Ex-Trump advisor Steve Bannon and New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who might seem like ideological opposites, agree on at least one issue: China trade.
Bannon, whom diehard Democrats view as the antichrist, and Friedman, who works at what President Donald Trump calls “the failing New York Times,” both feel the president is right to go after Beijing.
While it may seem surprising, the two have agreed on Trump’s China policy for some time.
Friedman, while critical of Trump on many issues, wrote about a year ago that the economic fight with China is “worth having,” adding the president’s “instinct is basically right” to hold the line “before China gets too big.” The country is so polarized politically that the mere mention of Bannon and Friedman being on the same page on anything becomes a watershed event.
“I really agree with so much of what Steve said,” said Friedman, who was guest-hosting CNBC’s “Squawk Box” during the Bannon interview Wednesday morning. “The stakes of this moment, I think, people don’t fully appreciate,” referring to the economic clash of the world’s two biggest superpowers.
hubris - Ex-Trump advisor Steve Bannon and New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who might seem like ideological opposites, agree on at least one issue: China trade.
Bannon, whom diehard Democrats view as the antichrist, and Friedman, who works at what President Donald Trump calls “the failing New York Times,” both feel the president is right to go after Beijing.
While it may seem surprising, the two have agreed on Trump’s China policy for some time.
Friedman, while critical of Trump on many issues, wrote about a year ago that the economic fight with China is “worth having,” adding the president’s “instinct is basically right” to hold the line “before China gets too big.” The country is so polarized politically that the mere mention of Bannon and Friedman being on the same page on anything becomes a watershed event.
“I really agree with so much of what Steve said,” said Friedman, who was guest-hosting CNBC’s “Squawk Box” during the Bannon interview Wednesday morning. “The stakes of this moment, I think, people don’t fully appreciate,” referring to the economic clash of the world’s two biggest superpowers.
I am very libertarian minded, but how can you battle the state controlled market manipulation of the chinese without them?
Free trade is well and fine when it is a somewhat equal field, but entire industries have been stolen by Chinese government backed business being able to operate outside normal market pressure of profit/loss.
I am very libertarian minded, but how can you battle the state controlled market manipulation of the chinese without them?
Free trade is well and fine when it is a somewhat equal field, but entire industries have been stolen by Chinese government backed business being able to operate outside normal market pressure of profit/loss.
China has been giving us actual stuff in exchange for green paper. We should be rejoicing for how much we've gotten for nothing.
I am very libertarian minded, but how can you battle the state controlled market manipulation of the chinese without them?
Free trade is well and fine when it is a somewhat equal field, but entire industries have been stolen by Chinese government backed business being able to operate outside normal market pressure of profit/loss.
China has been giving us actual stuff in exchange for green paper. We should be rejoicing for how much we've gotten for nothing.
Except that’s not true at all. We’ve given them a stronger economy and increasing influence in world affairs. That’s not nothing.
Slowshot - I don't think anybody really disagrees that China needs to be reined in, the disagreement is in what is the appropriate vehicle to do so.
I haven't seen much for alternate ideas to enforce it. Just bitching by the usual suspects about tarrifs bad, orange man bad.
Well, I've been bitching since we pulled out of TPP, which was a huge multinational trade deal built around the central idea of putting constraints on China.
Slowshot - I don't think anybody really disagrees that China needs to be reined in, the disagreement is in what is the appropriate vehicle to do so.
I haven't seen much for alternate ideas to enforce it. Just bitching by the usual suspects about tarrifs bad, orange man bad.
Well, I've been bitching since we pulled out of TPP, which was a huge multinational trade deal built around the central idea of putting constraints on China.
That was the right way to do it.
Exactly. If Trump had actually thought about the best way to address the issues the TPP would have been it
I am very libertarian minded, but how can you battle the state controlled market manipulation of the chinese without them?
Free trade is well and fine when it is a somewhat equal field, but entire industries have been stolen by Chinese government backed business being able to operate outside normal market pressure of profit/loss.
China has been giving us actual stuff in exchange for green paper. We should be rejoicing for how much we've gotten for nothing.
I am very libertarian minded, but how can you battle the state controlled market manipulation of the chinese without them?
Free trade is well and fine when it is a somewhat equal field, but entire industries have been stolen by Chinese government backed business being able to operate outside normal market pressure of profit/loss.
China has been giving us actual stuff in exchange for green paper. We should be rejoicing for how much we've gotten for nothing.
Barbarians are often impressed by trinkets.
Agreed. A bond due in 30 years from an entity $22 trillion in debt, with annual revenues of $3 trillion and expenditures of $4 trillion is a very impressive trinket. ;)
