Jump to content


The Trump Presidency Thread


  • Please log in to reply
1707 replies to this topic

#1661 JustDoIt

JustDoIt

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 894 posts
  • Favorite Poker Game:Omaha H/L

Posted 06 April 2018 - 09:39 AM

View PostFenxis, on 06 April 2018 - 05:51 AM, said:

I just happened across it on imgur and thought it was a pertinent quote. But go ahead and strawman Dan Rather than actually comment on anything real.

Rather is correct network news is all fluff and void of investigative reporting.

Of course the media was a useful tool helping the Obama gang subvert our democracy.

Mr. Rhoades whose brother David is President of CBS news said the following regarding the spin on the Iran deal.

When I asked whether the prospect of this same kind of far-reaching spin campaign being run by a different administration is something that scares him, he admitted that it does. “I mean, I’d prefer a sober, reasoned public debate, after which members of Congress reflect and take a vote,” he said, shrugging. “But that’s impossible.”

Ned Price, Rhodes’s assistant, gave me a primer on how it’s done. The easiest way for the White House to shape the news, he explained, is from the briefing podiums, each of which has its own dedicated press corps. “But then there are sort of these force multipliers,” he said, adding, “We have our compadres, I will reach out to a couple people, and you know I wouldn’t want to name them — ”

“I can name them,” I said, ticking off a few names of prominent Washington reporters and columnists who often tweet in sync with White House messaging.

Price laughed. “I’ll say, ‘Hey, look, some people are spinning this narrative that this is a sign of American weakness,’ ” he continued, “but — ”

“In fact it’s a sign of strength!” I said, chuckling.

“And I’ll give them some color,” Price continued, “and the next thing I know, lots of these guys are in the dot-com publishing space, and have huge Twitter followings, and they’ll be putting this message out on their own.”

https://www.nytimes....olicy-guru.html
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.

Mark Twain

#1662 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 07 April 2018 - 10:55 AM

Kreskin like

David P Gelles
‏@gelles
The parody front page from The Boston Globe. Published 2 years ago with headlines like “Deportations to Begin” and “Markets Sink as Trade War Looms”.

Posted Image
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1663 brvheart

brvheart

    I'm the best.

  • Members
  • 25,523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toyko, Japan
  • Interests:Playing in nuclear fallout.
  • Favorite Poker Game:I play 100/200 live with my best friend Jason.

Posted 09 April 2018 - 06:55 AM

The phony "Trade war" that the media is pushing is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Trump already tariffed 50b, which China matched. He is talking about 100b more. Can China match that also? Nope. We only export about 115-120 billion total to China.

Second problem for China: They only import stuff that they really need. Our main imports from China are stuff that our people want.

Good luck, China. At least you have some rare earth metals so that you have a tiny bit of leverage.

View PostiZuma, on 20 August 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

napa I was jesus christing suited, you guys just slipped in before me.

View PostEssay21, on 25 February 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

.

#1664 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 09 April 2018 - 04:51 PM

View Postbrvheart, on 09 April 2018 - 06:55 AM, said:

The phony "Trade war" that the media is pushing is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Trump already tariffed 50b, which China matched. He is talking about 100b more. Can China match that also? Nope. We only export about 115-120 billion total to China.

Second problem for China: They only import stuff that they really need. Our main imports from China are stuff that our people want.

Good luck, China. At least you have some rare earth metals so that you have a tiny bit of leverage.


There are legitimate problems with how China conducts trade but slapping tariffs on things is the worst way to deal with them.

Of course if the US was still in the TPP there would be a lot more leverage but that was the first thing that Trump dumped.

A lot of the narrative about China is actually old news such as their currency manipulation. Yup, they used to keep they currency artificially low but in fact have been doing the opposite for many years and have been spending hundreds of billions of dollars of their foreign currency to prop up the value of their currency.

The US runs a surplus on things like tourism and services. Focusing only on trade in goods shows a basic lack of understanding on what trade is.

