Jump to content

In bombshell, Trump says U.S. backs out of G7 communique, criticizes Trudeau


rooster59

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, heybruce said:

So by pissing off Canada and our European trade partners and allies, we're somehow getting China to behave?  Please explain how that works.

I'm not endorsing pissing off anyone. I was merely responding to the nonsensical idea that China was a more trustworthy partner than the US. It shows a great lack of perspective IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, riclag said:

The fact is plain and simple the past POTUS were stuck on the WTO and their global dictatorship.

Finally someone comes by and says enough,fair is fair. A new day for American's.China ,Germany and Putin can take the helm now.Good luck

Nonsense. US and EU have access to a dispute process via WTO, though rather lengthy it does enable Rule of Law. Trump's current attitude is throwing out the baby with the bath water. You  believe it will benefit the US to revert to a nationalist isolation policy, if so demonstrate where such policy has been successful with consistently delivering positive economic results.

Edited by simple1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You know, eventually those dollars have to be used in the country of origin.  They can be shuffled around between other countries for a while, but if they never return to the US, then the trade surplus countries will be letting us print money, buy goods with it, then never have to worry about what they will do with the dollars.  When we want more foreign goods we can just print more money--Why should we care? Once we send the money overseas it will never come back to haunt us.

 

Of course it doesn't work that way.  The money we spend overseas can be used to buy US goods (reducing the trade deficit), invest in the US (reducing the trade deficit, but we need to be careful about who is investing, how and why) or buy US Treasuries (funding the government deficit while earning interest on the trade surplus dollars and giving the overseas holders leverage on the US government and economy). 

 

In short, the money we send overseas will eventually be used to buy US goods. invest in the US, or fund the deficit.  The first two options reduce the trade deficit.  The more we reduce the Federal deficit the more we force the trade surplus countries to the first two options.  Trump and other politicians who run up huge budget deficits and cry about the trade deficit are hypocrites or idiots, or both.

 

 

 

The $USD accounts for almost 90% of global foreign exchange trades which are in excess of 5 TRILLION DOLLARS daily. The US deficit and foreign bondholders are a drop in the bucket compared to global commerce.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hummin said:

Please, did I do something mean to you? 

 

I can back up anything, but when other people know what im talking about, why bother explaining to you? 

 

What is your problem? 

You made a claim, I asked you to explain why you reached thus conclusion. Only hollow phrases since.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/germany-france-slam-trump-over-145005009.html

And quote from the article  "Germany and France on Sunday sharply criticised U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to abruptly withdraw his support for a Group of Seven communique, accusing him of destroying trust and acting inconsistently."

And also, "Trump's announcement on Twitter, after he left the G7 summit in Canada early, that he was backing out of the joint communique torpedoed what appeared to be a fragile consensus on a trade dispute between Washington and its top allies."


Donald Trump, there are nutcase conspiracy theories that say that you are a Putin puppet. Can you please stop acting as if the conspiracy theories might be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

You made a claim, I asked you to explain why you reached thus conclusion. Only hollow phrases since.

Maybe you can tell us why we do not need Usa, because I cant see you did anything else than aks a simple question, except making short statements about my hallow posts. Stalking at its best if you ask me! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/10/2018 at 8:43 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

If this is the condition he’s in when he arrives in Singapore Kim will walk all over him.

Rumor has it he is complaining that the air stairs used on the flight that Kim came on had a red carpet and the air stairs used for him to walk down was just a "truck mounted piece of crap with no red carpet"!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, riclag said:

The fact is plain and simple the past POTUS were stuck on the WTO and their global dictatorship.

Finally someone comes by and says enough,fair is fair. A new day for American's.China ,Germany and Putin can take the helm now.Good luck

What complete hogwash, but why waste 15 minutes looking up some factual information on this dispute when ignorance feels this good?  Who do you think designed the international trading system, and was that all altruism?  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

The $USD accounts for almost 90% of global foreign exchange trades which are in excess of 5 TRILLION DOLLARS daily. The US deficit and foreign bondholders are a drop in the bucket compared to global commerce.

