय व्यापार को शून्य-राशि खेल (zero-sum game) माना जाता था।

आज, हर प्रमुख व्यापारिक ब्लॉक, 1944 की वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था से कई गुना बड़ा है। EU, USMCA और RCEP अकेले उस दौर की पूरी दुनिया से कहीं आगे हैं। और आज राष्ट्रों को अनुभव है कि जब व्यापार गिरता है, तो समृद्धि भी गिरती है—और चरमपंथ उभरता है।

क्षेत्रीय “मिनी-WTO” का उदय, वैश्वीकरण का अंत नहीं

WTO का प्रभाव ज़रूर घटा है। विवाद समाधान तंत्र ठप पड़ा है। डिजिटल व्यापार, कृषि सब्सिडी और श्रम अधिकारों पर मतभेद हैं।

लेकिन इसका मतलब यह नहीं कि वैश्विक व्यापार मर रहा है। इसका अर्थ है कि वह रूपांतरित हो रहा है।

अब प्रत्येक क्षेत्रीय समझौता "मिनी-WTO" की तरह काम करता है—नियम, विवाद समाधान और प्रवर्तन की अपनी व्यवस्था के साथ। ये WTO का विकल्प नहीं हैं, लेकिन ये स्थिरता के स्तंभ हैं और नवाचार के प्रयोगशाला भी।

“व्यापार युद्ध” एक विरोधाभास है

साफ शब्दों में कहें तो व्यापार युद्ध एक ऑक्सीमोरॉन है। व्यापार युद्ध नहीं है, व्यापार सहयोग है। यह दोनों पक्षों के लिए लाभकारी है।

जब कोई देश टैरिफ लगाता है, तो वह अपने निवेश, उत्पादकता और उपभोक्ताओं को ही नुकसान पहुंचाता है। यह आत्मघाती कदम होता है, जो अक्सर उल्टा असर करता है।

सच्ची ज़रूरत: एक नया वैश्विक व्यापार मॉडल

क्षेत्रीय व्यापारिक ब्लॉक मज़बूत हैं, लेकिन एक वैश्विक बातचीत की आवश्यकता अभी भी बनी हुई है—एक ऐसी बातचीत जो न्याय, सतत विकास और साझी समृद्धि पर केंद्रित हो।

हमें चाहिए:

  • डिजिटल व्यापार के नियम

  • जलवायु लक्ष्यों के अनुरूप व्यापार

  • श्रम और मानवाधिकारों की सुरक्षा

  • विकासशील देशों को बराबरी का मौका

यह सब थोपा नहीं जा सकता, इसे साझेदारी से निर्मित करना होगा।

एक शुरुआत बिंदु

पुस्तक Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy इस नई वैश्विक बातचीत की उत्तम शुरुआत हो सकती है। यह व्यापार को एक संयुक्त भविष्य की ओर ले जाने का मानवीय दृष्टिकोण प्रस्तुत करती है।

निष्कर्ष

न तो दुनिया महामंदी की ओर बढ़ रही है, और न ही वैश्वीकरण मर रहा है। बल्कि, यह अब अधिक विकेन्द्रीकृत, अधिक क्षेत्रीय, और अधिक लचीला होता जा रहा है।

देश अब बहुत चतुर हो चुके हैं। उन्हें मालूम है कि व्यापार के दरवाजे बंद करने से अंततः नुकसान उन्हीं को होगा।

अब समय आ गया है कि हम "युद्ध" की भाषा छोड़कर "सहयोग" की संस्कृति अपनाएं।

आइए व्यापार को फिर से एक बेहतर दुनिया का निर्माणकर्ता बनाएं।







at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Monday, June 30, 2025

The US Dollar's Special Place

 



The U.S. dollar became the de facto global currency due to a mix of historical events, economic dominance, and structural advantages. Here's a breakdown of the key factors:

1. Bretton Woods System (1944)

  • After WWII, 44 Allied nations agreed to peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar, which was backed by gold.

  • The U.S. held the vast majority of global gold reserves, making it the most stable and trusted currency.

  • Although the gold standard was abandoned in 1971 (Nixon Shock), the dollar's central role persisted.

2. Size and Stability of the U.S. Economy

  • The U.S. has been the world's largest or second-largest economy for over a century.

  • It boasts deep, liquid, and open capital markets, especially for U.S. Treasury bonds.

  • The U.S. political system, despite flaws, has historically offered legal predictability and property protections.

3. Dollar-Denominated Trade

  • Oil and commodities are mostly priced and traded in dollars (petrodollar system).

  • Countries need dollars to buy oil, incentivizing them to hold dollar reserves.

  • Many global contracts and loans (e.g., for developing countries) are in dollars.

4. U.S. Treasury Securities as Safe Assets

  • Central banks around the world hold U.S. Treasury bonds as a reserve asset because they’re liquid and safe.

  • The U.S. government has never defaulted on its debt (though political standoffs occasionally threaten it).

  • This makes dollar-denominated assets the global "safe haven" during crises.

5. Global Confidence and Network Effects

  • Once the dollar became dominant, it created path dependency—most people and countries use it because others already do.

  • The dollar is used in over 80% of international trade transactions.

  • It's held as reserves by most central banks (60%+ of global foreign exchange reserves).

