What trade war? Markets shrug off US-China dueling tariffs

“Trade war? What trade war?” Alex Veiga reports for The Associated Press. “Wall Street shrugged off the escalation of a trade dispute between the world’s two largest economies Friday after the U.S. imposed tariffs on billions in Chinese goods and China responded in kind.”

“After a wobbly start, U.S. stocks were moving broadly higher, placing the market on track for a weekly gain after two weeks of losses,” Veiga reports. “The market’s reaction suggests investors are betting that Washington and Beijing will work out a deal before their trade dispute begins to weigh on corporate profits and the global economy.”

“Investors also welcomed new data Friday from the government showing that U.S. employers kept up a brisk pace of hiring last month, without having to hike wages much. Markets have been watching to see if tight labor market conditions would force wages higher, a sign of inflation.,” Veiga reports. “The Labor Department said that U.S. employers added 213,000 jobs in June. Average hourly pay rose just 2.7 percent from a year earlier, which means that after adjusting for inflation wages remain nearly flat.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Mr. Market shrugs.

I’m cognizant that in both the U.S. and China, there have been cases where everyone hasn’t benefited, where the benefit hasn’t been balanced. My belief is that one plus one equals three. The pie gets larger, working together. — Apple CEO Tim Cook, March 24, 2018

At least half of the popular fallacies about economics come from assuming that economic activity is a zero-sum game, in which what is gained by someone is lost by someone else. But transactions would not continue unless both sides gained, whether in international trade, employment, or renting an apartment. — Thomas Sowell, June 14, 2006

SEE ALSO:
U.S. President Trump puts tech in trade war crosshairs with planned curb on China investment – June 25, 2018
The Trump administration told Apple it would not place tariffs on iPhones assembled in China – June 19, 2018
Chinese stocks end at 2-year low, Apple suppliers sink on trade-war concerns – June 19, 2018
Why Apple CEO Tim Cook is acting like tech’s top diplomat – June 18, 2018
Apple CEO Tim Cook doesn’t expect a full-blown trade war between the U.S. and China – June 5, 2018
President Trump and Apple CEO Cook meet at White House with trade the focus – April 25, 2018
Apple CEO Cook to meet with President Trump – April 25, 2018
Why Apple stock can withstand a Chinese trade war – April 5, 2018
Apple CEO Tim Cook heads to China as President Trump orders 25 percent tariffs on up to $60 billion in Chinese imports – March 23, 2018
BoA Merrill Lynch: Apple is prepping a ‘foldable’ iPhone; U.S. and China trade tensions not an issue for Apple – March 23, 2018
Designed in California. Assembled in China. How Apple’s iPhone skews U.S. trade deficit – March 21, 2018
President Trump blocks Broadcom-Qualcomm deal over China concerns – March 13, 2018
Elon Musk sides with President Trump on trade with China – March 8, 2018
Analyst: President Trump’s tariff impact on Apple would be just a ’rounding error’ – March 7, 2018
Apple and other tech firms caught in crossfire as U.S.-China trade war looms – March 7, 2018
Apple Macs caught up in President Trump’s aluminum tariff plan – March 2, 2018

46 Comments

    1. … H-D had this in the works long before the tariff issue. They are just blowing smoke up everyones ass and trying to pin the blame on Trump.

    2. Yeah, H-D has been having trouble for a while. Long before Trump became President. They seem to be suffering from lack of interest in their product. The millennial’s aren’t so crazy about biking it seems.

  1. Give me a break, MDN. Not Apple news. Your tag list is tenuous at best.

    But since you insist on acting as a propaganda machine for the alt-right, then iCal it. (As if you ever actually verify your iCal’d items). You WILL feel the effects of this economic insanity. Just give it a little time, and the self-inflicted Trump Pain will spread.

    By the way, the markets are half asleep this week. Prices were stabilized in part by a decent jobs report and by the happy news of corrupt swamp scum Pruitt resigning. In the upcoming weeks, you will see the economic wheels fall off of the Trump Circus Wagon.

    1. You and BJ need to partner in the Conflation Company…you’re both good.

      “Alt-right.” C’mon. Talking about hyperbolic. Who’s the alt-right you speak of? MDN, Don, or the White supremacists you imagine leading the govt?

      Speech can be
      influential with out the exaggeration, no?

      1. You use a word that I suspect you don’t know what it means. Have you ever looked up the word Conflation or are you just parroting it for effect?

