Archive for Foreign Trade Policy

Opinion | The Dangerous Naïveté of Trump and Xi – The New York Times

Nicholas Kristof

By Nicholas Kristof

Opinion Columnist    Nov. 17, 2018,      280 comments

 

President Trump and President Xi Jinping of China in Beijing last November.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

 

Image
President Trump and President Xi Jinping of China in Beijing last November.CreditCreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

“Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping are a bit alike, and that presents a danger to the global order.

The American and Chinese leaders are both impetuous, authoritarian and overconfident nationalists, and each appears to underestimate the other side’s capacity to inflict pain. This dangerous symmetry leaves the two sides hurtling toward each other.

The 10 percent tariffs already imposed in the trade war are scheduled to rise to 25 percent in January, but there’s also a broader confrontation emerging.

Trump and Xi may well be able to reach a cease-fire in their trade war when they meet for the Group of 20 in two weeks. Even if a deal is reached, though, it may be only a temporary respite that doesn’t alter the dynamic of two great nations increasingly on a collision course.”

Source: Opinion | The Dangerous Naïveté of Trump and Xi – The New York Times

David Lindsay: Thank you Nicholas Kristof. Yes, and here are the top comments, which I endorsed:

ShenBowen
New York
Times Pick

I agree with many things in this article, but I’m not certain that Xi has shown himself to be ‘impetuous’. On the contrary, I believe that most of his actions are deliberate and carefully considered. I have been impressed with Xi’s constraint in his responses to Trump’s Twitter rants. If Xi was ‘impetuous’ he might have pulled the trigger and put an end to the Chinese buying of US Treasury Bonds. Also, I suppose that you could make the argument that the two men are ‘a bit’ alike, but there is one very big difference, Xi is a very intelligent man and Trump is not.

Aaron commented November 18

Aaron
Tokyo  
Times Pick

And those of us in Japan and Korea are caught in the middle. The contest will likely be decided by which side has the most friends. Indeed, the TPP would have been a very strong economic platform favoring the US. Trump chose to scuttle it and he has also chosen to starve the state department, effectively crippling the two biggest, peaceful levers America had to work with: trade incentives and diplomacy. Hopefully the next US President will revive these programs, but for now, we haven’t much choice but to hunker down.

 

Posted in: China, Foreign Trade Policy, Nicholas Kristof

Leave a Comment (0) →

Opinion | The U.S. and China Are Finally Having It Out – by Thomas Friedman – NYT

“With the arrival in Beijing this week of America’s top trade negotiators, you might think that the U.S. and China are about to enter high-level talks to avoid a trade war and that this is a story for the business pages. Think again. This is one for the history books.

Five days of meetings in Beijing with Chinese, U.S. and European government officials and business leaders made it crystal clear to me that what’s going on right now is nothing less than a struggle to redefine the rules governing the economic and power relations of the world’s oldest and newest superpowers — America and China. This is not a trade tiff.

“This is a defining moment for U.S.-China relations,” said Ruan Zongze, executive vice president of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s research institute. “This is about a lot more than trade and tariffs. This is about the future.”

In one corner stand President Trump and his team of China trade hard-liners, whose instinct is basically right: This is a fight worth having now, before it is too late, before China gets too big.”

Source: Opinion | The U.S. and China Are Finally Having It Out – The New York Times

 

Yes, Sir. I agree.

Here are two comments  I recommended:

allan slipher
port townsend washington
Times Pick

“..there is a trade imbalance today because we’ve been investing in our future and you Americans have been eating yours.”

Spot on. Wake up call, America.

Our choice is self indulgent consumerism, cheap political theatrics, empty celebrity worship, and self absorbed rants, or redirecting ourselves and doubling down on basic research, education, infrastructure, well paid work, investment in the well being of our children and grandchildren and upholding the rule of law.

Bruce Rozenblit commented May 1

Bruce Rozenblit
Kansas City, MO

China employs state run capitalism. The US employs market capitalism. China views government as an asset. The US views government as an enemy. China pays to have its brightest students educated in the worlds greatest universities. In the US, we question why we even have universities, let alone want to pay for them. China follows decade long economic plans. The US is ruled by quarterly profits. China cheats. We don’t tax the billionaire class. In China, civil rights are forfeit. In the US, money has more rights than people. China is destroying the environment for quick growth. In the US, we want to destroy the environment for feeble growth. China pursues multi-national trade and investment policies. In the US, we used to and now want to pursue only unilateral policies.

