Trump orders officials to look at $100 billion in new Chinese tariffs

[Fantom]

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/381900-trump-considering-100-billion-in-additional-tariffs-on-chinaTrump orders officials to look at $100 billion in new Chinese tariffsTrump orders officials to look at $100 billion in new Chinese tariffs


"In light of China’s unfair retaliation, I have instructed the USTR to consider whether $100 billion of additional tariffs would be appropriate under section 301 and, if so, to identify the products upon which to impose such tariffs," Trump said in a statement, referring to the U.S. Trade Representative.


Somebody find out what pu##sy President Trump grabbed ....send it to every politician.. My God America cannot spare this man...he fights.

Sure.. I am going to take a paper hit on my stocks...Meh    this is needed.

[kevindavis007]

Bad idea..

[Frank Cannon]

Love it. Raise the stakes on those little yellow bastards....

[edpc]

Kudlow:  They’re just proposals!  They’re just proposals!  Please....somebody get me a drink and a Valium.

[Fantom]

Kudlow:  They’re just proposals!  They’re just proposals!  Please....somebody get me a drink and a Valium.

Just playin' the game... why add the lie? Let his words speak for themselves.

No reason to go full on CNN

[edpc]

Just playin' the game... why add the lie? Let his words speak for themselves.

No reason to go full on CNN

How about going full CNBC, where Kudlow contributed to writing this.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/03/kudlow-mr-president-tariffs-are-really-tax-hikes.html

[Right_in_Virginia]

Why China Will Lose a Trade War With Trump
Beijing can huff and puff, but America holds the high cards. Expect the Chinese to back down quickly—or watch their economy and political system fall apart.
Daily Beast, Apr 5, 2018, Gordon G. Chang

<snip>

Experts, believing China holds more leverage, ignore important realities. First, that country is growing more dependent on access to the American market. In 2016, a stunning 68.0 percent of China’s overall merchandise trade surplus related to sales to the U.S. In 2017, that figure increased to 88.8 percent. Trade-surplus countries, as history shows, generally suffer more in trade wars.

Beijing, therefore, is generally vulnerable to being pushed around by Washington. “If trade is so unimportant to China, why has China’s trade predation lasted so long and taken so many different forms?” Alan Tonelson, an independent Washington, D.C.-based trade analyst, asked, in comments to The Daily Beast over the weekend.

Second, the American economy is far bigger than the Chinese one. Beijing claimed gross domestic product of $12.84 trillion in 2017. America’s economy, by way of contrast, clocked in at $19.39 trillion last year.

China’s GDP numbers are surely overstated because, especially during the last two years, the country’s growth was less than half that reported by the official National Bureau of Statistics. America’s larger economy is, at the moment, in fact growing at a faster clip than China’s.

Third, the American economy, for all its faults, is stable, and China’s, by most accounts, is on the verge of a debt crisis. China’s debt-to-GDP ratio looks like it is somewhere, depending on the amount of so-called hidden debt, between 350 percent and 400 percent.

<snip>

In short, Trump holds the high cards when it comes to China, and, unlike his predecessors, he knows it.

So, yes, Ambassador Cui, we will see who lasts longer if you choose to go toe-to-toe with president No. 45.


More:  https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-china-will-lose-a-trade-war-with-trump

[Right_in_Virginia]

The money quote:

In 2016, a stunning 68.0 percent of China’s overall merchandise trade surplus related to sales to the U.S. In 2017, that figure increased to 88.8 percent. Trade-surplus countries, as history shows, generally suffer more in trade wars.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Donald J. Trump
Verified accountï‚™ @realDonaldTrump 

We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 Billion a year, with Intellectual Property Theft of another $300 Billion. We cannot let this continue!

4:22 AM - 4 Apr 2018

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/981492087328792577

Donald J. Trump
Verified accountï‚™ @realDonaldTrump 

When you’re already $500 Billion DOWN, you can’t lose!

6:20 AM - 4 Apr 2018

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/981521901079146499

[Fantom]

How about going full CNBC, where Kudlow contributed to writing this.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/03/kudlow-mr-president-tariffs-are-really-tax-hikes.html

I am fine with tariffs as tax hikes. We need to broaden the tax base.

