Trade? NATO? Change Without Disruption? Dream On.

JULY 13, 2018. Beyond politics and a polarized media, the facts defining trade and NATO stand clear, despite media spin. Both are negotiations, not some flossy brunch with the partners. It’s business, national business, and that means upset.
But not to worry. Our European allies dearly love us–like a Sugar Daddy. Besides, fussing is much easier, and cheaper, then reworking insular national budgets. How upset does your daughter get if the funds aren’t there?
World War II ended 73 years ago. The Soviet Union collapsed 27 years ago. Treaties are binding, all round. Abrogations matter. Yet, is the United States really obligated to continue subsidizing the security of nations unwilling to live up to their own treaty commitments? If they don’t care enough to pay, why should we?
In stark violation of WTO rules, and free trade, China subsidizes, dumps, cheats, hacks, and shields, on behalf of its’ industries. Japan’s done so forever. The WTO is AWOL. Successive U.S. presidents have sat on the issue like an egg, and hatched a fat zero. But no, don’t do anything different, like tariffs. More importantly, never be disruptive, or unpredictable. Somebody might get upset. Worse yet, things might actually improve.

Read more