Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[froot loops]

I admire Jeff Buchanan's determination to find some sort of strategy on trade, but there is nothing there. It is all ad hoc bullshit that will amount to nothing positive. All of these multinational trade agreements are designed to combat this and it's more effective. Throwing tariffs up willy nilly and destroying your credibility in the process is shit strategy. What country is going to trust Trump on any agreement when he will back out of an agreement at any time. Once you lose your credibility it won't come back.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Oh, I do think there is an overarching strategy that defines the Trump administration. It's been published and I've linked to a couple of sources that describe it. In short, change the old liberal order that has prevailed since post WWII. That overarching strategy has spilled over into trade with tariff's being a tool of statecraft. There is plenty of disagreement on the strategic goal itself but probably more so with the means of achieving that goal...... tariffs as a means of statecraft in the modern world of a global economy and attendant economic inter-connectivity in particular.

But you are correct in your last assessment at least as it relates to the threat of tariffs on Mexican goods as a means of forcing the Mexican government to tighten up it's immigration policies and enforcement on their own southern boarder with Central America. That is a "willy-nilly" sort of step that, as you say, discredits Trump and defines the US as an unpredictable partner in the trade (vis-a-vis USMCA) or defense (e.g., Treaties with Japan and NATO members, JCPOA between the P5+1 and Iran) arena and an unreliable one should a new partnership among sovereigns be forged.

[Jeff Buchanan]

......... I'd add, and we will all probably agree with this regardless of our particular political views, Trump's character, in particular his narcissism, creates a toxic environment for negotiations when the potential for public embarrassment regarding outcomes is high. What I mean by this is that the Chinese are particularly sensitive to their citizen's perception of their leadership; their government purposefully and skillfully shapes it. Any social media driven perception that the leadership is weak is to be avoided. The Iranians have a different problem in this regard. They are not partners with the US. They are clearly an enemy and have been since the 70s so, the public dialogue between the US and Iran is by nature different than it is between the US and China.

But Trump's bullying approach - the Chinese have called it Trump's unilateral, America first, big stick policies on trade - intended to intimidate negotiators is an approach guaranteed to fail given the niceties of Asian culture. I suppose his tactics could work with the Iranians because the Mullah's hold on power could be viewed as tenuous - unlike the Chinese circumstance. Still, the old proverb that a little less vinegar and a little more honey along with less public stands - something Trump savors - is more likely to produce a good outcome with both countries than not.

[crashcourse]

AA

glad you survived

thinking about a major geographic change considering a job in Tuscon--anyone ever live there? Has to be better then the last 20years in eastern KS-

[Dr. Strangelove]

[Ghengis Jon]

Chump should be forced to watch MSNBC Clockwork Orange style.



The Trump Administration's Mideast Plan hasn't even been released yet and already they're backtracking.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/02/politics/pompeo-manage-expectations-middle-east-plan/index.html

[Kapture1]

to be fair, CNN is fucking garbage

[crashcourse]

ratcliffe from texas with more peter strzok facts and trumps being spied on

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ma1QjuW6jQ

[froot loops]

The liberal order since the end of WWII has been great for free trade and the world. People constantly complain about Mexico and NAFTA but does anybody besides Trump want a return to pre-NAFTA Mexico? If anyone does, its because they don't remember it. Check out this prediction from Jose Cardenas in NRO right when Trump was inaugurated:

[froot loops]

They must not upset the Czar. The dude can't spell stopped correctly.

[Jeff Buchanan]

The liberal order since the end of WWII has been great for free trade and the world. .........

Has been is the operative word here, Froot.

Here is an excellent article that lays out what the Liberal Order was and how it positively influenced peace and prosperity until a return to the great power rivalry was inevitable. According to the Trump administration we are there and have been for about a decade - at least. As well, this shift in the global order is not something that just got recognized by Trump. It's been a conservative talking point for a while and, indeed, there were clear signs during the Obama administration that they knew a global shift was ongoing and acted on it - not anywhere near with the audacity of Trump.

If one takes the time to study this article and understand the author's POV, it becomes clear how the Trump administration is dealing - or some would say should deal - with China, NK, Russia and the ME, in particular Iran. There is plenty of room for discussion regarding the means by which the Trump administration wants to fashion relationships between them when the great powers are all competitors in the global economy each attempting to establish spheres of influence by various means including militarily. But there is no debating the shape of the new world and the great powers that are competing within it.

I think the shit with Mexico is a misstep and have said so here. The move is inconsistent with a more robust and global POV, is purely regional in it's objective and pisses off freedom loving and democratic North American trading partners the US needs as a strong global competitor. I'm beginning to waiver in my support of Trump aligning with SA in the ME v. Iran because that policy seems to me to erode a new world conservative viewpoint that rejects authoritarianism. SA is very much an authoritarian regime and to embrace it seems contradictory at face.

I also think that there are clear headed people within the Trump administration that understand the competitive nature of the new world order and have put forth FP objectives and steps to achieve them that are consistent with how the author of the linked article below sees them. The problem, I think, is that Trump lacks the gravitas to understand his top advisers and tends to do things, probably contrary to their advice, that make the US look inconsistent and unreliable as a potential honest competitor among great and lesser powers that have overlapping strategic interests on a number of levels.





https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...ianism/569881/

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump told Gary Cohn, Rob Porter, and John Kelley all to stop the AT&T/Time-Warner merger at one point or another. Always because he didn't like CNN's coverage of him. We know he has repeatedly pushed the post office to end their deal with Amazon, even though the Postmaster has repeatedly told him it's a good deal for the US and one of the few things keeping the PO from even greater losses, because he hates the Bezos-owned Washington Post's coverage of him.

It's all fine and good to say well these threats were never carried out. He got over it. But what happens when the people willing to say no to him or save him from himself are all gone?

(AT&T's stock went up today, btw)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/06/03/trump-urges-customers-drop-att-punish-cnn-over-its-coverage-him/?utm_term=.8582ac51e7bb

[Ghengis Jon]

T.JPG


I wonder if other companies will line up clamoring "Ooooo, us too! Say you want us boycotted too!!"

[Dr. Strangelove]

D8K0p4lXoAABKil.jpg:small.jpg

[Dr. Strangelove]