Moultrie Products
China Tariffs will be Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge
Community
Contributors to this thread:
slade 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
Atheist 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
Mint 14-Mar-18
shiloh 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Woods Walker 14-Mar-18
Bentstick81 14-Mar-18
Woods Walker 14-Mar-18
Scar Finga 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
Atheist 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Bentstick81 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
Pig Doc 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
NvaGvUp 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
sureshot 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
gflight 14-Mar-18
slade 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
slade 14-Mar-18
bigeasygator 14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 14-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 15-Mar-18
bigeasygator 15-Mar-18
Thumper 15-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 15-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 15-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 15-Mar-18
bigeasygator 15-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 15-Mar-18
bigeasygator 15-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 15-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 15-Mar-18
bigeasygator 15-Mar-18
Trax 15-Mar-18
spike78 15-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 20-Mar-18
Pig Doc 20-Mar-18
Pig Doc 20-Mar-18
bigeasygator 21-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 21-Mar-18
bigeasygator 21-Mar-18
slade 21-Mar-18
Mint 21-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 21-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 21-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 21-Mar-18
slade 21-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 21-Mar-18
MT in MO 21-Mar-18
Grey Ghost 21-Mar-18
bigeasygator 21-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 21-Mar-18
MT in MO 21-Mar-18
bigeasygator 21-Mar-18
bigeasygator 21-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
Trax 22-Mar-18
Your fav poster 22-Mar-18
Trax 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
Windmill 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
Bowbender 22-Mar-18
JTV 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
slade 22-Mar-18
Windmill 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
Windmill 22-Mar-18
Windmill 22-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer 22-Mar-18
bigeasygator 22-Mar-18
TD 23-Mar-18
slade 24-Mar-18
TD 26-Mar-18
Trax 26-Mar-18
slade 26-Mar-18
rdohn 26-Mar-18
Shuteye 26-Mar-18
slade 09-Oct-18
slade 09-Oct-18
Spike Bull 09-Oct-18
bigeasygator 09-Oct-18
HDE 09-Oct-18
Bowfreak 09-Oct-18
Trax 09-Oct-18
bigeasygator 09-Oct-18
bow-hnt 09-Oct-18
Trax 09-Oct-18
From: slade
14-Mar-18

slade's Link
The put my financial portfolio ahead of Keeping America Great are going to have a tizzy fit......

Trump to Unveil Massive ‘Package of Tariffs’ Against China

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18
I might actually shop at Walmart, now.

Matt

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
The Trumpster is hellbent on doing what he can to wreck a good thing.

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
Good work by Trump. We should all be fed up with Chinese theft of US private technologies and cheap knockoff products. I first saw this when I traveled to China on business in 1997. On virtually every street corner vendors were selling knockoff CD's of popular artists. Since then I've seen hundreds of instances in which the Chinese are stealing US technologies including a current situation in which a Chinese company created a knockoff and is trying to sell a technology I personally patented here in the US in direct violation of the patent. This is theft, plain and simple. Then you have Tweedle dee and Tweedle dum cheering for them. Pathetic.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
Another tepid day in the market. DJIA has returned a rip roaring -5% since February when protectionist Trump started to rear his head. Nobody is saying China doesn't play unfairly, and there are certainly issues with protecting American IP as it relates to China. Rolling out a tax and burdening the American consumer with higher prices isn't going to fix that. Less free trade isn't the answer to our trade deficit with China.

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18
Americans will lose big time on this. They will lose jobs and pay more at the cash register for many of the things they buy.

That's not MAGA, that's flat stupid!

From: Atheist
14-Mar-18
Good luck to those working poor shopping at Walmart. Those cheap items will double in price. A trade war w China is stupid. There are better ways and trump won’t realize that. When all you carry is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18
"China Tariffs will be Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge"

Not really. According to most sources the tariffs will be on $30 - $60 billion of Chinese imports. The US imports over $500 billion each year from China. So, the tariffs will be imposed on roughly 10% of the imports, mostly technology and telecommunications products. We only export about $130 billion/year to China.

I see this as a slap on China's wrist for stealing our tech. China would be foolish to retaliate and get into a trade war. They have far more to lose.

Matt

From: Mint
14-Mar-18
"I see this as a slap on China's wrist for stealing our tech. China would be foolish to retaliate and get into a trade war. They have far more to lose. "X2 China has a tremendous bubble that has only gotten worse with their currency manipulation.

From: shiloh
14-Mar-18
So far hardly anyone that has been against Trump has been correct yet. I think I'll let the elected do his job! If he doesn't then he won't get hired back. Now let's hear it from the "what if he screws it up so bad it can't be fixed" crowd;)

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
Looking more and more like Larry Kudlow is going to be Gary Cohn's replacement. I don't even know what to think now. Larry is not a yes-man and is one of the biggest free trade guys out there. No doubt he's going to push back on Trump's protectionism - if not in public, then certainly behind closed doors. I think he's just what we need right now...I hope he's heard and I hope he lasts -- it will be a win for the markets and loss for the hawks.

From: Woods Walker
14-Mar-18
And when it comes from the fingertips of the Briarcliff Baron Of Bullshit it's also a LIE.

From: Bentstick81
14-Mar-18
atheist. Every time you jump to conclusions and post a LIE, you get your a$$ handed to you. Your average of being correct are very slim, but hey, knock yourself out, and keep showing us how stupid you really are. 8^)

From: Woods Walker
14-Mar-18
It's been correct??? When? I mean, when it simply makes a post it's already wrong because the registration is false. Hesheit's not known as the Briarcliff Baron Of Bullshit for nothing! It was EARNED!

From: Scar Finga
14-Mar-18
Every time something happens with Trump people freak out... He is a negotiator, he is going to bring China to the table! Free trade!

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
"Another tepid day in the market. DJIA has returned a rip roaring -5% since February when protectionist Trump started to rear his head."

Keep making shit up BEG. The big drop in the market occurred before Trump said anything about tariffs. You sure are hard on the guy you have "a lot in common with". LMAO.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
Dow down 2.5% since March 1 on the first inkling of tariffs. Agree that shit started turning south for stocks before the tariff news (mostly due to inflation concerns), but the new protectionist direction isn't helping anything. Tariffs are throwing fuel on the inflationary fire.

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
From 2/1 - 2/8 the DOW dropped 2,756 points. Trump made the tariff announcement on 2/26. The market is up over 5,000 points since Trump took office. Why not show a little love for the man that has so much in common with you. Where would the market be if Gary Johnson was POTUS? Guess we will never know because it will never happen.

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18

Grey Ghost's embedded Photo
Grey Ghost's embedded Photo

Grey Ghost's Link
"Dow down 2.5% since March 1 on the first inkling of tariffs.

Not sure where your getting your info, BEG. The DOW was trading around 24,900 at the time Trump made his tariff announcement on March 1st. It's trading at that same level currently.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
No, we won't know. But, my guess is the market would be better off than it would with Trump as a President -- think the good that has come with the Trump administration like taxes (though I give more credit to Congress for that) and deregulation without the garbage protectionist BS that Trump is pushing (this infatuation with trade deficits, tariffs, etc). There's a difference between showing a little love and blindly supporting everything the man does. Tariffs are stupid policy, and unlike the tax reform which we just got, they lay at the feet of our President. If he wants to take credit for the good, he needs to be blamed for the bad. This protectionist push is unnecessarily placing a lot of headwind on an economy that should be rolling along.

