Free trade however is not the goal here but US economic sovereignty.If we all adopted this stratagem then US corporations like Amazon and Google would not be able to sell into foreign markets at all! As for Blackrock's incursions into asset stripping well why not raise the standard of conduct on financial services too.The dollar's day as the world currency of reserve needs overhauling and China may be best placed to pull the plug.There is no reason why petrodollar nations shouldn't take payment in a new hybrid currency run by a global board representing all of the main economies. US debt would of course be unaffordable but then Trump wants to reduce US indebtedness so a lean time for the no.1 consumer led economy seems unavoidable.
You like so many others are completely missing the point, Trump is not making America great again. What he's doing is playing the oldest trick in the book, making money on a falling/failing market. If the stock exchange falls and you are rich it's like Christmas eve you rush around buy companies and stocks. then you cash in when things get better, for example do you really believe that Ford will go out of business? Not a chance but when there shares are down buy as much as 40%?.... Need I say more?
Stammer has already agreed to allow these Tech giants the best tax deal in history, it’s just not been made public yet. Even when it is made public, will it make a difference. We’ve already allowed this man to disgrace the good name of the Labour Party.
"It’s beyond obvious that the US is no longer a trustworthy trade partner..."
Where have you been all your life? It's been beyond obvious since about 1850 that the US is not a trustworthy anything partner. Ask the Native Americans - if you can find any live ones.
Hi Nigel, I'm interested in why you say "Global trade is wasteful and must be avoided". This fly in the face of economic theory going all the way back to Adam Smith in the 1770's. I'm interested to know what evidence or literature lead you to this conclusion. Many thanks sam
The old thinking was that comparative advantage was always good… but there were conditions for it to work that have been forgotten.. …Capacity can always be filled, and the wealth gradient must be close to equal… but in the global trade environment we still have 2B people underemployed and a huge wealth gradient between the west and the rest which was a problem for the west in the global free trade and peolpe migration debacle of the last 30 years. Tariffs are a useful device to force localization .. more on this if you want.
If you consider that the strategy is to make everybody poor and scared so that he can control them, then this is exactly the right strategy to accomplish that.
The process of selling off the UK assets to BlackRock is well underway and continuring under Starmer. It's not a case of whether to trust Trump or not, Starmer has no choice. The UK government is blackmailed or bribed into submission.
Also it can't be just about Trump's stupidity. Norton thinks it's a ploy to further cut taxes the rich at the expense of the poor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv5ZkxQvsz8
This is bizarre Tom. What you seam to be saying is that because Trumps tariffs are arbitrary and not based on reson then Starm should call this out. Why? To prove a point? Starma is dealing with a thin skinned ego and maybe the best way of protecting the UK is flattery. It may be ugly but it may also be the best option.
I'm afraid you are showing your ignorance of the US Constitution, perhaps understandable if you're not American. The reason the tariffs have been calculated in this "bizarre" way is that taxes (and tariffs have been regarded as a form of taxation since the days of the Boston Tea Party) can only be raised by Congress. However, Congress has authorised the President to apply tariffs for the purpose of "equalizing trade". Now do you get it?
And, by the way, 10% vice 20% is a Brexit win, even if an inadvertent one, and has nothing to do with Starmer's legendary negotiating skills. Likewise, the notion of the UK retaliating through tariffs would be an act of egregious self-harm. China might be able to win a trade war with the US but the UK very definitely cannot.
That's interesting thank you. However I thought he issuesd a EO under the Traid act of the 70' s. This I believe, alows the president to impose tariffs to address 'unfair traid practices.' This is broad and I see no reason that the act requires a direct link between tarrifs and trade deficits. In other words he can pretty much do what he whats with the Triad Act as a shield. Am I wrong? Is there a requirement under the act for it to be directly propositional? Thanks sam
Starmer can be trusted to opt for the stupidest course of action in any given situation, so of course he will surrender.
Free trade however is not the goal here but US economic sovereignty.If we all adopted this stratagem then US corporations like Amazon and Google would not be able to sell into foreign markets at all! As for Blackrock's incursions into asset stripping well why not raise the standard of conduct on financial services too.The dollar's day as the world currency of reserve needs overhauling and China may be best placed to pull the plug.There is no reason why petrodollar nations shouldn't take payment in a new hybrid currency run by a global board representing all of the main economies. US debt would of course be unaffordable but then Trump wants to reduce US indebtedness so a lean time for the no.1 consumer led economy seems unavoidable.
