Comments (62)

Mar 6, 2018

Stormy Daniels will take the helm

    • 4
Mar 6, 2018

No chance he's welcome back at GS. He's going to take some time off and then set up shop himself. Or potentially join a first generation shop that is currently succession planning.

    • 1
Mar 6, 2018

If free market believers like Cohn are being shown the door and the Peter Navarros of the world are receiving promotions that does not bode well. Prepare for trade battles (not going to call it war quite yet). Markets should be down tomorrow.

    • 2
Mar 6, 2018

Cohen isn't a free market believer in anything. Goldman benefited from endless government largesse.

And please explain to me the free market that occurs between China and the US? Or between anywhere.

Mar 6, 2018

I wonder how long Kelly hangs around? I feel like this administration will ebb and flow with the people going and coming. I can't imagine 3 more years--three more identities--of this leading to 4 more years in a second term.

Mar 6, 2018

We are absolutely at war with China. They steal our IP and military secrets. They steal our jobs without allowing free trade. They fight our economic and political agenda everywhere and Xi now wants to be president forever.

Please tell me why we value "free" trade with China so much?

Fuck off Cohen. Thanks for the tax cuts. Hit the bricks.

Mar 6, 2018
TNA:

We are absolutely at war with China. They steal our IP and military secrets. They steal our jobs without allowing free trade. They fight our economic and political agenda everywhere and Xi now wants to be president forever.

Please tell me why we value "free" trade with China so much?

Fuck off Cohen. Thanks for the tax cuts. Hit the bricks.

We would do better focusing on stopping or slowing China's ability to buy treasuries, not institute tariffs, because it hurts all world trade, which isn't what anyone wants, and it hurts our relationships with allies. Continuity is no small thing.

    • 3
Mar 6, 2018

So you advocate a different type of battle plan. Fine.

China dumps through other countries. Do I agree on XYZ tarriff? Not necessarily. But I do not think China is a friend, China is an open economy or China is to be treated kindly.

And while we are demonizing Russia, China is building islands, enhancing their military and experience economy with stolen IP and research and becoming a menace.

Trump, as usual, is 90% correct, just off on the execution. Cohen did his job, tax cuts are solid, now its time for him to go back to enjoying the "free market" aka accepting pay for play and other forms of government goodies.

Read the last 4 issues of the economist to see globalists waking up to the last 3 presidents failed policies towards China.

Mar 6, 2018

BTW - for everyone who thinks building a wall is a joke, Pakistan is building a wall in Waziristan to stop the Jihadists from coming in from the ungoverned Afghan provinces.

woke

Mar 7, 2018

And don't forget: China is America's biggest creditor!
So, bad people in living in China! Bad country! Bad Xi!

    • 1
Best Response
Mar 7, 2018

What's being proposed is a sweeping tariff on steel and aluminum, not a unilateral economic sanction against China for violating trade agreements.

Your question is obviously intended as rhetorical, but you seem to be in sore need of a reminder. It wasn't long ago that conservatives were righteously decrying the government's role in picking the economy's winners and losers. These policies heap windfall on the 140,000 thousand employees of the steel-producing industries at the potential expense of 300 million U.S. consumers and the 6.5 million employees in the steel-consuming industries. It defies the principles at the heart of conservatism.

Applying even a modicum of critical thinking reveals this policy and approach for the free-wheeling, political pandering and placebo that it is. China is not even a top 10 exporter of steel to the United States. If you want to target China for legitimate market-distorting practices, fair, but let's be explicitly clear, that is not what this proposal accomplishes. It primarily impacts NAFTA trading partners and more bluster and brinkmanship than anything else.

    • 14
    • 1
Mar 7, 2018

You should learn to get to the point.

No where in my post did I support steel or aluminum sanctions. I simply said that China is not a free economy or our friend. And Trump is correct generally on this topic, but wrong specifically.

We are in economic war with China. There actions are aggressive towards their neighbors. Inviting them into the WTO was a mistake and Trump is rightfully calling attention to them.

As for the steel and aluminum tariffs, it's probably a play to get better NAFTA terms under the guise of China. In fact, these emergency tariffs needed an economic war declaration to happen, something you couldn't get with Canada.