The US runs a deficit in trade on goods and services because the US savings rate is low and US consumption is high.
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1665 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:17 PM

Inadequate Savings—Not Trade Deals—Account for Much of U.S. Trade Deficit



In the 1930s, the U.S. ran trade surpluses for almost the entire decade. Had Donald Trump been president at the time, this statistic would, presumably, have made him happy.

However, the trade surpluses in the 1930s were directly linked to the Great Depression, which had such a devastating effect on the U.S. and world economies that American households stopped buying imports. This historical fact highlights how a trade surplus isn’t necessarily a sign of a healthy economy. Nor does a trade deficit imply that an economy is on the verge of ruin.

Yet, during the election campaign, Trump railed against the large trade deficits that the U.S. has with countries such as Mexico and China. He reportedly complained to his staff that he couldn’t find one country that the U.S. ran a trade surplus with.

Trump contends that trade deficits are a result of unfair trade policies. In his version of events, countries with large trade surpluses with the U.S. put high tariffs on imports of U.S.-made goods and services, making U.S. exports uncompetitive in these foreign markets. At the same time, Trump says, the U.S. doesn’t impose the same trade restrictions. Consequently, cheap imports flow into the country and lead to large trade imbalances. U.S. companies can’t compete with these low-cost imports flooding the U.S. market and are forced to lay off workers.

Some U.S. trade partners, including China and Japan, have implemented tariff and non-tariff barriers on U.S. exports that make it difficult for U.S.-made products to penetrate these markets. But the U.S. itself is not exactly a beacon of free trade. For example, it protects different segments of its agriculture sector, among others, against foreign competition.

In contrast to Trump’s view, a more plausible explanation for the chronic trade deficits that the U.S. has been running since the early 1980s can be found in the trends in savings and investment. In simple terms, the U.S. consumes more than it produces and doesn’t save enough. The lack of savings applies both to households, which have elevated levels of debt, and to the federal government, which continues to run large budget deficits. The shortfall in savings is financed by selling U.S. assets, such as government bonds, to foreign buyers. The funds raised from the sales of U.S. assets are used to fund consumption and investment spending. Consequently, the U.S. trade deficit is equal to the flow of foreign capital into the United States.1

The Wall Street Journal’s Greg Ip notes that the links between savings and the trade balance are apparent in the experience of numerous countries. If, as Trump insists, trade deficits were caused by protectionist measures, countries that implement barriers to limit imports should run trade surpluses. However, this is not the case. According to the World Bank, India and Brazil (which are highly protectionist) consistently run large trade deficits because, like the U.S., they save less than they invest. Conversely, Germany and Switzerland have relatively low tariffs and run trade surpluses because they save more than they invest. They lend their excess savings to countries such as Brazil and India to help them fund chronic trade deficits.
Trump also contends that free trade deals such as NAFTA were negotiated unfairly and provide other countries (in the case of NAFTA, Canada and Mexico) with an advantage over the United States. This perception of trade deals was a key factor behind his decision to pull the U.S. out of the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Just as there is no link between protectionist measures and trade balances, Trump’s claim that there is a connection between trade deals and large U.S. trade deficits is flawed. The U.S. has large trade deficits with Japan and Germany, yet neither of these countries has a trade agreement with the United States.


In the past, the U.S. government tried to reduce trade deficits by insisting that major trading partners adjust their trade policies. In the 1980s, the Japanese government agreed to voluntarily restrain exports of cars to the U.S. market to address the large trade imbalance between the two countries. This agreement eventually led Japan to shift some of its car production to the U.S. to quell the anger in the U.S. Congress. However, these initiatives failed to arrest the growth in the trade deficit because the U.S. continued to save less than it consumed.


Japan’s experience provides evidence that higher savings can lower trade imbalances. Post-war Japan was a high-savings country and ran large trade surpluses. But these surpluses have started to gradually diminish as aging Japanese workers retire and spend their savings on goods and services, including imported ones. This could eventually happen in the U.S., but not for a while. The U.S. savings rate was generally above 10 per cent until the mid-1980s, but the rate has gradually declined since then and currently sits at between 5 and 6 per cent.

