EU has already lost the Trump vs. EU Trade War

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

13 hours ago, Otis11 said:

(As another side thought - Go look at how the Chinese treat their ethnic minorities. Are you wiling to risk being put in this category?)

No. I am not. Therefore I want a strong EU. 

Being USs lapdog and participating in conflicts that are unjust (like Iraq) is not super appealing to me either. Yes, it is a natural consequence of relying of US protection. I accept that. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

8 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

No. I am not. Therefore I want a strong EU. 

Being USs lapdog and participating in conflicts that are unjust (like Iraq) is not super appealing to me either. Yes, it is a natural consequence of relying of US protection. I accept that. 

Rasmus I agree the EU needs a strong defence and it should be able to stand on its own 2 feet and look after itself militarily speaking considering the size of the economy we are talking about.

The problem is there appears to be no willingness to adopt a strategy to become self sufficient in defence. Therefore you are right that the EU is reliant on the US for protection but therefore must accept the political consequences of this.

I suspect you and other like minded people would welcome paying extra Euros in tax to fund a military defence becoming of a major world power such as Europe.Unfortunately the politicians in the EU do not share your thinking as they are only interested in preserving the bureaucratic system they oversee.This is constantly to the detriment of basic needs of the EU such as defence, economic strategy, social care etc etc. Whilst the US is prepared to pay 3.6% instead of 2% to NATO for this political influence the EU politicians will go along with it.

I also don't think 27 countries with different political agendas can ever be strong, as policies are constantly changing and there is no clear direction. If you look at US, China, Russia (the major superpowers) they all have strong leadership with clear direction and policies.

This is why I don't believe your dream of the EU being strong militarily will ever happen, and why I think the EU will ultimately fail.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 minute ago, Rob Plant said:

I also don't think 27 countries with different political agendas can ever be strong, as policies are constantly changing and there is no clear direction. 

I agree that this is the biggest weakness of the EU. But also what I think will change. My reasoning

1) I think EU is an economic success. 

2) Brexit will make above clear

3) post brexit it will be the consequences of leaving will be clearer and the benefits of staying ditto. This will make compromise easier. 

NB! This is not to restart the brexit discussion. And for the record - nothing here contradicts that brexit is the right thing for the UK. I for one would just rather be part of strong club and have some influence on the clubs policies. It is a trade-off I am willing to make. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

1 minute ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I agree that this is the biggest weakness of the EU. But also what I think will change. My reasoning

1) I think EU is an economic success. 

2) Brexit will make above clear

3) post brexit it will be the consequences of leaving will be clearer and the benefits of staying ditto. This will make compromise easier. 

NB! This is not to restart the brexit discussion. And for the record - nothing here contradicts that brexit is the right thing for the UK. I for one would just rather be part of strong club and have some influence on the clubs policies. It is a trade-off I am willing to make. 

I'm not sure I can agree on point 1 as there are some major countries in the EU that are really struggling at the moment.

However I do agree with point 3 and depending on your point of view the UK is either making a very brave decision or a very stupid one. As an Englishman I hope its the former, time will tell.☺️

5 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I for one would just rather be part of strong club and have some influence on the clubs policies. It is a trade-off I am willing to make. 

Respect your view on this mate!

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

37 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

However I do agree with point 3 and depending on your point of view the UK is either making a very brave decision or a very stupid one. As an Englishman I hope its the former, time will tell.☺️

I think it is entirely possible for Brexit to be a bad idea based on a purely economic metric, but be the right thing for the UK. The reason for this is cultural. I personally, think that European countries have many issues to address and for the UK I hope that you will do some internal reforms and not stop at brexit. If brexit is the catalyst needed for internal reform then fair enough; essentially it is a variation of what I think it will be for EU. 

48 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

I'm not sure I can agree on point 1 as there are some major countries in the EU that are really struggling at the moment.

This is true. But where would they be without EU? Just because some countries are bordering recession doesn't mean they would be better off without EU. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

51 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Respect your view on this mate!

thanks.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

4 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

This is true. But where would they be without EU? Just because some countries are bordering recession doesn't mean they would be better off without EU. 

Agreed on this point. However i would argue the "stronger together" mentality only works for the weakest members of the union and is the opposite for the stronger members.