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
It is rolling along. Over 5,000 point gain in 14 months. When some "bad" occurs go ahead and blame away. Other than a flat market for 2 weeks nothing "bad" has happened. Get a grip.

From: Atheist
14-Mar-18
I don't know what's more concerning:

The fact that Trump's replacement for Cohn as National Economic Council director, Larry Kudlow, admitted to having a $100,000/month cocaine addiction, or the fact that he claimed the economy was going to boom right before the Great Recession Yes he said that. But he only hires the best people, right?

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18

bigeasygator's Link
Matt, he's been more vocal this year on protectionism, going back all the way to January. Here's a link to comments related to trade with the EU where he hinted at protectionist measures to come from January 28th. This came on the heels of the tariffs that went into effect in late January on solar panels and washing machines.

The steel and aluminum tariffs have been in the news since mid-February, when the market was trading closer to 25,200 (though the President spoke publicly for the first time on March 1st) and the market has moved off the daily lows when I quoted the -2.5% number. No, it's not a crash -- but it's an unnecessary headwind IMO.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/16/news/economy/steel-aluminum-tariffs-trump/index.html

From: Bentstick81
14-Mar-18
Boy atheist. Just think, his predictions average are just like yours. 8^)

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
"The steel and aluminum tariffs have been in the news since mid-February,"

Link? First I saw it was 2/26.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18

bigeasygator's Link
It was in my last post. Here you go.

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
Thanks. And the market was up 500 points from that piece (2/16) to 2/26. It's hard for me to buy into the theory that this tariff announcement has done anything significant to the market. If you want to believe it did and blame Trump you should also be willing to give him some credit for the 5,000 point run-up since his inauguration.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
There's going to be up periods and down periods, but with all the other positive news out there for the market to perform like it has over the last month it's pretty clear that fears of trade wars are weighing things down. You want to keep fighting me on this, fine, but you're not going to change my mind that tariffs and taxes are good things for business and trade.

And I give Trump about as much credit for the 20% run-up since his inauguration as I do Obama for his 20% run-up in the same period. That is to say, not much. I'm for his deregulation measures, but I think they've largely been targeted towards losing industries. I'll give him some credit on taxes, but more so to Congress. All of this is to say that the economy and the market are far, FAR bigger than any one man or one administration.

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18
BEG,

You should know by now that, around here, when the economy does well under a republican POTUS, it's all because of the president. When the economy does well under a democrat POTUS, it's all in spite of the president.

Matt

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
I've never said that GG and don't believe it. Your sidekick is doing just the opposite. Blaming Trump for some imaginary market crash and giving him no credit for a 5,000 point run-up. I'm bright enough to know that there are hundreds of factors driving the market not things as silly as your ridiculous contention a few days ago that the Cohn departure tubed the market. It's too early to tell what the tariffs will do to the market.

Comparing the market run-up under Obama to that under Trump is just plain stupid. Obama came in at the bottom of the recession. The market would have gone up if a trained monkey was POTUS.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
Maybe one day I’ll learn, Matt!

From: Pig Doc
14-Mar-18
I doubt it. You've been wrong on virtually everything you have posted on this thread relative to tariff announcements and market reactions. On the CA thread you stated CA is not broke and they are $425 billion in debt, and you voted for Gary Johnson, one of the worst Governors in history. I would say learning is not your strong suit.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18

bigeasygator's embedded Photo
bigeasygator's embedded Photo

bigeasygator's Link
You just hear what you want to hear, don’t you Pig Doc. I said the WSJ ran an article that has California forecasting a $6.1 bln budget surplus for the next fiscal year. Having debt is not being broke. I can give you a finance lesson if you want because apparently you need one. And sure, the markets just love tariffs. Go ahead and google “DJIA” and see what today’s headlines read. Praise for tariffs, I’m sure.

And here’s the market over the last 10 years going back to essentially Obama’s inauguration. Can you point to the spot on the graph when the recovery ended? Looks to me like a market that’s been continuing an upward climb following a major recorrection.

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18
Reality Check!

Prices of steel and aluminum have risen significantly since Trump was elected.

Why?

Because of expectations he would follow the tariff road.

So if you're wondering why the price of things you buy that contain steel and aluminum has risen over the past year (thereby leaving you with less money to spend on other things and thereby causing people who produce and sell those other things to lose their jobs), Thank Trump!

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18

Grey Ghost's Link
Why investors decided to start caring about politics again

"The politics that matter for the market are the ones that impact the fundamentals," said Stephen Auth, chief investment officer of equities for Federated Investors. "Which politics have moved the market? The tax deal, and now the tariffs. The other stuff tends to be noise."

More at link....

But I'm sure Piggy knows better than a chief investment officer of a company that manages $400 billion in assets.

Matt

14-Mar-18
American consumers are spoiled. American labor is spoiled. Americans are spoiled. If you want a strong manufacturing base, you gotta give up on some cheap and readily available goods for, a higher manufacturing base. It will be a trade off but, it will correct over time. China's economy is becoming more and more like a free trade market. It's time they invested in our economy. They are becoming huge consumers of worldwide goods. It only makes sense to put our products in the running to such a large economy. It only makes sense to move some of their American aimed production to this country.

The total doom and gloom outlook being talked of here is not entirely correct. Nor does it consider the long term effects. Yes, some goods will become higher. But, better paying, sustainable American jobs will become more prevalent. It all depends on what one believes is bad and one believes is good. I drive cars until they fall apart. I buy American made clothes because they last longer. I'd prefer to buy an american made tool, even if they cost more, because they are a life investment. I'd prefer to have equal trade tariffs and pay a little more for american produced goods. Will that hurt investments initially? Yes it will. Will that hurt the average American? Not in the long run.

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18
WV Mountaineer,

Plagerisim?

Or did you write that yourself?

14-Mar-18
What's on your mind Kyle?

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18

NvaGvUp's Link
Don't want to answer the question, do you?

Because you cited a source verbatim without crediting the source, it's plagerism.

14-Mar-18
You are frail old man throwing false accusations around from the comfort and safety of his house. I'll take a lot. I won't take that quietly from a money adviser that acts as if he knows everything.

I never looked at any source to write that. I've been saying that since July 2016. You've been too high in your butt, miffed because your investment lifestyle stands to take a hit from economic practices that benefit a compromised America. Not the currently invested. It doesn't take a genius or cited article to understand what I wrote. Nor a cited article to understand why you are against it. Only two different views on whats Best for America.

I get it, you've made money in your lifetime. I understand your love for it. But, I UNDERSTAND economics. I didn't verbatim quote anyone but myself. I've don't even know what the link you quoted is. I didn't click on it. I don't need to in order to disagree on your gloom and doom predictions. They are self motivated and, have been since Donald Trump started campaigning on this. Get over it frat boy, life is gonna change. People are gonna have to do something beside live off of paper generated wealth if this country is to retain a middle class.

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18
"I never looked at any source to write that"

BS!

It's essentially word for word!

