The Left bashes Donald Trump and his trade positions day in and day out.
But other than building a wall on the Mexico border, is there any reason to believe they are at all different?
If you think so, please consider Obama Steps Up Trade Battle With China.
Barack Obama has escalated the US’s trade battle with China, launching a formal complaint against Beijing as both of his potential successors push the domestic political debate in an increasingly protectionist direction on the campaign trail.
The new case, brought by the US president on Wednesday with the World Trade Organisation, challenges Beijing’s export restrictions on key commodities needed by US manufacturers and was accompanied by sharp rhetoric from the White House.
The complaint is the latest sign that sentiment in Washington, which had agreed a sweeping trade deal with east Asia only last year, has become increasingly volatile towards free trade amid rising anger in the electorate.
The US filing complains that Chinese duties on nine key commodities — including copper, cobalt, tantalum and tin — are unfair export restrictions that enable Beijing to make important raw materials available to its own manufacturers at artificially low prices.
The case launched on Wednesday is the 13th brought to the WTO by the Obama administration which Mr Biden said had moved “more aggressively than any previous administration in history” to take on China and enforce US trade laws.
Trade Irony
The irony runs pretty deep. The US is pissing and moaning that China does not export what we want at low prices, while also pissing and moaning that China has too low prices on everything else.
Perhaps this is what one gets when one stupidly slaps 500% tariffs on unwanted commodities.
Free Trade Paradox
- Every country wants free trade on its exports
- No country wants free trade on imports
Peas in a Pod
I strongly disagree with Trump on trade. But how is Obama, Hillary Clinton, or Bernie Sanders any different?
If you think there are noticeable differences between Trump, Sanders, and Clinton, then please take this quiz and report back how many you got correct: Today’s Quiz: Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton – Who Said It?
Leaving aside Trump’s obnoxious way of saying things (a strategy that clearly won him the nomination), what real differences regarding trade with China are there between Trump, Obama, Hillary, and Bernie?
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Sorry Mish, but China does NOT play fair on trade. You try exporting there and you will see what I mean. Not to mention your product will be copied and sold in your market at a discount a year later. On the other hand they can do whatever they heck they want in the US and Europe: buy companies, set up logistics centers, send over millions of Chinese merchants (all good for them, but we can’t do the same) and support them with free credit to sell their goods and so on.
So all of these politicians do have a point. China is eating our lunch. And that’s historic. Even when Britain was at its peak the only thing it could sell them was drugs. Plus ça change…
Several HUGE differences I can think of:
1) Trump has to pay for his own plane, pay for fuel, pay landing fees, pay for provisioning. He has to pay staff to maintain and fly Trump One. When not in use, Trump’s plane sits on a tarmac at LGA airport. And Trump pays taxes on all the above
Obama gets all the above paid for by voters too stupid to realize they are being used. No taxes are paid for anything. Military weenies (paid by voters) handle piloting, maintenance and everything else. Even gets a special airplane hanger, guarded 24/7 by secret service, even though the hanger is in the middle of Andrews AFB, which has its own security (also paid for by voters).
Obama is a free-loading politician who thinks everyone else should pay more taxes. It costs millions of dollars to fly Air Force One back and forth to Hawaii.
2) Neither Obama nor the Clinton Foundation pays taxes on any of the staggering benefits they collect every day. Bill Clinton went to speak at a community college in California — and the college (alumni) paid for a private plane, limo, $700 dinner at the Fairmont Hotel, $1400 in long distance phone charges — and students were not allowed to ask questions (only questions that had been pre-approved by Clinton’s staff). Amount contributed to scholarships or student loans? ZERO.
Personal security for S&P500 CEOs runs into hundreds of thousands per year. Facebook supposedly pays into the millions for Zuckerberg’s security. Companies have to pay taxes on this compensation. Anyone want to guess the cost of having hundreds of secret service agents in multiple locations?
Trump runs all sorts of crazy charity donations — not just Celebrity Apprentice.
Obama doesn’t have to pay ObamaCare taxes… EVER. He gets his healthcare paid for by voters for life. Same for both Clintons. ObamaCare taxes are only for the little people.
Anyone here been to a government reception or “offsite conference”? Only lobbyists, bureaucrats and politicians get invited. They throw out enough food at the end of the night to fill a homeless shelter.
The real question is: why should Trump pay for all these things when he can become a politician and get them “for free” like Obama? Some paid for by oligarchs, most of it paid for with debt that future generations had no say in.
That is why everyone wants to be a politician. The perks, the tax free life, the endless stream of suckers who think the President only gets paid $300,000 per year.
Trump isn’t an idiot. He wants to live the good life tax free, he wants the same deal the Clintons and Obamas already have.
The idiots are the voters who let politicians get away with this, while struggling to make ends meet themselves.
