Thursday, May 23, 2019

Trade War Commentaries











































































Trump walkout marks point of no return Trump's strategy of torching a meeting, turning on his heel and raising the stakes is familiar from his life as a real estate magnate. But there is increasing evidence that walking away for the table doesn't work as well for a President as it can for businessmen........ He tried it with North Korea, and the Stalinist state still has its nuclear weapons. He did it with China, and a trade war is deepening........ "The President is, frankly, taking a position that no other president in history has ever taken, which is that somehow if you are being investigated by the Congress you can't do anything else," said Clinton's former chief of staff Leon Panetta........ The result of Wednesday's angry exchange is a Washington facing the prospect of a prolonged period of complete breakdown between the Congress and the White House.

Trump's golfing has cost taxpayers more than $100 million, by 1 estimate. That's not really the hinky part.

at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

One Million Uighurs

compared Trump on China to Ronald Reagan on the Soviet Union—ahead of his time in confronting its malevolence...... The Chinese Communist Party may worry about its ability to preserve its control. Otherwise, why would it need to build a surveillance state, to put 1 million Uighurs in “reeducation camps,” to ostracize and imprison human-rights lawyers, or to “disappear” the head of Interpol? But it doesn’t appear to be anywhere near actually losing that control.......... Previous American presidents theorized that China would see the advantages of becoming rule-abiding. Trump theorizes that the American economy is strong enough to force Chinese submission. Those different approaches portend very different kinds of relations for the United States with China: The first would make them partners in prosperity; the second would reveal them supplicants........ Treasury Secretary Wilbur Ross thinks not only that the U.S. will win the trade war, but that it may result in social unrest that challenges Communist Party control in China. So we are back to regime change, but this time by threatening penury rather than luring with prosperity.




China Isn’t Cheating on Trade Democrats and Republicans echo Trump’s anti-Beijing rhetoric, but escalating tensions could leave Americans far worse off. ......... in the coming weeks, the United States and China will sign an agreement that repeals the tariffs the two nations have been levying on each other’s goods for the past nine months. If past behavior is any guide, Donald Trump will call it the greatest deal ever, and global markets will breathe a sigh of relief. ......... Trump has already begun to renege on commitments made as part of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, which he hailed as “incredible” in October. ......... Politically, Beijing is growing more authoritarian, as evidenced by its Orwellian domestic-surveillance policies, its mass internment of Muslim Uighurs, and the cult of personality now developing around Chinese President Xi Jinping. Militarily, China increasingly dominates the South China Sea. .............. “a new consensus”—that only a far tougher U.S. trade policy can prevent Beijing from continuing to rip off America—“is rising across America.” .......... top Democrats have scrambled to out-hawk Trump on trade. .......top Democrats and Republicans in Congress are warning that Trump’s China trade deal won’t be tough enough...... Complaints like these have come to dominate Beltway discourse not because the evidence underlying them is particularly strong. It isn’t. They have come to dominate Beltway discourse because Democrats and Republicans both believe that Trump’s anti-China message helped him win Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and that the path to the presidency runs through those states again in 2020. The political incentive to be tough on China over trade today is blinding politicians to the risks of an escalating conflict that could leave Americans poorer, less free, and—perhaps—even at war. .......... Beijing’s economic policies are actually quite typical of a country at its stage of development. Like many regimes in the developing world, Beijing fears the “middle-income trap,” in which rising wages undermine its advantage as a center of low-cost manufacturing before it develops the capacity to produce higher-value goods. China worries that unless it moves from assembling iPhones to inventing them, economic growth will stagnate and popular unrest will follow. ....... China therefore erects tariffs to protect industries it hopes will help it make that leap. So did the United States when it was industrializing. ......... China has a lower trade-weighted average tariff than Argentina, Brazil, India, South Korea, Indonesia, South Africa, Turkey, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico. ........ ranked countries on how well they protect the intellectual property of foreign companies, China scored fairly well among developing nations: just below Mexico and Malaysia but above Turkey, Brazil, South Africa, and the Philippines ........... A 2017 study of cases in which foreign companies sued for patent infringement in Chinese courts by Renjun Bian of the University of California at Berkeley School of Law found that foreign companies actually prevailed at higher rates than did Chinese litigants. ........... Beijing pours money into promising companies in ways the United States and most European governments do not. But this isn’t unusual among developing economies either. ...........China actually intervenes less than India, Vietnam, and Brazil, some of America’s best friends in the developing world. .......... “unlike many of its [developing economy] peers, China is making concrete progress in building a 21st century national IP environment.” ....... a “natural evolution. Countries tend to be slapdash about IP until they get sophisticated enough to have a lot of their own IP to protect.” ........ National Counterintelligence and Security Center last year admitted that, while China still hacks into American companies (something the United States has also allegedly done to Chinese companies), such activity occurs “at lower volumes than existed before the bilateral September 2015 U.S.-China cyber commitments.” In other words, diplomacy worked........ the best way to accelerate China’s transition is to build alliances with other governments concerned by its economic practices, and to use that common leverage to press Beijing. That was part of the strategy behind the Trans-Pacific Partnership, through which the United States and 11 other Pacific nations would lower their barriers to trade and investment. When the TPP’s prospects looked bright, China reportedly began considering joining itself, which could have compelled it to make some of the very changes Trump is demanding now. But in 2016, Trump, with the help of progressive Democrats such as Sanders, made TPP politically radioactive........ rather than making common cause with Canada, Japan, France, and other democracies aggrieved by China’s trading practices, his administration has slapped tariffs on them. All of which has isolated the United States and left it seeking concessions from China that would be easier to secure were the Trump administration not working alone........ Historically, the United States has been one of the WTO’s most successful plaintiffs. But according to Simon Lester of the Cato Institute, the Trump administration has brought only two new cases against China at the WTO. And Trump officials, in keeping with their general hostility toward international organizations, regularly trash the organization........ But it’s not Xi who is crippling the WTO. It’s Trump. ....... “China does a reasonably good job of complying with WTO complaints brought against it.” The Trump administration, by contrast, has systematically blocked the reappointment of judges on the WTO’s dispute-settlement body and thus, according to Reuters, has “plunge[d] the organization into crisis.”.............

