# Trump trade politics benefited Mexico and Vietnam most



## notimp (Oct 30, 2020)

.. followed by Taiwan and Malaysia.

Build that wa... wait a minute.. 



> *Southeast Asia, Mexico benefited from trade dispute*
> For some, the gains from this trade redirection might even outweigh the negative effects of the dispute. "For non-China emerging economies, the positive impact dominates," says Sawada. "The gain seems to be the largest for countries who can produce similar products to those made in China."
> 
> Among those who benefited most was US neighbor Mexico: Between 2017 and 2019, the country exported an estimated $4.7 billion more to the US as a result of the trade dispute.
> ...


https://www.dw.com/en/the-real-winners-of-the-us-china-trade-dispute/a-55420269

Told you not to believe in populist slogans..  Or in pretty much anything that person said.

And Mexico will build that wall with all the profits we ensured outsourcing american jobs into the country next door would bring - for our business sector pals..

Next countries to make business in for Trumps friends? India. Probably.  Kenia. 

For great benefit of the financial profitings of the United States..., well, if the public demands that those profits are taxed. So how many of you knew, that this is the economic flow that was established?

How many of you work in the Malaysia import business...? 

Oh and all the benefits for the poorer classes... Those good vietnam electronics, and shoes. Chinese products dont even compare..  Great again America. rejoice.


----------



## LumInvader (Oct 30, 2020)

notimp said:


> .. followed by Taiwan and Malaysia.
> 
> Build that wa... wait a minute..
> 
> ...


Oh boy, now you've done it.


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 30, 2020)

I am curious about two things.
1) China has been getting quite expensive for many years now (it is actually quite a big problem inside China where home ownership among the youth, often a prerequisite to a family/relationship, is becoming troubled and that makes the impending population crash that much worse), such that cheap labour actually isn't any more.

2) How much of that is Chinese companies propping up other businesses in those countries for the same reason as things went to China originally and possibly also as a dodge.

You could also ponder whether giving China a black eye is worth it.


----------



## notimp (Oct 30, 2020)

FAST6191 said:


> I am curious about two things.
> 1) China has been getting quite expensive for many years now (it is actually quite a big problem inside China where home ownership among the youth, often a prerequisite to a family/relationship, is becoming troubled and that makes the impending population crash that much worse), such that cheap labour actually isn't any more.
> 
> 2) How much of that is Chinese companies propping up other businesses in those countries for the same reason as things went to China originally and possibly also as a dodge.
> ...


China is doing risk mitigation in their next five year plan:
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/10/29/china-unveils-5-year-path-to-becoming-a-tech

Domestic growth.

The west is trying to do the colonizing spiel with the next emerging markets available.

Not sure if I'm oversimplifying.


----------



## ghjfdtg (Oct 30, 2020)

Mexico is building the wall free of charge now. The money wall


----------



## Taleweaver (Oct 31, 2020)

I've got to ask the question : so what? 

By the very definition, there is at least one foreign country that 'benefited the most' in foreign trade. The rise of Vietnam at the cost of China just says that the trade war had its effect (1). I don't agree with the reason of the conflict (or rather : the complete absence of one being there), but I can't dispute its effectiveness. 

Mexico surprised me a bit until I saw that '2017' part. Since the conflict started in 2018, it had nothing to do with China. Mexico is just the most cost effective trader, I presume. 

Yeah, I know : it's a far cry from the racist rhetoric of the Trump cult, but at the end of the day they don't give a fuck who supplies them with whatever they want and need, as long as it gets there. 


(1) yes, it's possible that China just reroutes part of its trade through Vietnam. That doesn't change the outcome


----------



## notimp (Oct 31, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Mexico surprised me a bit until I saw that '2017' part. Since the conflict started in 2018, it had nothing to do with China. Mexico is just the most cost effective trader, I presume.


?


> Among those who benefited most was US neighbor Mexico: Between 2017 and 2019, the country exported an estimated $4.7 billion more to the US as a result of the trade dispute.



It says right in there, that this is the result of the trade dispute with china.

Come again? Whats your fairy tale about "but then I read the 2017 part" again?