So who wins? China will win. Trump did have the right idea about China getting away with murder. Many of our largest corporations made a fortune off of cheap Chinese goods, so we went along with it for years.

Until and unless we straighten out our twisted and self defeating ways, we cannot out compete China. The first step is to stop demonizing the government and allow government to participate in business. The ExIm bank is a good example. Big business in the rest of the industrialized world has government involvement. It’s about time we joined the club. We call it redistribution. They call it public investment.

Posted in: China, Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade

Leave a Comment (0) →

Trump Hits China With Trade Measures as White House Exempts Allies From Tariffs – The New York Times

“President Trump said he would impose about $60 billion worth of annual tariffs on Chinese imports on Thursday as the White House moved to punish China for what it says is a pattern of co-opting American technology and trade secrets and robbing companies of jobs and billions of dollars in revenue.

The measures come as the White House grants a long list of exemptions to American allies from steel and aluminum tariffs that go into effect on Friday, including the European Union, which has lobbied aggressively and publicly for relief from the trade action.

“The word that I want to use is reciprocal,” Mr. Trump said in announcing the tariffs in the Diplomatic Room of the White House. “If they charge us, we charge them the same thing.”

The China tariffs are his strongest trade action yet against a country he has branded an “economic enemy.” They fulfill one of his core campaign pledges, to demand more reciprocal deals with trading partners around the world.

But coupled with the administration’s decision to exempt the European Union, South Korea, Brazil, Canada, and Mexico from the tariffs on cheap metals, the action demonstrates how much Mr. Trump’s nationalist trade agenda is really targeted at a single country: China.”

Source: Trump Hits China With Trade Measures as White House Exempts Allies From Tariffs – The New York Times

David Lindsay Jr.

Hamden, CT 

“The tariffs, which the United States trade representative will publish within 15 days, will target 1,300 lines of Chinese goods — everything from shoes and clothing to electronics, administration officials said.” I understood the the argument for steel and aluminum, but what is the argument for these other 1,298 products? All the mainstream economists that I learn from, say that tariffs are toxic. The Chinese are famous for their intelligence, work ethic and pride. If they feel insulted, and have lost face, they will be forced to retaliate. Can Boeing stay on top without one of their biggest customers? Or did their stock price just drop almost 4% for no reason?

A five or ten percent tariff on just Chinese steel and aluminum might have been a more prudent test of the waters. Rejoining the TPP asap, would probably do more for the US economy and economic defense, than the steel tariff. The Chinese play like a people at war with the West, and they probably are, since they still have a score to settle over the bombardment and destruction of the Spring Palace, and its mulitude of treasure buildings and libraries, in the 1840’s, during the ugly opium war. The civilization that invented, paper, writing, gunpowder, history and literature, should be courted with carots as well as with sticks.

x

David Lindsay Jr. is the author of “The Tay Son Rebellion, Historical Fiction of Eighteenth-century Vietnam,” and blogs at here and InconvenientNewsWorldwide.wordpress.com

Posted in: China, David Lindsay, Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade

Leave a Comment (0) →

Some Things Are True Even if Trump Believes Them – by Thomas Friedman – NYT

Thomas Friedman is great in this column. He writes that China is a big problem, but the Trump steel tariff hurts our allies and not China. Then:

“So what would a smart American president do? First, he’d sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade accord. TPP eliminated as many as 18,000 tariffs on U.S. exports with the most dynamic economies in the Pacific and created a 12-nation trading bloc headed by the U.S. and focused on protecting what we do best — high-value-added manufacturing and intellectual property. Alas, Trump tore it up without reading it — one of the stupidest foreign policy acts ever. We Brexited Asia! China was not in TPP. It was a coalition built, in part, to pressure Beijing into fairer market access, by our rules. Trump just gave it up for free.

Once a smart president restored participation in TPP, he’d start secret trade talks with the Chinese — no need for anyone to lose face — and tell Beijing: “Since you like your trade rules so much, we’re going to copy them for your companies operating in America: 25 percent tariffs on your cars, and your tech companies that open here have to joint venture and share intellectual property with a U.S. partner — and store all their data on U.S. servers.” “

Source: Some Things Are True Even if Trump Believes Them – The New York Times

Posted in: China, Foreign Trade Policy, Thomas Friedman

Leave a Comment (0) →

U.S. Allies Sign Sweeping Trade Deal in Challenge to Trump – The New York Times

SANTIAGO, Chile — A trade pact originally conceived by the United States to counter China’s growing economic might in Asia now has a new target: President Trump’s embrace of protectionism.