the self-destructive absurdity of Trump’s behavior

......... If Chinese companies forge high-tech collaborations in Europe and Chinese students forge scientific breakthroughs at laboratories in Australia, American politicians—in their effort to quarantine China from global innovation—may end up quarantining the United States instead....... the United States has a long history of anti-Asian bigotry, especially during periods of conflict with Asian governments........ Since 2009, according to a 2017 study by the Chinese American Committee of 100, Asian Americans have been twice as likely as other Americans to be the subject of bogus prosecutions (prosecutions that don’t result in a conviction) under the Economic Espionage Act. Trump himself in August reportedly claimed that “almost every student that comes over to this country [from China] is a spy.” .......... The more trade hawks decouple America and China economically, the less incentive the two countries will have for mutual accommodation, since, as the Rand Corporation’s Ali Wyne has observed, “there are few factors … besides trade interdependence that compel the United States and China to exercise mutual restraint.” ....... The “painful adjustments” that America must make to accommodate China are more painful because the United States government has done so little to cushion Americans from the dislocation caused by China’s economic rise.

If Americans who lost their jobs didn’t also lose their health care; if they had access to generous government wage subsidies, retraining programs, and even guaranteed federal jobs; if paying for college didn’t plunge them and their children into debt—then the political incentive to scapegoat Beijing might not be as great. Over the past two decades, American politicians have not proved weak and inert in responding to China’s real and imagined misdeeds. They have proved weak and inert in responding to their own citizens’ needs. The reckoning Washington requires is not with China. It’s with itself.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

The Mighty Dollar

The starting point is the dollar’s status as a global reserve currency and international monetary standard, and the US current account deficit is the only mechanism through which the global supply of dollars can be increased. This is why a global economic boom often coincides with a higher US current account deficit, while global recessions often see the US current account moving in the opposite direction............ the expected surge in Chinese imports would almost close up America’s entire current account deficit and this would lead to a global dollar shortage. As a result, market forces would likely drive up the dollar to such a level where US exports to other parts of the world would be reduced, thus “re-creating” a trade or current account deficit. ...... In the end, either higher short rates or a stronger US dollar or both would act to slow down the US economy and ensure that America’s trade balance is more or less unchanged. ...... a Sino-US trade deal could simply amount to a zero-sum game in the short term: a gain for the US, a loss for the rest of the world, and indifference for China ..... a net efficiency loss in the world supply chains. ........ To avert or minimise the adverse impact of a China-US trade deal on the rest of the world economy, the Sino-US trade deal should focus on Beijing’s protective trade and investment policies rather than bilateral trade imbalance. The China-US trade imbalance is the natural result of global supply-chain evolution, and eliminating this imbalance is too disruptive for every country involved. ....... making sure that Beijing plays by the rules and levels off the playing field for foreign businesses and suppliers would represent a net gain for the world economy, benefiting all.
A US-China trade deal won’t be a win for global markets if Beijing shifts its trade surplus to other countries

