Trump pulled out of a massive trade deal. Now 11 countries are going ahead without the US

[TU Curmudgeon]

From CNN

Trump pulled out of a massive trade deal. Now 11 countries are going ahead without the US
​

A major 11-country agreement goes into effect Sunday, reshaping trade rules among economic powerhouses like Japan, Canada, Mexico and Australia — but the United States won't be a part of it.

That means that Welch's grape juice, Tyson's pork and California almonds will remain subject to tariffs in Japan, for example, while competitors' products from countries participating in the new Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership will eventually be duty-free.

Japan will offer similar tariff relief to the European Union, in a separate trade deal set to go into effect on February 1.

"Our competitors in Australia and Canada will now benefit from those provisions, as US farmers watch helplessly," said US Wheat Associates President Vince Peterson at a hearing on the potential negotiations with Japan.

COMMENT:-

While Russia and China are still more than willing to talk with the US government ["Putin tells Trump that Moscow is open for dialogue on a ‘wide-ranging agenda’" - "After Trump touts ‘Big progress’ in trade talks, China expresses willingness to work with US through ‘storms’"] they appear to be doing so in the full knowledge that they are negotiating with someone who is franticly trying to see how few keys he can get the piano vendors to agree to put on the pianos that he is buying for full price.

In the mean time, at least one of the other two countries involved with the US in NAFTA 2.0 is looking out for its own interests.

What will happen if the PRC signs on to the CPATPP, we will simply have to wait to find out.
​

 

[Mycroft]

From CNN

Trump pulled out of a massive trade deal. Now 11 countries are going ahead without the US
​

A major 11-country agreement goes into effect Sunday, reshaping trade rules among economic powerhouses like Japan, Canada, Mexico and Australia — but the United States won't be a part of it.

That means that Welch's grape juice, Tyson's pork and California almonds will remain subject to tariffs in Japan, for example, while competitors' products from countries participating in the new Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership will eventually be duty-free.

Japan will offer similar tariff relief to the European Union, in a separate trade deal set to go into effect on February 1.

"Our competitors in Australia and Canada will now benefit from those provisions, as US farmers watch helplessly," said US Wheat Associates President Vince Peterson at a hearing on the potential negotiations with Japan.

COMMENT:-

While Russia and China are still more than willing to talk with the US government ["Putin tells Trump that Moscow is open for dialogue on a ‘wide-ranging agenda’" - "After Trump touts ‘Big progress’ in trade talks, China expresses willingness to work with US through ‘storms’"] they appear to be doing so in the full knowledge that they are negotiating with someone who is franticly trying to see how few keys he can get the piano vendors to agree to put on the pianos that he is buying for full price.

In the mean time, at least one of the other two countries involved with the US in NAFTA 2.0 is looking out for its own interests.

What will happen if the PRC signs on to the CPATPP, we will simply have to wait to find out.
​

We already have a thread on this topic.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/342009-world-trade-moves-without-us.html

 

[Helix]

wait until the rest of the world figures out that they can tell us to **** off and use a different global reserve currency. this is **** that you risk when you go rogue and elect idiots.

 

[j-mac]

wait until the rest of the world figures out that they can tell us to **** off and use a different global reserve currency. this is **** that you risk when you go rogue and elect idiots.

So, we should continue to get screwed because the other countries prefer it that way? That's some sound logic right there...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Helix]

So, we should continue to get screwed because the other countries prefer it that way? That's some sound logic right there...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

if enough other countries band together and we are on the outside, it might end up not being a great situation for us. i'm not saying that this is the situation now, because i don't think that it is. however, it's a valid point.

 

[Risky Thicket]

So, we should continue to get screwed because the other countries prefer it that way? That's some sound logic right there...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Somebody gotta eat all those soybeans China isn't buying from the US. Y'all big on soybeans over there in Gaffney? And then there are all those peaches South Carolina won't be shipping to Mexico. Who knows, soybean peach burgers and soybean peach beer might in y'all's future.

 

[j-mac]

if enough other countries band together and we are on the outside, it might end up not being a great situation for us. i'm not saying that this is the situation now, because i don't think that it is. however, it's a valid point.

That's a position of weakness...My point stands.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[OrphanSlug]

We have two problems that are going to collide with things like this.

First, these “trade deals” are not really market based anyway. They have nothing to do with free trade and ultimately are labor movement and production control tools. They are more or less giant control mechanisms that end up benefiting larger corporations first before anyone small business can get into the mix. From a farming perspective it does more to deal with who pays for price fluctuations and the means of exchange that is also controlled far more than market based.

TPP is honestly nothing more than NAFTA on steroids which involves all kinds of provisions that protect business intentions at the expense of market dynamics and sovernty. Think TransCanada filing suit against US landowners using US courts to do so, or US DOT rules not applying to Canada or Mexico based transporation to the same extent they do our own, or where to apply subsidy, etc.

