SURVEY: Trade Wars -- necessary or not?

[Scott]

There have been a number of thread about the current trade 'war' between China and the US.   Which of the following best describes your opinion about the situation with trade conflicts.

 

Please feel free to leave a comment.

[GalaxyMan]

Don't like the choices. I am against retaliatory tariffs, but understand their need at times, like vis-a-vis the situation with China and the US. At the same time, I am for free trade, all things being equal, which is the real kicker, isn't it? I hate unfairness more than anything in life, which is stupid, as it's anything but a 'fair' universe.

[Ulic]

The West has waited for 50 years for China to live up to its trade commitments. Technology transfer, forced partnerships, theft of intellectual property, closed markets. I am less concerned about the trade imbalance, I am very concerned about trade practices. It really is time to play hardball. Stick to the full tariff program until China implements changes. Enough of the empty promises from China. 

[lannarebirth]

I am not against the concept of tariffs, but I wouldn't base it upon "you guys are making more money than us".

 

If the US were to continue to do meaningful amounts of business with China, I'd base tariffs on their human rights record, I'd penalize them for the exorbinant pollution that we will all bear for their cheap prices of goods with little environmental oversight. If their low prices are because their workers have no protection or safety or disability allowances as we would grant our own workers I would penalize them for that.  If we did those things we might discover we might be better off producing these items ourselves. Honestly, I expect a Chinese "cold war". The US should not be ousourcing the majority of it's manufacturing to a totalitarian state.

[Brunolem]

Trade wars are the necessary (last) step leading to hot wars... 

[ChouDoufu]

24 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

I am not against the concept of tariffs, but I wouldn't base it upon "you guys are making more money than us".

 

If the US were to continue to do meaningful amounts of business with China, I'd base tariffs on their human rights record, I'd penalize them for the exorbinant pollution that we will all bear for their cheap prices of goods with little environmental oversight. If their low prices are because their workers have no protection or safety or disability allowances as we would grant our own workers I would penalize them for that.  If we did those things we might discover we might be better off producing these items ourselves. Honestly, I expect a Chinese "cold war". The US should not be ousourcing the majority of it's manufacturing to a totalitarian state.

we WERE producing these things ourselves, but the bean-counters at the multinationals decided to move to china specifically for the "negatives" you cited.  as they say:  it's a feature, not a bug.

 

they offshored our jobs to save the costs of environmental protection, worker safety, pensions, disability and social security, etc.

 

totalitarian states are the best for the bottom line, as they have no unions, workers have no rights, and inspections/enforcement are tied to the thickness of whatever color envelope.

 

but don't expect after tariffs that textiles and plastic bucket production will be returning.  those multinationals owe allegiance to no country; they'll just pack up and move to vietnam......where they'll continue production in chinese-leased industial parks on chinese made machinery with chinese materials, and then loaded onto chinese ships at the chinese-controlled port facility.  and the products will have "assembled in vietnam" labels.....made in china.

 

if not vietnam, then myanmar or one of the 'stans -- with tariffs dropped to ensure their assistance in containing china/russia/enemy-of-the-week.

[Chomper Higgot]

49 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Trade wars are the necessary (last) step leading to hot wars... 

The next financial crisis, like the last two is being created by uncontrolled banking.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Ulic said:

The West has waited for 50 years for China to live up to its trade commitments. Technology transfer, forced partnerships, theft of intellectual property, closed markets. I am less concerned about the trade imbalance, I am very concerned about trade practices. It really is time to play hardball. Stick to the full tariff program until China implements changes. Enough of the empty promises from China. 

I urge you to look into the history of US trade practices and intellectual property theft.

 

The US v Charles Dickens is a good place to start.

[longtom]

I am not against the concept of tariffs, but I wouldn't base it upon "you guys are making more money than us".
 
If the US were to continue to do meaningful amounts of business with China, I'd base tariffs on their human rights record, I'd penalize them for the exorbinant pollution that we will all bear for their cheap prices of goods with little environmental oversight. If their low prices are because their workers have no protection or safety or disability allowances as we would grant our own workers I would penalize them for that.  If we did those things we might discover we might be better off producing these items ourselves. Honestly, I expect a Chinese "cold war". The US should not be ousourcing the majority of it's manufacturing to a totalitarian state.

Trump couldn"t care less about human rights.

Sent from my crappy device using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[malibukid]

absolutely.  love Trump for only 2 things.  the other is his immigration policy back home.

Edited May 19, 2019 by malibukid

[malibukid]

1 hour ago, Brunolem said:

Trade wars are the necessary (last) step leading to hot wars... 

if we do not confront the Chinese now it will soon be too late.

