18 minutes ago, Ralf61 said:

Ah, lot of noise. Those EU Soros Open Society Foundations puppets are used to follow orders. Now they have to act on their own, and they are obviously overchallenged to that. Trump this, Trump that...

I've got some news for you. The subject of this thread is 

Trump, EU leader pledge to cut trade barriers, hold off on further tariffs

Did you notice that "Trump" is the very first word in the subject?

Funny thing is, I don't see Soros' name mentioned anywhere in the article.

I suspect that you have special Soros Vision. You see him everywhere and in everything.

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You see him everywhere and in everything.

News for you: It's because he is, the real leader behind all this freedom and democracy bubbletalk. Eh, not to forget the Rockefellers aso.

1 minute ago, Ralf61 said:

News for you: It's because he is, the real leader behind all this freedom and democracy bubbletalk. Eh, not to forget the Rockefellers aso.

The Rockefellers too? Wow, a retro conspiracy theorist! No European bankers you'd care to mention? Or a certain middle eastern country?

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Wow, a retro conspiracy theorist!

2,155 posts in not even 3 months. Look who's talking!

3 minutes ago, Ralf61 said:

2,155 posts in not even 3 months. Look who's talking!

And you won't find allegations about conspiracies in any of them. What's your excuse?

Trump: "I'm putting additional tariffs on EU goods"

US businesses and farmers: "We're going to suffer because of this"

EU: "We're retaliating"

Trump: "Er, um, if you take away your retaliatory tariffs then I'll remove the additional ones I proposed"

Trump supporters: "What negotiating skills!"

Everyone else: "What negotiating skills?" 

 

3 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

Trump: "I'm putting additional tariffs on EU goods"

US businesses and farmers: "We're going to suffer because of this"

EU: "We're retaliating"

Trump: "Er, um, if you take away your retaliatory tariffs then I'll remove the additional ones I proposed"

Trump supporters: "What negotiating skills!"

Everyone else: "What negotiating skills?" 

 

Just to make it clear. The EU is not lifting the tariffs it has already imposed. 

"Mr. Trump did not promise to remove the tariffs on shipments of steel and aluminum coming from Europe, and the Europeans did not promise to lift their retaliatory tariffs. "

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/us/politics/trump-europe-trade.html

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed, the reply was removed too:

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.

 

Please sir, what about little Britain? Please can we have a deal? With either of you? We only need a little deal. Please?

More flip flopping from Trump. A Canadian former Prime Minister, Uncle Jean, said a couple months ago that after all Trump's huffing and puffing are done a comma will get moved and he will call it the greatest deal in history. I've been saying he would fold by Sept. It may be earlier. His party is turning on him fast. 

As for his face saving Euro farmers don't want or need his soy beams and natural gas needs infrastructure that takes years to put in place.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/when-trump-country-turns-against-tariffs/566084/

28 minutes ago, pegman said:

...As for his face saving Euro farmers don't want or need his soy beams and natural gas needs infrastructure that takes years to put in place.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/when-trump-country-turns-against-tariffs/566084/

 

Interesting, since I have owned stock in LNG (ticker symbol) for many years. There are already facilities in place in the USA currently exporting LNG, and several more near completion. Here is an older article but there are probably newer ones online....

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/u-s-become-major-lng-exporter/amp/

 

 

 

3 hours ago, bushdoctor said:

 

Interesting, since I have owned stock in LNG (ticker symbol) for many years. There are already facilities in place in the USA currently exporting LNG, and several more near completion. Here is an older article but there are probably newer ones online....

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/u-s-become-major-lng-exporter/amp/

 

 

 

You have missed the point. For EU countries to take on LNG imports from the US will require investment in further infrastructure, plus US will need to address the challenge of cheaper gas imports from Russia. Will have to wait and see when funding for the infrastructure will be announced and anticipated volume of LNG imports from the US.

9 minutes ago, simple1 said:

You have missed the point. For EU countries to take on LNG imports from the US will require investment in further infrastructure, plus US will need to address the challenge of cheaper gas imports from Russia. Will have to wait and see when funding for the infrastructure will be announced and anticipated volume of LNG imports from the US.

The point is new facilities are already due to come online. Some are already online, no need to wait years as claimed. 

I also think the EU would prefer not to be overly dependent on Russia for their energy needs. 

6 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

The point is new facilities are already due to come online. Some are already online, no need to wait years as claimed. 

Not so sure of your assertion sufficient infrastructure is inplace. Also US will need to address increased competition from gas suppliers in the EU marketplace. An interesting article looking at the big picture of gas supply into the EU...

