"We're Not Going to Negotiate Anymore"

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Trump is a master of messaging and tactics. He also has the cojones to follow through and do the right thing. All he can do is support the farmers as much as congress will let him. If he loses the next election it is not his fault, but the fault of the voters. Messaging is pretty hard to do well when 90% of the press, 70% of the Congress, 95% of Silicon Valley, 85% of the intelligentsia, 70% of the Deep State are dead set against you. Percentages are IMHO. 

Socialist wealth transfer and/or vote buying! LOL Those are silicon valley (Dem) tax dollars going to the poor in trump supporting states!

Edited August 8, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Well guess what... class separation and lack of fairness is also a capitalist ideology.

My, My.  And, folks, now you know why the Canadian Loonie is sitting at a 30% discount to the US Dollar..   All this negative thinking flowing from the masses.  Oh, well.  It was good while it lasted, up there.....

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Illinois is where I live. It is hopelessly Demoncratic due to Chicagoland. We are working to lop them off. Illinois is going broke because of the Demoncrats. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

28 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

XI has backed off of his promises and then Trump acted. 

Yep.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

4 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

My, My.  And, folks, now you know why the Canadian Loonie is sitting at a 30% discount to the US Dollar..   All this negative thinking flowing from the masses.  Oh, well.  It was good while it lasted, up there.....

We're doing fine, or not hurting as bad IMO, as I've mentioned before we like the lower loonie; just like the China likes their low buck. https://app.tmxmoney.com/news/cpnews/article?locale=EN&newsid=07dol1&mobile=false

Edited August 8, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

4 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

My, My.  And, folks, now you know why the Canadian Loonie is sitting at a 30% discount to the US Dollar..   All this negative thinking flowing from the masses.  Oh, well.  It was good while it lasted, up there.....

Those were are also not necessarily my views.  I just think USA is rapidly drifting from free-market capitalism. Closer to some form of  nationalistic protectionism.

[Jakridge + 122]

19 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Do capitalistic free-trade markets need massive tariffs to maintain competitiveness?  The ideology suggests pure capitalist countries will rise to the top regardless of other nations governments.

This war seems more and more like a less capitalist nation is taking your lunch and now someone is crying it's not fair.  Well guess what... class separation and lack of fairness is also a capitalist ideology.  Other corporations and nations are supposed to press their competitive advantages (called moat) and crush competitors - even using loss-leaders and other "unfair" but actually fair practices.

No capitalistic free trade markets need tariffs to maintain fairness and to keep from getting ripped off.  I'm  Sorry if your professor taught you that capitalism is unfair and is the problem with the world but I got news for you sunshine, if it weren't for capitalism you wouldn't be pecking away on your tablet right now or the internet wouldn't be here and a hundred million more people would be dead more than there were in 1945.  I can't for the life of me understand why so many people think that socialism would be so much better than what America has created with a capitalistic free trade representative government. No other country in the history of the world has lifted more people out of poverty than the United States of America. Why are there so many people desperately trying to reach our borders illegally or legally if capitalism and America is really the problem that the leftist seem to make it out to be? This country is the greatest and most prosperous Nation on Earth and if other countries simply followed our path we would not be having the problems we would be having with trade or anyting else. A free people and a free market is the key to Prosperity, the proof is staring you in the face. Government-run bureaucrats screw everything up and have throughout history and how leftist and socialist don't see that is absolutely mind-boggling.  Class separation and lack of fairness is not a capitalistic ideology. Another lie your professor taught you.

Edited August 8, 2019 by Jakridge

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

6 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Do capitalistic free-trade markets need massive tariffs to maintain competitiveness?  The ideology suggests pure capitalist countries will rise to the top regardless of other nations governments.

This war seems more and more like a less capitalist nation is taking your lunch and now someone is crying it's not fair.  Well guess what... class separation and lack of fairness is also a capitalist ideology.  Other corporations and nations are supposed to press their competitive advantages (called moat) and crush competitors - even using loss-leaders and other "unfair" but actually fair practices.

IF we were competing against a Free Market China, on a level playing field that did not involve a 'trading partner' who felt that government subsidies to 'private' companies, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft, etc... were fair practices, then perhaps we would not have to invoke tariffs to level the playing field!

You imply that the US started this trade war recently, the fact is that China was engaging in a trade war, with not only the US but others, decades ago.

If China would have believed in fair trade and the internationally accepted trading rules, this current trade war would never have occurred. 

Just like the Nine Line Map, Taiwan and the financial colonialism fancifully called the Belt and Road Initiative, ANYTHING that does not benefit China, regardless of the effect globally, is termed by Beijing as being anti-Chinese and therefore unacceptable.

