The Politics Thread

[Worthy4England]

Which bit of "the world," is acting in shock? Pretty much everything that's been said about tariffs is, you do them, they'll do them...

The biggest culprits in this were the free market economists, like Reagan and Thatcher, the companies too, but only in the sense that they are forced into it. You're in a niche if you can only sell a Harley made in the US for $50k and Kawasaki can knock out a similar spec bike for $25k having shipped it from Japan.

Same with services, we'd be delighted to sell UK based services, just tell me who's gonna pay for 'em?

The US started to wake up to the fact that free market capitalism is only a clear advantage when you have the clear advantage. They know they're going to lose to China and probably India, eventually.

[BWFC_Insane]

When you inflict tariffs on a country, then that country retaliates, I don't quite get why the world acts in shock?

The biggest culprits in this are the huge companies in their great haste to export manufacturing to others who enjoy virtual slave labour to provide the goods at buckshee prices. Example, iPhone cost the, well yeah, stupid consumer over a grand yet the Chinese manufacturer them for about $30.
Closer to home, the likes of Dyson, Triumph motorcycles and hell, that great US symbol, Harley Davidson.

The world has been screwed by the 'speed of greed' disguised as so called advances in living standards, that, frankly, would have happened anyway, probably without all the fallout.

The thing is the root cause of this greed isn’t globalised economies. The root cause is capitalism and Trump and those he associates with have been the biggest of cheerleaders for capitalism in the last fifty years.

If you take any business - it starts small and then builds. Tech is the best example since it’s such a young industry and we all know in many cases how these companies started.

But they start with one very bright individual usually who then takes their idea with a few likeminded folks and builds it out from there. Eventually they need investors. So people invest in their business. They have a product. They get that product out there. They lose a lot of money. Need more investors. Eventually they start making money and those investors start to be repaid. Then because scaling these businesses needs huge capital they float. And then they have to employ people in roles who are solely answerable to shareholders. And these people initially might be quite close to the original business and balance that with shareholders. But eventually the business gets so big that in essence those roles are solely about managing the lines on a graph to make sure investors are happy. And the lines go up and shareholders nod. But then what? Shareholders look at the next company starting as a threat and decide there is risk and worry their lines aren’t going up fast enough. So those roles answerable and now more powerful than anyone else decide the only way to solve it is to make massive cuts. Shave the workforce. Move roles to cheaper places. Save money. Profit line goes up. Everyone is happy. Till the next quarter and so on….

The reality is that globalisation of economies is not any different to how capitalism operated since forever. It just expanded the scale. And as things got further the underlying systems exposed more and more people to them.

When thatcher closed the coal mines - something I suspect you cheered on - that was capitalism. Something could be got cheaper elsewhere. Why should we pay more for it? And indeed you can go back further - industrial relocation and rationalisation has happened for hundreds of years - for one reason only - the folks who are invested want more money for less. And there are many many people who are employed solely to ensure that happens.

[BWFC_Insane]

Which bit of "the world," is acting in shock? Pretty much everything that's been said about tariffs is, you do them, they'll do them...

The biggest culprits in this were the free market economists, like Reagan and Thatcher, the companies too, but only in the sense that they are forced into it. You're in a niche if you can only sell a Harley made in the US for $50k and Kawasaki can knock out a similar spec bike for $25k having shipped it from Japan.

Same with services, we'd be delighted to sell UK based services, just tell me who's gonna pay for 'em?

The US started to wake up to the fact that free market capitalism is only a clear advantage when you have the clear advantage. They know they're going to lose to China and probably India, eventually.

Yep but it doesn’t matter what they do because they’ve already lost. The idea that the USA will become competitive in say chip manufacture or car manufacturing is for the birds. As is - inspite of the nonsense Trump and his allies spout the idea you can return to a 1950’s style internal market. What are people going to say? Oh I won’t have a $1500 dollar iPhone I will happily have the Trumpmobile that costs $3000 yet is 3 generations of tech behind.


They won’t. And it’s the same as ‘eat British food’ stuff. No matter what the sense of it or even how it’s forced if any government seriously thinks the public will accept that or be forced into it en masse they will receive a very rude awakening.

None of trumps big backers - the tech bros - want this future either. And I’m not sure Trump even knows what that future would entail. It’s not like he’s a bright spark.

America as a nation is more successful than ever. It’s richest few are richer than ever. So they aren’t failing. The country is by definition the biggest success. The people who are suffering are the bottom 20%. They are the ones who have no industry left. But that is by design what capitalism wants to achieve. And the idea Trump cares about them is for the birds. What he’s doing will hurt the richest he’s just not worked it out yet.

[Hoboh]

When you inflict tariffs on a country, then that country retaliates, I don't quite get why the world acts in shock?

