If trump keeps tweeting about chinese tariffs
Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:32 pm
for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
https://uwsboard.com/
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Oh, bullshitVisorBoy wrote: Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
Did you read the article you linked?Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Why do you claim tariffs are unpredictable?VisorBoy wrote:Did you read the article you linked?Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
The concentration of toxic fine air particles — also known as PM2.5 — in these northeastern cities fell 33% last year, Greenpeace East Asia reports.
It is not my contention that 'all is well'. Simply that the trope of China not doing anything about their environmental problems is dated.
My recommendation for a way forward on IP and trade is to sit down and negotiate with China. This is one of the sitting President's strong suits, is it not? Flipping the tariff switch has unpredictable consequences, and hence is reckless.
The real question is did YOU read the article I linked? The next few paragraphs were...VisorBoy wrote:Did you read the article you linked?Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
The concentration of toxic fine air particles — also known as PM2.5 — in these northeastern cities fell 33% last year, Greenpeace East Asia reports.
It is not my contention that 'all is well'. Simply that the trope of China not doing anything about their environmental problems is dated.
My recommendation for a way forward on IP and trade is to sit down and negotiate with China. This is one of the sitting President's strong suits, is it not? Flipping the tariff switch has unpredictable consequences, and hence is reckless.
C'mon, man! China may be doing some things to improve their environmental problems, but like most things China, they crow about the things that make them look good and hide the things that don't. As Kong has stated multiple times, there are plenty of proven, inexpensive technologies that China could use to make a real difference that isn't implemented.But impressive as this sounds, citizens of China's great metropolises won't be putting away their pollution masks just yet.
In fact, the cut in PM2.5 in the northeastern provinces was only partly down to the coal heating ban, with favorable weather conditions, such as stronger northern winds also playing a major role, according to the Greenpeace analysis.
Across the country as a whole, PM2.5 only dropped 4.5% last year — the smallest annual decrease since China declared its "war on pollution" in 2013.
Greenpeace estimates that even this improvement will have spared 160,000 people across the country a premature death last year.
But in many of the industrial cities not subject to the strict regulations imposed in the northeast, air pollution actually got worse. In Heilongjiang province, emissions from industries like steel production pushed particle levels up 10%.
Jack Galt wrote:The real question is did YOU read the article I linked? The next few paragraphs were...VisorBoy wrote:Did you read the article you linked?Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
The concentration of toxic fine air particles — also known as PM2.5 — in these northeastern cities fell 33% last year, Greenpeace East Asia reports.
It is not my contention that 'all is well'. Simply that the trope of China not doing anything about their environmental problems is dated.
My recommendation for a way forward on IP and trade is to sit down and negotiate with China. This is one of the sitting President's strong suits, is it not? Flipping the tariff switch has unpredictable consequences, and hence is reckless.
C'mon, man! China may be doing some things to improve their environmental problems, but like most things China, they crow about the things that make them look good and hide the things that don't. As Kong has stated multiple times, there are plenty of proven, inexpensive technologies that China could use to make a real difference that isn't implemented.But impressive as this sounds, citizens of China's great metropolises won't be putting away their pollution masks just yet.
In fact, the cut in PM2.5 in the northeastern provinces was only partly down to the coal heating ban, with favorable weather conditions, such as stronger northern winds also playing a major role, according to the Greenpeace analysis.
Across the country as a whole, PM2.5 only dropped 4.5% last year — the smallest annual decrease since China declared its "war on pollution" in 2013.
Greenpeace estimates that even this improvement will have spared 160,000 people across the country a premature death last year.
But in many of the industrial cities not subject to the strict regulations imposed in the northeast, air pollution actually got worse. In Heilongjiang province, emissions from industries like steel production pushed particle levels up 10%.
As for trade, I agree that negotiations MIGHT work. For those to work, China would actually have to abide by the deal. Which, based on the past, isn't guaranteed.
As for IP, no amount of negotiations is going to keep China honest. They have literally reproduced American products that they stole the TDP for right down to the data plates on the parts. With the American companies name and that company's part numbers on them.
I trust China about as much as I trust Russia. Maybe less.
I don't know if Trump is trying to use all this as a bargaining chip or if he's playing a high stakes game of stupid. Only time will tell.
