Winning?
33 responses | 0 likes
Started by cfdr - Dec. 3, 2018, 8:50 a.m.

https://tinyurl.com/y9yglnps

Carmaker Shares Surge After Trump Mysteriously Tweets China Will Reverse Auto Tariffs

I had to laugh when I read that someone had posted that Trump had "given away the store" to Xi.  Did he take tariffs off Chinese goods?  No, he only delayed new tariffs for three months.

What did Xi get?  That delay on tariffs, plus he saves face in importing soybeans China seems to need.

Makes a person think, doesn't it, that Xi really does not want those increased tariffs?

Hard to avoid the conclusion that the world's economies are dependent on the US economy.


Then, this just out:

https://tinyurl.com/yaonf7mm

As one of his first acts in office, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and his counterparts from three Central American countries have signed an agreement to formulate a plan which will stop the flow of migrants seeking asylum in the United States.

Note the words - "and his counterparts from three Central American countries."


We need to take a moment, all of us, to be thankful for a President who is not incompetent, and who has the best interests of our country at heart!

What a refreshing change. 

Comments
Re: Winning?
0 likes
By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 9:16 a.m.
Like Reply

"As one of his first acts in office, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and his counterparts from three Central American countries have signed an agreement to formulate a plan which will stop the flow of migrants seeking asylum in the United States."
 
Surprise, surprise !!! Did you think that Mexico wants those "thugs, rapists and murders" parked there while they attempt to get past the border patrol ?

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 9:19 a.m.
Like Reply

"Makes a person think, doesn't it, that Xi really does not want those increased tariffs?"

Do we ?


By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 9:36 a.m.
Like Reply

"Carmaker Shares Surge After Trump Mysteriously Tweets China Will Reverse Auto Tariffs"

"(Chinese policy makers earlier this year had agreed to lower tariffs on US cars before the trade war erupted in the spring)."

"As Bloomberg pointed out, a reduction in Chinese tariffs would benefit Daimler and BMW more than US carmakers like General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co., as the German luxury brands dominate the top 10 list of car imports to China"

If your selective headline posting makes you happy, then more power to you.

Re: Winning?
0 likes
By wglassfo - Dec. 3, 2018, 10:38 a.m.
Like Reply

The only reason the world looks to the USA is the reserve dollar and the willingness of the USA to print USD from thin air and add to the debt, both consumer and gov't debt. Think student loans and car sale payments not to mention housing. plus just plain old adding to house hold revolving debt. [bank and credit card debt, plus advance pay check loans] to name a few

Given the USA is willing to print massive amounts of dollars, from thin air to shop at Wall Mart, pay for social benefits and a military to name just a few, this can only lead to a eventual crisis of loss of confidence in the USD. Then the chickens will come home to roost  The world will want to sell massive amounts of USD as USA default will be a major concern. Until then the USA just keeps on printing money from thin air and adding to the debt, which most people can see will not continue.

China is entering the age of advanced technology and most  current tech from the USA is obsolete [not everything but more and more every day]

Trump wants to make America great again. Code words for going back to maybe 1970 when assembly line workers had jobs. Well if Trump wants assembly line jobs, who will buy the high priced product produced. China is investing in advanced technology with skilled workers, money for infastructure whilst America wants to turn back the clock and can't even repair crumbling road, bridges air port and modern transportation. The truck is more expensive but how else can goods arrive when no other means is available that is not already used to capacity. The truck should only go from rail head yard to local urban centres not used as long haul capacity.

Can anybody tell me what Trump gained from the china USA summit other than some energy sales, a few soybean sales[with china deciding how much to buy] and not much else. Not to mention the clown act at the G-20 summit.

Trump went into that china meeting with the desire to return America to the 1970 era of the assembly line glory days. China gained access to stuff they needed and Trump got very little.

America and Trump should look ahead 10-20 yrs but I don't see that happening.

The whole USA and Canadian economic system is one big mess.

Nobody in the USA cares about tomorrow, which is the really big issues of china-USA trade relations.

The USA power house is limited in time if Trump continues to want a return to the 1970 with unskilled assembly line workers and a willingness to print massive amounts of fiat from thin air to pay for  social benefits, the military etc.