        Conflation is not happening here. What is happening is MDN clickbaiting non-Apple news with a myriad of other terms. tags including: AAPL, Alphabet, aluminum tariff, Amnesty International, Apple, Apple suppliers, Apple Watch, China, China Development Forum, diplomacy, economy, Environmental Protection Agency, google, iPad, iPhone, iPhone suppliers, Mac, macroeconomy, President Trump, steel tariff, Thomas Sowell, Tim Cook, trade, trade imbalance, Trump administration, wealth creation, White House

        That’s not conflation. That’s just cheap lame ass excuses for accurate web hosting. If you call yourself Mac Daily News, then please at least pretend to care about the Mac.

        1. the merging of two or more sets of information, texts, ideas, etc. into one.

          Alt-right with MDN’s posts.

          Isolationism with trade negotiations.

          Dictator with______…hell, I don’t know. It just doesn’t make sense.

          You erroneously merge and, or associate word definitions with aplomb.

          I might ad, the stock market’s uptick with the departure of the EPA chief is simply worth a chuckle. Btw, please don’t construe my statement to mean I advocated the guy, or promote fracking, or like politician’s acting selfishly. Thx.

    2. You don’t need a break, MDN does from the likes of you. They own the site and have the freedom to post articles of this type ALL DAY LONG. You don’t like it, then take a hike already and quit your whining.

      “corrupt swamp scum Pruitt resigning.”

      How CIVIL of you, hypocrite…

    3. “Give me a break, MDN. Not Apple news.”

      I don’t entirely disagree with you, but in fairness, this article could be contextualized in interpretation to make it very much relevant to Apple.

      The opening salvo of the trade war has just begun, and if Trump doesn’t cool it, we may very well be looking at a nasty situation when it comes to purchasing our next iPhones.

      Apple is in a very bad position in regards to Trump’s shenanigans as Apple depends both on components going into China, and assembled iPhones (and other devices) coming out. They could get hit by tariffs in both directions as well as increased taxes on assembly lines and cultural boycotts at the retail level of iPhone purchases in China (and elsewhere).

      Apple stock ended up today on a very low volume day based on an increase in unemployment and zero adjusted wage growth compare to last year which will reduce pressure on the Fed to raise interest rates, but it’s worth keeping in mind that it reflects some optimizing that Trump may stop being an absolute idiot (at least when it comes to tariffs).

      Regardless, I think even if Trump pulls his head out of his @ss, at this point, we’re looking at higher iPhone pricing (or at least not the lowered pricing we otherwise would’ve received), since Trump policies have already reduced purchasing power with the US dollar.

  2. When listening to politicians and executives discuss tariffs and trade barriers, it is important to keep in mind that they have their own best interests in mind. The German Chancellor says and does things to advance her country, as does the French Prime Minister or the CEO of GE. They are not concerned about the US, or the world economy – only their own. Of course.

    1. This is not strictly true. Most sane leaders understand when to compromise.

      In 1776, 13 colonies decided to forego their individual goals in order to forge a new alliance which would enable something greater than any one could alone. They UNITED. It involved compromise.

      The European Union … UNITED. Despite being on the front lines of Soviet aggression and muslim extremism, the EU has achieved excellent economic results overall, including a Euro that is stronger than the Dollar (and has been for 17 years), some of the highest quality of life and standards of living anywhere in the world, some of the best infrastructure in the world, leading cultural and scientific achievements, and yes, economic upward mobility that the USA is now floundering to achieve.

      But let’s just stick to trade. Trade has always been a major economic part of every successful nation. While the USA thinks it’s big enough to go it alone, China dwarfs the USA and has no reason to cowtow to the orange dictator wannabe. All nations, small and large, benefit from wise fair and low cost (nothing is free) trade. Multilateral treaties allow nations to prosper by each giving a little in order to achieve much bigger benefits than any state could gain alone.

      Now the USA has a weak minded president who thinks that sitting on a pile of nuclear arms and housing 5% of the world’s population entitles him to “win” in all trade negotiations. He’s clueless. If only one side benefits in trade, then there soon will be no trade and everyone loses in the end.

      No former trade partner of the US proposed hiking tariffs until the USA did so. They are hoping that somebody in D.C. pulls his head out of his arse before the world economy goes into a tailspin, but I don’t think hope is very high. Meanwhile watch as Canada and Mexico forge new transoceanic trading alliances, Europe resets itself by looking east instead of continuing to give the USA favored treatment. China and India will grow their domestic consumer economies faster than ever, as they don’t need the USA for anything but food and raw materials. That can easily come from South America or Canada instead.

