Comment by ggm

Comment by ggm 5 hours ago

2 replies

Personally no. I remain sceptical about imputed p2e on almost all non tangible deliverables, ad revenue aside. Inflated licence costs and accounting tricks and brand power appear to a shitload of value carried into being. But, some companies (apple) are sitting on a lot of money, and their value proposition has grounding in real goods and a walled garden.

Others, (tesla) are precarious despite a rocket ride of share price and others (spacex) are changing a landscape in a specific, high cost area.

China operates in a different model. It has different cost of capital, labour, compliance. It also has a giant domestic market, 3x the scale of the US, and had three decades or more of enforced savings. The scale of suppressed spending demand in that place cannot be understated across this time.

India is more interesting in some ways because it's forcing its middle class out into the world and also growing its domestic economy, but without the Chinese state planning drives.

I think the next 50 years belongs to Asia. Europe will have to rethink itself, in a demographic decline, but resistance to growing its missing labour force from the obvious places in the Middle East and Africa. Latam economies seem stuck in the Sargasso sea of boom-bust.

I don't see how the US comes back from removing the underpinnings of the post Bretton Woods world of mutual trust.

I should point out a senior citizen friend invested in every stock I decried on moral and financial grounds and made bank on his stake over 18 months including crypto ETFs (God...) and I meanwhile depend on fund managers to plot my slow and steady pathway to the natural 7% longterm return. So, there's that: people who ignore me do significantly better in the short term.

nickpsecurity 4 hours ago

"I don't see how the US comes back from removing the underpinnings of the post Bretton Woods world of mutual trust."

There never was any. Many countries were cheating us on corporate ownership, regulations, tariffs, I.P. theft, etc. Others taking our markets as elites offshored our jobs. Many doing serious, human, rights violations on top of it. All kinds of international corruption.

The U.S. itself always tried to coerce others into its empire with protection, aid, petrodollars, and so on. That we had a Five Eyes agreement with priority ovet other partnerships shows we don't trust most countries much at all.

Peace was a lie. It was more like a Cold War for politicians and corporations mixed with some military interventions in unstable (for them) areas. Then, U.S. wanted to re-balance the trade deals to favor us by doing to them a fraction of what they did to us. They're responding. It's heating up.

Who knows what will happen. I'm glad our trade deals might benefit our job market now even if it hurts for a while to reverse the past. Don't forget that we lost hundreds of thousands of jobs during prior trade deals. They hurt us for nothing but now we're hurting for maybe something.

  • ggm an hour ago

    I think you objectify a lot of "they" in this and a conversation about that will probably descend into ad hom rapidly. Suffice to say I agree with almost nothing you have said here, except it's true an awful lot of cheap production economies have shocking human rights abuses and low to no labour laws.

    You appear quite bitter towards your own state as well as mine and everyone else's. There's a lot of "everybody lies" on the table. I do not think all bilateral trade is based on lies and I do not think there is only a zero sum winner and loser outcome on the table, Implicit in your response.