United States of America

[Zardo]

[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt71KTw_iWc]

https://www.hudsonbaycapital.com/documen...System.pdf

Scott Bessent, a Trump advisor floated as potential Treasury Secretary, has proposed putting countries into different groups based on their currency policies, the terms of bilateral trade agreements and security agreements, their values and more. Per Bessent (2024), these buckets can bear different tariff rates, and the government can layout what actions a trade partner would need to undertake to move between the buckets In this manner, tariffs create negotiating leverage for incentivizing better terms from the rest of the world on both trade and security terms. America would encourage other nations to move to lower tariff tiers, improving burden sharing. One can imagine a long list of trade and security criteria which might lead to higher or lower tariffs, premised on the notion that access to the U.S. consumer market is a privilege that must be earned, not a right. For example, maybe the U.S. wants to discriminate based on:

• Does the nation apply similar tariff rates to their imports from the U.S. as America does on their exports here?
  
• Does the nation have a history of suppressing its currency, for instance via the accumulation of excessive quantities of foreign exchange reserves?
  
• Does the nation open its markets to U.S. firms in the same way America opens its markets to foreign firms operating stateside?
  
• Does the nation respect American intellectual property rights?
  
• Does the nation help China evade tariffs via re-export?
  
• Does the nation pay its NATO obligations in full?
  
• Does the nation side with China, Russia, and Iran in key international disputes, for instance at the United Nations?
  
• Does the nation help sanctioned entities evade sanctions, or trade with sanctioned entities?
  
• Does the nation support or oppose U.S. security efforts in various theaters?
  
• Does the nation harbor enemies of the United States, e.g. terrorists or cybercriminals?
  
• Do the nation’s leaders grandstand against the United States in the international theater?
  

Because of the concern of the impacts of such a system on global markets, a Trump Administration may want to pursue a rate phase-in approach as described above, starting with low tariffs and only hitting the maximum 10% rate over time. Moreover, such a system is likely to begin with a small number of criteria as it is tested out, and then the criteria can grow in number. If the system is effective over time either at raising revenue or incentivizing more favorable treatment from trading partners, it could eventually have a top tariff rate significantly in excess of 10%, that applies to a small number of countries. Similar to the domestic tax code, once the government starts carving out exclusions and deductions for various behaviors, it needs to raise rates to achieve the same revenue goals. Such a system can embody the view that national security and trade are joined at the hip. Trade terms can be a means of procuring better security outcomes and burden sharing. In Bessent’s words, “more clearly segmenting the international economy into zones based on common security and economic systems would help … highlight the persistence of imbalances and introduce more friction points to deal with them.” Countries that want to be inside the defense umbrella must also be inside the fair trade umbrella.

Neue "fair trade" Weltordnung: Nicht mehr nur Schokolade mit dem "fair trade" Siegel kaufen, sondern neu auch Regenschirme made in USA. Oder so ähnlich.

Mehr vom Autor Stephan Miran hier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMB_OYqV-HE&t=672s