      Isolationism is not the way to greatness.

      1. Yeah, but when you realize that most countries have higher tariffs on US goods than the US has on theirs, that they have polices which require their governments to buy only their country’s goods, etc., then you realize why “no former trade partner” has proposed hiking tariffs – they already have.

        1. I keep hearing this assertion that other countries levy higher tariffs on U.S. goods than the reverse. It is stated as a certainty by Trump (very unfair…very sad) and most Trump supporters. But is it true? Have any of you actually researched the facts on trade? Well, I am going to because I know that I cannot trust Trump to tell the truth. He lies incessantly and forces his chosen ones to lie for him.

          If you have any integrity, Trump supporters, then you will question the words that come out of Trump and his Administration. Don’t swallow them whole and unquestioned just because you hate people who do not agree with your platform.

          1. Soooo…..did you verify that?

            And did you add in government subsidies , lower wages, unfair work conditions, child labor, and ‘dumping’??

            Well DID YOU?????

      2. My God this is such an infantile post and it would take too long to counter each knee-jerk point you (don’t)make so I will just point to ‘Oh, Mike,MIke….’ below as the perfect counter.

        What a bubble you are surrounded by.

        1. My FIRST thoughts exactly. I would have been worn out and exhausted responding to all the juvenile grasp of partisan politics and misguided beliefs. Add my kudos as well to ‘Oh, Mike,MIke….’

  3. “Orange Dictator” Please, “Orange” sounds so juvenile and “Dictator” is hardly disciplined.

    “economic upward mobility that the USA is now floundering to achieve.” Both black and latino employment rates are the lowest in history. Yes, HISTORY. Kind of pertinent because it’s minority employment levels that often gauge broad opportunity in our country.

    Spain, Italy, Portual, Greece, Ireland all are EU based and all are being tickled by default. So much for great infrastructure and financial health. Quantitative easing is a good sign of health to you? Not me and it’s been a recent “protective measure ” employed by the EUB.

    “Isolationism”…please that’s like your “alt-right” trigger. Who the h and where the h is isolationism developing and being promoted? I perceive you interpret vigorous negotiation with pursuing future isolationism? Btw, one can see just about anything when using one frame in a video. For example, demanding that we not be Europe’s defense sugar daddy does not mean isolationism is being sought. Similarly, stirring up trade deals does not equate to isolationism. (For the record, I don’t advocate tariffs, but sorting terms in any deal is necessary and should be ongoing.) If you define isolation and independent, ok, you like the One World structure. I, for one think “sovereign” and “friendly” can exist simultaneously. I am in no way interested in Angela’s interest in one-world, that she, btw, recently restated. Central govt has absolutely NO long term success in history. Again, please don’t conflate, this statement–it has no relationship to isolationism

    And no, “China doesn’t dwarf the US.” Such a blanket statement is ridiculous, except if you’re talking about population. Btw, please don’t conflate the response with naiveté. I am simply challenging the undisciplined charge to bolster your argument. They are an economic and military force, no doubt.

    Seriously….”president who thinks that sitting on a pile of nuclear arms?” I know you despise and probably hate the guy, but really, it’s the nuke arsenal that’s giving him the courage to act? As hard as it may be to acknowledge, he has been around the block in respect to negotiations. RE deals are complex and have numerous short and long term implications…financial, legal and relational. With that in mind, do you really believe he’s acting with this mindset; ” only one side benefits in trade?”

    Again, speech can be influential with out the exaggeration.

  4. The stock market has lost all the gains for the year and the fundamentals are still showing a downward trend. Call me when it gets back to 26,616. I doubt I’ll be getting a call from anyone anytime soon because Obama is still controlling things behind the curtain.

      1. yet adding 50 states together is sooo different?

        Every regional trading bloc is composed of smaller governing bodies. statisticians and liars might not like it, but a free trade zone is a free trade zone. Trump coulda held NAFTA together as an equal counterpart to the European Union, but it’s not looking like he can get along with any other democratic leaders. Trump would rather conflate economy with security, forming a new Axis power. He’s doing his best to woo North Korea to the club.

  5. I’ll put this in layman’s terms: China and the EU have been screwing the US on tariffs for years, and the previous administrations have stuck their heads in the sand about it. Finally the current administration is doing something about it and China and the EU are shocked and in disbelief. And now China is reacting like it just got bitch slapped and it is really about time because China is just a bunch of fucking thieves. Fuck them.