"What does it matter what countries we are trading with, as long as stuff gets there?"

If you are mainly dealing with countries below your own wage level, as a result production and investment goes into those countries. Also, as you tend to export into those countries as well to reduce the trade imbalance, it allows you to keep your own wage level near the poverty line, in fact it forces you to do so, to be able to manufacture products, that those countries could afford.

As said in here before, chinas labor costs are ahead of those in Malaysia, Vietnam or Mexico, so the US shifted to the next poorer countries to continue the trade game.

Meaning, the Trump administration continued the race to the bottom, which allows industry leaders, not to invest, keep the same processes, not innovate, but stretch the value extraction phase of production a little longer by dealing with the next poorer country.

Also lets stress this again, investment opportunities in those countries are huge as a result of newfound business ventures.

Provocatively said: You are developing the entire rest of the world, before you are investing in the US.

Also product quality, at least for a time gets worse for people who have to buy at low pricepoints.


----------



## Taleweaver (Oct 31, 2020)

notimp said:


> ?
> 
> 
> It says right in there, that this is the result of the trade dispute with china.
> ...


Yes, I read that part. But I also googled around a bit: The USA / China dispute started (early) 2018. I won't argue that there wasn't rhetoric prior to that, but...erm...we both know Trump, okay? He was already playing the victim of everyone and everything at that point. So when Mexico boomed as the (second?) best trade partner of the US in 2017, it wasn't because of a trade dispute that was still a year in the future.




			
				notimp said:
			
		

> "What does it matter what countries we are trading with, as long as stuff gets there?"
> 
> If you are mainly dealing with countries below your own wage level, as a result production and investment goes into those countries. Also, as you tend to export into those countries as well to reduce the trade imbalance, it allows you to keep your own wage level near the poverty line, in fact it forces you to do so, to be able to manufacture products, that those countries could afford.
> 
> ...


I agree 100% on that (more so: I don't think I could've said it better  ). The thing is...you didn't properly quote me. Summarized, it'd be like this:

_at the end of the day [the Trump cult] don't give a fuck who supplies them with whatever they want and need, as long as it gets there._


Frankly said, I think the drones who diss average republicans as being "too left" when they criticize their leader will just put a "fake news" label on this news because they can't fathom the actual truth.


----------



## gregory-samba (Oct 31, 2020)

That shit China produces is over priced junk. You're better off not buying cheap garbage that's been "Made in China".


----------



## notimp (Nov 1, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Yes, I read that part. But I also googled around a bit: The USA / China dispute started (early) 2018. I won't argue that there wasn't rhetoric prior to that, but...erm...we both know Trump, okay? He was already playing the victim of everyone and everything at that point. So when Mexico boomed as the (second?) best trade partner of the US in 2017, it wasn't because of a trade dispute that was still a year in the future.


Correct on that Mexico relations were 'about to flurish' because of a leadership change in Mexico that was favorable to US political interests (Mexico actively seeked out opportunities to get into high level economic talks with US interests in an attempt to align the two economies, regardless of prior political history, and they were succesful), a deal was brokered there.

Which lead to the following rhetoric: https://apnews.com/article/47c5cbca357641128078f485b7250183

My point is the following. Everyone in the populist movement told voters, that they needed to vote for Trump - if they wanted their manufacturing jobs to remain in the US.

While in reality, plans already were underway to outsource all manufacturing possible to not only Mexico, but even lower wage countries in the south pacific.

Reducing imports from china meant, that goods, that already had become 'more expensive' than what the US wanted to pay for them, and that had additional transport cost attached (= not profit that ends up with China), were sourced from cheaper countries, and mexico - entirely ruining the prospects of an 'industrial renewal' in the US. For good. And longterm.

Instead of investing into production in the US, the administration continued, to drive an investment boom for Mexico. Which is directly in front of your borders, where transport doesnt cost a thing.


At least, with a different administration, you would have invested in new sectors, or mondernisation - but Trump made SURE, that none of this happened.

You were lied to royally.

As always, noone flipping cares about the peasentry.


----------



## notimp (Nov 1, 2020)

So what did the US get out of it?

