"“Recent White House policies have heightened concerns among Washington’s Asian allies, particularly Japan and South Korea,” said Lu, adding that these two countries should return to a path of strengthening regional cooperation and improving engagement with China in order to cope with US pressure.
Two US allies deepening relations with China. I think we are about to see more of this. Predictability is huuuge in global economy.
As I wrote on the other thread just now, the biggest issue with Trump is this: he acts like a schoolyard bully rather than a statesman. He lacks the diplomatic nuance required to navigate complex negotiations and seems convinced he alone knows how to handle everything. The truth is, he doesn’t. Putin is outmaneuvering him, and China appears content to sit back and watch as he stumbles over his own rhetoric. His behavior is so counterproductive, just as @Codtrawler87’s message above shows. Is Trump’s administration so inept that they were not able to foresee this happening? Say what you will about tariffs, Trump has given a lesson on how to loose 100 years worth of “soft power” capital in just about 100 days. Well done Orange Man.
S.Korea and Japan coming to arrangements with China is not necessarily a bad thing.
The US is currently defending both of them militarily.
The Korean armistice was 1953, 72 years ago, yet there are still 28,500 US troops in S.Korea defending against N.Korea which is a nuclear-armed Chinese client state. It would be great to be able to bring those troops home. There are even more US troops stationed in Japan. 54,000 according to Google. Japan has her own disputes with China, including a chain of islands between Okinawa and Taiwan (Senkaku is the Japanese name) which China, Taiwan, and Japan all claim. Japan also has a dispute with Russia over the Kuril islands, some of which were seized by USSR at the end of WW2.
It doesn’t make much difference to me who owns the Senkaku islands or the Kuril islands.
Japan and S.Korea have traditionally used the same mercantilist tactics that China uses today. I remember Bush I going cap-in-hand to Japan begging them to allow more US goods into their marketplace, and in the process vomiting all over the Japanese prime minister because he was zonked out on sleeping pills. Japan-China trade is fairly evenly matched. In 2023, Japan exported $138B to China while China exported $169B to Japan. S.Korea had a tiny $7B trade deficit with China in 2024. By contrast, in 2024, the US exported $143.5B to China but China exported $438.9B to the US. In 1988, a congressman from Michigan (Gephardt, who was House Majority Leader) unsuccessfully sought the Democrat nomination for the presidency. He ran on trade, and one of his issues was that at the time, Hyundai cars (which at the time were awful) sold in the US for $5,000 to $6,000, but comparable US cars (he mentioned the Chrysler K-car) sold for about $40,000 in S.Korea because of tariffs and “luxury taxes” on imported goods. Which essentially meant that the S Korea could sell cars in the US but not vice versa.
My point: Japan and S.Korea are already doing what Trump has just done.
re: the penguin islands
Lutnick says Trump tariffs on uninhabited islands prevent other countries from using ‘loopholes’
It’s to prevent trans-shipments and the like.
I drove a Chrylser K car back in the day. The thing was far from a “luxury vehicle”. 
A nice reliant automobile 
A pretty good short video
Interesting video.
On his chart, the vertical units are millions of dollars, so the 2024 trade deficit was just shy of $1T ($918B according to Google),
The US transferred jobs to China to build a Chinese middle class, and we were told that this would change China from a totalitarian Communist dictatorship to a capitalist democracy. That didn’t happen
If the WTO is the problem, leave the WTO.
That was quick
EU Floats ‘Zero-For-Zero’ Tariff Pact For Industrial Goods
that still leaves agriculture et al
Before Trump imposed retaliatory tariffs, the EU was offered Zero-For-Zero on everything, so the EU’s offer is more restrictive than the original Trump offer
Not sure why the European markets have been falling. I thought the Trump tariffs only hurt Americans
The House just passed the budget resolution 216-214, with 2 GOP members voting against (Thomas Massie and Victoria Spartz) and no Dems voting for.
The budget resolution is critical to advancing President Trump’s legislative agenda on the southern border, tax cuts and energy policy
1 Democrat (Norcross, NJ) and 2 Republicans (Onder and Valadao) did not vote.
Where’s the outrage?
Shipping Nations Agree on World’s First Global Carbon Tax
Not aimed at people here but at the outside world.
The same people who have been screaming that tariffs are a tax and will hurt consumers are probably celebrating this new tax which will increase shipping costs and hurt consumers by making imports more expensive.
It also seems designed to disproportionately effect the US and UK/Europe
The IMO meeting also established an “emissions control area” in the northeastern Atlantic, where ships would be required to observe tougher regulations on carbon emissions. Most shipping traffic between the U.S. and Europe would pass through this control zone.
So shipping between the US and EU/UK will have tighter rules than shipping from China to the USA and from China to the EU. Why aren’t I surprised.
I don’t have a strong stance on tariffs or carbon taxes, but I think it’s worth pointing out a few things for context. It’s true the IMO’s new carbon pricing rules will raise shipping costs, and that could eventually lead to higher prices on imported goods. That’s a valid concern.
At the same time, it’s a bit of a stretch to say this is “designed” to disproportionately affect the US or Europe. The new emission control area in the northeastern Atlantic does impact transatlantic routes, but similar zones already exist in other regions like North America and parts of Asia. The IMO’s long-term goal seems to be global application, and this is just one step in that rollout.
As for comparing this to tariffs—yes, both can raise prices, but they serve different purposes. Tariffs are usually about protecting domestic industries, while carbon pricing is aimed at reducing global emissions. So even if the end effect overlaps (higher costs), the motivations behind them are pretty different.
Got it.
Tariffs which raise the price of imports = bad,
Carbon taxes which raise the price of imports = good.
If the negotiations don’t work out, I suggest that President Trump resist the urge to reimpose tariffs and instead impose a carbon tax on imports. That way everyone’s happy.
We can be MAGA and care about the planet at the same time.
During Trump 1.0, I suggested putting solar panels on the border wall, and selling the green electricity to Mexico. That didn’t pan out, but hopefully the carbon tax on imports will.
Don’t really know how you arrived at that conclusion, but hey—whatever floats your boat. I laid out a few basic distinctions without endorsing either side, but if your takeaway is to reduce everything to some sarcastic binary, then it’s probably not worth continuing the conversation. Nuance clearly isn’t your strong suit, nor is reading comprehension.
Interesting viewpoint from the Babylon Bee
I wonder if I donate a grand will she tell me should I go with BULL10X or BEAR10X certificates on SPY.
“The video then pivoted into fundraising mode, outlining a series of gifts for honoring God and supporting her ministry, culminating in a Waterford crystal cross for a “Passover/Easter resurrection offering of $1,000 or more.” Next came footage of Trump in the Oval Office lauding White’s ministry and political work. “You have helped us so much in so many different ways,” Trump said.”
Televangelist Paula White Finds Herself at Home in Trump’s White House - WSJ
Kind of an expected turn. The administration seemed somewhat surprised by how little leverage they actually had over Kreml and Putin, given the battlefield and economic realities.
“Now, if for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say you’re
foolish. You are fools, you horrible people,” Trump said. “And we’re going to just take a pass. But
hopefully, we won’t have to do that.”
Trump’s correct. If they don’t want peace, the US should just walk away.
And no more US funding to Ukraine. If the Europeans want a war, let them pay for it.