In this instance however...we are stopping an economic(and military aggressor we are funding) aggressor..China. We hold the cards.. And Trump is playing them


 As Kudlow is recently added to President Trumps team of advisors. I would have to say it undermines your logical fallacy of "Appeal to Authority" .... as that same "Authority" is on team Trump now.

[edpc]

The money quote:

No, the money quote happened yesterday....


Donald J Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump

We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 Billion a year, with Intellectual Property Theft of another $300 Billion. We cannot let this continue!

6:22 AM - Apr 4, 2018


Interesting how trade wars are good and easy to win, but we already lost it, and China is destined to lose the war they already won.  WTF?

[libertybele]

Bad idea..

Agreed.

Futures fall as Trump seeks $100 billion in additional China tariffs

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/futures-fall-as-trump-seeks-100-billion-in-additional-china-tariffs-2018-04-05

[libertybele]

Opinion: Trump’s unwinnable trade war with China

A tit-for-tat escalation in tariffs would leave everybody worse off

Nobody wins from a trade war. When a nation seeks to punish another country with tariffs on its goods, exporters in the target country suffer, but so do consumers and import-consuming industries in the country imposing the tariffs. In fact, they may suffer more economic damage than the targeted country. If the targeted country retaliates, the damage is compounded further in both countries.......

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trumps-unwinnable-trade-war-with-china-2018-04-03

[Fantom]

Agreed.

Futures fall as Trump seeks $100 billion in additional China tariffs

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/futures-fall-as-trump-seeks-100-billion-in-additional-china-tariffs-2018-04-05

Oh, my stock money is fine.  I'll go to work tomorrow and add more. Buy the dip.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Opinion: Trump’s unwinnable trade war with China

A tit-for-tat escalation in tariffs would leave everybody worse off

This is not tit-for-tat for the United States.

It is for China, and they cannot afford to do this much longer ... not economically or politically.

[Fantom]

Opinion: Trump’s unwinnable trade war with China

A tit-for-tat escalation in tariffs would leave everybody worse off

Not us. China on the other hand.

And it is not tit for tat. It is double or nothing. We win however it turns out. We keep 800 billion...lose 170 billion. Not to mention the lose of tech.

So Trump just went to 150 billion in tariffs. Lets see if China dares match it. We can buy or build what we want.. China cannot grow enough food.... no soybeans for China..LOL. If that is what they want.

[WilliamVA]

This is not tit-for-tat for the United States.

It is for China, and they cannot afford to do this much longer ... not economically or politically.

China has been doing the import tariffs for year, in direct violation of
trade agreements.   It's what Trump was referring to the other day, when he said
"we lost the trade war with China years ago".   

[Hoodat]

"In light of China’s unfair retaliation, I have instructed the USTR to consider whether $100 billion of additional tariffs would be appropriate under section 301 and, if so, to identify the products upon which to impose such tariffs," Trump said in a statement, referring to the U.S. Trade Representative.

Oh goody!  A $100 billion tax increase on American consumers!  And people here are actually cheering this on?  When did this place turn into Dummy Underground?

[edpc]

I am fine with tariffs as tax hikes. We need to broaden the tax base.

In this instance however...we are stopping an economic(and military aggressor we are funding) aggressor..China. We hold the cards.. And Trump is playing them


As Kudlow is recently added to President Trumps team of advisors. I would have to say it undermines your logical fallacy of "Appeal to Authority" .... as that same "Authority" is on team Trump now.

You’re in a minority if you’re fine with the tax hikes.  If all these tariffs go into effect, they’ll completely negate and overtake any benefits middle class Americans received from the tax cuts.

As far as who holds what cards and who is willing to take the hit longer, we’ll see.  Trump is a 4-8 year president, max.  Xi Jinping is there for life.

Cohn was an advisor until the tariff fight began.  Kudlow is against them and probably joined to talk him down.  We’ll see if he lasts as long as Cohn.