The biggest culprits in this are the huge companies in their great haste to export manufacturing to others who enjoy virtual slave labour to provide the goods at buckshee prices. Example, iPhone cost the, well yeah, stupid consumer over a grand yet the Chinese manufacturer them for about $30.
Closer to home, the likes of Dyson, Triumph motorcycles and hell, that great US symbol, Harley Davidson.

The world has been screwed by the 'speed of greed' disguised as so called advances in living standards, that, frankly, would have happened anyway, probably without all the fallout.

The thing is the root cause of this greed isn’t globalised economies. The root cause is capitalism and Trump and those he associates with have been the biggest of cheerleaders for capitalism in the last fifty years.

If you take any business - it starts small and then builds. Tech is the best example since it’s such a young industry and we all know in many cases how these companies started.

But they start with one very bright individual usually who then takes their idea with a few likeminded folks and builds it out from there. Eventually they need investors. So people invest in their business. They have a product. They get that product out there. They lose a lot of money. Need more investors. Eventually they start making money and those investors start to be repaid. Then because scaling these businesses needs huge capital they float. And then they have to employ people in roles who are solely answerable to shareholders. And these people initially might be quite close to the original business and balance that with shareholders. But eventually the business gets so big that in essence those roles are solely about managing the lines on a graph to make sure investors are happy. And the lines go up and shareholders nod. But then what? Shareholders look at the next company starting as a threat and decide there is risk and worry their lines aren’t going up fast enough. So those roles answerable and now more powerful than anyone else decide the only way to solve it is to make massive cuts. Shave the workforce. Move roles to cheaper places. Save money. Profit line goes up. Everyone is happy. Till the next quarter and so on….

The reality is that globalisation of economies is not any different to how capitalism operated since forever. It just expanded the scale. And as things got further the underlying systems exposed more and more people to them.

When thatcher closed the coal mines - something I suspect you cheered on - that was capitalism. Something could be got cheaper elsewhere. Why should we pay more for it? And indeed you can go back further - industrial relocation and rationalisation has happened for hundreds of years - for one reason only - the folks who are invested want more money for less. And there are many many people who are employed solely to ensure that happens.

Actually, no, I didn't cheer on pit closures, only the kick in the balls for the Commie union leaders.

[Worthy4England]

I have no idea how your first para relates to the last one and I reckin it'd take a Trump spokeswoman to exlain it. They have 35 trillion of debt...and the 8th highest GDP per capita....your last para is just plain wrong. As are your bizarre assertions it's about the bottom 20%. It's not. It's about the bottom 95%. Wake the feck up, man.

[BWFC_Insane]

I have no idea how your first para relates to the last one and I reckin it'd take a Trump spokeswoman to exlain it. They have 35 trillion of debt...and the 8th highest GDP per capita....your last para is just plain wrong. As are your bizarre assertions it's about the bottom 20%. It's not. It's about the bottom 95%. Wake the feck up, man.

They have a debt to GDP ratio that is iirc half of chinas.

And yes it is the bottom 95% but the people it’s bitten immediately and hard is the bottom 20% or so. It’s working its way up and will squeeze everyone outside the richest. Not disputing that.

But my point is that they are a very successful country. Doing exactly what they are meant to do. Transfer wealth from average joe into the elite few. That’s capitalism. That’s the aim. They are successful. Trump will make that worse. Not better.

[Worthy4England]

That first bit. Debt to GDP is the other way round. China's is lower than the US. The top 10 cover some basket cases running from 283% (Lebanon) to 123% (Bhutan). The US is next on the list at 122%. China is about 84%.

I don't doubt that if we took Bhutan at 123% and asked the question who's more successful Bhutan or US, people would say US.

You might notice when Trump had a smaller go at this in his first term, Biden for the most part didn't roll-back those changes. As the BRICs continue to industrialize their ability to "do capitalism" better that the US is progressing. I don't think that's a contentious view, particularly. Nor is the view that they're trying to improve on their current deal (wherever that "new wealth" lands)

It's a relative system and their ability to remain top dogs is very clearly waning.

[BWFC_Insane]

That first bit. Debt to GDP is the other way round. China's is lower than the US. The top 10 cover some basket cases running from 283% (Lebanon) to 123% (Bhutan). The US is next on the list at 122%. China is about 84%.

I don't doubt that if we took Bhutan at 123% and asked the question who's more successful Bhutan or US, people would say US.

You might notice when Trump had a smaller go at this in his first term, Biden for the most part didn't roll-back those changes. As the BRICs continue to industrialize their ability to "do capitalism" better that the US is progressing. I don't think that's a contentious view, particularly. Nor is the view that they're trying to improve on their current deal (wherever that "new wealth" lands)

It's a relative system and their ability to remain top dogs is very clearly waning.

China’s central government debt is lower but that’s because they don’t include their massive industrial subsidies - there isn’t an official figure but it’s way way higher than the USA’s. It’s state managed investment.

As for the last part - I don’t think we disagree I just think we disagree on the solution. There is no rolling back to America as the lead tech and industrial and defence superpower. And trumps misguided and foolish attempts will ensure that prices (that Americans for some reason already felt were too high) rise, consumer power will go down and the 20% will very rapidly become the 60%. And why would a business worry about that market? They won’t be moving production to America - they will just whack the costs up more in most cases.

[Worthy4England]

If their subsidies aren't debt, they're not debt. All governments subsidise. We subsidise oil and gas as one example. We say we don't but that's just as bollocks here as in China.

[BWFC_Insane]

If their subsidies aren't debt, they're not debt. All governments subsidise. We subsidise oil and gas as one example. We say we don't but that's just as bollocks here as in China.

It is debt when ultimately any liabilities would fall on central government - or see their economy collapse.

The fact they farm out subsidies across local government doesn’t obscure the reality their true debt to GDP is over 300%.

And there is nothing to stop the US or indeed anyone from copying that model. It’s why China can make stuff so cheaply in the main. Yes they can use slave labour too in some instances the biggest difference is insane levels of ‘government’ subsidies across a wide range of industries.

[Worthy4England]

If their subsidies aren't debt, they're not debt. All governments subsidise. We subsidise oil and gas as one example. We say we don't but that's just as bollocks here as in China.

It is debt when ultimately any liabilities would fall on central government - or see their economy collapse.

The fact they farm out subsidies across local government doesn’t obscure the reality their true debt to GDP is over 300%.

And there is nothing to stop the US or indeed anyone from copying that model. It’s why China can make stuff so cheaply in the main. Yes they can use slave labour too in some instances the biggest difference is insane levels of ‘government’ subsidies across a wide range of industries.

I think the latest debt-swap in China started in about 2023. We seem to have moved from subsidies (not debt) to LGFV's (yes debt). There are a number of taxation areas where China could increase tax take to meet the US levels - I mean - to get a like for like, you probably aren't just going to read IMF papers (largest shareholder; USofA) - it is for sure complex. I mean what effect does having a taxation system that allows depreciation over 39 years in the US with 20 in China have. So I'm not sure focussing on the detail will get to an answer.

At the top level, there are plenty of reasons the US is targeting China. It's not because they think they have an unassailable position against them.

[KeyserSoze]

Trump threatens tariffs <100% on China for its retaliation.

The American consumer may soon find itself not particularly fond of this brave new world.

[Worthy4England]

Trump threatens tariffs <100% on China for its retaliation.

The American consumer may soon find itself not particularly fond of this brave new world.

Most American consumers didn't vote for this brave new world - even the Reps. But it will likely settle down. Much harder for the markets to lettuce Trump that it was to lettuce Truss.

[KeyserSoze]

Trump threatens tariffs <100% on China for its retaliation.

The American consumer may soon find itself not particularly fond of this brave new world.

Most American consumers didn't vote for this brave new world - even the Reps. But it will likely settle down. Much harder for the markets to lettuce Trump that it was to lettuce Truss.

We will see given the tariffs are going into effect in five hours. The trump support will evaporate (and it is already slowing) if this drags on and shelves aren't stocked. And given both sides are now dug in and showing no sign of negotiating...deary me.

We are not at truss level yet but we are heading in a trajectory. If this drags on companies will find themselves without a business model quite quickly.

[Worthy4England]

Trump threatens tariffs <100% on China for its retaliation.

The American consumer may soon find itself not particularly fond of this brave new world.

Most American consumers didn't vote for this brave new world - even the Reps. But it will likely settle down. Much harder for the markets to lettuce Trump that it was to lettuce Truss.

We will see given the tariffs are going into effect in five hours. The trump support will evaporate (and it is already slowing) if this drags on and shelves aren't stocked. And given both sides are now dug in and showing no sign of negotiating...deary me.

We are not at truss level yet but we are heading in a trajectory. If this drags on companies will find themselves without a business model quite quickly.

It will settle down. Lots of things will be broken by then.

It's only not at Truss level cause Turnip has a stronger hand with better cards in it, so always likely to take longer to lettuce.

[Worthy4England]

Wonder how much the insiders are making out of all this stop / start? Like Luttnick's Cantor.

They're an absolute set of c*nts.

[KeyserSoze]

No one can bully the bond market

[KeyserSoze]

Wonder how much the insiders are making out of all this stop / start? Like Luttnick's Cantor.

They're an absolute set of c*nts.

I genuinely think you're giving them too much credit. Just morons

[Prufrock]

If I keep adding 40, and you keep adding 40 to the result, then I add 40 again.... what happens?

[Worthy4England]

Wonder how much the insiders are making out of all this stop / start? Like Luttnick's Cantor.

They're an absolute set of c*nts.

I genuinely think you're giving them too much credit. Just morons

They are. To an extent. The people that work for them can be pretty bright though.