 

Considering that most of the existing capacity is located in Western Europe, and that internal bottlenecks exist from the Atlantic coast to the East, the development of a few new regasification units in Eastern Europe would be justified.

 

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/imports-and-secure-supplies/gas-and-oil-supply-routes

 

43 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Not so sure of your assertion sufficient infrastructure is inplace. Also US will need to address increased competition from gas suppliers in the EU marketplace. An interesting article looking at the big picture of gas supply into the EU...

 

Considering that most of the existing capacity is located in Western Europe, and that internal bottlenecks exist from the Atlantic coast to the East, the development of a few new regasification units in Eastern Europe would be justified.

 

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/imports-and-secure-supplies/gas-and-oil-supply-routes

 

 

Thanks for the link, though I didn’t see anything opposing what I said. With LNG it is easily transported by ship. One company doing that is Teekay (TGP), and there are several others. The US has an enormous amount of comparatively cheap natural gas. 

2 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

 

Thanks for the link, though I didn’t see anything opposing what I said. With LNG it is easily transported by ship. One company doing that is Teekay (TGP), and there are several others. The US has an enormous amount of comparatively cheap natural gas. 

 LNG is not price competitive with pipeline natural gas.

https://www.europeangashub.com/articles/us-lng-vs-pipeline-gas-european-market-share-war

That may be true presently but the market for LNG is expanding, so imports should increase naturally. The EU is larger than just Germany. Poland recently signed a deal to buy LNG, and other EU countries like Spain and Portugal don’t have strong links with Russian pipelines and have ample LNG import capacity. No country wants to depend on just one source, giving the U.S. an opportunity. I’m not saying it’s a given, but I wouldn’t rule it out since apparently the EU is said to be considering it. 

 

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

EU countries to take on LNG imports from the US

This raises a somewhat tangential question to those EU members who are also NATO members who have pledged to increase GDP spending for NATO defense.

If such countries in the EU willingly pay more for LNG on a per unit basis from the US than from Russia for secure energy, are not such additional expenditures related to their national security? Thus, such additional expenditures should be counted in terms as percent of GDP against their NATO pledge.

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

This raises a somewhat tangential question to those EU members who are also NATO members who have pledged to increase GDP spending for NATO defense.

If such countries in the EU willingly pay more for LNG on a per unit basis from the US than from Russia for secure energy, are not such additional expenditures related to their national security? Thus, such additional expenditures should be counted in terms as percent of GDP against their NATO pledge.

Would put the cat among the pigeons

4 hours ago, bushdoctor said:

That may be true presently but the market for LNG is expanding, so imports should increase naturally. The EU is larger than just Germany. Poland recently signed a deal to buy LNG, and other EU countries like Spain and Portugal don’t have strong links with Russian pipelines and have ample LNG import capacity. No country wants to depend on just one source, giving the U.S. an opportunity. I’m not saying it’s a given, but I wouldn’t rule it out since apparently the EU is said to be considering it. 

 

LNG costs more because there are more costs associated with it. Pipeline gas has an inherent advantage. Also the Gulf states also ship LNG and they too have an inherent cost advantage of US LNG because they don't have to frack to get the gas.

It was probably a waste of time and effort

 

Quote

EU-US trade truce falters on Day 1 over farming

 

Quote

Only a day after the EU and U.S. struck a peace deal on trade, cracks are emerging over the sensitive topic of farming.

Quote

Brussels was quick to shoot down such suggestions. “Agriculture is not part of the scope of the talks,” an EU official told reporters on Thursday.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-us-trade-truce-falters-on-day-1-over-farming/

As normal facts between what „Tiny Don“ (not my invention) says or said and the reality has a distance just from here to the eternity.

 

Alternative and real facts:

1. Soybeans; The agreements between Trump and Juncker are more vague in the official statement. Soybeans are only one of various commodity groups they would like to work for to reduce the hurdles. With an eye on the midterm elections „the dealer“ trumpeted, nearly immediately the Europeans would buy more soybeans!!

2. LNG; The EU wanna import more LNG from the USA to diversify the energy supply. The man with the orange face trumpeted again: big/giant purchase quantity. His usual exaggerations.

3. As already noted here, the US LNG would be too expensive, much more expensive than the Russian one trough the pipe line. Who would like to buy it in the EU? And last not least the „tremendous“ ignorance of the "great dealer": Although The Commission externally represents the EU countries in trade-related matters, it cannot decide on concrete projects and deals. The companies pick the contractors by themselves.

          Hot air, Mr. Trump, to save face?