Who wins in a Trade War? China or US?

[zdreg]

No one wins in a trade war.

However, a $350 billions deficit is not sustainable. Something has to give whether Trump starts a trade war or not.

This reminded me of colonialism and imperialism of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Western countries exported more to their colonies and serfdoms than imported raw materials from them and thus dominated their economy and politics.

Taken to the limit, the huge US deficits, adding up in a few decades, could turn the US into a serfdom? Think China in the late 19th century and early 20th century. I think they still remember those days.

No one wins in a trade war.

However, a $350 billions deficit is not sustainable. Something has to give whether Trump starts a trade war or not.

This reminded me of colonialism and imperialism of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Western countries exported more to their colonies and serfdoms than imported raw materials from them and thus dominated their economy and politics.

Taken to the limit, the huge US deficits, adding up in a few decades, could turn the US into a serfdom? Think China in the late 19th century and early 20th century. I think they still remember those days.

The US will ruin itself through budget deficits, not through trade deficits.

 

[eurusdzn]

Our GDP last year was the highest its been in 13 years. China's GDP was the lowest its been in 28 years. Since the start of the trade war our stock indexes are close to flat. The Shanghai composite is down about 20%.

There's no doubt that the trade war has hurt China more than it has hurt us. Both sides would benefit from a deal, but China needs it more than we do. That leverage should allow us to come out on top. Hopefully the ends will justify the means.

Tarrifs Friday coincide with Trump and Dozus'' boys recently getting the fed in line.
What a coincidence. Easier to stay flat now relative to the 20 percent December selloff.
Good to see the comparison to China stock indices. My opinion on this matter will follow that.

 

[zdreg]

Poll should have asked additional choices in a trade war are both counties winners or are both countries losers.

 

[ElCubano]

Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Iraq, Afghanistan. What do they all have in common? These were all places that America with its superior resources was supposed to score easy victories. And in all of them, America failed to secure a clear cut victory. Why? Because in each case America failed to account for the resolve of the opponent. China seems to be quite willing to suffer for as long as it takes to get their way. Furthermore China does have one advantage - they don't have to worry about politics and whether their voters are suffering from the sanctions.

America should win in the end, but I wouldn't bet on it. Sometime the tortoise does beat the hare.

The bay of pigs was an outright back stab by jfk.

 

[curiousGeorge8]

None will win.

 

[neke]

While highly trained and specialized researchers from Europe have a super hard time to obtain visa

narrow-minded

 

[Overnight]

Nobody wins in a trade war. And the war goes on, and then peace is called, and it goes right back to where it was in the beginning...A huge negative trade imbalance, because America loves to buy cheep stuff.

 

[themickey]

......cheep stuff.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

You nicely conflated all the issues, I never remotely suggested that H1B visa applicants take jobs away from managers in the EB1 category. Then you start dancing around peanuts by not wanting to admit that the truth is that the majority of H1B visa go to Indians and not because they are so truly qualified but because there is a need for 2nd and 3rd tier IT workers in the US. (I define with 2nd and 3rd tier those who work with SQL databases, do web design, front end work,... Not 1st tier as in working at the forefront of AI or robotics or research in biochemistry or the medicine or the like). It's completely irrelevant whether those came from India or are Indians who made a pit stop at a US university.

My point has been that US immigration law is completely outdated in that there are very few work visa categories and that the acceptance vs rejection decision is based on a cap and that such cap is by majority exhausted within days by individuals of 2 countries, India and China. Because there are no country quotas because of the sheer number of Indian and to a lesser degree Chinese applicants hardly anyone else has a reasonable chance in obtaining H1B visa to work in the US even though there is a strong need for skilled workers in other than IT sectors. The sheer number of Indians overwhelms the entire system for work visa. And why do you feel addressed. You attended school in the US for about 10 years or more you should have never tangented by the H1B issue.