Second, in the balance is isolation from these deals knowing they are problematic. To see these 11 or more nations go forward with the deal we can start to predict who will win. Japan and the EU (through a separate deal) will end up winning the most here in how tariffs are applied if ever. US producers will be on the outside looking in and ultimately the farmer will be hurt first.

Now they will be anyway but the question is which evil do they pick, isolation from the deal having to compete with tariffs or going with the deal and being subject to all those controls (and odds are staying on the government dole to pay for the difference.) In this case Trump is deciding for them and suggesting that he may be trying to wait out the rest of his trade fiascos with just about everyone else.

No wonder the markets (equity, commodity, and debt) are uneasy...

 

[j-mac]

Somebody gotta eat all those soybeans China isn't buying from the US. Y'all big on soybeans over there in Gaffney? And then there are all those peaches South Carolina won't be shipping to Mexico. Who knows, soybean peach burgers and soybean peach beer might in y'all's future.

Don't know, I'm not a farmer, nor do I live in Gaffney...but, enough is enough. Its past time to send the message that the US is no longer going to put up with unfair trade.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Helix]

That's a position of weakness...My point stands.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

no, it isn't. do you really think that the rest of the world will keep just bowing to our self perceived mastery of empires when they could get together and **** us over? this is something that our leaders should be thinking about when they are making policies. well, at least the leaders who have an IQ above a pulse rate.

 

[DaveFagan]

We have two problems that are going to collide with things like this.

First, these “trade deals” are not really market based anyway. They have nothing to do with free trade and ultimately are labor movement and production control tools. They are more or less giant control mechanisms that end up benefiting larger corporations first before anyone small business can get into the mix. From a farming perspective it does more to deal with who pays for price fluctuations and the means of exchange that is also controlled far more than market based.

TPP is honestly nothing more than NAFTA on steroids which involves all kinds of provisions that protect business intentions at the expense of market dynamics and sovernty. Think TransCanada filing suit against US landowners using US courts to do so, or US DOT rules not applying to Canada or Mexico based transporation to the same extent they do our own, or where to apply subsidy, etc.

Second, in the balance is isolation from these deals knowing they are problematic. To see these 11 or more nations go forward with the deal we can start to predict who will win. Japan and the EU (through a separate deal) will end up winning the most here in how tariffs are applied if ever. US producers will be on the outside looking in and ultimately the farmer will be hurt first.

Now they will be anyway but the question is which evil do they pick, isolation from the deal having to compete with tariffs or going with the deal and being subject to all those controls (and odds are staying on the government dole to pay for the difference.) In this case Trump is deciding for them and suggesting that he may be trying to wait out the rest of his trade fiascos with just about everyone else.

No wonder the markets (equity, commodity, and debt) are uneasy...

"Free Trade" and its' definition might be worth mentioning. Do sanctions, tariffs, weaponized currency, weaponized banking, weaponized trading mechanisms etc. still allow trade by the USA that practices these policies to be referred to as "Free Trade?"
/

 

[OrphanSlug]

"Free Trade" and its' definition might be worth mentioning. Do sanctions, tariffs, weaponized currency, weaponized banking, weaponized trading mechanisms etc. still allow trade by the USA that practices these policies to be referred to as "Free Trade?"
/

The hidden truth that no one really wants to discuss is that in our modern times there is no such thing as “free trade.” Nothing more than a pipe dream, but political sold with horrible frequency.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

We already have a thread on this topic.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/342009-world-trade-moves-without-us.html

So we do.

I'll ask the mods to merge the two.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Don't know, I'm not a farmer, nor do I live in Gaffney...but, enough is enough. Its past time to send the message that the US is no longer going to put up with unfair trade.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Good for the US.

Now, how about returning the money that the US got through the application of tariffs that were ruled to be illegal but which the US government said it wasn't going to remove unless it got to keep the money it had collected under them?

 

[Godric1970]

Don't know, I'm not a farmer, nor do I live in Gaffney...but, enough is enough. Its past time to send the message that the US is no longer going to put up with unfair trade.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

first you have to manufacture stuff the rest of the world wants ... we are not going to buy any old *rap just to appease America ... you have only 1 decent car manufacturer "Ford" the rest are *rap, they are to big for our drive ways, garages and car parking spaces, they are petrol guzzlers and they are ugly .... Chrysler have tried to get into they EU market .... they are not doing very good their cars may be small enough but they are ugly things

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

first you have to manufacture stuff the rest of the world wants ... we are not going to buy any old *rap just to appease America ... you have only 1 decent car manufacturer "Ford" the rest are *rap, they are to big for our drive ways, garages and car parking spaces, they are petrol guzzlers and they are ugly .... Chrysler have tried to get into they EU market .... they are not doing very good their cars may be small enough but they are ugly things

Looks slightly better than an Austin A-40, eh wot?