This is NOT Trump's trade war, China started it years ago, Trump just had the stones to say 'enough is enough'.

China owns this trade war and each and ever consequence that results from it!

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 minute ago, Jakridge said:

No capitalistic free trade markets need tariffs to maintain fairness and to keep from getting ripped off.  I'm  Sorry if your professor taught you that capitalism is unfair and is the problem with the world but I got news for you sunshine, if it weren't for capitalism you wouldn't be pecking away on your tablet right now or the internet wouldn't be here and a hundred million more people would be dead more than there were in 1945.  I can't for the life of me understand why so many people think that socialism would be so much better than what America has created with a capitalistic free trade representative government. No other country in the history of the world has lifted more people out of poverty than the United States of America. Why are there so many people desperately trying to reach our borders illegally or legally if capitalism and America is really the problem that the leftist seem to make it out to be? This country is the greatest and most prosperous Nation on Earth and if other countries simply followed our path we would not be having the problems we would be having with trade or anyting else. A free people and a free market is the key to Prosperity, the proof is staring you in the face. Government-run bureaucrats screw everything up and have throughout history and how leftist and socialist don't see that is absolutely mind-boggling.

I didn't say they were my views, nor a problem, I was discussing the ideology as a whole -  which does say the "cream rides to the top" aka inequality / lack of "fairness."

I live in a prosperous capitalist society and am doing very well, but hell I'm a 40 year old white male with significant positive net worth - the world actually cares what I think!

I enjoy my privileges... but just becasue I am happy it doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

9 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

IF we were competing against a Free Market China, on a level playing field that did not involve a 'trading partner' who felt that government subsidies to 'private' companies, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft, etc... were fair practices, then perhaps we would not have to invoke tariffs to level the playing field!

The market theory says that those socialist practices makes them less competitive not giving an unfair advantage.

"Tech theft" is mentioned too often here.  They have tons of scientists as do many other nearby nations.  Also if you are so smart up your security!

Edited August 8, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Jakridge + 122]

1 minute ago, Enthalpic said:

I didn't say they were my views, nor a problem, I was discussing the ideology as a whole -  which does say the "cream rides to the top" aka inequality / lack of "fairness."

I live in a prosperous capitalist society and am doing very well, but hell I'm a 40 year old white male with significant positive net worth - the world actually cares what I think!

I enjoy my privileges... but just becasue I am happy it doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way. 

You have your privileges because it sounds like you earned them, not because you're white or anything else.  I promise you would not be able to earn them in a socialistic society. And if you are happy and successful then why is it not the best way? Why would you not want others to have it? Why would you want to change the way that provided for you and not allow others to have that same way?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

36 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

The market theory says that those socialist practices makes them less competitive not giving an unfair advantage.

"Tech theft" is mentioned too often here.  They have tons of scientists as do many other nearby nations.  Also if you are so smart up your security!

 

39 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

I didn't say they were my views, nor a problem, I was discussing the ideology as a whole -  which does say the "cream rides to the top" aka inequality / lack of "fairness."

I live in a prosperous capitalist society and am doing very well, but hell I'm a 40 year old white male with significant positive net worth - the world actually cares what I think!

I enjoy my privileges... but just becasue I am happy it doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way. 

I suppose that there was some reason to give your ethnicity in your post. Nonsense like this simply drives the racial wedge for no apparent reason.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

37 minutes ago, Jakridge said:

You have your privileges because it sounds like you earned them, not because you're white or anything else. 

That is an incorrect conclusion.  A Canadian's "privileges" flow directly from being white.  Do try to grasp that. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Nonsense like this simply drives the racial wedge for no apparent reason.

Not really. The speaker is Canadian.  Outside of Toronto and Vancouver, there is no "racial wedge" other than the very small minority that are the natives, or "First Nations" in correct-speak.  Canada is designed as a society of three tranches:  the First-nation folks, the Whites, and whatever else managed to immigrate, mostly from Iran and Pakistan, collectively known in Canada as "the browns."  Being White is the internal passport to a comfortable Canadian life and prosperity.  Just the way it is structured up there. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

2 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

IF we were competing against a Free Market China, on a level playing field that did not involve a 'trading partner' who felt that government subsidies to 'private' companies, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft, etc... were fair practices, then perhaps we would not have to invoke tariffs to level the playing field!

Be carefull with such broad statements. You knowthe offshore industry, so I am sure you know the Jones act. Basically a massive government subsidy to the US shipping and in particular offshore industry. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

26 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Be carefull with such broad statements. You knowthe offshore industry, so I am sure you know the Jones act. Basically a massive government subsidy to the US shipping and in particular offshore industry. 