You like so many others are completely missing the point, Trump is not making America great again. What he's doing is playing the oldest trick in the book, making money on a falling/failing market. If the stock exchange falls and you are rich it's like Christmas eve you rush around buy companies and stocks. then you cash in when things get better, for example do you really believe that Ford will go out of business? Not a chance but when there shares are down buy as much as 40%?.... Need I say more?
One thing’s for sure: if there’s a disaster - economic or otherwise - the already stinking rich will find a way to exploit it and get even richer.
Money raised by tariffs are not subject to Congress oversight This means that they can be spent however Trump wishes
Stammer has already agreed to allow these Tech giants the best tax deal in history, it’s just not been made public yet. Even when it is made public, will it make a difference. We’ve already allowed this man to disgrace the good name of the Labour Party.
"It’s beyond obvious that the US is no longer a trustworthy trade partner..."
Where have you been all your life? It's been beyond obvious since about 1850 that the US is not a trustworthy anything partner. Ask the Native Americans - if you can find any live ones.
That’s Trump’s ‘thinking’ - a zero sum game where a winner necessarily entails a loser. There is no win-win in his mind - just wind blowing.
Look its not your god given right to trade with the US or anyone.
If they can add value internally and avoid the trade that’s a good thing for their economy and its their call not yours.
Global trade is wasteful and must be avoided.. get used to it.
As an American, you too should get used to dwindling exports.
thats the plan
Hi Nigel, I'm interested in why you say "Global trade is wasteful and must be avoided". This fly in the face of economic theory going all the way back to Adam Smith in the 1770's. I'm interested to know what evidence or literature lead you to this conclusion. Many thanks sam
Sam
I have plenty of material on my Substack and suggest you should go through it.
Economists are mixed on if Global free trade is viable.
I attach a short article that describes what is now called the Productivism Paradigm by Dani Rodrik, a leading economist,. This is Trumps agenda..
The new productivism paradigm? - CGTN
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-07-06/The-new-productivism-paradigm--1brjj1feoVO/index.html
The old thinking was that comparative advantage was always good… but there were conditions for it to work that have been forgotten.. …Capacity can always be filled, and the wealth gradient must be close to equal… but in the global trade environment we still have 2B people underemployed and a huge wealth gradient between the west and the rest which was a problem for the west in the global free trade and peolpe migration debacle of the last 30 years. Tariffs are a useful device to force localization .. more on this if you want.
https://nigelsouthway.substack.com/p/does-the-usa-need-usmca
https://nigelsouthway.substack.com/p/does-the-usa-need-usmca
I thank you, and I will have a read. Happy Friday sam
FFS Nigel. CGTN?
that’s ok considering the preparers and presenter.
He is doing a GREAT JOB KILLING America.
Who would of thought of that 🤣🤣
If you consider that the strategy is to make everybody poor and scared so that he can control them, then this is exactly the right strategy to accomplish that.
It's about blunt manipulation the stock markets: these are not bright people, it's all they know.
The process of selling off the UK assets to BlackRock is well underway and continuring under Starmer. It's not a case of whether to trust Trump or not, Starmer has no choice. The UK government is blackmailed or bribed into submission.
Also it can't be just about Trump's stupidity. Norton thinks it's a ploy to further cut taxes the rich at the expense of the poor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv5ZkxQvsz8
This is bizarre Tom. What you seam to be saying is that because Trumps tariffs are arbitrary and not based on reson then Starm should call this out. Why? To prove a point? Starma is dealing with a thin skinned ego and maybe the best way of protecting the UK is flattery. It may be ugly but it may also be the best option.
I'm afraid you are showing your ignorance of the US Constitution, perhaps understandable if you're not American. The reason the tariffs have been calculated in this "bizarre" way is that taxes (and tariffs have been regarded as a form of taxation since the days of the Boston Tea Party) can only be raised by Congress. However, Congress has authorised the President to apply tariffs for the purpose of "equalizing trade". Now do you get it?
And, by the way, 10% vice 20% is a Brexit win, even if an inadvertent one, and has nothing to do with Starmer's legendary negotiating skills. Likewise, the notion of the UK retaliating through tariffs would be an act of egregious self-harm. China might be able to win a trade war with the US but the UK very definitely cannot.
That's interesting thank you. However I thought he issuesd a EO under the Traid act of the 70' s. This I believe, alows the president to impose tariffs to address 'unfair traid practices.' This is broad and I see no reason that the act requires a direct link between tarrifs and trade deficits. In other words he can pretty much do what he whats with the Triad Act as a shield. Am I wrong? Is there a requirement under the act for it to be directly propositional? Thanks sam
Big, big, big mistake (in a Donald Trump voice 🙄) These people are not stupid (apart from Trump himself) They know exactly what they are doing!