Furthermore, why does the H1B issue also impact other work visa categories? Because the H1B system has been so badly abused that there is a negative stigma attached to it and because the current climate surrounding work visa applications also negatively impacts executives on a managerial level.

Listen, the situation is pretty easily assessed. Are countries like India shit hole countries? By no means. But they are not attractive countries at all even for their own citizens. Give Koreans, Chinese, HK locals, Indians, Filipinos, and many citizens of other Asians a free US passport and air ticket and guess where almost an entire continent will flock to? Yes, America. You yourself made that very same choice apparently. One culture is noticeably absent: Japanese. Japanese by large majority would choose to stay and live in Japan if given a choice, so would a large percentage of Europeans. The problem really arises with the few researchers and highly skilled workers (as in highly, not Web design or low level IT shit) who are sought after by US companies but who can't obtain a visa because 2 nations in the world completely overload and exhaust the work visa system in the US.

No matter how much you hate to hear it but at some point we all will need to ask the following question: at what point are there too many Indian and Chinese immigrants in the US and Canada? When is it gonna be too much? I don't think Indians would like it if in a short span of time 10-15% Turks or Scandinavians made up their population. There are limits to tolerance and assimilation, especially when people of certain cultures actually refuse to assimilate or ever pledge their allegiance to their newly chosen home country. What is the percentage of Indians or Chinese who attained citizenship in the US who serve their country in the military? It is as small as a rounding error. Vastly different moral and ethical values, completely different incompatable values of life. Where is the willingness to fit in? I want to be very careful in stressing that I am talking about averages not generalize or include each and every person in this assessment. Some cultures are more compatible than others.

I am absolutely convinced that the current immigration policy is a fad and that at some point a majority of the population will re-assess and realize that there are enough of a certain cultural background and that is when quotas for each country will be implemented. That is when a balance will be re-established. For example, 5% of all Indians who apply get the work or immigration visa, 5% of Europeans, 5% of Japanese who apply pass and so on. That is when an immigration policy becomes fair. Europeans should not be penalized that India is a pretty unattractive place to live and that the only reason Chinese are still in China is that the government brainwashes people and keeps all information away from public discourse. Why do you think Vancouver, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland, Christchurch are almost unaffordable to even their own citizens? Because a disproportionate amount who earned their money in unverifiable ways enters those countries and bids up the entire market. Hong Kong locals got a free pass to Australia, New Zealand, US, Canada for no apparent reason, at no point were HK locals in danger of persecution, imprisonment, death before, during, or after the handover to China, yet they all got a free pass. I truly believe the reason is that Europe has so far played a very weak game and has not looked after its own citizens and its citizens' interests in the world. Very soon Europe will be the next to put the screws on China because otherwise entire Europe will be swamped with Chinese and trade will be as imbalanced as is currently the case with US-Chinese trade. You might disagree, and that is your prerogative, but I am absolutely convinced that Europeans and white Americans will soon wake up and demand that their voices will be equally heard given that they still represent an absolute majority in their home countries.

if you actually read the USCIS report, you'd know that USCIS defined it specifically as 74% of Indian origin (as in, place of birth), not people who grew up and graduated and worked in India....and then moved over to the US as adults. there are tons of Asians who either immigrated to the US after being born in their respective countries or came to the US for college. these are usually kids from rich families or kids who were at the top of their class in primary school and were given the chance to attend college in the US...or both. every single one of people in this group are lumped in with the "unskilled workers from india" you're referring to so it's a useless statistic.

for example, i was born abroad but attended MS, HS, college, and grad school all in the US, as an international student. i am as american as they come but i would be counted as being part of that 74% if my country of birth was india.

the inter-company transfer of managerial executives is 1 of 3 categories within the EB1 category. it is also the one category that has literally no competition with unskilled Indian or Chinese counterparts so it is hardly relevant to the original discussion of uneducated Asian workers displacing skilled European ones.

yes the trading floor is diverse but that's because the buy-side of finance is a meritocracy by design. that's also why most jobs where you actually have to know your shit like medicine, IT, engineering, scientific research, etc. are so diverse. b/c it's all about performance and results, and performance and results don't care about your ethnicity.