Maybe this is where the UK will gain economically as it wont have to support weaker nations. In our own United Kingdom England subsidizes the other 3 nations financially already. I think many English people would be happy to see the break up of the UK for this reason, although as a global player it would diminish our influence on the world stage.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

Just now, Rob Plant said:

However i would argue the "stronger together" mentality only works for the weakest members of the union and is the opposite for the stronger members.

I disagree. I believe we are going to see a world with less global trade. This means trading between EU countries become much more important. I believe in comparative advantages. It might be that less weaker / less industrialized nations gain more. But overall I think it is win-win.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

4 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I disagree. I believe we are going to see a world with less global trade. This means trading between EU countries become much more important. I believe in comparative advantages. It might be that less weaker / less industrialized nations gain more. But overall I think it is win-win.

Again respect your view and I agree that in the short term this may be correct in the current political climate of trade wars, tariffs etc. However  this wont last forever. IMO the world has become a much smaller place in terms of travel, trade between nations, understanding different cultures to do business etc etc. Look how international trade has evolved and expanded over the last 70 years, I don't believe this will go into reverse in a big way, too much to lose.

I guess it depends on the timescale you are talking about.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 minute ago, Rob Plant said:

I guess it depends on the timescale you are talking about.

my guess is as follows: 
1) next 5 years - brexit and some sort of new normal in Europe

2) Next 5 - 10 increased regional trade : Europe - Europe - Africa; US - Latin america + canada; China - Russia - Asia

3) Above trends will continue next 15 - 25 years. 

Obviously it is not going to be a complete stop in all International trade. Just a slowdown.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

5 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

my guess is as follows: 
1) next 5 years - brexit and some sort of new normal in Europe

2) Next 5 - 10 increased regional trade : Europe - Europe - Africa; US - Latin america + canada; China - Russia - Asia

3) Above trends will continue next 15 - 25 years. 

Obviously it is not going to be a complete stop in all International trade. Just a slowdown.

I think we'll probably disagree on this

in 25 years I'll probably be drinking through a straw , sitting in my incontinent pants , forgetting my own name, whilst watching the telly in some God forsaken old people's home, so i wont give a f*ck anyway 🤣

[Marcin + 519]

Some food for thought.

In a our Eurocentric and US-centric discussions we need to consider the wider universe in which we exist.

Our corner of the world is only about 1/9 of total population.

About developing world and our corner losing importance.

Every and each year we are becoming less important and thus less influencial, each region at its own pace: US is becoming less important to the rest of the world (developing world) in a pace of about 2.5% and Europe in a pace of about 3.5%. This is the most important factor. Cause most of these countries are starting from the very low GDP/capita level so have 2-3 decades of growth before the simplest ways of development are exhausted at about 10-15 thousand GDP/capita ( and they stay at middle income trap). I am trying to say that even if (less than 5% probability, but still) China will somehow stop developing at 15-20 thousand/capita Europe and US will still loose a lot of economic importance vs the rest of the world. So as a status quo powers both EU and US should co-operate closely, simple marriage of convenience, develop defence policy and stick to it, even if it is difficult at times because of this US superiority complex (I am trying to remind you about this issue as often as possible, no offence !). 1 billion people is developed world, 1.4 is China, 5.2 is the rest of developing world.

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

in 25 years I'll probably be drinking through a straw , sitting in my incontinent pants , forgetting my own name, whilst watching the telly in some God forsaken old people's home, so i wont give a f*ck anyway

And that's also the reason this remainiac isn't that bothered about the result ... 😅

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

3 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

And that's also the reason this remainiac isn't that bothered about the result ... 😅

Hey I thought I was a remoaner?🤣

The result is the result, now its long overdue we left.

Go Boris!🤣

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

20 minutes ago, Marcin said:

So as a status quo powers both EU and US should co-operate closely, simple marriage of convenience, develop defence policy and stick to it, even if it is difficult at times because of this US superiority complex (I am trying to remind you about this issue as often as possible, no offence !). 1 billion people is developed world, 1.4 is China, 5.2 is the rest of developing world.

Marcin as I have been saying over and over the EU has no defence policy / strategy it is wholly reliant on the US and is happy to give up political influence to the US in return for the US paying to keep the EU safe from the East.