6. U.S. Military and Geopolitical Power

  • U.S. global military reach and strategic alliances reinforce trust in its system.

  • The U.S. can enforce sanctions and control access to the dollar-based SWIFT system, giving it powerful leverage.

7. Lack of Viable Alternatives

  • The euro lacks political and fiscal unity.

  • The Chinese yuan is not fully convertible and China’s capital markets are not as open.

  • Gold and cryptocurrencies are too volatile or impractical for most global trade.

Summary:

The U.S. dollar dominates because of a historical head start, economic strength, financial infrastructure, and global trust—not because it's perfect, but because nothing better has yet emerged.


 


While the U.S. enjoys significant benefits from the dollar’s status as the de facto global currency, there are also serious disadvantages—some subtle, some structural. Here's a breakdown:

🔴 1. Trade Deficits: The "Dollar Trap"

  • The global demand for dollars forces the U.S. to run persistent trade deficits—it must export dollars to the world.

  • This often means importing more than it exports, hollowing out U.S. manufacturing over decades.

  • It’s a paradox: for the world to hold dollars, the U.S. must supply them—usually by buying foreign goods.

Result: Loss of industrial base, fewer manufacturing jobs, regional economic decline.

🔴 2. Strong Dollar Hurts U.S. Exports

  • Global demand for dollars often drives up its value.

  • A strong dollar makes U.S. goods more expensive abroad, hurting American exporters.

  • It also makes imports cheaper, discouraging domestic production.

🔴 3. Asset Bubbles and Financialization

  • As dollars pour into U.S. capital markets, they inflate asset prices (stocks, bonds, real estate).

  • Encourages financial speculation over productive investment in infrastructure or R&D.

  • Increases wealth inequality by enriching those who own capital assets.

🔴 4. Dollar Weaponization Risks Blowback

  • The U.S. uses the dollar’s dominance for sanctions and financial pressure, which can be effective short-term.

  • But it incentivizes other countries to create alternatives (e.g. BRICS payment systems, CBDCs, gold settlements).

  • Overuse could undermine long-term dollar trust.

🔴 5. “Exorbitant Burden” of Responsibility

  • The U.S. Federal Reserve sets policy for domestic needs—but its decisions impact the entire global economy.

  • A rate hike to fight U.S. inflation may trigger currency collapses or debt crises in developing countries.

🔴 6. Global Financial Imbalances

  • The dollar system contributes to a two-tiered global economy where rich countries control currency flows.

  • It often traps developing countries in dollar debt cycles, requiring austerity or IMF bailouts.

  • This creates moral pressure on the U.S. to act as a global lender or crisis manager.

🔴 7. False Sense of Security

  • The U.S. can borrow cheaply because the world demands dollars.

  • This may encourage fiscal irresponsibility, growing the national debt without immediate consequences.

  • Eventually, that trust could erode if deficits become unsustainable or if alternatives to the dollar take hold.

Summary:

The U.S. dollar’s global role boosts U.S. financial power—but it comes at a cost to exports, industry, and stability, while inviting backlash from rivals. It’s a double-edged sword: enormous influence, but growing long-term vulnerability.




A multipolar currency world is already emerging. While the U.S. dollar remains dominant, several realistic scenarios point toward a future with multiple global currencies used for trade, reserves, and settlements.

🔄 SCENARIO: A Multipolar Currency System

In this world:

  • The U.S. dollar still plays a key role.

  • But the euro, yuan, and others share the stage.

  • Trade, reserves, and investment flows become more diversified.

  • Power is more balanced — both economically and politically.

🧭 Key Drivers of Multipolarity

1. Geopolitical Realignments

  • U.S.-led sanctions (e.g., on Russia and Iran) have pushed countries to seek dollar alternatives.

  • China and Russia are actively reducing dollar dependence in bilateral trade.

  • BRICS countries are discussing a common settlement currency backed by a basket of commodities.

2. Technological Disruption (CBDCs & Blockchain)

  • Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) from China, India, and others can bypass SWIFT and reduce dollar reliance.

  • Blockchain-based stablecoins or commodity-backed tokens can settle international trade instantly without needing dollars.

3. Growing Currency Blocs

  • Euro already accounts for ~20% of global reserves.

  • The Chinese yuan is being internationalized through the Belt and Road Initiative and swap lines.

  • Gulf countries and ASEAN are exploring regional payment systems, often linked to local currencies.

4. U.S. Overreach and Trust Erosion

  • Weaponization of the dollar (e.g., freezing reserves) has made other countries wary.

  • Holding too many dollars feels risky if geopolitical tensions rise.

🧮 How It Might Work

Use Case USD Euro Yuan Others
Energy Trade ✓✓✓ ✓ ✓✓ ✓
Reserves ✓✓✓ ✓✓ ✓ ✓
Bilateral Deals ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓✓ ✓✓
Tourism/Travel ✓✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓
Debt Issuance ✓✓✓ ✓✓ ✓ –

No single currency dominates across all domains. Instead, a flexible ecosystem emerges.

⚠️ Challenges to Multipolarity

  • Network effects: Most systems, banks, and contracts are dollar-based.

  • Liquidity: Dollar markets are deep; other currencies can’t yet match.

  • Trust and convertibility: The yuan, for example, is not fully convertible and China has capital controls.

  • Political unity: The euro lacks a centralized fiscal union; BRICS lack cohesion.