but look at the sell-side of the finance business b/c that's where "soft factors" aka race, fit, etc. trump meritocracy, unlike the buy-side. also look at the partnership of v10 law firms (i'm talking cravath, wachtell, sullivan cromwell, kirkland ellis, skadden, davis polk, etc.), which i'm sure you're familiar with if you've ever worked at a respectable bank. i used to work in one of these firms and attaining partnership is the exact same story as it was the case with attaining MD in many of my IB clients like goldman. i mean, the sheer ignorance you must have to be complaining about there being an overrepresentation of Indian-americans in the IT managerial space when so much of the same for whites is present right in your back yard and then some, is ironic.

i do not condone racist hiring/promotion practices, whether it's being done by Indians or Whites. but don't expect anyone to take you seriously when the hypocrisy is literally in plain sight for all to see. when Asians are passed over for partnership due to not being part of the boy's network with White partners, it is unsurprising that you would see a similar thing happening within Asians. this happens a lot even in Silicon Valley of all places, where there are a ton of Asian engineers but the ones who get promoted to manager often are not. when someone is rejected by members of another ethnicity, it is natural for him to seek refuge within his own ethnicity. as i said in the prev post, it's just a fact of life that people are attracted to their own. and racism only begets more racism from those that were a victim of it.

your example of CMU's quant program is hardly representative. most of our IT folks come from CS undergrad programs from US colleges and the top CS undergrad programs are definitely populated by majority Asian-americans. i would know since i actually graduated from one.

so you don't like family-based immigration because you think it undercuts the skilled people who want to immigrate to the US but can't. that is a valid point.

but the crux of your original argument hinged upon unskilled Asian workers from Asia filling up the spots that the skilled European workers deserve to be getting. this is a largely separate issue from family-based immigration yet you somehow related the two. the way one would argue that it is NOT a separate issue is by making the assumption that if the US were to cut visa allocation to family-based petitions, the US would also increase merit-based petitions by the same amount. but now we're going on a tangent which i am not willing to waste even more time debating. you would also have to make the assumption that those benefiting from family-based petitions are the people "skilled Europeans" are in direct competition with. the issue becomes intricately more complex with additional x factors. your claims are too broad and involve different subsets whose relationships with one another aren't easily qualifiable. if you wanna debate, narrow the scope of your argument.

i probably have similar conclusions about immigration reform as you do but for different reasons. it just pisses me the fuck off when people spout bullshit claims to support those conclusions- claims like how those lower-skilled Indians or Chinese or Mexicans are taking the white-collar, high-paying jobs from the educated White Europeans or Americans b/c of MUH CHEAP LABOR or MUH CHAIN MIGRATION.

Chain migration is a problem for other reasons, like national security, welfare, etc. But don't give me this bullshit about how family chain migration is the reason these script kiddies from India are taking the high-paying managerial jobs that Europeans are more qualified for. For a group of people that likes to shit on welfare recipients so much, it's funny how much you like to clutch onto the straws of victim mentality when it favors you.

Of course, it's much easier to simply point the finger at those brown or yellow "clans" instead of something abstract like legislation since you can't rally a base around an issue without creating an identifiable target with a recognizable face.

It's like when people all blamed the bankers during Occupy Wallstreet or how people blame Apple/Google for legally avoiding taxes by not repatriating from Ireland, when the real issue is abstract and why they were allowed to do it in the first place.

 

[nooby_mcnoob]

I feel like this guy may be a little racist. Do other white people on this forum feel the same about the issues he raises? I personally feel as if it's a media inflated issue to cause this very type of thing for insecure people.

Though I readily agree that the quality of people the UK let in is antithetical to the idea of successful immigration. I recall reading books on this when I was younger, specifically about the UK. And if the US adopted such a policy, it would be a bad result in the end.

Fortunately, the US is a big place.