Today may look good but tomorrow does not look so good. Enjoy while it lasts

3rd world countries want into the USA but countries like Canada etc want no part of crossing the border into the USA, as a place to live and work.

Why do you think the unskilled worker wants into the USA adding to a problem of vast numbers of unskilled workers, seeking social benefits and adding to the USA debt.

This can not continue unless the USA has the courage to forge ahead with a different economic policy goal

Trump is taking the USA back into the wilderness of yesterday

So far, a new forward thinking economic policy is not going to happen and everybody will pay the price.

And lord help us if socialism gains a stronger voice in economic policy, by virtue of the ballot.

That would be the final nail in the coffin of a world American power house in decline

The above senerio would be a gradual process

Increased numbers of elected socialism members of congress would be a fast and brutual end of the empire


By cfdr - Dec. 3, 2018, 10:50 a.m.
Like Reply

Surprise, surprise !!! Did you think that Mexico wants those "thugs, rapists and murders" parked there while they attempt to get past the border patrol ?

And who do you think was responsible for them "parked there" rather than being released into the US??

Your severe case of TDS is getting in the way of your thinking, Carl.

By cfdr - Dec. 3, 2018, 10:53 a.m.
Like Reply

"Makes a person think, doesn't it, that Xi really does not want those increased tariffs?"

Do we ?

Chinese businesses are paying for by far the bulk of the ones currently in force.  The US is, according to the WH, raking in lots of money from the tariffs.

Without the tariffs, we would still be giving away jobs and intellectual property.

You bet, we had better want them!

By cfdr - Dec. 3, 2018, 10:57 a.m.
Like Reply

"As Bloomberg pointed out, a reduction in Chinese tariffs would benefit Daimler and BMW more than US carmakers like General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co., as the German luxury brands dominate the top 10 list of car imports to China"

If your selective headline posting makes you happy, then more power to you.

Once again, you didn't even bother to read the article, did you, Carl?  You just make your assumptions and don't bother to even look to see if they are reasonable.

Ironically, shares of German companies like Daimler and BMW outperformed US auto stocks because many of the cars they export to China are manufactured in the US.

"because many of the cars they export to China are manufactured in the US"

(I made it bold for you, Carl.)

Re: Winning?
0 likes
By wglassfo - Dec. 3, 2018, 11:37 a.m.
Like Reply

I see a lot of people have positive thinking about car sale tariffs being removed from sales into china.

 What kind of Kool Aid are you folks drinking??

1st of all you can bet the americian model will be much more expensive than domestic Chinese models. Americian workers wages alone will increase the cost of americian sales price. Then you have to transport those cars to Chinese ports of entry and then distribute to sales room locations. All of which puts the price higher then domestic cars. Add in the Chinese advantage of robot production and which Chinese buyer will pay more for foreign models

That car thing was a very minor concession for Xi to concede. On the other hand Trump can brag about his deal making ability and everybody comes away with a win, in the eyes of the media and americian public.

But really, think a bit

Not only will the USA model be more expensive, but the market for americian cars is extremely limited in china. You have a billion people but only a fraction can buy a car. The last time we were in china the cost [tax] of just getting in line to buy was extremely high[more than the cost of the car] and the wait time was at least 10 yrs. thus eliminating many would be buyers. This was done on purpose to limit the number of potential car buyers. Not everybody in china can buy a car as the potential grid lock  would be impossible. You can't fathom the number of people in china and not everybody can just go down to the show room and buy a car. The number of car sales are limited by the infrastructure and just plain old space available. I saw veggie gardens growing on land that was available from road sides with on and off ramps. Land space is precious in china and every inch is used for something. Mass transit will remain the means of moving mass numbers of people from point A to B every day. Plus motor bikes, scooters and bicycles for shopping etc. The whole family can ride on a very small motor bike. Amazing but true. Kids sit on handle bars or hang off the side.. Have you ever seen a hundred or more bicycles lined up at a stop light waiting to turn green. You have no idea what a billion people that need to go from point A to B every day is like. A car is not even in the thoughts of most people. It just is not practical.

The number of car sales has to be limited and if the car barrier is removed it will not be the road to riches the americian people think. You have to be in china to understand they have very different needs than americians have.  A car is very low on the list of needs or wants in china. Especially an American made model. Even electric will meet with limited sales simply because there is no room to drive your car and park it etc. Most people who do have a car use it once or twice a yr to visit relatives in far away places but the bullet train will gradually replace the need for a car to go a long distance., The rest of the yr it sits under a cloth to protect it from the elements if you do own a car. Trucks are much more plentiful in china than cars.

Trucks have a use in short distance hauling of food etc but cars are an expense and a pain to own

Just think in N.Y or major urban centers in NA. Many people do not own a car for obvious reasons. Kids in high density urban centers don't even care if they have a drivers licience. Multiply that by many magnitudes of numbers and you can see why very few people in china will ever own a car. There is simply not enough room to add to the number of cars.

Hard to believe, I know but go to china and see for yourself

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 11:44 a.m.
Like Reply

Carmaker Shares Surge After Trump Mysteriously Tweets China Will Reverse Auto Tariffs
There I made it bold for you.

"And who do you think was responsible for them "parked there" rather than being released into the US??"
How many caravans were there under Obama, who never advocated open borders ?

Without the tariffs, we would still be giving away jobs and intellectual property.
We still are giving away jobs and intellectual property.

Once again, you didn't even bother to read the article, did you, Carl?
Where the Hell do you think I got the quotes that were not supporting your initial post in this thread ?

Omg, I'm engaged in a debate ! Must be my TDS.

By TimNew - Dec. 3, 2018, 12:22 p.m.
Like Reply

'How many caravans were there under Obama, who never advocated open borders ?"

Are you blaming Trump for Caravans?  Now that's TDS :-)


BTW, Obama may not have wanted open borders,  but he was recorded actually encouraging illegal aliens to vote. And I Still maintain that if you support sanctuary cities,  you support open borders. 


By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 1:28 p.m.
Like Reply

Tim, I was responding to"And who do you think was responsible for them "parked there" rather than being released into the US??" … cf giving credit to Trump for the caravan being stalled.

" I Still maintain that if you support sanctuary cities,  you support open borders. "

Apples and oranges. sanctuary cities protect long term residents by not cooperating with the authorities, but they do cooperate with the police if there is criminal activity involved.

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 1:34 p.m.
Like Reply

Wayne, you are a voice of reason … but no one listens or responds.

By TimNew - Dec. 3, 2018, 2:03 p.m.
Like Reply

'Apples and oranges. sanctuary cities protect long term residents by not cooperating with the authorities, but they do cooperate with the police if there is criminal activity involved."

So,  you believe that you can support the idea that entering the country illegally is not criminal activity while opposing open borders.  BTW, Can you tell me how you know if someone is a long term resident if they are here illegally?  Do you just ask them?


Do you see a potential flaw in that logic?  Anyone?  Ferris?  Ferris Bueller?

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 2:48 p.m.
Like Reply

"how do you know if someone is a long term resident "

If you've been saying "hi" for years every time you pass them on the street.

If you've been buying stuff in their mom and pop store for some time.

If their kids went to school with your kids.

If their Priest calls them by their first name. 

Can't think of any more right now ... TDS is a bitch.

By TimNew - Dec. 3, 2018, 3:14 p.m.
Like Reply

So, the government advocating these sanctuary cities has all that information and they somehow convey that to all the law enforcement agents, and everyone he needs to know, knows who has been here for a while. 


Why, it's.  It's, IT's BRILLIANT!!!

By mcfarm - Dec. 3, 2018, 3:56 p.m.
Like Reply

laws, boarders, fences, we don't need any of that. Ol berky saw you before then what berky says is all we need.......not that he thinks much about being such an elite or anything

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 4:49 p.m.
Like Reply

OK, Tim, let's get brilliantly simplistic. If the city government gets inquiries from the INS, they do not cooperate. If the inquiry is from the police, they do cooperate.

Re: Winning?
0 likes
By wglassfo - Dec. 3, 2018, 6:07 p.m.
Like Reply

Tks Carl

Maybe I should start my own threads instead of piggy back on somebody else

By carlberky - Dec. 3, 2018, 7:13 p.m.
Like Reply

Wayne, every thing you said was pertinent to this thread.

By metmike - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:39 a.m.
Like Reply

Wayne,

You can do both and are doing just fine either way.

By TimNew - Dec. 4, 2018, 3:37 a.m.
Like Reply

So, we enforce laws and prosecute, unless those laws involve entering the country illegally.   But of course,  when they are actually attempting to cross the border,  that's illegal. Once they've crossed the border, it's no longer illegal and we won't enforce the law.    Seems real simple..  


While we're at it,  we won't enforce voting laws after the fact.  If you are caught attempting to vote illegally,  you'll be prosecuted.   But after you've voted,  it's OK. That means we support voting laws but we also support sanctuary votes.


This should work for bank robbery too.   If you are caught in the act,  off to the pokey you go.  Once you've made a clean get away, the money is yours.  That means we support robbery laws but also support sanctuary robbery.


It all becomes quite simple when you look at it like that.



By cfdr - Dec. 4, 2018, 9:58 a.m.
Like Reply

Without the tariffs, we would still be giving away jobs and intellectual property.
We still are giving away jobs and intellectual property.

But, finally, we have a president who is not incompetent and who is actually trying to do something about the problem.


Once again, you didn't even bother to read the article, did you, Carl?
Where the Hell do you think I got the quotes that were not supporting your initial post in this thread ?

That makes it even worse, Carl.  By your logic, when GM invests in manufacturing cars in China, that investment does not benefit China.

Again, trying to explain economics to a liberal is like explaining satellites to a flat-earther.

Do you have any clue why it is that the US is the only economy in the world that is robust right now? 

By carlberky - Dec. 4, 2018, 11:04 a.m.
Like Reply

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/01/05/the-fastest-growing-and-shrinking-economies-in-2018

"Do you have any clue why it is that the US is the only economy in the world that is robust right now?". Sadly wrong. 

"according to the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), the world’s GDP is expected to increase by 2.7% this year, just slightly  less than the 2.9% registered in 2017. Once again, the biggest contributor will be China. The world’s second-biggest economy is projected to grow by 5.8% this year,  representing roughly a third of the total global expansion."

Off the top of my head, the US grew by 2.1% in 2017 and a projected 2.2% in 2018 ... a "robust" one tenth of a percent. 

Tim, please correct me if I'm wrong.

By cfdr - Dec. 4, 2018, 11:18 a.m.
Like Reply

Once again, the biggest contributor will be China. The world’s second-biggest economy is projected to grow by 5.8% this year,  representing roughly a third of the total global expansion.

So, if we assume those numbers are meaningful, how do you think China is managing to grow?  Why is it such a major deal for them when our President puts tariffs on goods they ship to the US?  Why don't they merely "pivot" to some other direction?  Or simply turn inward and build demand in China?

Common sense, Carl.  The US is the indispensable country right now.

If we continue on the path we were on before Donald Trump, however, that will not be the case - in just a few years.  I'm afraid that it's people like you - and frey and mojo and vandeplas - who want to hurry that along. 

By carlberky - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:08 p.m.
Like Reply

So, you are saying that our growth is not robust because china is like the bat is to the indespensable cow ?

By TimNew - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:13 p.m.
Like Reply

US GDP for 2018 is projected to be somewhat north of 3. 19 and 20 are a bit more conservative.

By carlberky - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:20 p.m.
Like Reply

"Again, trying to explain economics to a liberal is like explaining satellites to a flat-earther."

Professor, I never asked you to explain economics to me ... just some of the easily deflated statements you make.

By jaguar - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:32 p.m.
Like Reply

Rocks, paper.....

By metmike - Dec. 4, 2018, 12:45 p.m.
Like Reply

"Again, trying to explain economics to a liberal is like explaining satellites to a flat-earther."

cfdr,

You contribute oodles and oodles of substantive posting with value but comments like that are the sure fire way to cause one side to be defensive  and NOT objectively read/interpret good points that you have.

And it's being disrespectful to the individual(s) that you are responding too.

Thanks for all the other great stuff though!

Mike

Re: Winning?
0 likes
By wglassfo - Dec. 4, 2018, 1:22 p.m.
Like Reply

I may be wrong but somebody estimated that 62% of all settlements to pay for goods bought and sold in the world use USD as a medium of exchange, or currency to do business.

That number of 62% to pay for goods using USD will gradually be reduced. One example is the treaty between china and Russia to use their own currency to exchange oil and make payments. They are having a bit of difficulty trying to establish currency values but I suspect due to current sanctions they will get it working some time soon.

That 62% number has to become less and less as the world will not want to use USD for payment of goods and services. Countries will do anything to avoid sanctions and keep on doing business. India may enter and want to use something other than USD. They are in the process of deciding what to do as of now. That is a big chunk of business if they abandon the USD.

As time goes along, the USD will lose out as one after another country see no use for keeping USD reserves or at least as many USD  

When we see that sanctions no longer have the desired affect, that is when the USA has lost the top dog place in world dominance.

Today we watch as china and Russia pay no attention to sanctions in the sale of oil from Russia to china as they work out details to use their own currencies as payment. This use of other currencies can only become more common. As of now India is thinking of ways to maybe by-pas the use of USD in their trade. That is a huge chunk of trade especially if they don't use USD

Countries that need to keep reserves of USD is the only reason why the USA is dominant. Think of the day when USD are no longer wanted or needed and those dollars become sellers on the world market

Not good and it won't end well.

Printing USD from thin air, selling USA bonds on the world market may be a problem.

Re: Winning?
0 likes
By wglassfo - Dec. 4, 2018, 1:26 p.m.
Like Reply

Sorry for repeating Russia and china thought.

No idea what I was doing to repeat this paragraph

By cfdr - Dec. 4, 2018, 4:44 p.m.
Like Reply

 but comments like that are the sure fire way to cause one side to be defensive  and NOT objectively read/interpret good points that you have.

Yes, that's why the frustration.  I keep thinking that there must be ONE person on the Left who will look at current events and see what is going on right in front of our eyes.  One person who is not blinded by TDS.

If you watch both CNN or MSNBC and Fox News, the conclusion is inescapable that the DOJ and the FBI were weaponized to prevent Donald Trump from being elected.  It is inescapable that recently they have been in protection mode - doing everything possible to avoid accountability for their actions.  I keep thinking that at least ONE person on the Left will look at what has been going on and recognize this - but there is not even one.

It's funny.  When I was young, we (the Left) distrusted the FBI and the CIA.  We knew that they were capable of doing bad things.  And, that they were not only capable, they did bad things.  The protests in Berkeley were about free speech, not the suppression of speech.  Today, the Left is blindly defending the Intelligence Communities - the reason is obvious.

As I said earlier, it is hopeless.  One side is willfully blind.  FBI agents' texts clearly show the bias and the intent to have an "insurance policy" if Trump actually wins.  One text of an agent who went to work for Mueller clearly states that "there is no "there" there."  They know there was no collusion, even before they went to work to destroy the man.  It is getting more and more clear that Mueller was appointed immediately after Sessions recused himself because that was how to limit the damage and hide evidence with the excuse of an "ongoing investigation."  There are even no protests from the Left when a whistleblower's home is raided by the FBI.

And, so, I can now see that there is not even ONE person who will look at the evidence objectively.  This country will, in all likelihood, have to crash and burn.  This is the time of year when I enjoy working on my models of the markets.  I think I'll concentrate on them for awhile.  I can now see that there is not enough intelligence or integrity on the Left to make a conversation worthwhile.

By mcfarm - Dec. 4, 2018, 6:21 p.m.
Like Reply

and on top of the evidence in cf's post we have what is obvious. Mueller had no crime to investigate. Mueller has trapped people with process crimes after his investigation started, not before. Repeat go watch and Bongino's excellent summary of this entire mess. Wow just did it again. Made  logical plea to the left.