- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 19,662
- Reactions
- 11,963
That's true, but is there any evidence that manufacturers were moving back to the US as he promised they would ?
That's true, but is there any evidence that manufacturers were moving back to the US as he promised they would ?
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 19,662
- Reactions
- 11,963
Well, actually, there is...
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Biden has already proven himself the opposite of Trump, and he wasted no time tossing out Trump's many agendas.
Trump made America weaker in the international stage than it has been since WWII, and gave China a massive leap forward in the global arena. While America has been self serving in covid vaccine deployment, and remains so under Biden, China has already distributed vaccines to 27 nations and has arrangements in place to supply vaccines to another 26.
Internally America's only strategic advantage over China is in technology, and Biden will need to outsmart Xi if he is to maintain that lead.
And if Biden chooses to isolate China any further than Trump has, then China is likely to react even more strongly than it has to date. In the firing line is Australia and its commodity supply chain. While China does not yet have the volume alternatives from other nations, it would only take a few years of massive investment in Africa and South America to sideline Australia.
Trump's mishandling of covid has strained USA financially, and Biden will struggle to compete against China as it woos more nation into its trading web.
So while Biden is quickly returning America to its seat at international forums, the influence it had pre-Trump will take time to rebuild.
- Joined
- 18 September 2008
- Posts
- 4,041
- Reactions
- 1,185
Am I missing something? Trump has been in power for 4 years but did nothing about the precarious position US manufacturing is in, except create crazy trade skirmishes with China that mostly backfired, losing markets to US farmers and unnecessarily increasing costs to US businesses.
It is Biden that is doing something about it as per your article.
Biden simply tweaked a lot of Trump's strategies.
The only thing he is opposite in is his allowing biological men to enter women's sports, toilets and to allow young teenagers to transition without parents consent.
He allowed mass immigration again. Good luck with that.
He killed off gas.
Jumped back into environmental commitments and WHO.
So majority of differences is the "woke" factor Policy.
Still watching the middle East as he recently bombed Iran backed troops in Syria. But he most likely won't back Saudis or Israel as Trump had done. He paused weapons to Saudis but this was cutting edge stuff. Still most likely to go through but Biden has a bug up his arse when it comes to the Saudis and the middle east (probably due to his abysmal track record).
However the talk is that they will follow Trumps framework. But middle East isn't much of a priority. So get ready for it to blow up again.
China has trapped nations in its Web pre Trump. Trump signalled the dangers and Australia got to see it in action. But Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, Argentina, Korea also witnessed it when they attempted to stop Chinese fishing boats from raping their waters. China simply blocked trade as a weapon. Nobody trusts China they just use them for the money and goods they generate.
China is not making friends and only leaping ahead by gouging and making frenemies. If Clinton won we would have seen China overtake on every metric while nations were trapped in "trade or die" type situations. Eyes were opened.
Biden following a soft approach can literally shaft the western world at this stage. It's good to see he took a strong stance on China. Hopefully not in the same dithering way Obama approached problems and perhaps more competent then Trumps handling.
To early to judge just yet. But some of his policies are pointing at ruin.
Was it even spoken about pre Trump?
Outsourcing to China proved to be a risk. Obama said you would need a magic wand to bring manufacturing back. Umm no you need a change in consumer sentiment. Now which direction is it heading?
4 years is a short time to completely change the direction of a nation.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Compared to Obama's term which saw manufacturing employment rise steadily, Trump oversaw a continuing decline:
It remains to be seen if this decline can be stemmed, as in January China supplanted America as Europe' major trading partner.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
My comments are in coloured ink above.
You need to do much better with the information you present.
As we are not yet 6 weeks into Biden's Presidency, it's a bit early to know what impact his decisions will have in coming months and years.
All the hard policy decisions remain undecided, as Biden is adopting a position of review to determine what actions are best.
- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,047
- Reactions
- 23,589
Looks like an airstrike in Syria, is a good start, six weeks in seems like a bit of pent up anger.lol
Prior to Trump getting in, everyone was asking for the U.S to butt out of the middle east, seems like that has been an about turn.
Obviously the re escalation of middle east tensions is good, maybe takes the heat out of holding China accountable, for the trade imbalance?
Nothing like like a bit of misdirection.
Prior to Trump getting in, everyone was asking for the U.S to butt out of the middle east, seems like that has been an about turn.
Obviously the re escalation of middle east tensions is good, maybe takes the heat out of holding China accountable, for the trade imbalance?
Nothing like like a bit of misdirection.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,102
- Reactions
- 16,888
I'm no fan of Trump as a person, a point I've made many times on this forum - he's a classic example of a narcissistic bully. Remarkably similar to another individual, who isn't a politician, I once had dealings with hence I found his nonsense all too familiar.
