Which side is more likely to win a trade war, (1) an economic powerhouse governed by a ruthless, unelected dictator capable of violently suppressing dissent or (2) an economic powerhouse that’s democratic and whose electorate punishes leaders who preside over a struggling economy?
An actual leader would explain WHY it is imperative to American National Security to end the trade inbalance with China and gear the country up for some short term pain. We do not have an actual leader and haven't since Bush (Whatever mistakes he made he led the nation after 9/11.)
When composing your column , please define how you will calculate and decide who “won a trade war” ? My question is sincere, not rhetorical. In cases of comparative advantage (which almost always exists ) trade should ne mutually beneficial and not a zero sum game. It is also often multilateral , not bilateral which further complicates the calculus. As does any consideration of the strategic national importance of some industries. In the current situation there are almost certain to be two losers according to my view of the outcome. So when your column is written telling us who won and who lost, how will you decide?
I think the U.S. will have lost if Trump ends up backing down (while speciously declaring victory, presumably). In that event, Trump will have looked silly and China will believe (as I think it suspects) that he's relatively weak -- a big talker who can't live up to his talk when faced with a strong adversary.
In addition, if China is taking unfair advantage of the U.S. as Trump says (and I believe) it is, then we will have lost the trade war if Trump backs down because he will have failed to reverse the imbalances that led him to start the war.
An actual leader would explain WHY it is imperative to American National Security to end the trade inbalance with China and gear the country up for some short term pain. We do not have an actual leader and haven't since Bush (Whatever mistakes he made he led the nation after 9/11.)
When composing your column , please define how you will calculate and decide who “won a trade war” ? My question is sincere, not rhetorical. In cases of comparative advantage (which almost always exists ) trade should ne mutually beneficial and not a zero sum game. It is also often multilateral , not bilateral which further complicates the calculus. As does any consideration of the strategic national importance of some industries. In the current situation there are almost certain to be two losers according to my view of the outcome. So when your column is written telling us who won and who lost, how will you decide?
Thanks for your comment and question.
I think the U.S. will have lost if Trump ends up backing down (while speciously declaring victory, presumably). In that event, Trump will have looked silly and China will believe (as I think it suspects) that he's relatively weak -- a big talker who can't live up to his talk when faced with a strong adversary.
In addition, if China is taking unfair advantage of the U.S. as Trump says (and I believe) it is, then we will have lost the trade war if Trump backs down because he will have failed to reverse the imbalances that led him to start the war.