Plan B: Building a trading network rather than retaliating against Trump?

To borrow your analogy using a jigsaw puzzle foxie48, it is not always necessary to put "all the straight edged pieces together first" but you do need to be aware of the need to do that.

What is absolutely necessary is the ability to see the whole of the picture; where pieces obviously group together, where one task of assembly prompts the ability to see how to do another bigger part and to recognise your limits on time, ability etc.

Good puzzlers are not necessarily rich or loud but they do, as your post suggested have stamina, intelligence, and knowledge about the important small and simple tasks as well as the bigger ones. Those are the hard working people we need.

I am a bit late to this thread this morning, and in a bit of a rush. But a couple of initial thoughts.

Trump is about political coercion and not economic cooperation. He isn’t about equality and fairness, nor is he about fairer trade. Trump is about rearranging the tax regime in the USA which will reduce it for the wealthy and spread it amongst the poorer members.

Trump is also about coercing China. Well, we shall see, but my bet is at present on China.

There has never every been a Thatcher/Friedman type free trade economy. But where free trade does exist it is based on strict rules, equity and cooperation.

Got to rush off now but will hopefully pick this up later.

Europe is in probably the best position to build a group of participants willing to build a trading network outside of Trump influence.

Europe is undoubtedly the most stable and mature group of economies that has the political heft to build such a group, which can include other participant around the world.

This group can then form some sort of relationship with China to oppose Trump.

foxie48

Just to add, it is reported that Musk spent the weekend trying to get Trump to back down on tariffs and there is growing disquiet amongst key Republicans. Trump's tariffs are not popular which many of the wealthy republican donors!

I was wondering when the wealthy Americans were going to say something.

Out of chaos, sometimes comes war.

This group can then form some sort of relationship with China to oppose Trump

A relationshp with China?

fancythat

Out of chaos, sometimes comes war.

Precisely. Trade wars, or real wars. Destruction of fragile economies in the poorest countries, meaning yet more people leave to become economic migrants.

I completely agree with foxie's and others' reservations. In every way.

Some degree of tariffs are helpful in balancing certain industries - for example the way car production relies on parts flown or shipped in too and fro with the final result, a car, being the product from several countries and many journeys is ludicrous, and adjustments in food tariffs to encourage and foster "home grown" may help

But taking a hostile wrecking ball to the world whilst threatening to take over Canada, Greenland, Ukraine to grab the mineral resources is just another form of modern imperialism

and totally ignoring the effects of climate change of your policies, and pushing your own population into poverty (inflation, pricing, cuts in education, provision of medical care) cannot end well.

Trumps personal character has everything to do with this. Its extremes, its lying, its arrogance.

fancythat

^This group can then form some sort of relationship with China to oppose Trump^

A relationshp with China?

Yes. Discussions have already started.
‘We're just getting details of a phone call held between EU chief Ursula von der Leyen and Chinese Premier Li Qiang today.
According to a read-out published by von der Leyen's office, the European Commission president "stressed the responsibility of Europe and China... to support a strong reformed trading system, free, fair and founded on a level playing field".
She also called for a "negotiated resolution" and emphasised the "need to avoid further escalation", the statement says.’
From BBC News.

foxie48 While I agree with you broadly, I would query the detail.

The jobs and industries outsourced are ones that in their original country didi pay good wages and offer good working conditions. It is that the countries that they are outsourced to felt it unnecessary to offer either the wages or the conditions. This was because they have labour forces who were desperate for work and would do any work in any conditions or for any pay that save them and their families from starvation.

The reason that a number of these jobs are now moving to smaller SE Asian countries like Vietnam and Cambodia is because a booming Chinese economy has driven up wages there and the work can be done more cheaply elsewhere, China has been hoist by its own petard, one could say.

No country can be completely self-sufficient and it is quite clear that Trump's policy to Ukraine is driven by his desire to ensure that that countries mineral wealth is irrevocably committed to the USA. As you say that governs its attitude to Greenland and Canada, but I do wonder how much they are ploy, and they will be let off the hook, if Trump gets a monopoly on what mineral resources Ukraine has. A country that the majority of US citizens have never heard of and couldn't point to where it is on a world map.