Your tax dollars at work… SUCKERS
“Trump isn’t an idiot. He wants to live the good life tax free, he wants the same deal the Clintons and Obamas already have.”
Trump said he is not going to take s salary for being Prez. So, Trump is essentially saying he will work at no cost to the taxpayers. Of course, taxpayers still pay for the White House, but Trump can stay free at his own hotels for some of his travels. The guy is a billionaire. He could be on the golf course or retired, rather than working for free long hours as president of the USA. Trump does not need a job or government benefits.
PS — I think its funny that Mish believes Obama or Hilary (or members of Congress) have actually read any trade agreements. They have staffers for that — LOTS of them.
Staffers also wrote the speeches that complain about the trade deals, based on “input” and “comments” from lobbyists. If my lobbyist gives a better bribe than your lobbyist, then my input / comment gets a more prominent spot in the speech.
Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette had their chamber maid and man servants, politicians have staffers. “Staffers” is a less jarring term to the peasants — I mean voters.
Hi Frank. I like the way you talk.
Agree about politicians not reading any treaties and leaving it to their staffs. Actually, I think the process is even less work intensive than that.
Most people think that lots of complicated interactions that involve at lease a few smart people run the world. They think that somebody somewhere is responsible for something. To some extent, that’s true. Somebody decided it would be a good idea to hustle Central Banks into a free money forever plan for the sake of giving said planner and friends free money forever for artificially inflated asset values and personal wealth. They played a long game, got the right people into influential places and let them do their magic with probably occasional whispers in their ears to keep them on track. It took a while but now it’s institutionalized. It’s the new normal.
Treaties are even less work intensive. People are as lazy as they can be. Politicians make promises for a better life, but don’t define what that is and never will unless they’re sure it will play well in the headlines. Of course, it’s subject to change when the wind blows in another direction.
Treaties are meant to benefit the politician, who needs re-election. It takes money for this because lots of others want the same privilege and compete to be a politician. Thus, business is solicited for cash. Being smart business agrees, but expects something in return, such as trade restrictions that benefit their business’ at the expense of anyone who can’t fight back.
Eventually, they work out a ‘trade treaty’. The politician says, Fine. Now, Pay Me’. Donations are made. Support for the treaty is received from the politician. On to the next treaty.
Anyone, prove otherwise.
Frank, the good thing about trade treaties is that can be trashed with little or no notice from anyone, other than a likely increase in overall living standards over time. A few who received special benefits will suffer, and scream bloody bloody murder about losing them, but everyone else will benefit to some degree.
With respect to the hustle that gave Central Banks the idea to provide free money forever – it’s the new normal. The entire world has adjusted to it. The concept has been ring-fenced by the equivalent of cannon fodder … 401k savers who will cry out in agony if their account loses value. They will sound terrible and they will break your heart. This ring-fence is needed because asset prices will fall if / when price discovery returns to the world and prices are again used to reflect market value. They are a kind of insurance policy that performs as a powerful motivator that keeps sympathetic politicians in line. Brilliant plan. The current FOMC is evidence of the success of this insurance. Even ordinary business reporters have noticed how cowardly the FOMC acts about raising rates. Game.Set. Match. The hustlers won. No rate normalization without massive upsets in asset prices as price discovery returns to the world.
Trade agreement are small potatoes in this regard.
Absolutely agree. I felt like I wrote that Frank! It is absolutely disgusting what the politicians are getting away with. What’s the difference between lobbying and bribery? Answer,…nothing! It’s simply documented bribery so it is not illegal. Politicians could care less about the greater good. That’s why they let all the manufacturing jobs leave and created such a trade deficit with the rest of the world. Hillary is so corrupt but powerful that the FBI is scared to bring any charges against her because she didn’t break the “intent” of the statute. I’ll try to remember that if I’m ever out driving drunk because I sure don’t intend on hurting anyone. As you pointed out, Frank, the staffers do all the work for these elitist politicians. I’ll never forget, Nancy Pelosi saying that “we need to pass Obama care in order to find out what’s in it”. Such a disservice to the American people.
Free trade with China is fine as long as they start adhering to the same clean environmental standards as the US and stop manipulating their currency to give themselves a competitive advantage in the trade arena. If they play dirty – why shouldn’t we?
Obama makes Trump look like Mother Teresa on every level. Mostly, Trump is open and honest about his intentions. Obama is a conniver and a shakedown artist. With Trump what you see is what you get. I would trust a rattlesnake before I’d trust Obama.
“If they play dirty – why shouldn’t we?”
Yup! “We” should start dumping toxic industrial runoff in rivers as well…..
“We” used to do that. Back when “we” were as poor as the Chinese are now. Hence had more pressing concerns than squeaky clean air.
