Showing posts with label MAGA-nomics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MAGA-nomics. Show all posts

Saturday, February 1, 2025

Trump and Stockholm Syndrome: In a Captured State | Steve Brown

The current reverence for Donald Trump as potential savior of the Western world is like a twisted version of Stockholm Syndrome. The Biden regime was so vile and so corrupt, that the manifestation of Trump (since his election) seems like a life raft thrown to a drowning person. In other words, the US situation is so hopeless that any sort of hope from anywhere must look good to the average US American now.
 
Trump is, of course, beholden to his donor class. It is a donor class where unsavory ‘trillionaires’ like Zuckerberg, Bezos, and their Wall Street moguls (including the banks) have ‘switched sides’ to back the Trump regime. And well, that is the mantle of power. Trump’s backers preside over war, mayhem, and death all over the globe with glee – just as Biden’s did. The only question for elites now – whether Democrat or Republican – is  how affordable this ongoing destruction may be.
 
The great debacle for the former United States is that its political leadership has failed — meaning both parties — and the Wall Street model of leveraged graft, theft, corruption, and greed has eventually devolved into a Western financial system built on bullshit and fake industry — which Pepe Escobar calls ‘casino capitalism.’ That devolution has now become apparent to the entire world. Trump has drawn a veil over donor influence by promoting a populist message of ending the ‘forever wars’ that the US engages in. But ending forever wars is not a goal that the entrenched Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) can allow, even if that is the will of the American people.

 » MAGA in itself is an admission that the US has already failed. «

Thus, Trump has used the immigration issue as cover too, to obfuscate a deeper agenda. That agenda includes confrontation with China, assistance to the Greater Israel project, and accepting advice to leverage crypto as a means to support the lagging primacy of the US dollar. The foregoing agenda will be enforced later during his regime after the dust has settled.

The point is, Trump promised to “make America great again” — which in itself is an admission that the US has already failed and is playing catch-up. China’s success in AI with Deep Seek is just one example. Bottom line, where US America was once about its industry and the ingenuity of its people, due to the criminality of Wall Street and its banks, that dynamic is gone. Ironically, all that remains of US success (as a unipolar hegemon) is the primacy of the US dollar.
 
 And the swamp? Still thriving.

US financial markets, including debt instruments, are still the most secure and reliable stash for trillions of US-manufactured Federal Reserve Notes to go. Of course, when those dollar investment vehicles become ignored by the rest of the world, that becomes an issue, and that process is underway. Meanwhile, I stand by my article from 2019, "Trump’s Limited Hangout: Populism Derailed."

 

While the above may seem a bleak message for the West, the bottom line is that the United States has been on the wrong side of history since the end of the Second World War. Only the redeeming asset of the US dollar and Western financial markets have maintained US primacy over these decades.

The hopeful message is that, as the US dollar erodes and eventually US financial markets crash, the Neocons and satanic creatures who have led US foreign policy for eighty years now will finally erode away as well—or at least be marginalized—and that's via their own historic folly, personal excess, and greed.

 
 

Monday, December 23, 2024

Outlook for 2025: Depression, Debt, Default & Destruction | Martin Armstrong

The year 2025 marks a critical turning point, with a global economic crisis on the horizon. Our computer models predict a major downturn, particularly in Europe, and a prolonged US recession extending into 2028. This crisis stems from long-term mismanagement by central banks, especially the Federal Reserve, which kept interest rates too low for too long, forcing banks to hold risky government debt. While analysts focus on short-term rates, the Fed has little control over long-term rates, which continue to rise despite rate cuts. Tensions in Europe, including the threat of World War III, are exacerbating this issue and pushing rates even higher.

» While financial elites are aware of the looming collapse, everyday people will feel its full force. «

The rise in long-term rates reflects a loss of confidence in government debt. For instance, corporate bonds in France are now offering better returns than government bonds, and even Greece's debt is becoming more attractive. This points to systemic weaknesses within European governments. Meanwhile, the US faces its own dilemma: raising rates to combat inflation only makes its national debt more expensive. As the world's largest borrower, higher rates simply add to the debt burden rather than reducing spending. This crisis underscores the failure of Keynesian economics, which Paul Volcker acknowledged in 1979. Today, the US government borrows far more than in the past, and raising interest rates does little to curb spending—it only adds to the debt.