OR we could do what past admins have done and do nothing and hope it gets better... hint... it won't. And most economists will tell you that sooner or later the USA better try and make the trade more balanced and fair for the long term economy of the USA..... yes Trump has the balls to try and do something, I know this is shocking to folks like you that worshipped ObummerHvilleHokie wrote:cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
No kidding.. I love it. If Trump tweeted that he was a VT fan, liberal VT alumni would root for UVA. ClockworkUSN_Hokie wrote:Oh, bullshitVisorBoy wrote: Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
YupCFB Apologist wrote:No kidding.. I love it. If Trump tweeted that he was a VT fan, liberal VT alumni would root for UVA. ClockworkUSN_Hokie wrote:Oh, bullshitVisorBoy wrote: Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
You may be right, but I don't think I've seen anyone decide to stop rooting for VT b/c Bannon is an alum.CFB Apologist wrote:No kidding.. I love it. If Trump tweeted that he was a VT fan, liberal VT alumni would root for UVA. ClockworkUSN_Hokie wrote:Oh, bullshitVisorBoy wrote: Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
The core issue is the stealing of IP and trade secrets. This tariff war is just a means to get towards a resolution on that matter.TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
Nah, core issue is destroying the middle class. Corp profits are great and all, but this is about restoring the middle class jobs.133743Hokie wrote:The core issue is the stealing of IP and trade secrets. This tariff war is just a means to get towards a resolution on that matter.TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
I addressed this as well (bold)133743Hokie wrote:The core issue is the stealing of IP and trade secrets. This tariff war is just a means to get towards a resolution on that matter.TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
Just responding to your statement "...the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China." IMO IP and stealing trade secrets is the heart of the issue. Tariffs are secondary.TheH2 wrote:I addressed this as well (bold)133743Hokie wrote:The core issue is the stealing of IP and trade secrets. This tariff war is just a means to get towards a resolution on that matter.TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
I get that. I also said IP theft was the problem and tossed out a couple of ideas. I'm not writing a thesis here133743Hokie wrote: Just responding to your statement "...the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China." IMO IP and stealing trade secrets is the heart of the issue. Tariffs are secondary.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer termsTheH2 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thoughtElbertoHokie wrote:for the next 2 months, whether he actually enacts them or not, it's going to be rocky on Wall Street.
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.
Please explain the give away in the TPP.cwtcr hokie wrote:ok, on fair terms as the article says, it it not the give away the farm Obummer termsTheH2 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 5c4664c638TheH2 wrote:First, the trade imbalance is meaningless. We consume more than we produce, therefore, we have a trade deficit. China makes a lot of stuff that we don't, that's not changing. There are also examples as to why the number is actually wrong. For example, the iphone is assembled in China but produced around Asia. The full deficit is attributed to China. Also, mfg is about 1/3 of the retail value of the iphone, which is a huge net benefit to the US, while still adding to the trade deficit.Jack Galt wrote:Fake News seems to disagree about smog in China, just 4 days later.VisorBoy wrote:There are better ways to go about that than tariff wars. Ask nearly any economist.cwtcr hokie wrote:
Or the Chinese could open their markets and stop making it so difficult for US companies to operate there and stop subsidizing some of their industries which makes our products not competitive. Maybe while they are at it they can adhere to the same epa rules we do and the same labor rules. just a thought
Also, your talking points are a bit dated. China's improvements in environmental policy are notable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/opin ... wrong.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 046241001/
So, would you provide some suggestions, other than tariffs, to be able to better protect the intellectual property generated here and exploited by China, as well as addressing the trade imbalance with China? TIA.
Second, the tariffs were crude and ill timed. For example, China has significantly reduced its supply of steel over the last couple years. So, where historically one could point to dumping, that isn't the case anymore. Also, mfg is about 10% of the US economy. Therefore, a 10% boost to mfg only boosts GDP by 1%. Now consider that steel will directly effect several industries including construction, auto, aero; the idea of saving a couple thousand jobs to the detriment of several industries is not good policy.
There are plenty of steps the US could take. The first would have been to sign the TPP. Since tariffs are actually quite low on trade, the goal of TPP was to reduce state support. This is the heart of the issue with China. The US could set the table for trade between a lot of Asia, and work to get China into the deal. Other approaches could be more targeted. Let's address the problem - IP theft, not just add tariffs to random products. We have a mass market as well and could suspend the use of products in the US. Steal aerospace IP, work to shut off Chinese suppliers of products - not always possible, I know. Some of this is already done and it is just a misconception about our policies. The US has prevented China from entering the US (https://www.ft.com/content/b3bfe924-185 ... c814761640) and has all but banned Huwei going forward. This gets to the heart of the issue, not blunt tariffs.
The US has also done really well by operating in China. Certainly there have been issues, but the China market, and labor has been very beneficial for the U.S. People fail to look at the entire picture. A couple of examples being Yum brands, Ford/GM (no matter how much China tries to support the industry, they continue to fail), Nike, Apple, just to name a few. There is even a cola war in China.