[Atlantis]

I don't know if this precious morsel of economic wisdom from the Trump camp has already been posted:

Trump exploring stricter environmental rules for imported cars as ‘nontariff barrier’

Just days ago, administration announced an easing of emissions standards for domestically manufactured automobiles

Bloomberg News/Landov
An employee dusts the logo on a Volkswagen electric automobile at the Frankfurt Motor Show in September.
The Trump administration is pursuing ways to protect domestic vehicle manufacturing by forcing imported cars to meet stricter environmental rules when entering the country, according to senior administration and industry officials, a move that would make imports more expensive.

The cost of meeting the stiffer import standards would, at least in part, be passed along to U.S. consumers. This style of “nontariff barrier” — a protectionist stratagem the U.S. has long condemned in other countries — is designed to reduce the relative cost of cars manufactured in the U.S., by American workers, the officials said.

Trump has asked the Environmental Protection Agency and several other agencies, including the Commerce and Transportation departments, to pursue plans to use such laws as the Clean Air Act to subject cars made overseas to strict emissions-standards testing and reviews when entering the U.S. The rules could effectively require more expensive technology on some foreign cars or subject those cars to more expensive hurdles that can be billed to the manufacturer or importer.

Either option would likely raise the costs for foreign cars sold in the U.S., making domestically produced cars cheaper by comparison. This effect of raising prices on consumers is common to most nontariff barriers, which seek to penalize imports through measures other than tariffs or duties.

This is a simplified version of an article in the WSJ.

"This effect of raising prices on consumers is common to most nontariff barriers, which seek to penalize imports through measures other than tariffs or duties."

I think the WSJ has seen better days. Perhaps this is a result of cost cutting?

"Non-tariff" barriers are to force imported products to adhere to domestic standards. To create two different sets of standards, a low standard for domestic products and a high standard for imported products is certainly not part accepted non-tariff barriers among developed economies. Maybe that's how trade works in the mind a a child-president, but certainly not in the real world, unless Trump wants to destroy the WTO, in which case he could just impose arbitrary tariffs and channel money to the US treasury at the same time.

Anyways, it would destroy US industry in the medium-term because the effect would be to encourage foreign companies to develop better technology while US companies would be encouraged to continue producing with old technology.

[One Degree]

@Atlantis

Anyways, it would destroy US industry in the medium-term because the effect would be to encourage foreign companies to develop better technology while US companies would be encouraged to continue producing with old technology.

Economics does not necessarily reflect reality. The US is 5% of the world in both land and people. It is capable of maintaining it’s technology totally isolated. Add to that the US actually is in control of half the world and it is easy to see the US does not need anyone’s cooperation. The US may be waning but the world still needs the US more than the US needs the world.
I do realize you said ‘medium term’ and that is more likely.

[Godstud]

Economics does not necessarily reflect reality.

Where do you get such silly ideas from??? Economics IS reality.

As a social science that studies how a society’s resources are shared, economics (a) describes and analyzes choices about the way goods and services are produced, distributed, and consumed, and (b) assesses the consequences of those choices. The word “economics” comes from the Greek oikos, meaning “household,” and nomos, meaning “rule,” or “governance.” Thus “household management”—the performance of the tasks and services that allow a family to survive and prosper—refers to those economic activities…
https://kids.britannica.com/students/ar ... ics/274118

[One Degree]

Where do you get such silly ideas from??? Economics IS reality.

As a social science that studies how a society’s resources are shared, economics (a) describes and analyzes choices about the way goods and services are produced, distributed, and consumed, and (b) assesses the consequences of those choices. The word “economics” comes from the Greek oikos, meaning “household,” and nomos, meaning “rule,” or “governance.” Thus “household management”—the performance of the tasks and services that allow a family to survive and prosper—refers to those economic activities…
https://kids.britannica.com/students/ar ... ics/274118

My point is economics do not change whether applied to a world of 7 billion or 5% of that. The US is such a large part of the world that it can exist without the rest. Economics do not reflect this reality. This gives the US power the economic theories ignore. The path of harm they project for the US does not include the concessions other countries must make due to our unique Situation. We are easily capable of being self sufficient. How many others have a resource/population balance to equal ours? The economic analysis ignores the bargaining advantage we have. The US will always come out better than projected because of this position unless we continue to artificially increase our population.
Edit: If you look at the population zone based upon latitude that actually supports the world’s people, you would see the 5% the US controls is actually a much larger portion of the world’s habitable zone.