🔮 Future Scenarios

  1. Gradual Decentralization

    • Dollar use shrinks slowly; others rise.

    • CBDCs reduce frictions in non-dollar trade.

  2. Regional Currency Zones

    • Africa, Latin America, and Asia develop regional currencies or stablecoin networks.

  3. Tokenized Trade & Commodities

    • Gold-, oil-, or carbon-backed tokens facilitate neutral, trustless settlement systems.

✅ Conclusion

A multipolar currency world is not only possible — it's already forming. The process will be gradual and uneven, but the dollar’s monopoly is weakening, and currency diversity is becoming a strategic imperative in a fragmented, deglobalizing world.




John Maynard Keynes's idea from 1944 may actually have been the best model for global trade: a neutral, global currency not controlled by any single country.

🧠 Keynes’s 1944 Proposal: The Bancor

At the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, Keynes proposed creating an international clearing union (ICU) with a global unit of account called the bancor.

📌 Key Features:

  • The bancor would not be a national currency like the dollar or pound.

  • It would be used only for international trade settlements, not for domestic transactions.

  • Countries would hold bancor accounts at a global central bank (the ICU).

  • Trade imbalances would be automatically corrected by penalizing both surplus and deficit countries.

🌐 Why the Bancor Was a Brilliant Idea for Global Trade

1. Neutrality

  • It avoids giving disproportionate power to one country (as happened with the dollar).

  • The global economy wouldn't depend on the domestic policy or deficits of the reserve currency issuer.

2. Balanced Trade Incentives

  • Keynes didn’t just want to punish deficit countries (like IMF austerity does).

  • He also wanted surplus countries (like China today or the U.S. post-WWII) to spend more or invest abroad to rebalance trade.

  • This discourages hoarding of foreign reserves and encourages fair trade.

3. No Need for Dollar Hoarding

  • Developing countries wouldn't need to accumulate billions in dollar reserves "just in case."

  • Less pressure to run export surpluses purely to get hard currency.

4. Reduced Global Imbalances

  • The bancor system would have automatic adjustments: limits on how much surplus or deficit a country could build up.

  • That could prevent crises like the Eurozone imbalance, or the U.S.-China trade gap.

🔴 Why It Didn’t Happen

  • The U.S., emerging from WWII as the dominant power, rejected it.

  • It insisted on using the U.S. dollar (tied to gold) as the backbone of the new global financial system.

  • As a result, global trade became dependent on the monetary and fiscal policy of one country — the U.S.

⚖️ What’s Best for Global Trade Today?

System Pros Cons
Dollar Hegemony Deep liquidity, stability Biased, creates global imbalances
Multipolar System Flexibility, competition Complexity, fragmentation
Bancor/Neutral Currency Fair, balanced, stable Needs global governance and trust

In principle, Keynes’s idea remains the most equitable and sustainable — especially in a world of multipolar powers (U.S., China, EU, BRICS). But it would require unprecedented international cooperation and a new global institution to administer it.

🧩 What Could a Modern Bancor Look Like?

  • Blockchain-based token issued by a global institution (e.g. a reformed IMF or a new BRICS+ clearing union)

  • Backed by a basket of currencies or commodities

  • Used only for cross-border settlements

  • With built-in rules to automatically penalize excessive trade surpluses and deficits

✅ Conclusion

Keynes’s bancor was ahead of its time — a neutral global reserve currency that promotes balanced trade. In an age of dollar fatigue and rising economic nationalism, a modernized version of the bancor could be the ideal framework for fair, sustainable global trade.




The Trump administration's desire to:

  1. Maintain the U.S. dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency, and

  2. Simultaneously achieve balanced trade with every single country,
    is inherently self-defeating. It's a classic case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

🧠 Why This Is a Contradiction

🔵 Reserve Currency Role Requires Trade Deficits

  • For the dollar to function as the world’s primary currency, the U.S. must export dollars to the rest of the world.

  • That usually happens through running trade deficits—importing more than it exports.

  • Countries need dollars to buy oil, repay debt, and build reserves. If the U.S. insists on balanced trade with each country, where would the world get those dollars?

🔁 Global dollar demand requires a U.S. trade deficit.

🔴 Bilateral Trade Balancing Undermines the System

  • The Trump-era strategy of bilateral trade negotiations (vs. multilateral frameworks like the WTO) ignores the reality of multilateral trade imbalances.

  • A country like Germany may run a big surplus with the U.S., but a deficit with China. The trade system is circular, not bilateral.

  • Trying to impose 1-to-1 balance with every partner is economically incoherent in a globally networked economy.

⚖️ Example: Dollar Hegemony vs. Balanced Trade

Policy Goal Implication
Preserve global dollar role Must keep trade deficits flowing to supply global demand
Balanced trade with all nations Implies trade surpluses or zero-sum balancing, which would reduce global dollar circulation

They cancel each other out.

🏛️ WTO Dismantling Makes It Worse

  • The WTO helps manage global trade under predictable rules. Its weakening under Trump increased trade uncertainty and undermined multilateral discipline.

  • Without a rules-based system, big countries can bully small ones, and currency manipulation and retaliation rise.

  • Ironically, this undermines trust in the dollar, especially if the U.S. itself is seen as destabilizing global trade norms.

