What's new
What's new

Who's ready for another trade deal?

millNchill

Plastic
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
The conservatives locked in a huge win in the UK, now BREXIT is just a matter of time. How do you expect this to affect manufacturing here in the US and in the UK?
 
Maybe China will take a leaf from trumps plan and insist the USA have a national health plan before they let the USA do business with China.
Bill D
 
Maybe China will take a leaf from trumps plan and insist the USA have a national health plan before they let the USA do business with China.
That's exactly what they will not do, and why over time they will kick US ass. They buy and sell. They don't try to force-feed their suppliers and customers. Like Switzerland, they will take anyone's money.
 
"The Brothers in Arms" treaty.

Picture it, both flags only having red, blue, and white.

None of those socialist flags with green.....
 
WE have always had a good relationship with UK, so any future trade deal should be straightforward. Physical trade with UK however is really not game changing in volume. UK needs to be more concerned with the EU, as they are going to lose some business as they start changing regulation. EU isn't going to accept 'differently' tested beef or electronics that don't meet[whasat lead spec] and such. WE might have to set up something that as they deviate from EU rules that we are used to we might need to update import policies
 
MAGA changes day to day so any president will follow it some of the time. Build the wall don't build a wall, support coal or don't. He is my close friend and associate or he is a low level flunky I barely know, etc. etc.

Obahma did not.

Not even 1% of MAGA.

His administration was that "the good times are over, never to come back"
 
Obahma did not.

Not even 1% of MAGA.

His administration was that "the good times are over, never to come back"

Is that why, once he (and Congress) had got the country past the recession with QE etc., the economy and employment kept growing back steadily at a rate that didn't change even when his successor came into power?
 
Is that why, once he (and Congress) had got the country past the recession with QE etc., the economy and employment kept growing back steadily at a rate that didn't change even when his successor came into power?
The endless rounds of QE was the Fed- not the Congress or Obama.

2016 GDP growth- 1.6%
2017 GDP growth- 2.3%
2018 GDP growth-3.1%

...
 
Is that why, once he (and Congress) had got the country past the recession with QE etc., the economy and employment kept growing back steadily at a rate that didn't change even when his successor came into power?

No, because he said so.
 
Maybe they Brits could sell you some Tea, seems almost everyone forgot the lessons of that.
 
The endless rounds of QE was the Fed- not the Congress or Obama.

2016 GDP growth- 1.6%
2017 GDP growth- 2.3%
2018 GDP growth-3.1%

...


Try not to get confused by looking at a small subset of the data. It'll make you thing that the Orange buffoon is almost as good as he thinks he is (No one could be that good).

GDP growth (annual %) - United States | Data


No, because he said so.

If he was referring to the financial/derivatives bubble that caused the depression, then I hope he was right!
 
Try not to get confused by looking at a small subset of the data. It'll make you thing that the Orange buffoon is almost as good as he thinks he is (No one could be that good).

GDP growth (annual %) - United States | Data
I am not looking at any "subsets". I am looking at US GDP growth, BEA data.

You stated
the economy and employment kept growing back steadily at a rate that didn't change even when his successor came into power?
This is simply not true. The rate increased 50% between 2016 and 2017, and 2018 was double the rate of Obama's final year in office.

The entire Obama term- post-recession, was the slowest recovery the US has seen since WW2 and averaged below 2% overall. Even if we ignore his first year, which includes the great recession- it still only averages 2.1% growth over the remaining 7 years.

It took more than 2 years just to return to pre-recession employment levels. And it was NOT steady growth- we had several quarters that were flat or negative.

Obama had the Fed propping up the economy with QE and 0% interest rates his entire presidency. Trump saw 8 interest rate hikes in the first 2 years, and no QE.

The rate did change when Obama's successor took power. All the other typical indicators also improved- LFPR, unemployment rates, household incomes, wages.

And this is all in the midst of a trade war that is pulling GDP down by 0.5%-1.0%.

Whatever your opinion of Trump- and the trade war notwithstanding- US businesses obviously like his policies.
 
The entire Obama term- post-recession, was the slowest recovery the US has seen since WW2
There was no recovery. It merely took a while for the theft of most middle class savings to work its way through the system, so that it looked like a "recovery".

But what it really was, was a redistribution. Upwards.

Whatever your opinion of Trump- and the trade war notwithstanding- US businesses obviously like his policies.
I don't think we should blame or praise presidents for what happens economically during their administrations.

The crash of Bush was created by Bill Clinton. Stupid things Bush did had their effects during Obama's days. Whatever Trump actually does won't show up until five or ten years from now. Even Jimmy Carter probably wasn't to blame for the mess that landed in his lap. Countries always inflate the hell out of the currency after a war so they won't have to pay for their own stupidity. Or the guys at the top won't, anyhow. Somebody does. Somebody always does.

Presidents are the tail of the previous guy, but the dog for the next one.
 
...Presidents are the tail of the previous guy, but the dog for the next one.
I agree, in part at least..

There are structural things that Presidents have little or no control over. The demographics of the working age population, monetary policy (owned by the Fed), fiscal policy (owned the Congress and only sometimes does the President get a say).

There are other places where a President does have influence. Trade and regulatory policy are mostly driven from the White House. The President has a lot of impact when it comes to consumer and business sentiment, which has a pretty direct effect on the economy. Saying "You didn't build that" isn't going to endear you to small businesses, and saying you are going to eliminate coal mining is not going to help the economy in places like West Virginia.

We went from an anti-business President to a pro-business one, and you can see it in places like new business startups as well as the economy writ large. You would have a hard time convincing me that things would be as they are today, with Hillary in the Oval.
 








 
Back
Top