Author
Topic: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?
(Read 1493 times)

highVOLtage · « **on:** April 04, 2018, 09:43:22 PM »

"In this interview there is a very apropos example of the twisted disconnect evident in the multinational corporate media perspective. Please watch the part that begins around 04:55 and listen closely to Cavuto:

Quote

…”and we’re really seeing the effect on the folks who have to pay the bills for this sort of thing … we’re already seeing soybean prices coming down; we’re seeing pork related prices coming down … folks are taking it on the chin, what are you telling them?”… etc.

https://youtu.be/kCwrSVgtpy8

There it is. Did you catch it?

In discussing futures Cavuto sounds the alarm for “Soybean prices coming down.” “Pork prices coming down”; and “the folks “taking it on the chin.”

Now, think. What Neil Cavuto is saying is that U.S. food futures prices are forecast to come down. In that scenario who exactly is taking it on the chin?

Who is it that Neil Cavuto sees losing out in his position? It’s not the family going to the grocery store… they will see lower prices… so who are these “folks” losing out?

There it is.

Right there.

It’s easy to miss the gaslighting because it is so commonplace. Cavuto doesn’t even see himself doing it.

This is the twisted and controlled market being discussed.

Neil Cavuto is not calling for ‘free markets’, he is advocating for ‘controlled markets’, and his anxiety is because the “folks” he references as “losers” are the Multinational Corporations and Big-AG who control the Pork and Soybean market.

Cavuto’s ‘consumers’, those he is advocating for, are Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Monsanto, Cargill, Unilever, Nestle’ and ConAgra. Those are the names of Cavuto’s folks that he sees as “taking it on the chin.” He is NOT, repeat NOT, talking about people who shop at supermarkets and grocery stores, ie. the middle-class.

I cannot emphasize this enough… once you know how to spot this economic disconnect in the arguments by advocates for multinational corporations you can never go back to a time when you don’t see it.

This is the most important economic lesson that most Americans simply do not comprehend. We are in an abusive relationship, and most U.S. consumers don’t even know about it.

If the U.S. were to exit NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), the price you pay for most foodstuff at the grocery store would drop 10% in the first quarter and likely drop 20% or more by the end of the first year. Here’s why.."

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/04/04/very-important-economic-confrontation-neil-cavuto-vs-larry-kudlow/

gymvol · « **Reply #1 on:** April 04, 2018, 11:11:05 PM »

It has futures investors worried but won't have much affect at the grocery store.

Now what would really help at the grocery store is do away with Ethanol. Thirty percent of our corn crop is mandated to go into Ethanol production.

Only Congress can come up with a stupid idea of using your main food source to make a useless fuel.

DunkingDan · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2018, 08:42:09 PM »

It also aids to pollution all down the Mississippi and in the gulf

agentorange · « **Reply #3 on:** April 06, 2018, 05:56:00 PM »

The reason that soybean and pork price futures dropped is because China placed a tariff on imports on those from the USA. This means less sales in China for those companies as the price there is artificially increased by the tariff. That could create a short term supply glut here which lowers the price here. That is short term good for the consumer here but bad for the companies and those that are employed at said companies. Long term production could decrease and prices rise back to current levels.

The USA tariffs on Chinese goods make those more expensive here for US consumers and hurt Chinese companies and workers. A protracted trade war is certainly bad for both countries.

Having said that, I see what Trump is trying to do here. He thinks China will be hurt more by this and will eventually agree to equal and less tariffs on both sides and maybe some agreement on intellectual property theft. I hope that he is right and the trade tif is over soon. The only way I see that China stops the property theft (other than war) is when we start stealing enough from them to hurt them. Then they would agree to stop on both sides. Otherwise the benefit is too much for them.

fuzzynavol · « **Reply #4 on:** April 06, 2018, 06:14:24 PM »

Quote from: agentorange on April 06, 2018, 05:56:00 PM

Having said that, I see what Trump is trying to do here.

Yup - bully his opposition with an ill-considered bluff.

He thinks China will be hurt more by this and will eventually agree to equal and less tariffs on both sides and maybe some agreement on intellectual property theft.

Where his "wisdom" is lacking in thinking that the Chinese government cares as much and is as responsive to the clamorings of its people as ours has to be. It's not. Relatively speaking, their government couldn't care less if their peasants are suffering. We're going to lose any kind of stand-off like that, and send the world into a recession (at best) if it happens. We don't have the stomach for it, and they do.

And before anyone accuses me of spouting leftwing or msm talking points, I haven't paid any attention to this story and have no idea what anyone's saying about it. To me, it's just common sense.

I hope that he is right and the trade tif is over soon.

You know better.

The only way I see that China stops the property theft (other than war) is when we start stealing enough from them to hurt them. Then they would agree to stop on both sides. Otherwise the benefit is too much for them.