The financial system is now in deep trouble, and the average person will bear the consequences. Europe is headed for a depression, and the US is facing a severe recession. Unemployment will rise, wages will shrink, and basic goods will become more expensive. The gap between the rich and poor will widen, and financial instability will increase. A sovereign debt default in Europe by 2025 is likely to trigger a broader collapse, with massive financial instability by 2026-2027. Many banks and pension funds are heavily invested in government debt, and a default could lead to the disintegration of European financial systems. Insiders are very much aware of the crisis and fear that public panic could worsen the situation, potentially triggering bank runs. While not all banks are equally at risk, poor management and political interference in banking have worsened the problem. The Federal Reserve, designed to act as a backstop for failing banks, may be overwhelmed by the scale of the crisis.
 
The impact on ordinary Americans will be severe, with rising unemployment, shrinking wages, and higher living costs. While financial elites are aware of the looming collapse, everyday people will feel its full force. The US government’s failure to roll over its debt could spark a chain reaction, causing widespread bank failures. The interconnectedness of the banking system means one collapse could trigger a broader financial breakdown. Cash will become essential, as digital transactions and credit systems may fail, as seen in previous disruptions like the Canadian trucker protests.

I strongly recommend preparing for this crisis by having physical cash and at least two years' worth of food stored. The collapse of the financial system will lead to widespread losses in banks and pension funds, and the government and central banks will be unable to protect everyone. Those who are unprepared will suffer the most.

 November 2024: A Norwegian task force has advised against the immediate adoption of a central 
bank digital currency, while South Korea has launched a CBDC pilot with seven major banks.

As the debt crisis worsens, geopolitical instability will exacerbate inflation and push capital into the US as a safe haven. The dollar will strengthen, and sectors like gold, food, and bonds will see increased investment. However, emerging markets with high foreign-denominated debt, such as Brazil, will be particularly vulnerable to financial crises.

I also caution against the growing threat of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which would grant governments unprecedented control over personal finances. The rise of gold as a long-term safe haven, coupled with rising long-term interest rates, will create significant risks for those holding variable-rate debt. People should prepare by securing tangible assets like cash, food, and gold, and locking in fixed-rate debt where possible. The coming crisis is inevitable, and those who prepare will have the best chance of weathering the storm.

 

The Panama Canal, Greenland, and Trump 2.0 | Andrew Korybko

Trump threatened that the US might retake control of the Panama Canal if it remains under indirect partial Chinese management and continues to charge the US what he described as exorbitant rates for passage. He then posted shortly after that, "For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity." Both are his for the taking if he really wants them, but it’s unclear whether he does.

 » Available for Trump to claim if he truly desires. «

As regards the Panama Canal, Trump's immediate imperative appears to be rolling back Chinese influence over this crucial waterway, which he seemingly fears could be leveraged by the People's Republic to cut the US off from transoceanic shipment in the event of a crisis over Taiwan. He might also want to coerce Panama into shutting down illegal migrant routes to the US via the Darien Gap. Both are sensible from the perspective of his MAGA worldview that aims to restore the US' unipolar hegemony.

His objectives in Greenland might be similar in the sense of ensuring that Chinese companies don't obtain a monopoly over that island's critical mineral reserves as well as preventing the construction of "dual-use infrastructure" that might one day give Beijing military and intelligence advantages. Direct control over sparsely populated and practically undefended Greenland, which formally remains part of Denmark, is seen as the most effective means to that end.
 
  » A monopoly over the island's critical mineral reserves. «

Trump's threat to the Panama Canal and his claim to Greenland are also likely meant to appeal to his supporters' expectations that he'll "Make America Great Again" in a visible geopolitical way. Even if he doesn't impose formal US control over them, expelling Chinese influence from both and replacing it with US economic influence could be enough to satiate them. This could also solidify his legacy and lay the basis for his successor, who'd probably be
JD Vance, to establish formal control sometime later.
 

Both are Trump's for the taking if he really wants them since neither could meaningfully oppose the US military if he authorizes an invasion. They'd be low-cost operations with high economic and political returns even though they'd occur at the expense of the US' international reputation. The global community would predictably decry them as imperialist invasions, but nobody would stand in the US' way nor sanction it afterwards. The most that might follow is harsh rhetoric, nothing more substantive.
 