A group of 11 nations — including major United States allies like Japan, Canada and Australia — signed a broad trade deal on Thursday that challenges Mr. Trump’s view of trade as a zero-sum game filled with winners and losers.

Covering 500 million people on either side of the Pacific Ocean, the pact represents a new vision for global trade as the United States threatens to impose steel and aluminum tariffs on even its closest friends and neighbors.

Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from an earlier version of the agreement, then known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a year ago as one of his first acts in office. It will undeniably be weaker without the participation of the world’s biggest economy, but the resuscitated deal serves as a powerful sign of how countries that have previously counted on American leadership are now forging ahead without it.

“Only free trade will contribute to inclusive growth of the world economy,” Taro Kono, Japan’s foreign minister, told a group of ministers from Southeast Asian countries in Tokyo on Thursday. “Protectionism isn’t a solution.”

Source: U.S. Allies Sign Sweeping Trade Deal in Challenge to Trump – The New York Times

Here is a comment I endorsed at the NYT.

Rich G

New York 4 hours ago

“While American beef farmers will have to pay 38.5 percent tariffs in Japan, for example, members like Australia, New Zealand and Canada will not.”

I’m sure that most in the beef industry voted for Trump. Well guess what, More expensive steel is going to mean your costs are going up and the tariffs mean your income is going down. America First? Much more of this and it will be America Last.

Posted in: Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade, Japan

Leave a Comment (0) →

As U.S. Trumpets ‘America First-’ Rest of the World Is Moving On – The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Trump is arriving at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, to explain his “America First” approach at a moment when the world is moving ahead with a trade agenda that no longer revolves around the United States. The world marked a turning point in global trade on Tuesday, when 11 countries agreed to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, announcing they had finalized the pact and expected to sign a deal on March 8 in Chile. It was a remarkable moment for a beleaguered agreemen

Source: As U.S. Trumpets ‘America First,’ Rest of the World Is Moving On – The New York Times

 

David Lindsay:  Yes. Donald Trump, or Twitter Drumpf as I like to call him,  is damaging the US in world trade, and no where more than in Asia, with his pulling out of the Transpacific Parntership.

Here is the top comment so far, I endorse:

Bob Bascelli

Seaford NY 1 hour ago

“America First” is a tag line not unlike “Make America Great Again”. They both appeal to our base instincts and are effective in stirring our faux “American Pride”, but that’s as far as they go. Questions need to be asked. What do we want to be first and great at; healthcare, coal production, number of millionaires, people in poverty, a healthy economy, number of nuclear warheads, deaths by gun violence, having the most stuff, …..? Do we have to be great or can we get along being respected, fair, and truthful? First and great mean very different things to many different people. Can one be truly great when so many are left behind? Ask the questions. Give truthful answers. That would be great.

Posted in: Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade

Leave a Comment (0) →

The Workers Who Regret Trump’s Scrapping of a Trade Deal – by Neil Gough – NYT

“HO CHI MINH CITY, Vietnam — Do Thi Minh Hanh, a labor activist, had grown accustomed to being beaten, hospitalized and jailed for her work in a country where independent trade unions are banned.

So it gave her hope for a reprieve when Vietnam reached a trade deal with the United States and other countries that called for its members to bolster workers’ rights and protect independent unions.

That hope fizzled in late January, when President Trump pulled the United States out of the trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with the stroke of a pen.“

The Vietnamese government will use this as an excuse to suppress the labor movement,” Ms. Hanh said. “They never wanted to have independent unions in Vietnam.” “

Posted in: Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade, Post War Problems in Vietnam

Leave a Comment (0) →

What Is TPP? Behind the Trade Deal That Died – The New York Times

“Today, the United States and most developed countries have few tariffs, but some remain. The United States, for example, protects the domestic sugar market from lower-priced global suppliers and imposes tariffs on imported shoes, while Japan has steep surcharges on agricultural products including rice, beef and dairy. The pact was an effort to create a Pacific Rim free-trade zone.

Environmental, Labor and Intellectual Property Standards

United States negotiators stressed that the Pacific agreement sought to level the playing field by imposing rigorous labor and environmental standards on trading partners, and supervision of intellectual property rights.”

 

Posted in: Foreign Trade Policy, Globalization and Trade, Post War Problems in Vietnam

Leave a Comment (0) →