Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (141907)	6/3/2018 1:29:13 PM
From: Alex MG	Respond to of 219855

I is very smart, baaleeve me... 100%

To: elmatador who wrote (141907)	6/3/2018 3:19:51 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219855

Re <<Should USA turn into a Canada? Trump trade policy will turn the US into Brazil>> I cannot recommend either direction. (1) Re <<Shielding raw materials exporters while ignoring the decline of America's high-tech capacity, defensive trade action stands no chance of rejuvenating the US industrial base>> at a superficial / first-cut level, the article is premised on conjecture / contention / premise that US industrial base requires rejuvenation. (1-i) The US industrial base is currently the strongest in the world, so I am guessing the conjecture / contention / premise is more about trajectory rather than current position. (1-ii) If about trajectory, seems to me to change requires an industrial policy as opposed to anything to do with trade policy. (1-iii) If actually about trade policy, and particularly trade policy w/r to China, would mean China has something to do w/ what America chose to do - running down its industry (i.e by exporting jobs, etc). This is the (wrong) premise that the USA trade- / china- hawks are working from. I cannot agree w/ the hawks' premise. I tend to put the state / trajectory of USA industry down as a consequence of USA fiat money inflation protocol ala 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum following on to the 2001 Financial Collapse ... etc etc, that which had been and is still playing out. The monetary policy led to trade consequence. Cause and effect. (1-iv) If above so, then to fix industry trajectory would require reset of monetary policy, and the trade-hawks, perhaps unintentionally / inadvertently, may well cause a monetary reset. (2) Re <<... underlying problem, and American manufacturers avoid big capital commitments because they can’t compete with Asian subsidies for industrial plant and equipment. Asian economies view a $10 billion semiconductor fabrication plant the way Americans view a bridge, stadium or airport, as a public good that merits taxpayer support. China’s economy is so big that its subsidies distort capital investment around the world.>> If this (subsidy) is the problem, then very easy to fix, for Trump can just subsidise any industry in question. But America had been subsidising all its industries all along, by way of the dollar printing, that which led to de facto industrial policy of hollowing-out. watch & brief