Vladimir Putin and Crown Prince Mohamad Bin Salman are in an all-out economic brawl, keeping a barrel of oil at an extremely low price point.
The U.S. shouldn’t be complacent after winning the first round of the trade war. China is a formidable strategic competitor and will remain so for many years to come.
After adding up the expensive externalities and the social cost, cheap stuff from China does not look as affordable as it does on the store shelf or the online cart.
The U.S. and China have such different economic and political systems and different sets of values. We may have to settle our differences through other means, beyond a trade agreement.
Free traders have the same view of trade war as Quakers do of real war: that it is never the answer.
Free trade with communist nations will defeat every law we have. In a free market with an unfree nation, we have created a competition of systems, and bad systems will drive out good.
A top legislative priority for the White House, the agreement was signed by the United States, Mexico, and Canada on Nov. 30 of last year but has stalled in Congress.
The ongoing economic brinkmanship between China and the United States is hurting all parties involved, yet no one is happy with the status quo.
What China did this week is the strongest counteraction it has taken so far in its ongoing trade war. It might have achieved the desired effect of causing market panic, but it will end up hurting China the most.
The trade war between China and the United States isn’t a conflict that will remain confined to the economy. It’s a risky play in a new Cold War.
Any political regime depends in part upon trust, and, when those in power do not live up to their commitments to the people, an appetite for change grows.
Chinese President Xi came to the summit with serious economic and political challenges domestically. President Trump was in a stronger negotiation position. So what happened?
A game where only one side plays by the rules is rigged. We have now locked ourselves in an embrace with a corrupt regime, and it has not been to our benefit economically or morally.
Tariffs can serve non-economic purposes. Although economically harmful, they can sometimes be used to gain political advantages that outweigh their economic costs.
China has enough bargaining chips to cement its spot as export king of the developing world. Trump must be strategic in trade negotiations with Xi Jinping.
Cooler heads have to prevail to ensure Meng Wanzhou’s arrest doesn’t become a catalyst that worsens the trade war.
We understand it would be wrong to let politicians interfere with our freedom to trade with our local grocery store. The same argument applies when looking at international trade.
China may be able to absorb the latest round of tariffs by turning goods destined for export around for internal consumption.
Free trade supporters will be disappointed in clauses such as the minimum wage requirement and recognition of bargaining rights. But such clauses appeal to union voters, who like Trump.
- WATCH: CBS News Posts Fraudulent Video Of ICU Nurse Crying Over Poor Working ConditionsCBS News posted a video of a nurse who claimed she quitcontinue reading >
- The Senate’s Plan To Save Small Businesses Is Already Failing, And Mnuchin Just Made It WorseThe details are out of Treasury now, and it looks like continue reading >
- Why Severe Social Distancing Might Actually Result In More Coronavirus DeathsWhat the media and policymakers are not telling us is tcontinue reading >