单边主义政策

Search documents
中方终于翻脸,美国被踢出局,1200吨杂粮将入华,美农民财路被断
Sou Hu Cai Jing· 2025-08-19 16:52
Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the severe challenges faced by American soybean farmers due to the trade policies implemented by former President Trump, particularly the increased tariffs on Chinese imports, which have led to a significant loss of market access for U.S. soybeans. Group 1: Impact of Tariffs - Trump's announcement in April 2025 to raise tariffs on Chinese imports from 34% to 84% resulted in a total tax rate of 104%, which prompted China to retaliate with a 10% tariff on U.S. soybeans, eliminating the price advantage of American soybeans [3] - As a consequence, Chinese buyers signed contracts for 12 million tons of soybeans from Brazil, accounting for half of the demand for the next two months, leaving American farmers without any sales [3] Group 2: Agricultural Subsidies - In response to the crisis, Trump proposed a $61 billion subsidy plan, but most of the funds went to large farms and urban investors, while small farmers received minimal support, insufficient to cover rising costs [5] - Following the announcement of subsidies, soybean prices fell by 1.5%, indicating market skepticism about the effectiveness of these measures [5] Group 3: Market Dynamics - Trump's pressure tactics, including demands for China to purchase four times the amount of soybeans, were ineffective as China continued to secure supplies from Brazil, even establishing currency settlements to avoid exchange rate risks [7] - The reliance on Chinese orders has historically been significant, with over 40% of U.S. soybean exports going to China, but by August 2025, orders from Chinese buyers had completely ceased [9] Group 4: Consequences for Farmers - The financial strain on American farmers is evident, with 88 farms filing for bankruptcy, a 76% increase from the previous year, as subsidies failed to cover loan interests [11] - The article highlights the disparity in subsidy distribution, with funds benefiting Wall Street investors rather than actual farmers, leading to disillusionment among the agricultural community [11] Group 5: Competitive Landscape - China's investments in Brazil have strengthened its supply chain, with a 48% increase in Brazilian soybean shipments to Chinese ports, while American shipments have virtually disappeared [13] - The cost advantage of Brazilian soybeans, which are $31 per ton cheaper than U.S. soybeans, combined with shorter transportation times and reduced currency risks, has made American soybeans less competitive [15]
冯德莱恩刚走就亮剑!千亿关税砸向美国,中方划红线后欧总算醒悟
Sou Hu Cai Jing· 2025-07-26 03:01
Group 1 - The EU is preparing a countermeasure plan against the US, indicating a shift in trade dynamics and a response to the US's unilateral tariff increases [1][9][14] - The EU's countermeasure includes a list targeting €100 billion worth of US goods, significantly higher than previous plans, signaling a stronger stance against US trade policies [9][14] - Germany's exports to the US are substantial, with €157.9 billion in 2024, making the country particularly vulnerable to US tariffs, which has prompted a more aggressive response from German officials [5][9] Group 2 - The EU's core demands from China include lifting rare earth export controls, halting energy trade with Russia, and addressing overcapacity issues, which clash with China's red lines [3][7] - Despite political tensions, practical cooperation between the EU and China is ongoing, with negotiations on electric vehicle subsidies and rare earth trade [3][7] - The EU's dependency on China for rare earths is significant, with 78% of its supply coming from China, highlighting the complexity of the EU's position in the trade landscape [7][9] Group 3 - The EU is increasingly viewing China as an independent partner rather than a subordinate in the context of US-China relations, reflecting a strategic shift in its foreign policy [3][14] - A survey indicates that 67% of German companies plan to increase investments in China, showcasing a growing interest in the Chinese market as a counterbalance to US pressures [9][14] - The trade relationship between the EU and China is projected to reach a record high of $847 billion in 2024, demonstrating the importance of this partnership for both sides [9][14]
加拿大贸易学者建议:把“贸易流氓”踢出WTO,让美国沦为“国际弃儿”
Sou Hu Cai Jing· 2025-07-08 17:46
Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the potential consequences of President Trump's trade policies, particularly the threat to impose significant tariffs on EU goods, which could push the global economy to the brink of collapse [1][3]. Group 1: Impact of Trump's Policies - Trump's unilateral trade policies and protectionism have been a consistent theme since his first term, undermining international organizations like the WTO [3]. - The current situation may lead to a resurgence of trade protectionism reminiscent of the 1930s, exacerbating global economic instability [1][3]. Group 2: WTO's Role and Challenges - The WTO has been hampered by the U.S. blocking the appellate body, making it difficult to enforce global trade rules [3][4]. - There is a growing concern that if the U.S. continues to violate trade rules without consequences, other countries may follow suit, leading to a breakdown of the global trading system [3][4]. Group 3: Proposed Solutions - The article suggests that WTO members must unite to reject Trump's trade aggression, potentially considering the expulsion of the U.S. from the organization as a necessary measure [4][5]. - Although there is no precedent for expelling a member from the WTO, mechanisms exist that could allow for such action if a two-thirds majority agrees to amend the agreement [4][5]. Group 4: Economic Consequences for the U.S. - If expelled from the WTO, the U.S. would face severe economic repercussions, including loss of preferential tariff access to global markets and potential punitive tariffs [5]. - The U.S. would also lose access to critical markets for service exports and protections for intellectual property, which are vital for its economic success [5].
当不成总统了?美国风向大变,加州公开“造反”,局势严峻
Sou Hu Cai Jing· 2025-05-12 14:31
Core Viewpoint - California Governor Newsom's opposition to Trump's high tariffs on China has sparked significant attention regarding the internal dynamics of the U.S. and the economic turmoil stemming from tariff policies [1] Economic Impact on California - California's GDP reached $3.86 trillion in 2023, making it the fifth-largest economy globally [3] - The state contributes over $400 billion in federal taxes annually, significantly exceeding the federal funds it receives [3] - The implementation of Trump's tariff policies has severely impacted California's economy, particularly affecting its ports, which handle nearly one-third of U.S. cargo [3] - The volume of incoming goods at California ports has decreased by 35% due to tariffs, leading to a sharp decline in port operations and potential job losses for port workers [3][5] Industry-Specific Effects - The technology sector in Silicon Valley is facing increased supply chain costs due to tariffs, which disrupts its extensive Asian supply chains [5] - California's agricultural sector, particularly almond exports, has suffered significant losses due to retaliatory tariffs from China [5] Legal and Political Reactions - California has initiated legal action against Trump's tariff policies, claiming direct and indirect economic losses amounting to billions of dollars [6] - A coalition of 12 states has joined California in suing the federal government over tariff policies, indicating a broader conflict between state and federal economic authority [6] - Public sentiment is shifting against Trump's tariffs, with 54% of voters opposing the imposition of tariffs on imports and 75% believing it will lead to increased prices [6] International Repercussions - Trump's tariffs have prompted strong reactions from international leaders, such as Japan's Prime Minister, who opposes the 25% tariffs on auto parts, highlighting the potential economic damage to Japan's automotive industry [8] - The ongoing backlash against Trump's tariff policies is putting pressure on his administration, potentially affecting his support in upcoming midterm elections [8]