It’s March 5th, 2018 and the occupant of the White House has just announced — by a tweet as usual — “He tweeted out Friday morning that for the United States, a trade war is “good” and “easy to win.” This is July 3rd, 2018 and evidently le crétin economique still believes this. There are three very simple reasons why this belief borders on insanity:
First: Prices will go up. Why? Because in order for prices to remain the same or decline the product must be manufactured in the “home country” at a level which would fill the gap between imported and domestic goods. Buh, buh, buh but — then American manufacturing will increase to fill the gap! Hooray!! Maybe eventually, and eventually is always the dearest vision of the economic theorist while the rest of us try to buy our beer in aluminum cans rather more immediately, and there’s another little sticky spot. For some time now DB’s railed about “financialism” and the propensity of the financial markets to “manufacture” and sell “paper.” DB’s howling notwithstanding, the US has been primarily a “service economy” for some decades (yes, that’s decades) now and while our manufacturing output and sales may be on the wane our “export” of service related products is definitely not. As in last year we had a $243 billion services trade surplus. [CNN money] Please don’t try to tell me Mr. “I went to U PA” just not the famous economics school therein… hasn’t at least grasp the nonsensical nature of starting a trade dispute with countries with whom we have service surpluses… oh, wait… he did already.
The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with Canada was $8.4 billion in 2017. […] Trade in services with Canada (exports and imports) totaled an estimated $91.5 billion in 2017. Services exports were $58.7 billion; services imports were $32.8 billion. The U.S. services trade surplus with Canada was $25.9 billion in 2017. [USTR]
We could speak of regional trading hubs and re-exportation of goods at this point, but let’s not, it would only confuse him.
Secondly, interest rates could easily go up. There’s already some pressure for increasing interest rates given the increases expected in the federal debt. We know, that federal debt the GOP’s been screaming about for years? That debt.
“One thing keeping rates in check so far is the demand for US debt from overseas. America’s foreign trading partners, including China, are among the largest buyers of that debt. It added $127 billion to its holdings last year and now owns more than $1 trillion in U.S. debt, making it the largest foreign holder of our debt.
The trade deficit that President Trump decries is one of the reasons for those holdings. It gives foreign countries a powerful incentive to buy that debt, since they have to do something with the dollars they get back on those sales.” [CNN money]
Shrink the trade gap = less incentive = significant increase in interest rates.
Third reason, American businesses will lose sales. Much effort is expended reaching deals for the sale of everything from pharmaceuticals to auto parts. Remember all those sales and marketing divisions? The ones in every major corporation in this country? The departments and divisions pitching products in every corner of the globe? Let American products become less competitive because of trade restrictions, and then watch foreign buyers find new suppliers. Business Rule #1: Losing customers is never a good idea.
So, what went on this week?
“Canada over the weekend imposed tariffs on $12.6 billion in U.S. goods in retaliation for U.S. levies on steel and aluminum. On Friday, China is set to slap levies on $34 billion in American goods like soybeans in response to a symmetrical imposition of tariffs by the United States on Chinese goods. Also last week, the European Union sent a letter to the Commerce Department threatening to implement tariffs on $290 billion in American goods if Trump follows through with his desire to crack down on foreign autos.”
Remember not so long ago when DB was bellowing about soybeans? Yes, DB is back to bellowing about soy beans.
Threatening tariffs may be a negotiating tactic, but at some point the other party will reach a point at which they tire of the gamesmanship. Reality sets in, deadlines come, and the skirmishes begin. World Wars can with something as dramatic as the invasion of Poland or the bombing of Pearl Harbor; however, World War I began with an assassination in Sarajevo. The US Civil War can be said to have begun with attacks and counterattacks in Kansas. The problem with skirmishes is that unless they are carefully controlled they can spiral beyond retrieval, the results are usually not pretty.
There is also the poker element; eventually a bluff will be called. We’re not far from the Canadians and Chinese calling our bluff, the EU as well for that matter. Someone in a position of responsibility ought to have the wisdom to know when to (and not to) bluff; when to fold; when to up the ante. In short, there has to be some adult supervision. My way or the highway is almost never a strong negotiating position. Bullies often have accomplices, but they rarely have wing-men.
Thus the Business Roundtable, the US Chamber of Commerce, and other organizations not generally perceived as bastions of liberal thought will decry the Administration’s tariff and trade policies, academics will refer to the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, and citizens will watch the price of can of beer increase as the cost of the aluminum can increases. And all because le crétin economique thinks in bumper stickers.