🎯 Bottom Line

Yes — Trump’s trade and currency objectives are deeply at odds:

  • You can run global deficits to supply the world with dollars, or you can balance trade bilaterally, but not both.

  • You can dominate a rules-based system, or you can tear it down and go bilateral, but doing both makes the system weaker and less likely to support dollar supremacy.

In short, you can't run a global monetary system and a nationalist trade regime at the same time.






Grounded Greatness: The Case For Smart Surface Transit In Future Cities
The Garden Of Last Debates (novel)
Deported (novel)
Empty Country (novel)
Trump’s Default: The Mist Of Empire (novel)
The 20% Growth Revolution: Nepal’s Path to Prosperity Through Kalkiism
Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy
The $500 Billion Pivot: How the India-US Alliance Can Reshape Global Trade
Trump’s Trade War
Peace For Taiwan Is Possible
Formula For Peace In Ukraine
A 2T Cut
Are We Frozen in Time?: Tech Progress, Social Stagnation
The Last Age of War, The First Age of Peace: Lord Kalki, Prophecies, and the Path to Global Redemption
AOC 2028: : The Future of American Progressivism

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, April 05, 2025

5: WTO

at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

Trade War Temporary Truce: Phase 1

As part of the deal, the United States agreed to cancel the 15-percent tariffs that had been scheduled to take effect on December 15 on $160 billion worth of Chinese goods, and to halve an earlier set of tariffs on another $120 billion worth of goods. In exchange, China agreed to increase its purchase of U.S. products by $200 billion in the next two years. ....... To reach the next phase will require each side to determine what fundamental concessions it might be willing to offer the other. ........

Trump’s 25 percent tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese imports will remain, as will China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods.

..... Washington presented several Chinese pledges as concessions to U.S. concerns about Beijing’s trade practices. But these promised measures are either vague or extensions of policies already in place. Indeed, China had initiated most, if not all, of these measures—including steps to reform foreign ownership limits, currency exchange policies, and intellectual property protections—well before the trade war began. ........ As early as 2017, China had begun lifting foreign ownership restrictions—limitations that prevented foreigners from having controlling interests or, in some cases, any interest at all in firms operating in China—in many industries, ranging from financial services to the automotive sector, with the aim of removing all limits in a few years. In financial services, including banking, securities, asset management, and insurance, majority foreign ownership was allowed for the first time in June 2018, and ownership limits (now at 51 percent) are set to be completely removed in 2020. Ironically, the pace of change might have been faster if not for the trade war, which forced China to withhold some reforms. ......... Since 1994, China’s central bank has usually intervened to prop up the yuan, not to weaken it. ....... Regarding intellectual property, China has significantly tightened rules and enforcement in recent years. Beijing set up specialized intellectual property courts in three major cities in 2014 and intermediate-level tribunals in 17 provinces in 2017. In the last four years, China’s Supreme Court has issued guidelines and policies on the judicial protection of intellectual property rights. These have strengthened the courts’ jurisdiction over intellectual property infringement cases and provided a framework for damages. The Supreme Court inaugurated its own permanent intellectual property court on January 1, 2019. ........... China’s total intellectual property payments to foreigners have grown on average 20 percent per year since 2000, far outpacing the median growth rate of 9.5 percent across all countries, according to a study by Shang-jin Wei, a professor at Columbia University. The improved regime of intellectual property protection helps explain why China attracts more foreign direct investment than any other country except the United States.......... The trade war has so far failed to achieve Washington’s stated objectives—namely, to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States and narrow the country’s trade deficit.

By September 2019, U.S. manufacturing had sunk to a more than ten-year low, and it has continued to weaken since. The U.S. trade deficit with the rest of the world has ballooned from $544 billion in 2016 to $691 billion in the 12 months ending in October.

.......... Tariffs on Chinese goods have backfired, in that U.S. consumers have paid almost their entire cost ....... China’s export prices to the United States have not really changed since the trade war began. .......

There are, of course, no winners in this trade war, and to think otherwise is delusional.

........ The longer the trade war drags on, the more damage both countries and the world economy will sustain. Already, global supply chains are disrupted. More consequential will be the oft-talked-about “decoupling” of U.S. and Chinese technological systems. Technology companies used to boast that “the world is our market.” No longer. ............

the ten largest U.S. semiconductor companies earn a combined revenue in China ($79.3 billion) nearly three times their sales in the United States ($28.1 billion)

. All of these firms are now forecasting significantly lower sales to China........ With Phase II negotiations ahead, a wide gap still separates the two sides on major issues, and the prospect of serious compromise remains distant. ......... Neither side has provided concrete details on what it hopes to achieve in the next round of negotiations. But China’s main objectives are unequivocal. Beijing wants Washington to remove all the tariffs imposed since the trade war began, and it will be prepared to reciprocate in kind. It wants the United States to drop its sanctions on Chinese technology firms such as Huawei, and to relax restrictions on Chinese investments in the United States. ......... The ultimate goal of the next stage of negotiations for both sides should be very clear: to reach an equitable deal that lowers barriers to trade and investment.

If both countries follow the same rule-based system, freer trade lowers consumer prices, promotes competition, improves efficiency, stimulates innovation, and ultimately leads to greater economic growth.