Ironically, by threatening to punish Mexico for its large trade surplus with the U.S., Donald Trump is picking a fight with a country that has a similar problem. Mexico has a healthy trade surplus with the U.S., but runs an overall deficit when its trade with other countries is included in the total. And Mexico has a trade deficit for the same reason as the U.S.—it doesn’t save enough and must borrow from abroad to make up the difference.

Sources

Greg Ip, “Deficits Are a Flawed Guide to Unfair Trade Practices,” The Wall Street Journal (March 15, 2017); Alan Reynolds, “What the China Trade Warriors Get Wrong,” The Wall Street Journal (October 26, 2016).
Related Report

U.S. Outlook Spring 2017
Related Webinars

NAFTA 2.0 and Canada
The Conference Board of Canada, June 13, 2017 at 02:00 PM EDT
Live Webinar by Kristelle Audet, and Danielle Goldfarb
Canadian Outlook with the Chief Economist: Economic Growth Accelerates But Risks Abound
The Conference Board of Canada, June 21, 2017 at 02:00 PM EDT
Live Webinar by Craig Alexander
1 Trade in financial assets are included in the capital account of the balance of payments. The U.S. current account deficit on trade in goods and services is matched by a capital account surplus as capital flows into the U.S. to finance the current account deficit.

Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1666 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:36 PM

MAGA indeed. It just turns out it stands for “My Attorney’s Getting Arrested”
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1667 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 16 April 2018 - 09:40 PM

View Postbrvheart, on 09 April 2018 - 06:55 AM, said:

The phony "Trade war" that the media is pushing is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Trump already tariffed 50b, which China matched. He is talking about 100b more. Can China match that also? Nope. We only export about 115-120 billion total to China.

Second problem for China: They only import stuff that they really need. Our main imports from China are stuff that our people want.

Good luck, China. At least you have some rare earth metals so that you have a tiny bit of leverage.

Justin Wolfers


@JustinWolfers
The first rule of tariffs is don’t impose them.

The second rule is don’t impose them on intermediate inputs and capital equipment used by American businesses, or you’ll just hurt their competitiveness. https://piie.com/com...ategy-trade-war

So here’s what the master negotiator did:

Posted Image
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1668 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 17 April 2018 - 02:06 AM

Bill Sweet


@billsweet
42m42 minutes ago
More
great and accurate summary of the comprehensive effect of tariffs:

“It’s hurting our suppliers. It’s hurting us. It’s hurting our customers.”

https://www.wsj.com/...iffs-1523793600

Posted Image
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1669 Fenxis

Fenxis

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,996 posts

Posted 17 April 2018 - 05:21 AM

View PostJustDoIt, on 06 April 2018 - 09:39 AM, said:

Rather is correct network news is all fluff and void of investigative reporting.

I see your Rather and raise you Sean Hannity who apparently is in the TrumpCo entourage. There's bias and then there's gone off the deep and making up stuff.

View PostJustDoIt, on 06 April 2018 - 09:39 AM, said:

“I mean, I’d prefer a sober, reasoned public debate, after which members of Congress reflect and take a vote,” he said, shrugging. “But that’s impossible.”

Uh... Obamacare had 18-months of hearings before being passed. The GOP repeat and not replace had ONE DAY of actually being in the hands of Senators.
"@sergetoronto Bang-up analysis there" -- James Mirtle

#TradeMelnykNotKarlsson #MelnykOut

#1670 Fenxis

Fenxis

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,996 posts

Posted 17 April 2018 - 05:23 AM

View PostFCP Bob, on 09 April 2018 - 04:51 PM, said:

Of course if the US was still in the TPP there would be a lot more leverage but that was the first thing that Trump dumped

Oh there was a trial balloon floated that he might rejoin the TPP to "protect the farmers". Because the Chinese smartly targeted red states.
"@sergetoronto Bang-up analysis there" -- James Mirtle

#TradeMelnykNotKarlsson #MelnykOut

#1671 brvheart

brvheart

    I'm the best.