What is needed is a more nuanced approach that enables individual countries to protect their core industries, while leaving other areas free to to face world competition.

I would also like to see a movement to control foreign ownership and control of national countries.

The potential for huge corruption should also not be ignored. It would not surprise me if Kushner and others party to information directly from Trump are making huge profits from this current instability in world markets! Below is a brief quote from the Guardian Sept 2024 regarding an inquiry into Kushner's investment company, Affinity.

"In a letter to Chad Mizelle, Affinity’s chief legal officer, he said the inquiry’s findings have “heightened my concerns that investments in funds managed by Affinity create unprecedented conflicts of interest”.

He added: “Affinity’s investors may not be motivated by commercial considerations, but rather the opportunity to funnel foreign government money to members of President Trump’s family, namely Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.”

I would also like to see a movement to control foreign ownership and control of national countries.

We now have much of the world interlinked with foreign investment too and fro between countries, and we also have, unlike the 1980's..

.... huge international financing companies that aren't attached to nation states in anyway but just look for the money. Benefitting the rich, th investors, who care little for the effects they cause.

That is why Trumps policies in the end are a backward looking protectionist yearning. We cant recreate the past.

This is fascinating (bit of a slow beginning).

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYrp7S_tRmU

Times Radio: The problem with the theory behind Trump's tariffs: The Story.

It's only just gone up. Keep going - I would say it goes from "yes, we know that" to really quite explosive.

Full disclosure: I really like Times Radio

I'm just back from a long weekend away in France where we've had no access to the internet and a 'holiday' from world news.

WWmk2 says

There has never every been a Thatcher/Friedman type free trade economy. But where free trade does exist it is based on strict rules, equity and cooperation.

There may never have been a 'pure' version' of this but economic 'orthodoxy' since Reagan and Thatcher has been based on the 'neoliberal' economic theory that Hayek formulated and Friedman developed.

I need to get my thoughts in order to be able to address this theme so I'll have to come back to it later. But globalisation and economic advantage for the wealthy plays a bit part in it. But I'm a bit foggy with a very early start yesterday and a lot of driving on our nice crowded motorways...

foxie48

Just to add, it is reported that Musk spent the weekend trying to get Trump to back down on tariffs and there is growing disquiet amongst key Republicans. Trump's tariffs are not popular which many of the wealthy republican donors!

Wealthy Republicans would have lost a lot of cash in the shares sell off, they knew the risks of share dealing, I’m shedding no crocodile tears for them.
As of yesterday the Dow Jones is only 2% lower than a year ago and most likely will gain this week.

Wealthy Republicans would have lost a lot of cash in the shares sell off,

That will depend on how much they paid for them. If their 'value' is now below the price they paid for them, yes, if they tried to sell them now they would have made a loss, but if it is at par or still above they have lost nothing apart from the potential profit they nay have expected.

They will, of course, in the meantime,have benefited from dividends paid on their holding.

I am not saying that this applies to all investors. It will depend on whether they have been held long term or were a vehicle for speculation.

Trump imposes a tariff on China. China retaliates with like for like. Trump adds 50% to the tariff.......

Trump imposes a tariff on the EU. The EU discusses a similar response. Trump suddenly decides that the EU should payback in "reparations" an enormous amount of upfront cash if it "Wants to discuss tariffs".

Trump spends a long time negotiating a deal with Ukraine for a 50% share in their mineral resources. It having been agreed, he then decides that Ukraine can get nothing from the mineral until reparations have been paid and they have control over all the minerals.....

Where will craziness end? His own citizens being led into a crash because he acts precipitously, in ignorance, without consulting his own congress.

His lack of consistency is part of his tactics, but will backfire. he's creating hostile relationships with nearly every other country in the world.

No detail there, Monica just very broad sweep observations otherwise it would have ended up being an essay rather than a quick post.

Politicsnerd another fan of the Times podcasts, I listened to TRIP US whilst walking the dog, the Story is my afternoon listening! There are so many excellent podcasts to listen to I actually need a longer day!

David49 the drop in the Dow is of real relevence to anyone who is coming up to retiring and that's if they live here or in the US. The rich can wait it out until the markets jump back but the ordinary citizen can't and in the US many more "ordinary" people have their savings in stocks and shares fwiw a 2% drop in value from a year ago represents a very big fall for investors as they invest to increase not decrease the value of their savings!

MaizieD

^Wealthy Republicans would have lost a lot of cash in the shares sell off,^

That will depend on how much they paid for them. If their 'value' is now below the price they paid for them, yes, if they tried to sell them now they would have made a loss, but if it is at par or still above they have lost nothing apart from the potential profit they nay have expected.

They will, of course, in the meantime,have benefited from dividends paid on their holding.

I am not saying that this applies to all investors. It will depend on whether they have been held long term or were a vehicle for speculation.

I agree.

When one purchases shares surely a risk is assumed.

Buy and wait to sell at a profit - there will be ups that could yeild a profit if sold, downs that could yield a loss if sold.

Now may be a good time to hold paper losses.

There has never every been a Thatcher/Friedman type free trade economy. But where free trade does exist it is based on strict rules, equity and cooperation.

No, it isn't. IF that were the case China would not dominate world manufacturing and wield the power it does.

Whatever the supposed rules, countries have found ways round them and ignored them.

M0nica

^There has never every been a Thatcher/Friedman type free trade economy. But where free trade does exist it is based on strict rules, equity and cooperation.^

No, it isn't. IF that were the case China would not dominate world manufacturing and wield the power it does.

Whatever the supposed rules, countries have found ways round them and ignored them.

I was thinking in terms of the EU. Where free trade exists between a group of countries, where strict trading rules are applied across the board including fair employment law.

If a business in any country breaks the rules it is answerable in court and appropriate penalties imposed.

Norah

MaizieD

Wealthy Republicans would have lost a lot of cash in the shares sell off,

That will depend on how much they paid for them. If their 'value' is now below the price they paid for them, yes, if they tried to sell them now they would have made a loss, but if it is at par or still above they have lost nothing apart from the potential profit they nay have expected.

They will, of course, in the meantime,have benefited from dividends paid on their holding.

I am not saying that this applies to all investors. It will depend on whether they have been held long term or were a vehicle for speculation.

I agree.

When one purchases shares surely a risk is assumed.

Buy and wait to sell at a profit - there will be ups that could yeild a profit if sold, downs that could yield a loss if sold.

Now may be a good time to hold paper losses.

Buy at the bottom, sell at the top.

That is how they will make money, and I suspect that there will be a degree of insider trading taking taking place with Trumps help.

Wyllow3

*I would also like to see a movement to control foreign ownership and control of national countries.*

We now have much of the world interlinked with foreign investment too and fro between countries, and we also have, unlike the 1980's..

.... huge international financing companies that aren't attached to nation states in anyway but just look for the money. Benefitting the rich, th investors, who care little for the effects they cause.

That is why Trumps policies in the end are a backward looking protectionist yearning. We cant recreate the past.

Yes and why large economic blocks like the EU are in such a good position to set rules and control over these massive companies.

Whitewavemark2

Wyllow3

I would also like to see a movement to control foreign ownership and control of national countries.

We now have much of the world interlinked with foreign investment too and fro between countries, and we also have, unlike the 1980's..

.... huge international financing companies that aren't attached to nation states in anyway but just look for the money. Benefitting the rich, th investors, who care little for the effects they cause.

That is why Trumps policies in the end are a backward looking protectionist yearning. We cant recreate the past.

Yes and why large economic blocks like the EU are in such a good position to set rules and control over these massive companies.

Not it they allow China and others to ignore the standards that we uphold, everything we import from China ignores environmental standards, freedom of speech, state subsidy, and intellectual property.

But I guess that’s OK if it’s cheap.

More is made short selling and buying back for less, the skill is choosing when the market will change direction, no insider trading at present markets are behaving predictably to bad news.
So far today Dow Jones is 2% up waiting for good news.