From: NvaGvUp
14-Mar-18
Here's what you wrote:

"American consumers are spoiled. American labor is spoiled. Americans are spoiled. If you want a strong manufacturing base, you gotta give up on some cheap and readily available goods for, a higher manufacturing base. It will be a trade off but, it will correct over time. China's economy is becoming more and more like a free trade market. It's time they invested in our economy. They are becoming huge consumers of worldwide goods. It only makes sense to put our products in the running to such a large economy. It only makes sense to move some of their American aimed production to this country.

The total doom and gloom outlook being talked of here is not entirely correct. Nor does it consider the long term effects. Yes, some goods will become higher. But, better paying, sustainable American jobs will become more prevalent. It all depends on what one believes is bad and one believes is good. I drive cars until they fall apart. I buy American made clothes because they last longer. I'd prefer to buy an american made tool, even if they cost more, because they are a life investment. I'd prefer to have equal trade tariffs and pay a little more for american produced goods. Will that hurt investments initially? Yes it will. Will that hurt the average American? Not in the long run.

Then, here's what the person on the link I posted wrote:

"American consumers are spoiled. American labor is spoiled. Americans are spoiled. If you want a strong manufacturing base, you gotta give up on some cheap and readily available goods for, a higher manufacturing base. It will be a trade off but, it will correct over time. China's economy is becoming more and more like a free trade market. It's time they invested in our economy. They are becoming huge consumers of worldwide goods. It only makes sense to put our products in the running to such a large economy. It only makes sense to move some of their American aimed production to this country.

The total doom and gloom outlook being talked of here is not entirely correct. Nor does it consider the long term effects. Yes, some goods will become higher. But, better paying, sustainable American jobs will become more prevalent. It all depends on what one believes is bad and one believes is good. I drive cars until they fall apart. I buy American made clothes because they last longer. I'd prefer to buy an american made tool, even if they cost more, because they are a life investment. I'd prefer to have equal trade tariffs and pay a little more for american produced goods. Will that hurt investments initially? Yes it will. Will that hurt the average American? Not in the long run. "

So pleeze dont tell us "I never looked at any source to write that" , because its a damned lie!

14-Mar-18
Nope. All it takes to factually disagree with the invested groupies like you, BEG, and GG on these subjects, is a strong understanding of economics and, a love for country. Instead of a love for one's own dollar.

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18
Kyle,

I've scrolled thru the link you posted twice, and still don't see the words you claim WV plagiarized. What am I missing?

Matt

14-Mar-18
Well, You definitely got me to click on the link with that accusations. Are you on drugs man? Can you not operate a computer? That's what I WROTE here on Bowsite!!!!!! The cited article does not say that. No where. I just read it and the responses. What is wrong with you?

From: sureshot
14-Mar-18
Kyle has obviously been drinking again.

14-Mar-18
Hey Kyle, you've been haunting this thread with your ego since I made my first post. Where's your response to being too ignorant to use a computer? I know your ego is huge. How's it feel to stick both feet, knee deep in your big mouth? Tell us Kyle. Where is your skeptical, egotistical big mouth now? Where are you? Intent on calling me a liar. Acting as if I'm just a dumb hillbilly. All the while being a slave to his dollar. Ain't life grand. Where did you go mouth piece?

Matt, I will apologize to you. I admit that I took a shot at you there. It wasn't meant with malice. It was in poor taste on my part. I don't mind spirited debate but, I deplore cheap shots from a computer. And, that is what that was in jest. I apologize and hope you accept it as much.

From: Grey Ghost
14-Mar-18
WV,

While Kyle sorts out his mistake, I'll respond to your comments.

I don't think Americans are spoiled. I think they are lazy. We figured out that we can do all the R&D legwork, then have another country with cheaper labor rates build our stuff. The problem is those other countries steal our ideas, then capitalize on it to the rest of the world.

If I had to model a county's system, it would be Germany. They develop the ideas, protect them, and then figure out a way to manufacture them viably.

Matt

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
“All it takes to factually disagree with the invested groupies like you, BEG, and GG on these subjects, is a strong understanding of economics and, a love for country.”

Lol...sure. Tariffs are great for the economy. Just look at the market today. Go look at Smoot Hawley and lecture me on economics. You seem very unfamiliar with the concept of taxes and dead weight loss. Tell me how lost jobs and higher prices for consumers equate to a love of country.

The government shouldn’t be picking which industries are winners, the free market should.

14-Mar-18
I understand Matt. Can't say I totally agree. Just that I understand.

14-Mar-18
I agree with that BEG. Now, will you explain to all of us how current trade policy represent free market's?

From: gflight
14-Mar-18
With walmarts gun ban I am all for cutting their business but not by more government involvement in our "free" market....

From: slade
14-Mar-18
Go easy on the feeble one WVM, he talks out his ass then disappears.............

We have for far to long relied on foreign steel. What happens if shite really hit the fan, do anyone really think they are going to keep supplying our military needs....

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
Again, the answer to “unfair” trade practices is not less free trade. Y’all are basically saying the answer to government intervention is more government intervention. Pretty damn funny for folks that like to throw the term “liberal” out as an insult.

From: slade
14-Mar-18
Keep lying and spinning away bge, your spots never change, only your positions.

From: bigeasygator
14-Mar-18
What other industries do you want to see the government pick as a winner, slade?

14-Mar-18
20 years after the Smoot Hawley act, The USA was the largest producer of consumer goods in the world. We produced over 80% of our consumed goods, versus closer to 50% now. Almost a 1/3 of our workforce was middle class employed in manufacturing jobs versus times where the government is now the 2nd largest employer in the country. Many of those jobs are regulation based BTW. I wander how much influence that law had on American Manufacturing back then? I wander how much influence a level trade environment would affect a current America? Since we have great infrastructure in comparison, a stable government, a very efficient and educated work force, etc... I wander where investment will occur then? Probably the same place it did back then.

In 2015, America's middle class population, for the first time in history, wasn't the largest population bracket in the country. Tell us again how the "free markets" you prefer, is better for America's future then a level playing field. Should we give up our Middle class future's? Or, should we level the field and let the chips fall where they may? I'm all about the second option. Since you aren't, why don't you give us another option that is fair to future Americans.

From: Grey Ghost
15-Mar-18

Grey Ghost's Link
"In 2015, America's middle class population, for the first time in history, wasn't the largest population bracket in the country.

Wrong. In 2015 the middle class no longer represented over 50% of our population. It's still the largest population bracket by far at 49.9%. In the last 25 years the upper class has grown from 14% to 21.1%. And the lower class has grown from 25.2% to 29%.

I never thought mediocrity should be a goal.

Matt

From: bigeasygator
15-Mar-18

bigeasygator's Link
Lol...I gotta give it to you WVM. That might be the cherrypick to end all cherrypicked right there. Crediting Smoot Hawley, dreamed up ahead of the Great Crash, with the boom in the economy post-WWII...nice try. The Cato Institute has a great piece on Smoot Hawley’s role in the Great Depression (see link).

