The Trump Economy

[TPS]

3 hours ago, Nanker said:

Oh yes. It’s all smoke and mirrors. Trump and the US lost badly here. Really badly. 

Not smoke and mirrors, but it's not much different than the last time Trump said he had a deal.  The real issues haven't been addressed in Trump's agreement.  And, according to the WSJ, that's all it is for now--Trump's agreement, as China says it hasn't reached a deal.  Go ahead, though, believe whatever he tweets....

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, TPS said:

Not smoke and mirrors, but it's not much different than the last time Trump said he had a deal.  The real issues haven't been addressed in Trump's agreement.  And, according to the WSJ, that's all it is for now--Trump's agreement, as China says it hasn't reached a deal.  Go ahead, though, believe whatever he tweets....

I understand China had a press conference and they verified what Trump has tweeted. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

7 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I understand China had a press conference and they verified what Trump has tweeted. 

Here are the tweets for those wondering:
 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

I just can't help but wonder about the timing of all this. China has been stalling on a trade deal wishin' and hopin' Trump would not be reelected in 2020.  Yet, in spite of the shampeachment proceedings, China agreed to phase 1 (which kept on current tariffs while accepting US imports) and is now willing to move on to phase 2. That is very interesting, dontachya think? 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal

[TH3]

23 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Here are the tweets for those wondering:
 

 

DT tweeted? Must be true

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, TH3 said:

DT tweeted? Must be true

After we just learned the entire media complex got Russia Trump (intentionally) wrong for over three years, it’s funny you’d say this. 
 

 

[Foxx]

21 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I just can't help but wonder about the timing of all this. China has been stalling on a trade deal wishin' and hopin' Trump would not be reelected in 2020.  Yet, in spite of the shampeachment proceedings, China agreed to phase 1 (which kept on current tariffs while accepting US imports) and is now willing to move on to phase 2. That is very interesting, dontachya think? 

dunno, just spitballin' here but... could it be that the existing tariffs have been so damaging to their economy, that they don't think they can absorb any new ones?

[TPS]

2 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

I understand China had a press conference and they verified what Trump has tweeted. 

Thanks, just saw this on wsj.com, though they called it a "limited" deal, which is what I essentially described it as.  

[Foxx]

6 minutes ago, TPS said:

Thanks, just saw this on wsj.com, though they called it a "limited" deal, which is what I essentially described it as.  

 

2 hours ago, TPS said:

Not smoke and mirrors, but it's not much different than the last time Trump said he had a deal.  The real issues haven't been addressed in Trump's agreement.  And, according to the WSJ, that's all it is for now--Trump's agreement, as China says it hasn't reached a deal.  Go ahead, though, believe whatever he tweets....

[row_33]

NOW what is WRONG with the filet mignon perfectly cooked for you?

 

 

[3rdnlng]

7 hours ago, Foxx said:

 

Well, back whenever China had agreed to a comprehensive deal and then backed out after Trump announced that they had basically reached a verbal agreement. Obviously China was concerned about additional tariffs scheduled to take place on 12-15-19. They agreed to Phase 1 of the more comprehensive deal to avoid those tariffs. Trump has played this better than any president in the past 2-3 decades. Trump recognized the opportunity and has found a way to bring China to the negotiating table. I think that's what 63 million people hired him to do. The right man in the right place at the right time.

[keepthefaith]

7 hours ago, TPS said:

Thanks, just saw this on wsj.com, though they called it a "limited" deal, which is what I essentially described it as.  

 

Yeah and all Trump's gonna get for now.  China's best possible outcome is that Trump loses in 2020 and the next pres has a completely different set of priorities and let's China resume business as usual.  No way China is gonna make a significant deal now with less than a year before knowing election outcome.   

[3rdnlng]

2 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

Yeah and all Trump's gonna get for now.  China's best possible outcome is that Trump loses in 2020 and the next pres has a completely different set of priorities and let's China resume business as usual.  No way China is gonna make a significant deal now with less than a year before knowing election outcome.   