The Chinese are poor? They’re holding over a trillion dollars of our debt. Besides, if your next door neighbor was ‘poor’ would that give him the right to dump his garbage and sewage in your backyard?
Not saying the US should copy China and pollute the air and water. Only saying that the US should take defensive action by imposing trade tariffs on China for manipulating their currency and creating toxic waste dumps to give themselves a competitive advantage in the international markets.
@stuki moi — “Yup! “We” should start dumping toxic industrial runoff in rivers as well…..”
Actually, the EPA has dumped enough toxic sludge into the Colorado river for all of us. The EPA spill was many multiples of the Exxon Valdez, but Obama doesn’t care about the environment and will never hold bureaucrats accountable.
The US EPA is the biggest threat to the environment now
“The US filing complains that Chinese duties on nine key commodities — including copper, cobalt, tantalum and tin — are unfair export restrictions that enable Beijing to make important raw materials available to its own manufacturers at artificially low prices.”
The USA does not need to buy any of these commodities from China. The USA has its own low-cost sources of these commodities, and has never depended upon China for any of these metals, which are mostly in worldwide oversupply. China’s stated reasons are ntional security, same as USA has had for prohibiting exports of USA petroleum.
Sounds like clever corporate lawyering to me, and Obama’s role is Corporate Shill, like with all the secret “trade agreements.” The “real story” is the corporate names in the secret trade lawsuits. Companies alleging “injury” under USA “trade laws” get to keep all the tariffs and other monies collected by USA.gov from China. Well worth the cost of high-price lawyers, Obama fund-raisers and campaign donations (investments).
Obama and Hilaty have public track records on these issues. Hilary did some nifty uranium and mining deals for her friends in the old Soviet republics, to name one egregious example. I doubt Bernie Sanders, if his rhetoric is to be believed, would be quite that corrupt. Ditto Trump, as he has all the money he needs and could spend the rest of his life on the golf course and has no real need for trade shenanigans. So, there might be differences. Trump, for all his talk, is practical rather than ideological on these matters, and I expect he would talk with China and get different outcomes than Hilary or Obama. Different approaches to problems should yield different outcomes across the board, in trade, foreign policy (e.g. Russia, Syria, ISIS) and Supreme Court.
Not only is Trump worse on free trade than Hillary he’s worse in foreign policy actually. He has gone so far as to exclaim “the time to question the sanctity of repaying our debt is now” which puts this guy in a class of nutjobs that is indeed very rarified. In no way is this an advisement to vote against him…mommy put some common sense in you back in the day and that’s called “you’re free to do whatever you want” in my book. But in my view both of these individuals…besides being the two weakest candidates to try for the this office ever are both travelling down the road singing “the last 8 years have been the best thing ever and a vote for me is to make it worse.”
If the American people have no understanding of that then all I have to say is if you think my life is bad wait until you see what yours is about to become.
“He has gone so far as to exclaim “the time to question the sanctity of repaying our debt is now” which puts this guy in a class of nutjobs that is indeed very rarified.”
In ancient times they had a thing called the year of Jubilee. It came every 50 years. Kondratiev discovered a 50 year economic cycle.
Math simply is. 1+1 always = 2. Eventually, a credit cycle reaches the point where it can no longer be sustained.
Trump is acknowledging that fact. The nut jobs are those who refuse to acknowledge the laws of math.
The laws of math were discovered in ancient times and these cycles repeat over and over again, because the math never changes. It is never different this time. 100% of bubbles burst and deflate. 100% of booms end in a bust.
“the time to question the sanctity of repaying our debt is now”
If he said, and genuinely means, that; he is far, far from a nutjob. The nutjob position, is to believe it is some sort of duty for entire generations to live their entire lives as debt slaves. Just because their grand[parents and parents were ignorant enough to believe in Santa Claus.
Debt is only “our” debt, for those whose signature happens to be on the loan documents. For the rest of us, the debt is “theirs.” Not “ours.”
Trump doesn’t hate America and white people. That’s enough for me.
Like
Why did Obama run for President since he (like his father) obviously hates America?
Obama/HRC = pro-TPP = diminished US sovereignty.
Trump = anti-TPP = preservation of US sovereignty.
Very, very simple.
The “trade” issue (in this cycle) revolves around TPP, which must be stopped/trashed, IMO.
Some neighbor kids were playing capture the flag last week. It took the youngest kids less than one game to figure out they couldn’t leave their borders unguarded.
If Obama/HRC can’t figure out the most basic element of of a children’s game, its no wonder they can’t fight terrorists or illegal immigration.
I am voting for Trump because he is the only one serious enough to destroy China and do what it takes to eliminate them from the face of the earth. The dirty Chicoms are our mortal enemies and he is the only one who knows this and will fight them to the death. NUKE CHINA!