I’ll tell you why a pre-tariff market is better than a post-tariff market. Because the second you try to “level the playing field” with respect to business by deciding who you want to win, you are stepping further away from a free market, not closer to it, and bringing the inefficiencies that come with it - lost output, higher prices, lost jobs, and lost wages. If you want to make everyone middle class, then subsidize their lives - that’s far more efficient than doing it through tariffs. Trying to force industries to succeed by burdening the American consumer is not the way to a better life for any Anerican (except those working in the industries that the government decides they want to be winners).

From: Thumper
15-Mar-18
Do not over look Mexico and Canada being exempt from the new tariffs. Some steel costs will go up, others will remain the same.

From: Grey Ghost
15-Mar-18

Grey Ghost's Link
We only get 25% of our steel from Mexico and Canada.

Matt

15-Mar-18
You are correct Matt. I kept reading what I typed thinking that doesn't sound right. Because it wasn't right. You expressed what I was trying to say but, ineffective at doing so. Thanks for the correction.

BEG, in all reality, I think we have both had the schooling to understand what economies do and, how they respond to lows and highs. Your insinuation of what Smoot Hawley did for the depression, is no more credible then the boom of production that followed the great depression I attributed to in house manufacturing. There were far more variables to be considered then what we are exampling. The one thing that we both agree on is that free markets find a way to work. Unfortunately, we all know that is not what we have. So, lets fix it is what I want. At least make them fair. I'm not a huge middle class guy. I want people to have the ability to be what they work to be. That's all. And, the policies that have led to the demise and decline of the american middle class are not fair and no where near free market.

Hey Kyle, see how I handled that with Matt. You admit you made a mistake, albeit being a wise guy or in a hurry and not communicating well, say so and move on. I know its hard when you make a total Butthead out of yourself repeatedly. But, it is what any man that isn't spineless does. Get a cup of coffee when you roll your butt out of bed, drink the wine dizzy off and, apologize like a man for acting like a fool.

From: Grey Ghost
15-Mar-18
And, the policies that have led to the demise and decline of the american middle class are not fair and no where near free market.

What demise, WV? In the last 25 years the middle class has shrunk by 11%. 7% went to the upper class, and 4% went to the lower class. I wouldn't call that a demise, just a shifting allocation. I'm sure the 7% are pretty happy with our economic policies.

Besides, where is it written in stone that a country should be predominately middle class? What if the US was split evenly between the 3 classes, 33.3% in each group. Would our country be stronger or weaker?

Lastly, what specific economic policies are you talking about that aren't "fair" to the middle class?

Matt

From: bigeasygator
15-Mar-18
"Lastly, what specific economic policies are you talking about that aren't "fair" to the middle class?"

I'd like to hear this answer, too. That's why I tend to put "unfair" in quotes. Most of the economic policies in China benefit our low and middle class moreso than they hurt them.

WVM, it sounds like we want the same thing. I will pivot a bit and say that if this is a negotiating tactic and we end up with freer trade in the end (ie, the rollback of tariffs and restrictions), I will be happy and will give credit where credit is due. That said, I'm pessimistic that will happen and I think it's more likely we end up in some degree of a trade war versus having China come to the table with a bunch of concessions.

15-Mar-18
Matt, I’m also sure the 7% that moved up is happy about. Good for them. What I’m concerned adout id the 4% that went back. We are at the start of this global economy idea actually being up and running. What chances are the next generation going to have if we don’t bring opportunity back for the much higher population?

I disagree about helping the lower and middle class as effects of current policy. I guess I have a different definition of help and needs then you do. Cheap goods don’t define help and needs. Opportunity does.

From: bigeasygator
15-Mar-18
If tariffs are here to stay, there's a damn good chance we end up with net job losses. How does net job losses help opportunity?

From: Grey Ghost
15-Mar-18
WV,

I'd say a system in which a larger percentage of folks are moving from middle to upper class, instead of the other direction, is working pretty well.

Again, I ask, what if it was a even three way split between classes? Would America be even stronger? I say yes.

And I'm still curious on what economic policies are "unfair" to the middle class?

Matt

15-Mar-18
Matt, I think you are right if globalization policy hadn’t instituted those changes. It’s no secret why the 7% went up instead of staying the same or falling out of the middle class. It’s no secret that it isn’t sustainable either. What do we do then if we don’t get our piece of the pie?

BEG, as in all things Trump, there is no one saying tariffs need to be long termed. Only used as a tool to get the field leveled.

From: bigeasygator
15-Mar-18
What, in your mind, does getting things leveled look like? There are, IMO, two very different outcomes whereby you could argue the playing field is "leveled" but have very different economic outcomes.

1) China places restrictions on trade, and we respond with similar restrictions so that we are equal in the hurdles we face -- any new restrictions will be met tit for tat. Net we end up with more restrictions and obstacles to free trade, but the field is now "level" -- ie, they face a similar amount of hurdles to doing business in our country as we face in doing business in theres.

2) China responds to our tariffs by rolling back restrictions to trade that they've imposed on our country in a hope that we will respond in kind. On net we end up with fewer overall restrictions, freer trade, and a more level playing field.

In both scenarios you can argue that the playing field is now level -- but in both the playing field is very different. Personally, I think scenario 1 is more likely than scenario 2. Why? Precedent with China and because Trump hates losing, or made to appear as if he's losing. I don't see him giving up on a plan if it's not working as that is an admission of defeat. How long do we (or more specifically, Trump) tolerate scenario 1 before we give up on scenario 2?

From: Trax
15-Mar-18
Of course, there are scenarios 3 and 4. Maybe more beyond that. All is being negotiated now, with most everything on the economic table. China's currency manipulation is another avenue we could tangibly pursue. China does not want an economic war with us, nor we with them. But wars happen, wars of all kind. I expect these things will be negotiated and worked out. The economic muscle Trump and Co. have shown so far can grow, and China knows that. Or, we can both be happy happy. Finally we have some inroads on solving this puzzle. I agree and have from the start that stand alone real tariffs can not work. They can be used though. We shall see.

From: spike78
15-Mar-18
You know what will raise prices for sure? $15 hr minimum wage!

20-Mar-18
Well, I saw earlier where Kyle the coward had rejoined the community forum. He slithered out from under his rock where he hid in shame due to his claim of plagiarism. I PM'ed him about this incident. Asking him if he was going to apologize like a decent human or, continue to act as if he had done no wrong. His reply was that he had done no wrong. That the website HE linked had changed in the mere minutes from his initial post claiming plagiarism and, being told he was an idiot for doing so. So, there you have it. Now we all know what kind of person Kyle is. He is a loud mouth, big ego'ed fool that is too proud to admit his own short comings and mistakes. What a small, insignificant, prideful excuse for a human.

From: Pig Doc
20-Mar-18
"I can give you a finance lesson if you want because apparently you need one."

LOL! That would be akin to Trump taking lessons on being POTUS from your boy Gary Johnson.

From: Pig Doc
20-Mar-18
"But I'm sure Piggy knows better than a chief investment officer of a company that manages $400 billion in assets."

From the dope that invested in cellulosic ethanol. How's that working for you? Bwahhhha.

From: bigeasygator
21-Mar-18
“On the CA thread you stated CA is not broke and they are $425 billion in debt,”

Says the guy that doesn’t understand the difference between having debt and being broke. So Pig Doc, everyone with, say, a mortgage is broke? Either you don’t understand the distinction or you’ve decided that personal insults would be a better tactic. In other words, you’re either an idiot or an a$$hole. I’ll let you decide. What a joke.

