Author Topic: Trade, Globalization, Strategic Mercantilismm and Globalism itself  (Read 90662 times)


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
From above CD post
« Reply #351 on: September 15, 2024, 09:51:46 AM »
"US Locks In China Tariff Hikes..."

Tariff hikes

Funny

Biden bureaucracy takes a page out of the Trump policies

and no MSM backlash!

I thought tariffs are BAD.   

Are we going to see outrage on CNBC?   WSJ might however.

The rest of the media - crickets or adulation.

But when Trump speaks of tariffs ===> BAD

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
second post
« Reply #352 on: September 15, 2024, 10:44:25 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
Re: Trade, Globalization, and Strategic Mercantilism
« Reply #353 on: September 15, 2024, 04:27:47 PM »
Heh heh.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
Navarro
« Reply #354 on: October 02, 2024, 06:10:37 AM »
https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=738064a695780dad95de00dbe1d86b3b_66fd4415_6d25b5f&selDate=20241002

Thinking through the Trump tariffs

Leveling the playing field to facilitate fair trade

By Peter Navarro

The Trump tariffs will make America and American manufacturing great again. Here’s what you need to know.

Every country cheats. When one country uses unfair trade practices to gain a mercantilist advantage over another, the mercantilist cheater gains factories, jobs, wage gains and growth in its gross domestic product at the expense of the other country.

We have lower tariffs and trade barriers than any of our major trading partners. Not coincidentally, we have the highest annual trade deficits.

Each of our trade partners cheats us out of jobs and factories in different ways.

For example, Japan uses a dizzying array of nontariff barriers to keep American automobiles and other highvalue- added production out of its markets.

Germany and other European Union nations gain an unfair advantage with a value-added tax that acts as a de facto tariff on the United States, which relies instead on an income tax.

Our second-largest trading partner, Mexico, is regularly breaking the rules of the North American Free Trade Agreement replacement that former President Donald Trump negotiated but which the Biden-Harris administration does not enforce.

Our largest partner, China, breaks every rule in the World Trade Organization book with its “seven deadly mercantilist sins” — intellectual property theft, export subsidies, currency manipulation, dumping, state-owned enterprises, pollution havens and sweatshops.

The U.S. trade deficit has reached nearly $1 trillion a year. That’s larger than our defense budget, almost 4% of our GDP and about 15% compared with the federal budget.

Trade deficits destroy American jobs, shrink domestic manufacturing, threaten national security through the erosion of our defense industrial base and reduce annual GDP growth.

Over time, trade deficits transfer massive amounts of our wealth to foreign countries.

When foreigners buy farmland, factories or real estate, they gain control over American economic assets, and the U.S. becomes increasingly dependent on foreigners for food production, industrial capacity and even housing markets — China already owns far too much of our food supply chain and housing.

Consider, too, from a national security perspective that the U.S. trade deficit with China is significantly larger than China’s military budget.

In effect, American consumers are financing China’s construction of aircraft carriers, fifth-generation fighters, hypersonic jets, nuclear weapons and personnel that may one day kill Americans.

Reducing America’s massive trade deficits through the Trump tariffs is key to boosting sustainable GDP growth. It encourages domestic production, reduces reliance on foreign imports and ensures that more wealth stays within the U.S. economy to be reinvested in jobs and industries.

The faux inflation argument is a cudgel that globalist publications such as Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal like to beat Mr. Trump over the head with. In an election year, the Democrats are more than ready to pounce on this false argument.

Here’s the truth: The Trump tariffs did not cause inflation during his presidency. They will not cause inflation in Mr. Trump’s second term.

When America imposes tariffs on major trading partners such as China or Germany, the Trump tariffs force these trading partners to reduce the prices of their goods sold to us.

The American market is too important to their export-dependent economies for them to try to pass along the full tariffs to American consumers.

Over time, as the Trump tariffs bring our manufacturing and supply chains back on shore and American corporations invest more in American workers, real wages and employment rise, likewise moderating any possible inflationary effects.

Mr. Trump has proposed a 20% across-the-board tariff on American imports. With annual U.S. imports of nearly $4 trillion, such a baseline tariff would raise about $800 billion annually.

This is nearly equivalent to the U.S. defense budget for 2023. This incremental revenue would finance most or all of the annual federal deficit. At about 12% of total federal revenue, this tariff revenue could finance substantial tax cuts.