    1. if what T-dude’s written is true and, it’s been Trumps’s perception, (and Trudeau has confirm such) a simple question here is relevant to abate some of the hate-Don irrationality…

      Why should the US continue with this economic disparity per trade? Or is it best just to continue as sugar-daddy (no Mike, I’m not advocating the opposite = isolationism).

      The same question should be asked about military because the same disparity applies. The EU countries agreed to spend 2% of their GDP in 2014 (non-Trump era) and Obama never enforced it, or made it an issue. Trump is making it an issue and he bares the title of devil because of it. Absurd.

      Btw, only about half of the EU countries have met the agreed-to term…which is paltry in itself (2%), while approx 30% of our active duty military is based in Europe. No wonder Europe has the resources to offer their Bernie-like social services buffet.

    2. Yeah and we can say the same about US… ef them. Rest of the world is over 7 Billion people and we can live without few hundred million. So let’s start building the effing wall.

      1. do you have a brain? you don’t or you would would not say the u.s. is the same we are being screwed yes build the effing wall to keep out the brainless

  6. “ No wonder Europe has the resources to offer their Bernie-like social services buffet.“

    USA spends half of the military budget of the world. 325 Million people spends more money to military than rest of the world put together so that is why you can’t afford things like free quality education and free quality health and dental care. You know the basic things. We are happy to let the USA go from the Nato. Because we are not going to waste shit loads of money to the military like USA.

    1. nato needs to pay their fair share and if they don’t we are more than happy to leave tired of carrying your ass then they will need to raise their taxes much higher for military protection your argument amounts to shooting yourself in the foot

      1. No we do not need to spend more money to the military and we will not spend more money to military. It is the USA who spend stupid amounts of money to military. You have to spend less so that you can afford better education and fix your fat asses.

        1. “No we do not need to spend more money to the military and we will not spend more money to military.“. that’s because the u.s. is spending more in nato than the other fat ass deadbeat nations. yes mr. president, withdraw from nato save money and they are on their own for national security

    2. You need to seriously consider the long-term implications of your statement. Sure you don’t want to spend a boatload of money for the military like the US but you/ the EU, wants the protection that the US provides without the expense. Who wouldn’t? I’d like free healthcare too. Lemme just pull it out of my….
      No the EU is not happy to let the security provided by the US military just go away. Read the news. It’s abundantly clear that the majority of the nations bordering Russia have no interest in leading the US military support go away. In fact they’re requesting more. Memories of the Soviet Union are still alive to many And all though, there’s been a name change, Russia is lurking is familiar.
      Seriously seriously, you’re thinking like a Bernie supporter where money just happens…until you run out of other people’s money to spend.

      1. All the NATO members are paying all that they owe that organization. They are also paying most of the basing expenses for US and other NATO forces stationed in their countries… expenses that US taxpayers would have to fund if those forces were stationed stateside. We do not have a 30% vacancy rate on our existing domestic posts and bases, and would have to build fresh capacity.

        I assume that you are referring to the agreement by the NATO members to move towards spending 2% on their OWN military by 2024. That is still 6 years away on my calendar. Even when (or if) that is done, it will not relieve the US from its mutual defense obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty. There’s no reason to assume that the Russian threat to the West will be any less by then.

        1. “Even when (or if) that is done, it will not relieve the US from its mutual defense obligations.”

          exit the treaty and leave the eu to fend for themselves. the u.s. is being used to pay more money than they should. as a liberal you have no problem with that

          1. As a conservative, I have a problem with allowing the Russians hegemony over all of the Eastern Hemisphere that China doesn’t control. Isolationism does not work. Ask all the folks who supported the last America First movement and then got drafted for World War II. They were just as foolish as today’s isolationists.

            1. is advocating isolationism. People are wrongly construing that renegotiating trade deals and requesting the EU to square-up military spending is equivalent to isolationism. I’d call that a jump to a conclusion based on something other than facts.

              Having a disagreement with your wife/husband doesn’t mean you want a divorce.

            2. “As a conservative”

              Ho! Hee! Ha! Ha! LIE ALL YOU WANT, we KNOW the TRUTH. Hey folks, guess what, I’m now a a PC snowflake liberal just because I said so. Ignore my daily posts, that’s not the real me. You are a FAKE CONSERVATIVE, period!!! …

              Nuff said …

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.