A lot of things here for Bluesky-ers to think about… open.substack.com/pub/noahpini...
13.09.2025 11:14
👍 6
🔁 0
💬 2
📌 0
A lot of things here for Bluesky-ers to think about… open.substack.com/pub/noahpini...
Pasi… you’ve ‘Samson-ed’ the dog!!
My comments on Trump’s 50% EU and 25% Apple tariff moment youtu.be/UnHVr66OMoo
Fair to exempt B’ham with its 14.4% unemployment rate, which is close to 3x Nat avg. but out of work claims are up to 5 x as much. And other cites are also anomalies. There are sine unexplained variables here
The problem here is you’re not comparing like with like.
There must be other reasons why such a high % of people are claiming out of work benefits when we have more of less full employment. It’s an anomaly which requires explanation.
Thanks to Deutsche Welle for an extended interview on the US China trade war -> embargo -> de-escalation for now and strategically , what it all means youtube.com/watch?v=-4PO...
Trump says China trade tslks in Switz ‘total reset’. No stranger to hyperbole, him, but total reset is precisely what’s going on in world trade and much related to it, as I explain here: youtube.com/watch?v=7gEk...
Through the looking glass folks, abs ridiculous - Woman wins £30,000 compensation for being compared to Darth Vader
Scribble a note into my website email contact and I’ll get in touch
While the U.S. and China jostle, too many politicians and commentators have naively concluded the answer to trade more with the biggest mercantilist that only wants to export more to them. Dumb. Talk of cosying up to China is a dangerous fantasy
www.thetimes.com/article/018b...
I think we are learning something rather different. That large structural surplus economies, by imposing -ve welfare consequences on own population, force deficits and welfare losses on other countries. Which is why so many are raising ‘trade defence measures’ against the same surplus country.
Bbg’s Natthew Brooker on the UK Treasury and finance sectir interesrs naivete and weak acumen in setting the Lab Govt’s china policy www.bloomberg.com/opinion/arti...
Naturally, one can despair about Trump’s America, but the idea that Xi’s Leninist China is the mirror image and is therefore bound to ‘win’ whatever that means,is well, lazy. China has strengths, o/c, but also a slew of difficult probs that its leaders prob can’t address 2/2
When you write an article like this, it helps to know something about the political economy of the country you’re writing about, and how it works and what doesn’t. AndrewMarr comes up short here 1/2 www.newstatesman.com/internationa...
100% agreed. YNWA
Good piece. I think Hatzius is right. US$ depreciation is not the same as loss of reserve currency status. It’s a bear market, not a bare market.
Can’t see Trump firing him, myself. Even if he did, Powell is just one vote on the FOMC, and while you’d have been laughed out for saying this when he was appointed, he’s a pretty imp dude in scheme of things now
Interview w/ ‘The Market’s Mark Ditti on the US China trade war, or more like, embargo. many topics but in a nutshell, cajoling one another into talks still seems likely, but nothing can thrn clock back or reset this fractured relationship. themarket.ch/interview/ge...
The man is a serious liability
Technically a serious and content heavy research paper. But there’s also a far simpler political explanation which is rooted in CCP historical narratives, the embrace of unprecedented industrial scale industrial policy after 2005, and Leninist thinking and ambition carried to new levels by Xi.
About time the governors there et al developed a spine. Let’s hope they stand firm against all intimidation
Well….. I’m struggling to think of anything Ed Miliband has done or plotted that didn’t end up toxic or snafu’d….
Balance of advantage normally is with customer/ deficit state not the supplier/surplus country, esp if China's scaled p/low cost exports persist in being resisted in Europe and elsewhere. For the rest of us, rock and a hard place. Trump's tariffs or China undermining local mfg and jobs. 4/4
China will get to that point too because Xi doesn't want a full throated trade war with his economy in the pan, and Trump doesn't either for fear he ends up in same pan. Interesting to speculate who will cave/blink? Obv, both sides can still hurt one another, tariffs aside, 3/4
Barely a week after Rose Garden setting to upend global trade system, several countries have announced willingness not to retaliate or negotiate for better deals with the US. US claims of 50 nations not verified yet but some imp ones like Vietnam, Indo and India are notable.2/4
No question that politicians and markets (now just fear) were not braced for China's escalatory response. But this doesn't mean, despite awful optics now, that there wont be a deal at some point. Interesting q is who, by then, will hold the stronger cards 1/4
www.newstatesman.com/internationa...
Spokecwith @Deutsche Welle about Trump’s tariffs and China’s escalatory riposte youtu.be/bC3jZWm4pEI?...
The upside is hard to define, imposs to measure, if indeed there is any. But the implicit reordering in world trade is far from trivial, and strategically looks stronger than it is judged by common sense or fairness. And we’re barely in the foothills here. 4/4
So, hare brained and cruel as Trumps tariffs are, it’s not impossible to imagine this as a Bretton Woods collapse type moment in which supply chain geography and trade patterns go through the wringer and end up quite changed. Downside is less efficiency, lower trade vols, higher prices 3/4