And the Chinese do not have a similar 'act' similar to the Jones Act?

Heck, they claim the vast majority of the South China Sea....regardless of which other sovereign nations border the sea!

For heaven's sakes man, even a Chinese 'cheerleader' like yourself has to agree that China is somewhat lax in playing by the WTO rules. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Not really. The speaker is Canadian.  Outside of Toronto and Vancouver, there is no "racial wedge" other than the very small minority that are the natives, or "First Nations" in correct-speak.  Canada is designed as a society of three tranches:  the First-nation folks, the Whites, and whatever else managed to immigrate, mostly from Iran and Pakistan, collectively known in Canada as "the browns."  Being White is the internal passport to a comfortable Canadian life and prosperity.  Just the way it is structured up there. 

Okay, but the audience is not necessarily Canadian. In my opinion, race and wealth are irrelevant in these conversations. Knowledge and experience are appreciated.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

23 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

For heaven's sakes man, even a Chinese 'cheerleader' like yourself has to agree that China is somewhat lax in playing by the WTO rules. 

I am not a chinese cheerleader. 

And I agree BTW. I believe that bringing the overall china topic on the agenada is one of Trumps biggest accomplisments. I just disagree with the how and question whether his agressive approach gives the best longterm results. 

Edited August 8, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

22 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

And the Chinese do not have a similar 'act' similar to the Jones Act?

They definetly do. I never said they didn't. That was never my point.

Edited August 8, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Auson + 123]

9 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Good luck with that bet.  You may wish to pay a bit less attention to Mainstream Media.  Your choice.

A lot of people thought we would never see Boris as Prime Minister, he even said himself he wasn't interested in becoming PM. Same machinery behind Boris, Farage  and Trump.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

10 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am not a chinese cheerleader. 

And I agree BTW. I believe that bringing the overall china topic on the agenada is one of Trumps biggest accomplisments. I just disagree with the how and question whether his agressive approach gives the best longterm results. 

Okay, fair enough. For the sake of argument, what tools do you think Trump should have employed to combat the massive trade imbalance with China? Up until he began to utilize tariffs, nothing tried had the slightest bit of influence on how China conducted business or trade.

The Chinese have totally ignored any less aggressive tactic. That said, why would they not desire the status quo to continue, the massive imbalance of trade was driving their economy.

China is skating on thin ice at the moment. Their claim to the South China Sea is alienating their Asian neighbors, if it was not simply due to the Chinese military presence I feel this issue would already turned nasty. Hong Kong is definitely not happy with Beijing. Venezuela can no longer pay their debts to China (let's be honest here, this was a BRI initiative which went badly wrong). Taiwan just bought billions of dollars worth of arms from the US...and so on.

The Chinese say that the US can not question their sovereignty in the trade issue. What their media is alluding to is losing 'face'. They are losing face each and every day by bullying their neighbors and the underlying principle of financial imperialism inherent in the BRI. Any rational adult can see that this is nationalistic 'loansharking'.

So back to my original question, what tools or strategy do you feel Trump should have employed as opposed to tariffs?

I am not being argumentative in the slightest and would truly like to get your opinion.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

7 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

So back to my original question, what tools or strategy do you feel Trump should have employed as opposed to tariffs?

I am not being argumentative in the slightest and would truly like to get your opinion.

I think Trump should have taken the time and effort to get the EU onboard. Most of Europe is not super positive towards China. And generally, there is a sentiment in Europe that the US needs a fair chance also in trade with Europe. However, Trump wants things done his way and only his away. 

I think trump could have accomplished way more with a different approach. Probably would NOT have gotten him as many headlines though. I think trump is taking the easy short term route. He is not the only politician doeing this though; I accept that. 

Edited August 8, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

27 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I think Trump should have taken the time and effort to get the EU onboard. Most of Europe is not super positive towards China. And generally, there is a sentiment in Europe that the US needs a fair chance also in trade with Europe. However, Trump wants things done his way and only his away. 

I think trump could have accomplished way more with a different approach. Probably would NOT have gotten him as many headlines though. I think trump is taking the easy short term route. He is not the only politician doeing this though; I accept that. 

I don't believe that the EU wanted to confront China. They would much prefer that the US take action and see how that worked out, then fall off the fence on whichever side benefited them.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 minute ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I don't believe that the EU wanted to confront China. They would much prefer that the US take action and see how that worked out, then fall off the fence on whichever side benefited them.

I disagree, but we will not find now.. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

China would have been happy to get the EU involved. That bureaucratic nightmare would have played well with their strategy to 'wait out Trump'.

Trump will push hard for a timely resolution and is not prepared to play a waiting game.