Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Discuss.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+166|1252

Cybargs wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Tariffs directed specifically at China would be a really dumb thing to do. I meant I expect him to put a tariff on something like imports on a certain kind of wood or minor specialized electronics. Then he can go to American factories and talk about how many jobs he saved with his tariff.
China makes americans pay almost double what other countries pay for visa's entering china. it's part of their diplomacy tool box.
Neat. What does that have to do with my post?
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|4248

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Tariffs directed specifically at China would be a really dumb thing to do. I meant I expect him to put a tariff on something like imports on a certain kind of wood or minor specialized electronics. Then he can go to American factories and talk about how many jobs he saved with his tariff.
China makes americans pay almost double what other countries pay for visa's entering china. it's part of their diplomacy tool box.
Neat. What does that have to do with my post?
they do the exact same for american products.

threatening to cancel boeing orders over taiwan, put major tarrifs on major american agricultural imports.

state owned enterprises still play a major role in their economy, adding on to trade barriers their essentially protecting their own industries. Why shouldn't america respond in a similar fashion?
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
SuperJail Warden
Member
+166|1252
Okay but my post was about Trump. You can find someone else to argue the logic of tariffs.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|4248

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Okay but my post was about Trump. You can find someone else to argue the logic of tariffs.
and same here. he's just doing a tit for tat to what china does to every single american import.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Pocshy2.0
Member
+23|903
I don't know if this has been said yet (and I'm not reading the preceding 3 pages to find out), but why bother talking about a trade deficit figure that focuses on goods? Who cares? Shouldn't we want that if America is an advanced nation? Aren't we concerned with services, especially financial services?

Last edited by Pocshy2.0 (2016-12-22 19:20:33)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,592|3638|eXtreme to the maX

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

I don't know if this has been said yet (and I'm not reading the preceding 3 pages to find out), but why bother talking about a trade deficit figure that focuses on goods? Who cares? Shouldn't we want that if America is an advanced nation? Aren't we concerned with services, especially financial services?
The "we don't have to worry about a trade deficit in goods because we will make up the difference in services" argument has been running 30-40 years now and shows no sign of coming good, so its a safe bet its not going to happen ever.
Plus countries like China are now sufficiently advanced they don't need your services, so there's no reason for it to happen.

The US can continue running a deficit with China, while even less developed countries buy their services from China, not America.
Not to hard see where that's going to lead.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2016-12-23 00:52:37)

Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
uziq
Member
+138|984

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

I don't know if this has been said yet (and I'm not reading the preceding 3 pages to find out), but why bother talking about a trade deficit figure that focuses on goods? Who cares? Shouldn't we want that if America is an advanced nation? Aren't we concerned with services, especially financial services?
because post-industrial western societies that transferred to services and quaternary economies in the 80s basically disenfranchised their entire industrial working classes in the process. increased access to higher education didn't automatically transfer all those steel and auto industry workers into actuaries and corporate lawyers. the wealth gets increasingly concentrated and more and more people get left behind. 'making stuff' was a way of keeping a huge part of the population employed, producing and consuming. financial services are a nebulous and transnational affair. most of the wealth generated sits in giant offshore accounts or is accumulated by mega-funds that don't pay tax.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,592|3638|eXtreme to the maX
That and actuaries and lawyers don't have any real work to do without primary industry to support them in the long term.
There can be a 30 year overhang as industry goes through its death throes, then nothing.

Here its predicted that half of lawyers will be redundant in the next 5-10 years, its already a bloodbath with legal firms collapsing and fighting for work, at the same time everything is going to arbitration instead of court as people get smarter and meaner.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+1,959|2890|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

I don't know if this has been said yet (and I'm not reading the preceding 3 pages to find out), but why bother talking about a trade deficit figure that focuses on goods? Who cares? Shouldn't we want that if America is an advanced nation? Aren't we concerned with services, especially financial services?
The "we don't have to worry about a trade deficit in goods because we will make up the difference in services" argument has been running 30-40 years now and shows no sign of coming good, so its a safe bet its not going to happen ever.
Plus countries like China are now sufficiently advanced they don't need your services, so there's no reason for it to happen.

The US can continue running a deficit with China, while even less developed countries buy their services from China, not America.
Not to hard see where that's going to lead.
They have to spend their dollars somewhere
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
uziq
Member
+138|984

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

I don't know if this has been said yet (and I'm not reading the preceding 3 pages to find out), but why bother talking about a trade deficit figure that focuses on goods? Who cares? Shouldn't we want that if America is an advanced nation? Aren't we concerned with services, especially financial services?
The "we don't have to worry about a trade deficit in goods because we will make up the difference in services" argument has been running 30-40 years now and shows no sign of coming good, so its a safe bet its not going to happen ever.
Plus countries like China are now sufficiently advanced they don't need your services, so there's no reason for it to happen.

The US can continue running a deficit with China, while even less developed countries buy their services from China, not America.
Not to hard see where that's going to lead.
They have to spend their dollars somewhere
it's only a matter of time before the average quality
of their goods and services reaches western norms. it's not exactly beyond their ability. there's already a busy industry in technological and industrial plagiarism. they are learning fast. we can't bank on something forever being more desirable because it was 'made in the usa'. that might work for a fender guitar now but it won't work in the future.

what the west will retain a lead in is some 'luxury' or 'prestige' goods, for e.g. elite educations and fancy cars or fashion brands. you can't sustain an advanced economy and society on those petrol fumes, though. we need something else for our own populations. better yet, we should go for fully automated luxury communism, or a universal basic income and redistribution of the wealth we do have to work with. otherwise our traditional labour base are going to become a braying crowd of disaffected fascists.