From: Grey Ghost
21-Mar-18
"From the dope that invested in cellulosic ethanol. How's that working for you?

It's working out fine, Piggy, thanks for asking.

Meanwhile, we just had another week of flat markets since Trump started talking tariffs. I guess the chief investment officer I quoted was correct.

Matt

From: bigeasygator
21-Mar-18
Dow threatening to have its first losing quarter since 2015.

From: slade
21-Mar-18
Yes, it has everything to do with the tariffs and nothing to do with interest rates going up or the facebook crimes.

From: Mint
21-Mar-18
Good thread, enjoyed reading it. I think Trump is doing the right thing with these tariffs. I'm hoping this is to level the playing field and not outright protectionism because that would be a terrible thing for America.

21-Mar-18
I had to edit. Opened too many cans with my original post.

That’s all he is doing Mint. Leveling the field. I and many others, including those that deplore him, saw where he said as much last week. We also have all heard him talk about getting better terms in our trade deals. To anyone with a brain cell that is willing to use it, Trump’s intent is clear for these reasons. However, some would rather bash things not change or, are willing to take every opportunity it’s to express their disdain for the man himself. With no regards to what his real motives are.

China and other developing countries need our economy just as much as we Americans enjoy an easy life. There will be negotiations. And, We will get better trade deals.

From: Grey Ghost
21-Mar-18
"Yes, it has everything to do with the tariffs and nothing to do with interest rates going up or the facebook crimes.

The Fed hasn't raised interest rates since last December, and they are still extremely low relative to historic averages. Furthermore, the expectations of at least 3 rate hikes in 2018 has been priced into the markets for a long time, IMO.

I'm not sure what Facebook crimes has to do with it. Care to explain?

Matt

21-Mar-18
It wasn’t that long ago when we had some here making claims Trumps policies was not the reason for market explosion. Now we’ve got some saying the opposite. I guess I’m going to have to look up those older threads and post quotes of who is playing devils advocate.

From: slade
21-Mar-18
Care to explain?

Do your own homework or stay clueless.

From: Grey Ghost
21-Mar-18
"Do your own homework or stay clueless."

You made the claim "facebook crimes" are moving the markets. Back it up.

Matt

From: MT in MO
21-Mar-18
Turn on the TV or do a search on FB news stories over the last 2 days. That will probably clue you in...

From: Grey Ghost
21-Mar-18
I'm aware of the Facebook data crisis, and its plunging stock. But I don't see any evidence that is moving the entire market down. In fact, FB stock is making a nice comeback today.

Matt

From: bigeasygator
21-Mar-18
Facebook isn't even a component of the Dow. Facebook crimes are moving Facebook, not necessarily the broader market is what Matt's point was.

The concerns regarding inflation and the impact they have on interest rates certainly have weighed on the markets (not the Fed decisions which have been largely priced in). Expectations that we're entering a protectionist era have impacted the market as well IMO. No one thing or man deserves the entire credit for market moves in either direction - that's not to say things don't matter. GG's earlier post hit the nail on the head. The below quote is spot on.

"The politics that matter for the market are the ones that impact the fundamentals," said Stephen Auth, chief investment officer of equities for Federated Investors. "Which politics have moved the market? The tax deal, and now the tariffs. The other stuff tends to be noise."

I don't give Trump a majority of the credit for tax cuts as I think that would have happened regardless of which Republican was in office and it's more Congress' doing than his, but he deserves some credit. Tariffs, however, fall squarely on his shoulders.

21-Mar-18
Why wouldn’t you give Trump credit for the tax cuts? He’s been singing this all along. He’s tried even more but was stalemated by his Republican Party. You instead give credit to a congress and senate that has done nothing but continue to preach increased spending on everything but the agenda of the president. They are placing their special interest in front while trying to appease the base of people who voted for Trump. What about that is confusing to you? Are you so blinded by your personal feelings you missed this?

Nobody is suggesting that the “threat” of tariffs is not affecting futures and the stock market. But, what’s being improperly used is the intent Trump himself has spoke of. He’s going to wheel and deal by using everything in his tool box. Nobody believes he intends to cut off American imports or exports. Only make it more profitable for corporate business to invest here instead. No one has took their money and run so to speak. And no one will when it’s over. Quit being so influenced by your politics. Be patient and look at it for what it is. A better deal for the future of America.

From: MT in MO
21-Mar-18

MT in MO's Link
The DOW is not the only index for the 'market'...

Took about 2 minutes to find and post here...

But don't mind me...Not here to make a point or argue anything...

From: bigeasygator
21-Mar-18

bigeasygator's Link
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump will announce tariffs on Chinese imports on Thursday, a White House official said, in a move aimed at curbing theft of U.S. technology that is likely to trigger retaliation from Beijing and stoke fears of a global trade war.

From: bigeasygator
21-Mar-18

bigeasygator's Link
WSJ - China is preparing to hit back at trade offensives from Washington with tariffs aimed at President Donald Trump’s support base, including levies targeting U.S. agricultural exports from Farm Belt states, according to people familiar with the matter.

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
And the Dow has responded to the impending trade war by dropping nearly 2% so far today.

From: Trax
22-Mar-18
Tariffs in stand alone fashion can not succeed, they can not be a positive for this country. If that is what is going to be I am against it. At the same time, the Chi Comms have been essentially playing under the terms of espionage for far too long. Not only do they not play fairly, they are filthy dirty and they have been allowed to get away with it at tremendous cost to this nation. This has to stop. I am still hopeful this will bring about trade negotiations that will create a more fair balance. Make no mistake, like the Rushkies and Chinese are our military, political, and economic enemy. The difference is their economy is a giant. I believe this motion is in its early stages.

22-Mar-18
Trumps trade war is of course going to hurt the American consumer with higher cost fo all consumer goods. People only think the price of cars will go up.

They forget that everything moves by trucks, the more a truck or container cost the more you will pay to have products in transport. Stocks have lost somewhere around 300billion today alone. He doesn’t understand how this will also effect the dollar too.

From: Trax
22-Mar-18
What President Trump has done here is demand accountability, the Chinese have nothing to gain with a trade war any more so than we do. Both sides want to trade, but the rules of the game have been slanted heavily and unfairly to the advantage of the Chinese. As I said, stand alone tariffs can not work. Not in the long run. But let them work for now, let's see what it brings in terms of negotiation. The last thing the Chinese want to do is run out their best customer. President Trump is trying on multiple fronts to improve economic prosperity and free and fair trade. we all should applaud that. Exactly the opposite of what the America hating race pimp OBOZO and his band of merry thieves were trying to do. That goes for H, W, and Slick Willy Clinton as well to a lesser degree.

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
"let's see what it brings in terms of negotiation"

The market has weighed in on what it thinks the tariffs will bring with regards to negotiations and "leveling the playing field." Call me a pessimist, but I agree. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

From: Windmill
22-Mar-18
Instead of paying higher prices for foreign made products, people should try and buy all products MADE IN U.S.A. Also shop at local smaller mom and pop stores if able to. When we buy from Walmart, targets, and other big box stores that hurts America as a whole. Our money we make and spend should stay here not go out all over the world to other countries. We need to take care of ourselves. We have veterans of war homeless living under bridges, who served their country and fought for our freedom, instead of helping everyone of them we give money to 3rd world countries no ?’s asked. Come on people it’s time we ALL wake up!!! Both sides f the political aisles.