As far as the US having a "superiority complex" where do you get that from? Surely it is simply their own foreign policy combined with market forces which decides who they trade with.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

As far as the US having a "superiority complex" where do you get that from?

Oh I can't see that getting responses at all ... 🤣

@remake it  you're up ...

 

Edited November 19, 2019 by Guest

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

2 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Oh I can't see that getting responses at all ... 🤣

@remake it  you're up ...

 

If there is a God then than bot's wiring is hopefully fried!

[Marcin + 519]

Origin is 100 years of being strongest country plus safety of geographic isolation. It is so embedded in our collective world view we do not notice it most of the time.

That is why we  Europeans are astonished when US acts according to this parafigm. Merkels emotional we No longer have ally comes to mind

Edited November 19, 2019 by Marcin
Typo

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

I know you believe that China will soon overhaul the US as the largest economy, and this may happen at some point.

However from what one of my colleagues has told me Trump most definitely is winning the trade war (different thread on this site I know) as many large factories are running at a loss and are seriously considering closing if the tariffs continue much longer. He was there last week and witnessed this wherever he went.

That would spell disaster for China with spiraling unemployment brings civil unrest. Human nature says once you have experienced something good you never want to go back (ie aircon in your car). Many of these Chinese have experienced some good times in the last 10 years or so and to lose most of it will not be palatable for them. It also dispels the myth that China is unstoppable and the grand plan is working that the Chinese hierarchy would have their people believe.

Unless Pooh bear backs down soon there will be mayhem in China

I expect a backlash from the people if the tariffs remain for another year or so.

I think the US has a long time left as the hegemony

[specinho + 467]

On 11/18/2019 at 7:26 PM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

What do you think EU should do? 

Combine 27 countries into one dream, one moto, one...... one...... one........ Or, may be ........ two.

2 hours ago, Marcin said:

Some food for thought.

In a our Eurocentric and US-centric discussions we need to consider the wider universe in which we exist.

Our corner of the world is only about 1/9 of total population.

1 billion people is developed world, 1.4 is China, 5.2 is the rest of developing world.

 

Sometimes, it might matter who developes first and has achieved excellent results so that they can show less developed world how to get things done properly. The least developed might be the luckiest because they might be lucky enough not to have all the unwanted flaws experienced by others after drastic development, especially within a short pace (just discussed this idea with a friend from one of the least developed countries, but not sure where it takes).

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Marcin as I have been saying over and over the EU has no defence policy / strategy it is wholly reliant on the US and is happy to give up political influence to the US in return for the US paying to keep the EU safe from the East.

As far as the US having a "superiority complex" where do you get that from? Surely it is simply their own foreign policy combined with market forces which decides who they trade with.

eerrr....... Pardon me...... the opposite might be true.............. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by specinho

[Marcin + 519]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I know you believe that China will soon overhaul the US as the largest economy, and this may happen at some point.

However from what one of my colleagues has told me Trump most definitely is winning the trade war (different thread on this site I know) as many large factories are running at a loss and are seriously considering closing if the tariffs continue much longer. He was there last week and witnessed this wherever he went.

That would spell disaster for China with spiraling unemployment brings civil unrest. Human nature says once you have experienced something good you never want to go back (ie aircon in your car). Many of these Chinese have experienced some good times in the last 10 years or so and to lose most of it will not be palatable for them. It also dispels the myth that China is unstoppable and the grand plan is working that the Chinese hierarchy would have their people believe.

Unless Pooh bear backs down soon there will be mayhem in China

I expect a backlash from the people if the tariffs remain for another year or so.

I think the US has a long time left as the hegemony

1. I believe in nothing but God, and nobody but my wife (And I am saying this not because she may still accidentally read this comment).

2. I think I proved by means of sound economic analysis that trade war is not really important for neither China nor USA.

I will not bore you with this rubbish again, please consider the following threads:

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/8471-us-china-trade-negotiations-will-drag-on-cause-us-already-used-most-of-leverage/?tab=comments#comment-75371

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/8331-back-of-the-envelope-calculation-i-just-made-trump-economic-advisors-also-should-do-them-before-trade-war-with-china-was-started-and-show-this-calculation-to-trump/?tab=comments#comment-73949

3. More important headache for Chinese authorities is technology decoupling pursued by United States.

2019 cost of trade war is about: 0.3-0.5% of Chinese GDP. Tightening of access to credit for private sector about 1-1.5%, much more important, totally domestic issue.