You're making it sound like the US can print $5 trillion each day without consequences.  Being the default currency has big advantages, but it's not like that 5 trillion disappears every day.  The US national debt is 21+ trillion dollars right now, so how is that a drop in the bucket?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ChidlomDweller said:

You're making it sound like the US can print $5 trillion each day without consequences.  Being the default currency has big advantages, but it's not like that 5 trillion disappears every day.  The US national debt is 21+ trillion dollars right now, so how is that a drop in the bucket?

 

The debt is not a drop in the bucket. It's horrible. It is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of USD's traded though. The poster was making the point that that money has to return to the US in some fashion and that the size of the debt made that difficult. First of all it doesn't have to return to the US and second of all, USD monies far in excess of offshore held debt are being exchanged every week. It is the most fungible currency on Earth and it can be converted to almost anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Opl said:

That's the best one yet. ?

 

Being Belgian, I always thought Verhofstadt was a bit of a pretentious windbag, but the past few years he's grown on me.  There was also the great putdown of Farage (something like "finally we can cut from the EU budget its biggest waste, Mr Farage's salary.")

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

The debt is not a drop in the bucket. It's horrible. It is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of USD's traded though. The poster was making the point that that money has to return to the US in some fashion and that the size of the debt made that difficult. First of all it doesn't have to return to the US and second of all, USD monies far in excess of offshore held debt are being exchanged every week. It is the most fungible currency on Earth and it can be converted to almost anything.

Yes, but those 5 trillion (or whatever it is) can be reused, so it's a one-off benefit (i.e., license to print money), unless international trade is growing or dollars get a bigger share of payments.

Edited by ChidlomDweller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

Nonsense. US and EU have access to a dispute process via WTO, though rather lengthy it does enable Rule of Law. Trump's current attitude is throwing out the baby with the bath water. You  believe it will benefit the US to revert to a nationalist isolation policy, if so demonstrate where such policy has been successful with consistently delivering positive economic results. 

China has become a particular target for U.S. policymakers, who have increasingly used the WTO process to challenge Chinese government support for domestic industries, restrictions on imports, abuse of intellectual property, and other state-led trade policies. Between 2009 and 2017, the Obama administration brought twenty-five cases to the WTO, more than any other country in that period, and sixteen of those targeted China. The administration won seven of its WTO cases against China, including limits on Chinese agriculture and aircraft subsidies and steel import duties; the others are ongoing".

You think everything goes according to the book! Guess again!

 

Edited by riclag
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChidlomDweller said:

What complete hogwash, but why waste 15 minutes looking up some factual information on this dispute when ignorance feels this good?  Who do you think designed the international trading system, and was that all altruism?  

China has become a particular target for U.S. policymakers, who have increasingly used the WTO process to challenge Chinese government support for domestic industries, restrictions on imports, abuse of intellectual property, and other state-led trade policies. Between 2009 and 2017, the Obama administration brought twenty-five cases to the WTO, more than any other country in that period, and sixteen of those targeted China. The administration won seven of its WTO cases against China, including limits on Chinese agriculture and aircraft subsidies and steel import duties; the others are ongoing"

 

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/whats-next-wto

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Trudeau did his credibility any favors waiting for Trump to take off before attacked him. He should have said it when Trump was there. Trudeau always comes across, to me, as an amateur just vying for the camera. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, riclag said:

China has become a particular target for U.S. policymakers, who have increasingly used the WTO process to challenge Chinese government support for domestic industries, restrictions on imports, abuse of intellectual property, and other state-led trade policies. Between 2009 and 2017, the Obama administration brought twenty-five cases to the WTO, more than any other country in that period, and sixteen of those targeted China. The administration won seven of its WTO cases against China, including limits on Chinese agriculture and aircraft subsidies and steel import duties; the others are ongoing".

You think everything goes according to the book! Guess again!

 

The topic is regards to G7, not China. FYI list of WTO disputes below...

 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...