In the fog of this presidential campaign, do not be fooled by the facile arguments of the globalist elites who have told us for decades that tariffs are bad and free trade is the road to prosperity.

These globalist elites, financed by multinational corporations, feed us this free trade dogma as justification for sending our jobs and factories to Asia, Europe and Latin America. They always put their own profits above the American people.

Nowhere are the broken promises of the WTO, NAFTA and free trade better understood than in the battleground states of Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — ground zero for the carnage wrought by free rather than fair trade.

Michigan has lost much of its auto industry, North Carolina its furniture and textile industries and Pennsylvania its steel industry. Wisconsin said goodbye to thousands of industrial machinery, paper production and electronics jobs.

Come Nov. 5, voters in these battleground states will welcome the Trump tariffs with open arms — as should the rest of this country.

Peter Navarro served as Donald Trump’s trade and manufacturing czar. Read more about Mr. Trump’s policies in “The New MAGA Deal” and at www.substack.com/navarro

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
Glenn Beck on O'Reilly - the global elite and enemy within
« Reply #355 on: October 25, 2024, 08:00:23 AM »
Good podcast with numerous interesting points but the discussion with Glenn
Beck and his new book starts around 23:50 minute mark:

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/548-bill-oreillys-no-spin-news-28287326/episode/analyzing-the-enemies-within-our-country-231019093/

Perhaps we need a better thread for this?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
Re: Trade, Globalization, and Strategic Mercantilism
« Reply #356 on: October 25, 2024, 11:39:58 AM »
What would you have us call it?

We already have "Globalization" in the subject line here , , ,


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
Re: Trade, Globalization, and Strategic Mercantilism
« Reply #357 on: October 25, 2024, 11:42:28 AM »
Elites, UN, WHO WEF, Schwab control of the world?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
Re: Trade, Globalization, Strategic Mercantilismm and Globalism itself
« Reply #358 on: October 25, 2024, 12:00:52 PM »
I just edited the subject line.   What do you think?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
Re: Trade, Globalization, Strategic Mercantilismm and Globalism itself
« Reply #359 on: October 25, 2024, 12:13:01 PM »
better  :-D

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19887
    • View Profile
Trump Tarrifs - oh maybe not so bad after all
« Reply #360 on: November 15, 2024, 09:39:44 AM »
from a very disappointed Bloomberg (anti Trump the economy will crash) news:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/more-trump-tariffs-coming-ceos-200001165.html

now election is over => no biggie

 :wink:

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
Our CCP nails it
« Reply #361 on: November 23, 2024, 10:58:17 AM »
"Remember when the theory of globalization was that intertwining our businesses, investments, and products with CCP would prevent war, confrontation, and instability?

"Instead CCP took advantage of this to destroy us."

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
GPF: Global Economy is Changing (Protection of Dollar)
« Reply #362 on: December 04, 2024, 12:29:17 PM »


December 4, 2024
View On Website
Open as PDF

The Global Economy Is Changing, and so Is Latin America’s
A lot of it comes down to the protection of the dollar.
By: Allison Fedirka

Of all the regions affected by the global economic restructuring currently underway, Eurasia has commanded the most attention. And rightly so – the enormous landmass bridges export-dependent China with energy suppliers and access routes to European markets. It’s also home to the emerging markets of Central and South Asia where major economies hope to grow influence. But no region will be spared from the changes, the first signs of which in Latin America are starting to take shape. In addition to near-shoring efforts in the Americas – the clearest manifestation of changes in the Western Hemisphere so far – there have been a series of developments that suggest a deeper shift is happening in other areas.

One of those areas is trade blocs. The U.S.-Canada-Mexico Agreement and Mercosur, the hemisphere’s two largest groupings, face an uncertain future. The USMCA is slated for renegotiation in the coming months, and those involved have until July 1, 2026, to reach a new agreement or, by default, they will trigger the trade agreement’s sunset clause. This puts at risk nearly $2 trillion worth of trade across North America, $623 billion of foreign direct investment in the United States and $569 billion of U.S. FDI in Canada and Mexico. Given the amount of money at stake and the sheer integration among the pact’s members, it’s hard to imagine walking away from the agreement.

