The United States And International Public Opinion Strongly Criticized Trump'S Provoking And Upgrading Of Trade War.

In order to "give priority to the United States" and "make the United States once again great",

President Trump really took pains.

The main purpose of the trade bar is to lift the "opponent" to the negotiating table and maximize the interests of the United States.

In the face of the American people and enterprises, he has a strong voice and promises to achieve the prosperity of the United States. In the face of his allies and rivals, he is very fierce and wants to realize the interests of the United States.

However, the president of the trade, whose head is "trading art", does not seem to realize that commercially feasible or feasible, it will not work in international relations and international trade.

Whether at home or abroad, under the leadership of Trump, the United States and "do not rely on" began to shadow each other.

Trade war

Can the manufacturing industry return?

"Buy American goods, hire Americans!" is what President Trump has repeatedly stressed.

The revitalization of the US real economy is also regarded as one of the important reasons why the United States insists on its own initiative to stir up trade friction around the world.

However, as the United States continues to overweight in the trade war, what is the result?

Remember the Quarterly Bulletin of Halley Harley, a motorbike manufacturer who had announced the departure of the trade war and triggered Trump's angry motorcycles, showed that motorcycle shipments dropped by 11.3% in the second quarter.

The company's operating profit margin in 2018 was reduced from 10.5% to 9% - 10%.

In addition, according to the latest news, the Harley Davidson motorcycle factory in northern Kansas will soon be closed, taking the first step in shifting production.

Halley is currently building a new factory in Thailand, and plans to shift more production to India, Brazil and Thailand to save costs.

Of course, Halley is not the only American enterprise that calls bitter.

BMW, general motors and Whirlpool express their dissatisfaction.

BMW announced that it will increase the sale price of two US SUV products in China, which is the latest sign of the impact of Trump's trade war, the US Fortune magazine said.

According to the financial times, analysts said import tariffs were "a major threat to industry profitability" and warned that tariffs could cause losses to BMW and Daimler to 4% to 5% of profits in 2019.

BMW and Daimler have invested a lot of money in setting up factories, and now it is ironic that the trade war launched by the United States is irrelevant.

GM and appliance giant Whirlpool have also lowered their performance expectations.

According to the Japan economic news, the financial sector has begun to voice concerns about the willingness of enterprises to invest and the shrinking of their personal consumption.

The US economy remains strong, but trade wars may lead to a decline in investment and consumption, thereby increasing the blow to corporate performance and casting a shadow on the real economy.

Apple Corp has just become the first technology company with a market value of more than 1 trillion dollars.

But even apple began to cry.

According to Bloomberg News website, Apple Corp reported to the securities and Exchange Commission of the United States: "tariffs may increase the cost of products, make products more expensive, thereby reducing the competitiveness of products. The political uncertainty surrounding international trade disputes and protectionist measures may also have a negative impact on consumer confidence."

"Buy American goods" is difficult to achieve. "Hiring Americans" has become a "mirror".

Calvin Dooley, chief executive of the US chemical Commission, predicted that 25% of the tariffs would be "for the United States."

Manufacturers have devastating effects ".

A number of American businesses have warned that if the situation is not alleviated, it may have an impact on the economy and lead to fewer jobs.

In the smoke of trade war, Losangeles mayor Eric Gassetti led an urgent visit to Asia.

The reason is very simple.

According to the US consumer news and business channel website, as the White House threatened to impose higher tariffs on Chinese products worth 200 billion US dollars, many US port managers are preparing for the possibility of shipments cancellation and unemployment.

The port of Losangeles and the Long Beach port provide nearly 1 million jobs for the whole southern California.

This is the beginning.

According to data from the Pedersen Institute for international economics, if the United States really levying tariffs of 25% on the global market, 195 thousand of US workers will lose their jobs in 1 to 3 years, and in other countries, the situation will be even worse if they adopt counteracting actions: the United States will lose about 624 thousand of its jobs.

Price rise

Can the public be satisfied?

"American consumers are beginning to feel the pain of rising costs."

CNN reported.

"About half of China's products need to face higher tariffs," said Erin Ennis, senior vice chairman of the US China Trade Commission.

The increased cost will be pmitted to American consumers, which will affect most American wallets. "

The Times newspaper website reported.

From Coca-Cola to RV, from toys to clothing, the price surge has been raging.

CNN reported that Coca-Cola has raised the price of carbonated drinks, because the 10% tariff imposed on imported aluminum recently made Coca-Cola tank more expensive.

Chief executive James Kwesi admits that price increases are "disruptive" but necessary.

According to the Wall Street journal website, Michael Happe, chief executive officer of Wenner Bbe Gore industries, who has just enjoyed a busy sales season, said the company began to consider raising prices due to the recent rise in prices of some products.

Although the company is reluctant to disclose its price increase, it said that in order to cut costs, it has made changes, such as modifying the floor design of RV.

Toys will soon become "the hardest hit".

Among the US $200 billion exports to the United States, including children's toys, 12 billion 200 million dollars.

The United States is the world's largest toy consumer market, and China is the largest toy production base in the world.

According to the data provided by the Guangdong Toy Association, in 2017, 28.8% of Chinese toys were exported to the United States, while 80% of the American toy market was made in China.

Zhou Shijian, senior researcher at the Sino US relations research center of Tsinghua University, said that the US $200 billion consumer goods account for a large proportion of China's consumer goods, and its substitutability is very limited.

If this tax rises, most consumers in the United States can immediately feel that "as long as we declare that the prices of US consumer goods and so on will rise."

British science news website quoted America

Rick Helfenbain, chairman of the Federation, said that Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese products imported from the United States, which led to a retaliatory duty on Chinese exports to the United States, which amounted to a huge "Trump tax" on US workers, consumers and the US economy.

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate and professor of Columbia University, also believes that Trump's preparations for a full-scale trade war with China will lead to "tax everywhere". The cost of a substantial increase will be borne by the ordinary people, and the poorest class in the United States will suffer the heaviest blow.

"These punitive tariffs will be passed on to American consumers and offset all the positive results of the US economy in recent months.

There is no better example of self harm than anger. "

Matthew Seiru, chief executive of the National Retail Federation, said.

Deficit reduction

Can it make the United States more prosperous?

Cutting the US trade deficit is one of Trump's promises. It is also an important reason for the Trump administration to provoke a trade war.

Chen Chenchen, deputy director of the research department of the Chongyang Finance Research Institute, Renmin University of China, pointed out that since Trump took office, he had never given up his deeply rooted policy stance since 1980s.

Opportunities and trade interests are all brought back.

He will replace rules with absolute interests and replace global considerations with absolute American priority.

The "fair trade" that Trump most wanted to achieve is the most low-level trade with the greatest interest of the United States as the core.

Compared with the previous US government, the idea of leading the US power core trade policy is the zero sum experience in the commercial world.

However, almost all analysts believe that he can not deliver on this promise.

According to the latest figures from the US Department of Commerce, the US trade deficit reached US $46 billion 300 million in June, a sharp increase of 7.3% over the previous month, the first expansion in 4 months, and the deficit data is the largest in 19 months.

That is to say, the current US trade deficit is even higher when it comes to power, and has reached the highest level.

I wonder if Trump will feel a trace of embarrassment.

But neither media nor experts are surprised.

The Washington Post website reported that economists believe that Trump's focus on reducing the trade deficit is wrong.

The only way to really reduce the trade deficit is to let Americans buy less.

They believe that Americans do not suffer "trade losses": Americans get cheaper goods from abroad, and most of the US dollars flowing to other countries return to the US in the form of foreign investment or buying US bonds.

They stressed that the Trump administration's tax increase on Chinese products is unlikely to reduce the trade deficit, because Americans will still buy all these tax increases, so enterprises may take two solutions: one is to buy goods that have added taxes, and the other is to buy from other countries.

Kimberly Ann Elliot, a visiting researcher at the US Center for global development, wrote on the US world political review website that Trump did not seem to understand the three basic facts about trade policy: first, trade policy can not defeat a broad macroeconomic force; secondly, the main impact of trade policy is re distribution of the economy; third, trade policy is now far more complicated than before.

Lawrence Summers, a professor at Harvard University and former finance minister, wrote the articles for the Financial Times website. Trump also believes that it is problematic to put the offensive trade policy in the core position of governing the economy.

Most economists agree that the adjustment of trade policy is unlikely to play a significant role in promoting employment or gross domestic product growth.

Waving sticks

Can the United States be great again?

"Let the United States once again be great!" this is Trump's campaign slogan and Trump's ultimate goal.

However, so far, the various practices of the Trump administration have aroused widespread doubt.

"Trump is depriving the great thing of the United States," the title of the Washington Post article is simple and direct.

The article points out that after World War II, the foundation of American prosperity is technological breakthroughs driven by powerful innovation system.

American innovation policy has been successfully emulated in Europe and Asia, and has been followed by China in recent years.

Today, Trump launched a trade war with China in order to slow down the rise of China's science and technology.

On the contrary, the United States should do what it is best at home - innovate at home and trade with other countries in the world, so that America can flourish.

The Washington Post daily columnist Robert Samuelson's article also pointed out that Trump's campaign slogan "let the United States once again be great" brings an illusion: we can still achieve prosperity through isolationism.

The United States used to be "great", but it was achieved through active participation in international affairs through military alliances and trade policies.

Once, the United States was a well deserved leader of the western world.

Now, however, Western allies' attitude towards the US may be described only by "bitter".

At the end of July, an International Conference against the Trump administration launched a trade war in Geneva, Switzerland. Participants were the closest allies in the United States: Japan, South Korea, Canada, Mexico and the European Union.

The reason why these countries embrace "anti America" is because the United States began to investigate the threat of us motor vehicle and parts to the US national security in May this year. The investigation may be completed in August. The White House is likely to impose a 25% punitive tariff on all imported cars and accessories.

The German financial network emphasized that the message from the Geneva gathering was the EU's "mistrust of Trump's promise".

The German Frankfurt review said that Trump wanted to disrupt world order, so what countries would unite to protect international organizations and international rules.

Richard Amidiqi, former US Deputy Secretary of state, wrote in Japanese Yomiuri Shimbun that Trump publicly claimed to be trading without giving anyone a look at the cards.

It may be effective in business, but not in diplomacy.

Most foreign relations in the United States are weakened by Trump's apparent lack of credibility diplomacy, and his allies' trust in American leadership is declining.

The Washington Post website article points out that Trump values his pride, his need for attention and his ability to create disasters. If he needs to attack Western alliances to convince himself that he is smarter than all his predecessors, he will not hesitate to do so.

Chen Chenchen, deputy director of the research department of Chongyang Institute of finance, Renmin University of China, pointed out that in Trump's policy thinking, "allies who occupy the United States cheap" are not trustworthy. Only through smart foreign policy negotiations, including taxation of allied products, will "once again have an excellent ally".

The image of the United States has been damaged.

The American Brookings Institution website directly calls the United States "a hooligan rogue superpower", "actively, forcefully, and completely seeking for one's own interests".

Coercion and blackmail

Can the United States become a winner?

"Trade war is very simple.

It's easy to win. "

This is Trump's judgement.

"Trump thinks trade is a zero sum game.

He believes that trade wars are easy to win.

He launched a trade war against many countries, with the aim of forcing them to sit at the negotiating table.

The Washington Post website reported that

According to this logic, the Trump Administration recently launched a "combined boxing".

The national defense budget act, which was just passed by the US Congress, directly positioned China as a long-term strategic rival. The Trump Administration ordered the US Department of Commerce to put 44 Chinese enterprises and institutions on the export restriction list on the grounds of "significant risks to us national security" and to carry out the technical blockade. The Trump administration threatened to impose a 25% import tariff on China's 200 billion products on the trade side of the.

However, few people believe that the United States can easily win the trade war.

CNN quoted Phil Levi, a Chicago expert on global affairs, as saying that raising the tax rate on Chinese goods is consistent with the president's continued strategy of putting pressure on China.

Among the members of the Trump administration, there seems to be a feeling that China will succumb if you fight hard enough against China.

However, Levy said: "there is no evidence to prove this."

Martin Wolf, chief financial commentator of the financial times, points out that the United States' adoption of the "301 clause" to China sometimes seems to mean forcing China to eliminate trade surplus with the US, and sometimes it seems to be intended to stop the "China made 2025" plan, which sometimes seems to be intended to correct China's enforcement of technology pfer.

The first goal is ridiculous. The second goals do not have room for negotiation, and the third goals are difficult to achieve.

Australia's Sydney Morning Herald website article believes that in the economic war between the United States and China, Trump adopted the old arms of the seventeenth Century mercantilism era - tariffs, while China produced the weapons of twenty-first Century, the renminbi.

China's choice of weapons is more powerful because China's investment activities worldwide are large and growing rapidly, and are warmly welcomed.

Jeffrey Sachs, a professor of American economics and a group of enlightened American scholars represented by him, think that the US's practice of using trade wars and other means of containment to contain China's rise and technological development is "doomed to failure".

The US media believe that the Trump administration may have used Nixon's theory of madness.

It means that the opponent is careful because he suspects the president of the United States is unpredictable, occasionally reckless and may be mad.

However, the Washington Post website article points out that the theory of "madness" will not help Trump win the trade war. It is good for China and the United States to return from the margins of trade war, but it needs cooperation from both sides instead of conflict.

Self righteous "madness theory" needs to give way to a more cool headed mind.