Page 6 of 6

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:03 pm
by BruceP
windwalker wrote:
BruceP wrote: ... rd-numbers

.The US farmer suicide crisis echoes a much larger farmer suicide crisis happening globally: an Australian farmer dies by suicide every four days; in the UK, one farmer a week takes his or her own life; in France, one farmer dies by suicide every two days; in India, more than 270,000 farmers have died by suicide

Interesting, doesn't support the narrative that some are trying to push here.

The fact that it's been like that for decades is lost on them. Just like that 'Facism' (sic) thread where people were being stopped at border checkpoints because, Trump...

Too full of hate to smell their own bigotry

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 9:30 pm
by grzegorz
Where did you get your education? Trump university?

You are Wrong!

Full of hate...?

You guys are so brainwashed into defending Trump that you use confirmation bias to defend all things Trump

This was just in the news.

Bankruptcies for farmers in the Midwest have risen sharply. Some farmers have been hit by a trifecta of bad circumstances: trade tariff disputes, continuing low crop prices and extensive flooding.

If you guys want to deny the suicide of farmers then a simple solution would be to do research on the current bankruptcy rate of US farmers.

I asked what people believed Trump's tariffs would do and got no solid response.

The fact is tariffs are a Democratic strategy which have long been abandoned since the Reagan/Bush era.

I don't disageee with tariffs the problem is Trump did it by executive order. If he had done it through congress then these tariffs would have staying power and you could see factories open in the US but instead you have a trade war which is directly hurting farmers which some seem to want to deny.

Also if Trump had not destroyed TPP he could have used it as bargaining tool against the Chinese.

Anyway if some just want to point fingers and call me full of hate then go ahead but unlike Trump I am not going to cry, whine and run off to hide in Japan.

I will school you and show you where you are wrong as you both are.

But since you probably won't listen here is a picture that will remind you what party got us here in the first place.


Keep voting for Republicans and ask yourself why red states have the lowest quality of life.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 9:45 pm
by grzegorz
BruceP wrote:
Steve James wrote:
Great. Let's continue to check facts

For sure, Steve. That way, you guys don't have to keep moving the goal posts.

Steve, how can we discuss the facts when we can't even agree that farmers are struggling?

Funny that I am supposedly full of hate for posting "Dying of Whiteness." Some of best friends are white! LOL!

Actually Dying of Whiteness is not racism it is about understanding working class whites in red states and the writer has a lot of respect for these people but is trying to understand why they vote against their own interests by understanding their mindset. The idea that I am full of hate just proves that this conversation is too much for some people to comprehend.

Which doesn't surprise me.

By the way not long ago Trump supporters were bragging about the stock market. When stocks are doing well they give credit to Trump so when stocks fall will they blame Trump?

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 12:00 am
by Bao
grzegorz wrote:By the way not long ago Trump supporters were bragging about the stock market. When stocks are doing well they give credit to Trump so when stocks fall will they blame Trump?

They will blame the Democrats or China.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 9:17 pm
by grzegorz
The greatest distraction of all, especially for Americans, is war.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:43 pm
by grzegorz
U.S. farmers suffer 'body blow' as China slams door on farm purchases

Hallie Gu, Tom Daly

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese companies have stopped buying U.S. agricultural products, China’s Commerce Ministry said on Tuesday, a blow to U.S. farmers who have already seen their exports slashed by the more than year-old trade war. ... SKCN1UV0XJ

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:22 am
by Steve James

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:50 am
by windwalker
Need to pay for the $15 an hour wage increase somehow.
As it gets phased in expect things to increase.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 am
by Steve James
Trump was right. Americans (even legal working citizens) getting paid too much are responsible. I thought increasing business profits by lowering their taxes was supposed to translate into higher wages. Then again, there is no federal $15 minimum wage yet. Going back to a $5 minimum wage would allow companies to hire more workers, too.

:) Those who think wages are too high should offer themselves up for a pay cut.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:52 am
by roger hao
Steve - No thanks

I had to do that once under Clinton and then once under Obama.

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:47 pm
by Steve James
Yeah, the Bush admin was great for everyone. Alas, here we are. Well, anybody here make less than $15 p/hr who thinks that he is overpaid?

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 4:14 am
by Bob
Point of information regarding the efficiency of financial markets and arbitrage

"Generally speaking, the wisdom of the crowd,
aka the markets, are smarter than individuals, even "experts".

Most experts believe the market is "efficient" in the long run.
That means it "prices in" all available information.
The reason is simple.
If there is an inefficiency, traders will exploit that and do arbitrage.
Which is just making money on the difference.
Because of that, the inefficiency goes away - the trades exist until there
is no spread. Because making money is a time-cconstrained sport (down to milliseconds), the inefficiencies don't last long at all.