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
Congrats slade!! I'd say you were pretty spot on with the title of this thread! I'd call a 2.5% drop in the S&P, a 2.3% drop in the Nasdaq, and a nearly 3% drop in the Dow as HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE.

From: Bowbender
22-Mar-18
"Instead of paying higher prices for foreign made products, people should try and buy all products MADE IN U.S.A. "

Like what?

From: JTV
22-Mar-18

JTV's Link
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/22/trumps-tariffs-on-china-will-benefit-america-and-are-long-overdue.html

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
JTV, I suggest you avoid the opinions of national security experts and instead listen to economists when it comes to what tariffs will do to jobs and the economy.

From: slade
22-Mar-18
JTV,

Those who do nothing but suck off the tit of the gorbal one world cabal only care about their portfolio, screw the Americans who will be better off with the tariffs, why let them eat cake.

From: Windmill
22-Mar-18
That’s self explanatory. Anything one feels they need. We as Americans need to follow the motto set years ago, “Live Here, Buy Here”. Everyday items, cars, houses, whatever your hobby’s are. Manufacturing company’s should follow the practice of- buy American, sell American not foreign products.. We all contributed to this problem, and we all will solve this problem.

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
slade, just to be clear, by the “people better off with the tariffs” you mean the tiny fraction of people that work in industries protected by tariffs, and as far as “the people who are screwed” that would be “every single American consumer.” As long as you’re talking about that, then sure, I agree with your sentiment.

Windmill, I suggest you google the following “benefits of a free market” and “how much more would it cost to buy only American.”

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
And further more, I don’t understand the “bad policy as a negotiating tactic” crowd. I’ve never heard someone propose implementing gun control to prove to the anti-gun crowd that it doesn’t lower crime. This is the purest example of cutting of your nose to spite your face. Even if it somehow ultimately levels the playing field (I doubt it will), it’s going to come with a whole lot of pain in the process.

From: Windmill
22-Mar-18
I don’t google, and it’s like anything, eventually the currency’s of other country’s,as ours,will fluctuate at different rates, and as they do the labor costs will follow a trend. Thus making it a level playing field. Take note that whenever President Trump speaks of business moves, everyone cringes and jumps to irrational conclusions. We build the wall it isn’t gonna stop nothing. Just fly in or take a boat or continue to go under.

From: Windmill
22-Mar-18
I don’t google, and it’s like anything, eventually the currency’s of other country’s,as ours,will fluctuate at different rates, and as they do the labor costs will follow a trend. Thus making it a level playing field. Take note that whenever President Trump speaks of business moves, everyone cringes and jumps to irrational conclusions. We build the wall it isn’t gonna stop nothing. Just fly in or take a boat or continue to go under. He is a business man and has the most power in the world right now and seems to be trying to get the United States back to the top and is working all avenues possible to get the edge and advantages of our great nation back to what it once was many moons ago.

22-Mar-18
BEG, you don't understand anything that has a hint of Make America Great Again. You aren't being proven as right by posting the results of the Markets and the DOW. It isn't new news. People are simply showing caution until this gets worked out.

I'll make you deal. If 1 year from now we haven't recovered from this in the markets and the DOW, I will openly start a thread and link this thread in it. So everyone can "admire" your genius. I'll tell how you "told us so". However, if we have recovered, you must start a thread telling everyone your predictions were wrong. Where I will link this thread and we can all look back on it as well. Let's do this. What do you say?

God Bless men

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18

bigeasygator's embedded Photo
bigeasygator's embedded Photo
What happens if the market closes higher than the current value? I only see one payout on this bet.

As much as I’d like to take a bet where there’s apparently no downside to losing, I’ve never claimed that the markets will be down in a year due to tariffs. What I’ve claimed is that tariffs will do more harm than they will good as it relates to jobs and the economy; that they will generate deadweight loss. This is not up for debate. This is quite literally microeconomics 101. Tariffs make the producers better off and they make the government better off - but consumers are always worse off. And they’re always worse off by more than the government and the producers are better off (triangles d and f). The economy loses.

That doesn’t mean the market will stay down or that it will be down a year from now.

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18

22-Mar-18
Well, if you refuse to tell me what your hunch is, that can only mean two things. You are either doing this just to play devils advocate or, you hate Trump so bad you are looking at everything negatively. I've been pondering this for 6 months or so. I'm convinced of it now. God Bless men

From: bigeasygator
22-Mar-18
What my hunch with the market is or what my hunch as to the effect of tariffs?

1) nobody knows where the market is going to be. My hunch is that the market will be higher at year end because, despite the cold water that Trump is throwing on things with the tariffs, the fundamentals are strong and I expect a continuation of the strong earnings we’ve been seeing for the last few years.

2) with tariffs, I don’t have a hunch. It’s a fact that they will create economic loss. Please refer to my previous post. You can’t escape the impact on consumer surplus that tariffs will bring and those losses will always more than offset gains by producers and the government. The net result will be higher prices, less consumption, a loss of jobs, and lost wages. Again, this is not a hunch and I’m not playing devil’s advocate. This is economic fact. I’m guessing it’s been awhile since some of you have played around with supply and demand curves?

From: TD
23-Mar-18
If it goes to a "trade war" it is called a war for a reason. There will be casualties, sacrifice. But it's not like the other side always gets the best of it and we always lose.... far from it. And just as most war they are not a permanent action.

As an economic model trade wars are destructive. Economic is not the only measure. As a geopolitical tool..... there are reasons they are even considered. I have customers I will not do business with or others I refuse to make any concessions to. It actually may effect my business gross income. But in the long term I believe it is best for the business to not have to deal with them. Or if I do it is on MY terms,not theirs.

This move was not taken out of boredom and for the sport of it. It was taken to get China to the table and take some action. Maybe on more levels than we will ever know.....

From: slade
24-Mar-18
Watch and learn Bed-Wetters...

Michael Pillsbury: Trump Seeks to Thwart China’s Hundred-Year Plan for Economic and Military Dominance

China expert Michael Pillsbury of the Hudson Institute, author of The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower, joined SiriusXM host Rebecca Mansour on Thursday’s Breitbart News Tonight to defend President Donald Trump’s trade battle with China.

Pillsbury noted that Trump praised Chinese President Xi and thanked China for its assistance with the North Korean nuclear missile crisis even as tariffs were announced, framing the situation as a “major negotiation” between friendly states with competing interests rather than an all-out “trade war.”

“He’s offering them some solutions that he hopes they’ll move toward,” Pillsbury said. “One of them is, they simply purchase $100 billion worth of U.S. exports. Wilbur Ross, the secretary of commerce, went on television tonight and even hinted what that might be. It might be natural gas and oil – various kinds of products we sell them already, but they could buy a great deal more.”

Pillsbury found it necessary for Trump to take aggressive action to move negotiations forward because China simply has not taken American concerns seriously until now. Adding to the pressure on China is the release of a study that details “what China really has been trying to do to the United States.”

