The economy and the jobs and the cash and the resources that sustain it is one finite cake and China intends to take everyone else’s share.Because its population exceeds that of the US and Europe combined.That’s a Zero sum by definition.One cake split how many ways ?.
The US military is only as strong as the now decimated industrial might that supplies it and pays for it.
Compared to the mid 20th century America is an industrial wasteland and basket case.Much of that capacity having been handed over to Communist China along with the customers.
It’s also got an aversion to the strategy of mutually assured destruction.
Its UK and European allies are now effectively a Communist franchise like former DDR, Yugoslavia and Cuba.
Trump is running scared by necessity but more of the same will just make China even stronger and the US even weaker.Rock and a hard place and only 4 years to make the decision and to turn it around before Biden’s lot are back.
If that’s the case then what is Trump’s problem?
Two examples…
usa buys 433.74 billion worth of goods and sells 178.69 billion worth of goods to china.
Europe sold the us 605.8 billion worth of goods and bought 370.2 billion worth.
There are many many more examples. Trouble is if you spend more than you earn you get into debt basic economics the only way to offset that for a country is either borrowing or higher taxes. The other issue is you also end up with a skills deficit and a labour glut so wages stagnate and fall less taxes so increased borrowing or cuts. Dont believe me look at england
China has sent back some of the new Boeing airliners they bought from the USA.
Yep. That is doing the US manufacturers no good at all.
– – - – …
@carryfast
While we live on one planet (so far) with limited resources, world trade is not a zero sum game. Wealth and genuine spending power, are not zero sum.
Imagine a world where there was no international trade.
Some countries would have an excess of oil. Some an excess of grass and cows. Trading (fairly done) makes for a better life for all of us. We all get wealthier.
Trade is not zero sum.
Trade is not always equal and fair. Not everyone benfits equally.
All true, but that does not mean that all trade is unfair, nor a bad thing.
– – – …
@dennisjavelin
I think you have it correct.
The US is in a trade deficit, with goods.
It is a net importer of goods.
And the italics give the lie to Trump’s overly simplistic idea of trade and economics. Trade os more than just stuff.
I can be a driver for Tesco.
I am in a trade deficit with Tesco for goods. I buy my popcorn there. I sellthem no tomatoes from my greenhouse.
But they pay me to drive their lorries. I am in a services surplus with Tesco. The pay buys my popcorn and my rent.
Trump is ignoring the services the US sells. And it may surprise some that US tourism is about 3% of the US GDP. US automotive sector is also about 3% of GDP.
Hollywood, www services etc are also hugely important, but he is ignoring those when he ta;lkls of a trade deficit and only gives the (mostly inaccurate anyway) figures for trade in goods only.
More than that, all of this ignores foreign investment. Try the first 10mminutes of this. More or Less - The mistake in Trump’s tariff formula - BBC Sounds
However, if you’re a net exporter, you therefore must have a trading surplus with other countries that you trade with giving you a trading surplus.
Would the airline still use flight attendants for an empty aircraft, or use just one to serve food and drinks to the Captain and First Officer, a cargo airliner has no flight attendants, the pilots will heat up their hot meal provided by the company and have access to fresh coffee?
DHL/Fed Ex and so on
Madagascar is a poor country. It sells vanilla to the US for ice cream etc.
It does not want to buy V8 Mustangs nor fleets of Teslas. But might buy a few John Deere tractors
The US is in a tarde deficit with them.
Will imposing tariffs on vanilla make the US better off? Will it make Madagascar buy more US cars?
Maybe the US will use more synthetic flavourings or make more apple sorbet? In which case the US will still not sell it’s cars, and will also lose tractor sales to a country that sees it’s exports fall.
Both lose. (again not zero sum)
And to carry on…
What if the US does now make more artificial flavouring? Or eats apple sorbet?
Is that a fair exchange for the lost tractor sales?
Artificail falvourings will make some trade for the makers. But it is a high tech and employs few people.
Will the extra sorbet make more farmers plant trees? Maybe. So the laid off workers from the John Deere factory can move house and work in the orchards.
But again that is all not going to happen.
Manufacturing is becoming more automated all the time. Fewer jobs are involved all the time.
If Apple phones are made in the US what will happen?
Instead of using a factory with 1,000 people paid $100 a week, there would not be a factory using 1.000 people at $1,000 a week.
If there were Apple would sell fewer phones and need a smaller factory with less money in circulation all round.
So it is likely they would have a higher tech factory with 100 people at £1,000 a week.
The metal bashing jobs are going away. There is a need for a revision of the global economy.
Trying to turn the clock back to the 1950’s when the US was making stuff is not going to work.
As I understand it cargo aircraft are flight crewed the same as passenger planes. Normally two on the flight deck, with a third pilot for long haul. During level flight there need only be one on the flight deck enabling the other to visit loo or get coffee or food etc. No need for extra cabin crew to serve the pilots.
1 Like
Just maybe China has quietly hinted that it may well stop exporting to the US again those goods on which Trump had to back down on the tariff level.
Maybe the wheels are in danger of falling off the Trump wagontrain.
From the Al Jazeera link
" We have a situation where we have a very, very great place. It’s called the United States of America, and it’s been ripped off for years and years,”
Typical Trump statement. The US is and has for decades been the richest country by any just about every measure. But he is still moaning and crying about how hard things are.
.
The US is the global winner of the current system, and Trump wants to radically change it.
Either the US stays where it is, or falls back. Who, apart from an idiot, would play that game?
The article also mentions (as did More or Less) the US Bonds sold abroad. The things that allow US citizens to be consumers, to enable their lifestyle, that Trump ignores.
He takes a very simplistic view of things and hence takes short term actions as he cannot see more than a day in front of him. (often a few hours)
–.–.–.–.
Some are looking at Trump and saying he is like the Grand Old Duke of York. Imposing tariffs and then taking them off.
Here today, gone tomorrow. And when the shouting is over The US will have better deals and the world will go back to how it was.
That is not so.
Trump has not just done some thimngs and then simply reversed them, putting trade back to where it was. Some things have changed permanently.
@maoster mentioned the US defence industry earlier. Trump has by actions in trade and also in respect of NATO made the rest of us doubt the reliability of the US as supplier. Orders for the F35 are now in doubt. https://aviationweek.com/defense/budget-policy-operations/trump-moves-prompt-some-international-f-35-buyers-reconsider . Unreliability of a supplier to provide tech support will make high tech kit unusable. Without continued parts and software who woud buy US in the future? Trump renaging on deals, including deals he negotiated and sugned during his last term, make the US unreliable as a supplier.
And do not make excuses for him. It is not renegotiating for a future deal it is ripping up his own deals, and trying to extort concessions. He is the one “ripping off” the rest. Or tryimg to.
For all his rhetoric he is doing damage to the US now and in the long term too.
And the whole world will suffer too.
Apart, of course, from Russia and N Korea who are not subject to his big new tariffs.
He wants to trade more with Russia. He wants now that Ukraine give in to Russian advances so he can trade with Putin.
Russia has had it’s economy weakened and now Trump wants to give them a breathing sapce so they can regroup and have another go later.
Worse than mere appeasement, that is actually aiding an aggressor.
–.–.–.–.
But every cloud has a silver lining, 
…
Or so the saying goes… and the silver ling to Trump’s actions are…uummm… anyone?
When a clown moves into a palace he doesn’t become a king, the palace instead becomes a circus.” - Turkish Proverb
1 Like
Trump was asked if he would support a “Millionaire tax”. This was his response:
"He added: “You lose a lot of money if you do that. And other countries that have done it have lost a lot of people. They lose their wealthy people. That would be bad because the wealthy people pay the tax.”
That’s some comment coming from a man who has assiduously avoided paying tax for a number of years. There are clearly no mirrors in the White House.
1 Like
You can be rest assured that any country that currently has US military equipment will be getting their spares re-engineered as we speak. Another sales loss to the US economy.
That is akin to the debunked “trickle down” theory of economics.
“Allowing the already rich to get richer will let them spend more.Their wealth trickles down.”
That is not so.
Giving money to those who have enough does not improve the flow of money. It enables gthe rich to put that money aside.
Giving money to the poor means they spend all of it to fulfill their needs and their wants.
More income for the poor makes for a bigger overall economy.
We all do win that way. As said it is not a zero sum game.
Maybe the rich have a slightly reduced proportion of wealth, but in overall terms, all are actually better off.
Trump and his disciples are jealous people. They do not care if all lose out so long as others lose more than they do.
A bit like a “dog in a manger” attitude.
1 Like
Cheers Fran.
That’s similar to the FedEx aircraft in the Castaway film.