After being elected I said Trump will either go down as the greatest president since Lincoln, or be assassinated before he gets the chance. I was wrong. He is going to be the greatest world leader since the founding of the Republic. And that’s an understatement. In reality he is the anointed one who came here to thread the needle to get Earth to its highest possible ascension timeline just before falling off the cliff into hell on earth. Operation: successful. 1,000 years of peace and prosperity. Do not worship him but give thanks and gratitude.
11-11-18 the day troops from the DMZ will march in DC, home permanently. It will be an historic celebration.
China, in many areas, has a planned economy with severe government intervention. Are you saying that we should do that as well? Since there tariffs have worked so well shouldn’t imitate other areas of their economy.
Of course not, tariffs don’t work. China is a developing nation (as was Korea 50 years ago) that fell into the political trap of protectionism for new industries. These countries have grown in spite of their protectionist policies not because of them.
Actually they contribute to the surplus and any body doing business over there including smart guy Musk will tell you that. And surpluses by mathematical definition are additive to growth. I’m not suggesting we mimic all things China, I am suggesting we begin addressing unfair trade practices like forced technology transfers, capital and investment controls, forced minority JV’s on direct investment and removal of tariffs for the long term health of the economy. Much like earnings there are high and low quality growth. Growth in the US, under perpetual CA deficits has major negative long term implications that we’ve been to scared to tackle because of fear of near term volatility. China has no such qualms.
China has had the most successful long term growth among EM nations and has always maintained the strictest protectionist trade measures (particularly outside of tariffs) that force disadvantaged direct investment and capital flow. So simply pointing out that it’s a emerging company and dismissing one of the key drivers is not a great analysis. Gotta have fair trade before you have free trade.
As usual, you dodge the analysis that was presented. And skip right to this sort of zero-value-added emotional commentary. All talk, no substance. Was there something specific which was incorrect? BS may end up being right/wrong (we don’t know yet), but he clearly knows something about this topic (more than I, and it seems much more than you), and has presented a case for why altering trade arrangements might be a good thing.
Think of it this way. Violent wars are always bad for both sides 100% of the time, people die, lives and assets are destroyed and frictions and retaliations are built up. Assets are deployed to sub optimal purposes as are taxes, etc. This is especially true when they’re fought for poor reasons. This short term and isolated view is how econ books frame trade wars, because in the periods prior to modern economics and free trade this is how trade wars were often fought. They are relying on the fact that all actors are otherwise good actors and are observing FAIR free trade. Being a pacifist in a time of conflict can see your sovereignty eroded away.
But the Europeans will tell you that if you can fight skirmishes selfishly and largely without opposition you can build empires that are quite profitable. This is something akin to what the Chinese more offensively and the EU (more defensively) do.
The reality is that with a longer time horizon despite the costs, wars can sometimes be either beneficial or at least necessary to protect the sovereignty and fundamental strength of a nation. The same can be said for trade wars if conditions of fair trade are abused. Will it come at near term negative cost? Yes. With positive and sound long term benefits? Yes, if it can reestablish fair and balanced global trade. You really just have to establish that fair trade has been flagrantly enough abused to justify it (you don’t want to fight a world war over an archduke bishop) which current evidence suggests is the case. Nobody likes to fight an unnecessary war, but after 30 years of persistent trade deficits owing to unequal investibility, capital controls and domestic policies / tariffs as well as forced technology transfer its safe to say we’re arriving at this point.
When you start hearing Sunday School analysis about “X (tariffs) NEVER work” or “Y (trade wars) are ALWAYS bad” akin to “wars are always bad, mmmmkay?” the always or never rule is in full effect and the Dum Dums who don’t really understand the subject matter have conveniently outed themselves. In econ, in particularly there are myriad of exceptions and nuance in what is a soft science at best.
I was walking on Baggot St. today in Dublin and a bunch of middle schoolers were walking around with Trump masks on, it was real funny. I was impressed.
“I would love Oprah to win. I would love to beat Oprah. I know her weakness,” Trump told the crowd. “Wouldn’t we love to run against Oprah. I would love it. I would love it. That would be a painful experience for her.”
Now thats the sort of attitude that we all crave in a leader.
The govt trying to control the media! Turd will surely talk down about this attack on the free press and the attempted government control over free thinking.
yo PA - get woke on NK here. This guy’s grandpa or something helped create OSS. Go through his feed for fascinating inside info on how the US and world actually operate. This guy was dropping info that Q is just now talking about for over a year.
yesssss love that youre posting some classic turd conspiracy stuff - that kibbitzlaw guy was great - seeing as how next to no one follows that account its fair to assume thats your ramblings lol