Quoted from:

See also:

Sunday, December 8, 2024

Scott Bessent's Covert MAGA Strategy for Trump 2.0 | Lu Qiyuan

Many people believe Trump 2.0 will be a 'peaceful' presidency, but I think they are mistaken. If war becomes the best option to overcome the US crisis, Donald Trump will not shy away from further conflict. Trump and his team are determined to maintain US dominance on the global stage as an empire—nothing has changed in that regard. While some may hope for the decline of the US empire, and I can understand that sentiment, the following isn't about whether the US should or shouldn't remain an empire. It's about how the Trump 2.0 administration is attempting to salvage the situation.
 
 Lu Qiyuan, Geopolitical Economist.

Through Elon Musk, Trump will aim to reform and abolish much of the federal bureaucracy, including challenging some of the core interests of the military-industrial complex. If he succeeds, it could shatter the entire establishment system, including the massive oligarchy operating behind it, particularly in the pharmaceutical and military sectors. However, the question remains: Can Elon Musk and his new department, DOGE, accomplish this goal? Honestly, I don't think he can.
To make America great again (MAGA), there are three things the United States and its leadership must avoid:
  • The collapse of the US military: To prevent the US military from collapsing, significant reform is necessary. As it stands, the US military is only capable of operating at the battalion level and is no longer able to challenge a major power in large-scale conventional warfare. While US combat tactics and intelligence networks remain the best in the world, the country’s conventional forces—including the Army, Navy, and Air Force—are falling behind. The US still holds an upper hand over smaller or medium-sized countries, but in conventional warfare with a major power, the military would stand little chance. If this situation persists for another five years, the US will be unable to challenge even medium-sized nations. The military’s strength today lies in special forces, covert operations, and tactics like assassination—but in terms of large-scale warfare, as seen in Ukraine, the US is no longer capable of handling such conflicts. This is a serious issue. The US military cannot collapse; it is a basic requirement for maintaining a global hegemonic empire. Over time, parts of the military have been privatized, but these private forces are unlikely to match the capabilities of groups like Russia’s Wagner, and their loyalty could be questionable. This privatization has left the US military in a fragile state.
  • The collapse of the US dollar: To stabilize the US dollar, the US must address its looming debt crisis and budget deficit. At $40 trillion in federal debt, the US is approaching a dangerous threshold—a breaking point after which the dollar could face a severe collapse. This wouldn't necessarily mean a collapse against other currencies, but rather a collapse in value relative to assets like Bitcoin, gold, or other key commodities. This is a critical issue that cannot be postponed. The US needs to begin addressing this problem by 2025 and show clear results by 2026.
  • The collapse of US capital markets: The US capital market is a key pillar supporting the US empire. To prevent its collapse, the US must achieve a degree of reindustrialization. Currently, the capital market is one of the few remaining supports for the US dollar itself.
But let’s now turn to Scott Bessent, whom Trump has chosen as his Treasury Secretary. To me, Bessent is the real gladiator behind Trump 2.0, not Elon Musk. I believe Bessent is one of the most important members of Trump’s Cabinet, and his role will be crucial in keeping the US empire alive. So, when Scott Bessent enters the Trump Cabinet, we can be sure that Trump’s ultimate support still comes from the same old force, because Bessent is one of the most powerful champions of the US establishment deep state.

 
» Bessent is one of the most powerful champions of the US deep state. «
 
Bessent is extremely intelligent and capable. Many are confused about George Soros' financial attacks around the world, including his famous campaign against the British pound in 1997. The truth is, it wasn’t Soros who was the main architect behind that; it was Bessent. Soros became famous because of Bessent, not the other way around. Bessent’s capabilities go beyond what most people can imagine. He possesses a deep understanding of monetary, currency, and financial systems—and, more importantly, he has real-world combat experience in financial warfare. He is a genius. But like everyone, Bessent also has his flaws. People like him, who are highly capable and self-confident, often don’t hide their moves or intentions. He has outlined the following four main goals for the Trump 2.0 administration:

1. The US budget deficit must remain within 3%.  
2. The US GDP growth must exceed 3%.  
3. The US crude oil production must increase by 3 million barrels per day.
4. The US must turn Mexico into an economic vassal to replace China in their supply chain.

Let me offer my prediction: In terms of US debt control, Scott Bessent suggests that the federal deficit needs to be limited to around $1 trillion for fiscal year 2025. This is nearly an impossible task. According to my calculations, US debt will reach $40 trillion by the end of the third quarter of 2025. Achieving this goal would require drastic cuts to federal spending, and I don’t believe Elon Musk has the ability to accomplish that. The US federal government simply won’t be able to generate enough revenue in time to cover the deficit. If the goal is to increase state revenue, the only way would be to militarize the entire country—which is not only nearly impossible, but something I would strongly advise against.