Even so, some have already acknowledged the need for backup plans. U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has already linked trade negotiations with border security and has threatened a 25 percent tariff on all goods from Canada and Mexico if they don’t implement stronger measures to stem the flow of drugs and migrants. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government has a "plan B" for any U.S. tariffs on oil exports and remains open to enacting retaliatory measures as needed. Meanwhile, many provincial premiers in Canada have called for the federal government to consider entering into a bilateral agreement with the U.S. rather than maintaining the current trilateral structure. Though some of this can be attributed to negotiation tactics, it also hints at the possibility of a major revamping in how North America conducts trade.

Farther south, the presidents of Mercosur member states convene on Dec. 5 in Montevideo to discuss the bloc’s future. The top two agenda items – a pending free trade agreement with the EU and liberalizing rules to allow for independent trade deals – exemplify the bloc’s weakness and decline. Finalizing the EU-Mercosur trade deal has been 24 years in the making, and yet hurdles remain. The inability to strike a deal with other economic blocs or countries calls into question the very utility of Mercosur. Meanwhile, Argentine President Javier Milei is leading the call to allow for independent trade agreements for Mercosur members. Uruguayan President-elect Yamandu Orsi and Brazil’s business community members support his view. The pressure for such a drastic change stems from the different needs of different member states, not to mention their respective governments’ search for solutions to economic problems. Essentially, the ability to negotiate FTAs outside the bloc would ultimately defeat the original purpose of having collective power in gaining trade agreements, which require unanimous approval.

Elsewhere, there are notable infrastructure projects under discussion that could affect the transit of various goods throughout the Americas. Maritime transport dominates international trade in the Western Hemisphere, with most Latin American countries being organized around major port cities and infrastructure that supports the conveyance of natural resources from the interior to the coast. Unsurprisingly, transit between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans plays a crucial role in regional trade dynamics.

Historically, the Panama Canal has been a centerpiece of interoceanic trade. However, an intense drought recently put the canal’s dominance into doubt and spurred the development of alternative routes. Panama is considering the construction of a dry canal parallel to the water canal as a backup mode of transit. Mexico is already in the process of building infrastructure along its own isthmus. Nicaragua recently announced the revival of an interoceanic canal, 12 years after the initial (unsuccessful) proposal. (The feasibility of this project is uncertain given the engineering demands and insufficient information on financing.) And Colombia has also started moving forward with a transoceanic train project that it says will complement Panama Canal traffic. The success of any one of these new projects would change the landscape of interoceanic trade.

Finally, there are indications that Latin America may be a target for tariffs under the incoming Trump administration, which has been vocal about its intention to use tariffs as part of its overall economic strategy. (GPF has previously noted that despite the rhetoric, the administration will be strategic and selective with its tariff policy.) Most recently, Trump representatives said the administration would put tariffs on all imports from BRICS countries, particularly Brazil, if they attempt to devise a single currency. This is a reminder of how eager Washington will be to engage in economic warfare to secure the value of the dollar.

Given the prominence of commodities in Latin American economies – commodities that are traded primarily in U.S. dollars – the future of the dollar and the suppression of other currencies in trade matters. The U.S. dollar still dominates markets and comes with a level of stability absent in other currencies. While the likelihood of abandoning it remains very low, several Latin American countries have dabbled in local currency trade and non-dollar currency swaps. The prospect of the U.S. economic incentives to secure the dollar puts many of the region’s economies in the potential crosshairs of anticipated U.S. trade wars.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
GPF: ASEAN gains from global trade realignment
« Reply #363 on: December 10, 2024, 06:30:47 PM »


December 6, 2024
View On Website
Open as PDF

ASEAN: Beneficiaries of Global Trade's Realignment
More than a sixth of all foreign direct investment in 2023 flowed into the Southeast Asian bloc.
By: Geopolitical Futures

ASEAN | Recent FDI Trends

(click to enlarge)

Amid global uncertainties, companies diversifying supply chains away from China have driven a surge in foreign direct investment into the countries that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In 2023, FDI inflows to the region reached $236 billion, up sharply from the annual average of $190 billion from 2020 to 2022. ASEAN's share of global FDI rose to 17 percent in 2023, compared to an average of just 6 percent from 2006 to 2015.

