How can Trump 'own' a trade war?

I just read an article titled, 'Trump's Trade War Dominates Energy Markets' here on OilPrice.

How could this trade war be assigned to Trump? 

In the context of trade, according to Merriam-Webster, a 'war' is defined as:

"a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end"

Therefore, for a trade war you require at least TWO forces, one opposing the other. Trump by himself can not wage a trade war!

It takes two to tango, this war is owned by Xi Jinping as much it is owned by Trump.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A different perspective to consider:

... Withdrawing the tentacles of global exfiltration of American wealth; vis-a-vis the structural reset of the U.S. economy and how it engages with the global trade systems; is the pinnacle focus of President Trump. All other issues are ‘less than’; and the internal politics within Washington DC is far, far, less than in this set of priorities.

It may be uncomfortable for many to see and/or admit, but all other priorities held by supporters of President Trump fall below his primary economic objective.  American economic priority is the stuff Donald Trump has discussed, shared, considered and sought counsel on for over 30 years.

Any ancillary policy or issue that intersects with Trump’s focus on the U.S. economy gets priority [See: Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP); Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP); and Paris Climate Treaty as examples].  However, all issues which fall farther away from the economy are downstream priorities.

...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

However, all issues which fall farther away from the economy are downstream priorities.

Which is why Trump's famous Wall never got built.  Also, much more productive to be able to blame Democrats for stymieing the Wall construction, than actually building it   ☺️.    

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

American economic priority is the stuff Donald Trump has discussed, shared, considered and sought counsel on for over 30 years.

There can be no serious question that restructuring US trade and finance has been the No. 1 priority of the Trump Administration. And so far, he has done an admirable job of it, in very difficult circumstances, and in the face of insistent resistance from enemies, and at best tepid support from various Republicans, including various industry captains who should know better yet still hold to discredited ideas, even decades later.  Trump is an unusual, complex fellow.  I think he would be vastly more successful as President if he could somehow extricate himself from the past pattern of oafish boorishness and chronic narcissism.  Nonetheless, even with those handicaps, he is still making good inroads.  The re-emergence of American steel mills is but one example. 

P.S.  As a committed Monarchist, I am neither a Republican nor a Trump supporter, and I remain quite indifferent as to who sits in the White House, a matter of obsession with so many.  He is the man who prevailed in the election, so he gets to sit there. Fine by me.  Cheers.

  • Great Response! 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I just read an article titled, 'Trump's Trade War Dominates Energy Markets' here on OilPrice.

How could this trade war be assigned to Trump? 

In the context of trade, according to Merriam-Webster, a 'war' is defined as:

"a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end"

Therefore, for a trade war you require at least TWO forces, one opposing the other. Trump by himself can not wage a trade war!

It takes two to tango, this war is owned by Xi Jinping as much it is owned by Trump.

 

^Truth

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone fires the first shot.  Fort Sumter, the invasion of Poland, aluminum tarriffs.  You broke it, you bought it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would consider an unrealistic balance of trade and wanton theft of intellectual property on a global scale a pretty definitive 'first shot'.

  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really didn't write that! The Cyrillic alphabet is not my strong suite!😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I really didn't write that! The Cyrillic alphabet is not my strong suite!😂

Suit, not suite.  But he probably translated to Russian and replied without using Google translate.  I speak and read some Russian, but not that much.  I'll see if I can get the gist for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, vad.mm said:

Douglas right are You, the Trump is Trying to ACT with the old Methods - bullying and pressure . The problem is But that the world has changed and China is not that peasant country like 30-40 years ago (for the sake of interest you can see comparative data on the ratio of urban and rural population in China), it now will not work China has greatly grown during this time of example.In the United States, he “scores a goal.” I once came across; goods are made more than 10%, and it is 90% of the goods that have been taken. Replacing everything with 25% of Chinese imports.In the United States, it will be possible to meet the requirements of the United States.

It is about how much it’s been outsourcing. The problem is different. This is why he tries to make it possible to create problems with other countries. It has been achieved that he greatly saved taxes.Not only this, it can be a boldly shouting (it’s due to this factor). It’s 25% of the trademark and the trademark increased duties. It’s true that you’ve been meeting the chaos of the world.It would be your choice. If you’ve already understands that you’re understated by the United States

 

Douglas right are You, the Trump is Trying to ACT with the old  Methods - bullying and pressure . But it’s not a problem, since it was 30-40 years ago, now it will not work. China has greatly grown during this time of example.     In the United States, he “scores a goal.”  I once came across; goods are made more than 10%,  and it is 90% of the goods that have been taken.  Replacing everything with 25% of Chinese imports. In the United States, it will be possible to meet the requirements of the United States.

It is about how much it’s been outsourcing.  The problem is different.  This is why he tries to make it possible to create problems with other countries. It has been achieved that he greatly saved taxes. Not only this, it can be a boldly shouting (it’s due to this factor).  It’s  25% of the trademark and the trademark increased duties.  It’s true that you’ve been meeting the chaos of the world. It would be your choice. from the United dictation States, and he has many opponents, means to conduct a contractual policy with others  in both cases, substitution with import or import duties + increased.  It’s true that you’ve been meeting the chaos of the world. It would be your choice. from the United dictation States, and he has many opponents, means to conduct a contractual policy with others  in both cases, substitution with import or import duties + increased.  It’s true that you’ve been meeting the chaos of the world. It would be your choice. decree from the United States, and he has many rules for the conduct of a country . It is a question of the world of peace. 

Using Google translate.  https://translate.google.com/

Edited  1 hour ago by vad.mm bad expression in 1 original   
Edited by Okie
Added source of translation and clean up extra not needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a great translation, but you get the gist of what he was trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Okie!

vad.mm, 

You missed my point. Regardless of the reasons and mechanics of a trade war, one country cannot be held accountable for the war! It takes at least two players.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Regardless of the reasons and mechanics of a trade war, one country cannot be held accountable for the war! It takes at least two players.

So, if one country declares war on another and attacks without provocation, both countries are at fault?  I understand the argument that China was stealing technology, and some action was needed.  But Trump punished innocent parties (Canada, for one).  He also pulled us out of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which would have been slightly to our advantage.  The real problem is that once the money was made, it was given favorable tax treatment under U.S. law.  I think the proper response was to fix that inconsistency rather than blow up all trade agreements.

But, that is water under the bridge, so to speak.

Edited by Okie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you think it actually depends on WHY "...one country declares war on another country'?

You are making the assumption that ALL wars are unprovoked.

It in not only the US who is enraged about the theft of intellectual property - correct?

China brought this on themselves, Trump apparently is the only world leader to buck the status quo and address the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could this trade war be assigned to Trump?  .....Quite easy... He alone has started the fight the fight with Tariffs and his tweets. This is Trumps plan. The casualties, Soybean farmers where dragged into the front lines by China. This week we will see the Dow hit hard and China upping the war. The winner to date? Mexico..... it is now our biggest trading partner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites