Trump touts falling aluminum prices after tariffs

[Swordsmyth]

Things fall here n there.

Stocks dive as US proposes more China tariffs, Dow falls 700
PBS NewsHour-Apr 6, 2018

Panic selling, we shall see what happens as time goes by.

[enhanced_deficit]

Panic selling, we shall see what happens as time goes by.

To be fair, some even had termed Trump election a result of "panic voting",emotonal response to "threats" posed by Bracak Hussein Obama phenomenon post Iraqi freedom revenge war.

[osan]

From what I have seen on the idiot tube at a friend's place, it would appear China and USA are fixing to get into a trade war. That is, at least, the timbre of he saber-rattling being presented in the news that I have seen today. Who knows whether that is even marginally trustworthy...

It they choose that path, get ready for some lousy times.

The question here for me would seem to be: who stands to benefit from this, and in what ways? MIC?

Anyone?

I don't think we can credibly believe that this will be undertaken through ignorance, as there is far too much historical data to indicate trade wars lead to nothing good, broadly speaking. I certainly do not believe the Chinese would allow ego to drive their decisions. Trump... maybe, but I am as yet not willing to accept that he is that weak and stupid, but you never know. But if the parties in question are not that clued-out or weak-minded, then what would be driving the decision to take this road? After all, we could be talking about economic upheaval for years. It could lead to good old-fashioned hot-warfare. Could that be the objective here?

[Swordsmyth]

From what I have seen on the idiot tube at a friend's place, it would appear China and USA are fixing to get into a trade war. That is, at least, the timbre of he saber-rattling being presented in the news that I have seen today. Who knows whether that is even marginally trustworthy...

It they choose that path, get ready for some lousy times.

The question here for me would seem to be: who stands to benefit from this, and in what ways? MIC?

Anyone?

I don't think we can credibly believe that this will be undertaken through ignorance, as there is far too much historical data to indicate trade wars lead to nothing good, broadly speaking. I certainly do not believe the Chinese would allow ego to drive their decisions. Trump... maybe, but I am as yet not willing to accept that he is that weak and stupid, but you never know. But if the parties in question are not that clued-out or weak-minded, then what would be driving the decision to take this road? After all, we could be talking about economic upheaval for years. It could lead to good old-fashioned hot-warfare. Could that be the objective here?

Trump is trying to MAGA and collapse China, China is trying to finish off our economy for good.
I'm not sure how the chicken race will end but unless Trump flinches first China will end up worse off than we will.
I hope China has the sense to back down or things will get ugly.

[EBounding]

[juleswin]

And did you not discover that such isolations in multivariate systems often would not paint a sufficient causal picture? Synergistic effects based on complex balances of many factors often constitute a vertitable Gordian Knot.

It depends on the type of research you were doing. Ours were mostly genetic research, especially splicing one gene or combining one gene to a cell to see the effect on tumor suppressing. And to be honest with you, it was one gene at a time all the way through my exit from the job. Synergistic effect I guess would be for later studies. Regardless, it is not uncommon for researchers to isolate 1 factor to see the effect it has on a study subject.

I must agree that this seems unlikely. There must be more to the truth than this. It does, however, demonstrate that imposition of a tariff does not perforce lead to a rise - at least not immediately. Once again, complex systems can be painfully difficult to analyze correctly, one of the real sticky-wickets being the question of how do we know when the analysis is in fact correct.

Like you said before, there are other variables at play but when we are talking about tariffs alone which by its nature increases the price of buying the product. If everything else remains the same will always lead to an increase in price. Now those other factors that are at play can dampen or cover up this price change. But non the less, the price change will happen.

As of this moment, that is resolutely disproved by reality, at least in the short term.

The chart I posted earlier actually shows a sharp price increase within the last 3-4 days. Maybe that is just when the price increase showed up but reality actually agrees with me. Aluminium prices did go up after trending downwards since January.

That is not necessarily true. As I have posited, it is possible to apply a tariff with the intention of forcing the perceived offender to play nicely, both hands on the table. Whether it works remains to be seen. The result a 4% decrease in the commodity price demonstrates that a tariff does not of necessity have to result in higher prices; that other factors may have a more pronounced effect on price. Only time, and the manner in which China chooses to respond, stands to possibly lend clarity on the question for the longer term.

Lets assume the intent of this tariff on steel and aluminium is to get China to reduce the tariffs they have on our other goods. Well, if they do that, it would only reduce the prices on those goods and not aluminium. Aluminium price would still be higher since it is now experinceing a higher tax to buy than it was previously getting. Anyway you cut it, aluminium price goes it.

Eminently valid point. However, I suspect the picture may be more complicated and possibly more subtle than this. I had a notion of how and it just zipped right out of my head, so it may be a while before I can respond intelligently to any request I put up. Sorry about that.

Not necessarily. What if it proves out that proper application of such tariffing against those not playing nicely can actually result in the offender altering his practices based in circumspectly applied enlightened self-interest? The whole basis of international macroeconomics would be altered for the better in a fundamental way.

Play nicely could also mean, China adopting a higher minimum wage(as opposed to slave wages) and better environmental standards. I guess this could lead to a better way of doing business. But it would still leave us with higher prices. Circumspectly applied enlightened self interest? that is a load of words to swallow . But in the case, I think China can argue that their circumspectly applied, enlightened self interest is already being served. They are making money and the US are getting a cheap product.

The real sticky wickets there, however, would be knowing how much to apply, for how long, knowing when to remove the tariffs, and having the integrity and sense of enlightened self-interest to follow through, rather than give in to greed and power lust. Given that last bit, perhaps we are screwed no matter how this works out. Ugh.



Well said.

I think the best tariffs is the one that is big enough to product local producers from cheaper imports flooding the market. One that would target not just the raw material but the finished good and final one that would last long enough for local producers to gain expertise and experience. So the way I look at it, price increase is a good thing because those companies will need to be able to make some profits while they learn to make cheaper products. This is why I respond to this whole idea that a tariff somehow leads to a reduction in prices

[Madison320]

The question here for me would seem to be: who stands to benefit from this, and in what ways? MIC?

Anyone?

In the short to mid term the US will get killed by a trade war with China, especially if China stops loaning us money.

[fcreature]

Really not worth anyone's time to respond to something as idiotic as the idea that taxing something helps to lower it's price.

[juleswin]

Really not worth anyone's time to respond to something as idiotic as the idea that taxing something helps to lower it's price.

Healthy debating amongst friends only helps sharpen your debating skills for when you run into a much tougher topic.

[Superfluous Man]

Aluminum just went up 4% this morning. So much for that.

[oyarde]

Aluminum just went up 4% this morning. So much for that.

Platinum went up 16 dollars this morning and natural gas up 1 percent previous business day . For no reasons I can see .

[osan]

Trump is trying to MAGA and collapse China

Collapse China? Not sure how you come to that view, but if true, he's on a fool's errand. For one thing, we depend on China for probably at least half our manufactured goods, perhaps more - I've not checked the figures in years. Killing China might be a suicide move.

Furthermore, China is huge. Killing their economy is no mean task. Further still, this is how wars get started. If China faced a return-to-stoneage prospect, an existential threat, I would see them as having nothing to lose by launching a preemptive strike against America even if they knew they could not possibly win. Humans.

China is trying to finish off our economy for good.

I am more inclined to believe this, but only to a degree. If China kills us, it may kill itself. China would certainly injure itself in the short-term, though in terms of a longer view, the price may be worth it. After all, life is very cheap to the Chinese and has been, historically. Those at the top sacrifice those on the bottom without flinching.

I'm not sure how the chicken race will end but unless Trump flinches first China will end up worse off than we will.

How do you reason?

[quote}I hope China has the sense to back down or things will get ugly.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. They are the offenders, economically speaking. If they cannot compete honestly, perhaps they should be isolated. That would take years to make possible, not to mention withdrawal from CAFTA, which IMO would be a good idea... that is, after we reestablish our manufacturing chops here on the mainland.

[Swordsmyth]

Collapse China? Not sure how you come to that view, but if true, he's on a fool's errand. For one thing, we depend on China for probably at least half our manufactured goods, perhaps more - I've not checked the figures in years. Killing China might be a suicide move.

Furthermore, China is huge. Killing their economy is no mean task. Further still, this is how wars get started. If China faced a return-to-stoneage prospect, an existential threat, I would see them as having nothing to lose by launching a preemptive strike against America even if they knew they could not possibly win. Humans.

Collapsing China might not be the best idea as you say but they are our main geostrategic rival and their economy is much more brittle than it appears on the surface, for those who think that the world is a giant game of RISK collapsing them looks irresistible.

I am more inclined to believe this, but only to a degree. If China kills us, it may kill itself. China would certainly injure itself in the short-term, though in terms of a longer view, the price may be worth it. After all, life is very cheap to the Chinese and has been, historically. Those at the top sacrifice those on the bottom without flinching.

China is playing the same game of RISK that we are only from the side of the weaker new power, if they are to ever dominate the world they must bring us down first.

How do you reason?

It is a question of who's economic house of cards is shakier, I believe China's is in worse shape than ours, I think we will survive and and grow stronger but I think they will collapse.

I also think that China's hold on it's people is more fragile since it is based on fear.

The biggest question is how will their elite's react, I predict they will divide and fight over the shrinking pie, Xi is afraid of that and that is why he has been consolidating power.

Our people can vent their anger at the ballot box and our elite's can compete at it as well, the Chinese don't have that option and will be more likely to resort to arms.

Agreed. They are the offenders, economically speaking. If they cannot compete honestly, perhaps they should be isolated. That would take years to make possible, not to mention withdrawal from CAFTA, which IMO would be a good idea... that is, after we reestablish our manufacturing chops here on the mainland.

China is determined to dominate the world and they will treat the rest of the world much worse than we have if they succeed (including us), letting them get away with their trade policies has been one of the stupidest things the west has done, even if it isn't already too late it will still be difficult to recover from the damage they have done.

[devil21]

Agreed. They are the offenders, economically speaking. If they cannot compete honestly, perhaps they should be isolated. That would take years to make possible, not to mention withdrawal from CAFTA, which IMO would be a good idea... that is, after we reestablish our manufacturing chops here on the mainland.

Umm, it's not the Chinese or Americans that are the "offenders". Why do you think Nixon went to China with a HUGE delegation back in 1972? The year after the gold window was completely closed? The answer is because the situation with the Chinese that we are talking about now (trade deficits) was required in order to establish and, later continue, the petrodollar standard. All of this blaming China stuff is a smokescreen. The current situation was planned and executed by the same people that are now telling you to decry it. Your perception and perspective of the situation is being controlled and managed.

[nikcers]

Umm, it's not the Chinese or Americans that are the "offenders". Why do you think Nixon went to China with a HUGE delegation back in 1972? The year after the gold window was completely closed? The answer is because the situation with the Chinese that we are talking about now (trade deficits) was required in order to establish and, later continue, the petrodollar standard. All of this blaming China stuff is a smokescreen. The current situation was planned and executed by the same people that are now telling you to decry it. Your perception and perspective of the situation is being controlled and managed.

The reason why Nixon went to China was to bring capitalism to China- bring capitalism in order to bring their standard of living up and then leave so their economy topples so the people demand a more western government. The China just reacted by parading their nukes on CCTV when their economy was supposed to collapse. The current situation is a reflection of the petrodollar no longer sufficiently containing Russia, especially because we will lose our ability to control the price of oil if they start going after the oil in the arctic.

[Superfluous Man]

Agreed. They are the offenders, economically speaking. If they cannot compete honestly, perhaps they should be isolated. That would take years to make possible, not to mention withdrawal from CAFTA, which IMO would be a good idea... that is, after we reestablish our manufacturing chops here on the mainland.

It would not take years, and it would not require withdrawal from CAFTA. You and everyone else who wants to can start boycotting them right this second, and convincing others to join you in that voluntarily.

[Raginfridus]

Our local plumbing and hvac supplier has raised their prices several times since the tariffs were announced. My boss is using Lowes instead now.

[osan]

Collapsing China might not be the best idea as you say but they are our main geostrategic rival and their economy is much more brittle than it appears on the surface, for those who think that the world is a giant game of RISK collapsing them looks irresistible.

I'm all for wrecking China, since it is pretty clear they have that in mind for me. If Trump is smart, he will make damned sure we are firmly on our industrial feet before making any decisively ruinous move on China. If China went down tomorrow morning, we'd get sucked down as well. So would Europe, not that I give a damn about what happens to them.

China is playing the same game of RISK that we are only from the side of the weaker new power, if they are to ever dominate the world they must bring us down first.

At least to the degree that they could then dictate terms. Our utter destruction would not be in their better interest. Making us their bitch, OTOH, clearly would.

It is a question of who's economic house of cards is shakier, I believe China's is in worse shape than ours, I think we will survive and and grow stronger but I think they will collapse.

Here I must agree. In many ways the Chinese are a very timid people. I don't mean that as an insult; it is just an observation. They definitely do not possess the same drive as Americans, though they work very diligently and for very long hours. The people working at Bibi's hotel in Beijing have ONE weekend off per month. They sleep on a hard floor. During their free weekend, they will rent a room six or more at a time so they can sleep on a bed. It is very sad. Labor is treated very poorly there.

Because so few Chinese have any real opportunity, there would be a very small incentive for them to pull together to save the economy, IMO. Chinese government would almost certainly force them to work at the end of a gun. That's basically what they do now, anyhow.

I also think that China's hold on it's people is more fragile since it is based on fear.

As I wrote, they are VERY subservient. They are bred to it. Things would have to become life-and -death bad to get them to rebel.

The biggest question is how will their elite's react, I predict they will divide and fight over the shrinking pie, Xi is afraid of that and that is why he has been consolidating power.

A few days ago one of their muckety-mucks said China would pay any price to fight America in a trade war. Big words. Dangerous words.

Time will tell.

Our people can vent their anger at the ballot box and our elite's can compete at it as well, the Chinese don't have that option and will be more likely to resort to arms.

They don't have any, so...

China is determined to dominate the world and they will treat the rest of the world much worse than we have if they succeed (including us), letting them get away with their trade policies has been one of the stupidest things the west has done, even if it isn't already too late it will still be difficult to recover from the damage they have done.

Helping them out of the stone age was the worst thing we did. Allowing all our technologies in was a stroke of grand idiocy.

[osan]

It would not take years,

Unless the barriers to rebuilding our industrial base are relaxed, it most definitely will take years. Just consider the EPA tangle, the hoops through which manufacturers must jump to build new facilities. Such regulations are especially hostile to heavy industries like steel. One doesn't just build a steel mill and begin operating.

Then there are the OSHA requirements, some of which are reasonable, many of which are idiotically designed to protect stupid people from themselves.

There is the tax issue, which also drives companies away. How about zero percent corporate tax?

and it would not require withdrawal from CAFTA.

Not sure that that is true, but I can accept it as a possibility.

[Swordsmyth]

I'm all for wrecking China, since it is pretty clear they have that in mind for me. If Trump is smart, he will make damned sure we are firmly on our industrial feet before making any decisively ruinous move on China. If China went down tomorrow morning, we'd get sucked down as well. So would Europe, not that I give a damn about what happens to them.

Is it possible to whittle them down to size slowly? At this point I think that whenever their rise stops they will collapse spectacularly.

At least to the degree that they could then dictate terms. Our utter destruction would not be in their better interest. Making us their bitch, OTOH, clearly would.

Yes, they have an export addiction problem, they must try for a controlled demolition of our economy that is just enough to shut down the MIC and not our consumer base, that will be tricky since the MIC will do everything in it's power to outlive the rest of the economy.

Here I must agree. In many ways the Chinese are a very timid people. I don't mean that as an insult; it is just an observation. They definitely do not possess the same drive as Americans, though they work very diligently and for very long hours. The people working at Bibi's hotel in Beijing have ONE weekend off per month. They sleep on a hard floor. During their free weekend, they will rent a room six or more at a time so they can sleep on a bed. It is very sad. Labor is treated very poorly there.

Because so few Chinese have any real opportunity, there would be a very small incentive for them to pull together to save the economy, IMO. Chinese government would almost certainly force them to work at the end of a gun. That's basically what they do now, anyhow.

True but I was thinking more of their statist economy that is overloaded with debt and misallocated resources too a much greater degree than ours.

As I wrote, they are VERY subservient. They are bred to it. Things would have to become life-and -death bad to get them to rebel.



A few days ago one of their muckety-mucks said China would pay any price to fight America in a trade war. Big words. Dangerous words.

Time will tell.



They don't have any, so...

I'm thinking of a factional/regional conflict in which various power brokers start an uprising and arm the populace, their submissive culture won't stand in the way if they are following a leader, the leaders may talk solidarity right now but when the bone supply shrinks there will be too many dogs.

Helping them out of the stone age was the worst thing we did. Allowing all our technologies in was a stroke of grand idiocy.

China is the proof that the last few generations of THEM are stupider than their ancestors.

[enhanced_deficit]

Things fall here n there.

Stocks dive as US proposes more China tariffs, Dow falls 700

PBS NewsHour-Apr 6, 2018

Dow's 400-point rally is nearly erased in final hour on report of FBI raid of Trump's lawyer
The major indexes closed well off their highs after the New York Times reported the FBI raided the office of President Trump's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.April 9, 2018



It is good that he mixes it up, it would get boring if he kept touting same thing again and again.


Trump touts the stock market
washingtonpost
Jan 30, 2018 - Trump has made a regular refrain of the run-up in stock prices, leaning on it as a proxy for his own performance, since the president remains underwater in public opinion polls.

Trump touts Dow's fast rise
Aug 1, 2017



As long as he does not start touting fast rising debt also that is allegedly about to explode, it's all good.

[osan]

Is it possible to whittle them down to size slowly? At this point I think that whenever their rise stops they will collapse spectacularly.

That is perhaps the only way to avoid a shooting war.

The problem with China is that very few of their people can afford the things they make. I think I understand the strategy with the slave labor - get the bulk of the world's manufacturing through the artificially low labor costs. But once that happens, the wages must rise so that your own people can live as something better than penurious hags. The conditions out in the farmlands are pretty bleak.

Not an easy nut to crack.

There is a part of me that is sorely tempted to say nuke every military base and development facility in China and then dictate terms, but I don't think that would fly in today's world.

Now, if you could goad China into doing something stupid... But I don't think they are that foolish. And so the status quo remains, but time is decidedly not on our side. Time is China's friend, unless what you claim regarding growth is indeed so. Then we're pretty well both screwed... that is, unless the two of us would just agree to play nicely with each other. Don't hold your breath for that.

Yes, they have an export addiction problem,

And it is of their own manufacture. By disallowing a free labor market, they keep their people in penury.

they must try for a controlled demolition of our economy that is just enough to shut down the MIC and not our consumer base, that will be tricky since the MIC will do everything in it's power to outlive the rest of the economy.

I'd be more than happy to see the MIC dismantled, were it not for all the enemies we've made. Now we are pretty well forced to support it in order not to be consumed by a world that is becoming ever less patient with us.

True but I was thinking more of their statist economy that is overloaded with debt and misallocated resources too a much greater degree than ours.

But is that even true? I don't see it.

We are a train wreck insofar as debt goes. China, in this sense, owns our asses. I'm not sure their position is as tenuous as you seem to believe. I hope you are right and I am wrong.

But if China collapses, even just under its own weight, we are not going to fare well here... unless we get some true religion. I do believe that we have both the resources and the spirit to re-tool our industrial base in short order, just as we did during WWII. But that would require the dismantling of all the idiotic environmental and OSHA restrictions. Taxation at 0% would be another right step. Repudiate all national debt and start from a clean slate, but that would also require some tweaking of the Constitution.

Basically, we would need to put me in despotic control of the nation for one year. I could do it - especially massaging the Constitution. The power to tax needs to be swept away to at least the pre-Sixteenth conditions, if not those of the AoC. I would structure things such that people in government would live in a state of low-intensity terror for fear of violating the rights of others. Keep your police forces - they COULD serve a valid purpose: investigation of crimes, just to give one example. Any violation of the rights of men would result in draconian consequences such that many would take their own lives in preference. That is how it must be if government is not to wheedle its way back to tyranny. I'd disarm police, if we kept them. They could wear armor, and all they would do is keep watch and investigate crimes - ACTUAL crimes. Then, upon the usual sworn oath and affirmation resulting in a warrant, they would beg assistance from ordinary citizens - ARMED citizens - to form a posse to find and apprehend the suspects. In criminal cases, every evidentiary advantage is given to defendants and every obstacle placed before prosecution. If it results in lots of guilty people going free, I say that is far preferable to unjustly punishing a single man. There is part of the price of being free.

But I digress, as oft I am wont.

I'm thinking of a factional/regional conflict in which various power brokers start an uprising and arm the populace, their submissive culture won't stand in the way if they are following a leader, the leaders may talk solidarity right now but when the bone supply shrinks there will be too many dogs.

Not likely to happen. They are tamed, utterly domesticated people, bred to obey... though they do have opinions. I'm not saying it could not take place, but only that conditions would have to get to the level of what we're seeing in Venezuela before the average Chinaman would consider such a thing. But I like the idea - imagine smuggling 200 million firearms across the border and a trillion rounds of ammo, gleefully taken up by those sick to death of Chinese tyranny.

The real problem, of course, is the same that would arise in just about any other nation: that to which the newly freed people would repair is often worse than that against which they fought. The number of people across the globe who actually understand proper human freedom, I would wager, is less that one percent of one percent.

In order for such revolutions to yield something better than what came before, a solid understanding of what is wanted must be in hand, as well as the determination and courage to see it realized.

Just look at the French Revolution. The destruction part was a piece of cake, relatively speaking. It failed because what came in the wake was called "the terror" with good reason. Those filthy, progressive/communist-like bastards were far and away more lustfully murderous than the aristocrats could ever have been credited. They were mindless butchers with simplistic thought processes who, in the end, proved themselves far and away more corrupt than Louis and his hotbabe.

China is the proof that the last few generations of THEM are stupider than their ancestors.

I am not prepared to accept this at present, though I hope to hell that you prove correct.

I don't think we want to get into a shooting war with China. While our military is vastly superior to theirs, pound for pound, theirs is far and away larger than ours, and they have indeed developed some good weapons. My little brother recently illuminated me to the virtues of the DF 21 and its ability to kill carriers from THOUSANDS of miles away. That is not good news and China has been acting brattish in the South China sea for a number of years now. Those waters have been heating up slowly but steadily. In fact, I believe we have something like three or four carrier battlegroups steaming there as we type, as a show of whose is bigger. Not sure how smart a move it is, but I don't have the intel to be able to say one way or the other.

We are in interesting times. Let us hope they do not get too interesting.

[nikcers]

I'm all for wrecking China, since it is pretty clear they have that in mind for me. If Trump is smart, he will make damned sure we are firmly on our industrial feet before making any decisively ruinous move on China. If China went down tomorrow morning, we'd get sucked down as well.

Not really- last time their economy was supposed to crash they paraded their ICBM's on CCTV and so they backed off a bit. Now we are back on the TPP train, and Trump has even put anti ICBM thaad systems on the SK border as a clear response to NK's missle program. Now they are going to sell the idea that they are doing it for humanitarian reasons, to stop all the human rights abuses in NK. To save them from the oppressive Chinese regime!!!

SEOUL--The Chinese yuan apparently has growing currency in North Korea and is commonly used in daily transactions such as paying taxi fares and restaurant bills.That's according to hundreds of North Koreans who defected and were surveyed by Lee Jong-kyu, a fellow at South Korea's leading think tank, the Korea Development Institute.
The situation is a far cry from the 1990s, when only 4.9 percent of defectors said foreign currencies, including the U.S. dollar, were commonly used in daily transactions.
Lee's study targeted around 1,000 defectors. The results, released Feb. 28, found that 44.3 percent of defectors between 2011 and 2015 said foreign currencies were often used for transactions. However, 52.5 percent of defectors after 2013 said the yuan is chiefly used nowadays.

[osan]

Not really- last time their economy was supposed to crash they paraded their ICBM's on CCTV and so they backed off a bit. Now we are back on the TPP train, and Trump has even put anti ICBM thaad systems on the SK border as a clear response to NK's missle program. Now they are going to sell the idea that they are doing it for humanitarian reasons, to stop all the human rights abuses in NK. To save them from the oppressive Chinese regime!!!

I'm not following you here. How does your response relate to my statement?

[nikcers]

I'm not following you here. How does your response relate to my statement?

I seem to recall the implication that you had inferred if Chinas economy collapsed it would hurt our economy. That is quite the contrary, and that's basically their intention. I guess I could have misread what you wrote or implied if it was something more subtle in the huge post you wrote. If I did misunderstand you then I guess sorry, if not I do disagree, I don't think that if Chinas economy collapsed tomorrow the neocons would miss one night of sleep over it. In fact they would try to egg it on and then incite regime change within their population in order to change up the world order. In the words of Trump, maybe Mexico will be the new China, in terms of trade.

[osan]

I seem to recall the implication that you had inferred if Chinas economy collapsed it would hurt our economy. That is quite the contrary, and that's basically their intention. I guess I could have misread what you wrote or implied if it was something more subtle in the huge post you wrote. If I did misunderstand you then I guess sorry, if not I do disagree, I don't think that if Chinas economy collapsed tomorrow the neocons would miss one night of sleep over it. In fact they would try to egg it on and then incite regime change within their population in order to change up the world order. In the words of Trump, maybe Mexico will be the new China, in terms of trade.

This is how I see it at present. We are grossly over-dependent on China for a vast array of both consumer products and commodities such as steel, rare-earth elements, and so forth. If their economy goes <poof>, pray tell where will we procure the products and commodities in question in the shorter term if our own manufacturing base is not in place to take over?

I may have chosen my words less than optimally when I wrote that if China's economy goes, so does ours, but we would be negatively affected for a time. Add to that the dire state of weakness of a great multiplicity of Americans. About 10 years ago, for example, the state was late with welfare disbursements in my neck of WV. They were, as I recall, two days late - may have been three - and there were people ready to burn the county to the ground. This is not an isolated condition. What does anyone think that places like Los Angele, NYC, etc., will be like if the inept and dependent people cannot be kept passivated with the "free" stuff to which they have become accustomed? It's not just welfare recipients, either. Consider how many mentally and emotionally weak people there are out there - like college students such as those so commonly encountered in places like Yale, Harvard, Brown, and Evergreen. They have nervous breakdowns when people say things that leave them feeling "marginalized", such as when someone asks "where are you from?" This is deep psychopathology, clinically speaking. Do we believe they will suddenly buck up and become adult just because reality steadfastly refuses to kowtow to the whinging and tantrum pitching as do the administrators at their respective institutions of higher babysitting? I don't see it.

There would be rioting on a mass scale in some locales, methinks.

Don't misunderstand, I think this would be a good thing. Killing a few tens of thousands of stragglers in response to their as-yet unchallenged bad behavior could do nothing wrong in terms of delivering a lesson in hard reality to the rest. But that reality would still likely be as I suspect - unless you have a convincing basis for believing otherwise, to which my mind is wide open.

Europe is in even worse shape. They are at least as badly dependent on Chinese products, but suffer the additional problems of out of control immigration - particularly of people innately hostile to the fundamental fabric of that which constitutes all European culture, no to mention the widespread adoption of net-loss carrying "socialism". While our debt situation is bad, Europe's is even worse, so far as I can tell. The Euro is teetering, as are nations such as Sweden which, in direct spite of the lies told about how successful they are, is balancing on a knife's edge. I do not for a moment believe that Sweden would well survive a large disruption, whether by force majeure or political upheaval such as from a Tet-style attack by jihadist moles.

All this, of course, speaks to shorter term effects - well, maybe not for Sweden as they seem to be well down the path of national suicide, perhaps already past a point of no return. Longer term, barring something really bad like nuclear warfare, we would recover because the American spirit remains very much alive.

On the other side of the coin, China could better weather the effects of economic collapse than could Europe, IMO, because most of China remains just this side of stone-age agrarian in its fabric. Were 100 million Chinese to die over a year's term for lack of the things to which they had become accustomed, I cannot see that their government would be upset about it in the least. They would endeavor to save their brain trust, sacrificing peasants by the millions - perhaps the precise opposite of that which dear Uncle Mao did during his "cultural revolution", where he murdered tens of millions of intellectuals and other "counter-revolutionaries" in his steadfast effort to drive China back into being a stone-age society. Damned shame they got wise, but I digress.

[nikcers]

This is how I see it at present. We are grossly over-dependent on China for a vast array of both consumer products and commodities such as steel, rare-earth elements, and so forth. If their economy goes <poof>, pray tell where will we procure the products and commodities in question in the shorter term if our own manufacturing base is not in place to take over?

I may have chosen my words less than optimally when I wrote that if China's economy goes, so does ours, but we would be negatively affected for a time. Add to that the dire state of weakness of a great multiplicity of Americans. About 10 years ago, for example, the state was late with welfare disbursements in my neck of WV. They were, as I recall, two days late - may have been three - and there were people ready to burn the county to the ground. This is not an isolated condition. What does anyone think that places like Los Angele, NYC, etc., will be like if the inept and dependent people cannot be kept passivated with the "free" stuff to which they have become accustomed? It's not just welfare recipients, either. Consider how many mentally and emotionally weak people there are out there - like college students such as those so commonly encountered in places like Yale, Harvard, Brown, and Evergreen. They have nervous breakdowns when people say things that leave them feeling "marginalized", such as when someone asks "where are you from?" This is deep psychopathology, clinically speaking. Do we believe they will suddenly buck up and become adult just because reality steadfastly refuses to kowtow to the whinging and tantrum pitching as do the administrators at their respective institutions of higher babysitting? I don't see it.

There would be rioting on a mass scale in some locales, methinks.

Don't misunderstand, I think this would be a good thing. Killing a few tens of thousands of stragglers in response to their as-yet unchallenged bad behavior could do nothing wrong in terms of delivering a lesson in hard reality to the rest. But that reality would still likely be as I suspect - unless you have a convincing basis for believing otherwise, to which my mind is wide open.

Europe is in even worse shape. They are at least as badly dependent on Chinese products, but suffer the additional problems of out of control immigration - particularly of people innately hostile to the fundamental fabric of that which constitutes all European culture, no to mention the widespread adoption of net-loss carrying "socialism". While our debt situation is bad, Europe's is even worse, so far as I can tell. The Euro is teetering, as are nations such as Sweden which, in direct spite of the lies told about how successful they are, is balancing on a knife's edge. I do not for a moment believe that Sweden would well survive a large disruption, whether by force majeure or political upheaval such as from a Tet-style attack by jihadist moles.

All this, of course, speaks to shorter term effects - well, maybe not for Sweden as they seem to be well down the path of national suicide, perhaps already past a point of no return. Longer term, barring something really bad like nuclear warfare, we would recover because the American spirit remains very much alive.

On the other side of the coin, China could better weather the effects of economic collapse than could Europe, IMO, because most of China remains just this side of stone-age agrarian in its fabric. Were 100 million Chinese to die over a year's term for lack of the things to which they had become accustomed, I cannot see that their government would be upset about it in the least. They would endeavor to save their brain trust, sacrificing peasants by the millions - perhaps the precise opposite of that which dear Uncle Mao did during his "cultural revolution", where he murdered tens of millions of intellectuals and other "counter-revolutionaries" in his steadfast effort to drive China back into being a stone-age society. Damned shame they got wise, but I digress.

I just don't see production going down just because their economy goes down- because you are right people will still buy their stuff. It might even cause other countries to be able to buy their stuff easier. The thing with the way America manipulates their currency there would be lots of deflation and if their economy collapsed they would just no longer be able to control the deflation effects. They would become more dependent on other currencies and no longer be able to dump other currencies on the marketplace. Essentially when you don't have good credit you can't really monetize debt and interest in order to manipulate the markets.