  • Members
  • 25,523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toyko, Japan
  • Interests:Playing in nuclear fallout.
  • Favorite Poker Game:I play 100/200 live with my best friend Jason.

Posted 17 April 2018 - 02:55 PM

View PostFCP Bob, on 16 April 2018 - 09:40 PM, said:

Justin Wolfers
‏

@JustinWolfers
The first rule of tariffs is don’t impose them.

The second rule is don’t impose them on intermediate inputs and capital equipment used by American businesses, or you’ll just hurt their competitiveness. https://piie.com/com...ategy-trade-war

So here’s what the master negotiator did:


That's a limited short-term argument. Tariffs are bad world wide in perfect fair trade.

However, simple question ... if tariffs don't work for individual countries, why are the countries that impose the most tariffs doing the best on global trade?

View PostiZuma, on 20 August 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

napa I was jesus christing suited, you guys just slipped in before me.

View PostEssay21, on 25 February 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

.

#1672 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 17 April 2018 - 03:53 PM

View Postbrvheart, on 17 April 2018 - 02:55 PM, said:

That's a limited short-term argument. Tariffs are bad world wide in perfect fair trade.

However, simple question ... if tariffs don't work for individual countries, why are the countries that impose the most tariffs doing the best on global trade?

umm, they aren't ?

Running a trade surplus isn't good and running a trade deficit isn't bad. They are mostly just an accounting function determined by a country's saving rate and level of foreign investment.

A tariff is a tax on consumers of the goods being taxed. I thought you didn't like taxing Americans ?
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1673 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 18 April 2018 - 03:06 AM

View PostFCP Bob, on 17 April 2018 - 03:53 PM, said:

umm, they aren't ?

Running a trade surplus isn't good and running a trade deficit isn't bad. They are mostly just an accounting function determined by a country's saving rate and level of foreign investment.

A tariff is a tax on consumers of the goods being taxed. I thought you didn't like taxing Americans ?

Read this article at the WSJ. It explains things very well.

https://www.wsj.com/...ates-1524043800

The U.S. runs a trade deficit because it consumes more than it produces while its trading partners, collectively, do the opposite. (Another way of saying this is that the U.S. invests more than it saves, while other countries save more than they invest.) Lately, the gap has grown, to an average of $54 billion a month since October from $46 billion a month in the prior 12 months.

Some of the wider trade deficit reflects a recent falloff in foreign growth, especially Europe which the International Monetary Fund this week predicted won’t last, and a surge in post-hurricane construction and replacement demand in the U.S. But some is more long lasting, in particular the huge tax cut that Mr. Trump signed into law in December and took effect on Jan. 1. Anticipation of the tax cut spurred business investment and sent stock prices up sharply, generating more spending by newly enriched shareholders. In February, Congress passed and Mr. Trump signed a budget that boosts federal spending by nearly $300 billion over the next two years.

As those two measures push up business and household spending, U.S. imports should climb. Indeed, the spillover of American fiscal stimulus is a major reason for the IMF’s upbeat global outlook. For the U.S., this is a good thing: With unemployment at 4.1% the U.S. doesn’t have enough spare workers to meet all the new demand so imports are a safety valve against overheating. It’s one of many reasons economists don’t get worked up about trade deficits: They beat the alternative of less investment and maybe a recession.

Not so Mr. Trump who sees trade as zero-sum game and deficits as proof the U.S. is losing. His trade agenda is geared to correcting that: renegotiating the North American and Korean free trade agreements, tariffs on steel and aluminum, and threats to impose tariffs on $150 billion worth of Chinese imports. Yet these measures would likely have at best a negligible effect, if any, on the trade gap. Tariffs will redirect some U.S. steel orders to domestic from foreign mills, but many imports have no ready American substitute. Meanwhile, some sales may be lost by American companies that have to pay more for imported inputs or are hit by retaliatory tariffs in their export markets.

Correcting the deficit with one country or in one product is often pointless because the shortfall may simply reappear elsewhere. Indeed, the shale revolution has helped slash the single biggest contributor to the deficit by boosting exports of oil and slashing imports. Yet the gap in all other commodities has grown by more than enough to offset that benefit.


Permanently reducing the U.S. trade deficit requires some combination of the U.S. saving more and other countries saving less, a tall order because saving is heavily driven by structural factors such as aging, the social safety net and the availability of credit help. For many years China bolstered domestic saving by holding down its currency and controlling capital inflows, effectively restricting how much Chinese households could consume. But it hasn’t lately, contrary to Mr. Trump’s tweet Monday that China was playing a “devaluation game.”

Permanently higher budget deficits make trade deficits worse by diminishing national saving. Larry Kudlow, Mr. Trump’s chief economic adviser, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal disputed the link between the budget and trade deficits. But in a recent report economists at Goldman Sachs studied the historical record and found that all else equal, every $100 boost to the budget deficit because of policy decisions (as opposed to economic developments such as a recession) raises the trade deficit by $35.
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1674 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 19 April 2018 - 03:34 AM

How about them tax cuts for the rich.

Debt isn't always bad, it depends on how it is used. Investing in a country's physical and human capital thru debt is often (usually) a good thing. Cutting taxes on the richest people and on capital in this case isn't a good thing especially since the next shoe to drop from low tax GOP crowd will be to use the rising debt as an excuse to cut investments in people and physical capital.
Posted Image
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1675 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 20 April 2018 - 02:50 PM

@JoshuaGreen
Follow Follow @JoshuaGreen
More
What's the matter with Kansas? It's getting hit with a 178% sorghum tariff, blowback from Trump's trade war with China. "Half of Kansas sorghum or more was going to China. That probably stops." https://www.bloomber...friendly-kansas … via @BW
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1676 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 20 April 2018 - 03:00 PM

Posted Image
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1677 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 27,289 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 21 April 2018 - 08:00 AM

Brian Stelter

Verified account

@brianstelter
35m35 minutes ago
More
"America's newspapers were already struggling. Now they dread new tariffs on Canadian newsprint that they believe will make a strained situation even worse." Read @JDisis' latest

Local newspapers fear tariffs could cripple them
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#1678 Fenxis

Fenxis

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,996 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 01:42 PM

Who needs newspapers when you have Fox "News", Infowars and Sinclair network?
"@sergetoronto Bang-up analysis there" -- James Mirtle

#TradeMelnykNotKarlsson #MelnykOut

#1679 Fenxis

Fenxis

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,996 posts

Posted 26 April 2018 - 03:14 PM

Trump just said on Fox & Friends of Cohen: “Michael would represent me, and represent me on some things. He represents me— like with this crazy Stormy Daniels deal, he represented me."

Dude is getting outmaneuvered by a porn star... anyone still think he holds a candle to the Chinese or North Korea?

Posted Image
"@sergetoronto Bang-up analysis there" -- James Mirtle

#TradeMelnykNotKarlsson #MelnykOut

#1680 JustDoIt

JustDoIt

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 894 posts
  • Favorite Poker Game:Omaha H/L

Posted 29 April 2018 - 09:53 AM

View PostFenxis, on 17 April 2018 - 05:21 AM, said:

I see your Rather and raise you Sean Hannity who apparently is in the TrumpCo entourage. There's bias and then there's gone off the deep and making up stuff.

I don't do Cable which is 95% BS and I don't listen to Sean Hannity. But I will play your little game, I see you Sean Hannity and raise you Homophobe Joy Reed.

View PostFenxis, on 17 April 2018 - 05:21 AM, said:

Uh... Obamacare had 18-months of hearings before being passed. The GOP repeat and not replace had ONE DAY of actually being in the hands of Senators.

What does this have to do with what I was posting about. The subverting our democracy with lies and not even voting on the Iran deal in the Senate.

Let's do this, you do a summary on how Obamacare came about and then I'll do a summary.
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.

Mark Twain




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users