Last edited by uziq (2016-12-23 03:13:38)

SuperJail Warden
Member
+166|1252
We should probably stop bringing in a lot of unskilled laborers or letting other countries abuse our work visa system. I don't trust the government or Trumpist to go along with other changes and redistribution plans after that though.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+1,959|2890|London, England

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


The "we don't have to worry about a trade deficit in goods because we will make up the difference in services" argument has been running 30-40 years now and shows no sign of coming good, so its a safe bet its not going to happen ever.
Plus countries like China are now sufficiently advanced they don't need your services, so there's no reason for it to happen.

The US can continue running a deficit with China, while even less developed countries buy their services from China, not America.
Not to hard see where that's going to lead.
They have to spend their dollars somewhere
it's only a matter of time before the average quality
of their goods and services reaches western norms. it's not exactly beyond their ability. there's already a busy industry in technological and industrial plagiarism. they are learning fast. we can't bank on something forever being more desirable because it was 'made in the usa'. that might work for a fender guitar now but it won't work in the future.

what the west will retain a lead in is some 'luxury' or 'prestige' goods, for e.g. elite educations and fancy cars or fashion brands. you can't sustain an advanced economy and society on those petrol fumes, though. we need something else for our own populations. better yet, we should go for fully automated luxury communism, or a universal basic income and redistribution of the wealth we do have to work with. otherwise our traditional labour base are going to become a braying crowd of disaffected fascists.
I meant it literally. Dollars are useless to them in their own economy, they have to spend them. Whether it's in services or buying our treasury bonds or buying real estate or trading with other countries that accept dollars, the money has to be spent. When we go to the money changer it seems automatic, but there has to be someone on the other side that is willing to buy our money in order for the conversion to happen. Your pounds aren't destroyed and euros created, a swap has to occur. The Chinese aren't going to just toss trillions of dollars into a vault and sit on it, it would be destroyed by inflation. So they spend it. It's how trade works.

And seriously consider changing your name to pessimiq.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|4248

Dilbert_X wrote:

That and actuaries and lawyers don't have any real work to do without primary industry to support them in the long term.
There can be a 30 year overhang as industry goes through its death throes, then nothing.

Here its predicted that half of lawyers will be redundant in the next 5-10 years, its already a bloodbath with legal firms collapsing and fighting for work, at the same time everything is going to arbitration instead of court as people get smarter and meaner.
AI and computer automation will kill off a lot of 'skilled' and other high paid industries.

financial services will be getting rekt by fintech.

lawyers are going to get rekt, but first by the big four professional service firms (kpmg, pwc, ey and delloite). it's mostly that lawyers are pricing themselves out of the market. makes no sense that your legal fees are 30-40% of your recovery money.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|4248

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


The "we don't have to worry about a trade deficit in goods because we will make up the difference in services" argument has been running 30-40 years now and shows no sign of coming good, so its a safe bet its not going to happen ever.
Plus countries like China are now sufficiently advanced they don't need your services, so there's no reason for it to happen.

The US can continue running a deficit with China, while even less developed countries buy their services from China, not America.
Not to hard see where that's going to lead.
They have to spend their dollars somewhere
it's only a matter of time before the average quality
of their goods and services reaches western norms. it's not exactly beyond their ability. there's already a busy industry in technological and industrial plagiarism. they are learning fast. we can't bank on something forever being more desirable because it was 'made in the usa'. that might work for a fender guitar now but it won't work in the future.

what the west will retain a lead in is some 'luxury' or 'prestige' goods, for e.g. elite educations and fancy cars or fashion brands. you can't sustain an advanced economy and society on those petrol fumes, though. we need something else for our own populations. better yet, we should go for fully automated luxury communism, or a universal basic income and redistribution of the wealth we do have to work with. otherwise our traditional labour base are going to become a braying crowd of disaffected fascists.
It costs china more money to produce high quality goods than western countries. It's not about whether they can do it or not, it's whether it'll be cost effective.

cost of doing business in china is quite high and it's getting more expensive. their double digit GDP growth also meant income has been skyrocketing.

what i'm really scared of is china's possible and upcoming real estate bubble which is essentially the driving force of their economy now. if it ever crashes i doubt they'll ever recover ala japan.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
uziq
Member
+138|984

Cybargs wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:


They have to spend their dollars somewhere
it's only a matter of time before the average quality
of their goods and services reaches western norms. it's not exactly beyond their ability. there's already a busy industry in technological and industrial plagiarism. they are learning fast. we can't bank on something forever being more desirable because it was 'made in the usa'. that might work for a fender guitar now but it won't work in the future.

what the west will retain a lead in is some 'luxury' or 'prestige' goods, for e.g. elite educations and fancy cars or fashion brands. you can't sustain an advanced economy and society on those petrol fumes, though. we need something else for our own populations. better yet, we should go for fully automated luxury communism, or a universal basic income and redistribution of the wealth we do have to work with. otherwise our traditional labour base are going to become a braying crowd of disaffected fascists.
It costs china more money to produce high quality goods than western countries. It's not about whether they can do it or not, it's whether it'll be cost effective.
as i said, they are learning fast. they are basically having a second wind of neocolonialism in africa, for a start.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+166|1252
Even if America collapses at least westerners get to watch China put itself in debt with stupid interventions in Africa for the remainder of the 21St century.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|4248

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Even if America collapses at least westerners get to watch China put itself in debt with stupid interventions in Africa for the remainder of the 21St century.
china has a massive private debt issue with it's real estate and share market.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
SuperJail Warden
Member
+166|1252
Second time on the same page you miss the point of my post to drop some China facts on me.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2017 Jeff Minard