China has been listening in on the left's conversation and knows that their polls have been way off and Trump is going to win in a landslide. If they wait to negotiate they'll be negotiating with a person in a much stronger position. Trump's actions, which are only fair have caused China's economy to plummet. Do they really think they can hold out for 5 more years?

[Buffalo_Gal]

Is there a thread for this? If so, plmk and I will move it there (I could not find it via search).

Anyhoooo.... this may be the only way to get rid of the bureaucracy (deep state or otherwise), and let people choose whether to quit or move and then just hire people on a true need basis. It happens to private sector employees every day, especially in the last 30-40 years. When a private sector employee closes up shop in an area, you either move to the new location (if offered a position) to continue on with the company, or move on to other another employer.   Everyone has children, parents, spouse,  schooling, housing, etc., issues that come into play with a job relocation. 

Opponents warn of staff exodus as US breaks up lands bureau

The deadline for most staffers to notify the land bureau, which is overseen by the Interior Department, whether they intended to move was Thursday. But the bureau had not yet compiled a count for how many staffers had so far agreed to relocate, spokesman Derrick Henry said.
 

The bureau oversees about 388,000 square miles (1 million square kilometers) of public lands, the vast majority of it in the U.S. West. It issues permits for oil and gas drilling, mining and ranching, manages outdoor recreation and enforces environmental protections.
 

Bernhardt has called for about 300 positions to be switched from Washington to other offices in 11 Western states, including Nevada, Arizona and Utah. About 25 will be going to the new headquarters in Grand Junction, Colorado.
 

</snip>
 

”I think, frankly, it’s going to cripple the bureau for a long time,” said Henri Bisson, a former deputy director for the agency.

With fewer career staffers in Washington to weigh in on management of federal lands, “it will result in decisions that are more political than they are resource-based,” Bisson said.
 

Employees who agree to move have 120 days to report to their new posts. Bisson and other former bureau officials who are talking to employees said it appears the majority of reassigned staffers will leave instead.
 

“Many of them are in families that have two careers, and their spouse can’t move. They have kids in high school. They have ailing parents they are taking care of,” said Kit Muller, who retired last year after 38 years with the bureau and is one of those projecting that fewer than half of reassigned staffers would move. “You can imagine the reasons.”
 

</snip>

Edited December 14, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal

[TPS]

17 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

Yeah and all Trump's gonna get for now.  China's best possible outcome is that Trump loses in 2020 and the next pres has a completely different set of priorities and let's China resume business as usual.  No way China is gonna make a significant deal now with less than a year before knowing election outcome.   

Agree, I've been saying that for awhile now myself.

[3rdnlng]

28 minutes ago, TPS said:

Agree, I've been saying that for awhile now myself.

From above:

 

China has been listening in on the left's conversation and knows that their polls have been way off and Trump is going to win in a landslide. If they wait to negotiate they'll be negotiating with a person in a much stronger position. Trump's actions, which are only fair have caused China's economy to plummet. Do they really think they can hold out for 5 more years?

•  

[TPS]

50 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

From above:

 

China has been listening in on the left's conversation and knows that their polls have been way off and Trump is going to win in a landslide. If they wait to negotiate they'll be negotiating with a person in a much stronger position. Trump's actions, which are only fair have caused China's economy to plummet. Do they really think they can hold out for 5 more years?

•  

Yes, I saw it, and disagree. China's position won't change much either way.  trump needed a win more than China, which is why he's making it sound like the deal is bigger than it is.

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, TPS said:

Yes, I saw it, and disagree. China's position won't change much either way.  trump needed a win more than China, which is why he's making it sound like the deal is bigger than it is.

You discount the economic downturn China has been going through. We win a trade war with them and they know it. It seems like it is more than just a coincidence that this Phase1 got done 2 days before more tariffs were placed on Chinese goods. Remember, they had to devalue their currency a while back so that their goods remained competitive. They needed this deal more than we did.

[TPS]

36 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You discount the economic downturn China has been going through. We win a trade war with them and they know it. It seems like it is more than just a coincidence that this Phase1 got done 2 days before more tariffs were placed on Chinese goods. Remember, they had to devalue their currency a while back so that their goods remained competitive. They needed this deal more than we did.

I wouldn't call a decline in GDP growth from 6.7% to 6% an "economic downturn."  I'm not disagreeing about the timing of the announced deal, I'm simply saying it's more window dressing than the significant deal that Trump claims it is.  China has more leeway and time than you think.

[row_33]

I see your name and realize it will be attacking anything the GOP does, no matter how realistically great it is

[GG]

22 minutes ago, TPS said:

I wouldn't call a decline in GDP growth from 6.7% to 6% an "economic downturn."  I'm not disagreeing about the timing of the announced deal, I'm simply saying it's more window dressing than the significant deal that Trump claims it is.  China has more leeway and time than you think.

 

For them, a decline in growth may as well be a downturn.  They still don't know how to deal with a real decline, so diminished growth sends major shivers down their spine.  I agree with 3rd, Communists in China know they're playing with fire by waiting out until the election.

 

Maybe that's why smart people would be more worried about 2020 election interference from China  than from Russia

[TPS]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

For them, a decline in growth may as well be a downturn.  They still don't know how to deal with a real decline, so diminished growth sends major shivers down their spine.  I agree with 3rd, Communists in China know they're playing with fire by waiting out until the election.

 

Maybe that's why smart people would be more worried about 2020 election interference from China  than from Russia

I'm sure they can live with 6%, so we disagree...of course.  

 

The short run impact really hasn't been that significant for China, at least not as much as the overall global slowdown.  Compared to the first half of last year, their goods surplus with US is down $20 billion, and will probably be close to $50 billion for all of 2019.  The real issue is whether or not it's significantly impacting the supply chain decisions of US Corps, and I'm not sure what that answer is yet...

[GG]

13 minutes ago, TPS said:

I'm sure they can live with 6%, so we disagree...of course.  

 

The short run impact really hasn't been that significant for China, at least not as much as the overall global slowdown.  Compared to the first half of last year, their goods surplus with US is down $20 billion, and will probably be close to $50 billion for all of 2019.  The real issue is whether or not it's significantly impacting the supply chain decisions of US Corps, and I'm not sure what that answer is yet...

 

You're missing the impact that slowing growth and export reduction is having on China's internal finances.   China has financed its growth through runaway borrowing, which assumes uninterrupted high growth rates. As it is, China's debt bomb is on a short fuse, and with further slowdowns, the government will be faced with a choice of letting major banks/companies fail or prop the zombies up with hard reserves.   

 

Communists hate either option, and will have to play ball with Trump when he has the upper hand.  China's and Dem's only hope is a massive economic shock in the US in the next 10 months.  

[Koko78]

5 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

”I think, frankly, it’s going to cripple the bureau for a long time,” said Henri Bisson, a former deputy director for the agency.

With fewer career staffers in Washington to weigh in on management of federal lands, “it will result in decisions that are more political than they are resource-based,” Bisson said.

 

Damn, if only instant telecommunications was a thing.

[3rdnlng]

3 hours ago, TPS said:

I'm sure they can live with 6%, so we disagree...of course.  

 

The short run impact really hasn't been that significant for China, at least not as much as the overall global slowdown.  Compared to the first half of last year, their goods surplus with US is down $20 billion, and will probably be close to $50 billion for all of 2019.  The real issue is whether or not it's significantly impacting the supply chain decisions of US Corps, and I'm not sure what that answer is yet...

Consider that China's economy is closer to a Ponzi scheme than what you might already think. Then take in the fact that other countries are jumping to fill the void that China's producers might not have available down the road. They don't have a lot of options and the best one seems to be making a deal with Trump. 

[TPS]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Consider that China's economy is closer to a Ponzi scheme than what you might already think. Then take in the fact that other countries are jumping to fill the void that China's producers might not have available down the road. They don't have a lot of options and the best one seems to be making a deal with Trump. 

We'll find out soon enough...

[3rdnlng]

Just now, TPS said:

We'll find out soon enough...

Yes, the proof will be in the pudding. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Byproduct of a stronger economy, although the "msm" will probably spin it as people are starving on the streets and #OrangeManBad (assuming they report it at all).

 

More than 5.9 million individuals dropped off food stamps since President Donald Trump assumed office in February 2017, according to the latest data released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
 

The most up-to-date USDA data shows that 5,975,736 people discontinued using food stamps, also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), between February 2017— when Trump completed his first full month in office— and September 2019.
 

</snip>

[3rdnlng]

37 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Byproduct of a stronger economy, although the "msm" will probably spin it as people are starving on the streets and #OrangeManBad (assuming they report it at all).

 

More than 5.9 million individuals dropped off food stamps since President Donald Trump assumed office in February 2017, according to the latest data released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
 

The most up-to-date USDA data shows that 5,975,736 people discontinued using food stamps, also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), between February 2017— when Trump completed his first full month in office— and September 2019.
 

</snip>

Yes, "Trump Takes Food Stamps From Nearly 6 Million People", the NYT's reports. 

[Nanker]

17 hours ago, GG said:

 

For them, a decline in growth may as well be a downturn.  They still don't know how to deal with a real decline, so diminished growth sends major shivers down their spine.  I agree with 3rd, Communists in China know they're playing with fire by waiting out until the election.

 

Maybe that's why smart people would be more worried about 2020 election interference from China  than from Russia

Well, maybe they think they know how to play with fire...

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

19 hours ago, TPS said:

I'm sure they can live with 6%, so we disagree...of course.  

 

The short run impact really hasn't been that significant for China, at least not as much as the overall global slowdown.  Compared to the first half of last year, their goods surplus with US is down $20 billion, and will probably be close to $50 billion for all of 2019.  The real issue is whether or not it's significantly impacting the supply chain decisions of US Corps, and I'm not sure what that answer is yet...

 

...at the same time, what US President has actually had the bawls to take on China directly?....how many predecessors on BOTH SIDES have talked the "tough talk" but did squat?....they have owned us for years and are now at "the table".....is that a bad thing?..........

[TPS]

2 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...at the same time, what US President has actually had the bawls to take on China directly?....how many predecessors on BOTH SIDES have talked the "tough talk" but did squat?....they have owned us for years and are now at "the table".....is that a bad thing?..........

No, and I've consistently said I support his efforts here. Saying that this phase one part of the negotiations is less than what it appears is my analysis of the situation, not a criticism.  I also think China has more flexibility in its dealings than some here think, mainly because of its authoritarian ability to manage the economy, which is also an analysis. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, TPS said:

No, and I've consistently said I support his efforts here. Saying that this phase one part of the negotiations is less than what it appears is my analysis of the situation, not a criticism.  I also think China has more flexibility in its dealings than some here think, mainly because of its authoritarian ability to manage the economy, which is also an analysis. 

 

 

...I have to agree....but at the same time, what US President has made an effort to reign in China?.....haven't they used the huge trade imbalance to build up what the US thinks is a formidable military?....aren't China and Russia our two major foes for world dominance?......good 'ol George said, "I can see Putin's soul through his eyes"......carefully reading line three said, "K G B"......

[TPS]

19 hours ago, GG said:

 

You're missing the impact that slowing growth and export reduction is having on China's internal finances.   China has financed its growth through runaway borrowing, which assumes uninterrupted high growth rates. As it is, China's debt bomb is on a short fuse, and with further slowdowns, the government will be faced with a choice of letting major banks/companies fail or prop the zombies up with hard reserves.   

 

Communists hate either option, and will have to play ball with Trump when he has the upper hand.  China's and Dem's only hope is a massive economic shock in the US in the next 10 months.  

Btw, I was at a presentation by Steve keen several years ago where he was predicting a debt fueled crisis in China based on his Minsky model.

Regarding propping up the zombies, that's why I'm a little more skeptical that Trump has the upper hand, the authoritarian state can always choose to bailout (especially with their level of $ reserves) its banks/companies, unlike one that relies on markets--we only do it in severe times of distress. They can outlast US no matter who is president.  My opinion.

2 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

...I have to agree....but at the same time, what US President has made an effort to reign in China?.....haven't they used the huge trade imbalance to build up what the US thinks is a formidable military?....aren't China and Russia our two major foes for world dominance?......good 'ol George said, "I can see Putin's soul through his eyes"......carefully reading line three said, "K G B"......

None. I agree here.

[GG]

1 hour ago, TPS said:

Btw, I was at a presentation by Steve keen several years ago where he was predicting a debt fueled crisis in China based on his Minsky model.

Regarding propping up the zombies, that's why I'm a little more skeptical that Trump has the upper hand, the authoritarian state can always choose to bailout (especially with their level of $ reserves) its banks/companies, unlike one that relies on markets--we only do it in severe times of distress. They can outlast US no matter who is president.  My opinion.

 

China can outlast this election, but they can’t outlast Trump’s second turn.  

 

If they’re using reserves to prop up zombies and to counter a slowdown, that leaves less to invest in areas that produce real economic growth. Don't forget their efforts to fight capital flight by the new billionaires, .  Add in the fear of HK protests crossing into mainland, they will run out of runway much sooner than conventional wisdom would indicate

 

The last tHing China wants is another Trump term. 

 

[TPS]

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

China can outlast this election, but they can’t outlast Trump’s second turn.  

 

If they’re using reserves to prop up zombies and to counter a slowdown, that leaves less to invest in areas that produce real economic growth. Don't forget their efforts to fight capital flight by the new billionaires, .  Add in the fear of HK protests crossing into mainland, they will run out of runway much sooner than conventional wisdom would indicate

 

The last tHing China wants is another Trump term. 

 

I agree with that last statement.

[CoudyBills]

On 12/14/2019 at 5:48 PM, TPS said:

I'm sure they can live with 6%, so we disagree...of course.  

 

The short run impact really hasn't been that significant for China, at least not as much as the overall global slowdown.  Compared to the first half of last year, their goods surplus with US is down $20 billion, and will probably be close to $50 billion for all of 2019.  The real issue is whether or not it's significantly impacting the supply chain decisions of US Corps, and I'm not sure what that answer is yet...

Completely agreed regarding supply chain.  It benefits the US to drag this out and cause pain locally.  That would push production to other shores but we dont have the stomach for that.  We are used to cheap goods.  Now, discussing the fact that communist china will have a HUGE problem operating within a free trade agreement.  That's a horse of a different color right there.

[3rdnlng]

31 minutes ago, CoudyBills said:

Completely agreed regarding supply chain.  It benefits the US to drag this out and cause pain locally.  That would push production to other shores but we dont have the stomach for that.  We are used to cheap goods.  Now, discussing the fact that communist china will have a HUGE problem operating within a free trade agreement.  That's a horse of a different color right there.

We have placed tariffs on many Chinese goods and they have devalued their currency to not make them more expensive to our consumers. That should tell anyone who is in the cat seat. All we have to have is patience.

[TPS]

One data point isn't a trend but positive news this morning on China's growth.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-economic-activity-gets-a-lift-as-2019-comes-to-a-close-11576471966?mod=cx_picks&cx_navSource=cx_picks&cx_tag=contextual&cx_artPos=6#cxrecs_s

 

"A raft of supportive central government policies lifted China’s economic activity in November—bolstering factory production and consumer spending—which prompted some economists to raise their growth estimates for next year."

[Tiberius]

What's the deficit look like this year?