As for the 3% annual GDP growth goal: I believe it is achievable. Given Bessent’s capabilities, I think he could reach this target by maintaining a capital accumulation rate above 6%.

 
» You know what I did? I left troops in Syria to take the oil. I took the oil. «
Donald Trump in a January 2020 interview on Fox News.

Now, let’s focus on the goal of increasing crude oil production by 3 million barrels per day in the US: This is one of the clearest indicators of Trump 2.0’s strategy. But why 3 million barrels? Why this specific number? This is not a random figure. Do you know how much OPEC is reducing its production? Exactly 3 million barrels. Saudi Arabia has cut production by 1 million barrels, Russia by nearly 1 million barrels, and the remaining reductions add up to roughly 3 million barrels. So, while OPEC is cutting production by 3 million barrels, the US is increasing its production by the same amount.

Do you think Scott Bessent wants oil prices to fall? To crash? Maybe down to $20 a barrel? Do you think the energy giants would be happy with that? No, they would be furious because the cost of production in the US is around $30 a barrel. Do you think 
Bessent hasn’t thought about this? Of course, he has. He likely predicts, just as I do, that oil prices could rise to $150 a barrel. That’s why I said Bessent shouldn’t have made these statements public—they act as a warning signal about a potential US military operation. It suggests that the US might be preparing to take action against Iran and, in doing so, potentially shut down the entire Persian Gulf. That’s why Bessent wants to increase US crude oil production by 3 million barrels.
 
 
We would have gotten all that oil. It would have been right next door. But now we're buying it. «

For those who don’t understand the logic behind this, there’s a fundamental principle of supply and demand in the oil market: When OPEC reduces production, it typically signals a slight decrease in demand. However, when supply drops dramatically—such as due to war—prices can skyrocket, often exponentially rather than linearly. The US, as one of the few remaining major oil producers, stands to benefit from a major conflict in the Persian Gulf. With countries like Russia and Venezuela under heavy sanctions, the US could potentially monopolize oil prices, using this leverage to strengthen the US dollar against other currencies. This is essentially the same strategy the US employed in the Ukraine conflict, where by provoking the war and cutting off Russia’s energy supply to Europe, the US launched an attack on both the euro and the ruble.
 
 » Mexico is gonna have to straighten it out really fast, or the answer is absolutely. «

Scott Bessent, normally an extremely capable strategist, shouldn’t have revealed these goals so early, as doing so gives countries like China the chance to prepare and implement countermeasures. His statements now serve as a warning signal to world leaders about what’s to come and suggest that it is less likely the US will directly provoke a proxy war targeting China. During the anticipated surge in oil prices, the US could successfully collapse the euro, the Japanese yen, and the British pound, helping Scott Bessent achieve his goal. 
 
 
» Trump suggested missile strikes into Mexico against drug cartels. «
Mark Esper, Secretary of Defense in the first Trump administration, May 6, 2022.

On top of that, there's an additional strategy: The US could swiftly vassalize Mexico, rapidly industrialize it, and use it to complete a North American internal economic circulation. This would be the only way the US could successfully reindustrialize. Essentially, the US would turn Mexico into an economic vassal, replacing China in its supply chain. In fact, the most direct and simplest way for the US to reindustrialize would be to militarily occupy Mexico and use it as a substitute for China in its economic system.

Thursday, November 28, 2024

Trump’s Coming War on BRICS and the Global South | Pepe Escobar

The incoming Trump 2.0 administration is expected to intensify US economic and geopolitical strategies against BRICS and their growing global network. Trump's actions will likely resemble earlier colonial approaches, involving covert regime-change operations, military pressure and intervention, and economic incentives to undermine BRICS and protect US control over resources such as oil and rare earth minerals. The goal is to prevent the new, multipolar world order that reduces US hegemony. This will shape US-BRICS relations and have significant implications for the entire Global South. 
 
Trump's swampy 'realist' approach to international relations contrasts with Biden's 'liberal' approach, primarily in that Trump openly defines the national interest as global, full-spectrum American military and economic dominance, asserting that all wars, sanctions, tariffs, and 'great deals' benefiting his donor class and billionaire peers would also be acceptable to his MAGA crowd of 'hard-working Americans.'  
 
 Goodbye, America. The cheating game of YOU counterfeiters is over.