They'll just continue to deny it's even going on. Again, they don't care.

highVOLtage · « **Reply #5 on:** April 06, 2018, 06:57:12 PM »

"The USA tariffs on Chinese goods make those more expensive here for US consumers"

Hmm...

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/982214297160839173

HK_Vol · « **Reply #6 on:** April 06, 2018, 07:03:28 PM »

I'd say the US has the advantage in any trade war with China.
The reason? The country with the trade deficit has less to lose than the country with the trade surplus.

2016:
Value of US exports to China:
$115.6 Billion
US GDP
$18.6 Trillion
Exports = 0.7% of GDP

Value of US imports from China:
$462.6 Billion
China GDP:
$11.2 Trillion
Exports = 4.0% of GDP

A 100% trade war (tariffs on all products on both sides) is very much to the advantage of the US.

fuzzynavol · « **Reply #7 on:** April 06, 2018, 09:11:40 PM »

Quote from: HK_Vol on April 06, 2018, 07:03:28 PM

I'd say the US has the advantage in any trade war with China.
The reason? The country with the trade deficit has less to lose than the country with the trade surplus.

Which country's population do you think would better tolerate a recession?

Is the Chinese government worried about getting voted out in a couple of years?

Come on, HK. You of all people know the Chinese will win.

Drew4UTk · « **Reply #8 on:** April 06, 2018, 09:18:55 PM »

@fuzzynavol said:

Quote

Where his "wisdom" is lacking in thinking that the Chinese government cares as much and is as responsive to the clamorings of its people as ours has to be. It's not. Relatively speaking, their government couldn't care less if their peasants are suffering. We're going to lose any kind of stand-off like that, and send the world into a recession (at best) if it happens. We don't have the stomach for it, and they do.

And before anyone accuses me of spouting leftwing or msm talking points, I haven't paid any attention to this story and have no idea what anyone's saying about it. To me, it's just common sense.

so... uh... doesn't China offer the precise model of governing you would like to see here? maybe you realize you're totally busted by this apparent loss of traction- maybe you don't... i thought it worthy to point out.

Drew4UTk · « **Reply #9 on:** April 06, 2018, 09:28:50 PM »

funny story of how this type of thing impact us on a personal level:

I just bought a steel building... when i deposited on it the concern was heavy about this tariff thing- and prices were poised to launch... i was told i got lucky as the size of the building (small for what these guys usually do) was in stock, but i had waited it would have cost me 15~20% more.

dealing with government and trying to get the permit has taken not a little longer, but a lot. i had to call and back off the production/delivery/installation time... which.... meant my building was going to cost more as the production of it (they build it off site, deliver it on a truck, and raise it on site) would be pushed back for people who could take immediate delivery.

until......

prices dropped instead.

i called them and scheduled the delivery/construction once i got the permit's, and asked about the prices as their webpage was/is showing a reduction... i said "if the availability can raise the price, why can't it drop them?"- boom... i transferred a deposit to them of 20%, but that same amount is equiv to 30% instead, so once i approve their job and they hand me the keys i pay them a lot less.

thats a good thing.

thank you trump!

HK_Vol · « **Reply #10 on:** April 06, 2018, 09:39:43 PM »

Which country's population do you think would better tolerate a recession?

Depends.
China has a TON of debt in its system.
Have you seen the prices of real estate in China?
Why are they so high? They've been inflated with debt.....

Not as clear as you think.
And the key issue is forcing technology transfers to do business in China.
The horses have already left the barn.
So China can give in to that demand pretty easily in my opinion.
It is less about the issue at this point and more about "saving face."

Drew4UTk · « **Reply #11 on:** April 06, 2018, 09:49:43 PM »

i said this same thing when the aluminum/steel tariffs went in...

just a word of caution, and because i'm always thinking about how these things COULD work out...

these kind of things can turn nasty, and start wars... china cozening up with russia is a little alarming. especially considering that 18 years ago many thought the next major engagement would be between these two and arguing over mongolia and stretching into siberia... the chinese already worked a deal with afghanistan and their 'blue mountains' which gives them ownership of a rare metal only found there- often said 98% of the planets supply, and used in high tech electronics........ we need it for things such as cell phones to systems used in the defense industry..

don't get me wrong, we ought to press the issue as it hasn't been fair in a long time- but as we near the edge we should show some caution.

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

highVOLtage

Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

gymvol

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

DunkingDan

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

agentorange

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

fuzzynavol

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

highVOLtage

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

HK_Vol

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

fuzzynavol

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

Drew4UTk

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

Drew4UTk

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

HK_Vol

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?

Drew4UTk

Re: Does a trade war = lower prices for families at the grocery store?