In the service of this aim, each country must determine what its real objectives are and prepare to make important concessions. ........... The United States must decide whether what it really wants is access to the Chinese market and better prices for U.S. consumers, or whether it simply wants to contain China’s rise at all costs. Washington cannot have it both ways. The former aim could ultimately lead to a trade deal, but the latter never will. ........

For its part, Beijing must finally decide what to do with the most pernicious holdover from its planned economy days: China’s inefficient state-owned sector.

....... China’s own stated goal is to let the market be the decisive force in the allocation of resources in the country. China should continue to restructure, reform, downsize, and privatize the state sector in accordance with this goal, not just because doing so may entice the United States to stop the trade war but because such reforms will be good for China. Whenever China has undertaken market reforms, for example in 1992 and in the early 2000s, its economic growth has surged. Conversely, its growth suffers when the pace of reform slows down. .........

If Phase II leads the United States and China to more trade and greater economic cooperation than they had before the trade war, then both countries will have managed to win.



Weijian Shan Prior to TPG Capital, Mr Shan worked, between 1993 and 1998 at JP Morgan as a Managing Director, concurrently serving as its China Representative, Chief Representative for JP Morgan Beijing Office and Chief Representative for JP Morgan Shanghai Office......... Mr Shan was a professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania for six years before joining JP Morgan........ Mr Shan worked as an investment officer at the World Bank in Washington D.C. in 1987.......Mr Shan received a Ph.D. and a Masters of Arts in economics from University of California at Berkeley, an MBA from University of San Francisco.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, December 15, 2019

Trade War: US, EU, China, Japan

The trade war is a proven recipe for a global recession or worse and possible political mayhem. Trump's trade war with the EU bores ill for global trade because the EU has none of the China issues, supposedly. Bilateral trade is a primitive concept. It is like ditching digital money and going back to silver coins.

A global depression would create a new wave of fascism across the planet. Irrationality will come to rule.

The only hope is that all this saber-rattling is posturing and will soon give way to common sense. But there are no such signs yet on the horizon.

The idea that every country and every group of countries have been unfair to the US on trade ...... the whole idea of "fair trade" has been that the US has been unfair to the rest of the world, especially to the poorest countries. Racist white nationalism will also have you believe that you feel sorry for the whites because they have suffered so much from racism.

Brexit? Aexit?

The sensible thing to do would be to attempt WTO reform. Killing the WTO takes us back to the 1930s. So far the global economy's resilience built through trade has held. But that resilience can stretch only so much.

Trump's trade temper tantrums are insanely destructive. And his traditionally pro-trade party is going all the way with him. It is strange. This might not be the first time politics trumps sound economic theory.

A trade war with Europe would be larger and more damaging than Washington’s dispute with China Data from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative shows that in 2018, the U.S. imported $683.9 billion of EU goods and $557.9 billion from China. ..... There have already been tariffs on European steel and aluminum — which led the bloc to impose duties of 25% on $2.8 billion of U.S. products in June 2018, and, there’s an ongoing dispute regarding Airbus and Boeing — but experts believe a wider spat with Europe would be much more damaging than the current tit-for-tat with China. ....... “In 2018, the U.S. exported more than three times more to the EU than to China,” Hense said, adding that the region could therefore hit back hard against Washington. ..... “The rules of international trade, which we have developed over the years hand-in-hand with our American partners, cannot be violated without a reaction from our side” ...... Both economies are slowing down, and the cyclical effect of the tariffs is likely to be pretty strong ..... Speaking at the U.S. Senate in mid-July, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said that “crosscurrents, such as trade tensions and concerns about global growth, have been weighing on economic activity and the outlook.” .......

the business models of multinational firms is in danger as a result of a potential U.S.- EU trade war

...... “Much of the (EU-U.S.) trade takes place within firms rather than between them … (as a result) when you impose tariffs between the U.S. and Europe, you end up raising the prices for consumers and complicating the way goods are assembled in both places, as in the U.S.-China case, but you also end up disrupting the profitability of the business models for large multinationals,” he said. ...... “Since many, if not most of those large multinationals are American, this is going to put a further drag on the U.S. economy” ....... “A trade war between the U.S. and Europe would be more challenging than a trade war between the U.S. and China because it would weaken U.S. multinationals, reduce the size of the markets U.S. firms can access, and create incentives for U.S. firms to divest from their foreign assets and so unleash further foreign competition”.....“In other words, it would undo all the structural advantages that successive U.S. administrations created since the end of the Second World War”

How Trump May Finally Kill the WTO

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, June 28, 2019

US, China, Milky Way, Andromeda



This so-called US-China trade war I compare to the future projected collision between the Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxies. This clash is political. At some level, it was inevitable. It had to happen. And there is no going back. We will end up at some new equilibrium. Both powers will change in the process. The world itself will change. I think the primary casualty will be the nation-state itself. There will be no Milky Way left. There will be no Andromeda left. Something new will form.

The WTO is only as strong as its two largest trading partners will let it be. And there the train has already left the station. This tussle necessarily asks for fundamental reform of the WTO. But the US will not be the sole power shaping that new form. This tussle creates an opportunity for many powers who are represented in the G20 grouping to flex their muscle and wake up to the fact that they do have a seat at the table.

