World Reacts to Trump's "****hole Countries" Remark

[rjpalmer]

Meanwhile, to Svensson, I would say that as bat dung crazy as it currently is over here in America, it is starting to look like we may have received a significant shove from your side of the pond: viz., Wigmore, Banks, Cambridge Analytica, Northern Ireland, and various British 'agent provocateurs.' The shite is so deep that it may take years to shovel it all away, but ultimately all of it is traceable to Putin's backside. At least in the Profumo scandal the women were good looking and the stakes were ideological. This is just a bunch of grifters tying to get richer quick.

[jason_c]

Really, if there is any lesson at all to be learned form that comment, it's that No matter how far removed from Reality Trump's comments are, his Supporters will believe anything.

The US has had a better recovery from the 2008 financial crisis than the Eurozone, so the deal you had evidently wasn't that bad at all.

The deficit bashing is also nonsensical. You pay for the good you receive and you also get money for the goods you sell. There is no loss. A 500 Billion Trade Surplus does NOT mean you lose 500 Billion because you are getting good for those 500 Billion in return. Presumably worth 500 Billion but I would need to double-check on that...

Fact is, you are being sold one Red Herring after another by Trump and his goons. Meanwhile, the rest of the world are just trying to work out how we negate the Trump presidency without too much damage to the world-economy and existing geo-political relationships. The next guy can;t come soon enough and I don't mind if he's Democrat or Republican, I just want him to be sane.

The trade deficit in itself is not a problem, but I think you misunderstand why the deficit is usually cited. The huge trade deficit is the result of an unfair trade agreements. The deficit is not the problem, it is merely cited as a way to highlight the current unfair practices Trump thinks past administrations have signed up to. The deficit is indicative of unfair trade agreements that hurts Trumps base - farmers and manufacturers(remember those rust-belt states Clinton lost in 2016). If the white working class in the US is hurting you can be sure it's partly caused by trade agreements the US previously signed up to. However, I don't expect many anti-Trumpers to understand this. It's why Trump will very likely win Minnesota in 2020.

[Svensson]

So a trade deficit occurs when a country buys more goods and services than they sell overseas. This happens when when there is demand for a product or service that can not be met domestically. And for this reason, the customer will look overseas to fulfil this demand.

I'm fairly confident that even in the age of Trump, we can agree on this basic principle.

With this in mind, would you be able to point to some specific instances where the trade agreement with the EU puts the American producer at a disadvantage, hence forcing the American customer to buy from the EU? Basically, I don't see it.

Trump complains about German cars. Well, the reality is that American cars are in general not up to the same standard. They are expensive to run, the parts are sometimes difficult to get hold of (i.e. its not uncommon for an Audio part to also fit a Volkswagen), they are polluting and Gas guzzlers. The latter is something that Trump has conceded to the Europeans and Japanese permanently btw by repealing the Obama fuel standards. Face it, you're no good at building cars and this is unlikely to change.

On the other hand, our Euro fighter is a flying turd, an EU vanity project that might get us some sales to Egypt or India but European Nations members are better off to buy fighter form the American F-range.

These are just two examples that show that the pan-atlantic trade relationship is completely interconnected. If Trump wants to risk it, then his Base will be hit worst. The EU will start jacking up prices on American Burbon soon. Let me tell you that the Irish, Welsh and Scottish Whiskey makers won't mind this one bit... Likewise, BMW and KTM will be the main beneficiaries of tariffs going up for Harley Davidsons.

Shame. But it's time for Trump to do something productive rather than smashing up stuff.

[jason_c]

So a trade deficit occurs when a country buys more goods and services than they sell overseas. This happens when when there is demand for a product or service that can not be met domestically. And for this reason, the customer will look overseas to fulfil this demand.

I'm fairly confident that even in the age of Trump, we can agree on this basic principle.

With this in mind, would you be able to point to some specific instances where the trade agreement with the EU puts the American producer at a disadvantage, hence forcing the American customer to buy from the EU? Basically, I don't see it.

Trump complains about German cars. Well, the reality is that American cars are in general not up to the same standard. They are expensive to run, the parts are sometimes difficult to get hold of (i.e. its not uncommon for an Audio part to also fit a Volkswagen), they are polluting and Gas guzzlers. The latter is something that Trump has conceded to the Europeans and Japanese permanently btw by repealing the Obama fuel standards. Face it, you're no good at building cars and this is unlikely to change.

On the other hand, our Euro fighter is a flying turd, an EU vanity project that might get us some sales to Egypt or India but European Nations members are better off to buy fighter form the American F-range.