A little good news could go a long way. If the US and China are shrewd enough, between them they can clinch recovery with a trade compromise that convinces investors that the future remains bright.
The world is taking leave of its senses and falling down the rabbit hole of a deepening global trade war, economic shocks and political instability. The post-war world order is breaking down, multilateralism is giving way to national self-interest and the political forums for peaceful debate are failing.......It’s time for someone to step forward and show stronger leadership before the world sinks back to where the 2008 financial crisis left off. Right now, the world is in self-harm mode and deeply vulnerable.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

India 2019: Looks Like A TsuNAMO

90 minutes into the vote counting, and it is beginning to look like a massive victory for Narendra Modi. If he pulls a hattrick and wins again in 2024, he joins the rank of the Congress Party's Nehru. This is happening after a long time in India that a party with a majority is winning another five-year term. He should be able to give India double-digit growth rates before he goes to the people again in 2024.





3:30 AM EST Update



My Projection Puts Modi At 300-350

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

2020: The Year Of The Social Democrat

2020 is going to be the year of the Social Democrat. The New Democrat reign lasted from 1992 to 2016. Now the mainstream talk inside the Democratic Party is that of the Social Democrat. The most popular ideas are those pushed by the Social Democrats.

Inequality And Climate Change Are Existential: A Blueprint For Survival

The New Democrat claimed to have moved to "the center," wherever that was, whatever latitude and longitude. The Social Democrat has a strong, uncompromising focus on human capital and the environment, is unapologetic about tackling inequality. But the Social Democrat also must have an energized sense of the role of tech entrepreneurship in the solutions of tomorrow. In that sense, the Social Democrat occupies the revitalized center. The Social Democrat is not giving a leftward lurch to the party and abandoning all hopes of victory.

Inequality And Climate Change Are Existential: A Blueprint For Survival

The Universal Basic Income that Andrew Yang is talking about only truly works the way it is supposed to work when new technology has given the economy massive increases in productivity. In one projection the US starts seeing annual growth rates of 50%. You can not talk down those tech entrepreneurs. They are part of the solution.

Inequality And Climate Change Are Existential: A Blueprint For Survival

The wealth tax that Elizabeth Warren is talking about is the saving grace for capitalism. Inequality is as much an existential threat as climate change. 


at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Andrew Yang: Universal Basic Income, Elizabeth Warren: Wealth Tax

Andrew Yang is not a one trick pony, although he almost exclusively talks about the Universal Basic Income. His website has the richest policy proposals of any candidate with the possible exception of Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren's central idea is the idea of the wealth tax. I fully support. These are two ideas that can not lose, no matter if Andrew Yang and Elizabeth Warren win or not.

That is why the presidential campaign is so important. That is why the debates are so important. These two ideas have to be hammered into the political discourse.

Bernie Sanders, similarly, talks about Medicare For All. Many candidates do. But Bernie has been the most vocal. He was talking about it also in 2016. This is also an idea I like. Obviously, three people are not going to win. There will eventually be only one winner.

But all three of these ideas must win.

And there is the Green New Deal. It is not a specific idea right now. It is more of a conversation. It is more the outlines of a paradigm. And the face associated with it is not even running, can't run. But it is the biggest idea of all. And it also must win. All four ideas must win.

The one who will win will win. But the campaign has to be conducted in such a respectful way that all the candidates together build a platform that includes these wonderful ideas.




at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Trade War: Intellectual Property

It is easy to see why the US gets so passionate about IP, but it is not the “existential” issue so many Americans claim. IP may be central to the US’ view of itself as the world’s technology leader – but it is also a massive earner. The US may have a miserable trade deficit in manufactures, but it has a handsome surplus in services exports, and right up there is the money it earns from royalties in payment for IP rights....... In 2017, this amounted to US$128 billion – second only to earnings from tourism and education services (US$211 billion), and well ahead of financial services (US$109 billion) and transport services (US$89 billion). A tighter deal on IP protections would mean a significant boost to services exports........ Flying in the face of claims that China abuses IP rights is the reality that China pays more to the US in royalties than any other economy. Wanting to sell more IP to China is, just like wanting to sell more beef or soya, a perfectly reasonable aspiration. So is selling legal services – and there can be no bigger beneficiary of negotiating IP arrangements than the US’ army of IP lawyers. ...... China is not wrong to try to keep the cost of royalty payments at a manageable level, so there is a perfectly reasonable negotiation to be had over rules for royalty payments. There is no place for electorally pungent claims that China is in some way “stealing its way up the economic ladder”, as Christopher Wray at the FBI puts it....... The relative market calm suggests that no one believes this breakdown will not be resolved.
No trade deal? Why China should walk away and hit back at the US, in the sectors where it really hurts

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)