The elephant in the room, though, is technology. The US demands Huawei deliver on issues where the US technology giants themselves have a poor record. Privacy and security issues plague the tech sector like plastic waste in the Pacific. Here I propose the creation of a T100, a grouping of the top 100 technology firms of the world measured by market cap that meet on the sidelines of G20 and take the lead on issues of privacy and security. Trump asking Huawei to offer ironclad guarantees on security is like that emperor who demanded a flooded river to stop, just stop. Huawei alone can't do it any more than Google and Facebook have been able to. The CIA has got to be the top stealth organization when it comes to cyber snooping. I would not be surprised if the Chinese are a close second. They both take advantage of the security flaws in hardware and software that are extremely hard to patch.

5G is way more monumental than any road, or bridge, or port, or rail China can build with its Belt And Road Initiative. 5G is that infrastructure that will finally level the playing field for the Global South. Trump cannot be allowed to stand in the way of 5G deployment. On the other hand, take stock of all the privacy and security issues the world has had to encounter over the past 25 years and multiply that by 100. Much faster internet, much more ubiquitous internet will mean greater challenges for privacy and security. Here the T100 needs to take the lead. There are technological solutions. There are common standards to agree on. There is also room for law enforcement. But no nation state is at the center of this debate.



There is no way out for China from this trade war than through some major structural reforms which, by the way, would be good for the Chinese economy. Some of the structural reforms that are being demanded will make sure state funds do not go to state-owned enterprises that are losing money on massive scales. Such moves will make China more efficient and more competitive.

The US will also see structural changes. The 2020 election will see the rise of the Social Democrat. The US will likely go for Medicare For All. The US will become more like China on education and health.

And there's the all-important Clean Energy. On that, the two powers must fully cooperate. The problem is too big for any one of them to go solo.

In the clash of the two powers, that at some level was inevitable, both will fundamentally change and will become more like each other. But when the dust settles both will have become unrecognizable from their current vantage points.

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 10, 2019

The WTO And The Regional Trading Blocs



The WTO has ushered in a new era of prosperity for the planet with a record number of people climbing out of poverty. That part has worked. The WTO has to be treated as a floor on which regional groups of countries can hope to build deeper trade relationships. Countries in the west Pacific are doing exactly that. The continent of Africa has been moving towards a free trade zone of its own. All these add to the WTO.

What makes Trump's tactics different is that they take away from the WTO. He wants to deal with countries one at a time. He thinks he can mete out unequal treatment in the process.

The problem with that approach is you are putting political whim above sound economic theory. The economic theory behind trade is sound. Trade does lead to rises in productivity.

But the WTO has not been designed to narrow income inequality. But that is like saying the Department of Education does not seem to be doing anything about health. Well, it has been designed for education, not health. That is no argument against health.

Trump is trying to go backward in time. He wants to take America and the world to an era without the WTO. That was not a good era. Instead of thinking what the next stage in America's economic growth is, he wants to go back to an era when America's trade with China was minuscule.

The tragedy is, there are plenty of smart people in America who have been thinking about what the next stage of economic growth for America is. But Trump is utterly uncurious.


at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, May 31, 2019

The Possible Outline Of A Deal Between Xi And Trump In June

Will The Trade War Force A New Equilibrium?

  • Both parties agree to roll back all tariffs immediately. 
  • The US ends its harassment of Huawei, although it could choose to not use Huawei equipment for its 5G efforts. China lays to rest its rare earth minerals threats. 
  • China agrees to a set of structural reforms and agrees to a review of the progress every two years. 
  • China agrees to buy substantially more agricultural products from the US. 
  • China agrees to additional purchases to the tune of $30 billion. 
  • Both powers agree to call a meeting of the WTO for a new round of negotiations with all countries of the world participating. The US takes all its grievances to the WTO. The negotiations might last a few years. 
  • The two powers organize a gathering of the top 100 technology companies of the world for a Privacy And Security Summit along the lines of the Rio Summit in 1992 for the environment on the sidelines of the G20 Summit next year. The top 20 economies and the top 100 tech companies thrash out solutions. How much of it is about agreeing on common standards? How much of it is about lawmaking and law enforcement? How could the law enforcement agencies of the world cooperate? How much of it is technical? How much is beyond reach and awaiting further advances in technology? 
  • The T100 is a permanent forum meeting annually on the sidelines of G20. 



No President Is Above the Law First, a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 election to help candidate Donald Trump get elected. Second, candidate Donald Trump welcomed that help. Third, when the federal government tried to investigate, now-President Donald Trump did everything he could to delay, distract, and otherwise obstruct that investigation....... That’s a crime. ..... He’s referring President Trump for impeachment, and it’s up to Congress to act.

Business groups are considering legal action against the White House over Mexico tariffs The powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce is mulling its legal options in response to the duties...... While top business organizations have repeatedly slammed tariffs Trump levied on trading partners such as Mexico, Canada and China, a lawsuit would mark a major escalation in their opposition to White House trade policy....... The duties could damage key U.S. industries such as auto manufacturing, and crucial 2020 electoral states such as Arizona, Michigan and Texas could feel particularly sharp pain from the tariffs.