[Crantag]

I have a 2017 Honda, which is currently parked in the US, as I am sat in China.

Over the past couple of months, the value of the car has actually been increasing.

So, these events with respect to effecting higher costs for imported cars could further ease my anxiety about having a car that is parked as I am sat in China, not knowing when it may see the road again.

As far as it goes, economics predictions are really an art of logic, and uncertain until the proper time comes.

I do think Atlantis provided a pretty persuasive outlook.

I'm also curious as to what the Yuan is going to do in the coming time periods. Perhaps it will eventually value upward if it becomes convertible. Of course, unforeseen circumstances leading to the adverse is always a possibility.

As the Yuan is pegged to the dollar, a further curiosity is what the future of the dollar holds. Could the Yuan becoming convertible eventually be a catalyst for the collapsing of the value of the dollar? Or could a secular collapsing of the value of the dollar become a catalyst for the Chinese abandoning the dollar peg?

Maybe I had ought to think about paying my car off once I've saved up enough and trying to ship it to China (I don't think it's simple or cheap, but I also don't think it's impossible). Or maybe I had ought to call my peeps in the states and have them sell it sooner rather than later. Think I'll just bury my head in the sand for a little longer though, with respect to the car. And that gets back to the point about rising costs of imported cars perhaps working in my favor again. Meh, fuck it.

[Crantag]

My point is economics do not change whether applied to a world of 7 billion or 5% of that. The US is such a large part of the world that it can exist without the rest. Economics do not reflect this reality. This gives the US power the economic theories ignore. The path of harm they project for the US does not include the concessions other countries must make due to our unique Situation. We are easily capable of being self sufficient. How many others have a resource/population balance to equal ours? The economic analysis ignores the bargaining advantage we have. The US will always come out better than projected because of this position unless we continue to artificially increase our population.

Mainstream economics explicitly opposes this line of reasoning, even for a country the size of the US.

I have never been 100% sure that they are absolutely correct, but I sort of defer to their reasoning because I don't have sufficient cause to go against them.

One thing though which I feel is pretty certifiable is that in a dynamic economic situation in which trade patterns and linkages are pretty well established, a sudden change in the layout of market relations (based on international trade) will surely have effects on established norms, with respect to input and output markets.

What this means in common speak, is that some businesses which utilize imports for inputs within their production chain will incur supply shortages. This means higher costs of inputs. This in turn means a squeeze on profits, as well as higher prices for consumers.

The obverse of this is also true. Companies that rely on foreign markets for their output will see a shift in the demand for their goods. Both sides of this scenario may cause some businesses to go under.

[One Degree]

Mainstream economics explicitly opposes this line of reasoning, even for a country the size of the US.

I have never been 100% sure that they are absolutely correct, but I sort of defer to their reasoning because I don't have sufficient cause to go against them.

One thing though which I feel is pretty certifiable is that in a dynamic economic situation in which trade patterns and linkages are pretty well established, a sudden change in the layout of market relations (based on international trade) will surely have effects on established norms, with respect to input and output markets.

What this means in common speak, is that some businesses which utilize imports for inputs within their production chain will incur supply shortages. This means higher costs of inputs. This in turn means a squeeze on profits, as well as higher prices for consumers.

The obverse of this is also true. Companies that rely on foreign markets for their output will see a shift in the demand for their goods. Both sides of this scenario may cause some businesses to go under.

I understand these initial problems, but if we still have the same US that responded to a quick change of production that decided WWII, then they will be overcomed quickly. The US has a historical reputation of rapid adaptation that I believe is deserved and can be depended upon.

[One Degree]

I am always curious about weird connections and cultural differences. The US opened China to the world market. China has benefitted beyond anyone’s imaginings. Is our current conflict due to the cultural difference of the West expecting consideration out of gratitude and China seeing no need for such gratitude?
Edit: I am obviously fully embracing being a crazy old man today, sitting in comfort and letting my mind wander. It’s great.