If we look at the current "futures" and markets, stocks are up in Asia and USA.
This is because Trump is seen as backpedaling on Huawei.
Which the market seems to think means movement toward trade agreements.
The "information" should include political and jobs info.
Now I'm not a "conservative", and this is fairly standard WSJ/MBA type of stuff, but it makes common sense." ... 7&start=75


The behaviour of contemporary financial markets is explained by two competing theories, the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) and Behavioural Finance. The EMH assumes full rationality of investors, instant distribution of information across the market and thus its complete absorption by stock prices. Meanwhile, behavioural finance accounts for psychological factors and motives in investor behaviour claiming that these motives may significantly influence the investor’s decision making. . .

The EMH proposes that beating the market and receiving extra profits from studying historical stock prices is impossible in theory. The core driving force affecting price changes is the appearance of new information. In an “efficient” market, prices react to information instantly, reflecting it objectively and without bias. Thus, stock price cannot be “too low” or “too high” as it objectively reflects current situation. Stock prices change fast and any arbitrage opportunities that may emerge resolve very quickly. Even financial ratio analysis and fundamental analysis of stocks is believed to be useless in pursuit of abnormal returns. The main driver of the appearance of an efficient market is strong competition among investors and traders. The skill to recognise mispriced stocks with their market value deviating from the fair value is very useful as investors would be able to make riskless profits but according to the EMH this is impossible. For obtaining new information faster, investors strive to reveal mispriced stocks and spend many resources on that. Gradually, more investors compete for gaining advantage and probability for arbitrage becomes lower and lower. In reality, only a very small group of large investors whose deals can affect market prices will benefit from recognising mispriced stocks, while for most investors the costs of receiving information and transaction fees will be higher than potential profit.

EMH is based on several assumptions that simplify the reality. However, these simplifications are too rough; so, they do not hold in real life and are a point of criticism of the theory. The most significant criticism of the EMH comes from the behavioural finance, which links investment decisions to human psychology and explores human subjective motives for particular actions in the financial markets. Critical remarks of behavioural finance regarding the EMH are the following.

The main underlying assumption of the EMH is that investors exhibit totally rational behaviour. This implies that they are risk averse and are interested in acquiring assets with the highest yields or returns given a certain acceptable level of risk. It is noteworthy, however, that the EMH does not require all investors to be fully rational. The market may be still efficient if some individual investors are irrational but group decisions are rational.

Empirical evidence shows that the assumption of complete investor rationality does not hold in real life. First, total rationality is difficult to determine as there always may be a chance of temporary irrational actions or motives. Second, human behaviour is frequently unforeseeable, and subjective motives such as emotions, herd instinct or panic behaviour may prevail over rationality. The investor rationality as a concept is linked to the conservative scientific paradigm of mechanistical essence of human being. It was suggested in the previous centuries that the nature and people are only mechanistic systems comprising visible elements without accounting for complex relationships between the parts of these systems. Therefore, spiritual and moral values, illogicality of a human’s mind, absence of direct and clear interest and serendipity are not perceived as substantial determinants of the economic thinking. Only later, research and experiments in the fields of psychology, sociology and economics revealed the important role of these stimuli in human decision making.

It is also important to emphasize the presence of numerous market anomalies such as the day-of-the-week effect, January effect, the effect of Holy Islam Days, and seasonal anomalies. The concept of irrational behaviour is also likely to explain the presence of numerous market bubbles of different size.

In conclusion, behavioural finance explains that underlying assumptions of the EMH do not hold in real life. In particular, investors’ behaviour cannot be fully rational due to individual traits of character, different perception of the level of acceptable risk, different expectations, current mood and fleeting emotions. The concept of instant distribution of information, which is the second important mechanism of market efficiency, appears to be too idealistic as well. Investors have different tools and opportunities for receiving and utilising information. Also, they may react to the same information in different ways and with different time lags, which makes the effect of information distribution suboptimal. These findings from behavioural finance also cast doubts on the validity of the third assumption of the EMH that asset prices follow a random walk

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:31 am
by grzegorz
Trump called for a cease fire but Beijing had other plans.

China retaliates with tariffs on $75 billion of US goods

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:18 am
by Steve James
Is it true that Trump can force US companies to leave China?

Re: Trump's Trade War

PostPosted: Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:14 pm
by Steve James
Lindsey Graham: 'Accept the pain' of the U.S.-China trade war

“The Democrats for years have been claiming that China should be stood up to,” he said during an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “Now Trump is and we just got to accept the pain that comes with standing up to China. How do you get China to change without creating some pain on them and us? I don’t know.”

Yep, the Democrats should have done it a long time ago. Oh well, no pain no gain. Okay, okay, were Americans really suffering that much before the trade war? Granted. Things can always get better. But, now, it seems it'll be good just to get it back to when there was less pain.

Anyway, it's on things like this that the talk about US bullying other countries and a globalist agenda make sense. However, the "Trade war" just hurts workers and consumers. It is true, though, that Americans with the ability to consume won't feel the pain as much as the Chinese worker. Otoh, the Chinese worker won't elect a new government or protest much. It's just my op, but I think Xi gets more popular by standing up to Trump --and he doesn't have to manufacture propaganda like Kim. The other thing is that, even if its economy stagnates or shrinks, China can afford to wait. It's been around a while.