Answer: https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/united-states-mexico-canada-agreement



> The USMCA is a mutually beneficial win for North American workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses. The Agreement  is creating more balanced, reciprocal trade supporting high-paying jobs for Americans and grow the North American economy.


Translation. Workers stay employed as long as Mexico is bribed/force into buying US cars mainly, and all industrial products for as long as it takes them to catch up to US manufacturing standards, which are subpar (compared to the world standard).

This is institutionalized corruption.  At least all people in the Brexit thread are saying that, when the EU tries to protect the italian shoe industry doing the same.. 



> Agreement highlights include:
> 
> •   Creating a more level playing field for American workers, including improved rules of origin for automobiles, trucks, other products, and disciplines on currency manipulation.


= Structural corruption.  Agreements for mexico to have to purchase US cars for the forseeable future,  and - mexico agrees to less currency dumping in exchange for more investments and open borders . (Thats mexico getting the better end of the deal.)



> •  Benefiting American farmers, ranchers, and agribusinesses by modernizing and strengthening food and agriculture trade in North America.


The majority of farmers in the US are highly automated, large acreage businesses, who now have better export markets to dump their products in. No new jobs to be created anywhere. (Productivity can not be increased by increasing manpower.) So basically a gift to rich (large acreage) landowners. (Who were currently producing soy that china _had_ to buy..  Lower transport costs for them, so they get richer.)



> •   Supporting a 21st Century economy through new protections for U.S. intellectual property, and ensuring opportunities for trade in U.S. services.


Gift to the tech industry and Hollywood, and the financial services industry. (Partly kidding on Hollywood..  ). Also a play for mexico not to develop too fast. Would be interested in what this entails in more detail.



> •   New chapters covering Digital Trade, Anticorruption, and Good Regulatory Practices, as well as a chapter devoted to ensuring that Small and Medium Sized Enterprises benefit from the Agreement.


Developing mexico. And making some deal to somehow cut in 'small and medium sized enterprises'. Again, would be highly interested in what this entails.



edit: Here is the chapter on small an medium size enterprises:
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/file...ext/25_Small_and_Medium-Sized_Enterprises.pdf

edit: Following opportunities shall be created for small and medium enterprises (SMEs):

A:  





> " small business support infrastructure, including dedicated SME centers, incubators and accelerators, export assistance centers, and other centers as appropriate, to create an international network for sharing best practices, exchanging market research, and promoting SME participation in international trade, as well as business growth in local markets; "


PR bingo and networking opportunities, as well as knowledge transfer to mexico.

B: 





> strengthen its collaboration with the other Parties on activities to promote SMEs owned by under-represented groups, including women, indigenous peoples, youth and minorities, as well as start-ups, agricultural and rural SMEs, and promote partnership among these SMEs and their participation in international trade;


PR

C: 





> enhance its cooperation with the other Parties to exchange information and best practices in areas including improving SME access to capital and credit, SME participation in covered government procurement opportunities, and helping SMEs adapt to changing market conditions; and


more financing where needed, and where a businessmodel to produce something mexico needs is underlying (i.e. not 'easier access to credit' just more informed access to credit  ) Benefits rich folks, first and foremost. And entrepreneurs.

And people who payed for lobbying because they get more state contracts. Through SMEs. (More corruption opportunities..  More easy access to tax money for lobbied interests.  )

D: 





> encourage participation in platforms, such as web-based, for business entrepreneurs and counselors to share information and best practices to help SMEs link with international suppliers, buyers, and other potential business partners.


Drive efficiency gains. Produce even more cheaply in the US, using less labor.

Haha!!!


----------



## notimp (Nov 1, 2020)

Intellectual property chapter:
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/Text/20 Intellectual Property Rights.pdf

I was a dummy, this is a gift to the US pharma industry.

Another highly automated industry, that has entirely decoupled from catering to half of the US population, because they make more money catering to richer folks. They now get more free money, because mexico will honor their patents.