And who cares what "conservatives" said or think. Trump is a populist. Nothing conservative about him.

Mar 7, 2018
Schreckstoff:

It wasn't long ago that conservatives were righteously decrying the government's role in picking the economy's winners and losers. These policies heap windfall on the 140,000 thousand employees of the steel-producing industries at the potential expense of 300 million U.S. consumers and the 6.5 million employees in the steel-consuming industries. It defies the principles at the heart of conservatism.

Right on all points, but we conservatives still do oppose idiotic tariffs.

Mar 7, 2018

You're now gonna get downvoted by teenagers who can't imagine paying a few extra CENTS for their illicit 6pack of beer, or having to buy a few less shitty plastic Chinese imports because prices went up marginally.

Consumerism and neoconservatism views on "Muh free markets" have infected this country, and to hell with those decent paying middle class jobs if it means 16yo Chinese girl labor at a sweatshop like Foxconn can save me $10 on that new $1,000 iPhone (although I only upgraded to the previous version 11 months ago).

The best part is that no one, even those vaunted ECONOMISTS among us, think about the secondary and tertiary costs of annihilating jobs that pay modest middle-class wages. Increased welfare, drug abuse, opioid clinics, single moms, broken homes, criminality; these are all downstream consequences of policies that disproportionately alter the availability of jobs that would otherwise have allowed societal contribution through family formation, stable homes, and community engagement. I've LITERALLY had a professor in my M7 MBA class shush me when I brought this up in class because "well, while you do have a valid concern, these things are simply too difficult to measure!" WHY CAN'T THAT 45yo STEEL WORKER WHO JUST LOST HIS JOB SIMPLY LEARN TO CODE AND UPROOT HIS ENTIRE FAMILY TO SAN FRANCISCO!!??? wails the academic while he enjoys the sinecures of his lifetime tenure. Pathetic.

It's legitimately a disease of the American soul, and it's not like China in any way reciprocates with "free trade."

    • 4
    • 3
Mar 7, 2018

Bingo. China takes our jobs and never buys our shit. They lure companies to their soil by providing spave labor and law environmental laws. In exchange Americans lose their jobs and the Chinese simply steal their IP.

Mar 7, 2018

This has little to do with China. China isn't even in the top 10 sources of steel imports. If you want to go after China, there are a million other ways that are way more rational than going after steel imports.

Canada, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, Japan, Taiwan, Germany, India (in
that order) are the top import sources of steel.

Mar 7, 2018
TNA:

We are absolutely at war with China. They steal our IP and military secrets. They steal our jobs without allowing free trade. They fight our economic and political agenda everywhere and Xi now wants to be president forever.

You can't "steal jobs." Jobs aren't property that belong to anyone. Labor is a resource that the market directs to its most warranted uses. Many of those uses, in particular industries, is in China. This is called comparative advantage and it promotes national and global economic growth. Yes, Chinese companies "steal technology." But so do American, German, Brazilian, Japanese companies etc. They rip each other off, poach talent, etc. Welcome to competition.

TNA:

Please tell me why we value "free" trade with China so much?

Fuck off Cohen. Thanks for the tax cuts. Hit the bricks.

Because, as consumers, we get high quality goods at super cheap prices. That's why we buy them. And, as producers, we get access to super cheap credit (i.e., the current account deficit shows up as a capital account surplus which provides excess funds to our capital markets, pushing down yields and stimulating US investment).

So just because China fucks over their own people with oppressive protectionist policies doesn't mean we have to as well. We didn't do it when Japan was the boogey man and it worked out fantastically for us (and not so much for them).

    • 7
    • 1
Mar 7, 2018

This is where you libertarians part ways with reality. Free trade is good and Trump's tariffs are asinine and counterproductive and do little, if anything, to hurt China, but to not acknowledge that China is a bad actor in trade is to ignore reality. China is one of the most abusive trade partners in the world. Not only are they abusive in trade, but they have made it increasingly difficult for the U.S. to realize the silver lining of a trade deficit, which is an investment surplus, because China has instituted oppressive controls on foreign investment. Chinese investors have to literally sneak money out of China to invest overseas. China is bad all around.