These are just two examples that show that the pan-atlantic trade relationship is completely interconnected. If Trump wants to risk it, then his Base will be hit worst. The EU will start jacking up prices on American Burbon soon. Let me tell you that the Irish, Welsh and Scottish Whiskey makers won't mind this one bit... Likewise, BMW and KTM will be the main beneficiaries of tariffs going up for Harley Davidsons.

Shame. But it's time for Trump to do something productive rather than smashing up stuff.

I'm not American.

I cannot show you specific instances where trade agreements place US producers at a disadvantage. Just as you cannot show me the agreements are fair. I can guarantee no-one on this forum can show me that the trade agreements are fair. In ALL the media coverage of these trade deals no media outlet has looked at the individual agreements in much detail. We are ALL relying on rhetoric and vitriol. However, since the BBC, MSNBC, Guardian and CNN all refuse to investigate these trade agreements in detail they are hiding from the issue imo. This leads me to suspect Trump is mostly correct. IF Canada isn't artificially protecting its farmers as Trump claims then it seems to me that Trump would be easily refuted by media outlets. They so far haven't refuted his claims.

Btw you may be correct that international consumers don't buy American cars because they are crap. But hey, just remove those tariffs so we can all find out for sure.

Irish and Scotch whisky producers sell far, far, more to the US than Bourbon producers sell to the UK. There will only be one winner in any whisky trade war.

[Svensson]

I'm not American.

I cannot show you specific instances where trade agreements place US producers at a disadvantage. Just as you cannot show me the agreements are fair. I can guarantee no-one on this forum can show me that the trade agreements are fair. In ALL the media coverage of these trade deals no media outlet has looked at the individual agreements in much detail. We are ALL relying on rhetoric and vitriol. However, since the BBC, MSNBC, Guardian and CNN all refuse to investigate these trade agreements in detail they are hiding from the issue imo. This leads me to suspect Trump is mostly correct. IF Canada isn't artificially protecting its farmers as Trump claims then it seems to me that Trump would be easily refuted by media outlets. They so far haven't refuted his claims.

Btw you may be correct that international consumers don't buy American cars because they are crap. But hey, just remove those tariffs so we can all find out for sure.

Irish and Scotch whisky producers sell far, far, more to the US than Bourbon producers sell to the UK. There will only be one winner in any whisky trade war.

That's because Fair/unfair is a matter of opinion. The underlying facts are that the trade-relationship between the EU and the US is one that appears to be mutually beneficial.

BBc have run an article on this very subject to dig a little deeper:

On any basis, the EU's average tariffs are fairly moderate but certainly not the lowest. The lowest figure for the EU is the trade-weighted figure for applied tariffs (the most recent in the WTO database is 2015). It was 3%.

That's higher than the US (2.3%) and Japan (2.1%), but lower than Australia (4%) or Canada (but only just at 3.1%). Some developing countries have higher levels, such as 10.4% for Brazil

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44291103

And given Trump's record on ac curacy, he is almost certainly incorrect. He pretty much lies everytime he opens his mouth or reaches for twitter. I was in Germany last week and the following Trump tweet made the headlines there:

"The people of Germany are turning against their leadership as migration is rocking the already tenuous Berlin coalition. Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!"

There are 5 lies or mistakes in there:
1. Merkel remains the most popular politician in Germany (so they are NOT "turning against their leadership").
2. Yes, Immigration is rocking the German coalition but this is widely accepted as electioneering by the far-right CSU in the coalition and thier interior minister. Merkel should basically sack him.
3. Crime in Germany is not up, is has just hist it's lowest rate since 1992.
4. The Pro-immgration Green party is up in the polls, the anti-immigration AfD remain stagnant. So there isn't this swing that Trump would like to see in order to justify his own immigration issues.

Also, Der Spiegel wrote a debunk in English and posed this on their website:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/trump-tweet-on-german-crime-fact-checked-a-1214066.html

So if those had been mistakes, he had ample opportunity to rectify these problems with his tweet but since he didn't, we have to assume that these were conscious lies and he had no desire to be accurate.

What makes us think that his thinking is any different on the issue of trade? For someone who has over 3000 proven lies in 17 months in office (WaPo database), it's unlikely that he is correct on anything material.

[Svensson]

on the lying, just yesterday during trump's signing on his U-turn in Child-separation:

"We have dealt with North Korea" - Erm, no. You have not dealt with it, nothing has actually happened at all except that NK have "re-affirmed" their desire for a denuclearised peninsula. "Re-" meaning that this is not new.

"We have dealt with Iran" - Erm, no. You have given Iran permission to restart enriching Uranium and to kick out the inspectors should they desire to do so.