[Fantom]

China has been doing the import tariffs for year, in direct violation of
trade agreements.   It's what Trump was referring to the other day, when he said
"we lost the trade war with China years ago".

To be fair, Nixon to China was the thing to do , Geo-Politically. It split the Soviet-Sino coalition. One head of the marxist/left monster was defeated....

....someone needs to tell us to quit feeding the other head.....Oh Snap...

[Concerned]

Not us. China on the other hand.

And it is not tit for tat. It is double or nothing. We win however it turns out. We keep 800 billion...lose 170 billion. Not to mention the lose of tech.

So Trump just went to 150 billion in tariffs. Lets see if China dares match it. We can buy or build what we want.. China cannot grow enough food.... no soybeans for China..LOL. If that is what they want.

Of course China doesn't need to "match" the tariffs.  They have a much bigger baseball bat to potentially use:

If this trade fight does escalate, then more tariffs could be slapped on more goods. But China could fire back in a far more significant way: selling a large chunk of the $1.17 trillion of U.S. treasury bonds it holds.

<snip>

If China did decide to sell off those bonds in a fit of rage aimed at President Donald Trump, then it could cause major havoc on international markets, said Jeff Mills, co-chief investment strategist at PNC Financial Services Group. "It's certainly something they could do," he said.

The biggest impact would be on interest rates and bond prices, he says. If China floods the market with treasuries, and the supply of U.S. bonds spikes, then fixed income prices would fall and yields would rise. If yields climb then it would become more expensive for U.S. companies and consumers to borrow and that would cause the U.S. economy to slow down.

It will also become more expensive for the U.S. government to issue debt — they'll have to pay higher rates to borrowers — while the $15 trillion of treasuries held by itself and investors would fall in value. Equities would be sent crashing, too, as yields climb. "Higher interest rates would ripple through the entire economy," says Mills. "It would have a slowing effect."

Fortunately, trade wars are easy to win.   

https://www.msn.com/en-us/finance/markets/the-2412-trillion-weapon-china-could-use-in-a-trade-war-with-the-us/ar-AAvvKHL

[edpc]

To be fair, Nixon to China was the thing to do , Geo-Politically. It split the Soviet-Sino coalition.

It didn’t last.

China Military Tells Russia 'We've Come to Support You' Against U.S.
 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-military-tells-russia-apos-161427016.html

[catfish1957]

Last I looked China owns $1.3T, or over 7% of Treasuries.

I understand that they also have their finger on the trigger to liquidate.

I hope this country is prepared for those consequences.  It will be ugly ugly ugly,  but if that is what it takes..........

[Fantom]

You’re in a minority if you’re fine with the tax hikes.  If all these tariffs go into effect, they’ll completely negate and overtake any benefits middle class Americans received from the tax cuts.

As far as who holds what cards and who is willing to take the hit longer, we’ll see.  Trump is a 4-8 year president, max.  Xi Jinping is there for life.

Cohn was an advisor until the tariff fight began.  Kudlow is against them and probably joined to talk him down.  We’ll see if he lasts as long as Cohn.

Last first as is my wont.

Well, these last tariffs are after Kudlow joined. Seems he is down with the fight.

Yeah... seems like there was no chance Reagan would tear down that wall either. I see where you are coming from.


I am fine with broadening the tax base. Like most conservatives/kudlow/Austrian economics. And no, losing 170 billion and gaining 800 billion is not a blow to American workers. It is a blow to China mercantilism and global military expansion.

[Fantom]

Last I looked China owns $1.3T, or over 7% of Treasuries.

I understand that they also have their finger on the trigger to liquidate.

I hope this country is prepared for those consequences.  It will be ugly ugly ugly,  but if that is what it takes..........

We are already liquidating 3 trillion in T-bills the obama occupation printed. China cannot dump it's holdings of T-Bills without making the dollar drop in international trade. Further helping us and our exports vrs import with every country out there.

Also, China is in a world of hurt economically.... they are facing a debt/and population bomb. They really are over the barrel. We hold the cards and have a President who... thankfully knows it.