Reuters: Global stocks slide, yen gains, as trade war fears grip markets
LONDON (Reuters) - The threat of a global trade war sent stock markets sliding on Friday and investors rushing for the safety of currencies like the yen and government bonds, after U.S. President Donald Trump announced tariffs on up to $60 billion of Chinese goods.
Another bruising week for stocks has left global equity markets heading for their first quarterly loss since early 2016 after a spike in volatility, nervousness about rising inflation and the specter of a trade war spooked investors enjoying a multi-year bull run.
European stocks fell, with Germany’s Dax down 1.4 percent, the French CAC 40 1.3 percent lower and Britain’s FTSE 100 0.4 percent in the red.
That followed large falls in the U.S. and overnight in Asia, although futures pricing pointed to a slight recovery for U.S. stocks when they opened on Friday.
Read more ....
World Market Reaction To The U.S. - China Trade War
Markets edgy on US-China trade war fears -- BBC
World stock markets tumble on Trump trade war fears -- AFP
World markets roiled by fears of US-China trade war -- AP
Global markets plunge as China reacts to Trump’s steel tariffs -- The Guardian
U.S. Tariffs
Trump reveals $60bn of fresh tariffs on China as EU wins reprieve -- The Guardian
Donald Trump sets $77 billion China tariff plan, sending Wall Street tumbling -- ABC News Online
Trump to impose tariffs on $60bn of Chinese imports -- Al Jazeera
US launches WTO challenge against China -- AFP
Reaction From China
China targets $3 billion of US goods in tariff spat -- AP
China responds to Trump tariffs with proposed list of 128 US products to target -- CNBC
China plans tariffs on $3B worth of U.S. goods after Trump order -- UPI
China threatens retaliatory tariffs on US products -- DW
China urges U.S. away from 'brink' as Trump picks trade weapons -- Reuters
Commentaries and Analysis On The U.S. - China Trade War
Trade wars, Trump tariffs and protectionism explained -- BBC News
This is the start of the US-China trade war -- Zheping Huang, Quartz
China Started the Trade War, Not Trump -- Wall Street Journal
Here's How China Could Really Hurt Trump in a Trade War -- Shawn Tully, Fortune
China doesn't want trade war with US, its 'very best customer': Analyst -- CNBC
4 comments:
The trouble with treaties is they freeze a situation in time yet situations change. Trade is a great example, who would have thought 10 years ago that the US would be a leading oil producer by 2017? Would have thought 5 years ago the US would be competing to be the largest exporter of LNG by 2020?
When the US voted for China to join the WTO, the Chinese surplus in trade with the US was about $80 billion and had been fairly stable for years, moderately increasing year over year. Once in the WTO club, Chinese surplus's took off like a rocket and now is $300 billion. That is not something the US can long endure. Trade relations envisioned in 2001 have been overturned by new situations undreamt of in 2001.
If the US loses big in the WTO court, might the US withdraw from the WTO years down the road? Seeing its economy destroyed by corrupt Chinese trade practices is something Americans will strongly reject.
You would think trade agreements would have a safety clause for when a major inequality occurs that triggers a corrective process. Then I guess during the negotiations everyone involved has a positive outlook and thinks that should an inequality occur it would be in their favor so they just don't suggest it.
To bad it has to come down to a war of words with financial impact on innocent investors.
Anon,
I real could not have put this any better myself. The only thing I might add is a similar situation seems to have occurred with bans on missile defense systems and other upgrades to nuclear weapons involving the Soviet Union. When the treaties were negotiated the Soviet Union was a strong and stable country that no one would have ever thought would go anywhere. In fact, the consensus was probably that the Soviet Union would probably still be around long after the United States ceased to exist but had been forgotten about.
Unforeseen events then occurred. The Soviet Union is no more. These treaties were negotiated with the Soviet Union not with Russia. As such, the argument could be made that these treaties were/are null and void needing to be renegotiated. Nevertheless Russia is a very powerful country whose cooperation we are going to need in a number of areas if we are to survive let alone prosper. So we might want to honor such an agreement if they wish even though it was not made with them.
The next unforeseen event was the rise of International Terrorist organizations. the states who support them, and smaller nations possessing missile and nuclear weapons capabilities. This meant the constraints of Cold War I on nuclear weapons upgrades and missile defenses that may have made sense no longer made sense for America and the Russians would not budge on a compromise. Then again America did violate an agreement that likely existed at the end of Cold War I not to expand NATO into former Soviet or Eastern Bloc countries. Further complicating matters is these countries are bat sh!t crazy.
Bob,
"To bad it has to come down to a war of words with financial impact on innocent investors." I couldn't agree more!!
those treaties where made withe soviet union but the central part of that remains Russia, and that nation has not said anything about the end of treaties. Russia expanding and intefering with EU and our elections etc and so what you say is merely an apologetic for Mother Russia. As ususal.
Post a Comment