[osan]

I just don't see production going down just because their economy goes down- because you are right people will still buy their stuff. It might even cause other countries to be able to buy their stuff easier. The thing with the way America manipulates their currency there would be lots of deflation and if their economy collapsed they would just no longer be able to control the deflation effects. They would become more dependent on other currencies and no longer be able to dump other currencies on the marketplace. Essentially when you don't have good credit you can't really monetize debt and interest in order to manipulate the markets.

Ah, methinks I see the disconnect - our respective notions of the economy tanking. What I mean is ruin, not recession. Industries tank in their near-entirety.

Anything less than that is an inconvenience. When I say "tanks", I mean "tanks all the way".

Many Americans believe the US economy tanked in 2008 with the election of slime to the Oval Office. Such people are sorely ignorant of what a busted economy looks like. In the wake of burst bubbles and all that, the worst we can say about the American economy was that is experiences a slight bump, which is not to say some people did not lose their shirts, for surely they did. But food, shelter, heat, etc. all remained plentifully available. Compare with post-war Germany where women sold themselves just to have a couple of cigarettes such that they would have some marginal relief from the misery of their daily existences. That is the truer meaning of a downed economy, not mere inconveniences of which soft, weak, ignorant, and characterless people shriek and holler about as if the world were coming to an end.

So now that we perhaps understand one another better, what say you?

[nikcers]

Ah, methinks I see the disconnect - our respective notions of the economy tanking. What I mean is ruin, not recession. Industries tank in their near-entirety.

Anything less than that is an inconvenience. When I say "tanks", I mean "tanks all the way".

Many Americans believe the US economy tanked in 2008 with the election of slime to the Oval Office. Such people are sorely ignorant of what a busted economy looks like. In the wake of burst bubbles and all that, the worst we can say about the American economy was that is experiences a slight bump, which is not to say some people did not lose their shirts, for surely they did. But food, shelter, heat, etc. all remained plentifully available. Compare with post-war Germany where women sold themselves just to have a couple of cigarettes such that they would have some marginal relief from the misery of their daily existences. That is the truer meaning of a downed economy, not mere inconveniences of which soft, weak, ignorant, and characterless people shriek and holler about as if the world were coming to an end.

So now that we perhaps understand one another better, what say you?

Just because we bailed out the industries doesn't mean they didn't crash. 50% of the people I knew who owned a house lost their house and are making debt payments to the banks that we bailed out. Everyone else is renting forever because they think that buying a house is a big $#@!ing scam.

I know we have been pretending like the crash of 08 wasn't that bad, but I think it really depends on what market you are in. The people who won the election for cheeto Hitler did so because they were apolitical jackasses who thought that they could get back at the political elite and because they were promised a government solution to the 2008 problem that never really ended. If it ended we would have higher wages, not stagnation. They just passed a bunch of tax breaks to hide the wage stagnation.

[osan]

Just because we bailed out the industries doesn't mean they didn't crash.

Actually, it does. That aside, we were not speaking of industries, but entire economies. BIG difference. It's one thing when your 30' cabin cruiser sinks with 3 people aboard. There is a big difference in degree when a cruise ship with seven thousand people goes under.

50% of the people I knew who owned a house lost their house and are making debt payments to the banks that we bailed out. Everyone else is renting forever because they think that buying a house is a big $#@!ing scam.

That sucks dead bunnies, but it is not the same as having no food.

I know we have been pretending like the crash of 08 wasn't that bad,

The pretending was the opposite - that the world had somehow come to an end, or was about to.

I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't bad - I sure am not. But people were not dying by the millions, if even by the handfuls. I'm sure a few suicides can be rightly linked to the downturn, and as I before acknowledged, many lost their shirts - but the fact that new shirts could be had is prima facie proof that the economy had not come anywhere near to crashing. Had it, the corpses would have been piled high.

When an economy crashes for real, government is unable to bail out people because there is nothing left with which to do so. It is a most dangerously unfortunate habit of men to inflate truth with words unsuited to a circumstance. "Oh my GOD, the economy has CRASHED!!!". No, $#@!, it hiccuped or farted and some people were hurt. Nobody went hungry. Hospitals didn't run out of medicines. Fuels didn't become unavailable. Fertilizers didn't disappear, along with entire crops.

A market crash is not good, but it is nothing compared with a general economic crash wherein the transactional infrastructure collapses into rubble. That is very serious business and has happened only a relatively few times throughout human history. Even the black plague didn't quite bring about European economic collapse, though it seems to have come uncomfortably close.