First, as I noted in the previous post, the trade “deal” with the UK is really not a fully fleshed-out deal, but a framework. Supporters need to consider this when assessing the administration’s claims that it is going to rapidly negotiate deals with dozens and dozens of individual countries.
If all it can show with one willing partner is a framework, with details to be announced later, that does not bode well for arting all the deals.
Via the NYT:
President Trump said Britain had agreed to increase market access for billions of dollars of American exports, including beef, ethanol and other farm products under a new trade deal — but left many of the details to be worked out later.
The agreement — promoted by Mr. Trump as the first of many that will result from his efforts to blow up the global trading system — appeared to be more of a framework than a full trade deal. Both sides agreed to drop tariffs on specific products and made general agreements in other areas, but officials from both governments will still need to meet in the coming months to hammer out specific language. That can be a tricky and difficult process, leaving open the possibility the agreement could still fall apart.
It is, therefore, inaccurate to state that the US and UK have reached a deal. They have agreed to keep talking about maybe reaching a deal.
Second, the stupidity of this is just off the scale:
Update: The BBC has some details, which suggest that maybe there is more definition than the NYT reporting provides. We shall see what formal agreement has been reached.
I know that, definitionally, if we buy less from the Chinese, then the trade deficit shrinks. But exactly who gets richer as a result is beyond me. This constant assertion that “we” are richer makes no practical sense.
I suppose consumers who cannot buy certain goods keep their money and therefore are richer in some sense. But, of course, the most likely outcome there is that they will have to spend more for a more expensive alternative, which will make them poorer.
But the dock worker, the trucker, and the like, who lose hours, or maybe even their jobs, are not richer. They are objectively poorer.
Like I noted in the previous post, this is all a choice.