His administration will aim to sanction any country bypassing the US dollar in trade, targeting the de-dollarization trend supported by BRICS. The de-dollarization movement, gaining momentum, challenges US financial dominance, with BRICS countries increasingly using national currencies and the Petroyuan, and exploring alternative payment systems. 

Marco Rubio will attempt to overthrow the governments
of Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia and seize control of their resources.
 
One of the major risks of a Trump 2.0 administration will be the attempt to destabilize the growing connectivity corridors across Eurasia, which are crucial for the strategic partnerships between Russia, China, India, and Iran. These corridors are part of two key axes: a horizontal one spanning across the Heartland from China to the West, including Central Asia, West Asia, and potentially extending to Europe (BRI), and a North-South axis connecting Russia, Iran, and India through the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC). This development is critical to Eurasian integration. 
 
As the United States observes these emerging networks, and it sees its influence in Eurasia waning, particularly as BRICS and associated countries assert themselves. In the long term, this shift threatens America's presence and influence, not only in Eurasia but also in Africa. Africa and Latin America remain more complex due to entrenched regimes and comprador elites that support US interests. Overall, this represents a broader bipartisan struggle by Washington against the integration of Eurasia and the Global South, which undermines the unipolar world order that the US has historically maintained.

 
In Latin America, Venezuela, a quasi BRICS country, economically aligned with China, Russia, Türkiye, and Iran, remains a major obsession for the US, which is expected to escalate sanctions and covert actions to oust the Maduro government in order to gain access to the world's largest reserves of hydrocarbons, to gold, bauxite, iron ore, uranium, diamonds, and rare earth elements. Bolivia, which has the world's largest lithium reserves and is rich in natural gas, tin, silver, and copper, will be treated in a similar fashion by the US. Washington think tanks still consider Brazil a 'swing state,' and controlling the policies of South America's industrial giant remains central to US efforts to limit and sabotage BRICS in the region.
 
 Spotted in Caracas, October 2024.
 
However, in recent years, US attempts at assassinations, regime change, maximum pressure sanctions, hybrid wars of all sorts, and the installation of puppet leaders like Jeanine Áñez, Juan Guaidó, María Corina Machado, and Edmundo González have become increasingly unsuccessful (with Javier Milei or Daniel Noboa appearing more as temporary exceptions). And China, Russia, and Iran will not simply allow Venezuela being looted by Trump, Musk, Rubio, Prince, and other swamp creatures from South Florida.
 
»
Facts have proven that the US is the biggest source of chaos in the international system [...] From Afghanistan to Iraq, 
from Ukraine to Gaza, all these crises and conflicts are the result of the self-serving double standards of the US. « 
— Jing Jianfeng, Lieutenant General of China’s People’s Liberation Army, Singapore, June 16, 2024.
 
Saudi Arabia's shift toward full BRICS membership would mark a major change in global financial power. Trump will likely apply diplomatic pressure or sanctions such as asset-freezing to prevent this, as US influence over global oil markets is already diminishing rapidly. Africa will see intensified efforts to counter mainly China’s and Russia’s investments in infrastructure and energy. Also, Trump will likely increase sanctions and, eventually, together with the French and the British, support destabilization, e.g., by terrorist jihadis, as well as blackmail, assassination, and regime-change tactics to prevent further integration of African nations with BRICS.
 
»
The US is at war with the rest of the world [...] the war in Syria is a microcosm of World War 3  through proxies. «
— Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, November 28, 2024.
 

Monday, November 25, 2024

Trump's Plan to Ruin China │ Dmitry Skvortsov

Losses in the hundreds of billions of dollars may await China in the coming months – and it’s all because of a document that has just been adopted in the United States. Now, everything depends on the decision of the next White House administration and Donald Trump personally. What is at stake, and how does Trump want to squeeze China out of the American market?


The
U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) recommended stripping China of its Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status. This move is intended to facilitate the introduction of the trade tariffs promised by Trump on Chinese goods. This is the first time that the USCC, in its annual report to Congress, has openly called for an end to a policy that has been a cornerstone of China’s economic rise over recent decades. In 2022, the Commission had proposed to Congress to temporarily suspend China's PNTR status if the U.S. Trade Representative determined that Beijing had failed to meet its World Trade Organization (WTO) obligations regarding market access.

