Servile bootlicker Anthony Scaramucci vainly declares that USA would win (trade) war against China - Polidicks

[quote]One of Donald Trump's closest advisers has told the BBC that the US would win a trade war with China. Anthony Scaramucci warned that if China chose to retaliate when the Trump administration imposed tariffs on imports, it would cost them "way more" than it would cost the US. He added the current trade relationship was "more favourable to China than us". The comments came just as China's President Xi warned that no-one would "emerge as a winner in a trade war".[/quote] [quote]In the first address to the World Economic Forum by a Chinese president, Mr Xi gave a staunch defence of globalisation and attacked protectionism. "Pursuing protectionism is just like locking oneself in a dark room. While wind and rain may be kept outside, so are light and air. No-one will emerge as a winner in a trade war," he told the audience. "China will keep its door wide open and not close it," he added.[/quote] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38646804[/url]

I don't see how a country of 350 million will win against a country of 1 billion who's economy is growing stronger and stronger every day and is willing to trade with the rest of the world, while Trump seems to be willing to sacrifice current relations for political points.

On what numbers is he basing this incredibly mature statement? [editline]17th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51685462]I don't see how a country of 350 million will win against a country of 1 billion who's economy is growing stronger and stronger every day and is willing to trade with the rest of the world, while Trump seems to be willing to sacrifice current relations for political points.[/QUOTE] Especially since he's also willing to impose tariffs on Mexico an Germany.

[QUOTE=Overhauser;51685466]Especially since he's also willing to impose tariffs on Mexico an Germany.[/QUOTE] Having a trade war with China, a G8 country and a close neighbour doesn't sound like a good idea to me, especially since a lot of the jobs Trump is apparently responsible for are jobs that will be speedily replaced by automation in the future.

America being run by children it seems.

man, what a title

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51685462]I don't see how a country of 350 million will win [B]against a country of 1 billion[/B] who's economy is growing stronger and stronger every day and is willing to trade with the rest of the world, while Trump seems to be willing to sacrifice current relations for political points.[/QUOTE] China had 1 billion people already 35 years ago, you are missing the entire population of USA there :v:

[QUOTE=Overhauser;51685466]On what numbers is he basing this incredibly mature statement? [editline]17th January 2017[/editline] Especially since he's also willing to impose tariffs on Mexico an Germany.[/QUOTE] Cant you read "way more". Its almost like you don't speak 5 year old.

If by "win" he means that the U.S.'s economy will be only marginally less annihilated, maybe? Not much of a 'win', though.

A fine example of when the only winning move is not to play. Though we have to wonder how far he'll really go when his pick for ambassador to China is Terry Branstad, an old friend of Xi Jinping and governor of a red state that is highly dependent on China for trade (Iowa).

[QUOTE=Maegord;51686306]If by "win" he means that the U.S.'s economy will be only marginally less annihilated, maybe? Not much of a 'win', though.[/QUOTE] America would lose the least, in the short term at least. In the long term, with China's investments in developing economies in Africa and South Asia, China could pull ahead by selling products that they currently sell to the US. I have no clue why Trump and his administration is so fervently anti-China. I assumed during the campaign it was just nationalistic populism.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51686568]America would lose the least, in the short term at least. In the long term, with China's investments in developing economies in Africa and South Asia, China could pull ahead by selling products that they currently sell to the US. I have no clue why Trump and his administration is so fervently anti-China. I assumed during the campaign it was just nationalistic populism.[/QUOTE] He needs a scapegoat for the public to direct their hate towards so he can get into office and do whatever the hell he wants. China fits that role.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51686568]America would lose the least, in the short term at least. In the long term, with China's investments in developing economies in Africa and South Asia, China could pull ahead by selling products that they currently sell to the US. I have no clue why Trump and his administration is so fervently anti-China. I assumed during the campaign it was just nationalistic populism.[/QUOTE] They are anti-China because they can't use Russia as the bogeyman to rile the voters up, since Trump is his puppet. Every former republican president in recent memory has used someone as a bogeyman, so since Trump has to use someone why not "Jhina".

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51686568]America would lose the least, in the short term at least. In the long term, with China's investments in developing economies in Africa and South Asia, China could pull ahead by selling products that they currently sell to the US. I have no clue why Trump and his administration is so fervently anti-China. I assumed during the campaign it was just nationalistic populism.[/QUOTE] As much as I hate to say this, China is still an authoritarian government who controls anything and everything it's citizens do or see, their products are still pieces of shit, and they are overcasting their aggression all over SE Asia. I don't like Trump, and I certainly don't want a war with China, but it is perfectly legitimate to dislike China to the level Trump has, though I believe it should be done more with Saudi Arabia.

[QUOTE=Megadave;51686891]As much as I hate to say this, China is still an authoritarian government who controls anything and everything it's citizens do or see, their products are still pieces of shit, and they are overcasting their aggression all over SE Asia. I don't like Trump, and I certainly don't want a war with China, but it is perfectly legitimate to dislike China to the level Trump has, though I believe it should be done more with Saudi Arabia.[/QUOTE] "fervently anti-China" probably doesn't go far enough, what I should have said was "outright antagonistic" towards China.

[QUOTE=_Maverick_;51685834]America being run by children it seems.[/QUOTE] With the terrible system that we have, GIGO is amplified. Therefore system needs replacing. Maybe the people, too.

Wow that title.

Who even wins in a trade war [editline]18th January 2017[/editline] By that I mean "what are the victory conditions" but the answer may as well be China at this point [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/gAExxV7.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51686568]America would lose the least, in the short term at least. In the long term, with China's investments in developing economies in Africa and South Asia, China could pull ahead by selling products that they currently sell to the US. I have no clue why Trump and his administration is so fervently anti-China. I assumed during the campaign it was just nationalistic populism.[/QUOTE] That's because Vladimir Putin's displeased at how closely the US is allied with China. He wants his puppet to damage US-China relations to make Russia forging a stronger alliance with China against the US more plausible.