----------



## notimp (Nov 1, 2020)

Detail information: What is 'rules of origin for a car' in the context of a trade deal:



> The rules of origin are used to determine whether a product may be considered as sufficiently linked to the country from which it is exported to say that it ‘originates’ from there. If you wish to benefit from the preferential tariff when exporting to the EU, refer to the agreement’s rule of origin applying to your car.


src: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/may/tradoc_151237.pdf

So a better set of those becoming a high ticket item in a trade deal means, it matters more for a car to be identified as 'from one country' for 'preferential tariffs'. Which means - "Agreements for mexico to have to purchase US cars for the forseeable future".


----------



## notimp (Nov 13, 2020)

> President Trump has kept Asian economies on the edge, brazenly slapping or threatening tariffs even on closest US allies. Biden promises more stability but is unlikely to drastically alter Trump's hawkish trade policy.



https://www.dw.com/en/joe-biden-trump-us-china-trade-war-asia-india/a-55588355

Please dont ban me for not editing this into my previous posting.

edit: Short primer on globalization:


----------



## Joom (Nov 15, 2020)

China benefitted the most with us pulling out of the TPP. Since the US no longer holds contention over copyright with China, it created a vacuum that they filled. Because of this, China is the most powerful nation in the world now.


----------



## notimp (Nov 15, 2020)

Joom said:


> China benefitted the most with us pulling out of the TPP. Since the US no longer holds contention over copyright with China, it created a vacuum that they filled. Because of this, China is the most powerful nation in the world now.


Could be the case if 'free development' was available to everyone equally.

As it turns out - it isnt. 

There are some industries, where you _need_ USD to buy product/expertise.  But lets say you 'hack' expertise. That still means you cant hack markets (that themselves also would need USD, and only have a few venues available to get them, and therefore....).

So lets say you have expertise (hacked), but you have a hard time getting certain products (resources), and you have a hard time selling certain products.

Ever heard of Huawei? 

(Now china is turning to internal growth.)


----------



## Joom (Nov 15, 2020)

notimp said:


> Ever heard of Huawei?


Sure, but they're also ran by the Chinese state, or at least, the Chinese government has a heavy hand over them.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ne-found-hidden-backdoors-in-huawei-equipment


----------



## notimp (Nov 15, 2020)

Joom said:


> Sure, but they're also ran by the Chinese state, or at least, the Chinese government has a heavy hand over them.
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ne-found-hidden-backdoors-in-huawei-equipment


No, Huawei is prevented to get access to certain parts they need for certain industries (all chip production has to move inhouse f.e.), and is prevented to do business in certain countries of the western alliance (even rich ones, just imagine, what a pushover less rich countries in the western alliance are (they also _need_ USD).

See: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53402694

Imagine that happening on a global scale - in all kinds of important industries to 'get you out of being - the manufacturer of the world' (which means you are 'managable' through resource flows, you dont 'own the entire production chain on'.)

Of course they are operated by the chinese government.  But thats not the point.


----------



## Joom (Nov 15, 2020)

notimp said:


> No, Huawei is prevented to get access to certain parts they need for certain industries (all chip production has to move inhouse f.e.), and is prevented to do business in certain countries of the western alliance (even rich ones, just imagine, what a pushover less rich countries in the western alliance are (they also _need_ USD).
> 
> See: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53402694
> 
> ...


There's also this.
https://www.engadget.com/2020-03-02-huawei-trade-sanction-violation-documents.html?guccounter=1


----------



## notimp (Nov 15, 2020)

Joom said:


> There's also this.
> https://www.engadget.com/2020-03-02-huawei-trade-sanction-violation-documents.html?guccounter=1


Iran has oil. (Or rare minerals, or...) Which means oil byproducts.

Oil typically is only bought in USD.

You are getting it. 


edit: This is an oddly fitting tidbit I just came across:
https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/05/gotta-be-a-pony-under-there/#jack-ma


----------



## notimp (Nov 17, 2020)

The pushover countries decided not to be such pushover countries anymore:


Oh, and they kinda coopted Australia, to also do a Brexit. Just - in reverse..  (Leave the US in terms of allegiance..  )

(Please don't bann me for not having edited this into the previous posting. This is a separate news item with only tentative connections to the last topic. Also it has 'timely' relevance. (Meaning, its interesting as a separate news item in its own right - but I didnt want to open an entirely new thread for it.))


----------