“It was thrilling to me because it picks up many of the themes I had in my book three years ago, The Hundred-Year Marathon. But it adds what’s been happening in the last three years,” Pillsbury said. “I had not realized myself that it’s actually gotten worse. The Chinese treatment of the United States has gotten more unfair, if I can put it that way, than was the case three years ago when I wrote my book trying to sound the alarm.”

Pillsbury described the response to the tariff memorandum and release of the supporting report as a “massive media attack on President Trump, and the stock market dropping on the theory that the Chinese are going to react very harshly.”

“They’re going to put enormous tariffs on American imports to China, they’re going to stop buying soybeans and sorghum and live hogs — three of our biggest products in the farm states — and so the farmers are going to be angry at President Trump, and this is all going to be terrible for world trade, because everybody sort of knows that as tariffs go up it’s a tax on all the countries involved so the world growth rate will drop. This is what the head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, said a couple of days ago,” he recalled.

“My own view is quite different from the critics of President Trump,” Pillsbury countered. “I think he’s on the right track and this is really a historic decision that takes the past presidents, like George W. Bush and Obama – they whined and they complained and they made speeches about Chinese unfair trade practices, but they really wouldn’t do anything about it.”

Pillsbury found China’s reaction to Trump’s announcement “remarkable,” as the Chinese ambassador in Washington, DC belligerently declared his country would “fight back” with furious intensity – a very different line than the top leadership in Beijing has taken.

“They knew this was coming,” he concluded. “The prime minister gave a press conference saying that China wants to open up further, wants to welcome more foreign investment, is totally for free trade, would never steal anybody’s intellectual property. He went through in this press conference almost point-for-point what President Trump was going to say today, and said China would not dream of doing these things.”

Pillsbury cautioned that many Americans retain an “out of date” image of China as poor, technologically backwards, and reluctant to provoke economic warfare with wealthier nations while so many of its people struggle with poverty.

“I wrote my book against that idea,” he said. “One of President Trump’s key advisers, who was obviously present today at the meeting with the president and has gone on television since, is a gentleman – a professor, actually, University of California Irvine in the past – named Peter Navarro. Very courageous fellow, he wrote three books blowing the whistle on Chinese unfair trade practices.”

“One of his books is called Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism Means for the World. What this caused is the opening of a debate among China experts in America: are the Chinese really as friendly and poor? Often people say they will collapse soon. They sort of present a picture of China as about to collapse. While all this debate has been going on, the Chinese have doubled their economy again. They’re quite close to passing us. This is really a shock to most people. How can a poor, backward country surpass the size of the American economy? It’s just astonishing,” he said.

Pillsbury pointed to the new United States lawsuit against China in the World Trade Organization over the behavior outlined in yesterday’s report as another serious measure against Chinese trade practices, and further evidence that President Trump appreciates the scope of the problem.

“We’ve sued China before. China is the country we’ve sued the most in the World Trade Organization, but never this scale of criticism,” he noted.

Pillsbury added that Thursday’s actions actually represent the third and by far the largest round of tariffs against China under President Trump, and yet the president made it clear that even more measures could be forthcoming.

The products targeted by the new tariffs and the rationale for including them will send a strong message to China. “It’s going to be examples, as this report explained today, the examples are based on a kind of reciprocity that if China has stolen intellectual property, stolen trade secrets and then made money off of it, that is the kind of product that will have the tariff placed on it. It’s kind of like a stiletto, if you will, not a sledgehammer,” he explained.

Pillsbury predicted that the Chinese will now understand Trump means business, and will make concessions to hold off further sanctions.

“I happen to think they need us more than we need them,” he said. “I don’t measure just trade. I measure all the things we’ve essentially — I hate to use this phrase — given away to China over the last 30 or more years. They still need our investment, our technology, our goodwill, our buying their products, the scientific programs we share with them – there’s an extremely long list of the benefits China gets from the United States, counting everything.”

“We get very little benefit from them along those lines,” he continued. “We don’t get a wide, comprehensive set of benefits from China. We get some benefits. That’s where this debate is really happening.”

“My own forecast is there’s not going to be a big trade war. The Chinese are quite afraid of being demonized in the United States and around Asia. Despite the ambassador here in Washington making this unfortunate remark, I think what’s actually going to happen is we’re going to have some successful negotiations for the first time,” he said.

“The kind of stonewalling they were doing last year is going to end. They’re not going to roll over and just suddenly buy $100 billion worth of products in the month of April, but I think we will see a number of steps by the Chinese that will justify what President Trump did today in this historic decision,” he anticipated.

Pillsbury lamented that many people don’t appreciate the severity of the challenge to American interests posed by China.

“But they will when China begins to fight back, at least rhetorically,” he told Mansour. “They don’t understand what you and I are talking about tonight, that China is wrapped up with the loss of jobs, the competition for resources in Africa and Latin America – just a whole range of competitive things we’re engaged in with the Chinese.”

Even as the Trump administration pursues what Vice President Mike Pence described yesterday as “the end of the era of economic surrender,” Pillsbury advised keeping areas of productive cooperation with China in mind, most notably North Korea.

“That’s a brilliant way to start out,” he said of President Trump’s remarks on Thursday. “He didn’t say, ‘You’re bastards, I hate you, I’m going to bring China to its knees with my memorandum today.’ He didn’t say anything like that.”

Furthermore, he noted that even the American freedom of navigation patrols in the South China Sea, which the Chinese frequently complain about, do not represent an aggressive challenge because the American ships follow “innocent passage” protocols, keeping their weapons radars off and avoiding military maneuvers as they cruise through the area.

“We have not challenged China in the South China Sea yet. That’s the important thing to understand. Some people think we should. It’s very difficult to come up with specific measures, especially if you are looking at economics and trade issues as being more important. We can’t fight China on all fronts,” he said.

Pillsbury quoted U.S. trade representative Ambassador Robert Lighthizer’s statement on Thursday that in addition to imposing tariffs and blocking intellectual property theft, one of the Trump administration’s top goals is to place “restrictions on Chinese investment in the United States.”

“They blocked large sectors of their own country, and they say, ‘We will not permit foreign investment in this sector,’” Pillsbury said of the Chinese. “We’ve negotiated with them for more than ten years to try to reduce that list – it’s called the ‘negative list,’ for lack of a better phrase – and the Chinese just won’t budge.”

Pillsbury found it telling and encouraging that two days ago, with the Trump tariffs looming, Beijing for the first time signaled a willingness to open new sectors to foreign investment.

“The Chinese anticipated this, and they’re trying to deal with it calmly. They don’t want to squander the goodwill that they have, and the widespread belief in America that exists that China is our friend, and is a poor backward country that’s going to collapse,” he said.

“They want to continue what I described in Hundred-Year Marathon as a kind of stealthy acquisition of the role of the Number One economy in the world. They will blow all that if they follow the kind of rhetoric that the Chinese ambassador in Washington used. He actually did this on Fox News! Fox News called him up, apparently, and he made this comment,” he marveled.

“I think he’s going to be in trouble. I think the prime minister and President Xi have indicated more clearly what the future is: that they want to deal calmly, not emotionally, and they will be considering how their own reforms, if they open up their country more, that will meet one of President Trump’s requirements right there,” he said.