The PNTR status was approved by Congress for China in 2000 in exchange for Beijing’s agreement to open its markets and liberalize trade practices before joining the WTO. This status obligates Washington to apply the same basic tariffs and privileges to Chinese goods as it does to most of its trade partners, in accordance with U.S. commitments under the WTO. It was also in October 2000 that Congress created the independent USCC, composed of 12 commissioners appointed by Congress. Its role was to monitor U.S.-China relations in trade and security and to provide annual reports to U.S. lawmakers on these issues.
 
  » In China, Tom Cotton wouldn’t even be a village chief. «

According to WTO rules, the U.S. can strip a country of trade advantages under exceptions for national security reasons. The Biden administration used this rationale when imposing sanctions on Russia after the start of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 (without specifying what exactly constituted a national security threat to the U.S.). In relation to China, American lawmakers want to free their hands in advance, creating the possibility of imposing tariffs or sanctions without any conditions or timelines.

Last week, Representative John Moolenaar, a Republican from Michigan and chairman of the House China Committee, introduced a bill to revoke China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations status. He cited U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai’s assessment that China still adheres to a 
"state-managed, non-market approach to its economy and trade," which contradicts WTO norms and principles. The bill is likely to gain support from Republicans, including Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Marco Rubio of Florida (Trump’s current nominee for Secretary of State), who were strong advocates for revoking PNTR for China during Trump’s first term. Democrats during Biden’s presidency also pressured China by limiting chip supplies and increasing military tensions between the two countries. However, Biden’s administration’s ultimate goal was to force Beijing to retreat and engage in what is called "decoupling."
 

In Washington’s interpretation, this would mean preserving a global economy where the U.S. would hinder the development of China's high-tech sectors while allowing it to continue earning revenue from supplying mass consumer goods to America. Chinese oligarchs were subtly hinted that they could return to a "business as usual" scenario if they could deal with Xi Jinping and avoid interfering in high-tech areas.

The Trumpist position is different. They want to strengthen America’s industrial power, even if it requires sacrificing the interests of global financial conglomerates and the very existence of a unified global economy. In this scenario, Chinese products would be forcefully squeezed out of the U.S. and several countries crucial to American economic interests. Whether China will find alternative markets to replace the U.S. is of little concern.

In a report published Tuesday, November 19, the Commission justified its recommendation to Congress to revoke PNTR status by stating that it 
"allows China to benefit from the same trade terms as U.S. allies despite its practices of intellectual property theft and market manipulation." Among the Commission's findings is also a recommendation for Congress to revoke the de minimis exception for e-commerce goods. This provision, enshrined in U.S. trade law, allows goods worth less than $800 to enter the U.S. duty-free and with less oversight from regulatory agencies. USCC experts refer to statements by U.S. officials that the "de minimis loophole" used by Chinese e-commerce companies like Shein and Temu harms U.S. jobs and could allow Chinese companies to deliver illegal products, including materials related to fentanyl.

China's Four Red Lines: Xi's warning to Biden and Trump.
November 17, 2024.
 
The recommended revocation of PNTR status would enable a Trump administration to increase tariffs on a wide range of Chinese products. Additionally, without this status, China could face annual reviews of its trade practices, as was the case before PNTR was granted. As USCC commissioner Jacob Helberg stated, "Increasing tariffs on Chinese industrial goods will accelerate the return of supply chains to the U.S., which aligns with President-elect Donald Trump's argument for imposing universal tariffs on imports."

The Chinese Embassy in Washington immediately responded to the recommendations in the USCC report. 
"Attempts to return U.S.-China trade and economic relations to the Cold War era violate WTO rules and will only harm the mutual interests of both countries and undermine the global economy," said embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu.

In 2023, China's exports to the U.S. amounted to $448 billion (compared to $505.6 billion in 2017). China has already been surpassed by Mexico ($480 billion) and is only slightly ahead of Canada ($429 billion). U.S. imports from China totaled $147 billion. In this regard, China ranks third, behind NAFTA  (USMCA) countries Canada ($352 billion) and Mexico ($323 billion). The U.S. trade deficit with China in 2023 was an unprecedented $301 billion, and it could increase by 4.4% this year.

If Trump imposes the 60% tariff he has promised (which would be easy to do if the USCC's proposal is adopted), the volume of Chinese goods entering the U.S. will drop sharply. China’s trade surplus with America will also shrink drastically. Even for Chinese companies that don’t leave the U.S. market, profitability will plummet. For those for whom the U.S. market is effectively closed, things will be much harder. Bankruptcy of a number of companies, mass layoffs, and decreased budget revenues are possible.

Quoted from: