Is President Trump a Communist?
I wonder what President Trump's supporters think of him now.
1. He's raised tariffs to an unprecedented level (formerly protectionism was something Democrats always wanted) and is damaging average Americans and business with it by raising costs on an assortment of goods and also negating any effect of his tax cut by increasing consumer expenses.
2. He has "ordered" American businesses to stop doing business with China, thereby defying the typical relationship between government and business and demonstrating both an authoritarian and anti-capitalist sentiment.
3. The tariffs themselves and his overall economic policy demonstrate a misunderstanding of monetary policy because he's concerned more about the trade imbalance, which isn't the problem. The problem is the theft of intellectual property. Attempting to right the trade imbalance is actually going to do significant damage to the economy, which is why many economists are predicting a recession.
4. He's massively raised government debt.
What do people think of these rather anti-capitalist, free market Trump policies.I think the only ideology Trump subscribes to is his ego. Every decision, every tweet, every White House lawn rant is all about making himself feel better or look good, especially to his base. These tariffs are merely an extension of his need to feel dominant and in control and to look tough for his base.
I wasn't ever a fan of Trump, but did try to give him the benefit of the doubt in the beginning of his Presidency. So much for that. I don't think communism is in his game plan (assuming there is some kind of plan). I can credit him with addressing the issues of the trade imbalance and intellectual property theft. It didn't seem the Obama administration had anything substantial to offer in this department.
His ordering American businesses as the "chosen one" and any tweets or comments along those lines seem to emulate the authoritarians and dictators he so admires. I'm not sure I would use the term anti-capitalist, but he's definitely not a full capitalist either. I'm usually reluctant to share Washington Post articles, but I think they nailed the description of Trump here as a selective socialist. He rallies against socialism when it serves him and uses socialism as his go-to when it will compensate for his own failings. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … milies-no/
And yes, he certainly did raise government debt. Worst of all, without any meaningful gains in the lives of working class and middle class Americans.America exports 2.5 Trillion dollars worth of goods.
America takes in 3.2 Trillion dollars worth of goods
This creates a deficit
The deficit is about 700 Billion
China is responsible for about 500 Billion of that, roughly 70%
A deficit can be equated to job loss, business displacement, growing debt, etc. all bad things for a nation, its economy and its citizens.
Tariffs exist to protect a nation's businesses and jobs.
If you go to Germany, you would see Mercedes Taxis and Police cars, because they are not tariffed and they are subsidized by the government.
Much like many police and government admins have Fords and GM vehicles here in America.
Tariffs help protect local/national businesses and make it so that 'Made in America' is more affordable than made Else-where.
China has benefited from a unfair advantage where they were able to tariff American made products at a high rate, while not suffering tariffs on their products. Trump is trying to change that, which essentially will reap benefits of jobs and business back here in America.So, in a nutshell, you're wrong. Not about how tariffs work, but about how solving the China problem involves solving the trade imbalance.
Trying to equalize trade with China will actually make interest rates rise. The thing Trump should be doing with China is going after their businesses that steal American intellectual property by banning them in the U.S. not raising tariff rates and punishing American consumers.
And since when did protectionism become a Republican thing? Republicans were always for free markets and Democrats always used to be criticized for wanting to install tariffs. Now Republicans are for tariffs because Trump doesn't know any better and wants to use them against China.
Here's a brief economics lesson:
Since we own the reserve currency, we get to pay for these goods in dollars, which then return here as the Chinese or foreign recipients invest in US assets, namely our Treasury debt. That’s good for Americans. In fact, it’s critical. Our interest rates would be sharply higher, and our currency much lower, if not for the trade deficit, because US savers would have to cover the entire government debt. We don’t save nearly enough to do that.
The U.S. owns the world's currency. If we don't run a deficit, the rest of the world doesn't have enough currency to conduct trade. If we tighten that currency flow, we will see a worldwide recession.You are correct about the intellectual properties part, not entirely about all else.
What happens, eventually, to all those cars, phones, tvs, computers, etc. that are made in China when they become expensive to import?
Short term, you are correct, the cost passes on to the consumer.
Long term, those items will be produced in America, Mexico, Canada, to avoid those tariffs.
This will employ more Americans, North Americans in total, which will improve our economy, improve wages, and improve the number of people employed.
Its not about forcing the Chinese to buy American, its about being able to compete against Chinese products here in America... our politicians allowed our country to be swindled, stole from, etc.
This is something that had a benefit for both countries, or should I say for corporations, the American workers have not benefited from it, wages and jobs stagnated for the 30 years that China has prospered... but whatever the case for the past, the issue now is that China is our equal in every way, and if this trade imbalance is not addressed now, China will be our superior in every way in just a few short years.
This is an economic certainty that most people can't seem to grasp. But it will be as certain and swift as the way the internet and cell phone has changed the way we live and work... not in decades, but years.I understand what you're trying to say, but I think you're fundamentally wrong about how to turn the tide with China.
The way to turn the tide is not to use tariffs and punish the American consumer. The way to turn the tide is to punish the Chinese corporations directly by banning the sale of their products in the U.S. Play by the rules and we buy your products. Don't play by the rules and you can't sell in the biggest market in the world.
Attempting to solve the problem by using tariffs is going to constrict the global currency market and restrict global trade, resulting in global recession.
And I will say this again, I hate Donald Trump, but I think he's doing a very good thing by challenging China. He's just doing it the wrong way.“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” ~ Sun Tzu
China knows itself, and knows the enemy (US). We have become a Nation/Society that neither knows the enemy or itself.
Too many think they understand, think they know how to proceed, but many such experts have never spent a day in China or amongst Chinese, many of which make policy in Washington.
The Chinese are far more capable than we are today, as a society, as a nation. In thirty years they dragged themselves from the poorest of nations to the most industrialized and technologically advanced nation in the world.
We could not do that today, we are a squabbling fractured nation with a corrupt government that has some of the most incompetent leaders the world has seen sitting in Congress making the laws we have to abide by.
The Chinese government invests trillions into its AI, Satellite, 5G, Genetic, Renewable technologies. America does not. China is not hindered by regulations, nor foreign laws, China does what is best for China, and everything in China, from foreign business to foreign citizens exist to serve China's progress whether they realize it or not.
China is monumentally under-estimated by the West, by America & the EU.
Something somewhat related that I personally experienced was being in South Korea in 1996. The country was a step or two behind America, streets were small, few people had cars, businesses were 2nd world in nature. Four years later when I returned they had 8 lane highways stretching all over the place, it seemed like every person had a car, businesses were everywhere and seemed as modern as could be, cell phones worked everywhere and were 5 years ahead of what I would see in America when I returned.
In four years time South Korea went from a step or two behind American standards and technology, to starting to surpass where America was.
POINT:
You can't punish Chinese corporations because all Chinese corporations ARE China.
If Germany punishes GM.... GM is punished, not America.
If Germany punishes Geely…. it is punishing China.
China is the ultimate Nation State, and every Chinese corporation belongs to China, ultimately.
China does not conform to the Western mindset, Western ideals, nor does it concern itself with 'playing by the rules' … it is only concerned with meeting its own goals, to become the greatest nation on earth, and second to none.Well, that's very interesting information and an interesting perspective. Thanks!
That is a very persuasive comment Ken. All good points.
I think your foundation of the Sun Tzu quote supports the entirety of your thought.
And I admit it is a scary thought to have to agree with your comment.
From what I have read they have already replaced us as the #1 world economy, and are very close to passing us technologically. Soon they won't need to steal our "intellectual property."
But scariest of all is my mental image of our "decision-makers," blinded by their own arrogance, ignoring any true China expert because of the message such a true expert would bring.
GAGA,
Yes, China is focusing immense amounts of wealth into advancing technology, they produce more 5G, microchips, satellites, than America... today... not in the future. The funding for research into AI, genetics, etc. dwarfs what America invests into these fields today.
China has a much more focused one-party system, than our corrupt bickering two-party government, the ruling class in China do not sell out their nation to corporate, banking, foreign or global interests. Quite the opposite actually, corporate and banking interests bend to the will of the Communist Party.
America will not be able to do anything more than accept its diminished position in the world, just a few years from now.
China's technological advantage will make our military obsolete at that time, they will be able to counter our missiles and rockets with superior Satellite networking, AI, and cyberwarfare capabilities.
When America chooses to test this, and they launch a Tomahawk at some target, and the Chinese redirect that missile, taking control of it mid-flight, the game will be over.
It is an event that may never become public knowledge, most likely it will never be reported to the American people... it will seem as if we merely stepped aside to allow China to dictate to the world the direction it will now take.
The dollar will be replaced as the International Reserve, the military will be downsized and used to repel pirates on the seas and rebels on land, the days of world wars will be over... China will rule by economic might, along with a version of its Social Credit System going global.Sounds like we need a new Marshall Plan. Something to help emerging economies advance at China's expense and provide us with other markets. Sadly, I don't think our politicians have that much foresight any longer.
I guess the question then, Ken, is do you believe that increasing tariffs is the way to force Americans to stop buying Chinese goods? Because American consumers are the ones punished by those tariffs. If the ultimate goal is to move American purchases away from China, that policy then makes some sense. I just don't think that's Trump's goal.Crank you have to look at it as if this were a war.
It is just a different kind of war.
Take for instance Huawei, it has deployed its products and services in more than 170 countries, Huawei's infrastructure equipment enables surveillance by the Chinese government. Its 5G wireless networks make countries like Canada dependent upon Huawei technologies to continue to operate their nation's internet and cell phone services.
In 2007, Huawei began a joint venture with U.S. security software vendor Symantec Corporation, to provide end-to-end solutions for network data storage and security. Huawei bought out Symantec's share in the venture in 2012, with The New York Times then noting that the partnership could allow "United States government classified information" to be obtained.
That was 2012, a lifetime ago in the world of information technologies, Huawei now uses next-generation information and communications technology worldwide to access information via cloud computing, big data storage facilities, cell phone towers and phones, in 2018 alone Huawei sold over 200 million smartphones worldwide. That is 200 million people China is gathering information on.
This is just ONE Chinese company. It has global reach, and the technology it uses is second to none. The key thing to remember is that it is not a entity separate from the State, it is a tool of the State, all Chinese companies are but an extension of the State.
The ultimate goal of this 'trade war' is to move American purchases away from China so that America may survive as an independent nation, one capable of producing its own computers, cars, and advanced technologies... something that we are in danger of ceding entirely over to China.
There is almost nothing today in America that is not reliant on some form of Chinese technology, be it circuit boards or cell tower boosters. Made in China is everywhere today. The price to free ourselves from reliance on Chinese products may hurt the pocketbook in the short term... the price not to do so now, may be our economic prosperity and freedom in the future.
Good chance that we are already too late, and Trump's efforts will not be enough to free America from the coming subservience to China. This is a certainty if he loses the election, as the alternative will be another puppet that goes along with America's abdication to China.Ken,
I really enjoy reading your perspective on this issue despite our differences on some other issues.
I'll just state again: I believe China is a problem. In fact, I had a professor almost 30 years ago now who predicted this, so I've known about the China threat for a long time. And, I think of all the things Trump is doing, this is far and away the most important and if politicians had any decency, Dems and Republicans alike would be standing up for him or at least trying to help.
Ultimately though, even though it may be good for us as a nation to approach this as a war, I'm not sure any politician will survive telling American consumers that they're going to force a giant cost increase on them. Look how we deal with tax increases. They get weaponized. It's going to be easy for any politician's opponents, much less Trump's, to weaponize these cost increases.
I suggested a Cold War approach to this issue. The problem with that and the major difference is that the Soviet Union never had an economic stranglehold on the U.S., so isolating them was easier. Isolating China is almost impossible now.
As you eloquently suggested, the solution is going to be a bi-partisan approach that is going to hurt American consumers and the American economy for some amount of time.
Because of the way our political system works now, few politicians are willing to play a long game any longer.Crankalicious, your second paragraph reminded me of a discussion in which I participated probably 25 to 30 years ago. My boss and our lead attorney, both devout Catholics, were discussing problems in the Middle East relating to the then-current situation and the Bible. I'm not Catholic, but I remembered some predictions that eschatologists said meant China and Russia. So I made the comment that they weren't taking into consideration China. My boss blew me off with, "oh, I'm not worried about China." I didn't know what to say, so I bowed out.
This was approximately the same time as your professor was predicting that China was going to be a problem. I could see it, but I couldn't see why the boss couldn't see it, as astute a bureaucrat as he was.
Funny (or not so funny in this case) the way things turn out.
haahaha.
Or you have a great sense of humor, or you have to read a bit more about what the concept communism means.
As Ga said.
Do you no what a communism entitles?You got me. I don't "no what a communism entitles".
my fault. a typo.
I was hesitating between the sentences.
Do you know what a communist is?
Do you know what communism entitles?
But by your weak defensive comment I wonder indeed if you really do.ok, so you used it as a clickbait crankalicious. Which I think is not a clever thing to do. clcikbaits makes the internet an unhealthy environment.
May thoughts about the USA-China trade war is that Trump wants a crisis. As a crisis is a good thing for the super rich as they can purchases land, properties etc. for cheap prices and sell them when the economy goes better. Crises are made artificially nowadays. So the raises of tariffs is not a communist thing but a classic disaster capitalistic thing. It is a means to cause a crisis. All the aggressive tweeting of the POTUS is meant to keep the social media off balance. PEople start to react without thinking and forget to look what really is going on. A class war between the super rich and the ordinary people. Just like Brexit is a weapon in the class war.
Free Market and capitalism. Free Market does not exist and if it exists it would never hold. If you simply look at how cheap the food is in the supermarket and how much the farmer gets then you know that farming is subsidised. (Still I wonder where that money is going as most farmers I know are definitely not getting super rich...)
In a free market there is no government support.
Pure capitalism does not work as it will tend to slavery and ownership.
The best capitalism is the one that is controlled (how much is another discussion). Hence no free market."A class war between the super rich and the ordinary people. Just like Brexit is a weapon in the class war"
Precisely....
The Corporate class is ruthless in its pursuit of power and control relative to rest of us, who can stand?
The ultimate struggle has always been between the haves and have nots, it is at the foundation of eve struggle and confrontation today.In politics you always have to ask: Where is the money going?
During elections politicians talk about "trivial" things. Like gay marriage, abortion, immigration, racism, nationality, The ideal subjects to get people angry.
But what was the first thing Trump did? Not the wall, were most of his campaign was about. But tax cuts for the elite.
Divide and rule. the oldest trick in the book.
Don't let the people organize themselves. split them in groups and let them fight with each other, but not against the ruling class.
In the end it is about money. Self enrichment. This was a thousand years ago the case and it is today the same.
Do you know what a communist is, or was your title just clickbait?
Tariffs can be a form of protectionism, but I don't think that is their intent in this current case.
His "order" has no force of authority, but I agree it is a non-typical authoritarian-type action. However, I don't think it demonstrates an anti-capitalism sentiment because I don't think the thought process went beyond the authoritarian aspect.
Misunderstanding or being ignorant of something has nothing to do with communism either. But, I too think his method of trying to address our trade imbalance, (which, from what I understand isn't really a problem), is damaging our economy.
If raising our debt were a criteria, all our recent presidents would be communists.
GAI have to agree with you on this one, GA. I believe it is the very opposite of communism. After all, extreme capitalism can be just as damaging to a society as communism.
Tell me what kind of political philosophy involves the government attempting to control and limit private business as though it had the power of ownership?
Yes, it was clickbait as I know what Communism is.
My point though, was that attempting to control the private business industry through "orders", which contrary to your assessment, does actually have some basis in law, is complete anti-capitalist.It seems you are right Crankilicious, the president may have the authority to enforce his "order" through the International Emergency Economic
Powers Act, (IEEPA). I was surprised to learn this.
I was also surprised to learn presidents have used this authority 54 times, and that 29 of those uses are still in place. So, although I was wrong about his authority. it is not absolute - Congress can terminate these actions. (The International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use)
As crazy as it might seem for the president to use this Act's power in this instance, my opinion is still that his intent, (sentiment?), is not anti-capitalist. In looking at some examples of past IEEPA specifics, (the Iran instance?), I think it is a stretch to label it as such.
Even so, you were technically right twice; he does have the authority, and my original assessment of that point was wrong.
GA
GA,
Trump has an adviser named Peter Navarro, who is the architect of Trump's economic policy.
So when you say no thought went into this beyond the authoritarian aspect, I say, quite definitively, you are wrong.
Communism
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
So, I think you are barking up the wrong tree on this one. I'd say that definition clearly identifies almost everyone running for the democratic nomination (except for the pay part. One of the candidates just wants to give away free money no questions asked). Not Trump.Wow, I must be asleep at the wheel. I've spent considerable time evaluating the Democratic candidates and haven't seen any mention of a proposal to make all property publicly owned, or even a statement that it should be. Can you direct me to these policies or statements? I must be inept because I am unable to find them. Shesh, I obviously need help.
There is a difference between socialism and communism, LTL. Some of these candidates are advocating a form of socialism, not communism. They are not advocating that everything be government-owned, including industry, which is a big tenet of communism. They know that doesn't work. In about 70 years, the Soviet Union ran itself into the ground. They are advocating a socialistic democracy, and as a result, are being called "Socialist Democrats."
Keep telling yourself that. I would like to believe many believe that. It will be a comfort to know you were all hoodwinked and not complicit. Because in the end, one is as bad as the other.
Obama for the most part was a middle-of-the-road capitalist, particularly with his treatment of corporations, to when I hear right-wingers or conservatives talk about Dems as communists, I usually chuckle. Dog whistle.
What's particularly interesting about my point is that this is the right-wingers chosen son expressing a profoundly anti-capitalist sentiment.
"I have the power as the President to tell you what to do and order you to run your business in a way totally antithetical to free market principles."I know I've said this before, but I grew up listening to relatives who lived under the Communist Soviet Union. Trust me, President Donald Trump is NOT a communist. He can "ORDER" Americans businesses to do anything he wants. They have NO legal obligation to obey. In a communist country, all the country's means of production are controlled by the government. The leaders don't have to publicly announce business has to do anything. They simply tell those in charge of industry and it is done. The government determines what is produced, how much is produced, what businesses will exist and more. I could write for a long time about the Russians and the collectivism they put on the farms of my family in the Ukraine. It didn't go well. I think what President Donald Trump did by ordering businesses to find other markets than China was for publicity and nothing more. The free market still determines what happens in the United States economic system. So, is President Donald Trump a communist? Not even remotely close. Our economy is strong and growing because of capitalism. I believe President Donald Trump knows, as do most free nations, capitalism is the goose that lays the golden egg.
Trump has said he has the authority to order businesses to stop buying their goods from China.
He's trying to subvert the free market.
His tariffs are punishing American consumers (negating his tax cut) in a misguided effort to even the trade imbalance with China when we actually need the trade imbalance to maintain the low interest rates he's demanding the Fed artificially lower. This combination of actions is threatening to make a lot of things worse, which is why so many economists are predicting a recession.
My point is, that request is fundamentally anti-capitalist. Amazing, coming from the Republican president.Can we agree if he actually tried to punish a company for such a thing there would be a huge Supreme Court challenge? I believe what he said was for publicity and nothing more. Raising and lowering interest rates by the fed should be done based on economic needs. A strong argument can be made for lowering interest rates. I agree, his request was anit-capitalist. Can we also agree, the things he has done has brought China to the negotiations table to negotiate a better trade deal?
Trump Tariffs Tank Asian Equities, Chinese Yuan. China Ready To Negotiate.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51032/br … n-saavedraMike, I support dealing with China and give Trump credit for doing something.
It's just that he's doing it wrong.
The trade imbalance is not the problem. The stealing of intellectual property is the problem. He needs to deal with the right problem.
Much like North Korea, he can try to make all the deals he wants with China. Either way, if he's trying to equalize the trade imbalance, he's making things worse.I agree with the intellectual property stealing being part of a huge problem. China does not have a history of creating a lot of its own technology. They also steal from Japan, Israel and other technologically advanced nations. I don't know that he isn't dealing with this problem. They've agreed to discuss a deal, what it will contain nobody knows as of yet. I don't think a deal with China will make it worse. It's pretty bad right now.
A deal with China to equalize the trade imbalance will make things worse because of how our currency works.
He doesn't need to make any deals with China. He just needs to ban all Chinese companies who steal our property from doing business in the U.S.Okay. I agree with the need to devise more effective ways of protecting American intellectual property from China and other countries around the world. We'll see if equalizing a trade imbalance will make things better or worse. I will state that I do not know. There are convincing arguments on both sides.
If we don't have a trade imbalance with the rest of the world, then the rest of the world will not be able to trade with each other, which will tighten trade on a global scale.
The reason for this is that the dollar is the default trade currency. It has to be plentiful in the market in order for unfettered trade to occur.
"Trump has said he has the authority to order businesses to stop buying their goods from China." You have completely rephrased his tweet to bait.
This is a trollish statement. When you make such a statement you need to back it up with proof. Not sure why anyone would even post on this thread? Don't bother coming back at me with a ridiculous deflect. Got you pegged..
Here's just an example of one of many links to the defense of the order:
https://www.usnews.com/news/business/ar … s-on-china
If you read through the thread, there has been a lot of agreement about China and excellent information about the differences in approach and just a generally good discussion. Pretty heady stuff overall, so you might want to go elsewhere.I was pointing out the verbiage Trump used in the tweets did not have him stating or claiming in any respect that he has the power to order anyone from to stop buying goods from China. It well appears he did dig up some form of Act. He certainly ordered American Companies to look for alternatives. One would never guess he would have such power. The article you posted certainly makes the case he may. He fights hard...
Related Discussions
- 75
Majority Say Biden Seeking to Jail Trump to Stop His Reelection
by Readmikenow 39 hours ago
In our new national poll 56% of all voters think Biden really wants to stop Trump from winning by putting him in jail.Democratic constituencies also have a negative view of Biden's actions with African Americans at 41%, Hispanics at 53%, and women at 53% agreeing.Here are more findings of our poll...
- 29
Has President Donald Trump Been Compromised by Russia?
by Allen Donald 5 years ago
How else do you explain his behavior over the past few days and in Helsinki? Why does he refuse to hold Putin and Russia responsible for interfering in our election? Why, whenever he's given the chance, does he describe Putin as a strong leader and criticize America?Here are a couple of links. The...
- 50
President Donald Trump's poll number remain steady.
by Readmikenow 9 months ago
Even after being indicted, President Donald Trump's poll numbers remain solid. Could be a result of people losing faith in the legal institutions such as the FBI an DOJ? Is it possible the blatant use of them against a political opponent is obvious to more and more people?"Donald...
- 118
Shouldn't the Impeachment of a President Be Open and Transparent?
by The Minstrel 4 years ago
With something so serious, you would think that Pelosi and the rest of her conspirators would bring a level of respectability to their so-called impeachment inquiry by following a strict adherence to the Constitution and rules. No, they have chosen to use their majority to run a kangaroo court....
- 90
President Donald Trump Again?
by Miebakagh Fiberesima 8 months ago
Despite all the socio-political questions hanging about, how would you picture former president Donald Trump, as a potential candidate in the 2024 piesidentialrace? Can he make it again? Will the GOP give him a second chance?
- 24
President Donald Trump as Presidential Candidate or President ...
by Kathryn L Hill 19 months ago
If Trump had a crystal ball which showed he might (somehow) start a civil war here in the good ol' USA, would/should he decide not to run? - wondering.