“We need to harden our own economy against Chinese theft, Chinese investment,” Pillsbury recommended. “Sometimes it can come in a small company. They will buy a technology in a joint venture or through a small company, let’s say in Silicon Valley, that no one’s ever heard of. Back in the days when robotics and artificial intelligence wasn’t a household word, they were acquiring these high technology companies, sometimes very small.”

“Frankly that scared friends of mine in the Pentagon, that American military superiority in the world depends largely on technology. Sure, we like to say that we have smarter troops, but technology is a big part of making weapons succeed. If we lose our technological edge, my Pentagon friends told me, we can’t get it back,” he noted.

“So China will be not only the dominant economy in the world, which they’re well on their way to doing, but they’ll be the dominant military power in the world. Now, this isn’t in the next few months or the next few years, but this is the trend. What President Trump is doing is trying to halt that too with these restrictions on Chinese investment in our high-tech sectors,” said Pillsbury.

From: TD
26-Mar-18

TD's Link
"U.S. Stock Market Rebounds On Report Of Trade Talks With China"

Huh. Imagine that, immediate and serious trade talks with China. What could have prompted it???? Out of the blue I guess......

Market up 300 points I heard on the radio this morning. Must be a Trump trick prompting some insider trading by his buddies.....

From: Trax
26-Mar-18
As I said on a related thread....

This is what we talked about early on. Stand alone tariffs can not work. If they lead to improvements to the playing field they can pay great dividends in the short term as a negotiation tool. If President Trump can pull this off it will be HUGE>

From: slade
26-Mar-18
Well, well, well it looks like the butthurt never right are clueless once again.

Trump’s Tough Talk On China Works: China’s Premier Pledges Opening Market To Avert Trade War

MAGA

From: rdohn
26-Mar-18
Trump has a set. Its been a long time since we had a President who did.

From: Shuteye
26-Mar-18
The Dow ended up 669 points today. Some investors like what Trump did with China. Trump is right again. Trump never said he was a politician, he is a business man, thank goodness. Also, the swamp is being drained, slowly but surely. Big ole report will be coming out soon, possibly next week. Democrats heads will explode.

From: slade
09-Oct-18
Larry Kudlow was on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo this past Sunday and he shared what President Trump is doing that prior Presidents only talked about. Larry Kudlow this past weekend touted the explosive Trump economy on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. The stock markets are up. Unemployment is down. Americans are making more money.

Then Kudlow mentioned one of the most courageous and stategic moves made by President Trump – to address the trade and information theft issues. Kudlow said –

Well look, this whole story on trade is coming together nicely. The President’s strategy appears to be working. we’ve seen this with USMCA [the new US, Mexico and Canada trade agreement]. Now, we’re holding trade negotiations with Europe. We’re holding trade negotiations with Japan. We issued a tri-part letter, the three companies basically saying non-market economies, read China on that, have got to shape up. China is probably the biggest culprit as you know. So look the key issues here [are] high tariffs, high non-tariff barriers, technology theft, intellectual property theft.

There’s a story in the paper yesterday, in the Wall Street Journal, “China expands its cyber security rule book, heightening foreign corporate concern”. This is brand new. They’re putting in new rules that will permit Chinese officials to inspect US companies and all foreign companies information tech and access proprietary information.

This is exactly a step in the wrong direction. This is forced technology transfer. This is IP theft. This is exactly what we’ve been warning about. We’ve tried to communicate these concerns to China. So far we’ve not had luck. Look, we’ll talk to them. Serious and significant talks any time but it looks to me like they’re moving in the wrong direction. Right now, I think this is most unfortunate.

You know, you talk about national security issues, I can talk about economic security issues. Why should we allow the Chinese to own American companies in China and moreover force us to lay out all of our technology blue prints in the name of cyber security, which by the way, they way they cyber hack us constantly. Why should we give them new advantages in the race for technology. That’s a big problem going forward.

Kudlow continued –

… President Trump is very strong on this issue. A lot of people blaming POTUS for imposing tariffs as part of his trade strategy. He is first and foremost a trade reformer. I think you know that. We have given China our asks any number of times regarding the technology issues, and the IP and the tariffs and the trade imbalances and so forth. I think you know that too.

My advice is don’t blame Trump. Help us, don’t hurt us, help us because there’s got to parity. There’s gotta be a level playing field. There’s got to reciprocity. China regrettably is not playing by the rules, and has not played by those rules for many years. Prior US Presidents have given lip service. President Trump is giving the toughest rebuttal and actions against them.

You gotta protect the US economy Maria. You gotta protect our technology family jewels, our inventiveness, our innovation. You’ve got to protect our workforce and our new businesses. That’s the strength of America’s free market economy. The President is doing just that!

“President Trump is taking the fight to China – It’s a worthy fight!”

From: slade
09-Oct-18

slade's Link
New Evidence of Hacked Supermicro Hardware Found in U.S. Telecom Discovery shows China continues to sabotage critical technology components bound for America

09-Oct-18
God bless those that get it.

From: bigeasygator
09-Oct-18

bigeasygator's Link
Ford is planning to lay off '24,000 staff' globally after it was revealed Trump's tariffs cost the U.S. car giant almost $1 BILLION

From: HDE
09-Oct-18
And how many of those 24k can and should retire...?

From: Bowfreak
09-Oct-18
Lets see how this plays out.....my opinion is Trump is smarter than the naysayers just like he was with the Canada/Mexico deal.

In the long run, it will be another win.

From: Trax
09-Oct-18
Big Easy Liberal the self proclaimed Liberaltarian desperately waiting to post something, anything that will make President Trump look like he's failed. He's waited a long time, win after win! That's right Bow, this negotiation is only in its early stages. It will take some time to see the end result, I believe it will come slowly and in stages. Meanwhile NAFTA is retooled for the better and the EU is at the table with a bib on begging for some nourishment. Commercial bankers are saying borrowing and domestic investment is soring to great heights, and it's only beginning. The big difference is we have a leader who is taking on the old school global cabal and trying to make things better for the USA instead of selling us out.

From: bigeasygator
09-Oct-18
Lol...I love it when SZ, the champion of conservatism, defends the anti-free market, protectionist, TAXES that Trump is putting in place. And as far as NAFTA 2.0...we get access to 3% more of the Canadian dairy market in return for a bunch of labor protection clauses that would make any Union giddy....this is "yuuuuge???" You're funny, SZ.

From: bow-hnt
09-Oct-18
The Chinese can go pound sand! Do it President Trump! they need us, or their economy will die and they have way too many mouths to feed! Please Do It!

From: Trax
09-Oct-18
This is a big picture production. As I've stated many times before, stand alone tariffs can not work long term. These are not stand alone tariffs. They are part of the big picture, and that picture does not include tariffs. Small minded liberals can not see the big picture. Now THAT's funny because it is so true! China is our military enemy, political enemy, and economic enemy. Past presidents have acknowledged that and then allowed them to continue to play their game. This president is not going to allow it. Friend or foe China, you call it. In the end, far more prosperous for both, especially so China, if we are friend. They need to make some changes in order to get their. President Trump is helping them make those choices, and free markets and trade will benefit greatly.

  • Sitka Gear