GOP lawmakers, business groups slam Trump's Mexico tariff threat
Making Sense of the New American Right
Trump and Bibi’s Bad Week
Trump's approval rating hits highest point in two years
Jeremy Siegel says Trump must cut a trade deal with China to protect the two pillars his re-election case: The strong stock market and economy “The market wants a solution,” says Siegel. “Don’t forget, the market didn’t really want this trade war.” .... Since Trump’s tariff-threat tweet on May 5, the S&P 500 has lost about $1.1 trillion in value. ....... stocks could drop 10% to 20% if the U.S. and China were to dig in during trade talks, he said, “The market is going to continue to react” if Trump wants to push China to be the end....... “You can pull victory out of defeat. No one is really going to look at the details,” the Wharton professor said, stressing that the president has a bully pulpit to cast any agreement with China as a victory even if it’s just so-so.

Beijing experts’ latest message as trade talks stall: The US needs China sentiment contrasts with that of Chinese state-run media, which is emphasizing China’s ability to stand up to the U.S. ...... as long as there is negotiation, then there will be results ..... Beijing would like to keep negotiating with the U.S. It could even be a years-long process that cycles through negotiation and fights ...... China has been removing ownership restrictions in some industries such as financial services and autos. This March, Beijing also rushed to pass a new foreign investment law that officially prohibits forced technology transfer and increases the protection of intellectual property rights. In June, the government is also set to release an expanded list of industries to which foreign businesses can have access. ...... Some have hoped the trade tensions would push Beijing toward important changes to the structure of its economy.



We asked the Democrats running for president how they would negotiate with China on trade. Here’s what they said “Donald Trump has shown he knows nothing about trade,” says Rep. Seth Moulton...... Five Democrats say any trade deal with China should address human rights issues. Among them: Sen. Bernie Sanders, who said he would target American firms that provide surveillance equipment. ...... “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” Biden told a crowd in Iowa earlier this month. ....... Sanders: It is in the interests of the United States to work to strengthen institutions like the WTO and the UN rather than trying to go it alone. American concerns about China’s technology practices are shared in Europe and across the Asia-Pacific. We can place far more pressure on China to change its policies if we work together with the broader international community and the other developed economies. International institutions also offer China a template for reforming its own internal intellectual property and industrial practices. ...... Sanders: Yes. Labor protections are very weak in China, and the rights of workers are an essential component of human rights. The Trump administration has proven itself indifferent to labor rights, and apparently would prefer that American workers are reduced to the position of Chinese workers, rather than that labor everywhere enjoy basic protections and strong standard of living. The Trump administration has also done nothing to pressure China over its abhorrent treatment of the Uighur and Tibetan peoples. Future trade negotiations should, for example, target American corporations that contribute surveillance technologies that enable China’s authoritarian practices............ Sanders: While China has adopted some better practices, it still has a long way to go. The Trump administration is correct to put pressure on China to reform its practices, and I hope that some good comes from current trade negotiations. The economic relationship between the United States and China has been the engine of global growth for the past 25 years, and we should acknowledge that in China it has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. In both China and the United States, however, the benefits of this growth have not been shared equally, and have accrued in a very disproportionate way to the very wealthiest. The problem is that the Trump administration is mainly interested in addressing some of the imbalances between America and China overall, when it also needs to address basic drivers of economic inequality. The future of this relationship requires both a degree of pressure on China, and reform of the economy inside the United States itself. ....... Sanders: The U.S. has a role to play in supporting bilateral and multilateral diplomacy between China and others in the region to deescalate and handle disputes. The best policy in both the near and long term is to strengthen international institutions, in this case the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The United States should press China to abide by internationally agreed guidelines for managing maritime issues, in no small part by ratifying UNCLOS itself. ......





Elon Musk’s SpaceX is now worth more than Tesla Musk is the largest shareholder and CEO of both companies, with a 54% stake in SpaceX and more than 20% ownership of Tesla........ investors shouldn’t rule out the possibility that Musk could use his SpaceX stake to “collateralize” Tesla. “There’s a precedent for Elon Musk to think across his portfolio of companies”

Cramer: The US economy ‘could be on the verge of a significant slowdown’ executives are also weighing the odds of the Democratic Party winning the White House in 2020 ...... “yields don’t protect you anymore ... the stocks keep falling on fears of a worldwide tariff-related slowdown.”

Markets signal to US and China on the trade war: You have ‘blundered into a minefield’

The New York Fed’s gauge of recession probability over the next 12 months is now at 27.5%, the highest since the financial crisis.

..... “It’s like lighting a match. You think you know how to control it. That’s where the uncertainty comes in” ...... Whether it’s increased expectations for interest rate cuts, decreasing expectations for inflation or queasy bond and stock market investors who are more aggressively pricing in slower growth, the message is being sent to the U.S. and China that danger lurks. ..... the ecosystem around the economy and the trade headlines remains fragile.