Should anyone doubt my views there, go back and see what I posted when he first became President. It's as per the above, he's a rotten individual most certainly.
He did however put a very serious issue on the agenda, being the first high profile politician in the West to seriously challenge globalisation in a very long time. That one action is important enough that it does blunt the edge on his numerous personal flaws.
To be fair, there are some good sides to globalisation but ultimately it's the reason Australia's been turned into a giant coal and iron ore quarry with the middle class hollowed out and it's much the same in the US and indeed throughout most of the West. A few key pillars thrive and a few get rich but overall most things decline and the middle class slides into the lower class.
It's like any recreational drug - short term pleasure, long term ruin and after a few decades of constant abuse the damage is glaringly obvious for all to see.
There's a role for trade sure, but there is not and never was anything even remotely close to a "level playing field" and there's essentially no chance there ever will be, at least not within out lifetimes. There's simply too many ways and too much incentive to cheat.
Hence there's a place for trading blocs, tariffs and quotas to create something closer to actually level. Doing so brings short term pain economically but, like any drug, it's either suffer withdrawal now or slowly but surely slide into the abyss.
I'll reserve judgement on Biden until he's been in long enough to have a meaningful influence.
I do think he'll be bullish for oil and gas prices though. Well, more bullish than Trump at least.
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 19,662
- Reactions
- 11,963
I'm no fan of Trump as a person, a point I've made many times on this forum - he's a classic example of a narcissistic bully. Remarkably similar to another individual, who isn't a politician, I once had dealings with hence I found his nonsense all too familiar.
Should anyone doubt my views there, go back and see what I posted when he first became President. It's as per the above, he's a rotten individual most certainly.
He did however put a very serious issue on the agenda, being the first high profile politician in the West to seriously challenge globalisation in a very long time. That one action is important enough that it does blunt the edge on his numerous personal flaws.
To be fair, there are some good sides to globalisation but ultimately it's the reason Australia's been turned into a giant coal and iron ore quarry with the middle class hollowed out and it's much the same in the US and indeed throughout most of the West. A few key pillars thrive and a few get rich but overall most things decline and the middle class slides into the lower class.
It's like any recreational drug - short term pleasure, long term ruin and after a few decades of constant abuse the damage is glaringly obvious for all to see.
There's a role for trade sure, but there is not and never was anything even remotely close to a "level playing field" and there's essentially no chance there ever will be, at least not within out lifetimes. There's simply too many ways and too much incentive to cheat.
Hence there's a place for trading blocs, tariffs and quotas to create something closer to actually level. Doing so brings short term pain economically but, like any drug, it's either suffer withdrawal now or slowly but surely slide into the abyss.
I'll reserve judgement on Biden until he's been in long enough to have a meaningful influence.
I do think he'll be bullish for oil and gas prices though. Well, more bullish than Trump at least.
China, along with India are the two biggest markets in the world.
If they paid their workers enough so that they could afford to buy the goods they produce they wouldn't need the Western consumers, they could be self sustaining.
A few few people in those countries make a fortune at the expense of the great many, and quite a few of those few are corrupt as well.
It's time the Western countries got together and impose tariffs based on the difference between our median wages and those of the country of origin. That would encourage the low wage countries to increase their wages and give our own producers a chance.
But somehow I don't think that figures in the minds of the globalisers who run the WTO these days.
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,102
- Reactions
- 16,888
Quoting someone I used to work with - "Chinese goods for Chinese people sounds like an excellent idea. Australian goods for Australians and American goods for Americans also sounds like just what we need".
I'm not against trade per se, but it's one of those things where some is good but too much ends in tears. The US, and Australia, needs to have some sort of viable domestic industry otherwise they're ultimately stuffed. That doesn't preclude trade including trade with China, India etc but it does require that domestic industry continues to exist.
- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,047
- Reactions
- 23,589
Which goes back to tarrifs.Quoting someone I used to work with - "Chinese goods for Chinese people sounds like an excellent idea. Australian goods for Australians and American goods for Americans also sounds like just what we need".
I'm not against trade per se, but it's one of those things where some is good but too much ends in tears. The US, and Australia, needs to have some sort of viable domestic industry otherwise they're ultimately stuffed. That doesn't preclude trade including trade with China, India etc but it does require that domestic industry continues to exist.
- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,047
- Reactions
- 23,589
What is really weird is, the left introduced globalisation to lift poor countries out of poverty, but in reality it hasn't done that the people still live in poverty , while their elite class get megga rich.
Meanwhile their poor try to flee their countries, to come to countries like Australia with welfare which is getting harder to fund, because we are still outsourcing our manufacturing to the countries that the refugees are fleeing.
A very weird negative feedback loop is developing IMO.
Maybe there is a logic to it, I just can't see it, the only plausible reason I can think of is we are trying to reach the lowest common denominator.
Meanwhile their poor try to flee their countries, to come to countries like Australia with welfare which is getting harder to fund, because we are still outsourcing our manufacturing to the countries that the refugees are fleeing.
A very weird negative feedback loop is developing IMO.
Maybe there is a logic to it, I just can't see it, the only plausible reason I can think of is we are trying to reach the lowest common denominator.
Let's start with the new transgender laws. It was an extension of Bostock v Clayton. So it extends to federal schools. So no changes until someone sues. Of course it's going to bloody change. I don't really have a problem with it anyway.
Immigration hasn't changed much? Really?
Maybe because his bill won't likely pass. But expansion of work permits and the increase of asylum seekers from 15000 to 125000 is just the start. You then have those current illegals in US as of Jan 1 getting visas and pathways to become citizens.
It's now much easier to get in and stay in. Oh maybe one thing that didn't change, they still held children illegal past the allotted 72 hours on "covid concerns" which were bs. They ended up in worse conditions than HSS when ORR couldn't fit anymore in.
You currently have Mexican troops on their borders stemming the flow from central America which will soon go back to barracks.
The whole situation is similar to when Rudd dismantled our border protection. It then start to gather momentum and turned into a giant cluster fluck.
They have re-establish the diversity training after Trump banned it. Critical race theory is basically political indoctrination. That was rescinded. That's about as woke as you can get.
Any higher taxes/ higher spending at this level of dept to gdp is likely to lead to ruin. If immigration blows out there's another. Middle East is a 'watch".
China is a "watch".
There's too much to cover at the moment. But better to wait till he has been in office a few months to see where they are heading. A lot of this can turn real bad real quick.
Inflation/money printing, taxes, climate regulation changes, oil prices and these are just to name a few of the upcoming problems that are a time bomb when all synced together. And there's a list as long as my arm.
I'll wait it out and see, but looks like business as usual.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Many of your points have been proven false, yet you repeat them, just as Trump still lies about his "stolen election".
Others are just poor takes on the truth. For example, the "diversity training" taught about understanding and respect for all people irrespective of race, which is yet again the opposite of your claim.
The issues ahead of Biden were the same as when Trump was in Office. The distinction is that Biden has immediately started to tackle them. The one neither can change is money supply/inflation, and Trump ramped that up massively for covid:
You basically lied in your post and are now trying to cover. Smithsonian had issued a whiteness chart describing "hard work" as "racist white attitudes". It is in fact woke bs that gets (unsurprisingly) taken to far by left leaners. If my points were false you'd be all over it like a rash. All your points were simplistic and half truths at best.
$2 trillion spent was not all on COVID dems had lobbyists shilling for all sorts of crap. Republicans were no better. But Democrats planned strategy of taxes, climate and regulations in the current form is likely a handbrake after covid.
All we can do is watch and wait. But you are fooling yourself if you think dems won't speed inflation with their current program.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
I provided links in my initial replies to you. Yet all you did was repeat your proven false claims and misquote with sidetracks, which you again did above.
You do this repeatedly, and never credibly substantiate your claims, nor meaningfully debate issues.
Last May the Democrats pushed for greater stimulus measures and they were thwarted all the way, even after they had lost the election. Biden finally got his package up last week, but the Republicans will continue to block it. Party politics is more important than people as far as Republicans are concerned, as we all discovered when the Senate voted not to convict Trump over inciting insurrection. Now they want to deny impoverished Americans a small pay cheque to help them through the pandemic; an incredibly sad state of affairs imho.
On the inflation front, during Trump's term money supply increased by 45% - the most ever in a presidential term, yet you want to pin the blame on Biden! Biden cannot undo what Trump already locked in. As I said, increasing money supply is necessarily inflationary, however, Biden also has plans for infrastructure spending which down the track will more than pay for itself via efficiencies.
They were handing money everywhere.
Here's a few examples of the previous stimulus bills:
$85.5m for assistance to Cambodia, $134m to Burma, $1.3bn for Egypt and the Egyptian military, which will go out and buy almost exclusively Russian military equipment, $25m for democracy and gender programmes in Pakistan, $505m to Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama.
There was a further $33 mill for Venezuela, $500mill to Israel,$300 mill to counter China.
And you're worried about rushing them through?
Just to be clear both sides engaged in this. Trump pointed it out ( regardless of showboating for the election or not).
Trump managed to get the US economy buzzing back after covid. And it wasn't from regulating and taxing the sht out of everything. And once again Covid happened and money was spent. But you can hide behind that fact by just quoting figures without context.
He was a high spending president. Didn’t agree with a lot of it, or his claims. But he pointed out inherent flaws and threats correctly.
Execution he failed. But majority of presidents never shot in the right direction to begin with.
Debt to gdp what 130%?
Good luck on that return.