Mar 7, 2018

You really need to just add your rejection of the nation state and borders.

Everything you're talking about sounds nice, and might be, but when you have voting citizens demanding their elected officials serve citizens, you can't pretend like the one way street economic relationship we have with China will not be the focus of their ire.

Your opinion isn't supported by history, reality or even most business leaders.

Mar 7, 2018

You're really eating up the neocon BS. The last thing this country needs is more shitty quality (not high quality) shit, just because it's cheap.

The last 100 years of economics is entirely based on the premise that MORE = BETTER, but psychology of human behavior, as well as behavioral economics, has started to push back against this idea. It's simply a false premise. There are significant diminishing returns to having more and more shit, and that's not what makes a developed nation better off. People are more than BEEP BOOP robotic consumers.

    • 1
Mar 7, 2018
Esuric:
TNA:

We are absolutely at war with China. They steal our IP and military secrets. They steal our jobs without allowing free trade. They fight our economic and political agenda everywhere and Xi now wants to be president forever.

You can't "steal jobs." Jobs aren't property that belong to anyone. Labor is a resource that the market directs to its most warranted uses. Many of those uses, in particular industries, is in China. This is called comparative advantage and it promotes national and global economic growth. Yes, Chinese companies "steal technology." But so do American, German, Brazilian, Japanese companies etc. They rip each other off, poach talent, etc. Welcome to competition.

TNA:

Please tell me why we value "free" trade with China so much?

Fuck off Cohen. Thanks for the tax cuts. Hit the bricks.

Because, as consumers, we get high quality goods at super cheap prices. That's why we buy them. And, as producers, we get access to super cheap credit (i.e., the current account deficit shows up as a capital account surplus which provides excess funds to our capital markets, pushing down yields and stimulating US investment).

So just because China fucks over their own people with oppressive protectionist policies doesn't mean we have to as well. We didn't do it when Japan was the boogey man and it worked out fantastically for us (and not so much for them).

People don't understand that the capital account balance does more damage than the protectionist schemes China has in place. In fact, China's protectionist schemes are in place to hurt households in favor of industry. Wages are low, unemployment is high, and the average networth of Chinese people is mere pennies.

If you look at other developed countries like Japan or in Europe, they don't allow China to flood their accounts with easy capital. It's because cheap credit fuels growth in America instead of low unemployment and higher savings. The capital account surplus here is directly related to the account deficit.

If you implement protectionist policies, the only thing that will happen is the world becomes more divided, but even more importantly, households will feel more burdened, and I would assume people will take on more debt or otherwise savings will drop.

    • 4
Mar 7, 2018

I think Cohn was a valuable influence on Trump, who notably only listens to rich, male advisors over six feet tall. Unfortunately it wasn't enough to stop him from enacting a tariff on one of the key input goods for American manufactures. Protectionism = Bad.

    • 3
    • 1
Mar 7, 2018

Very sad news. Trump unfortunately is moving in a direction that many on the right hoped he would avoid. I guess we're not that lucky.

    • 4
Mar 7, 2018

If nothing else, this is a great litmus test to find out who the actual, principled conservatives are versus simply Trump sycophants.

    • 2
Mar 7, 2018

I just cannot understand why Donald Trump insists on sabotaging himself and his administration. If it's not him Tweeting ridiculous things, it's him hiring incompetent people; if it's not him not forcefully condemning Nazis (a real political layup, if ever one existed), it's him enacting utterly asinine tariffs over the objections of nearly every remaining person in his administration.

Mar 7, 2018
Troll - Aged 18 Years:

I just cannot understand why Donald Trump insists on sabotaging himself and his administration.

Because he is a septuagenarian semi-literate man with a family history of degenerative brain disease who has masqueraded as a serious businessman for the last 30 years while slapping his name on buildings and has declared multiple bankruptcies while conning a long line of business partners. He launched a chaotic presidential bid on the back of birtherism and white rage by promising his voters that he had all the answers, and is now morbidly unqualified for the most important job in the world. I really don't know why anyone would be surprised by his constant missteps if you've been paying any attention for the last three years.

    • 9
Mar 7, 2018
Comment
Mar 7, 2018