China won when Trump blindsided Mexico with tariffs, says former Mexican ambassador to China
US manufacturing activity dives to more than 9-year low on trade war worries, survey shows
Grover Norquist urges Trump to get rid of trade tariffs, calling them taxes on US consumers
Major Wall Street banks jeer Trump’s Mexico tariffs: ‘Damaging at a number of levels’
‘Very dangerous’: Putin, Trump want to weaken the European Union, top official says
GOP lawmakers, business groups slam Trump's Mexico tariff threat

Making Sense of the New American Right The conservative intellectual movement has been and continues to be fractious, contentious, combustible, and less of a force than most assume....... The debate over Trump's character and fitness for office opened, or poured salt on, wounds that have not and will not heal. ...... The president did not win a majority, captured a smaller percentage of the popular vote than Mitt Romney, and took the Electoral College thanks to 77,000 votes spread over three states. It is also the case that to date President Trump has been most successful when he has adhered to the traditional Republican program of tax cuts, defense spending, and judicial appointments. ........ The rise of Donald Trump, Brexit, and nation-state populism throughout the world certainly suggest that something has changed in global politics. American conservatism ought to investigate, recognize, and assimilate the empirical reality before it. The trouble is that no one has concluded definitively what that reality is. ....... They believe the nation-state is the core unit of geopolitics and that national sovereignty and independence are more important than global flows of capital, labor, and commodities....... the conservative terrain has become so difficult to navigate that it's useful to have a map. ..... the people who remind us that America is not ruled from above but driven from below. ...... Social decline, he said, is related to the loss of manufacturing jobs. It happened in the inner cities. Now it's happening in the Rust Belt and in rural America. When jobs disappear and low-skilled male wages decline, family formation breaks down. ...... advocated a national industrial strategy ...... the frayed bonds that barely connect working-class Americans to each other ....... they are certain American foreign policy should be restrained, within constitutional bounds, and prioritize diplomacy over military force. ...... Economic freedom has brought about a global system of trade and finance that has outsourced jobs, shifted resources to the metropolitan coasts, and obscured its self-seeking under the veneer of social justice. Personal freedom has ended up in the mainstreaming of pornography, alcohol, drug, and gambling addiction, abortion, single-parent families, and the repression of orthodox religious practice and conscience. ..... the "strong gods" of familial, national, and religious authority. ...... turning away from the secular world and shielding, as best you can, spiritual life. ...... "to use these values [of civility and decency] to enforce our order and our orthodoxy, not pretend that they could ever be neutral." ...... Rather than asking the question, ‘What should conservatives/progressives do?' considerable advances can be made through certain purely practical considerations: ‘How can the integrity of the national political community be assured?' ‘How can commercial activity and technological development continue to be turned toward the common good, and toward our own strategic advantage?' ......... For decades now our politics and culture have been dominated by a particular philosophy of freedom. It is a philosophy of liberation from family and tradition; of escape from God and community; a philosophy of self-creation and unrestricted, unfettered free choice. ........ "celebrates the individual," Hawley went on. But "it leads to hierarchy. Though it preaches merit, it produces elitism. Though it proclaims liberty, it destroys the life that makes liberty possible. Replacing it and repairing the profound harm it has caused is one of the great challenges of our day."

Trump and Bibi’s Bad Week Even on Fox News, Mueller’s statement was greeted as a significant blow to the President, with the network’s chief political anchor, Bret Baier, telling viewers that Mueller had directly rebutted Trump’s claim of “no collusion, no obstruction.” ...... Washington and Jerusalem are facing twin crises, disputes over the reach of executive power in the face of scandal and investigation. .....

politics have become a crude reality show

.... “There are all kinds of things happening that, several years ago, could only be a figment of our imagination.” ..... We are living in a real-time seminar on democracy’s dysfunctions. ....... the context of the rise of authoritarian-minded right-wing populists across the Western world ...... It can all seem overwhelming—too many little crises to keep track of. ...... Whether or not there is anything to be done about it, the collapse of the liberal order is, in fact, happening. ........ the number of democratic countries in the world has fallen every year for the past dozen years. ...... E.U. parliamentary elections confirmed that the right-wing populism that fuelled Brexit and political discontent across the continent remains a potent force; populist parties received the largest share of the vote in four of Europe’s six largest countries. ...... Tumult is the new normal.



Trump’s Crazy Mexico Tariff Is Stoking a Meltdown on Wall Street In writing about Donald Trump, there is a daily temptation to say that this time he’s gone too far. ...... Trump’s move could derail congressional approval of a new trade deal with Canada and Mexico. ......

The only real constraints on Trump’s actions are the courts, the opinion polls, and the financial markets.

...... If the new tariffs do go into effect, they will raise the prices for consumers on a wide range of goods, which could produce a popular backlash. ...... eighty-two per cent of self-identified Republicans approve of Trump’s trade policies...... the President of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has already indicated that he won’t jump to attention. ..... (On Thursday, López Obrador sent Trump a letter in which he said, “Please, remember that I do not lack valor, that I am not a coward nor timorous but rather act according to principles.”) ...... Trump seems to believe that he can target anybody for his bullying ..... this latest Trump power play is so extreme and potentially self-destructive that, according to the Wall Street Journal, even his own hard-line trade adviser, Robert Lighthizer, opposed it. ....... On Wall Street, there is a lot of nervousness about where things are heading, and whether Tariff Man understands the risks that he is taking. Financial markets don’t usually go south gradually; they collapse suddenly, in a heap. ....... he’s going to have to blink on tariffs, because the market can’t live with this level of crazy.”

Trump's approval rating hits highest point in two years 48 percent approve of the job Trump is doing ..... “Every point of increase in this range of 45 to 50 improves the possibility of re-election.” ...... The president’s job approval rating is at 42.5 percent in the RealClearPolitics average. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found Trump at 48 percent, but six other recent polls found him ranging between 38 percent and 44 percent.

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)