4. Predicting Chinese economic development (bar catastrophic event) is fairly easy (unless you are part of Gordon Chang-like circle of pseudoeconomists, hahaha):

- first class physical infrastructure of all types (better than most of developed countries),

- first class education (in the middle of the pack of developed countries, primary&secondary much better than US, but worse than South Korea; tertiary behind US but fast closing the gap),

- technology development : still far behind US, Japan, Germany in many areas. But closing the gaps in every subject very fast. Scientific output will surpass US in 2020-2021 (international patents, citations).

Weak points: Too much grip of CCP on private sector, legal environment (but this is improving fast).

For 2 months since I started writing here about China, nobody has shown me good argumentation against the premise that China will become developed, high income country.

Edited November 19, 2019 by Marcin
typo

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

2 minutes ago, Marcin said:

, I am really trying this to not sound personal attack, but i am tired of arguments like my colleague has seen 50 out of 100,000 factories, but it was last week, so China is doomed. Guys if you cannot do better than parroting Trump or CNN, Bloomberg, Fox, Reuters please just ignore me, no offence

Yeah I’m tired of this too so let’s call it a day!

i would have thought first hand recent experiences in China were relevant not just hypothesis or guesswork but maybe I’m wrong

i would just add I haven’t “parroted” Trump or any media agency in my comments, they are mine alone and I’m entitled to MY opinion just as you are!

we agree to differ let’s leave it there.

[Guest]

Odd that China is CONSTANTLY mentioned in terms of China V USA in the first place ...?

Thread title is about TRUMP AND THE EU

Oh, it's turned into ''isn't China amazing?''   Shocker. 

16 minutes ago, Marcin said:

I think I proved by means of sound economic analysis that trade war is not really important for neither China nor USA.

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/8471-us-china-trade-negotiations-will-drag-on-cause-us-already-used-most-of-leverage/?tab=comments#comment-75371

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/8331-back-of-the-envelope-calculation-i-just-made-trump-economic-advisors-also-should-do-them-before-trade-war-with-china-was-started-and-show-this-calculation-to-trump/?tab=comments#comment-73949

3. More important headache for Chinese authorities is technology decoupling pursued by United States.

2019 cost of trade war is about: 0.3-0.5% of Chinese GDP. Tightening of access to credit for private sector about 1-1.5%, much more important, totally domestic issue.

4. Predicting Chinese economic development (bar catastrophic event) is fairly easy (unless you are part of Gordon Chang-like circle of pseudoeconomists, hahaha):

- first class physical infrastructure of all types (better than most of developed countries), COMPARISON

- first class education (in the middle of the pack of developed countries, primary&secondary much better than US, but worse than South Korea; tertiary behind US but fast closing the gap), COMPARISON

- technology development : still far behind US, Japan, Germany in many areas. But closing the gaps in every subject very fast. Scientific output will surpass US in 2020-2021 (international patents, citations). COMPARISON

For 2 months since I started writing here about China, nobody has shown me good argumentation against the premise that China will become developed, high income country.

(WHY SHOULD THEY IN A THREAD ABOUT EUROPE???). You love China. We get it.

Edited November 19, 2019 by Guest

[Marcin + 519]

Since 1990 (collapse of Soviet Union) rise of China is the most important event in Geopolitics.

Why very few persons at this forum are making effort to back statements "China will stop developing", "China will not surpass US as economic power", "China will not be developed country" with argumentation ?

Please show me something, pleeease.

[Marcin + 519]

Rob, first hand experience is good but has to be more concrete. You are talking about the continent. "Witnessing" what it means for continental economy ? F.e. Albion cliffs could be nice but you still know nothing about the rest of Europe.

To know whether business has future, or specific site has future you need: knowledge of the industry, site tour, numbers, business analysis, later interviews with higher management when you know what questions to ask etc. It takes time. To have a rough knowledge about the prospects you need a few days, or a few hours if you are checking the site again.