[MistyTiger]

Hey is the Stock Market still on the down swing? I think a lot of investors are nervous about a trade war. It is stupid to ever think that a trade war is easy to win.

Is any sort of war easy to win? Was the Vietnam war easy? Was the Civil War easy? How many people died and how many people are still suffering because of wars such as those? Tell a military veteran that wars are easy to win and see how they take it. I can bet you that most if not all of them will scowl at you and call you dirty names and look at you like you are a huge moron.

[annatar1914]

Hey is the Stock Market still on the down swing? I think a lot of investors are nervous about a trade war. It is stupid to ever think that a trade war is easy to win.

Is any sort of war easy to win? Was the Vietnam war easy? Was the Civil War easy? How many people died and how many people are still suffering because of wars such as those? Tell a military veteran that wars are easy to win and see how they take it. I can bet you that most if not all of them will scowl at you and call you dirty names and look at you like you are a huge moron.

Precisely. Many people have become so weak, so incapable of handling any great measure of suffering or sacrifice, at least in the First World. But War is coming, nonetheless, it's in the nature of the System, it's coping mechanism for economic crises is exactly different varieties of war.

[One Degree]

Precisely. Many people have become so weak, so incapable of handling any great measure of suffering or sacrifice, at least in the First World. But War is coming, nonetheless, it's in the nature of the System, it's coping mechanism for economic crises is exactly different varieties of war.

@MistyTiger
I have been ruminating on this. Does the same mind set that makes war illogical also make us weak? Have we lost the ability to decide which things are worth sacrificing ourselves for? When we decided war was stupid, we also decided we were more important than ANY concept? Did we go from war is illogical to personal sacrifice is illogical?

[jimjam]

Yes I gathered that. And in so doing you revealed a contradiction in your own outlook, which was seemingly based on a vulgar value judgement, e.g. the exception you allowed for solar. From thence I attained my fodder.

Holy shit! That's a brilliant use of the English language . I especially like: "seemingly based on a vulgar value judgement" and "From thence I attained my fodder."

Let us hold in abeyance this inconsequential colloquy and, in a first for pofo, and agree to disharmonize.

[MistyTiger]

@MistyTiger
I have been ruminating on this. Does the same mind set that makes war illogical also make us weak? Have we lost the ability to decide which things are worth sacrificing ourselves for? When we decided war was stupid, we also decided we were more important than ANY concept? Did we go from war is illogical to personal sacrifice is illogical?

Good questions. It's nice to see you back.

Personal sacrifice is not illogical. But this is Trump, he is not sacrificing himself to make life better. He sends out other people's children to do the work. He seems to want to stir the pot and aggressively confront others, particularly the Chinese. When actually, he has made prosperous business deals with the Chinese and now he wants to slap them and punish them? I smell a troop of dirty rats. The war he wants is illogical because the he wants the US to be isolated once again.

People hate Nixon. Nixon's idea to open up trade with China is just brilliant though. How many items that we use daily have parts from China? If tariffs are on all Chinese products, you and I will be paying a whole lot more for the same quality that we have always enjoyed. And tariffs will be hurting farmers, car makers, clothing sellers etc.

War is not illogical. But if the angry person wants to start a war to adjust his twisted sense of justice, then it is illogical. How is international trade hurting the US? The US thrives on trade. Like the US doesn't grow a lot of sugar so we need to get it from places like Australia and Taiwan.

[Crantag]

Holy shit! That's a brilliant use of the English language . I especially like: "seemingly based on a vulgar value judgement" and "From thence I attained my fodder."

Let us hold in abeyance this inconsequential colloquy and, in a first for pofo, and agree to disharmonize.

I tend to write a little bit differently when I'm typing out words laboriously on my phone, while sucking down a cigarette in a toilet stall in the few minutes I can garner in between classes. The result is a more rushed style of prose.

[One Degree]

Good questions. It's nice to see you back.

Personal sacrifice is not illogical. But this is Trump, he is not sacrificing himself to make life better. He sends out other people's children to do the work. He seems to want to stir the pot and aggressively confront others, particularly the Chinese. When actually, he has made prosperous business deals with the Chinese and now he wants to slap them and punish them? I smell a troop of dirty rats. The war he wants is illogical because the he wants the US to be isolated once again.