Investment came primarily from the United States, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Europe and South Korea, spurred by geopolitical tensions and the bloc’s pro-investment policies. ASEAN has leveraged regional agreements and frameworks to attract capital, targeting sectors such as infrastructure, digital economy, finance, transportation and renewable energy. Investors are attracted to ASEAN's stability, competitive advantages and diverse opportunities. Singapore remains a hub for hardware, software and services, while Vietnam and Indonesia lead in manufacturing sectors, including electronics, chemicals, solar panels and shipping containers. To sustain this momentum, ASEAN could focus on expanding small businesses, fostering emerging industries, enhancing skills development and deepening regional integration through additional trade and investment deals.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
FO
« Reply #364 on: December 12, 2024, 09:05:39 AM »


(5) U.S. AG VULNERABLE TO CHINA TRADE WAR: Dutch multinational bank Rabobank global sector strategist Steve Nicholson said the dynamics of a U.S.-China trade war have changed, and “this time they [China] are prepared” due to record stockpiles of agricultural products.
Citigroup Global Markets analysts said a resolution to a U.S.-China trade war could eventually emerge, but China will have a “lower appetite” for returning to previous import levels for U.S. ag products.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen urged the incoming Trump administration to maintain communication channels with China, including the Economic Working Group and Financial Working Group. Treasury Undersecretary for International Affairs Jay Shambaugh said the working groups were invaluable for preventing “unnecessary misunderstandings and escalations” between the U.S. and China.
Why It Matters: While the building trade war between the U.S. and China will likely hit U.S. agriculture exports, the primary fight is still likely to be over tech development and the U.S.-China AI race. The extension of the current Farm Bill, without cuts to financing mechanisms, will allow the Trump administration to mitigate the impact of Chinese ag import cuts as Trump did in his first term. Trump’s tariff threats are likely an opening move for trade negotiations with China, and Trump inviting China’s President Xi Jinping to the 20 January inauguration is likely a signal to China that the U.S. wants to maintain open communications. – R.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
FO
« Reply #365 on: December 16, 2024, 05:08:25 PM »

(1) TRUMP TELLS EXECS HE IS SERIOUS ON TARIFFS: According to people familiar with the matter, the Trump transition team told corporate lobbyists and consultants “there is no waving off” President-elect Trump’s plans to use tariffs when he takes office in January.
A lobbyist during the first Trump administration speaking anonymously said he is warning clients to take Trump’s tariff threats “at face value.”
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) said President-elect Trump might be open to negotiations over tariffs with Mexico and Canada, but will take a harder line with China due to the economic and national security threat posed by China.
Why It Matters: According to Goldman Sachs, Trump’s plans for tariffs are likely to be fast in decision but slow in implementation, as the Trump administration runs into legal hurdles levying blanket tariffs. Trump’s cabinet nominations signal that Trump is attempting to balance market stability with tariff threats to achieve foreign policy objectives. Mexico and Canada have already signaled cooperation with the Trump administration. China appears to be preparing for a trade war with the U.S., however, and China’s response to tariffs will likely exceed past actions such as shifting agricultural purchases away from U.S. exports. China has already begun targeting U.S. companies with sanctions and investigations and will likely increase export restrictions of key industrial inputs. – R.C

========================

(5) CFIUS IS SPLIT ON NIPPON-U.S. STEEL DEAL: U.S. Treasury’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) has informed Nippon Steel that the panel reviewing its $14.9 billion purchase of U.S. Steel remains divided, citing national security concerns. CFIUS has until 22 December to submit its recommendation to the White House, though both President Biden and President-elect Trump have publicly stated that they intend to block the deal. (Oversight of the Nippon-U.S. Steel deal underscores the growing importance of Treasury and CFIUS to business transactions with national security implications, and it is likely that their scope will only expand under a Trump Administration. – M.N.)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72713
    • View Profile
FO
« Reply #366 on: December 24, 2024, 06:00:24 AM »


(6) BUILDERS SAY TARIFFS TO DISRUPT CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY: Michigan-based consulting firm Ducker Carlisle managing principal Chris Fisher said the incoming Trump administration’s proposed broad tariffs could disrupt U.S. construction, and delay or cancel construction projects entirely. (Data center construction would likely take a significant hit from increased input prices, while already dealing with shortages of key electrical components that have slowed efforts to connect data centers to U.S. grids. – R.C.)