Edited May 19, 2019 by malibukid

[khunken]

Trade agreements are a win-win outcome. Tariff wars are a lose-lose outcome.

It's like claiming a win by shooting yourself in one foot because you shot the opponent in both feet.

[Brunolem]

26 minutes ago, malibukid said:

if we do not confront the Chinese now it will soon be too late.

Why does the US constantly need to "confront" other nations, and how is it gonna fare against China, considering how well "confrontations" have gone in Afghanistan, Irak and countless other places? 

 

Will the US ever learn (that problems are generally not solved through confrontation... especially against a nuclear power...)? 

 

[Thakkar]

In recent centuries, many nations have advanced through various nefarious means: some European countries through colonization and appropriation of others’ resources, the Americans through slavery, stealing Native American’s lands and resources and IP theft from Europeans, the Japanese through IP theft from Americans and Europeans. The Chinese figure it’s their turn. Doesn’t make it right.

 

ON the other hand, if we are really in a changed environment where that kind of thing must be frowned upon, it is incumbent upon advanced nations—especially those that have advanced through the means stated above—to help less developed nations develop and reach their potential instead of exploiting their poverty, weaknesses and lax regulations.

 

We can build a collaborative world, or a dog-eat-dog world. While competition is good, a race to the bottom helps only those who are already powerful—and those people belong to no country; they want to own the world, and most of it’s people.

[yogavnture]

i dont like to fight chinese hoards at the airport they push in line.  can they be retrained

[rickudon]

'Free Trade' has impoverished many smaller, less developed countries. When another country sells you, say rice, at 60% of your own production cost, your own rice farmers go bankrupt without any controls. OK, the populace gets cheaper rice, but does this offset the loss of GDP?

 

Africa has it's own rice species. But it is suited to African conditions and not as heavy a cropper. Free trade means this rice is now rare, 90% of rice is now the asian variety, and mainly imported. Cheaper rice, but what do you sell to pay for it?

 

Tariffs and quotas are needed to protect your own countries  industry/agriculture. However, tariffs at punitive levels encourage inefficiency and greed. You need to strike a balance that allows your own industry to thrive, but with sufficient competition to promote innovation and efficiency.

[Tug]

Don’t like tariffs cause I pay the price that being said if you are going to pick a fight with China why do you go around screwing our allies and friends ya dimwit 

[neeray]

This is definitely going to be an interesting thread.

 

I read and listen to much news and analysis about the all important trade war. The opinion that I have adopted is that Trump is right (OMG, did I just say Trump is right) to challenge China. But the way he has gone about it like a bull in a China shop is not right in the opinions that I hear and read.

 

Opinions often suggest that he would have been more successful with others fighting the fight with him. But instead, he alienated his allies who could have supported him in this trade war.

There really is "strength in numbers". Unfortunately, Trump chose the path of the lone wolf.

 

 

[Thakkar]

5 hours ago, neeray said:

This is definitely going to be an interesting thread.

 

I read and listen to much news and analysis about the all important trade war. The opinion that I have adopted is that Trump is right (OMG, did I just say Trump is right) to challenge China. But the way he has gone about it like a bull in a China shop is not right in the opinions that I hear and read.

 

Opinions often suggest that he would have been more successful with others fighting the fight with him. But instead, he alienated his allies who could have supported him in this trade war.

There really is "strength in numbers". Unfortunately, Trump chose the path of the lone wolf.

 

 

 

It’s almost as if Putin wrote the strategy for him.

1. Alienate allies

2. Withdraw from JPCOA, further alienating allies and potentially lead to trade war with allies who continue to trade with Iran.

3. Withdraw from TPP, which was meant to counter China. You now have a weaker hand when confronting China.

4. Confront China.

 

With the two most powerful nations busy and weakened fighting each other, guess who gains?

 

With the TPP, JCPOA and relations with allies intact, China could have been confronted successfully with a united front and they would more likely give ground without a trade war that hurts everyone, because it’s not like they don’t know they are in the wrong. Now it’s anybody’s guess how far this brinkmanship will go.

 

[Patriot1066]

On 5/19/2019 at 7:56 AM, ChouDoufu said:

we WERE producing these things ourselves, but the bean-counters at the multinationals decided to move to china specifically for the "negatives" you cited.  as they say:  it's a feature, not a bug.

 

they offshored our jobs to save the costs of environmental protection, worker safety, pensions, disability and social security, etc.

 

totalitarian states are the best for the bottom line, as they have no unions, workers have no rights, and inspections/enforcement are tied to the thickness of whatever color envelope.