"We have dealt with an economy that was going in the wrong direction" -erm, no. It was going in the right direction for about 6 years already.

Apart from that, his and his DHS secretary's whole stance on the subject for the last week was a lie. It was his policy that caused it and it was possible for him to reverse it any time (as he has done now).

So yes, whenever he opens his mouth, he is basically lying. He can't go 5 minutes without it. Actually, PF have recently counted 8 lies in 5 minutes during a "Fox and Friends" interview just on the subject of immigration: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-about-immigr/

[Svensson]

Just the other night Trump said: "we are going to reopen NASA"

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/06/trump-were-reopening-nasa-agency-has-fought-that-misconception-for-years/

Because, yes. Obama had apparently closed NASA.

"We're going to be going to space" (and his supporters went wild). Something tells me that his mind is already there.....

[Sam Flynn]

Shuttle diplomacy?

[Svensson]

Meanwhile, to Svensson, I would say that as bat dung crazy as it currently is over here in America, it is starting to look like we may have received a significant shove from your side of the pond: viz., Wigmore, Banks, Cambridge Analytica, Northern Ireland, and various British 'agent provocateurs.' The shite is so deep that it may take years to shovel it all away, but ultimately all of it is traceable to Putin's backside. At least in the Profumo scandal the women were good looking and the stakes were ideological. This is just a bunch of grifters tying to get richer quick.

Yep, as I have mentioned elsewhere, the UK has a number of people long versed in peddling ideologically slanted fake news (just look at the three "Daily" newspapers).

Um, and you forgot to mention Steve Hilton.

[Svensson]

At some point Trump is going to have to be judged on his results...any Hillary fan who says this meeting would have been possible is deceiving only themselves.

Let's face it, it is clear that Trump has had his pants pulled down by Kim. He got nothing (and no, "Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." does not mean a thing as there is a big difference between "comitting towards denuclearisation" and "committing to work towards denuclearisation") and he gave Kim everything he could have wanted, such as:

1. International acceptance on an equal standing
2. invitation to the white house.
3. Suspension to military exercises
4. Acknowledgement that these exercises are "provocative war-games" (face-palm....)
5. heaps of praise for Kim which will probably play on a constant loop in NK right now and thereby strengthening his regime.
6. all of the above making it more likely that China will veto any additional measures against NK should the talks with Pompeo fail.

Obama would have sacked Clinton had she completed such a "summit", and rightly so. The Singapore meeting was a monumental clown-show by the Trump Administration.

[DirectorDave]

Let's face it, it is clear that Trump has had his pants pulled down by Kim. He got nothing

N Korea 'begins dismantling' rocket launch site

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44933126

Maybe the Russians hacked the satellite images?

[Svensson]

from the same article:

"But according to recent reports based on US intelligence leaks, North Korea might secretly still be continuing its weapons programme."

We are not getting rid of cars by closing a random branch of Kwik-Fit.

And btw, he also had his pants pulled down by Putin. It is clear to the world now that Trump is working for the Russians and not for the American people (according to his oath at least). Some follow-up questions:

1. Will 1600 Pens Avenue now be referred to as the Russian Embassy?
2. Will Trump need to register as a foreign agent with the FBI?
3. On a slightly more serious note: Has Trump violated his inauguration oath?

The Europeans meanwhile let him believe that he is achieving something but not act on it. NATO has simply restated that they continue to commit to the 2% Spending target on their defense and allowed Trump to do his presser where he could take credit for a commitment that was extracted by Obama (a commitment that I actually don't agree with but that's a different matter). It seems to me that the Europeans have decided to sit him out and wait for sanity to return to the Oval Office. Once Mueller is done, the shackle-fitter will have an appointment at the New Russian Embassy.

[DirectorDave]

Trump will outlast all these Euro leaders.

May - Screwing up Brexit, everyone is going to vote UKIP.

Merkell - Now just a puppet leader.

Macron - Everyone now realising he is a bit of a fanny.


Italy, Poland and Hungary are on the Don's side.

[Svensson]

One thing that may be in favour of your prediction is the fact that Germany, UK and France all have free and fair elections.

[Limehouse]

Trump will outlast all these Euro leaders.

May - Screwing up Brexit, everyone is going to vote UKIP.

Merkell - Now just a puppet leader.

Macron - Everyone now realising he is a bit of a fanny.


Italy, Poland and Hungary are on the Don's side.

UKIP? The party who can't keep a leader for more than a few weeks? In fact, who IS the current leader? The party that supports fracking? The party that wants to privatise the NHS? Are you kidding?