People hate Nixon. Nixon's idea to open up trade with China is just brilliant though. How many items that we use daily have parts from China? If tariffs are on all Chinese products, you and I will be paying a whole lot more for the same quality that we have always enjoyed. And tariffs will be hurting farmers, car makers, clothing sellers etc.

I was more into philosophical rumination than specifically Trump/China, but you rightly brought me back on topic. Despite my limited budget, I welcome the distance from cheap goods. I have recently started spending much more at local meat and produce markets than to continue forcing Walmart’s ‘fresh’ foods down, whose odors and lack of flavor often make it impossible. We have sacrificed too much for cheap. If Trump can force us to rely more on our own resources, I think it is for the better. The current system can not be sustained anyway. As wages rise in China, India, etc, it collapses. We will soon not have enough poor to make our cheap products. Their increase in wealth will equal our decrease in wealth anyway, so we will lose the power to purchase them.
Edit: Americans side with corporations in international trade because they are shortsighted. They believe we can send our money to other countries to have poor people make us cheap products indefinitely. Do you see the problem? Corporations need cheap labor and people to buy their products. It does not matter to them which America is. They win long term no matter what.

[Rancid]

Over the past couple of months, the value of the car has actually been increasing.

Are you claiming you could sell it for more than you paid for it? This sounds like bullshit.

Give me the model, trim package, and list of modifications if any. Give me what you paid for it, where you bought it. Was is used or new? If used was it certified pre-owned? How many miles were on it when you bought it, and what are the miles on it now. Last, in which city would you resell the car?

[MistyTiger]

I was more into philosophical rumination than specifically Trump/China, but you rightly brought me back on topic. Despite my limited budget, I welcome the distance from cheap goods. I have recently started spending much more at local meat and produce markets than to continue forcing Walmart’s ‘fresh’ foods down, whose odors and lack of flavor often make it impossible. We have sacrificed too much for cheap. If Trump can force us to rely more on our own resources, I think it is for the better. The current system can not be sustained anyway. As wages rise in China, India, etc, it collapses. We will soon not have enough poor to make our cheap products. Their increase in wealth will equal our decrease in wealth anyway, so we will lose the power to purchase them.
Edit: Americans side with corporations in international trade because they are shortsighted. They believe we can send our money to other countries to have poor people make us cheap products indefinitely. Do you see the problem? Corporations need cheap labor and people to buy their products. It does not matter to them which America is. They win long term no matter what.

I understand the pros for buying local. I love local vegetables. But I can't buy an ASUS laptop that's made right down the street or in the next state now, can I? Processor chips are made in China, Taiwan or other countries. Lots of Americans like to buy KIA and that is certainly not local. The tea I drink...many of the ingredients are from China or India. The US does not grow a lot of spices that you can find in Chai or Matcha green tea.

Closing ourselves off to international trad is not wise. We are limiting productivity and reducing our resources.

[jimjam]

China’s aggressive response to Mr. Trump’s tariffs is aimed squarely at products produced in the American heartland, a region that helped send him to the White House. A trade war with China could be particularly devastating to rural economies, especially for pig farmers and soybean and corn growers. Nearly two-thirds of United States soybean exports go to China. In the meantime, Mr. Trump has been escalating his threats, and shows no sign of backing off. On Thursday night, he threatened to impose tariffs on an additional $100 billion in Chinese products. The White House strategy to press China to reform its economic behavior seemed unclear.

No problem .... trade wars are easy to win.............I got this from a guy who sells real estate

[One Degree]

@jimjam you don’t need to be an expert to see a pattern. Trump’s rhetoric is volatile. His actual actions are pretty tame. I see no reason for even mild concern.
A reduction in soybean production might be a good thing too.

[Zamuel]

A trade war with China could be particularly devastating to rural economies, especially for pig farmers and soybean and corn growers. Nearly two-thirds of United States soybean exports go to China.

I can't help but wonder where China intends to find that many (cheap) soybeans to offset American Production? And it occurs to me the Chinese population may not like having a major source of tasty protein (ummm ... Bacon) denied them.

Zam