 

but don't expect after tariffs that textiles and plastic bucket production will be returning.  those multinationals owe allegiance to no country; they'll just pack up and move to vietnam......where they'll continue production in chinese-leased industial parks on chinese made machinery with chinese materials, and then loaded onto chinese ships at the chinese-controlled port facility.  and the products will have "assembled in vietnam" labels.....made in china.

 

if not vietnam, then myanmar or one of the 'stans -- with tariffs dropped to ensure their assistance in containing china/russia/enemy-of-the-week.

As the west pumped billions into their economies the multinationals just borrowed cheap money and invested in China, Mexico, the EU companies moved jobs from western to Eastern Europe again on cheap money and EU grants.

 

if we don’t start supporting our own economies we will be lost to China gaining an unfair advantage in both Company ownership and technology theft and transfers  

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Patriot1066 said:

As the west pumped billions into their economies the multinationals just borrowed cheap money and invested in China, Mexico, the EU companies moved jobs from western to Eastern Europe again on cheap money and EU grants.

 

if we don’t start supporting our own economies we will be lost to China gaining an unfair advantage in both Company ownership and technology theft and transfers  

Which is why Trump’s MAGA merchandise was all made in China.

 

You are being conned.

 

Trump’s trade war tariffs are being paid by American consumers and by the loss of jobs across American industries.

[usviphotography]

13 hours ago, neeray said:

 

Opinions often suggest that he would have been more successful with others fighting the fight with him. But instead, he alienated his allies who could have supported him in this trade war.

There really is "strength in numbers". Unfortunately, Trump chose the path of the lone wolf.

 

The problem is that by "allies" they mean the usual crop of Western European countries run by Neoliberal Globalists who are the very reason the current unfair trade agreements exist in the first place. You aren't going to accomplish anything by working with the Swamp. Trump has proven that more than anyone as any issue that he "worked with" the Establishment on was promptly sabotaged and subverted. Trade would have been no different. This is a policy issue where you needed somebody to just dive in and start brawling. 

[Pauhi]

Cannot but worry about seeking a confrontation with China. Historic precedence of protectionistic policies paints a worrying picture. How can it be that the mantra of free trade, that to such extent has defined western civilization, now gets abandoned  in favour of protectionism ? My prediction ( from the bottom tier of society ) is that China will realize that they can do nothing about EU and US barring them from their markets, but will consolidate their position in third party areas like Africa, India, Russia other areas. If challenged there I believe in armed confrontation.  

[simple1]

5 hours ago, usviphotography said:

The problem is that by "allies" they mean the usual crop of Western European countries run by Neoliberal Globalists who are the very reason the current unfair trade agreements exist in the first place. You aren't going to accomplish anything by working with the Swamp. Trump has proven that more than anyone as any issue that he "worked with" the Establishment on was promptly sabotaged and subverted. Trade would have been no different. This is a policy issue where you needed somebody to just dive in and start brawling. 

Please provide a few examples of "Neoliberal Globalists" without the jargon

[Brunolem]

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

Please provide a few examples of "Neoliberal Globalists" without the jargon

Macron, Merkel, May... the 3 M... 

[Brunolem]

16 hours ago, Patriot1066 said:

As the west pumped billions into their economies the multinationals just borrowed cheap money and invested in China, Mexico, the EU companies moved jobs from western to Eastern Europe again on cheap money and EU grants.

 

if we don’t start supporting our own economies we will be lost to China gaining an unfair advantage in both Company ownership and technology theft and transfers  

Yet how can you support your economy when your own companies move their production abroad, in search of slave workers? 

 

You can cut your market from China, even 100%, that doesn't mean that production will come back home, it will simply and quickly move to Vietnam or Cambodia. 

 

Trump is very naive, risking war, hot war not trade war, with China for absolutely nothing in return in the long run... 

 

[lannarebirth]

20 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Yet how can you support your economy when your own companies move their production abroad, in search of slave workers? 

 

You can cut your market from China, even 100%, that doesn't mean that production will come back home, it will simply and quickly move to Vietnam or Cambodia. 

 

 

 

 

 

Lots of things you can do. You can pass a law that says that if your company hopes to sell it's product in our country xx.x% of production must take place in our country. If the business chooses not to meet that number you impose tariffs based upon how far they have missed the mark.

[Kwasaki]

On 5/18/2019 at 10:49 PM, Scott said:

Please feel free to leave a comment.

Don't think trade wars do any good and my thoughts on US having one with China if it's headed for a long run I believe the outcome will be worse for the US IMHO.

[zydeco]

Simple. Don't trade with the enemy. China is the enemy.

[MickeyDelux]

The survey question give's the wrong information. Not really a surprise the media promotes more lies. Everyone knows China has been stealing from the West. Now, finally a US President doesn't allow Chine to continue its unfair practices, the leftist call it retaliatory... Get real